User talk:Drmies/Archive 32

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Ask and ye shall receive[edit]

Oh, just eat already. 99.153.142.225 (talk) 15:56, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can't always get what you want[edit]

But if you try sometimes, you might find: you get what you need.

Beer!
Fried chicken!
Barnstars!

Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:10, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh god damn it, 99, you stole my thunder! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:11, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's what I do, Writ Keeper. By the time we're through here, the poor bastard will need a virtual bypass. 99.153.142.225 (talk) 17:06, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Doghouse Diaries[edit]

Although the article has been deleted, I wasn't able to get any response for my last edit, which includes another reference from webmagazine, MakeUseOf. I agree some of these webmagazines I have never heard of, but that doesn't really qualify them to be unreliable sources. For example MakeUseOf, has a full editorial board, and not just from the magazine, but also from its wiki entry it seems like a reliable web magazine. In any case, this was my final comment, if because of this you change your mind, please let me know what I could do.

I have added yet another reference which puts doghouse diaries in the list of Top 8 web comics. This was in the web-magazineMakeUseOf, an independent media magazine, with an independent editorial board. MakeUseOf, Mashable and Gizmodo, each of them have covered Doghouse Diaries well enough to qualify it to be notable. The objection however could be as to whether the above sources are reliable or not. Here are my points why they could be considered reliable
  • They are not related to Doghouse Diaries, nor does it seem that they are trying to unfairly promote Doghouse Diaries.
  • They have editorial system, for which I refer to their corresponding wiki articles, for example the editorial for MakeUseOf is Editorial staff. Each one of them has an Editor-in-chief and so on.
The clarity of this discussion would be enhanced if the other wiki editors could cite the reason why they think the above references cannot be taken as reliable. Points like Mashable is a trivial source, is a trivial argument.Shashi B Jain (talk) 09:02, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some baklava for you![edit]

I appreciate your patience to face unwanted "categories".Yes you know candy is hard to bite but it is better than to fight?.Justice007 (talk) 16:38, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well said, Justice. I hear it's warm in the motherland--I'll check it out next week. Drmies (talk) 17:26, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are awake and I'm out the door[edit]

Is it me, or is Legolover26 trolling? Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 19:58, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Mwa. I think he's bored. He's made some article edits. Drmies (talk) 20:19, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • He also made a bunch of trouts, helpmes and other edits, so it might be bored, but I figured it was a 50/50 chance. Trolling starts from boredom, too. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 20:20, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • On an unrelated note, your buddy A:-)Brunuś is off block. He nom'ed a subpage of a user [1]. The rest of his CSDs look fine. I'm just wondering what is going on in his mind. Just monitoring for now. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 23:24, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for keeping me posted. I'll have a look. Drmies (talk) 02:21, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-warring[edit]

Hello! I am sorry to bother you but can you please explain to me why I am the one facing a block? Have you not noticed my pleas for discussion in each edit summary? I have started a discussion at Talk:Teresa Cristina of the Two Sicilies#Descent from Philip and Louis. I have cited numerous reasons, articles and sources, while the only argument of the other party is: "It is relevant." I got the last response on 23 May; they don't even bother to respond anymore. The relevance note tag was my attempt to encourage the discussion because, after doing my best to prove that one of the subject's great-great-great-great-great-grandparents needs not be mentioned unless there is a specific reason (inheritance, genetics, anything), no reason was given at all. I was simply ignored, as if there was no need to pay any attention to my arguments. I apologise for causing inconvenience but I cannot help feeling that this is not right. Surtsicna (talk) 21:06, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies, the above user was mentioned to me on my talk and I looked at the ANI that's up now. And I looked at what they're doing. They're disruptively hacking away at a lot of Royals articles. Please look and consider blocking them now. Cheers, Jack Merridew 22:31, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oh, right, you are Jack! Well, a belated welcome. I've heard a lot about you. ;) Drmies (talk) 12:58, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I am sorry to bother you, but please take a look at this edit summary. The above user wants to provoke an edit-war that would lead to me being blocked. When I removed that section, I cited WP:See also. I explained my edit both in the edit summary and on the talk page. He responded with: "you should be blocked, soon". "Disruptively hacking away" is what he calls this and this edit - yes, one of them is changing the width of a picture from 250px to the default 215px. The above user reverted those edits simply because I made them. I must say again that, for the first time in a long time, I actually feel bullied. After five years spent editing this Wikipedia, it seems that I will be hounded and that I will eventually have to ask users like him for permission to correct typos. Surtsicna (talk) 22:41, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Seems you /do/ know me; reference all the right terms. Also seems to me that you're damaging a lot of articles. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 22:46, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sheesh. I get pinged on Facebook, my inbox is full, all because of this? Jack, sorry, I'm not going to block that quickly. Surtsicna, you got a warning because you were edit-warring. If you've been here five years you should know the rules; I'm not even going to link to it. You first removed that information and then three times tagged it, against other editors. That's edit warring. Your question, as far as I could tell, was addressed on the talk page. As for the claim of provocation, see the (spurious) ANI thread that I just closed. Drmies (talk) 01:38, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So I heard ;) I didn't look too much further into what he'd cut up. Those articles are watched. DrK and Lecen are involved in more than a few of them. I'm fine with how this went and will look back tomorrow to see how things sort out. Terima kasih, Br'er Rabbit (talk) 02:18, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

Dear Drmies I'd like to draw your attention toward the article at User:Maharathi/sandbox which I've rewritten and invite your valuable suggestions and feedback to improve the article.Maharathi (talk) 01:56, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Responded on John CD's talk page. Drmies (talk) 02:04, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I beg you, please...[edit]

Stop mentioning [2] your pool, the balmy temperature, cocktail hour, etc. etc. etc. or I shall be forced to rent a car, drive for several days, and show up at your door in my Speedo, primed for some R&R. (And, believe me, you don't want to see me in my Speedo.) Your Yankee friend, Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:03, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hehe. Guess where I'm sitting right now--with a Triple Imperiale from Brasserie des Rocs (which tastes a lot more like a Dubbel). The fence is unlocked, by the way, so just come around the side of the house. Drmies (talk) 03:07, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • 86°F, eh? Well, you can keep it. :) I am sweltering up here in Virginia with 72°F and 78% humidity (it was 90°F today and felt like 94°F, ugh!). I will be very, very happy when September gets here and Autumn begins. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:22, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Fall here starts in November. Actually, I kinda can't wait til football starts. Drmies (talk) 03:25, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'd love 86. It hovers around 98 here. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:28, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Crisco, it's the pool that was at 86, not the world around it. ;) BTW, football--someone cue User:Tide rolls, please. Drmies (talk) 03:33, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • @Drmies: Well, here in Northwestern Virginia, it starts in Mid-September, right around the beginning of the TV season and the peak of the leaf season here. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:14, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                • I don't miss fall/autumn, not at all... mind you, photography is much easier when the sun isn't actively trying to give you cancer. @The Dr, what's the world around it like? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:20, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                  • Low 90s, today, but for the rest I'd have to write you a book. Drmies (talk) 04:29, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                    • I'm not sure where you live, but if the pool is 86, it must not be Cleveland. 90 here in NC today with humidity just as high, and I'll be outside all afternoon at a wine tasting. Not so much a fan of NC wines, but it is something to do and it has been a while. Entertainment is by a Country and Western band, which is a first I've seen at a wine tasting. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 12:15, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                      • We just closed ours this week, the harsh WA (not that WA) winter is upon us, although I am sure with some effort I would have been able to keep ot usable all through the winter, although we did have the coldest morning in May on record in 98 years. Dennis, the Margret River is supplying me with my spiked grape juice tonight, but it is Tenth Doctor episodes rather that country music for entertainment, not that I am against country music. --kelapstick(bainuu) 13:10, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                        • Ours is open year-round (it doesn't have a "close"), and my oldest and I have swam every single month of the year; we started in earnest in March. The Dutch are tough. Canadians are pussies. Small wonder we had to liberate you in the 1940s--oh wait, never mind. Drmies (talk) 15:33, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                        • I am a big fan of the wines east of you, don't think I've tried any on your side of the continent. Not sure what Aussie's think of Yellow Tail and Alice, but we yanks love it. Just picked up a bottle YT Shiraz yesterday, and always have several varieties in stock. This is the 12th annual North Carolina Wine Festival [3], and apparently another article I need to create. Think I will bring the camera. It's a pretty relaxed affair, and I love regional cultural events. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 13:57, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                          • Oh I don't know what the Australians think of it, but I quite like it, and Wolf Blass. You know that none of the bottles here have corks? All (and I mean all) are twist off, Australians are classy like that :) --kelapstick(bainuu) 14:05, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                            • Aussie wines have synthetic corks here. We yanks look down on screw caps for some reason, likely because of E & J Gallo Winery using them for their cheapest wines, back in the days when California wines were considered less than par anyway. They don't put me off, as I'm not a wine snob, I just like the stuff. Already half done creating a stub for the article as we speak, then to shower and head off. :) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 14:22, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                              • Ahh, good ole' Strawberry Hill. Goes down like kool aid but hammers your head all the next day. It is just a step above Mad Dog. :P
                                ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 16:18, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                                • I'm back, bought a nice dry bottle from some vineyard called "Owl Winery" that was quite good. Much of the wine was sugary sweet stuff (blackberry, blueberry, watermelon), like many NC wines, but a few where very interesting. Tasted from over 15 wineries, several from each, then came home and opened that bottle of Shiraz, grilled a T-bone. Don't think I will be doing too much editing tonight. :) Fun event, very low key, hot as hell. Was spread all out in the woods, so not sure that I got any photography worth posting. Gotta love a good cultural festival. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 23:49, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                                  • It's currently 52F/11C. It has been raining. Mountains are covered in a dusting of snow. It snowed 2 inches last year at the house over Memorial Day weekend, so I guess I have something to be grateful for. I have to spend tomorrow with the Spawn of Satan, AKA mother-in-law. Yesterday it was confirmed that the Spawn will have hip surgery in June. So, the week of June 18th, I get to spend the week in Hell, AKA Spawn of Satan's house, taking care of her during the day. Great, in hell during the day, with the wife in the evening. I have to snuggle tonight with the wife while watching the last of Breaking Bad. I don't drink, but I just may turn to some bottles Everlear. Life sucks. Hate you all, except kelapstick. No matter what you Drmies, kelapstick will always be a friend. Bgwhite (talk) 02:10, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Help_desk#Thine_Antique_Pen.
Message added 14:11, 26 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Deathlaser :  Chat  14:11, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How odd... that page does mention Drmies - but not at the section you've linked. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 14:20, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have an interest in it nonetheless. Drmies (talk) 15:36, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bees for Development[edit]

Are you satisfied that the article passes the notability requirements now? For the DYK nom. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:46, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • I made a note there. Thanks Crisco--this thing has dragged on long enough. Drmies (talk) 16:06, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Crisco, it's a pleasure working with you. But don't drop by during nap time! Or, if you do, lower your body into the water gently so you don't wake anyone up. Drmies (talk) 16:14, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wouldn't want anyone to see how hideous I look in whatever bathing suit I dig up, so don't worry! Besides, better 86 degress than the 45-50 I'm stuck bathing with (we don't have hot water). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:16, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment[edit]

Dear Drmies, I apologize for being harsh on anyone. But please I am asking because I do not know whom to ask. Could you please tell me what is the solution when there is lots of WP:RS but no consensus. What needs to be done in such cases on the wikipedia? But in anyway I apologize for being harsh. Could you please help me and suggest a solution. Best regards and thanks Robin klein (talk) 01:49, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Almost![edit]

I'm at #1002. Gerda is one ahead of me. LadyofShalott 02:12, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • You're wrecking the curve for the rest of us, you know? I've somehow moved up 114 spots this week, up to #2529, and I'm still ashamed. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 03:08, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep at it, Lady. You're doing great. Drmies (talk) 03:27, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, and Dennis, you have no reason to be ashamed - you're doing a lot on here! LadyofShalott 03:38, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh I'm not really ashamed :) I'm not fast or particularly eloquent at writing, more gnomish. I'm a fan of self-motivation, so I think it's great that you are doing this. It's making me want to shoot for 2000. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 10:41, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Happy adminiversary![edit]

In an extraordinary and surprising display of competency, you've somehow managed to be an admin for one whole year without destroying Wikipedia.

It's hard to believe it's only been a year – it seems like you've been an admin forever. You've done an exemplary job, and you've made the literally hundreds of people who supported your RfA very proud. Thanks for your dedication to the position, and congratulations! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 11:13, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, congratulations! Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:02, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Congratulations, Drmies! I'd leave another image of food and drink, but methinks you've had enough already. Speaking of which, it's almost time for my breakfast. Nice of Mandarax to acknowledge your milestone by giving you the, er, finger. Very best, 99.153.142.225 (talk) 12:04, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • And in an amazing coincidence (giving the finger?), this man, who has held the family jewels, is in the paper today. I guess he's notable! Drmies (talk) 12:56, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mind giving food.
  • Montgomery, eh? It just occurred to me that I've got a painting in a Birmingham gallery--don't ask how it got there. Let me know if you're ever there with 7 minutes to kill. 99.153.142.225 (talk) 13:09, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll be sure to check it out--where is it? As a matter of fact, the girls are in Birmingham today. If you have any work at the zoo, I'll tell them to have a look. Drmies (talk) 17:32, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Work at the zoo.... maybe not an inappropriate idea. I'd prefer to share the information off-Wiki, if possible. 99.153.142.225 (talk) 18:44, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • My cousin is a birdkeeper at the B'ham Zoo (currently that is - she's worked all over there). LadyofShalott 22:21, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Of course. I don't know if you have access to the email function, or if you still have an account--but Mandarax has my contact info as well. Drmies (talk) 19:07, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Congrats, friend. Too bad you aren't here, I have a bottle of Moldavian champagne that needs a special occasion, and this would be worthy. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 16:31, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks to everybody! This is greatly appreciated, and at lunchtime I'll toast you all with something delicious, though not yet anything from Cantillon Brewery, unfortunately. Drmies (talk) 17:32, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tangents[edit]

  • Note: I've "coined" words before, only to later discover that someone else had previously come up with 'em, but I was pretty sure adminiversary would be all mine. Alas, I've now checked, and I found that it had appeared on three other user talk pages. I have, however, created a unique word to describe such words created by me: portmandaraxteau. This word is both a portmanteau and an autonym. Going further out on one of my famous tangents... for an old discussion in which I mention one of my favorite portmanteaux, see this. And further still... I was reminded of another very funny portmanteau, from Arrested Development: Tobias created a new category for himself which combined analyst and therapist, so on his business cards he referred to himself as an analrapist. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:01, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, I should've known: analrapist exists! Too bad that redirect couldn't be expanded into a DYK.... MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:47, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mandarax, I totally thought you were a grown-up. It's a good thing some Beauty and the Beast thing is on TV or my Sippi might see that horrible word you just posted on my talk. Drmies (talk) 00:55, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hehe, I might've actually thought you were serious if I didn't know it was coming from the creator of the testicular barnstar.... MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 01:46, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do like "portmandaraxteau". I lack the originality for such fancy footwork; I'm glad creativity is not dead yet. Drmies (talk) 01:51, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks. I like the plural: portmandaraxteaux. As for your lacking originality, that's just plain ridiculous – you're overflowing with creativity. Also, I've thought about it; that is a pretty horrible word and a concept which a small child should not be exposed to, so I've struck the offending word above. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 23:18, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, just a vile joke on my part. Let's forget about it. Drmies (talk) 01:59, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Right, we're all adults here, and Wikipedia iz zeriouz bizznezz. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:01, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

UFC on Fuel TV: Munoz vs. Weidman[edit]

Just wanted to drop you a note that I tagged UFC on Fuel TV: Munoz vs. Weidman G6, you closed the AfD on the article, it was moved during the deletion discussion, and you only deleted the redirect, not the nominated article. Monty845 00:01, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring, personal attacks and common sense[edit]

