User talk:Bishonen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Fairybread Barnstar.gif

MONGO Army has arrived to help protect page from wackos![edit]

MONGO tank somewhat obsolete but lunatic (me) driving it so killing power enhanced!--MONGO 17:43, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Ah, Tiktaalik![edit]

Hey, Zill. Gotta love an early tetrapod whose name is cognate with ichthys. μηδείς (talk) 19:47, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Cognate with ichthys, really? What is your evidence for that? The Tiktaalik#Discovery section of the article doesn't support it. Deor (talk) 21:10, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I don’t think “cognate“ is the word you want: AFAICT the Inuktitut word is composed from two roots. The first, tik, I‘m not sure of, but it’s also the stem of the word for “index finger“; -taalik means “long”. I believe the most generic word for “fish“ is iqaluk. OTOH the origins of ichthys are unknown–at any rate the word doesn’t appear susceptible to analysis. (Sorry for the pedantry, but I was unpleasantly reminded of a certain prolific Usenet Hellenomane who claimed, among many other silly things, that iglu derives from oikos.)—Odysseus1479 21:26, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

my mistype probably[edit]

I can't do the gravure diacritical above the O, but I didn't mean to type the extra I. Just oddly enough by coincidence I was trying to compare examples with the RfD at wishes and tried dishes and bishes and so on: then you came in I am surely entirely coincidentallly so I mentioned bish, which leads this way to bishonen as {{R from title without diacritics}} (at least it should; not sure that it does). I just mistyped: please excuse me; I have never heard this forenam (or surname): please excuse my ignorance. Which language is it from? Si Trew (talk) 21:20, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Japanese. Anime, manga and bishounens are features of Japanese culture. Did I forget to link them in my message on your page? Bishonen | talk 21:24, 26 May 2014 (UTC).

Politics[edit]

Please take a look at Soraya Post, Kristina Winberg and Peter Lundgren (politician). Thank you :)--BabbaQ (talk) 21:55, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Wow, you're on the ball! Excellent work, Babba. Bishonen | talk 20:12, 27 May 2014 (UTC).
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Bishonen. You have new messages at BabbaQ's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--BabbaQ (talk) 14:05, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


Could you please take a look at the latests posts from user Libstar at my talk page. I think it is OK to discussions but when posts are done only to taunt then I think it goes a little to far. I am not an angel by any means but I let other people have their opinions and I do not re-add posts three times after other users remove them :). Is there a way to strike out those latest unnecessary comments. Cheers.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:17, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
I don't think Libstar was re-adding anything verbatim, but they were certainly nagging and taunting and refusing to drop it. I've asked them to stop. Bishonen | talk 23:57, 30 June 2014 (UTC).

There is a deeper story to this (BabbaQ and I have interacted for years), and this forms part of the jigsaw puzzle. All will be revealed soon.LibStar (talk) 11:11, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, Libstar is right. There is years of this user contacting me being rude and not respecting other users opinions and taunting (atleast against me ) in connection with AfDs and I have had enough. These last comments has been the last straw for me. And I am telling you right now Libstar, do not contact me with taunts or rude commemts anymore. Users are entitled to their personal opinions about notability etc, and you have no right to taunt users simply because they do not share your opinion about certain things. I frankly wish to hear nothing further from you.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:29, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
then why did you decide to deliberately follow me around in a conversation in the last 24 hours on another user's page on a discussion that you had no previous participation in .. If you wish to ignore me and no longer interact with me, you could have easily not. WP:KETTLE Regardless your comments above confirm an extra piece of the puzzle, I was unsure before of the origin of certain things but that more securely locks in what I've been suspecting. All will be revealed soon... LibStar (talk) 12:39, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
I was definitely provoked by your attempts on again and again contact me, as you yourself point out this is a pattern of you contacting me over several years on Afds that you have had no previous involvement in, and also continuing taunting me at my talk page. I still do not understand why you get so provoked by my comment at that other users talk page considering that you do exactly the same thing all the time at AfDs :)But that does not change anything about my opinion that you could/should take the high road from now on and leave me alone. And for your Finland comment are concerned I did not respond to them on three occassion because that is just simply childish and yet another provocation from you, and frankly I am not surprised that you want to provoke me because it has been your MO for years. This is my very last comment about this and I hope this is the last time I ever hear from you Libstar. And no I am no angel and I give you back when you go to far, but still I do not see a good reason for your over the top taunting. I am fed up with you to be totally honest and I think you are out of line on so many levels. I wish to hear nothing further about this if not totally necessary, and I will ignore this conversation. Regards, --BabbaQ (talk) 13:41, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Oh the irony, "I'm fed up with another user and don't want to interact with libstar anymore but will happily join in a discussion on another user's page because I need interaction." On so many levels?.Takes two to tango (idiom). The Finland question will become very clear and relevant soon. LibStar (talk) 13:49, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

It is hard to not tango with you when you have a history of contacting me after I post anything on any AfD. You need to get over whatever grudge you have against me and move on. And for your Finland comment,,, well see you in Helsinki and stop threatning me. Now have a wonderful day :)--BabbaQ (talk) 13:52, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Hard to understand the request for no interaction and I will ignore conversation and the continual replies from BabbaQ . Contradictory? LibStar (talk) 13:54, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

BabbaQ even thanked me for above edit! :) LibStar (talk) 13:56, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Following BabbaQ around like this looks like Wikistalking to me. Don't you have anything better to do? Thomas.W talk 14:07, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
and suddenly joining in a discussion on another user's page when never previously involved in that discussion is classed as what? LibStar (talk) 14:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes I did it one time after you provoked me for the thousand time. And I apologize for that. But please move on and try not to interact with me again for considerable time. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:13, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Just a pause for thought, if you react this heavily to me doing that. How do you think other users reacts to you contacting them, making comments at AfDs in a much harder tone? If you can not take it, you should not do it. That is all. Bye.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:15, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Still replying? You said 30 mins ago you will ignore me and this conversation. I am bewildered. LibStar (talk) 14:16, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Why don't you both stop? What you're doing is just silly, especially when it's being done on the talk page of someone else. Thomas.W talk 14:19, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
as I said someone keeps replying, totally confounds me, I've had some people say in the past I will not interact with you and they meant it, in this instance, doesn't make sense. LibStar (talk) 14:22, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
It still takes two to tango, and you're doing your best to keep the squabble going. So why don't you just leave the dancefloor and do something productive here instead? Thomas.W talk 14:24, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
And what are you doing then! Coming in didn't exactly stop BabbaQ responding... LibStar (talk) 14:26, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
You've posted three times since she posted last, so who's keeping it alive? Thomas.W talk 14:28, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Well, chère, I bet you're really glad you have a talk page archiving system designed specially for the sort of erudite discourse above. --T-RexxS (rawr) 15:32, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, RexxS. LibStar, it's a little hard to interpret BabbaQ's one comment, which you have now mentioned perhaps five or six times, as Babba following you "around", so you might as well drop that before it becomes (even more) ridiculous. See WP:REHASH. You need to keep AFD discussion on AFD and article discussion on article talkpages. It's completely inappropriate to flood people's user talkpages with scolding about the opinions they have registered at AfD's, or with triumph at an admin having agreed with you, and other such pinpricks. Please don't post on Babba's or Necrothesp's pages again, and don't try to keep the repetitive arguing you seem to enjoy alive by moving it to other people's talkpages, either. (Not mine, not Thomas's.) Article talkpages, and such discussion pages as AFD, are provided precisely for the purpose of discussion of encyclopedic issues. Do not personalise these issues by taking them to user talkpages, and especially don't post so insistently and repetitiously that it becomes harassment. (I'd say that happened on Babba's page, with the idiotic hinting about "Finland"... what? No, no, please don't bother to explain, I don't want to know. Just drop it.) Recently you have posted 7 times on Babba's page, 4 times on Necrothesp's, and when I return after some hours away from the keyboard, I find 10 posts from you on mine (!). I respect your AfD nominations and AfD arguments, but argumentativeness on usertalk pages does nothing to improve Wikipedia. It merely irritates people and is bad for the Wiki climate. Bishonen | talk 22:01, 1 July 2014 (UTC).
necrothesp did not request I cease contacting him/her, so somehow characterizing the 4 edits on their talk page as excessive is misrepresentative. is 4 times some yardstick? You do talk about not irritating others, so what was the intent of BabbaQ turning up suddenly on necrothesp's page to oppose me? Takes 2 to tango as I said. LibStar (talk) 22:56, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
(So now it's six or seven times you've mentioned that very same single post of Babba's. You just have no respect for WP:REHASH, do you?) You say Necrothesp didn't "request I cease contacting him/her", so apparently his "Good grief, it's like a stuck record!" was too subtle a hint. Don't get technical with me about how many posts are "some yardstick", please. It's not a matter of how many posts, but of how annoying and repetitious they are. ("Please point to the policy that says bla bla". Bah.) Don't bother to try the same tricks with me. Just stop going around trying to rile people unless you want a formal block warning for disruptive editing on your page. Oh, and I formally request you not to post on my page again, since the hint about your ten posts while I wasn't even here was seemingly also too subtle. Incidentally the next person who invokes that stupid old chestnut about "two to tango" (see wiktionary:chestnut, sense 6) may consider themselves banned from my page. This is a cliché-free zone. Bishonen | talk 00:14, 2 July 2014 (UTC).

WP:SEASON[edit]

Anyone know (stalkers, don't be shy) if this[1] is a fad or something that is actually part of the vitals of MoS these days? Are seasons overall considered bad prose and not permitted as general indicators of time periods?

Peter Isotalo 10:33, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Why would you need to ask another user when the answer is to click the link in the heading? SEASON has been part of MOS for a long time. --John (talk) 10:41, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I didn't know anything about WP:SEASON, I was as innocent of this principle as you, Peter, but it does make sense. It says Because the seasons are reversed in the northern hemisphere versus the southern (and areas near the equator may have wet and dry seasons instead) it is usually preferable to avoid such references as winter 1995 in favor of (for example) early 1995;  the first quarter of 1995;  January to March 1995. But I don't see how you're expected to remove information, as John does when he changes "the summer of 1512" to "1512". Why? "The middle of 1512" would presumably work, unless somebody wants to go to the (print) source and find what month it was, and use that. There may have been other raids in 1512, so just removing "the summer of" potentially makes this raid less well-defined. I agree with your revert, but you want to reply on talk, too, don't you? (Incidentally, don't you think the phrase "poor writing" referred to the "however"?) Bishonen | talk 10:51, 27 May 2014 (UTC).
Reverted some of the reverted fixes. I'm looking for second opinions, because a lot of these changes don't make all that much sense to me, even after reading the MoS. I'm all for neutrality, but it seems like somewhat of an over-reading to defer to the southern hemisphere in an article that is geographically limited to a specific part of Europe.
Peter Isotalo 11:05, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
What about our numerous Antarctican readers? Penguins are people too yah know.--MONGO 11:36, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
It's not just about the southern hemisphere, there are also the tropics to consider. In India and most of Africa, where a majority of the English speakers of the world live, there are no seasons. There may be a dry season and a wet season, but these are different from place to place. Saying the summer of 1608 is not just lazy and ambiguous writing, it may also place a barrier to understanding between you and the reader. Why would you wish to do that? Would you accept an Indian writer saying the dry season of 1408? The situation is no different. --John (talk) 12:40, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) If an Indian writer wrote the dry season of 1408 or the wet/monsoon season of 1408 in an article about an event that took place in India, it would be far more informative than writing early/middle/late or whatever 1408, since it would tell the reader what the weather was like when the event took place; just like writing summer/winter of 1512 for an event that took place in Europe. So I'm all for stating what season of the year an event took place. Thomas.W talk 12:54, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
That's a good point. It would depend (as MoS makes clear) whether it was something like a harvest or a miltary campaign where the season makes a difference, or just as a lazy and half-assed way of talking about when something happened. The former is ok if the sources support it and proper explanation can be made. The latter never is. --John (talk) 13:01, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
The specificity of certain events are always dependent on their relevance to something. Why is it relevant to know the exact dates for the start and end of the 1664-65 logging season in Sweden in an article about a ship?
Peter Isotalo 15:44, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Indeed....John is correct. I would have been as mystified as Peter was...and I am guilty of being a northern hemisphere partisan as I know I have, numerous times in my writing, used the seasonal wording to describe the time of year....I can hear them now....the Antarcticans are coming to get me!...--MONGO 15:50, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm hesitant to ask for this, but could someone just hint about the lack of consensus regarding WP:SEASON at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Kronan (ship)/archive1?
Peter Isotalo 20:10, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Peter....looks like an excellent article. MOS does guide us to avoid mentioning seasons, explicitly stating that naming the month or perhaps the quarter of the year to make the issue hemispherically unambiguous is expected. John is a fairly strict adherent to MOS guidelines, and for the sake of standardization, that's probably not a bad thing. The best thing about this project is that the collaboration brings specific talents together at FAC and the end result is usually some pretty damn good articles. However, my take on MOS guidelines allows some grey areas that would excuse noncompliance with SEASON.--MONGO 01:27, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
It feels more like it's simply jumping through hoops right now, especially in view of this.[2] Is this type of language sticklerism common fare at FAC these days? Right below the FAC talk on the paramount importance of not writing "winter", there's a fierce discussion on the beastly American habit of not writing "admitted to hospital".
Peter Isotalo 05:18, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

User:QuackGuru[edit]

Fresh from our interesting discussion above about seasonal nomenclature in Featured Articles, it's good to see you again in regard to this editor. I approve your restoration of talk page access and your block of User:Stimpy3 as an illegitimate sockpuppet. I'd probably say the same about User:Fasf14, but then I realized that actually I find myself indifferent as long as they don't continue the shenanigans. You might block them too if you feel like it. I also thank you for digging out this, which with this and in its way this made interesting reading. I got dragged into this matter via an unblock request in which I was able to broker a deal to get FergusM1970 back editing other areas when he had got past a point where his edits were productive in a certain area. I wonder if ultimately something like this will be best for QuackGuru too. In any case, I am not comfortable discussing it at QG's talk page beyond a certain point. Let's wait and see if the user comes back with an unblock and meantime I remain open to your suggestions about how to proceed. --John (talk) 23:17, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Well, I'm a pretty conservative duck hunter; I don't block just because a "new" account obviously isn't new, or I'd be going bang-bang-bang all day long. I blocked Stimpy3 because they not only acknowledged being a sock, but also spelled out their discreditable motives for not using their main account (wrapped in self-righteous accusations about abusive admins protecting QG, why is nobody surprised?) I summarize: they were trying to avoid scrutiny.[3] And you notice their random relationship with facts again in their next post: assuming that anybody who thwarts them must be an admin and getting two out of four right. But I suppose that's too common to point to anybody in particular.
As for Fasf14, maybe I should ask Darwinbish to edit her template warning to apply to throwaway "accounts" as well as IPs, then it would be just right for them.
About the block, I'll be frank, John. It will probably stick because QG does give sceptics a bad name, as someone said. But I don't think it was well timed, in the middle of an argument between the two of you, and following hard upon your revert of his removal of a conversations from his talkpage (not good). A bit like arresting Al Capone for tax evasion, as another of those IPs said, and he wasn't even evading very much tax. (My god, doesn't any of the acupuncture and chiropractic true believers have the guts to use their account? Or maybe they're all blocked.) As for an unblock request, yes, he should post one, but I'm beginning to wonder if I didn't tell him emphatically enough that I'd restored tpa. Does he know he can appeal? Well, probably. He must be reading the page, after all. Bishonen | talk 09:41, 31 May 2014 (UTC).
QG / KV is perfectly capable of discussing when he wishes, but for strategic reasons has a history of either laying low and being quiet when in trouble, or becoming a nearly normal editor, with lots of promises of reform and offers of compromise when seriously threatened with indef blocking/banning. That's his history under both IDs. If one were to apply duck to both accounts, you'd see one person masquerading as monozygotic twins..... -- Brangifer (talk) 03:02, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

For sharing that insight. I will review it in detail before I post again to any Admin board. Cheers!) -WPPilot echo 22:18, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Bishonen | talk 10:16, 3 June 2014 (UTC).

email harrassment[edit]

Hang on: You asked me for my email address, I gave it, I should expect you to be polite by giving you the privilege of knowing it (when I don't advertise it on Wikipedia) and you abuse it.

Now, User:BDD had suggested a couple of months ago that someone had been impersonating me since it was not my style. I checked but couldn't find that was the case, so I imagine it was mine, but it is possible. The only time I have ever sworn (in what I would regard as swear words such as F; which many people seem to use as commas) in the many years I have edited WP is to express my extreme discontent with this hounding by a few admins who have a different opinion from mine. Even though I have done my research offer an opinion – often several which negate the others – for others to choose. I thought it was redirects for discussion, not redirects for imposition, and is certainly not Redirects for deletion, no matter what the sidebar says.

I probably pushed that point rather strongly. When I come to' RfD with refs, researched, before bringing the discussion, I am told I am WP:TOOLONG. Not my fault people have short screens and short attention spans. If i come with an allusion to another relevant topic that has the same relationship, I am told it is irrelevant, even though I point out what relationship it has (a kinda law of similar triangles): a redirect we should but haven't to similar triangle: A is to B as C is to D; a [[ratio] (from which we get the rational numbers and the idea of being rational, although that is a back formation of rationale, by the way, but comes from the same root). If I bring special knowledge and declare an interest in having that, I am told I am up my own backside for showing offset: WP:RS means I cannot quote means I cannot even quote what someone else has written but have to quote what someone else as said about someone else writing it, i.e. gossip. So we have an enyclopaedia founded on gossip. A successful one but ultimatel if one cannot go to the horse's mouth then useless.

But if I am humble and edit without commenting, I am told I should have made it clear. The other two pillars, WP:N and WP:V are equally dodgy in practice. WP:N means "is the person who said this someone you might of heard of?", so Oprah Winfrey's chat show applies but an expert in numismatism or calisthenics doesn't, and it is not a triangle in the first place since WP:V is just WP:N and WP:RS in a straight line. (Mathematically that is a triangle but rather a special case.)

I am not out to win and don't need to. I tried to improve the Wikipedia for the last eight years. I am not saying I always succeeded.

Do you know how much shit I have to take from it? I have the pleasure, on balance, to have contributed and have people thanking me for doing so. They used to thank with a brief message, and perhaps how we could proceed togethere to make it even better... I went to libraries and sourced books and even bought books (second hand) to improve articles. Now one just hits "thank" and that is enough. No, it is not enough.

I have given you the courtesy of a reply. Now you are an admin, I blanked my account, please delete my account.

S.

Please don't babble and maunder on my page. What do you mean by posting a section called "e-mail harassment" here and talking about me "abusing" the e-mail addy you confided to me? As if I'd been harassing you by e-mail? I've written two e-mails to you, ever, in which I tried to explain certain things to you that I didn't want to tell you in public. *You* have e-mailed *me* ten times. Do you realise I have also given *you* the confidence of *my* e-mail address (and I'm sorry I did)? I don't "advertise" it on Wikipedia either.
As an admin, there's nothing more I can do about your account than what I already described in my e-mail of May 27. But since you're still in good standing (=not blocked), you can vanish for good from Wikipedia, if you're sure that's what you want to do. Read all about it here and follow the instructions. Bishonen | talk 22:56, 5 June 2014 (UTC).
(talk page stalker) I don't think anyone can delete an account; however you can apply for Wikipedia:Courtesy_vanishing, if you'd like to leave and not return.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 22:34, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Note left on user page[edit]

[4] --NeilN talk to me 01:37, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of it. I hope the user takes advantage of the advice he has been given from several quarters. Bishonen | talk 09:03, 6 June 2014 (UTC).