Too many words

Hi, Drmies. Thank you for making your way to the article talk page to discuss our recent edits to the lede. I'll respond to your comments relating to article improvement in the new section you just opened (although there is already a subsection about the same material further up on that page). You also, however, saw fit to include personal attacks in your talk page comment, including calling me "a professional wikilawyer", and accusing me of page ownership. Your personal attacks are unwarranted (in addition to being unbecoming an administrator), and I am formally requesting that you remove them. Xenophrenic (talk) 02:29, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • If you request informally, I'll think about it. Your ownership of that page, however, seems pretty clear; your editorial battle mentality is clear also. Drmies (talk) 02:32, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed them for you. You appear to be confusing adherence to policies and guidelines with "Wikilawyering"; editing of a page with "ownership of that page"; and the reverting of an edit you made with "editorial battle mentality". Uh, no. I reverted a stupid edit; deleting sourced content (without even reading the sources) goes against "common sense", to use your phrase. While it may be a "never ending battle" to keep improving the Wikipedia articles, please don't misconstrue my edits as some sort of challenge to you personally. It didn't help that your edit mirrored exactly an edit previously made for different reasons by an actual tendentious editor, who was indefinitely blocked just moments before. I now see you are aware he was blocked. There is no "battle" between us, unless it is one of your making - and I'd rather not join in.
So rather than run off to a noticeboard to raise a big stink about your incivility and personal attacks, how about I ask you to substantiate them? What actions of mine could possibly prompt you to cast the aspersions of "Professional Wikilawyer", "Page Owner" and now an editor with "battle mentality"? Help me to understand where you are coming from. And help me to understand what purpose could possibly be served by posting these aspersions at an editor on an article talk page. In the meantime, I'll go review those sources and see if I can make the article lead more clear. Xenophrenic (talk) 04:08, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't want to stop you from running to the noticeboard. I don't see what that blocked user (good riddance, by the way) did to that article--or how such an edit "mirrored" mine. Now, if you could make that lead more clear, that would be great. I hope you see my point about the "increasingly". Ownership--well, the recent history seems to suggest that you are taking care of the article, and your edit summaries are a bit terse. In one, you mentioned ELYES, from which I site: (Did you mean cite? "proper use of English!" -Xenophrenic ;-)) "Wikipedia articles about any organization, person, website, or other entity should link to the subject's official site, if any. See Official links below." Note the singular in "official site". ELMAYBE gives me no reason to believe that there should be an exception here; what pages with rich media files have to do with this is not clear: that line is a suggestion to mark such pages explicitly--in this case, there was a website and a Facebook page, and in general we consider ELNO to mean "one of those is enough". Thank you, Drmies (talk) 04:24, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Well, I don't want to stop you from running to the noticeboard."
Doesn't seem likely to happen. I'll frequently raise the spectre of possible noticeboard drama (i.e.; I'll get a 2nd opinion at AN3) when I feel an editor is pushing the boundries of Wikipedia policy compliance or straying from collaborative behavior, but if I seriously intend to drag someone through noticeboard mud, there will usually be no such forewarning. I was serious, however, about the inappropriateness of your article talk page comments to me -- while I won't be crying on a noticeboard about it, other editors could cause you a lot of grief in similar circumstances. Please don't make such comments about fellow Wikipedia editors, even if you can fully justify it, as it just doesn't serve any purpose. File that under friendly advice. That brings me to...
"I don't see ... how such an edit "mirrored" mine."
Please see this edit by the now blocked for "tendentiousness and socking" editor. Identical edit, down to the last pixel. Also see the discussion presently at the top of the talk page, under the heading: Removal of POV Statement that CPUSA" has since grown into an increasingly diverse organization". Note that while you complained that the "diversity" wasn't adequately explained, the now-blocked editor had removed it on the false and silly grounds that it was POV. You see, that editor was very determined to remove any content that conveyed diversity, or non-partisanship or trans-partisanship -- anything that contradicted the meme that the organization was really just a secret liberal arm of the Obama Administration. And what did you do? You first posted a talk page comment noting the blocking of User:NeutralityPersonified, and 2 minutes later implemented the identical edit last made by that blocked editor. I hope that better explains how your edit mirrored the edit of the POV warrior, albeit with a different stated justification, but also accompanied by removal of links to sites associated with that group.
"Ownership ... you are taking care of the article, and your edit summaries are a bit terse."
Ya think? I've already addressed your concern about "taking care of articles" at the He owns an article! section of the Complaints Department. Yes, some of my edit summaries can be a bit terse, I'll admit. That does not, however, indicate article ownership, nor does it justify your making such comments about a fellow editor. As for the WP:EL policy, please note that the Facebook page and the Website are both Official Links (as defined by the 2 criteria listed at the policy page), and both qualify to be listed under External Links. Please further note that nothing in that policy restricts the linking to just a single Official Page. Now, just between you and I, can you please explain to me how the removal of just that one of two links improves the article for our readers? The EL list is short, and in no way excessive: just 2 links. The links are not redundant, as they have different content on each. They are both "Official Links" as defined by Wikipedia. Neither can be "incorporated into the article", as they contain too much information.
"ELMAYBE gives me no reason to believe that there should be an exception here; what pages with rich media files have to do with this is not clear..."
Incorrect. It specifically states: "Very large pages, such as pages containing rich media files, should be considered on a case-by-case basis." The Facebook page, which is an Official Page, is just such a page. What case do you make, what service are you providing to our reader, by removing one of just two external links from that article? I expect we'll be revisiting the EL section soon. With no substantiation forthcoming regarding the three attacks, I'll just wave them off as silly stuff spouted in a moment of frustration. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 07:15, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A Facebook page as a Rich Media site? That's indeed rich. Or desperate. Your wall of text does not obscure the normal editing practice here: one link per club. And what an edit from April 2011 has to do with mine, well, impugning guilt by association comes to mind. Have a nice day. You could have fixed the problem twenty times over already. Drmies (talk) 13:20, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I'm going to box this ridiculous wall of text in. Drmies (talk) 13:25, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Xeno, that is not what a personal attack is, disruptive editing and unproductive comments are not vandalism or personal attacks. Learn to read before you accuse.LuciferWildCat (talk) 04:04, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's funny, thanks. However, I was not accused of vandalism here. Nice of you to keep track of me, though. Drmies (talk) 04:06, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't even know how to respond to that. Xenophrenic (talk) 04:08, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Xenophrenic, this is a rather gratuitous comment from an(other) editor who is disgruntled with me and who, I guess, is looking for an opportunity to pile it on. It's not worth our time. Drmies (talk) 04:24, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Galvatron (Beast Wars II)[edit]

As I said in the tag, Galvatron (Beast Wars II) was an attempted article split that was undone. There is history at Galvatron (Beast Wars II), but this content was not merged back into Galvatron (they just reverted the edits at that article). So, this would count as an WP:CSD#A10 as a recently created duplication of content (the article was still "recently created" when the editors blanked the page), or as WP:CSD#G6 as housecleaning. I used a generic template so that I could explain more clearly. The redirect itself is valid, the redirect is not the problem. The problem is that so many editors were moving content back and forth with the Megatron and Galvatron articles and that creates attribution problems. Deleting this page simplifies that issue, as I've determined that the edits were not carried forward, and this history does not need to be kept. The redirect itself can be recreated right after. I hope this makes sense, I'm just trying to untangle the article history. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 04:17, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry, but I don't see what the problem is with retaining the history under that redirect, or how it would cause attribution problems. But maybe some smarter person than me who happens to look at this can set me straight if I'm wrong. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:27, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • The reason being that the edits imply that this is a split history, and only by going through and reading the numerous edits is it clear that this is not a split history, it is a history dead-end. Redirects from merges must be maintained for history, and this would appear to be one of those to someone who has not read through the edits. Further, these articles are about to get more confusing as they require a massive copyedit, as well as a merger of some content (between Megatron and Galvatron) and a content split, between the first Galvatron (who is actually Megatron) and the second Galvatron, from Beast Wars II. The content of the history of Galvatron (Beast Wars II) isn't even specifically about the Galvatron from Beast Wars II. There is a reason these pages are protected from editing now. If you are still uncomfortable with deleting this article, or see some reason why this redundant and unseen content should remain, I won't bother you any further. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 04:50, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A request against Vandalism[edit]

Hi, I think you're an admin, so I have a request. Khwarazmian Dynasty is vandalised by an unknown user with the IP: 94.128.139.98. Can you protect the page please? BozokluAdam (talk) 15:53, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes I am. However: first of all, we don't protect over a few edits. Second, I don't see how those edits are vandalism--which has a pretty sharp definition here (see WP:VANDALISM). This looks like a content dispute. I urge you to engage the IP editor on the article talk page. Please don't revert their edits as vandalism: it's not. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 16:09, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see that the talk page is seeing some action, and the IP's contributions are not very helpful. Drmies (talk) 16:15, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is an ongoing discussion, but that person deleted the other contributions different from the discussed subject, so I said it's vandalism. Also, I suspect those unknown IP's can be the same person? Anyway, I'm trying to solve the problem. Thanks for your help. BozokluAdam (talk) 16:30, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is not easily called vandalism; it looks like a content edit, though the date on the CN tag indicates they're restoring or undoing something--if this continues it's edit-warring and it may become disruptive. But you reverted the IP here without explanation, something they might call vandalism. Drmies (talk) 16:38, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the information; I'll care about it. And 94.128.139.98 reverted the article three times within 24 hours, so he/she should be blocked. Anyway, I don't want to join this edit-warring. BozokluAdam (talk) 17:51, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I checked now and noticed that I had reverted the IP here as it changed the order of the words in the intro sentence; however, I fixed it now by just fixing that sentence. In the meantime, I hope you might also check the page Hazara_people and the debate on its talk page (where I couldn't see a consensus-version though an editor "‎Lysozym, his previous name is Tajik" claims it, and attacking other ethnic groups instead of discussing and solving the matter. Anyhow I need to reply his claims automatically.). BozokluAdam (talk) 18:12, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BozokluAdam, you should be very careful with your accusations. I did not attack any ethnic groups. In fact, this is a bad faith accusation on your part and a violation of WP:PA! The current intro of the article Hazara people is a consensus version. It is a short and precise intro and you are one of a very few who do not accept it. You claim to be a Turkologist, but your edits actually prove that you have no clue of the subject. And as for the IP calling you a Pan-Turkist: he has a point. All of your edits are about pushing for some kind of "Turkishness" in various articles. You even claim that there are "38 million Turks in Iran" - a totally laughable claim that is only popular among Turkish nationalists and Pan-Turkists. No scholar would agree. Personally, I do not care what political ideology you follow as long as you keep you keep your edits neutral and well-sourced. So far, I have not seen any good edit on your part. You should also read WP:SOURCE: it's not important how many sources you can list but what quality these sources have. --Lysozym (talk) 18:45, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lysozym, I believe that I'm neutral, and I'm not a Pan-Turkist or racist. I only observe that your edits display you're not objective. So try being a bit objective. That's my warm and friendly advice to you. Anyway, you carry out the blood of Seljuq Turks (also Oghuz Turks who migrated and established their dynasties in Iran), and you also carry the blood of Azeri Turks (who governed Iran till 1920s); so you carry out some Turkic blood in your vessels as well as your Persian, Arabic and Mongol ancestors. So you don't need to be so racist as you don't carry out a pure blood. The world is a place where there is a harmony of the mixtured people, especially in those areas functioning as a bridge such as Iran. So, we know that many tribes settled and migrated to Iran. You can't claim Persian people being so pure. Your perspective should be on this fact, and get rid of your biased opinions. --- BozokluAdam (talk) 15:04, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Enough out of all of you. You shouldn't be having this discussion, if that's what this is, on my talk page. This namecalling back and forth is bringing me down. Both the IP and Bozoklu have received a warning for edit-warring/3RR. I have protected the article (full protection) until you and a bunch of other editors can figure out what should be in the article. Drmies (talk) 01:58, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, I don't want to go on the debate; I have already expressed the facts with sources. In the meantime, can you, please, add my previous contribution, except the debated matter of Persianate, in Khwarezmian Dynasty? That IP did also deleted some other contributions of me while he's reverting the article. The debated matter was on the term "Persianate" which required valid sources. If you check this difference between two reverts, you'll see what I mean. You can put Persianate there, which is on debate, but please don't delete my other contributions. Otherwise, I can lose my willingness on contributing to Wikipedia. Thanks. BozokluAdam (talk) 15:04, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not making any edits for you, no--and I think you have bigger problems than that right now. Drmies (talk) 00:50, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May 2012[edit]

I was going to slap a NPA warning here for calling me an Australian at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Doghouse Diaries, but then thought better of it as it could have been worse, you could have called me American. --kelapstick(bainuu) 02:58, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hehe. Drmies (talk) 03:07, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thoughts on Secret Archives of the Vatican? The BBC Introducing spot is interesting. --kelapstick(bainuu) 03:49, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yeah, that's a terrible article. What spot? This leads me to a 3-hour radio show; the other link is verboten for me. I'm interested, though--I love dub. Drmies (talk) 03:54, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • BBC Introducing is a radio program, so they would have been featured on that I suppose. In Canada we have CBC Radio 3, which showcases indie bands, and I think (if I recall correctly), that being on CBC 3 is basically meeting WP:BAND point 11, although I would have to check with Bearcat, he usually monitors the Canadian indie scene around here. BBC Introducing might qualify it for 12 (Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network) but I am not sure, and I don't want to listen to the program. --kelapstick(bainuu) 03:59, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Leslie Daigle[edit]

Not sure why the AfD hasn't closed yet...more than 27 hrs. overdue. That'll be messy, because if it's deleted (which it oughta be, 2:1 not keep:keep ratio), I guarantee you that one of "Keep" votes will DRV it and we'll have another fine mess.

But that's not why I'm here. There are a bazillion edit requests on the article. At least one of them is alleging COPYVIO. Could you or one of your admin buds resolve some of them? Oh, and I liked your "weird aussie" AfD vote...but you should've found in a way to work in TPH's otters pbp 03:19, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've dropped a note on WP:AN asking for admin assistance. I am not going to mess with editing the article; if there is a copyvio it's a minor issue anyway. Thanks for letting me know the time. Drmies (talk) 03:51, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article has been deleted...thank goodness. But I stand by my ominous DRV prediction pbp 04:17, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • We'll see. I hope you're wrong. Drmies (talk) 04:21, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, Northamerica and Lucifer are pressuring Timotheus Canens (the latter by taking pot shots at his experience) to relist or restore the article. He's rebuffed NA1K already; looks like we'll have a messy DRV on our hands within 24 hrs pbp 19:39, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Admin help[edit]

Could an admin take a look at the article that was deleted via this AfD and this version of Pricing Partners SAS. Old version was created by a blocked user. Two brand new editors are now working on the new version (plus French version) and wondering why I keep adding the COI tag. I'd take it to SPI, but they have 44 backlogged cases including one still open that I was involved with over two weeks ago. If the articles are similar, that would confirm COI problems.

Yep, very similar. The lead and infobox are identical, the history section has a new sentence or two, and the product section is new, but it's almost certainly the same editor(s). Jenks24 (talk) 05:58, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Well, speedying the new version and blocking the editors per DUCK is an option, but I think I'd prefer regular AfD and an SPI, as slow as the latter may be. If the AfD turns out to become a sock fest we can see then. Sorry if I seem not so proactive but it's hot here and I'm kind of slow. Drmies (talk) 18:12, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pricing Partners SAS. Drmies (talk) 18:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oy, didn't know it was AfD worth, but then you are a deletionist. Jenks24 answered my question. Hey, it is supposed to get in the 70s tomorrow. FYI, somebody else did Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric Benhamou (Pricing Partners). Bgwhite (talk) 06:25, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikAdvisor has sockpuppets active again[edit]

Hi, the user you ended up reigning in on the Studio 54 and The Rascals articles is most likely a sockpuppet of WikAdvisor. If you have any information you would like to contribute from your dealings with anonymous user: 66.65.134.176 [6], please feel free to contribute to the discussion about the SPI case [7]. Thanks! OliverTwisted (Talk) (Stuff) 07:38, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Admin help on a move[edit]

Not sure if a low life editor like myself can undo a move. A new editor moved Sophie Sumner to Annaliese Dayes. Sumner was a redirect and now Dayes is a redirect. Both people were on America's Next Top Model season 2,404, but I could be off by a few seasons :) . The old Sumner page had a long history. Bgwhite (talk) 08:26, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should be able to move back if no changes were made to the redirect after the move, if I am not mistaken. --kelapstick(bainuu) 08:59, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Judging by the history, it should work, give it a try, just use the regular move process. --kelapstick(bainuu) 09:01, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I get this error, "The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. Please choose another name, or use Requested moves to ask an administrator to help you with the move. Do not manually move the article by copying and pasting it; the page history must be moved along with the article text." Those evil admins just want all the power, glory and money to themselves. Bgwhite (talk) 18:05, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe no changes have to be made to either, because I know I have reversed a move immediately after a mistaken move, but that was a while ago.--kelapstick(bainuu) 21:52, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another admin fixed it. Long story short, two of us keep adding a redirect and a legion keeps restoring the article. This last time, they did a move to another name and did a redirect. I have feeling an AfD is on its way. Speaking of which, this month I set a record for the number of Prod and AfDs I've done. It beat the old record by a mile. Something is in the water. Bgwhite (talk) 06:18, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, some funky, skunky, smelly green shit. See below. Drmies (talk) 21:42, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch footballers[edit]

thanks for the advice on the links,i will also add the voetbal website to the articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronkoeman44 (talk • contribs) 15:08, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Makes editing here worthwhile[edit]