Flood geology[edit]

Interesting response. To paraphrase: "I haven't done anything wrong, it's the others (the Christians). Edit warring is bad, reverting is bad, but I think it's ok if I make these 2 reverts." Dougweller (talk) 08:56, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Don't hate me for being quicker on the draw....[edit]

I assume he removed your vote when he transcluded, per the usual guideline on waiting until it goes live, at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Deor. I had already put in a commented vote before you but it broke stuff so I reverted. Anyway, it is live now. Dennis Brown |  | WER 13:19, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Hey Dennis...see that tank up top...that's my tank and I operate it...but dealing with me and my tank is far better than dealing with some of Bishonen's more powerful allies....so watch yer step partner.--MONGO 14:13, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
She started it... Dennis Brown |  | WER 14:14, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Grrrrr....lol.--MONGO 15:07, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikilawyering "new" IP[edit]

Hello Bish. Would you mind taking a look at IP 85.197.52.156, a Wikilawyering "new" IP from Köln/Cologne, Germany (see discussion my talk page), to see if the actions and the geolocation ring any bells for you? Because it is definitely not a new user, and you seem to have a knack for spotting new incarnations of old users (remember TE?). I have a faint memory of having encountered an indefinitely blocked or banned user from that part of Germany, but my memories of that encounter are very faint. Thomas.W talk 18:40, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

I've always thought myself remarkable for my lack of sock sense, so I'm glad you noticed my unique TE feat (where I think I followed an SPI back inte the archives, and there was TE, bold as brass, no intuition needed). A MOS nerd in Cologne? Sorry, no, it doesn't ring a bell. I think I agree with them about removing the bolding, though. But their claim to know all about the MOS seems a little weakly founded, in that they don't know it's (of course) not a policy. Accusing you of "policy-violating" edits was a bit silly. My taste in tea is more vulgar than yours,[5] almost kitschy. Have you tried strawberry tea with a lime leaf in it? I like to eat a lot of jam and cheese with that. The combo would cheer up a tiger. Bishonen | talk 21:06, 9 June 2014 (UTC).
The Lapsang Souchong satt bra, with a piece of fullkornsbröd topped with Kavli Kyckling & Baconost. I guess I haven't adjusted yet to not working 9-5 anymore, because being retired isn't as fun as I thought it would be. Thomas.W talk 21:32, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

asmallworld protection[edit]

Hey Bishonen, I saw that the protection expired on the asmallworld page. I know when you spoke to IIIraute and me you mentioned such protection would be ongoing. I don't know if you intended it to become unlocked or not. I just wanted to notify you. Since it became unlocked an IP has been editing it and deleting sourced material and adding unsourced material. I only removed/restored the more heavy handed moves of the IP. Anyway, if your initial intention was to protect the page indefinetley you should reprotect it. Thanks (Mostlyoksorta (talk) 21:56, 9 June 2014 (UTC))

Thanks for letting me know. I actually never semi'd the page, I merely fullprotected it for a couple of weeks, timing it to expire at the same time as User:Ymblanter's semiprotection would have. Complicated? Yes — the log, here, makes it clearer.
The IP isn't necessarily trying to disrupt the article, even though they don't know about Wikipedia sourcing (you see how they attempt to refer to a source in the edit summary here?), or about how to write in an explanatory way for the common reader in an encyclopedia ( for instance, I have no idea what they mean by "assets = The World's Finest Clubs AG (November 2012)"). Perhaps you can educate them? They might blossom into a useful editor, I don't see why not. I've written on their page, suggesting a few things, but they're going to need more practical help than that. Bishonen | talk 22:43, 9 June 2014 (UTC).
Sounds good, thanks. (Mostlyoksorta (talk) 03:25, 10 June 2014 (UTC))
I see they came back from a different IP, either without having read my note (the most likely scenario) or having ignored it. A pity it's so hopeless to try to communicate with dynamic IPs, because I still think they may mean to be helpful. But I'm not going to chase after them trying to get lucky and have them actually read a note from me, and I obviously can't expect you to do that, either. (We should require registration to edit Wikipedia IMO, not least because of cases like this.) I agree with your request for semi at WP:RFPP and with Kelapstick's action on it. Bishonen | talk 14:20, 10 June 2014 (UTC).

Thanks[edit]

Hi. Just to say thank you for your swift action in the case of User:AHLM13. Have a great day!

RomanSpa (talk) 14:10, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

And thank you very much for the report. I wish I, or I suppose any admin, had paid attention to it sooner, because there is now a lot of work to do reverting those unconstructive reverts. I see NeilN has started. Bishonen | talk 14:17, 10 June 2014 (UTC). P.S., you'd think Johnuniq was an admin, wouldn't you? But he's not. Bishonen | talk 14:27, 10 June 2014 (UTC).

clear gaming[edit]

[6] with edit summary Reverted 1 edit by Collect (talk): Rv WP:OR -- a very surprising BLP violation by this editor...

I suggest is gaming here. Especially with his talk page comment: This edit amounts to WP:SYNTH and is thus a BLP violation. Please do not repeat it. And please be mindful of 3RR. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 13:21, 12 June 2014 (UTC) Inasmuch as he asked for the claim that "Santorum is a Catholic" to be cited, so I cited everything under the sun, and used separate sentences to boot. The edits which it replaced were [7] and [8] which appeared UNDUE as the issue of euthanasia is the teachings of his church. This is the type of thing I face every day -- and frequently from the same folks, and I rather think their intent is clear. Cheers. Collect (talk) 14:02, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

What, another article? Sorry, I don't much feel like reviewing that one, your editing of it, Nomoskedasticity's editing of it (there, I've pinged him for you), and on and on... and without that, I can hardly comment. Are you saying that you "facing stuff like that everyday" is an explanation of your BLP ruleslawyering and your combative sarcastic tone on the AN3RR noticeboard — is that your message here on my page? If so, I can understand what you mean. I can recommend a cup of tea and hanging with some nice people. You know, decompressing. Too much inhalation of the polluted air around the political articles on Wikipedia can't be good for anybody's temper. I wonder if the ongoing RFAR will help, but I can't say I'm really optimistic. Political passions on an encyclopedia that anyone can edit are bound to reflect political passions IRL.
I hoped you'd read my AN3 comment as emphasising your clean three-and-a-half year block log, but it seems you saw chiefly my description of your old blocks, which I meant to mention only to dismiss, as being, you know, old. Your response even italicised the words "more than three years ago", practically a fucking quote from my own first words, as if to awaken me to some novelty. I'll have to work some more on my emphasis and focus. But I'll stop typing now and go have some tea myself. Who's Nomo? (But this is not really meant to continue a conversation, in case ending on a question sounds like it. Please reply if and how you wish, but I think I'm done.) Bishonen | talk 16:45, 12 June 2014 (UTC).
  • Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.....--MONGO 23:13, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

Hello most honorable Ms. Bish and family. I was out and about on wiki - and wanted to drop by to wish you well. I did go see the new Godzilla movie (on opening day) ... WOW ... FANTASTIC!!!

Hope you and yours are doing well -- All my best always,

Ched — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.77.99.132 (talk) 15:49, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Ansegam[edit]

See here. I left a message on their talk. to which they replied here and then proceeded to revert the edit. The "data" added by the user is consistent with editing pattern of Ansegam with citations added from 'books.google.es'. If it's a SPA, I simply don't understand why the user cannot appeal their block and explain their actions. Any thoughts? Thanks.  NQ  talk 01:37, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Aha, thank for the heads-up. Did you notice Ansegam has a template on his page that reads: "This user is new to Wikipedia. Please assume good faith, remain civil, and be calm, patient, helpful, and polite while he/she gets accustomed to Wikipedia and its intricacies." And Graniole wrote to you "Let me become accostumed to Wikipedia". (Spelled differently, but then the first one was a template, not his own spelling.) That's almost enough for a duck block on its own. A little more ROPE might put it beyond doubt without bothering a checkuser. Let me ponder a little — I'm not really awake yet.
What an unhelpful diff. Ludicrous system. I had to stick it into Word and use the "Compare documents" to see what exactly it was he added..! Were you able to see whether it was in fact a restoration of refs that had been added by A before? (Please don't bother to chase it down if not, I think this is bound to be resolved rather quickly in any case.) And did you notice the UK IP reverting him afterwards, and then Graniole reverted again? That's enough of that, I'm going to give him the newbie 3RR template while I think. And a "use edit summaries" also. You already told him, but if he has no conception of them, he needs a link. Bishonen | talk 06:24, 13 June 2014 (UTC).
Now at 4 straight reverts:
Includes a revert after your warning. It's not often I wish I had a block button. --RexxS (talk) 10:20, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Isn't the echo of the quack from the quasi-dead duck hanging that rope loud enough? Best, Sam Sailor Sing 11:21, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
  • (talk page stalker) I saw this thread and filed a report at AN3, resulting in Graniole being blocked for 24h for edit-warring. Enough time for a quick look at the quacking. Thomas.W talk 12:21, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

@Sam Sailor: Yes, Sam, it's deafening. I thought seriously of just duckblocking, but it's an indeffing matter, of a user who originally meant to help I guess (though he immediately started showing he's not cut out to edit here, when he was challenged), so I thought it would be nice to have a check, and now I have. And the CU immediately blocked Graniole himself. Noooo… here I was just going to tell RexxS how satisfying it is to have your own block button and go BANG BANG… and Reaper Eternal went and stole my sockthunder! :-( Never mind, I go indef the master now. Unbelievable guy. You'd think he could at least have found an open proxy in China or summat. Bishonen | talk 14:48, 13 June 2014 (UTC).

PS, just drop a note here if anybody should notice new Ansegam socks at these articles. I won't make a song and dance with checkuser again. And thank you, Thomas, for procuring me some breathing space with the 3RR. [/me stuffs Thomas, RexxS, Sam, NQ, and Reaper Eternal into her pocket. I mean into Bishzilla's pocket! She especially likes to have a good selection of checkusers in there.] Bishonen | talk 15:13, 13 June 2014 (UTC).
Might not be of any value, but I did notice earlier today this post dated May 15, from a Spanish forum. I guess he didn't have a helluwa lot of luck recruiting collaborators. Judge for yourself. Best, Sam Sailor Sing 16:29, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Interesting. Did you get that just by googling Ansegam? Poor fellow. I thought he was well-meaning from the start, and that post certainly looks like it. Enthusiasm comes through, about Wikipedia, about his own articles, and about erudition. What a pity he wasn't able to adjust to our ways. :-( Bishonen | talk 17:17, 13 June 2014 (UTC).
Right you are. And how ironic is it that he tried to canvass off-wiki for co-editors considering that he could have had a dozen friends here and have been held in high esteem for his knowledge and hard work. Alas, WP:ACADEME. Best, Sam Sailor Sing 18:09, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm a little late, but glad to see everything resolved quickly, just like you said it would. Like Sam Sailor said, he could have been an asset with his knowledge and hard work, had he worked well within the framework of Wikipedia guidelines. I have been keeping a tab on the foroches forum thread ever since Ansegam got blocked, to see if there was any mention of edit warring or sock puppetry, but couldn't find any. The user Graniole was created merely two minutes after the last edit by Ansegam's IP and the first edit was to this article. The style of writing, adding lengthy non-formatted url citations from google books (spanish), constantly reverting edits with no edit summaries were dead giveaways. However I gave the user a chance to come clean by providing some context about the whole situation on their talk in order to dissuade them from making further edits and let the situation resolve itself. However they decided to create a new persona, claim ignorance and rightly characterised it as "a battleground between one user and the rest of Wikipedia0s community" - and that really rubbed me the wrong way along with Ansegam's prior attitude. Thanks for taking care of this.  NQ  talk 20:06, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Chauhan[edit]

Ha! The most recent contribution to Chauhan may be the source of all the prior disruption. Chauhan1192 (talk · contribs) has just reappeared after years of inactivity. I don't think SPI will do much, though, because of the IP linking issue. - Sitush (talk) 12:45, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

I saw him. Never mind the IPs, we could get the registered socks checkusered. [Checks pocket for little checkusers. Sure, a good flock of them. They're playing poker in there! Cute little fellows!] Hang on, I'm trying to think. That loud quacking noise is very distracting. Bishonen | talk 12:57, 14 June 2014 (UTC).
I was a little slow on the uptake there, sorry. Now indeffed per WP:NOTHERE and WP:USERHADBETTERNEVERTRYTOPLAYPOKER. Bishonen | talk 13:30, 14 June 2014 (UTC).
Didn't seem slow to me. Thanks, Bish. - Sitush (talk) 15:27, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Article[edit]

When you got time for it please take a look at Skogssamer. Thank you :)--BabbaQ (talk) 16:53, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, on sv.wiki a focus on the Swedish skogssamer is natural, but surely on en you need to bring in Norway and Finland under this umbrella? That may be a lot to ask, since you're obviously starting from the Swedish article. If you want it to be about Sweden exclusively, the intro could acknowledge prominently that there are wood sami in Norway and Finland also (but this article is going to be about Sweden). I was going to suggest you could acknowledge it in the article name, but since the name is a Swedish word, maybe it's allright as it is.
I've copyedited the lead some, except the bit about how Manker in the early 1900's found only one remaining habitation (kåta?) which "was located in Malå during the 1800s". Huh, what? Had it moved away from Malå to somewhere else by the time Manker got there..? I don't mean to make fun, but I don't understand the sentence. Bishonen | talk 17:53, 14 June 2014 (UTC).

48 Hour Block[edit]

Hello, I just pinged you in regard to this; I was told you had blocked me for 48 hours in April of 2014. However, I show no record of being blocked. I was gone for much of that month and my WP access was intermittent so I may have just missed it. However, in case you forgot to apply the block I wanted to give you a heads up and let you know I would receptive to its application now. I reviewed the case in question and I agree such a sanction would be justified for a 3RR I made, however, as I have not edited the article in question (Vance McAllister) since that time I would request you vacate the block. Thanks for your kind consideration. 23:38, 14 June 2014 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by BlueSalix (talkcontribs) .

  • [9] is your block log, which provides the details. Dennis Brown |  | WER 23:41, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
  • "Vacate" the April block? Now? What are you talking about? There's a record in the block log, if you follow Dennis's link, and a block notice on your page.[10] I see you took a break for six days after 9 April, when I placed the block, thus perhaps didn't attempt to edit, but I'm still surprised you didn't notice my block template on your page when you returned to editing on 15 April. I thought it was quite conspicuous. Please sign posts on talkpages with four tildes to produce a signature, not five. Bishonen | talk 00:12, 15 June 2014 (UTC).
Dennis Brown and Bishonen; thank you both, kindly, for this clarification. I've replied in the ANI, however, allow me to again apologize for this extra bookkeeping hassle resulting from my oversight. BlueSalix (talk) 10:38, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

RfA[edit]

Thanks for your support, even though I felt compelled to delete it before transcluding the RfA. You will at least have escaped the shame of a disadvantageous association if I manage to completely mess something up. Should I find myself in need of heavyweight backup, I'll keep the 'Zilla in mind. Deor (talk) 17:22, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

[Bishzilla can on occasion be protective of the little 'shonen, and now she's outraged.] Delete little 'shonen? ROARR!! bishzilla ROARR!! 17:42, 16 June 2014 (UTC).
Darwinbish bites Deor shrewdly on the ankle. darwinbish BITE 18:05, 16 June 2014 (UTC).

172.3.208.11[edit]

In a recent discussion, you suggested I contact an administrator should this IP return to the editing practices that provoked the warnings. Well, they have as you can see here and here. I waited until the 2nd occurrence to inform you. A short block of less than a week probably won't be effective, since the user occasionally goes more than a week between edits. I propose two weeks if that's possible. Thank you! --GoneIn60 (talk) 18:08, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for alerting me. The original idea was for "a short attention-getting block", but I agree they might not notice a short one. Two weeks should not be necessary, though, because at a quick look at the contribs, I don't see them going more than five days without editing, at least recently. (That's quite an orgy they had for a couple of days in May.) Blocked for a week. Bishonen | talk 18:52, 16 June 2014 (UTC).

Your Proposal about Rajsector3[edit]

Hi. Just to let you know that I've made a comment on your proposal about the above user here. I'll be interested to hear your comments. Thanks. RomanSpa (talk) 11:48, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Lawsuit[edit]

See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Legal_threats_against_Wikipedians. Not sure if that is the best forum; I'd appreciate your guidance. - Cwobeel (talk) 02:44, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

I see is already taken care of. - Cwobeel (talk) 05:16, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Request to take notice[edit]

I request you that on page Central University of Haryana there is competition to praise the present employees and creating accounts and advertising as per their whims and caprices. Previous information has been removed without giving any explanation by user:CuharyanaRajsector3 (talk) 03:14, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Good catch, Rajsector3. I've reverted Cuharyana's removals of sourced criticism and his long additions of promotional content, which also violate our copyright policy, being copypasted straight from the university's own site. (It's expected that a university website will read like an advertisement, I suppose — it is de facto an advertisement — but an encyclopedia article is different.) And, as you know by now, the copyright issue is serious also. I'll write a warning on Cuharyana's page. They're new, have editing nothing except this article, and probably know nothing about our policies. Thanks for the alert! Bishonen | talk 13:39, 22 June 2014 (UTC).
I've taken the equivalent of a Darwinbish bite out of the article to clean it up. Let's see if actually reading the source and summarising it accurately finds any favour with its current crop of editors. --RexxS (talk) 17:18, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Very nice fixes, RexxS, it's looking 1000% better. I was going to suggest to RajSector that he try to get some copyediting help, but you've beautified it beyond any reasonable expectation. I wish Indian articles weren't in such a parlous state altogether. I don't know how Sitush does it, really. Bishonen | talk 20:47, 22 June 2014 (UTC).

Request for help in survival of a page[edit]

Friend / Sir, I request you to help in survival of the page Corruption in Haryana , I am resident of Haryana and topic is notable with sources and essential to stop this menace. I make it clear hear there is no inclination of criticism and promoting someone. Even Lokayukt (Ombudsman) comments have been mentioned on the page. It is truth and having information for the world. If you are agree, please remove the template of deletion or extend the time period for discussion. Profound thanks.Rajsector3 (talk) 16:44, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

(for reference, the recent ANI thread. [11] AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:53, 22 June 2014 (UTC))
The sources may indeed demonstrate the notability of the topic, but the article itself is a piece of polemic and has no place in an encyclopedia. I understand your grievance with the authorities in Haryana, but Wikipedia is not the place to right great wrongs™ and I'd strongly advise you to read Wikipedia:Tendentious editing #Righting Great Wrongs and take note before it's too late. If you continue to treat Wikipedia as "essential to stop this menace", I'm afraid you'll rapidly outlive your welcome here. --RexxS (talk) 17:36, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Please listen to RexxS, RajSector, and take to heart what he says. You're flogging a dead horse. Wikipedia is for neutral encyclopedic articles only, not for polemics or for saving the world. Your continued attempts to keep Corruption in Haryana in the encyclopedia are frankly making you look like you didn't understand the arguments made against it on ANI. The topic may be notable, (although the very title needs to be more neutral) but no Wikipedia article can be written with yours as a basis. Sorry to be blunt, but it needs to be deleted per WP:TNT. Please click on that link. Bishonen | talk 21:40, 22 June 2014 (UTC).