Drmies's pool before cleaning. 99.153.142.225 (talk) 23:50, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Loved coming across this quote from a small town paper's publisher [8]. 99.153.142.225 (talk) 16:08, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • That's charming. Begs the "reliable source" question. So you turned the air on? I sometimes turn it off at night. Continued work on the play fort has me dripping already, but the good news is that the pool guy is on his way (the pool looks kind of like a swamp...). Drmies (talk) 16:55, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ewww, the pool description summons all sorts of diphtheria-inducing environments. Probably a suitable image in the commons, which I'll try to dig up later. Yesterday I helped Ms. 99 with yardwork, cooking and cleaning, which led to a good sweat. But I still get the easy end of things, with the standard market run in the afternoon to pick up missing ingredients. Great meal at the end of the day...not giving too much information away to say that the recipe came from a cook who was in the employ of a onetime governor, undersecretary of state, and U.S. ambassador, for whom Ms. 99 also once worked. I know people who know people.... 99.153.142.225 (talk) 17:23, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea why, but every time you say "Ms. 99", it makes me giggle uncontrollably. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:51, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I amuse wherever I can. Ms. 99, which is to say my better half, should not be confused with Barbara Feldon [9], who is also lovely. 99.153.142.225 (talk) 23:44, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, real funny. Pool came, broke the handle of a valve, pocketed a $60 check, and left. Drmies (talk) 00:18, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well that kind of sucks. Yet what strikes me is that something--anything--broke and cost you no more than $60. 99.153.142.225 (talk) 00:47, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"This great information cost me half a weeks pay, and the toilet blew up later on the next day"... Drmies (talk) 00:48, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. National Lampoon--the Onion of my youth-- once had a section on exploding toilets in its 'True Facts' compendium. They were always caused when Bonehead A dumped flammable liquid into the bowl, soon after which Bonehead B would sit, take out a magazine, light up a cigarette, and throw the match in. By the way, thank you for helping out with that other business today; still waiting for the sockpuppet investigation to resolve. 99.153.142.225 (talk) 00:53, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, SPI doesn't seem to be a real happening joint right now. We should double their salaries. Drmies (talk) 04:53, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Because the world needs to know these things, and the internet makes it possible: [10]. So Frank Zappa knew of what he spoke. 99.153.142.225 (talk) 12:41, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's the guy that's been "working" on the pool, no doubt. The pump is not even catching a prime anymore--I'm up shit creek, which is right next to the swamp. Drmies (talk) 13:59, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pricing Partners[edit]

I have put more comments on the deletion page for Pricing Partners. I am happy that you are hesitating to delete this page as I believe it is accurate and reliable. It follows the standard of wikipedia much better than many other pages as it provides a reliable reference for everything. And it is not too much promotional as it also gives a list of competitors. Overall, I hope this is convincing you this is fine. I am happy to talk more if you need further information. Many thanks in advance for your time Regards, --Paul.cabot (talk) 19:44, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: A Clash of Kings[edit]

I had forgotten how to deal with the problem and was just figuring it out when you came by. Thanks! ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 01:53, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at Dennis Brown's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

LadyofShalott 03:27, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake[edit]

Hello Drmies,

You seem to have made a mistake on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hip pop. We usually don't delete articles about notable topics just because WP:GENREWARRIORs tell us to. What went wrong? You should be aware that you are not allowed to delete that article per WP:UNINVOLVED. You wrote "the blind are leading the blind" and "dickishness comes from both sides here"; not exactly "edits which do not speak to bias". Please undelete the article and let an uninvolved admin make the decision. Thanks in advance, Arcandam (talk) 03:56, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • How am I involved with the article or the AfD? You and another editor on that AfD had a spat on talk pages and it was brought up on WQA (if you had given me the diff you would have saved me some time--this was all so inconsequential that I had forgotten where it was). I had nothing to do with the content or with the article, and if I refer to two editors on opposite sides as, well, acting like dicks toward each other (note that the thread went nowhere), I should think that makes me a paragon of impartiality. You are welcome to take it to DR, of course, but I categorically reject the notion that I made a mistake in closing the AfD. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 04:39, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • FWIW, that looks like a clear consensus to delete to me. LadyofShalott 04:59, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's what I thought too--so much so that I didn't see the need to comment on that. The Wikipedia:Wikiquette assistance thread is still there, top of the page. The histories of the respective user talk pages are also full of it, and there was so much that trying to figure out who was worse was impossible. Drmies (talk) 05:07, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I read the AfD "discussion" and have no desire to read the WQA thread or the user's talk pages. They both gave as good as they got and were equally childish and obnoxious. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:02, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lipstick[edit]

Thanks for taking care of Paloma Picasso's red period. It was the Seinfeld of articles – the article about nothing! I must say you were more generous than I would've been. Again, the article really wasn't about anything; all it said was that her favorite color is red and she likes wearing red lipstick. This was absolutely an article on one of the most inconsequential subjects I can possibly imagine, written by a now-banned user, apparently solely for the purpose of creating an April Fools' Day DYK.

My most significant contribution to Wikipedia may have been derailing that DYK and keeping this garbage off of the Main Page. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 05:23, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • April Fools? Hmm. Maybe, since Mbz1 has done a lot of good work, if memory serves me right. Drmies (talk) 14:00, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Today's crazy fact[edit]

"Basma bint Saud was born on March 1, 1964. She is the youngest and 115th daughter of King Saud." Bgwhite (talk) 08:11, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Fixed. One source does say she was the 115th daughter, but according to others she was the 115th child. Slightly less "crazy".... MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 01:27, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A shuriken for you! (it's like a barnstar, only with sharper points)[edit]

The Shuriken of Humor
For creating List of notable people who have articles on Wikipedia regarding their use of Twitter, thus increasing awareness of Twitter usage by really important people. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 12:33, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nicely done! I half expected an ANI notification. Drmies (talk) 14:03, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • So did I, and K had to spoil it by turning it into a legitimate article. Damn him. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 14:06, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • And to think, I created one of the first twitter feed articles at @fiksimini (they are mainly active through the twitter feed). Oh, wait... don't hate me! Anyways, love the list. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:09, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Oh, shouldn't @Horse_ebooks be on the list? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:12, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • That's funny. Yes, add it. The beauty of the list, like the articles X on Twitter, is that it's infinitely expandable. All it takes is one or two references, I guess, and the article is legit. Drmies (talk) 14:54, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Thy will be done — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:38, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
              • Poor LadyofShalott, she's probably still crying. She will never forgive you Drmies, and probably never forgive me for planting the idea in your head. Be sure to add this to your user page. I hope you are proud of yourself. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 15:43, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                • The two DYKs are drawing interest from other editors (see the history of the Obama one). The last time I was proud of myself was...I forgot. All the banter aside, I'm totally not enjoying this. I don't want to piss Tony off, but I'm quite adamant on this point, and I fully realize that I (we) may well be in the minority here. Drmies (talk) 15:51, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                  • I found this interesting. [11], which is related to this topic. And I see your beautiful new article was also sent to AFD. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 16:16, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                    • I was going to mention I had nominated it, but didn't want to be accused of canvassing. I knew everyone would eventually find their way to the party anyway. --kelapstick(bainuu) 02:53, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You all know what I think of this topic, and I am adamant as well. That we may be in the minority on this makes me sad. People will seriously take a person or subject with literally centuries of scholarship and argue for its deletion, but think that whether Bieber or Gaga has a higher ranking on Twitter is important. I don't get that. I don't get that at all. LadyofShalott 02:41, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • WP:NOTPEOPLEMAGAZINE needs to be turned blue... except it seems to becoming a lie. LadyofShalott 02:45, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • WP:UsWeeklypedia. --kelapstick(bainuu) 02:53, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • I am half tempted to expand the lead to 1,500 characters so I can nominate it for DYK, just so Drmies has a record of his work being on the main page. --kelapstick(bainuu) 03:45, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • That'd be great. At some point someone will accuse me of jealousy, since I don't even have 200 DYKs. Drmies (talk) 03:52, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Well expand away, you are only 7 from the target. I think the pictures add a nice touch, although I would like to see the text in the notes reduced to fit within a 120px image, but I think I may be grasping at straws. Although after the dust settles, and pages are kept/deleted, some condensing could be done, because I don't think the Biebs, Ashton, and Lady Gaga's pages are going anywhere. --kelapstick(bainuu) 04:19, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • It still needs more pictures of ponies and unicorns. And glitter. Lots of glitter. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 10:26, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're not the only one, kelapstick... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:47, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Two words, featured list. I already have ideas floating around in my head. Muahahaha. --kelapstick(bainuu) 11:21, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of Twitter users for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Twitter users is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Twitter users until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article..Dew Kane (talk) 16:07, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What a twist! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:11, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New article[edit]

Hi Drmies, want to collaborate with me on a new article? I thought we could write one on Sarah Palin's Facebook page, I found two mentions of it online, so it is definitely notable: Sarah Palin Makes Many New Facebook Friends & The Facebook posts Palin doesn't want you to see. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:18, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • That sounds like a great idea. You know, every time we think we are getting somewhere, someone comes up with an idea that could potentially add a million new articles to the project. Mark Arsten, you are a trailblazer and I salute you. Drmies (talk) 16:34, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • LOL, thanks for your kind words. Well, I'm off to file a deletion review for Otto Middleton. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:39, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • How appropriate! Since the future of Wikipedia is everything goes this should be no problem... Good luck. Drmies (talk) 19:15, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion[edit]

Discussion on whether Foo on Twitter should be deleted, merged, redirected or kept should be held in one place (WP:AFD). There should not be 5 different locations. I have undone the three discussions that have been started. We need one policy setting discussion in one location.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:51, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • No. Undo your strikeouts and removals or it's off to ANI we go. I have explained myself well enough in various places, including your talk page. I'm not sure you realize how out of line you are, striking out and removing merge tags and discussions when you are so clearly involved--I don't see how you could even do that if you're uninvolved. There is no policy or guideline that prevents me from proposing a merge on those articles. Drmies (talk) 18:54, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Have it your way, Tony. I have started an ANI thread on your actions. Drmies (talk) 19:13, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Drmies, would it be better to request merge into the List article, and rename it? Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 22:49, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Someone pinged me about an apology here. I think we have resolved that I overstepped on some of my actions yesterday and think that this is now resolved. Please advise otherwise. My intentions were all good, but I think the consensus is working towards a reasonable resolution on the related articles.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:15, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Why did it take an ANI thread for you to get to that point? Drmies (talk) 21:29, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hoping the pool gets fixed before my visit[edit]

A very small glass, since you ought to be cutting back. 99.156.68.118 (talk) 00:57, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wow. Don't hold your breath, but I went out and bought a separate pump to get rid of some of the nasty. We'll see tomorrow. Drmies (talk) 02:57, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Smith Bot[edit]

Hiya, Professor. Check this out and this too. Do you have anything to offer WRT the situation? Thanks Tiderolls 02:03, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hmm, I don't know, Tide. I think the correction in the first edit is great and speaks to your credit. But I have the feeling you weren't asking me about that. The first concern was the username (you know, I saw this go by on Recent changes and was about to act when they were blocked, a while ago), that's handled. The second concern is the COI, and they were asked explicitly to stay away from it--and they wouldn't say they would. So now it's up to you: judgment call on good faith to unblock them, or wait and get more opinions and maybe wait more. Here's what you could do, if you have the time to keep an eye on them: unblock them and explain that if they veer from neutrality, you'll block them as a COI account. Or you could leave the matter to someone else, which is probably what a lot of people have done already! Do you think they can write neutrally? If so... Drmies (talk) 02:55, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your response, Professor. I beg your pardon for my oblique message. You did address my main concern; a credit to your ability. Before I approached the editor with restrictions I wanted to seek comment (or help with the editor) from someone that doesn't share my fairly strict view on COI. However, you and I are very close in our view so I think I will leave the editor a message stating a generic COI restriction and see what develops. If you see me veer from the proper path, I'm sure I can count of you to get my attention. See ya 'round Tiderolls 18:11, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My pleasure, Tide. No need to beg for anything, except for a dozen wins. I looked at that talk page again yesterday or so but nothing had happened. As for the proper path, it is not too late for you to sign up for my summer class, where we will cover (among others) The Inferno. Drmies (talk) 18:14, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is that all it takes?[edit]

One dollar? I have a twenty in my wallet (AU dollars, so worth more!) seems like I can buy an evening of entertainment. --kelapstick(bainuu) 05:39, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • It takes a dollar and an apology, but I'm not holding my breath for either. Drmies (talk) 17:39, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • But I'm disappointed in you doc. You seem to be under the delusion that this is an encyclopaedia, shouldn't you know better? BTW, I'm planning on creating Obama on Friendster, I hope to unearth some print sources soon. —SpacemanSpiff 17:44, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • If it is any consolation Doc, it seriously looks like I am heading back to North America, I expect a cold beer by the pool when we come to visit you next summer. --kelapstick(bainuu) 12:50, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...And reverted by Nikkimaria. So no Mongolia again, K, or does that mean you all go back to Canada, with excursions to Mongolia again? I was thinking of you a few minutes ago... been looking at dumpling articles, including buuz and khuushuur. LadyofShalott 13:18, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, I am going back to Mongolia, but we are all going to Canada. Mrs. K and the kids head back in mid July, I booked them business class, unfortunately I will not be with them to see the kids trash the Thai Airways lounge *snicker. Some new routing has started too, so instead of travelling through Beijing, I may go through London, Istanbul (not Constantinople), Kyrgyzstan. Exciting! Buuz and khuushuur are excellent, although the way some of my Mongolian friends used to eat it was rather disturbing (pour boiling water on it, add coffee whitener, soak a tea bag in the water, and waft it against the buuz, ick.) --kelapstick(bainuu) 00:52, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • And I thought of you too, since we got a postcard from Montana with a pit mine on it. Drmies (talk) 00:46, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Does that mean that when I complete Obama on Friendster it may not get to be on the main page? I'll just pack my bags and head to Citizendum then! —SpacemanSpiff 13:29, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Collectieve Propaganda van het Nederlandse Boek[edit]

Yngvadottir (talk) 16:04, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for The Fourth Man[edit]

Yngvadottir (talk) 16:05, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since you got me thinking about dual DYKs....[edit]

I created the article for Take This Lollipop and in following up, had created the article its creator... Jason Zada... and began to mull over a suitable DYK. But then , in thinking about how Donkey Xote became a two-fer with Giulia Marletta, and in realizing the possibilities if I were not tardy, I created another article... one for his notable 2006 project, Elf Yourself... so that I could then use the two together. Please check them both and see what kind of eye-catching DYK we might create. Thanks in advance. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 23:37, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sure thing. Doubles are nice, quintuples are the best. ;) Why the "sic" in the lead for Elf? Drmies (talk) 23:43, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    "Sic" was to show direct quote and not an OR summation. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 02:28, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Sic is used (for example) if you are quoting text with a spelling mistake, so people don't think that you made the mistake (and on Wikipedia, try to fix the mistake), rather you are quoting it as they wrote it. you can also use the {{sic}} template. There are other uses, but just to show a direct quote (without a mistake in the original person's dialogue), it is not required. --kelapstick(bainuu) 02:43, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I ran through both of them; see comments in edit summaries. If you post the DYK nom, you can write a hook like the other one--and stick in one of the accolades for Elf, like the "annual tradition" or something about that flash mob (but that would probably require more words than the hook allows). When you do nominate it, let me know: do you want me to review them or list me as well? (I don't deserve the latter for a couple of copyedits, but I can sign off on the DYK real easy). Drmies (talk) 00:08, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Probably the latter. I'll be back. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 02:28, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I believe I have addressed your concerns with ELF. Please re-check. The "background" is now only just undated highlights as a "teaser", A reader must read the "history" section to get the expanded and dated particulars. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 02:58, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Good copyedite to Zada article. I agree with everything you did and made one small correction. Now for a twofer. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 03:05, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Did you know that Jason Zada's web application Elf Yourself allows users to upload photos, giving faces to elves that dance disco or country? Drmies (talk) 03:14, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See Template:Did you know nominations/Elf Yourself. My first hook is perhaps more likely to get readers to the article... I think. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 04:00, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FART[edit]

We now all know Bgwhite has a thing for pretty redheads in short skirts, but then again, who doesn't?

It appears my essay isn't appreciated. Meh. --kelapstick(bainuu) 01:26, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Both this section title and this edit made me snortle. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:55, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should have called it WP:QUEEF. BTW, where's my royalties, bitch? I'm watching How It's Made, the most addictive show on TV. Drmies (talk) 02:57, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • They are in the mail. I am doing all I can to keep the double entendres out of that discussion.--kelapstick(bainuu) 03:07, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Good show! I used to watch that regularly, but watch so little TV now. I dvr Mythbusters, and one other program that I'm too ashamed to admit. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 10:50, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Don't worry, my Mrs. Kelapstick has me semi-hooked on Coronation Street, nothing like a British soap opera to show your true colours. I counter it with making her watch Doctor Who, she's been able to experience the fifth, ninth, tenth, and eleventh Doctors, but the fifth is her favorite, I think it is because he wears celery in his lapel. --kelapstick(bainuu) 11:00, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I've tried to avert bad feelings between us two, no matter how hard that evil Drmies has tried. But, I've had it. The fourth Doctor is the best with the ninth Doctor 2nd, tenth doctor 3rd and I lust after Doctor Who's mother-in-law, Amy Pond and his wife. Arggh, thought I would never say this. Oh this hurts. I have a great wife when it comes to entertainment. Science fiction is her favourite genre, loves horror and hates romance. I feel dirty having said "great" and "wife" in the same sentence. My favourite science show is Connections (TV series). James Burke's enthusiasm is infectious. I have to watch it every few years. Bgwhite (talk) 05:24, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Well, we haven't gotten to the fourth doctor yet as I just started watching this year, so you will have to go easy on me. They just happened to be playing fifth doctor episodes on SciFi so I started just after his regeneration, and watched a few of those. Then I started watching the eleventh, and I must say, I quite like Ms. Pond (especially in that police uniform) and her daughter (sassy). I also find the eleventh is quite clever (I especially liked the trick he pulled at the lake). After ABC (not that one, that one) finished all their eleventh doctor episodes, they switched back to the reruns of the ninth, who I quite like as well. I finished the ninth doctor's episodes in about a month and now we are onto the tenth, who isn't bad either. I just watched the one with Sarah Jane Smith and will probably have another five to watch when I return home on Tuesday. Mrs. K can't watch any episodes that have the Daleks in it, their voice creeps her out. "Exterminate! Exterminate!" --kelapstick(bainuu) 05:39, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Wipe away tears... last season for Amy coming up. It will be a truly a sad day. After you get done with the Doctor, you should watch Torchwood. It is a good spinoff of the Doctor with Captain Jack. First season is good. Second they spent more money on production, but less characters. 3rd and 4th are mini-series. All of Doctor Who and Torchwood are available streaming via Netflix. Don't tell anyone but use something like this to view Netflix in your part of the woods. Bgwhite (talk) 07:54, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
              • Sweet. Will be handy on my return to Canada as well. My intention is to start downloading Torchwood and watch it while in flight. --kelapstick(bainuu) 07:57, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                • I'm pleased to say I have no idea what y'all are talking about. ;) Drmies (talk) 16:18, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Transclusion limit[edit]

Hi, Drmies. I just wanted to drop you a note about Barack Obama. Adding another paragraph of content to the article is not a big problem but adding the related citation templates is a big problem. I tried it out as an experiment, and eleven templates broke at the bottom of the page (navboxes, inter-wiki GA templates, etc). We can only put so many templates on a page before it goes over the limit, and stuff starts breaking at the bottom. Complex templates are more of a burden than simple templates, so it depends which template is placed in the article as to what it costs. The burden of transclusion of navboxes was the main reason for the big push to get rid of the various dot templates from navboxes and convert them to our new system, WP:HLIST.