Hm, yes, I am curious[edit]

Per your post here I would be interested in said info. Feel free to email me if you wish. Montanabw(talk) 22:40, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

FYI, just noticed this. I'm only observing for now. Montanabw(talk) 07:30, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Obviously somebody's sock, since new users don't often start by re-formatting footnotes, using templates. I had some hesitation about blocking per WP:DUCK, though, because the master account doesn't seem to use those same cite templates, so I've asked a checkuser, to make sure. Confirmed, sock blocked, sockmaster warned. Bishonen | talk 21:52, 28 June 2014 (UTC).

Follow-up to SOCK[edit]

Bishonen, I thought people were innocent before proven guilty, but have been misjudged here yet again. I'm not sure exactly what has been done wrong here. Do you really think there is necessarily one person living in a home where there is only one computer? We have several computers, and any number of people who use them at any time. Why not update your system to that which is more sophisticated so this type of thing doesn't happen? We went through this same stuff with Amazon last year. If I didn't know better, I'd say you're looking for a reason to argue. Peace to you, bro, Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 02:07, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

I will also follow-up with Coren, Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 02:09, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Actually, if Wikipedia should ever be interested in updating it's system, I can recommend some great models by which to follow, including AT&T, PayPal, and various credit card companies. Thanks, Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 02:27, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Don't call me "bro", please. In view of your "I'm being oppressed as a woman" schtick, it seems a little sexist of you to assume everybody on the internet is a man (I'm not one). You have said the same thing now on three pages; I see from your exchange with Coren that a member of your family using the same computer was responsible for the brand new account that gave you a barnstar. Obviously a Wikipedia-savvy person, whose very first edits were to format some references using cite templates, an art many established users haven't mastered. Quite remarkable. Does the person perhaps have another Wikipedia account? And no, I don't think there is necessarily only one computer in your home, so why were they using yours? Were you not aware that Checkuser can pinpoint the actual computer used? See also WP:ROOMMATE.
But I'm quite willing to let the matter drop. I wouldn't have said this much if you hadn't come to my page with so much condescension. Bishonen | talk 06:58, 29 June 2014 (UTC).

Edit notice[edit]

Hi Goddess. Would you please consider creating this edit notice? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 11:07, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Gosh, it turns out I have to use a ¥”¢‰¶\{}}≠}{\¶ fucken template. Why? Goddess Darwinbish created an edit notice for her own talkpage with the greatest of ease and intuitiveness. Well, I'll have to fly by the seat of my pants. Let's see if it works.
It seems to — so far — I can't really test without going live with it — but shouldn't there be an introductory sentence to guide new users, or they're liable to add their "thoughts on anything" to the article, or — in confusion — nowhere? How about "If you have any comments on the article, please add them to the talkpage. We're particularly interested, etc"?
I see there's discussion about this in box form, and not everybody may be OK with your edit notice either, but I'll (try to) create it boldly, if you're around to respond to my suggestion above, and it can very easily be removed if it needs a fucken RFC on talk or something.. my god. Anyway. Bishonen | talk 12:07, 29 June 2014 (UTC).
Hang on, I just realized you want to add the edit notice to the talk page. Then I suppose it doesn't need an introductory sentence. On the other hand, will new users even find the talkpage? We tend to think our system is intuitive because we're used to it, but it can be quite opaque to n00bs. Bishonen | talk 12:22, 29 June 2014 (UTC).
Ah, sorry. Go to the article and click on the box that is in the infobox's spot. (I asked User:Drmies and he's not touching it with a bargepole. But I know you're so much braver and wiser than him.) --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 12:43, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Oh, quite. Try to edit the talkpage now and see what you think. (I'm going out, back later tonight, if you'd like it changed.) Bishonen | talk 15:11, 29 June 2014 (UTC).
Thanks! It works, but I don't think it needs
  • "Please add comments below" because that's pretty intuitable from the layout I think.
  • "For a new comment, create a new section at the bottom of the page" because they're already doing that.
Is it possible to delete those? And could you please make the font a bit bigger? (<font size=4>bigger?</font>)? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 15:30, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
As it happens I can edit that notice as well. I've made some of the changes you want, but I've left "For a new comment, create a new section at the bottom of the page" because you also get the edit notice if you click the edit link at the top for the whole page - and we'd like to then direct them to edit at the bottom of the page. Is that ok? --RexxS (talk) 19:59, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Thank you RexxS. Well, would you mind deleting that bit too? My thinking is this, in all the time since that article went live - 3 years or so - not one newbie has ever edited it or left a talk page comment. So, odds are that any newbie who does edit the talk page now is highly likely to have come via the invitation button, and the present wording would be meaningless and confusing to them. While the edit notice is on the page, I'll be fielding any comments or questions, so should a reader put a comment in the wrong place, I'll move it. This isn't a universal solution to be rolled out over all encyclopedia articles, it's just an attempt by me to get some (ideally expert) input to that one, well-watched article.
Also, would you mind changing "but your thoughts on anything – especially ways in which the article could be improved..." to "but any ideas on improvement..." - just for concision? Ta! (Link to edit notice.) --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 01:41, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Done. I was never crazy about "your thoughts on anything" — I mean we sometimes get literally some of those on talkpages… Bishonen | talk 08:54, 30 June 2014 (UTC).
Anthony, would you perhaps like to be a template editor? If so, check out the guidelines for granting it here. If you fulfill 'em, I can give you the user right. Well, once I figure out how. Bishonen | talk 09:20, 30 June 2014 (UTC).
That sounds very impressive. I'll definitely look into that. Thanks. And thank you both (User:RexxS!) for your help just now. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 10:41, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
I've already asked Bishonen to give me the template editor permission. Waiting impatiently for a whole new field for my endeavours! I'm very good with templates! darwinbish BITE 00:01, 1 July 2014 (UTC).
Does it come with a badge? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 08:46, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Pffffft.gif This user has template editor rights on the English Wikipedia. (verify)
Yeah, cool "in your face, suckers" badge. You should use it, Famously. But the documentation don't inspire much confidence, does it? They've imported some admin documentation lock, stock and barrel. Some template editor needs to fix it. darwinbish BITE 09:21, 1 July 2014 (UTC).
I so want that badge. Mmm. I pass 3 and a half of the 6 criteria but it does say, "Items in this section are merely guidelines. An administrator may choose to substitute other proofs of an editor's competence in handling high-risk template responsibilities." (I promise not to handle high-risk template responsibilities. I swear, I'll make you proud.) --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 12:09, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia Template editor icon (1).svg This user has template editor rights on the English Wikipedia. (verify)
Well the badge that the geeks have devised isn't quite as pretty as DB's, but it is a little easier to invoke. At least it is now that someone has created the proper documentation for Template:User wikipedia/template editor, rather than having the documentation just point to somewhere generic. --T-RexxS (rawr) 12:50, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
That's very neat and professional. But I think I prefer darwinbish's Dadaist approach. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 13:05, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
You are now a template editor, Anthony, per rationale of highly active user, flawless editing of late years, plus he calls me "goddess". Anybody else who'd like to be a template editor, please call me "goddess" below. Bishonen | talk 18:39, 2 July 2014 (UTC).
Thank you Bishonen. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 19:09, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • MONGO pathetic monster refer to you as Goddess first!...but template editing bad bad bad to let MONGO do...better smart user do it. MONGO make massive mess, crash servers, anger users.--MONGO 11:27, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Goddess, I have multiple template edits and even a template RfC change pending. I've even been pocketed by Goddess' friend and have even spottierless record than MONGO and used less Tanks. Plus I only edit templates that are broken or not conform to policy. And also use sandbox, testcase and talk page--DHeyward (talk) 06:48, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Little DHeyward is now a template editor by divine intervention (Bishzilla ex machina). Fell free to use Darwinbish's improved userbox as per above, and to use tanks. Bishonen | talk 12:21, 16 July 2014 (UTC).

A topical video[edit]

This is fun. During 4:33-4:38 she is trying somewhat unsuccessfully not to laugh. vzaak 00:56, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

One question. I think I get the gist of most of this, for instance the suppressed giggling I mentioned is a prelude to this fantastic insult: "Er fula nuna är en skam för den person som bär den, ni förefaller skrynklig som ett handklaver." But what comes after the second "Alla kan ju inte älska alla här i världen, bland andra har jag särskilt svårt att älska er" at 4:25? Online translators and dictionaries are confounded by "Å hujjanemej, å hujjanedej, å fy faderullan faderittandej", if that is what the lyrics are. vzaak 13:53, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Haha, yes, great insult. Incidentally I tried putting my extract into Google Translate, as I assumed a page watcher or two might do that, and it was quite amusing, introducing a completely extraneous "your husband" (for "er man" in "särskilt sällsynt bliver den när er man ser", so one can't much blame it :-)). This version is very good, provided you keep your eyes tight shut while listening as the illustrations are beneath contempt. I think that's Brita Borg singing. It's better as a monologue, and I think it was written as such, for, indeed, Brita Borg.
As for those words… yikes. They're… exclamations, a bit dialectal and oldfashioned (as suits the song), expressing surprise/indignation. They're mostly just… rhythm, really. But there are a few semantically significant elements. You see how hujjanemej morphs into hujjanedej? That means "me" has turned to "you". So, you might loosely render the two together as "well, I'll be damned, well, you'll be damned". As for "fy faderullan", it's a euphemism for "fy fan", like saying "darn" instead of "damn". (Swedish is extremely fertile in those euphemisms, religiously-oriented swearing being more important than in English. Anything beginning with fa.. or jä.. is liable to be pressed into service: Fy fagerlund! Järnspikar!) And "fy faderittandej" conjoins the whole: "curse you to hell".
But your Swedish is obviously very good. Any background in it? Swedish parent? Bishonen | talk 17:02, 3 July 2014 (UTC).
Oh my, I am flattered by the thought that I might be cultured enough to know Swedish, but I have only a vaninishingly tiny knowledge of it arising from a general interest in languages. Despite being co-opted from a monologue, the duet arrangement was quite enjoyable for me, so much so that I was following the lyrics phoenetically while looking at the corresponding the Google translation. Initially, visually, the stage piece might appear to be another saccharine number akin to A Bicycle Built for Two -- I love how it's actually a series of insults and profanities. The mysterious "å hujjanemej..." part was tormenting me, resisting all my googling efforts. I really appreciate your explanation, thanks. Getting the lowdown from a native is always interesting. vzaak 05:54, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Making that out was quite a feat, then. I don't know if you noticed that the male singer in the duet was the writer of the song, Tage Danielsson. Creative guy, dead too soon. If you want to challenge yourself some more you might try Elektricitetsvisan. :-) Bishonen | talk 08:09, 4 July 2014 (UTC).
(talk page stalker) Or Tage Danielsson's monologue Om sannolikhet from 1979 about the Three Mile Island accident. Which is a real classic. Thomas.W talk 09:36, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
I found a version with English sub-titles too ([12]); watching that version is cheating, though. Thomas.W talk 09:43, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Block me if you can[edit]

6 months.[13] Abhi (talk) 12:20, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

I found you from here as I had searched this user's history after he commented in ANI thread to confirm what I was saying. Nothing strange about it. In fact your this comment is strange. I have given my previous username on my userpage, I have given dozens of links under username neo in above thread on arbcom talkpage. And you casually walk in the hall and declare that 'NOTE! THIS IS Neo.!'. So are you going to block me or should I continue banging my head against gang of anti-Indians and anti-Hinduism admins/users? Abhi (talk) 14:01, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Wait a minute... If those admins delete my posts on arbcom talkpage, then it would flame me and I will come back with IP or new username even after block. Those admins use alien tricks to flame users and then block or ban him. So first, restrain them or please wait. Abhi (talk) 14:59, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
[Light breaks.] Oh, what I took as a challenge to block you was a request for a self-requested block? Sorry. I don't do those blocks conditionally, but on request as per my page User:Bishonen/Self-requested blocks. Please read it. Mind you, your threat to sock indefinitely if "those admins" (who?) "flame" you (I don't think you mean "flame", really) is almost enough to make me block you without any request. But for the moment I'll do nothing, unless/until you come back with an unconditional request where you indicate you accept my conditions for self-requested blocks. In the meantime, please refrain from voicing personal attacks and conspiracy theories about other users. I know you haven't tried to hide your previous account, but you didn't make it clear in any visible way on the arbitration talkpage — not everybody clicks on links — so please don't take offense at my pointing it out. Bishonen | talk 16:39, 5 July 2014 (UTC).

Sitush ANI complaint #36785[edit]

A clueless complaint in Aisle 2, of the paid-editing sort. I mentioned your sadly defunct Clueless Complaints about Sitush subpage. Acroterion (talk) 03:09, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Gosh, I didn't know Sitush was a brahmin,[14] I'll be more respectful. About the clueless complaints noticeboard, some asshole hassled me about it on RfD, so I defuncted it. I guess it had got a little old anyway. Bishonen | talk 09:57, 6 July 2014 (UTC).

The vandal in Chile is back[edit]

Hello Bish. The vandal in Chile you blocked (after being reported by someone at ANI) is back, now as Special:Contributions/190.96.34.46. Same geolocation and the same old vandalism, introducing small factual errors in articles. Thomas.W talk 18:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Blocked by Chillum. Thomas.W talk 18:23, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Right. But please tell me who it was I blocked for the same thing before, so I can take a look at the range. I block so many! [Lovingly applies extra lick of polish to her well-worn cherrywood block button.] Bishonen | talk 18:27, 6 July 2014 (UTC).
201.239.30.37 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · edit filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). The IP-ranges aren't related, though, and are even from different ISPs (this latest one belongs to Gtd Internet S.A. while the previous one belongs to VTR Banda Ancha S.A., both of them in Santiago, Chile), so a range block isn't possible. Thomas.W talk 18:36, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Oh, you meant the one I just blocked? Sorry, I might have known. Bishonen | talk 20:30, 6 July 2014 (UTC).
Gente Totalmente Dispuesta (es:GTD Group) seems to be principally a business ISP; VTR Broadband (VTR (telecom company)) seems to have a strong presence in the home market. There's a reasonable chance you got both locations, unless the Chile vandal has figured out how to edit with a mobile phone. If so, could you ask him to explain it to me before you block him? --RexxS (talk) 21:03, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Editing on a mobile phone is hopeless, but many modern smartphones can be configured to serve as a wireless hub, letting you surf on a laptop, using the Internet connection of the mobile phone. And it's easy to configure, all you need to do is to read the phone manual and then tick a box in the settings on the phone (that's what I did on my Samsung). Thomas.W talk 21:11, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
All you need to do is read the phone manual?? [Still trying to get past the first page on her Samsung tablet manual.] But yes, editing on a touchscreen is indeed hopeless. Bishonen | talk 21:17, 6 July 2014 (UTC).
I've got myself a tablet too, but since I'm not particularly fond of on-screen keyboards I got a tablet with a keyboard dock that turns it into a 10" midget laptop. I hardly ever use it for anything that requires typing, though. Thomas.W talk 21:24, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
(edit conflict) It might be better to take your info and request to the ANI thread for more eyes, RexxS. Bishonen | talk 21:12, 6 July 2014 (UTC).
Aaargh, no, not the drahmah boards - what did I do to deserve that? Thanks for the tip, Thomas; unfortunately, here in the UK some of our mobile ISPs (I'd better not mention my old mobile provider) don't allow you to use your phone for tethering. --RexxS (talk) 21:28, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
How would they be able to tell? The only way to tell would be if they were packet-sniffing, looking for the identification tag of your web browser, indicating a desktop/laptop version of the browser (I'm typing this on my 10" "midget laptop" using Chrome for Android and tethering, with the web browser set to show the desktop version of WP and not the mobile version...). --Thomas.W.mobile talk 21:36, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Oh they know, I assure you. Here's a typical tethering policy that forbids tethering on unlimited data plans, and clearly shows that they look for it. Another mobile data provider that I won't name forbids any tethering at all. It may be worth checking your own T&C. --RexxS (talk) 22:43, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

WordGirl IP user[edit]

Hi, Bishonen. We've got a problematic IP hopper originating from Zapata, Texas. He has repeatedly added the May I Have a Word episodes? to the List of WordGirl episodes article, but it is unsourced, and has added the May I Have a Word critics into film articles ([15], [16]). I consider the IP's edits as problematic. Can you please do something about this? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:11, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

My lord, do you think you could ask another admin, please? I find those kinds of articles/lists, including their sourcing, so impenetrable. It's almost like asking me to handle a footballer article. (I avoid those even at RFPP, I'm afraid.) Sorry. Bishonen | talk 20:35, 6 July 2014 (UTC).
I'll go ask around and see what can be done. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:40, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Russians[edit]

The user I1990k is a WP:NINJA who refused to negotiate the reverting of the collage. There was a consensus established a few months ago to change the massive to collage to a smaller one with ethnic Russians only. The massive amount of text regarding Soviet cinema violates WP:POINT and focuses on a country's cinema rather than an ethnic group's culture. I've already reported User:I1990k for edit warring and I'd appreciate it if you understood the situation better. Khazar (talk) 22:59, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm looking into it, and will respond on WP:AN3 soon. Bishonen | talk 23:01, 7 July 2014 (UTC).
Thank you for your co operation. Khazar (talk) 23:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

User behavior[edit]

Hi, User:Ezzex badly behave in Talk:Operation Protective Edge, especially uncivilized wording You should stay the fuck.., own restrictions, which are not Wiki policy. Eg: Jewish editors should not don any edits on this article, Should not use Israel media as references. I don't see it as a constructive edit. Therefore, I want to complain about the user. Could WP:ANI be suitable place or could you take necessary action? --AntonTalk 19:15, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Admins are talking to the user at User talk:Ezzex and I added a formal discretionary sanctions notification. There should be no need to take any further action at the moment. I'm replying because Bishonen is on a wikibreak (see the message at the top of this page). Johnuniq (talk) 00:18, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you Johnuniq for your prompt action. --AntonTalk 01:50, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

95.180.123.154: disruptive editing continues[edit]

Hello again, Bishonen. Please note this. The IP was blocked for one week for the very same edit. Regards.--Jetstreamer Talk 16:37, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Now there is an other IP address but its most likely the same person vandalizing my talk page.--Uishaki (talk) 23:24, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I'm sure it is the same person. I've semi'd your talkpage as well. Going to bed now, folks. Bishonen | talk 23:33, 13 July 2014 (UTC).
Please note that I've reported the IP at WP:ANI.--Jetstreamer Talk 00:41, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

More generators[edit]

This one is funny, though I couldn't find enough material to support sticking it in his article. And COULD TEENAGE SEX TAX THE QUEEN? Drmies (talk) 18:43, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

It's only funny if you don't live in the country where he was Home Secretary. --RexxS (talk) 20:11, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I tried the headline generator (getting "ARE CHAVS TURNING YOUR PETS GAY?" on my first try) but it wasn't particularly funny, maybe because the headlines you see every day in the UK make no more sense than the ones from the generator. Thomas.W talk 20:33, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
It's a little disappointing that there's nothing about Sitush in that generator. Still, and while it doesn't cause cancer, the genuine headline in re the political leaders meeting at the memorial service for Nelson Mandela remains very nice: Obama and Castro agree on same-sex marriage. Perhaps from CNN. User:Tony1 showed it to me. Bishonen | talk 13:57, 16 July 2014 (UTC).
Amazingly, perhaps, this recent effort is the first time I can recall being called a Nazi. I do believe that Mr Blunkett was referred to in similar terms on a few occasions and, given that he is older than me, I may yet catch him up. - Sitush (talk) 00:35, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Problems continue at Chauhan[edit]

Yes, the problems continue at Chauhan. Most recently, it is Kggochar (talk · contribs), who has just yet again changed the article despite what the sources say and despite not offering a source that demonstrates an alternate opinion. I left them a sanctions warning here a couple of days ago because they've been making similar unsourced/anti-source pro-Gurjar edits on and off for months now and have shown no sign of discussing them except for a few minutes in January.