Serotonin–norepinephrine–dopamine reuptake inhibitor is an example of an article that's got a half a dozen templates that failed to expand; one of them is the {{reflist}}, so the citations are failing to display. Very bad joss. There's more information at Wikipedia:Template limits. Sincerely, -- Dianna (talk) 03:30, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know about that problem, and it is a problem. LadyofShalott 13:20, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. That's all a bit too clever for my; I guess I need to update my own operating system. Thanks for the note, Dianna. Drmies (talk) 14:07, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: DYK[edit]

Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at Presidentman's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

- Presidentman talk · contribs Random Picture of the Day (Talkback) 14:46, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Easy enough to do[edit]

Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Elf Yourself.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Okay Dr, I've tweaked the hook (see ALT3 at DYK nom) and added the "Scrooge Yourself" information into the Elf Yourself article.[12] Let's get this promoted. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 19:47, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you![edit]

Thank you for the copy edit to Samantha Richards.

LauraHale (talk) 21:55, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • You didn't have to do that, but I appreciate it anyway. Whatever your disagreement with me, please know that it's my interest in DYK that determines my actions. BTW, I didn't come to that article "through" you (if you were even wondering about that), but through another DYK volunteer. Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 22:00, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On various topics[edit]

I opposed your AfD on the list of Mets' no-hitters largely on the grounds that we need some assertion on the general worthiness of team no-hit list (which exist for most MLB clubs) first. The article might also be saved if it was written entirely on Johan's no-no, which could probably very easily be sourced.

Oh, and look at our favorite troll's latest edit. Looks to be a pretty airtight rationale, except that he pretty blatantly followed me over to the AfD, he went against the community consensus that middle schools aren't notable, and he used middle school rationale on an article about a ferry. pbp 05:18, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm sure that was a mistake, though it's an odd mistake. Hey, "troll" is not the word to use if you want this to quieten down a bit... Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 15:51, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • What word (or words) would you use for edit-warring, taking potshots at mops and following people around and using ridiculously inappropriate deletion rationales? pbp 16:37, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting theories[edit]

stinky sock put in the hamper by DB

I think your comment "SPI didn't get the result you want" was spot on. Mathsci has been pursuing Junior Wrangler (talk · contribs) for years -- see the history of User:Junior Wrangler -- for having asked a perfectly polite and sensible question at Talk:Château of Vauvenargues, and started his campaign as early as March 2011. He did not get the result he wanted in spite of taking JW to SPI in July 2011 (NB months after tagging JW) and again in October 2011. Instead he chose to hide his accusations away under his "alternate" account User:Altmathsci anyway, and to rant about them on various boards and talk pages. Why is Mathsci allowed to tag people he desn't like as soickpuppets on the basis of no SPI, or, even worse, failed SPI? Why is this not a blatant series of violations of WP:HUSH?

However, let me explain why he is persecuting User:Penny Birch. She spotted a huge chunk of WP:OR, asked about it politely, waited a year and then deleted it. If Mathsci can tag her as a "banned" user, then he will mis-use banning policy to revert her edits and reinstate his OR violations. Wait and see. Vurrgh (talk) 06:43, 2 June 2012 (UTC) Undoubtedly yet another sleeping sock of Echigo mole - please see new request at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Echigo mole Mathsci (talk) 08:40, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Guozbongleur set of hoaxes[edit]

Hi. Thanks for deleting Guozbongleur etc. Would you be able to perform the formal closures of the AfD debates? Otherwise they're just hanging there.—A bit iffy (talk) 07:19, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. The page is already in danger of becoming a platform for various irrelevant conspiracy theories. Vurrgh (talk) 08:31, 2 June 2012 (UTC)as above, this is what happens if the troll is fed Mathsci (talk) 08:42, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Drmies: I have just reverted another sock on this page. Please apply WP:DENY vigorously as debating whether obvious is obvious just feeds you know what. Johnuniq (talk) 10:29, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Robeson[edit]

Hi Drmies. I just wanted to let you know that I reverted your reversion at Paul Robeson. The IP editor made a lot of constructive changes in addition to the hidden comments, and unfortunately you undid them all. Thanks for leaving a message on the editor's Talk page about the problem comments. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 16:25, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, that's fine--in that list of edits it was difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff, but if you think there was more wheat than chaff I thank you for the revert. BTW, I was going to leave you a note as well since you have worked on the article but I forgot, I think I was sleepy. I learned about Robeson a few years ago, BTW, from an NPR program, and I thought he was fascinating. It's always nice to learn a culture is richer than you thought. Drmies (talk) 16:43, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look?[edit]

[13] I've blocked, but if I remember correctly that blog link was website-non-grata here (and you've acted on it before), but as part of the screed includes a tirade against me, I don't want to take any action. If you or the lady or one of your other able talk page stalkers wish to do what's been done in the past, feel free to do so. And, I'm beginning to think that the blog link is now gaining notability based on the number of talk pages it's been posted on. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 18:36, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yeah, they're not here to write GAs. Revoked talk page access. You nut, silly guy. Drmies (talk) 20:04, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Brahmeshwar Singh. Thank you. —SpacemanSpiff 21:09, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • I wouldn't attend. No refreshments are being served, not even pictures of refreshments.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:19, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I know! Ridiculous. Spiffy, what's with English language education in the subcontinent? Drmies (talk) 21:22, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • And now, as if one thread weren't enough, he's opened another. He's also claimed that Spiff, who, by his own admission, is "very very very bad", was blocked, for a week yet. You may not need refreshments, but I do.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:06, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • WTF?? Really WTF? I go off for a few hours and then I find out, courtesy of Bbb that I'm blocked for a week and not even a talk page notice! Doc, do you want to block me for not peeling potatoes or maybe for block evasion? And I thought that the original issue that I brought up was weird! Bbb, care to join me for some moonshine, the still's in a shed by Drmies' pool. (And, don't blame this one on the subcontinent Doc, he's apparently in the UK, the Queen has been ignoring some of her subjects it would seem.) —SpacemanSpiff 03:59, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Spiff, I just took a look at your block log and you don't have any blocks...ever, so no worries. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:47, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Er, I wasn't worried, just being sarcastic ... but perhaps I'm the more serious type! —SpacemanSpiff 08:50, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Ah, I missed the sarcasm with the couple "WTF"s. My goof. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:51, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Ah, so that's where that idiot got that idea from. Oops, I said a bad word, but sheesh. Drmies (talk) 14:43, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Ha, I didn't realize that until now! Perhaps it might be a good idea to introduce Ved036 and this gentleman. I'm presuming you got a friendly email from Ved036? —SpacemanSpiff 15:31, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Oh, and on something else we discussed before, there was a Facebook campaign by WM India, so apparently I was right on that one. —SpacemanSpiff 15:34, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lee Newton[edit]

You closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lee Newton as Keep, but didn't say why. As none of the Keep arguments were guideline or policy based, and were all pretty dire. I'd be interested in how it meets notability guidelines, namely WP:GNG or WP:BIO or WP:ENTERTAINER.--Otterathome (talk) 08:47, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Basically, the last claim, about Maxim, helps it pass the GNG in my opinion. The article, I'll grant you this immediately, is bad. I will also grant you that it is minimal. Drmies (talk) 15:19, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure how being listed there and having 2 sentences about her is 'significant coverage in detail'. On that basis, these are missing on Wikipedia too from that list - Alexandra Breckinridge April Rose Bria Murphy Caroline Wozniaki Dalena Henriques Dominique Storelli. I've also cut the article down to the two sentences of information I was able to get out of those 3rd party sources. You mind if I submit to WP:DRV in this state?
Lee Newton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)--Otterathome (talk) 23:53, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article was just gutted by someone.--Milowent • hasspoken 00:36, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Otter, you can do whatever you like as long as you make sure no animals are harmed in the process. Drmies (talk) 09:43, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Impersonal personal attacks[edit]

This is kind of an odd case. This user's got quite a history of colorful edit summaries, which, among other gems, includes repeatedly calling other users idiots, morons, and baboons. It looks as though they've never received a warning, because these epithets are never directed at a specific user by name. But if I were someone being berated for something I wrote, I would certainly feel as if I'd been attacked, even without being explicitly named. This is not conducive to a cordial and cooperative editing environment.

They appear to be someone who haughtily thinks they're right, but whose "corrections", accompanied by those scolding edit summaries, are usually wrong (at least the ones I looked at).

Fortunately, they're not very active, so maybe no action is called for, and maybe if we ignore 'em they'll just go away.... MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 09:18, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't there used to be a template for personal attacks not specifically directed? --kelapstick(bainuu) 09:24, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I may be thinking of way back when {{uw-defamatory1}} was referenced as Defamation not specifically directed. --kelapstick(bainuu) 09:51, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't really care if they're directed at anyone or not. I left a note, accompanied by an OED definition. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:40, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds like something I would do. Was thinking about it, but had to leave for a while. Templates are not the best solution for situations like this, what Drmies did is. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 16:57, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Drmies. You were gentler and more tactful than I might've been. It's hard to believe that the user got away with making those shameful edit summaries and incorrect corrections for over seven months without anyone mentioning anything. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:27, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed someone refactored your comments, Drmies. [14]. I left them a short message asking them not to. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 23:00, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and it appears Yryriza is now throwing it back in your face with their edit continued edit summaries. So much for being nice. It does work sometimes, but not always. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 23:02, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the correct diff of Yryriza's attack on you / refactoring of your comments on their talk page. And here's where they attacked you on your user page. Yes, they've stepped it up by lashing out at you with personal personal attacks in spite of your gentle, tactful note. They removed your comments (after I had restored them by undoing the refactoring) as well as two warnings, referring to them as "trash and threats". And yes, they discounted you and the OED by doing the same "hanged" edit again. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 23:55, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I undid the vandalism of Drmies's user page. Mandarax undid the vandalism at Yryriza's Talk page, all of which they subsequently removed with the now familiar insulting edit summaries. It's not a question of whether the user will be blocked, just when.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:05, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake on the link. I'm really tired. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 00:08, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm therefore assuming you're not reading this now because you're off-wiki getting some rest.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:12, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All this activity while I was in transit. Mandarax, you wouldn't believe the beer selection in the regular supermarket: I'm about to open a Westmalle Tripel. Thank you all for the help; did someone adjust the vandalism count on my user page? ;) Their comments on "hung" are pedantic, of course, but at least they've left out the insults. We'll see what happens. Drmies (talk) 15:11, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The vandalism count hasn't been updated! (Because they did it in two edits, I'm not sure if the count should be incremented by one or two.) Could the beer selection be another clue to your mystery location? I'm still sticking with my guess of San Francisco. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 01:34, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The country seems to be mentioned in the section immediately below this one. LadyofShalott 01:39, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh! I hadn't seen that. (I know there are plenty of Chinese groceries in San Francisco, but I don't suppose there's a Dutch supermarket....) MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 02:47, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are a couple in San Jose. One well known place is on Bascom -- a Dutch + Indonesian store. The place is filled with clogs but they do have some good pastries and a lot of unspellable groceries! There's another Dutch + Indian store too (the owner was from South Africa I think) further south.—SpacemanSpiff 15:22, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Get yourself some gestampte muisjes (and put it on buttered bread). Yes, it's an acquired taste. Or maybe they have Bebogeen, a kind of caramel paste. Here, it's time for the Hollandse Nieuwe--the fatter the better. Hoering, hoering, so fess wie Goering! Drmies (talk) 15:49, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thought of you beside your pool[edit]

Hey, Drmies! I thought of you today, while sitting beside my pond in the sunshine, enjoying a Hoegaarden witbier . David Letterman said it best, I think: "There's not a man, woman or child on the face of the earth who doesn't enjoy a tasty beverage." Besides, if one mispronounces "Hoegaarden" by giving it a long "o" sound in the first syllable, one can come up with some very droll associations. Cheers, --OhioStandard (talk) 10:25, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes, one can. I did in fact buy a six-pack of Hoegaarden the other day, just because I could. I'm off to a Dutch supermarket now to see what the offerings are. The pool, apparently, is looking better today. Drmies (talk) 12:49, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for !voting[edit]

at my successful RFA
Thank you, Drmies, for !voting at my successful RFA; I am humbled that you put your trust in me. I grant you this flower, which, if tended to properly, will grow to be the fruit of Wikipedia's labours. I considered not thanking you, to be ironic, but common courtesy won out. Shame I have no bacon here which you would enjoy. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:33, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good luck with your new job, Crisco. Don't forget to keep writing articles. Drmies (talk) 14:43, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So...[edit]

It seems that Miss Millie wasn't the only interesting sister. This morning I heard a talk on Mary Ann Rutherford Lipscomb; I knew'd she'd been Principal of Lucy Cobb after her sister's (first) stint there. It seems she did a lot for education and public health. So, I guess I have my new topic to work on. (It's just barely started, but I shall be developing it!) LadyofShalott 18:44, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In unrelated matters, don't forget about Talk:Jacobus Deketh/GA2; it's still open. LadyofShalott 19:08, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's taken care of; see below. Drmies (talk) 12:45, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Admin help on a recreate[edit]

A user was blocked and User:Ironholds deleted the blocked user's created articles. User:Norden1990 thinks Michael Szilágyi was a perfectly fine article and asks if it could be restored to his sandbox. Ironholds refuses to restore the article per User_talk:Ironholds#Michael Szilágyi. Norden left the request on my talk page and I personally think it is a reasonable request, but I'm unsure of policy here. Bgwhite (talk) 20:23, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've joined the conversation on Ironholds's talkpage. LadyofShalott 20:34, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Antony Price: editwarring, probable socking, copyvio, COI/POV, competence[edit]

Could you take a look at the mess that's going on at this article? Three editors (User talk:Gaslett, User talk:Clone tone, User talk:School monitor), probably socks of each other (SPI report), are edit warring to insert a distinctly inferior version of the article, one which includes copyvios and has serious POV problems. (Considering that socking editor has also used User talk:Antonypricefashion, the POV may be the result of a COI.) Several editors are reverting them, but the socks are not listening to what they're being told. In general, they are not getting it. I thought at first to take it to AN/I, but thought you might take a look instead. Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:19, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • I fully protected the article for three days. Drmies, feel free to adjust. Maybe semi-protection is all that's needed - esp. if the SPI confirms the suspected socking. LadyofShalott 01:01, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just FYI, the socks have been blocked as a result of the SPI. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:27, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good! Maybe that will be that (but I won't hold my breath). LadyofShalott 02:41, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm keeping an eye on it, and laboriously going through the socks' version of the article, trying to pick out whatever nuggets of good sourced information there are in it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:33, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Careful editing regarding younger editors[edit]

Hi Drmies, I thought I'd drop by with a suggestion that, where younger editors have unwisely posted information that looks like it probably needs oversight, it's not a good idea to repost parts of that information to widely-watched talkpages, as you did here.

I'm not disputing that 13-year-olds have !voted in AfDs; in fact, from my understanding of the state of such things, we've most likely had 12-year-olds both closing AfDs and closing RfAs in the distant or recent past, never mind !voting in them. Nor are any of us under an obligation to mitigate the risks younger editors put themselves at through carelessness. But, we should at least not exacerbate those risks. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:03, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • A. I said "AfD" incorrectly--I meant "RfA". B. that information came from the user's own user page. If you're suggesting that it should be or was removed from the user page, fine, though plenty of users have their ages on their pages. Drmies (talk) 12:15, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it was oversighted from the user page a few hours after you took it from there and posted it elsewhere.
Regarding ages on pages, there seems to be a grey area; as far as I can tell, "I am 15" will almost never get removed, "I am 12 (and what is this)" will usually get removed, and "I am 13" will sometimes get removed but sometimes not. Of course, often the age is accompanied by "and I go to nameofschool in nameofsmalltown", which makes it a bit more of a problem. Can't remember if that was the case here. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 13:27, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Yryriza[edit]

Hi there MIES, VASCO here,

could not resist to send you this diff (please see here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ralph_Wilson&diff=472578993&oldid=471552353), it seems that grammar gods do make mistakes every now and then :) LOAN IS NOT A VERB, news to me...