Could you perhaps fire a shot across their bows? - Sitush (talk) 20:08, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye on it, but note that their last edit so far was made just after your warning + general sanctions template. In other words, they could easily have made the edit, and only then seen the warning (through getting an alert). So, I don't think I should do anything right now, but one more of the same and (if I'm around for it) they'll get a guided missile across the bows. Incidentally, do you take this user to be related to you-know-who? Considering they have been editing since September, perhaps not? Bishonen | talk 20:47, 18 July 2014 (UTC).
That is a very fair point re: timings. I'm sure that it won't make any difference in the long run but it is the right call. I wondered whether there was a connection but the range of articles is much smaller. We get spates of these Gurjar/Gujjar claims from time to time across a big swathe of subjects; sometimes they're obviously socks, more often I think they're meatpuppets inspired by a call to arms on web forums dedicated to that caste. This one may even be flying solo. Me? I wouldn't know a Gurjar from a goujon and really couldn't care less provided that they're following the sources and the policies. - Sitush (talk) 20:56, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Yeah.. now that they've continued, I've posted a warning. Not nuclear at all, but the user's technical incompetence touched me (and also made it, for me, impossible to tell what s/he was talking about). But it is a warning. I'm going to bed now; perhaps it'll resolve itself, through some other admin, in the night. If not, I'll be as good as my word, and block next time. Bishonen | talk 23:05, 18 July 2014 (UTC).
I can live with the technical incompetence and you'll note that I've done some mild refactoring of talk page comments - indents etc. It is the underlying mission that concerns me. While their sources thus far are useless vis-a-vis what they wish to support, I'll take yet another look at the general issue when I have a moment. Right now, that has caused me to divert to Irawati Karve, whose article was poor and who just perhaps was one of those eugenicist types who favoured the viewpoint. I'll wrap that one up and see what else I can find. I'm beginning to wonder whether a lot of these caste articles need a Historiography section where we can dump the indubitable nonsenses of the Raj era. And by pure coincidence, given my immediately previous in the section above, Karve studied for her PhD at an institute in Germany that was a centre for Nazi eugenics! - Sitush (talk) 00:43, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Pi Pie[edit]

Do you want more to add to your collection. If so then check this. Thomas.W talk 21:38, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Nom nom. Bishonen | talk 21:51, 19 July 2014 (UTC).

I'll just...[edit]

*ba-cock*

...leave these hens here.
Peter Isotalo 20:09, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Aha, the excellent new Swedish pronoun höns? Fine critters, very motherly-looking! There should be one in every cookpot! (Am I quoting Marie Antoinette? Perhaps not.) Bishonen | talk 20:41, 20 July 2014 (UTC).
Kokt höna med currysås och ris är gott. Boiled hen with rice and curry sauce. Nom nom. Thomas.W talk 20:51, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
So you say, and indeed it is. But do you realise Google Translate thinks "kokt höna" can appropriately be rendered as "boiled chicken"? Can you fathom that there exists on earth a language so primitive as not to honour the (culinarily) essential distinction between tough old hens (a gourmet treat if boiled long enough, not to mention producing the world's best bouillon) and their tender but boring and flavourless immature offspring? How can a language that mashes the two together have become the global default? The Untergang des Abendlandes is upon us! Bishonen | talk 21:11, 20 July 2014 (UTC).
English is a primitive language in many ways, in spite of its claimed exceptionally large vocabulary. In my opinion Swedish is a more precise language than English, in the sense that it's easier to express nuances, in all its meanings, in Swedish than in English. At the expense of Swedish being a grammatically and syntactically more complex language than English. IMHO and so on. Thomas.W talk 21:23, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Continuing problems with user Kutsuit[edit]

Hallo Bishonen
after your educational intervention on User Kutsuit at Talk:Largest cities in Europe, she has been continuing her behavior on several articles, as Azerbaijani Language and Languages of Europe. The idea behind her edits is always the same one that you noticed last month, and the pattern is always the same: she edits boldly, and after being reverted according to BRD she reverts again invoking BRD against the other user, accusing him of disruptive editing, menacing him on his talk page, removing article templates, refusing to accept past consensus, and so on. Afterwards, mostly she accepts to discuss, but with her version as the stable one. Before yesterday she has been strongly reproached here by another user for having accused me of canvassing. Today I restored the lead on Azerbaijani Language (an article where I was not involved so far) and removed the most problematic edits at Languages of Europe. Can you please watch these articles, just in case that she continues her behaviour? Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 05:24, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

OK, I'll look into it, but it'll have to be a bit later. Bishonen | talk 08:15, 24 July 2014 (UTC).
Thanks a lot Bishonen, it does not hurry, this story lasts since one month... :-) In between, she reverted me again at Azerbaijani Language and Languages of Europe, ignoring my request to go to the talk page. BTW, to this two articles you can add Turkish Language, where I have removed a non pertinent reference explaining the reason on the edit comment, and she reverted me writing that the reference is "important". Alex2006 (talk) 09:04, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
That looked a bit worse than I expected. I've just taken some action. Bishonen | talk 09:10, 24 July 2014 (UTC).
Thanks a lot! So much energy of so many people wasted, which could be devoted to make wikipedia better... :-( Alex2006 (talk) 09:14, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Dealing with IP 114.31.218.104's edit warring and personal attacks[edit]

Hello, Bishonen -

I saw your exchange with Binksternet after he put indefinite semi-protection on Good Luck Flag, and I just wanted to weigh in to say that IP 114.31.218.104 has continued to revert and to engage in personal attacks despite having twice been blocked, once for 24 hours and again for 60 hours. So I don't think that the latest block will be effective beyond its one-month duration. The personal attacks are especially worrisome and really do need to be prevented permanently, which I assumed the page protection would in fact accomplish. But would repeatedly blocking the IP be better? I don't know enough about Wikipedia policy to figure this out, so I'd greatly appreciate knowing your rationale for blocking instead of protecting. Many thanks! Ailemadrah (talk) 05:53, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Well, we often try to prevent abuse, but it's hardly ever possible to do so permanently..! But we try particularly hard with biographies of living people. Yes, I think repeatedly blocking the IP is better than repeatedly semiprotecting the article. Semi probably couldn't have been made longer than one month anyway, in view of the page's (modest) protection history,[17] and I'd rather not swat away all IPs and new users because one static IP is being disruptive. It's different when disruption is coming in from dynamic IPs, which is actually a more common case. If the person pops back up after the one month (but I find people often get bored and move on after a longish block), they can then be blocked for, say, six months, and so on. If something else happens during the block, such as for instance this person discovers how to change their IP, then I will certainly semi. (Please let me know if I should miss it.) Binksternet, incidentally, isn't an admin; I only intervened because I knew Bink couldn't protect or block himself. What he told you was that he would request protection, and he did, on this page, where I also replied. I understand your concern, but I don't think you need to worry too much. Feel free to ask again if there's anything else you're wondering about. Bishonen | talk 08:10, 24 July 2014 (UTC).
Thank you! This makes perfect sense, and I very much appreciate your willingness to answer further questions. Ailemadrah (talk) 16:18, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Administrator intervention needed[edit]

Hello Bish. Could you please take a look at Vikings and Talk:Vikings. There's a POV-pushing new editor there, Wikifiveoh, who seems to have totally lost it. They have repeatedly been removing the British Isles from the intro of the article, claiming that it's offensive in Ireland, and have kept on doing it in spite of having been reverted by several different editors, pointed to WP:BRD and told to get a consensus for the change before doing it again. In addition to repeatedly messing with my indentation on the talk page, in spite of being told how we do things here, and being pointed to WP:Indentation. Probably in the hope of getting me irritated enough to leave the article.

The failure to get consensus for their change has now made the editor totally losing it, accusing me and editor RhinoMind of being the same person, claiming that I POV-push for the term "the British Isles" on other articles too (which I have of course never done), and so on. When all I have done is defend a version of the intro that has existed for a very long time, and that there is no consensus for changing. Thomas.W talk 21:21, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, no time. Talkpage stalkers ahoy? Bishonen | talk 21:42, 24 July 2014 (UTC).
Replied on your page. Bishonen | talk 08:40, 25 July 2014 (UTC).
I believe we have a competence problem... Thomas.W talk 15:38, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Well, I'm usually the guy who empties the standard external e-mailbox, but I haven't seen anything. Then again, it's been frightfully hot here, for days now, so maybe the report withered. Drmies (talk) 03:44, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 16:25, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you![edit]

Cute grey kitten.jpg

I had to offer you a Kitten. Why you ask? Because of those awesome balloon pictures on your user page! I guess also for your good admin work on Wikipedia.

NathanWubs (talk) 17:31, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

[Bishonen tickles the kitten under the chin. It purrs.] Awwwww. Thank you! Bishonen | talk 19:53, 26 July 2014 (UTC).