Seriously, quite pityful behaviour (and this from one who has written stupid summaries in the past, i admit it). From my six years at the site, i know that a block does NOTHING, we just have to "be brave" or whatever you want to call it, or leave for good to their (the users like this i mean) contentment; in a related note, how 'bout this declaration of intentions by User:Kostas45 (see here, read the very end, with his charming all-caps style http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kostas45)?

Kind regards, keep it up (maybe i've made a wiki-enemy with this text if they notice it, but i repeat, could not resist it) --Vasco Amaral (talk) 00:03, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some people don't like loan as a verb, myself among them, but I recognize it can and is used as a verb.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:17, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
..."Now chiefly U.S.; trans. To grant the loan of; to lend. Also with out." From the OED, which is my rock of Gibraltar. I have no problems with it. Hey Vasco, guess where I am? I'll give you a hint: it's cold and it's being painted orange. I'll have a look at your link. Drmies (talk) 12:17, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"PRICES , MEDALS.....fiddlesticks!" Drmies (talk) 12:51, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orange[edit]

Well, I have no idea what that last comment means. Were you on the Golden Gate Bridge? MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 21:58, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Could be, San Francisco's pretty chilly this time of the year. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:01, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not as cold as Van Gogh's homeland, Mandarax. The comment was unclear to me too, but I haven't heard "fiddlesticks" in a dog's age and it's worthwhile keeping. Drmies (talk) 05:18, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please forgive my ignorance. Until I just looked it up, I had no idea about the Dutch love of the color orange. Have you been wearing orange mustache sunglasses? I hope you're having a wonderful time – wish I was there.... MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 08:18, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, now I know what you were referring to. We have an article on it: Oranjegekte. Drmies (talk) 08:36, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mandarax, you can order a pair of orange balls for your truck. Note also, on that same page, a certain article about a certain dead cat... Drmies (talk) 08:49, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Small world! I find the photos for both of those items to be creepy. I've previously told you that I don't like Damien Hirst's dead-animals-preserved-in-formaldehyde-as-art, and the cat is even more distasteful. I don't think dead animals are art. (Or food. If people would stop eating them, they probably wouldn't need their simvastatin. There I go proselytizing again....) MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 10:37, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think Damien Hirst is strike BLP violation. My brother is coming for dinner tonight and he's "like you"--I can't figure out what to cook. But the beer! Mandarax, the beer! In 60 seconds I had gathered what would take me a week to collect state-side, and I'd have to drive out of the state for it. Any suggestions for din-dins? Maybe I'll make mac and cheese, they don't get that here... Drmies (talk) 13:56, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can you get green tomatoes there? Make him some fried green tomatoes! LadyofShalott 14:18, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I'm too late (would've suggested a paneer dish, maybe mattar paneer). Give your brother a big "Kunst is een kat dat kut zegt"! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 18:56, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Was about to admit i had given up finding your destination, until i saw all the kind comments above (i'm surprised YRYRIZA did not wager with an opinion finishing with "baboon"), hope you're having fun my friend, happy(est) return! --Vasco Amaral (talk) 12:10, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hey Vasco, there's still tickets for NL-Port, at E740 a pop. How 'bout you and me fly down? Come pick me up at Schiphol. Drmies (talk) 13:56, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • How i would like man, unemployed (for six years and counting, spend way too much time here, fighting vandalism and getting all tied up about it :)) as can be. Cheers! --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:10, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry about that pal. Consider emigration to the US? Hey, I'm not going either--I'm staying with my mom for a bit, and she's paying for groceries. Including beer, haha. Drmies (talk) 14:50, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA reassessment[edit]

Saw this and thought I would just let you know that the person who opens an individual reassessment is generally expected to close it. Is there any particular reason why you think someone else should do this one? It seems a simple uncontroversial delist, so there should be no dramas with it. I don't have time right now, but if it is still open later today I can close it for you. AIRcorn (talk) 03:32, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • I guess I read the GAR page incorrectly--I thought initially it was my job as well until I reread the page. My apologies (and I'm very sleepy now so I will wait to look at it), and I thank you for your message. Drmies (talk) 12:12, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see that Armbrust has taken care of the matter. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 12:46, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    It was your job. There would be no point in the distinction between individual and community GARs otherwise. Malleus Fatuorum 04:44, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I know now--I read the GAR instructions wrong. Blame lack of sleep, Malleus, besides my usual sloppiness. BTW, jet lag was great: I slept like a baby last night. BTW, it's 7AM and I'm looking at what my local US paper calls the standard "partly cloudy" sky: it's beautiful. Drmies (talk) 05:11, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    "Scorchio"? Malleus Fatuorum 06:00, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Haha yes. BTW, I noticed that my response to Aircorn is atrociously written and so ambiguous that I didn't understand myself when I reread it; I think I'm going to have a talk page for my talk page to comment on comments. For prose, pick up a copy of some of Gerard Reve's work if you happen to run into it--you might enjoy it. I'm reading his Mother and Son right now, a kind of apology/defense/explanation of his conversion to Catholicism. I wonder what English translators made of his curious mixture of styles and registers. Drmies (talk) 06:22, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weird article of the day[edit]

Orville (cat) is just freakish. LadyofShalott 17:22, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Agreed. Did you see the pictures? He looks very much alive. Isn't there a video so we can have a meme? Drmies (talk) 17:27, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • It seems a bit grandiose to call this a "half-cat, half-machine", when in fact it appears to be a machine carrying a dead cat. Seems closer to a flying hearse than to a cyborg. MastCell Talk 17:37, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • We're citing what, the Daily Mail? And the event is the KunstRAI, where "kunst" ("art") is the grossest of overstatements. Drmies (talk) 17:50, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I would have been fine until I clicked on the source that Drmies added. My mind needs a rewind and erase button. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 17:58, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • People didn't consider Fountain or The Rite of Spring to be art either, when they first dropped. Give the dead cat-copter a few years before you write it off. MastCell Talk 18:03, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Thank you Lady for the shiver that went down my spine when I saw the photo. Give it a few years? The government is probably working on a half-copter, half living dog. It will be used as a drug dog that can fly over people's houses. I can see it now... the German Shepard's legs straight out, starring at me thru Drmies' window and barking away because it sniffed Drmies' drugs. Bgwhite (talk) 20:11, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
              • Oh no, it is going viral as it hit Slashdot. Some of the better comments are: "I think it's funny because when the thing crashes it won't be a big deal. Cats always land on their feet.", "I guess there are now 102 uses for a dead cat.", and "I hope I'm a copter after my death and buzz my ex-wife's house all day." Bgwhite (talk) 20:32, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I know the cat's dead, but I still have to wonder if the expression on its face is somehow related to the installation of the "rudder assembly". --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:36, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies to anyone traumatized by the images associated with this article. Whether you call it art or not, there's something sick about it. LadyofShalott 01:41, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:FLYINGCAT. --kelapstick(bainuu) 02:04, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
lol LadyofShalott 04:32, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is that a keep per WP:LOLCAT? --kelapstick(bainuu) 04:49, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
People, we're trying to build an encyclopedia here. This is not the place for personal feelings of horror, nor for trivializing high-flying art with jokes from our trivial internet culture. My arguments on the AfD are falling on deaf ears, unfortunately. Bg, my drug of choice these days is Simvastatin. Drmies (talk) 05:15, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Kind of ironic (I know Mandarax) that I saw Drmies' photo today for the first time. I came across it on how Drmies got tenure. I'm still trying to figure out what is more scary, the cat or Drmies' photo. I'm not sure about the article as I can see why people would want to delete it as it could be a passing internet fad. But we could have the new Walter Potter. Time will only tell. I've got an Afd about the person who started the cinnamon spoon eating fad. Only two people have commented and it is to keep. Cinnamon spoon person is a keep, but a piece of art is delete. Go figure. Bgwhite (talk) 05:53, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just wait until I create Orville (cat) on Twitter. --kelapstick(bainuu) 05:57, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please keep the beans away from Drmies, he's had enough for one week. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 11:03, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oranje on Twitter. Absolutely notable. (See Oranjegekte.) [15] and [16], and especially this--indicating that Twitter was being colored orange in 2010 already, while the Dutch soccer players in South-Africa were (briefly) forbidden to use Twitter (boom, that's a "Controversy" section right there). Drmies (talk) 14:32, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Although Orville's article was deleted, his legacy lives on. Looks like he'll be on the Main Page soon. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:15, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I may cry. --kelapstick(bainuu) 00:23, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see someone pointed out what I did with the Orvillecopter thing when I found out about it - I apologize for the offended sensibilities (poor Orville . . . ) but that is a heck of a hook opportunity, and I think KunstRAI rather deserves that focus. (Well, it was either that or the schismatic history that came into view when I started researching it.) And I believe a line and a half is about right for the Orvillecopter - which I just made a redirect for ease of checking page searches numbers. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:42, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Inventory optimization[edit]

Dear Drmies,

I just posted this article in the mainspace and would greatly appreciate it if you could please review it when you have a chance and let me know what you think. (You helped me with a previous article, so I thought I'd seek your input again.) Thank you!Braedon Farr (talk) 18:47, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Braedon--well, it looks like an encyclopedic article and it smells like one, so you're off to a good start. It reads a little bit like an essay, though, as indicated by paragraph starters such as "Every company has the challenge of matching its supply volume to customer demand. How well the company manages this challenge has a major impact on its profitability". It's probably best to offer a definition of sorts in the lead (where the operative verb is not "performs" but "is", perhaps) and to expand, clarify, historicize that definition in the first body section. Also, the second sentence of your lead isn't exactly neutral and is more likely to appear in Supply Chain Management Review than in an encyclopedia. But that's a matter of rewriting. There's a caveat to my observations: I am not well-versed in the wiki-speak of inventory, management, logistics, etc. I had a quick look at Category:Inventory, and Just in time (business) strikes me as a decent article--look at the tone, and compare the lead and the first body paragraph to yours. If you can tweak using that as a model, you will easily improve the article. Good luck! Drmies (talk) 06:15, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you once again for your input, Drmies! I greatly appreciate it and will revise the article per your suggestions. By the way, if it's not too much trouble, could you possibly take a look at a new article I just posted ("Sheila Lirio Marcelo")? It's my first profile of a person (as opposed to a company or a technology) and I would value any suggestions you may have to offer. Thanks!Braedon Farr (talk) 15:18, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Canterbury Tales[edit]

I have made some changes to the article that reflect your improvement requests, and ask you to check your review page please. Oakley77 (talk) 01:13, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at Ron Ritzman's talk page.
Message added 01:23, 6 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

As the original nominator, what do you think? Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:23, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ron, you're thinking of someone else. ;) Drmies (talk) 09:41, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The talkback template should have pointed to the discussion on my talk page for this AFD. Not sure why it didn't show up. Try scrolling up one page. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 12:10, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Manning[edit]

1. Nobel_Peace_Prize#Nomination gives us info about the nomination process. 2. I don't like it either, but thanks for the self-revert. --S. Rich (talk) 17:28, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could you take a look[edit]

Could you take a look at David Steen (photographer). I think the article's history says it all. Bgwhite (talk) 18:40, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for looking at it, but your edits were reverted. Joy. I shouldn't have reverted the second time. If there wasn't a Drmies, what would have been the best thing to have done.
It is going to get ugly with the AfD of Matt Collins with spas. What is the best way to handle this type of situation? Should I do a SPI? Should I let things just go wherever it goes? Bgwhite (talk) 01:01, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it's time for the BLP noticeboard and one of the guard dogs there. Drmies (talk) 15:44, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding Matt Collins, if brand-new editors show up in an AfD to vote 'Keep' without offering any policy arguments their behavior is easy to recognize. The closing admin can be trusted to do whatever is necessary. I should offer the disclaimer that I voted in the AfD. Those who are afraid that the closing admin may be asleep at the switch can annotate the votes of brand-new editors with {{subst:spa}}. EdJohnston (talk) 19:31, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whatcha think?[edit]

Another possible two-fer? Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 00:51, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Checking in[edit]

Hoping you and yours are weathering the floods without difficulty. Give a holler. Best, JNW (talk) 22:25, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • There's floods? I'm actually at some altitude! (In the Ardennes.) Thanks, Drmies (talk) 12:04, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Stichting Oud Politieke Delinquenten[edit]

After the emblem was removed from your nomination, new ALTs were proposed, and in the last couple of days, that the multi-hook be split into individual hooks. I thought you should be consulted before the nomination is promoted, to see what your wishes are regarding hook wording and splitting, and whether any of the ALTs meet with your approval. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:18, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know: the reviewer objected to the word "judge" in the hook, saying it wasn't the equivalent of "justice of the peace"; "judge" has been changed to "official", and it (as ALT8) has been approved. Hope this works for you! BlueMoonset (talk) 14:38, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hoi Drmies[edit]

Ik lees geregeld over mensen met verwerpelijke ideeën dus toen ik de naam Paul van Tienen zag was mijn interesse gewekt.

In het Nederlands gebruiken we vaak het eufemisme 'fout' in de context van WW2. Doen Engelsprekenden dat ook? In het artikel Paul van Tienen staat nu:

"He also operated a mail-order book-selling business and was arrested[9] and convicted in 1965 of selling "wrong books",[2] that is, antisemitic literature. He was sentenced to three months imprisonment and three months probation."

Ik heb het even nagezocht, en op annefrank.org staat de volgende zin:

"In 1965 werd Van Tienen veroordeeld tot zes maanden gevangenisstraf (en een verbod om het beroep van boekhandelaar uit te oefenen voor vijf jaar) vanwege de verkoop van het boek Adolf Hitler – sein Kampf gegen die Minusseele."

In een document gepubliceerd door Stichting Argus staat:

"Het gerechtshof te Amsterdam heeft op 11 november '65 de Utrechtse boekhandelaar Paul van Tienen bij verstek veroordeeld tot een onvoorwaardelijke gevangenisstraf van zes maanden wegens het in voorraad hebben en verspreiden van het boek "Adolf Hitler, sein Kampf gegen die Minusseele".

Was er sprake van een voorwaardelijke gevangenisstraf van 3 maanden plus drie maanden onvoorwaardelijk, of was het een onvoorwaardelijke gevangenisstraf van 6 maanden? Best verwarrend!

Het Utrechts Nieuwsblad schrijft dat de officier van justitie 6 maanden waarvan de helft voorwaardelijk eiste, met een proeftijd van 3 jaar. Ook staat daarin de zin: "Hij verkocht het boek Adolf Hitler [onleesbaar] Kampf gegen die Minusseele in Nederlandse vertaling".

Is het een goed idee om te specificeren waarom hij veroordeeld is (het in voorraad hebben en verspreiden van het boek "Adolf Hitler, sein Kampf gegen die Minusseele") en dat "wrong books" eruit te halen? Arcandam (talk) 06:42, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • If you can find a better translation (and with an explanation that's easy to do), feel free to change it (you don't need my permission anyway ;) ). When I translate Dutch to English, and write an article in English, the results are sometimes disastrous. Please go ahead and improve it. BTW, I'm in the Ardennes in Wallonie right now, so you can understand I'm even more linguistically mixed-up today. Drmies (talk) 12:02, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm, I don't know. "Convicted in absentia", without specifying, would probably be best. But I have to admit I haven't looked at that set of articles since I wrote them. I may come back to them this afternoon--thanks for all the help you can get. Drmies (talk) 12:05, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The thing he actually got convicted for is "belediging van een bevolkingsgroep".
  • In 1965 wordt Van Tienen wel berecht, nu op grond van het feit dat hij een bevolkingsgroep had beledigd. Het ging om de verkoop in zijn Boekhandel Europa van het Duitstalige antisemitisch geschrift Adolf Hitler – sein Kampf gegen die Minusseele. - annefrank.org
  • "wegens belediging van de Joodse groepering van de Nederlandse bevolking" - hetutrechtsarchief
Omdat Het Utrechts Archief slechts over de aanklacht en niet over de veroordeling spreekt gebruik ik annefrank.org als bron. Oops I switched languages. Arcandam (talk) 14:06, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is ok. Arcandam (talk) 22:29, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's fine, thanks. Now let's beat Germany. Drmies (talk) 18:04, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
06:59, 12 June 2012

Another RfA[edit]

No rest for the wicked (me not LR).--Bbb23 (talk) 17:48, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Won't be the same without Malleus. Not sure if that is good or bad yet, but it won't be the same. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 18:41, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I thought of various different ways to comment on Dennis's comment, but then I decided that all of them were problematic for different reasons, so my ultimate conclusion was to post this comment about how I'm not commenting. Comments to my non-comment are of course welcome or unwelcome depending on the comment.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:27, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • You can place such comments on the talk page's talk page. Drmies (talk) 21:03, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bbb23, you have the makings of a fine politician, quite the opposite of Malleus in that respect. I have to admit, I seldom saw a comment that Malleus made where I had to wonder what he meant by what he said. There is something to be said about that degree of clarity, which of course came at a price. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 22:32, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah, Dennis, if only you knew me better. If there's one thing I would not make, it's a politician. In real life, I am blunt and honest to the point that some consider it a fault. If my comments on Wikipedia are not clear enough, it's not because of deft politicking but perhaps inadequate self-expression.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:46, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the end, I had to disagree with you on that RfA and oppose the candidate. Way too much parroting of others, "me too" type of activity. I like admins (and fellow editors) that are willing to disagree and take a stand, but this gent seems nice enough, but too nice to bother having his own opinions on anything. Trying to hard to "get along". Digging through his AFDs was rather telling, as they do look a bit padded up to meet some quota. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 18:11, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm happy to see that Malleus weighed in. I have little opinion on this candidate and am inclined to say "per MF", but given my lack of experience with this editor I'm not going to weigh in. Plus, I'm trying very hard to get along. Hey, maybe some of you can look at the message Blackmetalbaz left for me here, about goth rock bans--being overseas I feel a little out of it and I don't have a lot of time to devote to the project right now. I'm good at vandalizing articles, but you lot are better at dispute resolution; plus, I've been working with Baz since the beginning of my wiki career and am inclined to agree with him. Thanks, Drmies (talk)

Common eland[edit]

Hi Drmies! I saw your message at Talk:Common eland. You have indeed a good point there. Could you help me fix these references? The etymology references are alright, I believe, leave them. The improper resources can be fixed, but please do not deprive it of the GA status. --Sainsf <^>Talk all words 04:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Fixing references is easy--just use the proper template, from WP:Citation templates. But those etymology references, you may think they're alright but I disagree. Certainly the literature provides etymological discussion also, and if not, the Oxford English Dictionary or any other decent dictionary will provide something for "Taurus". Drmies (talk) 18:10, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Today's new weird article[edit]

Just out of Harvard, Megan Amram's claim to fame is her twitter account. But, that is not what makes it weird. Click on the first reference and have fun with the photo. Bgwhite (talk) 08:57, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bieber[edit]

Proposed to merge List of Twitter users BTW on the talk page.♦ Dr. Blofeld

Awkward BLP query[edit]

Do you have any thoughts regarding how to deal with the following BLP situation?

An alleged whistleblower claimed that a senior politician has been complicit by omission or commission in the deaths of 1200 people during riots, The whistleblower's evidence is examined by a court-appointed investigatory team, and the court then appoints an amicus curiae to independently examine that team's reports. A game of ping-pong ensues, with the team and the amicus allegedly unable to agree> One side allegedly says the whistleblower is unreliable, politically motivated, not even present at the time when he alleges complicity occurred etc, while the other says that the balance of probability favours reliability, presence, altruism and implicitly suggests a cover-up.

These reports presented to the court by both "sides" are confidential but are widely discussed in the media, who use the "sources say" formula to explain the contents of those reports. Without mentioning the media reports concerning the confidential documents, there really is likely to be little worth saying in our article. But mentioning them has potential BLP issues, especially given the vaguity of the media's sources, the controversial nature of the various allegations, and the fact that this is the Indian media whom we are considering here (whose general tendency towards plagiarism and breathless hot-headedness is all too familiar to me). My gut feeling is that we should not mention the stuff because it is impossible to do so without engaging in weaseling ("although the report of ABC is confidential, the XYZ newspaper has carried a story based on unnamed sources that says ..."). Then again, my gut says that this entire confidentiality business (and allegations of witness tampering, and even witness murder) is a part of what makes this article notable.

I am going to ask Spiffy and Salvio to take a look at this, the former because he knows some of the background and the latter because he may know something about the legal processes that are involved (although they are not in his juridiction!). - Sitush (talk) 11:22, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes, I would have to agree with this. If things are reported, we can decide to mention the report, but in a BLP, if specific people are mentioned or accused, extra care should be taken and that usually means it's a no-no. But I'm on the strict side here, as you know. Drmies (talk) 18:22, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I tend to have the same approach to BLP you have, Drmies; so it will surprise nobody that I share your opinion in this case. Wikipedia should not be used as a tool to spread gossip and should not indulge in reporting everything newspapers say about someone. This is supposed to be an encyclopaedia, after all. If, after removing those bits of info, what remains shows little to no notability, then I'd say that a PROD would be the best way forward. Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:08, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Twitter issue[edit]

As you had participated in the previous AfD, your views would be welcome here Talk:Use_of_Twitter_by_celebrities_and_politicians#Proposal_to_merge. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 16:26, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of gothic rock bands[edit]

Hi there, it's me again. There is some minor kerfuffel (is that how that's spelt? I've never written it down) over at the above linked article. Essentially it is one concerning sourcing; we have a new editor that is of the True Goff Is the Only Goff variety (you know, like the metal purists and punk purists that turn up on other lists). Unfortunately, this means that they don't really acknowledge that other viewpoints may exist (my opinion is irrelevant, obviously, but for the record I'm a tradgoth type of person, much like said editor, but realise that other viewpoints exist in reliable sources in the press; they however have perhaps just jumped on my username and made some assumptions). Sourced material is systematically removed with no reference to policy (well, apart from the fact that they disagree with WP:V, WP:NPOV and WP:RS in general), and whilst I have tried to remain civil in the light of a fair amount of abuse, I've left a final message at the bottom of the talk page with a solution that we've adopted at other contentious articles, e.g. the list of nu metal bands. I don't anticipate much positive reaction, but I did say I'd ask some other editors to look at it :-) I'd appreciate it if you could spare some time to take a look, as I'm not going to commit a WP:3RR violation and I'm not getting anywhere through dialogue with this particular editor. (Sent to a couple of other people as well.) Cheers, Blackmetalbaz (talk) 16:39, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • That's a pretty clear-cut situation. I've reverted also. Next up, dispute resolution, or possibly the 3RR board... Drmies (talk) 18:18, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, you can see how this particular editor works now. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 19:12, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Take it someplace, Baz. I suggest 3RR, if only for form's sake. Their response is clear enough: they're not here to hunt bears. Maybe ANI. Drmies (talk) 07:46, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ANI[edit]

Hi. I have indirectly referred to you on ANI, here. Not by name, but close enough. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 02:16, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MRG, it is so nice to finally hear from you again. I thought you had forgotten about me, and have been severely depressed. I assume that this link is actually to a place where you will firm up your commitment to your unborn Moonriddenchild. Drmies (talk) 07:44, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The irony is that I believe the editor has some useful contributions, but they (how do we know it's a he?) can't get along with anyone and toss around hyperbolic attacks like confetti.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, that went fast. I'm not surprised. Thanks for the shout-out, MRG. BTW, I disagree with BMK's comment about ROPE (sorry!): yes, it usually means we have to do the whole thing all over again, but I think it's the proper way in a case such as this, where damage is as yet limited (though jerkness is obvious), and often it leads to an indef block anyway, which shouldn't be handed lightly. Drmies (talk) 07:50, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(How dare you disagree with me!!) Unblocks are cheap, and when the end is easy to see (as it often is), it seems to me it uses much less of the community's time and energy to indef block, and then unblock if necessary, than to play out the rope and wait for the inevitable. We're not a legal system, we're a website dedicated to building an encyclopedia as collegially as possible, and when every indication is that someone is not on board with that program, I see nothing wrong with shutting the door on them and letting them request re-entry. Following that philosophy would have prevented a lot of angst. Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:21, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I like to live on the edge, BMK. And shouldn't you be in bed? Anyway, since I got that block option in my array of buttons I started feeling a bit differently about it: even though unblocking is always possible, any block, especially an indef block, causes harm to the user who gets blocked and should be done carefully. I don't mind showing up at ANI twice or thrice if an indef block is pursued, and even more so if the editor has made some useful contributions. ANI drama typically doesn't come so much from such users (there was a FOOTY editor not so long ago who got blocked, after three ANI threads, for lack of verification and communication) but from the long-winded ones (Agent00f, or whatever his name was) who are more than eager to communicate. But that's just my opinion, dude. Later, Drmies (talk) 08:54, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I find your change of attitude after becoming an admin interesting, and, really, quite proper. In a perfect world, those who wield power would always have qualms about the application of that power. Me, as a rank-and-file peon -- I get to keep being a hardass. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:47, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And why art thou not an admin? You would make a great hardass admin. Besides, isn't better to be associated with Drmies, the Lady and Dennis Brown than peons such as kelapstick and myself? Bgwhite (talk) 21:14, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Never really wanted to be an admin, and certainly never want to go through the RfA process. Now, maybe if Jimbo were to magically appear in my living room and annointed me one of the chosen ones.... Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:30, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, BMK, I think you need to get a few more edits under your belt, hehe. And thanks. I used to be a lot more gung-ho. Then again, I have less patience in other areas these days, esp. the COI and SPAM areas. And J/K-pop, of course. Drmies (talk) 22:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This latest incident strangely arose from one of the user's few edits which actually wasn't incorrect – not particularly useful, but not technically incorrect, and something which, without a source, would understandably be perceived as vandalism. (The article, appropriately, has "Uncivil" in its title.) With the long history of edit summary incivility, the recent personal attacks, and the disregard and disdain for any suggestion, criticism or warning, does anybody really doubt that an indef is inevitable? MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 09:28, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't doubt that a bit, Mandarax. In other matters, the past is never past. Drmies (talk) 09:40, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
He didn't, apparently, need any rope to hang himself. Drmies (talk) 18:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When I opened the topic at ANI, I was careful not to specify the duration of the requested block, leaving it up to the discretion of the blocking admin. That said, I was fairly certain that an indef would be forthcoming, if not immediately, soon enough - which it has. But I agree with Drmies about blocking and power, and I also think MRG was correct in her imposition of a short block. Except in egregious circumstances (often a judgment call), even if we think we "know" what will happen, we should be understandably reluctant to assume we are right, particularly with an initial block.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:03, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello stranger![edit]

Hi Drmies,

Hope all is well with you. Everything back here is returning to normality once again, after the recent family traumas etc. I was wondering if you could just cast an eye over something for me. Isn't 1, 2, and 3, clear evidence that I was right in my previous observations of a certain editors. Especially the way the 3rd comment is worded, it is a clear violation of WP:NPA is it not? Wesley☀Mouse 02:44, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Wesley, good to see you again. I hope you are well. That exchange it's not friendly, but you did support an SPI, didn't you? And Krosenstern (talk · contribs) is a sock. I'm not sure that constant reference to CIVIL is productive, even if you think you're right: Meowy clearly thinks you're patronizing them, and I don't rightly understand your continued engagement: nothing good can come of it, and I hope you will move on. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 08:00, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) The key is to "turn the other cheek". If someone calls you a nasty and awful little name: smile, take it on the chin and ignore it! Makes the CIV policy almost moot, right? That would depend on who you ask. Doc talk 09:39, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Kros is a sock!? I feel utterly stunned at learning that. I trusted Krosenstern as a respectable editor and to find that he lied and basically used me in what can only be described as a pawn in whatever game he was playing, is just sickening. Urgh, its left a foul taste in my mouth now knowing that. But as for Meowy, I contacted him as his two reverts on an Eurovision Song Contest 2012 (which is an Azerbaijan article) violated his 1RR per week on such articles Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2. The first edit he made, is what prompted me to post a polite comment asking him to open discussion on the article talk page, and be careful not to wander himself into 1RR trouble. But instead of taking advice, he did a 2nd revert. Anyhow, I've been rightfully pointed out now that I need to contact WP:ARE. Wesley☀Mouse 11:18, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Krosenstern did not "use" WesleyMouse. I think it was a case of two disreputable editors finding a common cause to come together in order to plan out a spurious sockpuppet allegation. I have a bit more respect for Krosenstern, actually - he just wanted to eliminate an editor who was acting against his pov-editing aims. There was nothing personal or vindictive about his actions, unlike WesleyMouse's, and WesleyMouse KNEW Krosenstern was probably a sock (he had accused him of being one). Now WesleyMouse continues to harrass. He reverted my edit without proper reasoning and he has so far declined to reply to the article talk page explanation about why I removed the content. Was the only reason he restored the content because I was the editor who had made the edit? I made one revert, not two. Meowy 12:20, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Meowy, I'm trying to get Wesley away from you, and you away from Wesley. Don't come here to stir the shit pot, please: if you hadn't guessed yet, I'm not going to take administrative action where the two of you are involved. You, Meowy, can make a good start by not following Wesley around. Discussion closed--thanks. Drmies (talk) 12:41, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies, I actually very much value and appreciate your advice and cool head and reasoning. However, anyone who comes into editing conflict with Wesleymouse must pay close attention to Wesleymouse's edit record immediately afterwards, and this requires following him around. Within 10 minutes of making my ONE revert, Wesleymouse was going the rounds canvassing to get me blocked [[17]]. He has done this MANY times in the past. If I can cite, say, another ten or so examples of WesleyMouse engaged in this sort of canvassing harrasement of me, are there sanctions available that would restrict his future interaction with me just to content discussion on article talk pages? I would want such sanctions to forbid him mentioning me in any other context, including user talk pages. I would not mind if the restriction applied to both of us. Or is there a voluntery agreement that could be reached, with sanctions if breached? Meowy 12:57, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To drag up the past is one thing, but to accuse me of conspiracy plotting with Krosenstern is just way above any league for anyone, without solid evidence to back-up such allegations. And as for only doing one revert, number 1 and number 2 - my mental arithmatic is pretty good enough to conclude that there are 2 reverts there, not one. And after the first one, I noted in my edit summary how you could classify your removal as POV, when it was clearly cited. And following that, I did the correct procedure in posting a polite message advising that it wasn't a POV, and that if you disagreed with that objective, that you should open a new discussion on the article's talk page regarding your concern. Which, I must admit, you did open discussion, right after you did the second revert. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm sure its BRD not BRRD. At least I stuck to the 1R side of the BRD. Another editor has spotted that more than 1RR a week on such articles. Wesley☀Mouse 12:59, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Removing content is NOT a revert. Restoring the content was a revert (you did that one), restoring the original removed content edit was also a revert (I did that one). Was this other user the same user who gave you inaccurate information about logins timing out? Meowy 13:08, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, according to WP:REVERT "reverting means undoing the effects of one or more edits, which normally results in the page being restored to a version that existed previously. More broadly, reverting may also refer to any action that in whole or in part reverses the actions of any editors." The first edit you did, restored to a version that existed previously - as an editor had already removed the content on a previous occasion, which was restored back again. The second edit, re-reverted again. So technically, you did do 2RR. Wesley☀Mouse 13:14, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Removing content is NOT a revert - my edit did not revert to anything [18]. The content was not inseted into the article in edits just prior to my removing it [19] so my edit did not revert the article to a version that existed previously. Restoring the content was a revert (you did that one [20]), restoring the original removed content edit was also a revert (I did that one [21]). Why are you not responding to my article talk page explanation if you feel so strongly that the content should remain? Meowy 13:20, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And for the record, I only noticed the first edit you made, because I am currently working on improving the older articles, which were/are in a poor skeleton state of affairs, and need a major re-write to improve their encyclopaedic value. Which if you need to verify this, then ESC 1956, ESC 1957, ESC 1958, ESC 1959, and ESC 1960 should provide that clarity. I did not go canvassing to get you blocked. As I have become a victim of 4RR recently, although it was noted that the 4th R shouldn't have been counted, and noticing this 2R incident, I wanted to seek advice, before inadvertently getting myself into trouble with edit warring again. I am and was perfectly within the rights to seek advice. Wesley☀Mouse 13:21, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) So you are, and Drmies gave you advice: he told you to drop it. I think it's an excellent idea. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:23, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Writ Keeper. Meowy and Wesley, maybe one of you is wrong. Maybe both of you are wrong. What neither of you seem to see is that the one complaining about the other, no matter whether the complaint is justified or not, is not likely to lead to anything--rightly or wrongly, BOOMERANG is often in effect. If one of you is so terribly wrong, then other editors will notice that too, and it is not an unwise to leave it to other editors (who might be less personally involved) to sort it out. Y'all's rehashing here of earlier infractions is not going to lead to any action by me or by the stalkers, methinks, and it might be the same at ANI. In other words, stay away. Meowy, let me reiterate: it would be wise of you to not follow Wesley here to add your side of the story: this is not a tribunal, and I think you know by now (as I said before) that I am not likely to start sanctioning one party or the other, absent clear-cut vandalism or racism or something like that. Now please, it is a beautiful day here, even if a bit windy, and the Watou tripel I'm drinking is delicious. I think you all should improve articles while I work on increasing my Heineken spoiler. Drmies (talk) 14:15, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Off on a tangent here, what does a watou taste like? Sounds interesting, and I do love the odd tipple of alcoholic beverages in my spare time. If its good at increasing a Heineken spoiler, then I think I shall invest in a full day's session of the stuff, I could do with a bit of a tubby belly on me. I've never heard of the phrase Heineken spoiler before, I'm going to adopt it over here, absolutely love it. Anyhoo, I'm enjoying myself at the minute improving all those poorly written ESC articles, giving me a bit of pride in myself seeing them grow from a skeleton article to a chunky monkey beast. Take care Drmies, and send my regards to Mrs Drmeis too. Wesley☀Mouse 14:23, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No tangent--this is not a dispute resolution page. A tripel is generally high in alcohol, 8 to 10 percent, a slight bit sour (IMO), no malty or hoppy taste. The Watou is history; I'm having a La Trappe right now, brewed by the only certified Trappist brewery in the Netherlands--but it can't touch the Belgian brews, which are amazing. Try a Chimay if you can (the yellow label, a/k/a "Cinq Cent", is the tripel). Mrs. Drmies is a long ways away, I'm afraid, which is why I have no qualms about having two beers before dinner. Take care Wesley, Drmies (talk) 14:33, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A-ha I love the sound of those drink, I have twisted my own arm into paying a visit to my local watering-hole tonight, and try out some of these new beauties. Tomorrow I could have a sore head, will let you know. Wesley☀Mouse 14:40, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Foxley Wood[edit]