Do you remember ...[edit]

... what the situation was with Charlie Strap, Froggy Ball and Their Friends and related? I dimly recall there being a long-term abuse case involving someone obsessed with these cute films and their voice actors. A new IP has cropped up and is removing maintenance templates and making other troubling edits at the group of pages I have on my watchlist, but I don't remember whether there's a ban-revert-on-sight situation and before I ransack my talk page archives trying to find it, I wondered whether you do remember. Yngvadottir (talk) 12:22, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Checking the article history, it comes back to me. 90.224.246.99, a static corporate IP, had been vandalising these articles all over the place, and is globally locked until Oct 2014. And for three years on sv. Compare my note here. When I discovered that, I blocked them for a year on en. 192.36.199.133 and their brother 192.36.199.130 who appears in the article history are also static IPs. Let me check, with my limited skills, if I can get in via port 80 or 81 (said she as if she had any idea what that meant, but I have a point-by-point manual from a nerd in my pocket).
No, I can't, so they're by my lights not obvious open proxies. But they're static, so if you think they're obviously disruptive, or obvious representatives of the globally locked 90.224.246.99 (though as you can see they're not in the same part of the country), you can block them for as long as you like. Or, better, just block their tiny range, 192.36.199.128/29. There are so many articles involved that semi would be a pretty boring option. Bishonen | talk 12:58, 28 July 2014 (UTC).
That would be my first ever rangeblock, not a career step I look forward to. So I'll continue to play whack-a-mole, I think, unless they do more outright vandalising (such as the talk-page blanking). It does serve as a useful reminder of where those actor articles are that I need to expand from sv. Thanks for the context. Yngvadottir (talk) 13:25, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
They are sometimes adding new text in poor English and with strange emphases (as in the past), but today are mainly removing maintenance templates and sometimes removing one project's template from article talk pages. I've just given them a Level 4 warning for the former; you or RHaworth may want to step in if they do it again. I'm rather hoping they stop with that. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:02, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • My reservoir of credulity that this is not the same person is getting low now. I just deleted Talk:Stall-Erik And The Snapphanarna as a hoax - supposedly opened in 2020 - and will shortly tell them so. But now I see sv:Stall-Erik och snapphanarna, with 2015-20 as the projected opening date - more plausible but still unlikely. Feel free to undelete it and move it to article space if you think I was over-hasty, but it seems to me like the same kind of writing. I'm going to try simply explaining why I deleted it. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:27, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
The long list of Swedish kändis-es is a tad hard to believe. I've dropped a query to someone I happen to know at Svensk Filmdatabas, the only source given, to ask whether or not Svenska Filminstitutet guarantees the contents. If the database is more like a wiki where directors get to list who they've worked with, then it's not a reliable source. I'll get back to you. Bishonen | talk 17:37, 28 July 2014 (UTC).
I've also just zapped another recreation of Talk:Agaton Sax and the Byköpings Village Festival (the globally locked IP had been creating it with And The). It would be nice if someone else would create these articles, with a reference or two, but I'm not equipped to do so, and inclusionist though I am, I'm not sure every film ever made should have an article. Yngvadottir (talk) 06:36, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Yngvadottir, I've e-mailed with one of Svenska Filmdatabasen's reps, who's a friend of a friend and is also given as one of two people to phone here. And it seems to be legit. She, my contact, wrote the database page herself, after some critical analysis of the director's claims. And, thinking about it, those actors are the kind of people likely to google their own names now and then, and to blow up if they find them misused. (They're not all dead.:-)) As for the 2020 date: the director used to say it'd be ready in 2015, later changing it to 2020, so 2020 would be correct in the article. But, since you do "Swedish with dictionary" I can forward the info from the horse's mouth, if you like, with some more details and opinions about the film from this expert. (I wasn't thinking, or I'd have asked her to reply in English.) So I guess it should be undeleted. (And then maybe deleted again but with a non-notable rationale. A Swedish film scheduled for 2020? Wikipedia is not a chrystal ball.) The suspect IP only translated, they had nothing to do with writing the sv article, which I won't meddle with, since it's notable enough for domestic purposes IMO. Bishonen | talk 12:24, 29 July 2014 (UTC).
Thanks. As I say, I wish someone else would do these instead, with a ref. but I can't. I'm going to ask you to look at that deleted talk-page article, and the Agaton Sax film talk page article, and the rest of the IP's contribs and see whether you think we should be treating them as a blocked/banned user (that was my criterion for the Agaton Sax deletion). If there's still enough doubt, then I'd be happy to do that, or you may want to do so yourself, although the wording in the deleted article should probably be changed to future tense in that case before it's re-deleted. From my few dealings with the first IP, it seems the poorly translated English and heavy use of Swedish is part of the M.O., but it could just be a different film enthusiast ... Yngvadottir (talk) 14:42, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Oh god. I mean, sure. I'll look at it later. It's too hot. Bishonen | talk 18:44, 29 July 2014 (UTC).
Yeah it is here too, and Wikipedia seems to have gone mad the past day or two. Thanks. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:08, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Yngvadottir, still pretty hot, but I've recreated the talkpage article, moved it to article space, copyedited for comprehensibility (the incompetent use of tense tricked you into thinking it was a hoax), and added the source which is certified reliable. After all that, I'd feel a little mean if I immediately PRODded it for notability, but I really think that's what it needs (2020 is just too far in the future). I don't think the creator is the same as the globally locked IP, at least not with any certainty. Bishonen | talk 19:59, 31 July 2014 (UTC).
Many thanks. I'm relieved you don't think it's the same person; I was afraid it was looking increasingly that way. Now I don't have to be a total hard-ass. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:08, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd like to mend my relationship with you...[edit]

Hi Bishonen, I've given this a lot of thought last night, so here goes... You and I have gotten off on the wrong foot a few months ago, and unfortunately things between us just deteriorated until the recent quarrels. I'm glad that you understand that I felt I was harassed by you for many months, and I also understand that you're trying to do your job as an administrator. The thing is, I'm usually not confrontational. In real life (i.e. outside Wikipedia) I'm a very happy-go-lucky person. I don't know what it is about this place but it always seems to bring out the worst in me, but I plan on changing that. Wikipedia is a very confrontational place, if you think about it. Edit wars and flame wars take place almost every second around here, so the environment is intimidating. Nevertheless, I understand where you're coming from. I shouldn't stoop down to the level of engaging in these kinds of antics/arguments and I shouldn't have viewed everyone as a potential threat. I'm sorry for hurting your feelings earlier, my dear, and I hope we can put this behind us once and for all. And from this day onward, I'm willing to learn from you. You have many more years of Wikipedia experience than I have, and I'll be willing to follow your footsteps. Anyway, have a nice day. :-) --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 13:16, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your olive branch, Nadia. But your situation on Wikipedia isn't so much dependent on your "relationship" (? do we have one? relationships are slow ripening fruit, as IIIraute said of friendship[18]) with an admin who's been trying to advise you, as on the way you act towards other users, all of them. I'm sure you're not like this in real life, as you say, and it's great to hear you acknowledge that Wikipedia — or perhaps the internet altogether? — brings out the worst in you. I read that as saying you want to turn over a new leaf, and to, well… work on your interaction style..? That's great, but why not start by mending bridges with the ordinary, non-admin editors you're in conflict with and whose Wikipedia experience you've quite frankly soured lately. By speaking of mending bridges, I'm not asking you to eat humble pie, merely to change your demeanour for the future. If you don't know who I'm referring to, have a think about it, research your own interactions on user talkpages, articles, and article talk. This has not been a matter of "getting off on the wrong foot" with me, still less of my "hurt feelings" (I don't have any). Happy editing, and I hope we get on like a house on fire in the future. Bishonen | talk 18:48, 29 July 2014 (UTC).

Hello Bishonen[edit]

I've got something perking and would like to hear your views about it off-wiki, away from prying eyes. I'd appreciate it very much if you'd drop me an email at your convenience as a couple of people have suggested that I get in touch with you about it. ShoeHutch@gmail.com Best, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 22:50, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Sure. Done. Bishonen | talk 23:07, 29 July 2014 (UTC).

Local Nature Reserve and National Nature Reserve[edit]

Last September I asked for help at Talk:Local nature reserve to move Local nature reserve to Local Nature Reserve, and you kindly sorted it out. An editor has now unilaterally and without discussion reverted the move and also moved National Nature Reserve to National nature reserve. Can you advise how to deal with this. As I pointed out the names should be capitalised. Dudley Miles (talk)

I've moved it back and left a note for the user. I'm frankly not sure which is the best name, but just moving it the way they did isn't the way. I've reverted the changes to capitalization in the article, too. Bishonen | talk 11:14, 30 July 2014 (UTC).
Thanks very much. As I pointed out in the previous discussion, Local Nature Reserve and National Nature Reserve are always shown capitalised in the sources, correctly in my view as they should be title case. The editor is changing National Nature Reserve and the lists for each county similarly. See Special:Contributions/Mauls. Dudley Miles (talk) 11:21, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I was just looking at that. Oh lord, the National Nature Reserves is dispersed into four articles, all with the lower-case spelling. And it's been renamed. I think maybe you need to discuss that separately, if you think it's worth it. You might put a note on Talk:National nature reserves in the United Kingdom, and links to it on the talkpages to the four subpages — England, Wales, etc. Please let me know if you need any admin moves going forward, if you get consensus (or indeed if you get no objections in say five days or so) for your versions. Bishonen | talk 11:26, 30 July 2014 (UTC).
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters - "Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization". The section Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters #Institutions is probably the closest to this case. In general, we only capitalise proper nouns and that implies that generic titles like nature reserve should not be capitalised, although specific instances, such as the Ripple Nature Reserve will be. --RexxS (talk) 17:21, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
In this case capitalisation is necessary for clarity, as well as being the usual style in sources. "Ripple Nature Reserve is a local nature reserve" does not signify that it is legally protected, whereas "Ripple Nature Reserve is a Local Nature Reserve" signifies that it has a specific legal status. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:05, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
No, it doesn't. --RexxS (talk) 19:32, 30 July 2014 (UTC)