You had some concerns with this article and its nomination. Have the recent updates addressed these, or does it still need more work? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:00, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's awful; issues were only partially addressed I'm doing work on both cleanup and expansion. I am going to steer clear of this editor's articles, and if they pop up among DYK nominations it will be necessary to pay close attention. Drmies (talk) 07:29, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Admin check[edit]

Christian Schwabe was recently created. It was deleted before because of a sockpuppet that created articles on scientists. It is a new editor and they created this and a few others in surprising quick fashion and well done. Wondering if sockpuppet is back. Could admin check current article with the past article. If similar, I'll submit a SPI. Bgwhite (talk) 08:24, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Advice regarding GA nomination[edit]

Hello! I'm coming to you for advice regarding the Georgian Orthodox Church article, as you had already been consulted about it, if I remember correctly, when a dispute was happening there last month. Following those incidents, and on the basis of new sources, I've taken upon myself to improve and expand the article. New sources, that work, and discussion on the talk page have finally put an end to that dispute (plus the blocking of some of the most virulent warriors for unrelated offenses, I might add), and I've been able to cover all of the article, taking inspiration from similar ones about other churches, and relaying on scholarly sources. I'm rather proud of the result, and it has not met opposition so far from other contributors to the article. I'm not a very experienced editor yet, so I don't know the usual necessary delays for such matters, but it seems to me that the article now meets most criteria for a GA nomination; the only thing I'm not sure about is the "stable" criterion: indeed, there was still a major dispute happening at the end of April, and I only finished the big rewriting these last days. Should I wait before nominating it? And if yes, how long would you think would be a reasonable time? Thanks a lot if you could give some light on that matter!!--Susuman77 (talk) 18:21, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Susuman--well, it certainly looks like a decent article. I'm missing a Works Cited, though--I'd separate the complete citations from the footnotes (but that's a matter of style)--and it seems to me that the article can still use more references. I don't know how long one should wait, if one should wait in the first place: besides, once you nominate it some time will pass before someone reviews it. Give it a shot and see how the stability is over the days or weeks. Good luck, and thanks for working on the article. Drmies (talk) 09:37, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks! I'll look up how to format better the Works Cited, try to add more refs, and then give it a shot. Working on this article has been quite fun anyway, whatever the results of this nomination are...--Susuman77 (talk) 07:54, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's the spirit. And you might find a sympathetic reviewer who helps out as well. Again, good luck: I admire your zeal. Drmies (talk) 17:43, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bambi Magazine[edit]

Hi Drmies, your thoughts would be most welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bambi Magazine and here [22]. Methinks there's COI and other stuff afoot, and now counter-insinuations are being made that I'm sockpuppeting there. Cheers, 99.156.68.118 (talk) 21:09, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite the case. I would however ask kindly that you reference and investigate the activity of both the IP and Guillaume2303 with respect to their input on several pages over a short period of time, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bambi_Magazine, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bambi_Magazine, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Guillaume2303 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jarred_Land. Both users have been quite active and in agreement recently on at least four different pages. I find this suspect and intimidating. Sir Chadly (talk) 21:41, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Re: the continued line of crap [23], even after your input, would you counsel leaving it be or opening a sockpuppet inquiry? Thanks....if at some point in the near future another bottle of virtual ale is left here, will that constitute inappropriate compensation, therby compromising your neutrality? 99.156.68.118 (talk) 23:20, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is like grade school. The IP has clearly become obsessive. And offering pictures of beer? Not having the luxury of such spare time, Drmies, should you wish to contact me directly via email or by phone at my office, I would welcome it. Short of that, I shall be contacting the appropriate press agent at Wikipedia tomorrow. If I'm not mistaken, that would be Mark Pellegrini. Sir Chadly (talk) 23:42, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is appropriate to raise concerns re: conflict of interest; your user name implies a connection to the editor of the magazine [24]. My determination, which is irrelevant anyway, is that accounts designed primarily or solely out of conflict of interest, and which can reasonably be suspected of using sockpuppets or meatpuppets in creating and/or arguing on AFD pages be blocked. And you most assuredly will not receive a virtual libation. Cheers, 99.156.68.118 (talk) 00:11, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sir Chadly, I have no interest in contacting. I didn't know we had press agents at Wikipedia, but I have no doubt that such a conversation would be very interesting. Anything you do will be more fruitful than this particular tangent you're on. 99, I can't offer you anything right now since we drank it all last night during that terrible football game: I'm drinking water. If you need material, a different topic, for your artistic pursuits, I just came back from the harbor of Enkhuizen--very picturesque, and my brother will be happy to receive you on his houseboat (ca. 1903). Then again, we may be each other's sock, in which case I'm not sure who I am anymore. I do know that I'm not in the south of France, like your other sock. Drmies (talk) 09:42, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well said Crisco. Doc, I am glad to see you are back to calling it football now that you are back on the continent. Down here we still refer to it as soccer, as football is reserved for some other monstrosity which I have yet to pick up, and likely never will. Anyone wanting a real beer however is welcome to come visit me, should you get past the security gate, my donga is S206, but be warned that the bar closes in an hour, and you will likely have to take a breathalizer test in the morning. Anyone looking to get some real work done, I see Tony is working on getting Barack Obama on Twitter up to GA, and I am sure he would appreciate the help. --kelapstick(bainuu) 11:50, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've looked at the editor's reviews for Islam and Delhi. I can't tell if they know what they're doing. Drmies (talk) 12:06, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I had wondered that myself, primarily based on the excessive excalamation points in comments. --kelapstick(bainuu) 12:38, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ditto. I did notice they're real good at making collapsible boxes, a skill to be envied. Drmies (talk) 13:58, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Commons on Twitter[edit]

Someone please explain to me how the Twitter bird is not copyrighted or copyrightable. It's an artwork, right? LadyofShalott 00:13, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is being claimed as not original enough to be eligible for copyright (as it is just a silhouette of a bird), although it is a registered trademark. Not that I agree with the statement, but if you think something should be done about it, the discussion will have to take place at Commons. --kelapstick(bainuu) 01:05, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually the text of the PD tag clearly says "This image of text is ineligible for copyright and therefore in the public domain, because it is not a “literary work” or other protected type in sense of the local copyright law. Facts, data, and unoriginal information which is common property without sufficiently creative authorship in a general typeface or basic handwriting, and simple geometric shapes are not protected by copyright." As it is not a "simple geometric shape", I really don't think it qualifies as PD. --01:08, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
No, I don't buy that argument either. LadyofShalott 01:33, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have nominated File:Twitter 2012 logo.svg and File:Twitter 2010 logo.svg for deletion at Commons. --kelapstick(bainuu) 01:47, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like the original uploader is suggesting a move to WP then deletion (which would have been the case anyway). On an unrelated note, I have secured a picture for Adam Mansbach from Flickr. Just waiting for upload bot to upload bot it. --kelapstick(bainuu) 02:37, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There was another copy of the Twitter bird that I found in the Twitter logos category; I've nominated it for deletion. Nicely done getting the picture of Mansbach. LadyofShalott 03:35, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I must have missed that one. I also found one (well a couple) of Ross Rebagliati, the first Olympic gold medallist in men's snowboarding. Who later had it stripped because they found marijuana in his drug test. It was returned on the revelation that marijuana is about as much a performance enhancing drug as a Big Mac would be. --kelapstick(bainuu) 03:39, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe I can't judge that--I've never had a Big Mac. Obviously Lance Armstrong never ate a lot of 'em. Drmies (talk) 17:05, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Woah, Nellie! Never had a Big Mac? For reals? You don't know what you're missing (literally). Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:13, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ANI[edit]

Into a single topic, apparently had a conflict of editing. Please do not close the topic, yet. Subtropical-man (talk) 14:18, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • No, too late. You split them, and I closed your part since there is nothing actionable there. You can't "unsplit" them after I commented and closed one section, at the suggestion of another editor. You may respond in the original thread, if you like, and if I were you, I'd change the tenor of your comments. Drmies (talk) 14:20, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Help Survey[edit]

Hi there, my name's Peter Coombe and I'm a Wikimedia Community Fellow working on a project to improve Wikipedia's help system. At the moment I'm trying to learn more about how people use and find the current help pages. If you could help by filling out this brief survey about your experiences, I'd be very grateful. It should take less than 10 minutes, and your responses will not be tied to your username in any way.

Thank you for your time,
the wub (talk) 18:10, 14 June 2012 (UTC) (Delivered using Global message delivery)[reply]

Peperga[edit]

Hi, want to collaborate over something? Not involving a Dutchman in his pants? Can you add some info from here?♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:56, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because we all know Drmies prefers Frenchmen without pants.--kelapstick(bainuu) 23:31, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Moral degenerates and heathens - the lot of you! LadyofShalott 00:47, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I take that as a compliment, thank you Lady :) --kelapstick(bainuu) 00:51, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody say degenerate? I'm here. Hey, I was duped. Blofeld, that wasn't a half naked model. Bgwhite (talk) 00:56, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Interesting little village, Ernst. Do you know the area has its own dialect, Stellingwerfs? Thanks! Drmies (talk) 09:45, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stellingwerfs? Hmm. Excellent job! Nommed. Now let's find a quirky old silent Dutch movie to do! Help! The Doctor Is Drowning would be quite appropriate, in a vat of magma of course.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:55, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

School's out for summer[edit]

Watch out for kids! - SummerPhD (talk) 00:22, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Block is probably imminent, for incompetence and self-protection. School's not out here in the motherland, Summer (nor is it summer...): my daughter has been going to school since Tuesday and she loves it. Are you doing well? Drmies (talk) 07:40, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orville (cat)[edit]

It's now at AfC. As far as I can tell, absolutely nothing has been done to the article since deletion except for routine things done to userfied drafts and then the usual things for AfC drafts... no actual article improvement, no addition of references, etc. Ai ai ai. It was userfied to Warden's space, but a new editor requested the AfC. LadyofShalott 03:49, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know where to put this, but I thought the cat-o-copter section would be appropriate. Post-production of Ra.One - an article about a film's post production. Fascinating.--kelapstick(bainuu) 06:32, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It gets worse, K: Principal photography of Ra.One, Marketing of Ra.One, Economics of Ra.One. Don't know what to say. And now for the cat. Drmies (talk) 07:31, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I got nothing to add on the cat. My comment at AfD was interpreted by at least one editor as a "keep". The AfD, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Orville (cat), BTW, is insightful: NJ Wine made a useful comment that can be copied to just about every single one of those news articles. Drmies (talk) 07:57, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What a pack of unnecessary and redundant articles! Added to watchlist for the inevitable AFDs that will follow. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 15:17, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, Dennis. Maybe I'm noticing it more, with the help of you lot, or maybe the amount of trivia is increasing greatly--with the "it's referenced" rationale. But I don't know of any other such articles about movies; if you look at Template:Matrix, you'll see that such articles are missing conspicuously. Besides "it's referenced", there's also "the main article will get too big"--two not so good reasons that bother me greatly. The last fake reason was cited for Death of Stevie Ray Vaughan, and that's how it survived AfD. Baffling. Drmies (talk) 15:27, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was reading a remarkably large article about a movie recently — No Country for Old Men (film) — it's 275K. That's larger than the main article about World War I which is 225K. I printed that out recently and it came to 52 pages of A4. Articles of that size are like small books and seem to be too large for convenient use online. It therefore seems sensible to split them. Warden (talk) 15:50, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Or to trim them. In this case, I could have chopped two full paragraphs immediately, on first sight, since they aren't about the film but about the book. Drmies (talk) 15:52, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies, you must know that I'm as big a fan of Stevie as one human could possibly be, and had the privilege of seeing him perform just before his death, but even I don't see why the separate article needs to be there. His legacy is what he left us, not how he left us. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 17:22, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I saw him too. Problem was, I had to get up at five that morning to hitch a ride to the show, at midnight, and the French people I hung out with had some really potent hash. SRV didn't mind, I'm sure. Drmies (talk) 17:41, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh hell, I would love to have been with you that night. I was with a date that I really wasn't attracted to, so didn't feel bad about ignoring her a bit. Nice girl, just not my type at the time. I was on the 7th row center, literally. Ernie Isley opened up for him, which alone was worth the price of admission. I still have the T-shirt. As I'm a blues guitarist with a bit of experience on stage in my younger days, I've always considered SRV as close to a deity as one could possibly be and still be mortal. As amazing as SRV is on vinyl, he was mind blowing live. I saw him 6 months before he died. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 21:31, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, LOL me too Dennis on both accounts, I'm a big SRV fan and a blues/jazz guitarist. I'm insanely jealous you saw the man himself! Love Albert King,, Sonny Boy Williamson and all that too. I'm venturing into jazz too. In fact I've been nailing the long solo on Joe Pass's Django up to speed this evening and its extremely fast (82 notes between 0:39 and 0.45 in six seconds)! Nothing makes my soul happier than listening to blues, jazz and flamenco. Dennis chekc out this and this.♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:37, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • I particularly liked Lawson Rollins, very nice! I did learn my theory and scales and did a lot of sit in work in country music, but I hated doing the same solo twice, which is what lured me into blues, where I could freestyle every night. Played in many disreputable bands over the years in some of America's finest dives, until middle age and tendon issues caught up with me. I was never disciplined enough to play jazz, although I love the music. I still love cranking up the distortion and playing to Bach as well. I'm no Yngwie Malmsteen, but there is a certain satisfaction in combining the two. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 00:09, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah jazz playing is like the chess theory of guitar. An incredible amount of theory knowledge needed and understanding why certain scales e.g G melodic minor work over C7 dominant chords etc (B flat is the minor third of the scale and 7th of the C7 chord), A flat melodic minor over D flat 9 sharpened 11th (G being the major 7th of the scale and raised 11th of the D flat chord) and F minor 7 flat 5 etc. My playing has come on leaps and bounds since I started studying jazz, much more sophisticated. Its a lot of theory but its the music I love which is what its all about!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:15, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Stevezdude1[edit]

I'm minded to give Stevezdude1 another chance and unblock him, after reading his latest comment at User talk:Stevezdude1. But I'd like to hear what you think first, if you wouldn't mind. (I'm asking JamesBWatson too). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:09, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • I personally don't mind. There's always ROPE. Go ahead, Boing, and we'll see soon enough whether you were a fool or not. ;) Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:18, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oh, I'm a Fool in many ways ;-) But thanks, I'll see what JBW says and will probably unblock. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:50, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Repeat prod of Liam Cole[edit]

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Liam Cole, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, it is best not to propose deletion of articles that have previously been de-{{prod}}ed, even by the article creator, or which have previously been listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Liam Cole‎[edit]

Your prod was turned down. Do you want to write up an AfD. After you write it, I'll just bareback onto yours. Bgwhite (talk) 20:35, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ANI (Borovv)[edit]

ANI discussion

I don't want this topic to be archived for inactivity. There was a diversion by Uncle G, which I tried to address (my review of Borovv's history at Unification Church only strengthened my view that Borovv can't edit), but I'm not sure exactly where we are now. Four editors have either supported a topic ban or, in your case apparently an indefinite block. What does it take to get an administrative decision? Is there something I need to do or should do? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:59, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since you obviously don't have enough on your plate...[edit]

Any interest in closing an RFC on the astrology talk page? I posted a request to WP:ANRFC but it looks like there's a pretty big back log over there and what can I say, I'm an impatient bastard :). The RFC bot already removed the template since it expired a while ago but no one seems to have looked at it, the thread is Talk:Astrology#RFC_on_change_to_pseudoscience_summary_in_lede. If you're willing to take the time to do it, I'll buy you enough Wikibeer to make Mrs. Mies think you're actually drunk. Yeah, that's all I got, sorry. What we need are 3D printers that print real beer. SÆdontalk 22:54, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • As much fun as that sounds, I have a few things to do first. Maybe Monday. If my liver survives! Drmies (talk) 23:00, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't blame you. I can think of at least 3.51 billion activities in which I'd rather partake than closing that RFC. It's requests like mine that make me not want to RFA heh. Ok, maybe not 3.51 billion, but maybe close. SÆdontalk 23:09, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently, I came late; the discussion is already closed. Saedon, I'm not sure I could have done what Jess did without some practice... Drmies (talk) 09:04, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Jess did a great job, and I meant to stop by and tell you that he had closed it but I've been on sparsely the last couple days. Thanks anyway, much appreciated. SÆdontalk 02:29, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A little help[edit]

Wondering if you could help us out a bit on the Braveheart article [25]. It seems an editor took it upon themselves to move the article title without any discussion at all and now we can't undo it without admin assistance. Niteshift36 (talk) 21:02, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for picking up the slack, Favonian. I thought I'd moved the talk page too... Drmies (talk) 22:12, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Stichting Oud Politieke Delinquenten[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:04, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's a fascinating (if somewhat horrifying) article. Nice work. Nick-D (talk) 08:41, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Nick. Today Dutch TV (AVRO) is showing the first part of a six-part documentary about a couple of these men, including Klaas Carel Faber, who was probably helped in his escape to Germany by the SOPD. Drmies (talk) 09:01, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Jan Wolthuis[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:04, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Jan Hartman[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:05, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Paul van Tienen[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:05, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:The Canterbury Tales/GA1[edit]

FYI, the nominator of this GA candidate Oakley77 (talk · contribs) has been barred from nominating, reviewing or participating in the review of GA articles; he's in fact currently serving a 48 block for breaching this. In the circumstances, he won't be back to finish addressing your points so you may want to bear that in mind when deciding whether to keep the review open or not. Regards, BencherliteTalk 20:01, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • What a fool. Wizardman already failed it (according to the article talk page); I just "archived" the GA review. Please check to see if I did things correctly and if there is anything else I need to do. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 20:11, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry, my fault, didn't realise that the review had already been closed. Yes, fool is certainly one way of putting it... I entirely agree with your stern comments on his talk page. Completely incidentally, I've just begun to read Peter Ackroyd's version of the Tales (having purchased it in the cathedral bookshop recently) - much more readable than all than ancient poetry nonsense! BencherliteTalk 21:05, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some advice please[edit]

Drmies,

May I burden you for a moment and ask for some advice on a matter? I've been brave (again) and nominated Eurovision Song Contest 2012 for GA review, and things are going well with it so far - I'm pleased to say that I am learning a lot through this process about producing a good article. Anyhow, there is a bit of a quandary going on at the talk page about the inclusion of split jury/televoting results onto the articles. Now I can see both sides of this argument and happily sitting myself on the fence even if the spiky bits are poking me in areas I wish they wouldn't. The way the contest works is that the jury members cast their votes during the contest rehearsals, and their points are added together to form a total result and kept secret. And then on the actual night(s) of the contest, the general public televote for their favorites too, and their points added together to form a total result. Both totals are combined to create the final overall vote, which determines the qualifiers (for semifinals) and the overall winner (final). The individual jury/televote outcomes get published weeks later.

In my opinion the combined results (which are already included in the article) bear more truth and notability to the facts. However, to include tables showing the individual outcomes don't really bear any significance to the article; albeit they are notable facts and their combined tally are what makes the overall result. But should we really be detailing the breakdown of individual outcomes too? Or would they be classified as trivial data? Thank you for you time my friend. Wesley☀Mouse 20:24, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Just a general comment, without having read either the article or its talk page. Eurovision voting is (allegedly) highly politicised and nationalistic, particularly with regard to the way that the former Eastern Bloc countries do their thing + the general anti-British etc feeling that goes back to 9/11. I have no idea if the jury votes coincide with the televote but, to be honest, are any of the voting details really necessary? Someone won, someone came last and may even have got nul points; the rest is not terribly important. Disclaimer: I am a Brit, but I don't watch it and couldn't hear the songs if I did. When that night comes round the choice for me is Eurovision or dig into a case of beer. It is a no-brainer ;) But good luck with the GA etc because it is a notable subject. Your problem is likely to be whether or not the reviewer can pass as a GA something that - per your query - is probably not stable. - Sitush (talk) 01:54, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that Sitush. I'm a Brit too, so I can agree with the politicised and nationalistic opinion on the votes themselves. Yes, us Brits get a bit badly treated in respect of the European voting lol. But that aside, the annual articles on here, do show a breakdown of the points awarded from each participating country. Those points are based on a 50:50 combination of jury votes and televotes. In the old days, the jury votes where only used. In the late-90's/early-00's only televotes were used. Since 2010 the voting has changed to try and pull away from the politicised and nationalistic diaspora. The way it works now, the juries cast their votes in the way they would have done in the older days. However, their votes are kept secret until the televotes have been cast. Then during the live shows, the public cast their votes. Those totals then get added together and combined with the juries to make an overall total. The way I see it, that overall total is what should be included in the article, as it is those which determine the winner. But to also show how the results would have turned out if only jury or televotes where used, is deviating away from the truth and also irrelevant data. The GA reviewer also stated that those split jury/public results (which don't show a breakdown of point awarded) are irrelevant and has said they need to be removed as part of his GA reviewing comments. Everyone else on the other-hand is saying a big fat no! and basically ignoring the comments/suggestion from the reviewer. Article stability won't be an issue, if there is some wiki-rule somewhere that would state the split results table are classified as trivial/irrelevant for inclusion. Wesley☀Mouse 09:04, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CONSENSUS seems to apply here, even if it means that the article loses focus. You could try arguing that the detailed stats are undue weight. Also, ddespite WP:OSE, you could suggest that the format should follow the style of other Eurovision articles. My bet is that you will be wasting your time doing either of these but they appear to be just about the only options. I've still not looked at the article, btw. - Sitush (talk) 10:25, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Wesley, I think the article has toooo much in those tables, and too many tables. The lay-out also seems to be challenged, at least on my netbook--I see tables next to tables and text. I find it hard to tell which data are really important and which are less so: it seems to me that a total tally is the best way to go. Drmies (talk) 11:30, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you to you both for looking into this and the advice too. @Sitush, I'll attempt what you have suggested and see if it works. @Drmies, yes - total tally should be the best way IMO; as it is the totals that make the official results. Showing the split-votes doesn't show anything other than how a result could have been if only one specific voting method was used, rather than a combined. Wesley☀Mouse 12:08, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

JSTOR- Grindon[edit]

Hello my friend, is there any chance of you getting hold of this? It is a little speculative but I am taking a short break from the warfare that is India-related! It is about time that I did something positive rather than the usual negative "unsourced", "BLP violation", "copyvio", "ridiculous POV" etc. - Sitush (talk) 23:53, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Done--in a belated response to a message: please accept my apologies. Drmies (talk) 07:42, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Entertaining random article[edit]

Some nights before I go to sleep, I get on an android tablet and touch Random article repeatedly. I'm not logged in and I make no edits (too hard on the tablet). The Wikipedia tour is often, uh, illuminating. If I find an article I want to attend to when logged in, I write it down and tackle it later.

Yesterday evening, I came across Thalasthanam. Before I touch it - not that I really want to - I thought you (and your multitude of talk page stalkers) might be entertained, and not in a good way, by the article. Have fun.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:01, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I facepalmed. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 00:03, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I hear that was a big hit at the box office. Well received. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 00:19, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps, Dennis. But without sources it will not be well received here. Which is, alas, about par for the course with India stuff. We (or, more specifically, the WMF) are diving into encouraging something with scant regard for education. The whole issue is a farce and whilst I accept that similar crap occurs in other areas of WP, it is pretty darn serious in this one. Encouraging involvement is A Good Thing, but not at the expense of a wholesale loss of integrity. - Sitush (talk) 00:43, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dennis was being facetious, of course, based on the article lead. My post here was intended for amusement. At the same time, I will address the article in due course if someone else doesn't beat me to it.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:56, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
For some reason, when I visit Drmies's talk page, I get sarcastic and become a bit of a smart ass. You people are a bad influence on me. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 01:02, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I missed the reference to faeces (sp? ... erm, perhaps not) in the article. My apologies! - Sitush (talk) 01:11, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) And is there something wrong with being sarcastic and a smart ass? I started as soon as I could talk, which I'm told was fairly young (not that I remember).--Bbb23 (talk) 01:12, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
BOOM! The Grim Reaper - Sitush (talk) 01:24, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Harumph, I could've done that. Sitush has now ruined the article. So, to see it in its previous pristine state, look at the version before Sitush swung his axe.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:27, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I ruin many articles. Quite frequently, by adding stuff rather than taking it away ;) What Android doo-dah are you using, btw? I've never edited from one of those and have no idea how awkward it might be. Except for the obvious: I have fat finger syndrome & even a full-size keyboard is problematic. - Sitush (talk) 01:31, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Here you go. The beauty of Wikipedia is the ability to go back in time. Of course, it is still unsourced, but now it is at least readable without the reader wanting to poke their eyes out with salad forks. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 01:58, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • So, at night you touch your "tablet" randomly? If you were a chick I'd find that terrifically hot. Drmies (talk) 07:47, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • The tablets Drmies prefers to touch randomly at night are small and blue, but age does that. Or so I am told. --kelapstick(bainuu) 22:57, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • This topic was supposed to be entertaining, not titillating. @Sitush, I have relatively normal-sized fingers, but I have a lot of trouble with touch screens anyway. A good part of the time when I try to touch "Random article", the tablet things I've touched "Donate to Wikipedia" - drives me crazy. So, to change something in an article would be a combination of touching (which sucks - keep a lid on it, Drmies) and having to bring up a keyboard to type one finger at a time (I'm a fast typist on a "real" keyboard). So, there you have it. Besides, I spend enough time on Wikipedia earlier in the day on a desktop doing a lot of editing - I don't really want to do it right before I go to sleep.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:32, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "I don't really want to do it right before I go to sleep"--isn't that the best time to do it? Other times are fine too, of course. Oh, K-stick, now I get it! Haha. Drmies (talk) 18:38, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Admin help[edit]

Ata Atun was deleted a month ago via an AfD. Could you take a look and see if anything is different. It was deleted as promotional. I just removed ~100 articles in the long, long table in the new version of Atun. That is the only thing I touched in the new one. Bgwhite (talk) 05:56, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • The "new" first version is an exact replica of the deleted article. Drmies (talk) 07:45, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I requested a Speedy. Bgwhite (talk) 08:08, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To cut a longer story short: see the recent history. ;) Drmies (talk) 11:16, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

royal question[edit]

I believe you are a subject of a Queen, so you are probably better at answering this. I believe Ewa Westling is not notable, but she is the mother-in-law of the crown princess of Norway. On a side note, Ewa is a great name for a mother-in-law as I often say eww in relation to my mother-in-law. Bgwhite (talk) 20:56, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I would say not inherently notable (you can take my advice, being the monarchist commonwealther that I am). The IKEA Wikipedia doesn't have much more than the bangers and mash Wikipedia does, and her husband Olle isn't important enough to offer inherent notability either, although a case might be made for a combined Olle and Ewa Westling, if nothing else, for the lulz. --kelapstick(bainuu) 22:55, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Right-wing socialism[edit]

Removal of reliable sources because they are not the "truth" <g> is occuring. Reason given is the sources are "off topic" even though a cursory glance belies that claim. [26] shows one source using that exact term - so I suggest that IDONTLIKEIT is the reason for the pretence that it is "off topic." See also the talk page where it is clear that the "truth" is the issue here, with one editor saying the term is "pejorative" and the article is really about the evil libertarians <g> Cheers - I know you do not like to get involved in any way - but this gives me a chance to vent without angering TFD again. Collect (talk) 13:46, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • I looked at the talk page. Holy moly. I may have said that last time too. Don't you think it's time for an RfC or something like that? Drmies (talk) 18:46, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think I tried once - the problem is that editors who sought AfD deletion in the past think that the next course is to simply delete anything they find not relevant to a topic which they say does not exist in the first place <g>. Personally, I think if one does not think the topic exists, the proper course is to ignore the existence of the article, but that seems like rocket science on Wikipedia. Cheers. Collect (talk) 18:55, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Hi Drmies, and thanks for responding to my comment on the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. I had never posted anything there before, but I am glad to see that the problem was quickly resolved.Safehaven86 (talk) 01:34, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Return of the balloons[edit]

It's not in the same class as the person who blew up animals for Jesus, but it is still creepy.

Also, what is the record for the amount of tags? Bgwhite (talk) 05:29, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant tagging is redundant. I like what SummerPhD had to say, and I don't find the tagger's response to be convincing of the need for such excessive tagging. Taking it to AfD, as you did, was the proper thing to do, not throw every possible tag at it. LadyofShalott 18:49, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A recommendation[edit]

I remember you enjoyed some music by dan le sac vs Scroobius Pip (e.g. "Thou Shalt Always Kill"). I thought you might like this, by the best post-modern hip-hop group of all time. The video is one of my favorite things ever. MastCell Talk 19:53, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • That was pretty cool. I'm glad they managed to defeat the Yuppie Gentrifiers--those are very dangerous, you know. Thanks MastCell! Drmies (talk) 20:25, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Peperga[edit]

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:03, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Twitter[edit]

Not only are there many, many, many Wikipedia articles on the thing. Now there are movies. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:41, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tags[edit]

I really don't see the problem, sorry. The nominator for deletion could have just as easily CSDed it rather than nominating, so that vindicates my decision tag it rather than CSDing. Not all of us have hours to spend on Wikipedia every day. It only takes a few seconds to tag. It can take a long time to properly investigate whether a subject is notable, find references etc. If I don't have that time when I come across a questionable article, I will continue to multiple tag it. (Indeed in this case, further tags were added by another editor.) I see no harm in it, and if prompts other editors who have the time to act, where one or two tags are often simply ignored, well that's the point isn't it? Harry the Dog WOOF 18:40, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As I - and others - said in the AfD, the tags were redundant. I really think you are incorrect that it makes it more likely to be fixed. If you say an article is like a fan-site, and that it is POV; that is just redundant: being a fan-site is one way of being POV. LadyofShalott 19:14, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No one likes drive-by taggers. If you have time to place thirteen different tags on an article, you have time to do a Google search. You may tag as you like, but your credibility is completely shot, as far as I'm concerned--don't be surprised if such a multitude of tags gets rolled back with the byline "drive-by tagging". Drmies (talk) 20:14, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well if people would rather rollback the tags than deal with the issues, that's fine. It doesn't do much for the credibility of Wikipedia to have dubious articles sitting with tags for years with no one acting on them. I will avoid redundant tags in the future but sometimes I am not sure what the best thing to do with the article is, so I want to alert editors with more experience and time to issues that I have found. I really don't see anything wrong with that and I will add multiple tags in good faith where I think they are required. Harry the Dog WOOF 20:39, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I use AWB to edit articles most of the time. When I do, I ignore tags as it is just some code. Reading the Chrisso Courtis article made my AfD senses to start tingling and I figured an AfD was in order. So, I'm a little different than most editors in that I don't look at the tags. Maybe I have more experience than you or I have a bias which started the tingling. If an article needs that amount of tags maybe an AfD or Prod is in order next time? There are some tags that editors do look at, such as cleanup, orphan, unreferenced BLPs or wikify. Problem being is that there are so many articles with these tags, it may not get looked at. Other tags such as COI, NPOV, BLP sources and nobility don't really get looked at. However, I add these, when needed, to alert the reader. Personally, after about four tags things do get redundant. FYI, Category:Wikipedia_backlog shows the status of different tags. Bgwhite (talk) 23:33, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to Ledbetter?[edit]

I've just cobbled up Peter Dorschel. I've got some more stuff to add but I am drawing a blank regarding a US Navy rating who was named as a party to the espionage. My guess is that either info relating to Garry Lee Ledbetter is classified over your side of the pond, or else it is behind newspaper paywalls etc & so I cannot see it. Could you possibly run a quick GSearch and perhaps update the article if, for example, any charges were eventually pressed against him? PS: I was young when this happened but his wife was a hottie: I vaguely remember her sunbathing nude in their garden ... and some who are slightly older have rather more vivid memories. Given how little suitable sunbathing weather Manchester sees, they were particularly fortunate! - Sitush (talk) 19:17, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cancel that. I've managed to find something behind a paywall & to get access to it. Although I am still curious re: whether it remains classified in the US, because it won't be in a few minutes when I add it to the article! - Sitush (talk) 20:13, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nice article, Sitush! I have not been able to find a picture of your sunbather, but it sounds tremendously interesting. Drmies (talk) 20:20, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A mate claims to have one, taken on a Kodak Brownie from his bedroom window. That kind of figures! He is searching for it but (a) WP:BLP and (b) it is probably very, erm, "worn". Eww. - Sitush (talk) 20:46, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:POPCRAP[edit]

I totally agree with you about this sort of WP:POPCRAP — Puppy of Dog The Teddy Bear • WOOF • 20:41, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now there's this FAC Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Justin Bieber on Twitter/archive1 PumpkinSky talk 22:23, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:FART may be applicable. --kelapstick(bainuu) 22:37, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent! - Sitush (talk) 23:28, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The future of Wikipedia is here. I just looked at the GA review of Obama on Twitter and it gave me a headache. What's most striking is that at no point any of those reviews seem to address content--is something actually worth writing about (and then promoting) in the first place? "Oh that's not in the criteria!" Yeah, but your article is still about a piece of crap. Drmies (talk) 11:40, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Page deletion - question[edit]

Hello,

I collaborated with a friend on the article on the Open Forum for CSO Development Effectiveness - it is now deleted with code G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion, although the entry provided external references. Would it be possible to get some more infomation on how the article can be improved for Wikipedia?

many thanks and best, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diana hrdev (talk • contribs) 15:26, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • There were a few issues with it. One was the promotional nature of the claims about the forum, the other was the essay-like nature of the article, which treated a bunch of things but not the particular forum. I suggest you try submitting it to WP:AFC. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 23:06, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drmies/Archive_32&oldid=1143385360"