User talk:Drmies

Eh...hello! RIP Arf.

List of works titled as "cycles"

Is there reason for this to exist? LadyofShalott 18:43, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Or List of literary cycles? --kelapstick^(bainuu) 19:13, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of works titled as "cycles". Drmies (talk) 01:57, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Good catch, K, and thanks, Drmies! LadyofShalott 19:53, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

The famous Dutch Woman

The famous Dutch Woman... yes -famous. Hafspajen (talk) 22:09, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

• Ah! That's the one? I'm so glad I finally have a picture of her--thanks! Drmies (talk) 01:50, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Louise Sophie Blussé

Harrias ^talk 08:01, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Maria Leer

Harrias ^talk 08:03, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Stoffel Muller

Harrias ^talk 08:03, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Zwijndrechtse nieuwlichters

Harrias ^talk 08:03, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Mass song redirect?

Hello. A few days ago, a brand new user created a slew of barebones articles about non-notable songs all by the same band and all of which say basically nothing (Special:Contributions/Purpleberrybomb). Can they just all be redirected to the appropriate album, discography, group article, whatever? Do we really have to go through a whole merge proposal process or AFD all of them? If I redirect them, what do I use as justification? This is so frustrating - seems like my efforts to get rid of crap song articles are just a drop in the bucket, ha ha. Thanks~ Shinyang-i (talk) 21:15, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

I boldly redirected all of them. They contained no information not already present in their album article and the group article. If someone wants to kick me off wikipedia for it, so be it. Shinyang-i (talk) 22:09, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

• Well, I doubt that anyone will kick you off the project for redirecting this! Holy moly that is bad. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 00:20, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
• Also, which "brand new" user? Drmies (talk) 00:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• They're nearly all that bad (kpop song articles), and yet you see how much people argue to keep them, throwing all kinds of nasty accusations at anyone who wants to just merge them, letalone delete them. And people scream even after the merges, even when not a single bit of actual info has been removed. I just wish a lot more editors would come along and do what I've just done, to keep all the weight off my shoulders. There's so so sooooo many of them that need to just stop existing, LOL. The newly-registered username is linked above, Purpleberrybomb. Actually a brand new editor? Well who knows, ha ha. (Man, I really want to get back to improving articles about stuff I actually care about, but the parade of songcrap never ends.) Shinyang-i (talk) 01:44, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Pablo Iglesias

Somebody has been messing around with the articles Pablo Iglesias and Pablo Iglesias Posse. To my opinion, the articles are in fact correct but a lot of history is lost due to a cut and past move. Can you, or any other admin, fix this? I think I miss the right tools to do that. The Banner talk 18:30, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

• OK Banner, here is one obvious problem. But the funny thing is, in that same history was a similar error, ten years ago, and deletion may actually solve the problem. Then again, I'm watching an episode of House, so strange twists are to be expected. Drmies (talk) 00:44, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Thank you very much. No strange explosions noted on the way. The Banner talk 03:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
    • Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Still, please ping Kelapstick; he's much better at tedious stuff than I am, and loves mining into old layers of crap. Zing! Drmies (talk) 03:30, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

A long history

@Drmies: you have no idea of the scope of this matter. If you dig into the last 3 months of drama and non stop aggression directed at me and my responding with what I felt was a honest reply to the users months of passive aggressive and intentional attacks, you are completely out of line here. If you care to bring up your concerns with the Signpost editor please do so. It has been almost non stop for months. I have tried and tried and tried to get the user to relax but it just continued and continued and continued. Do your research please before calling me a asshole. This is about 2 months of drama that most the SP editors are tired of already. I am not the source of the drama. We all made a stream of attempts to get the user to talk, and now to make believe that it was a typo and she meant to tell me that "I would go out and shout people in the street", give me a break. We all choose our own paths in this world and every editor of the signpost will tell you just how much I have tried to get this user to be reasonable. We all would rather Haffy calmed down and worked as a team member, but the cumulative number of random passive aggressive actions that have been directed at me with no justification whatsoever has become something no one wants to deal with. I am sorry if calling someone's behavior out as childish was not candy coated enough, perhaps that might cross cultural lines to be a offensive thing, but I know all the SP editors feel the same way. User:WPPilot

• I gave you a break. And just like Ed didn't call Hafs a sexist (or a troll), I didn't call you an asshole. Hafs makes enough typos for this to have been a likely one. And I will tell you something else, WPPilot: that last sentence of yours is completely assholish. This, this talkpage, is a happy place, and such passive-aggressive whining about supposed "cultural lines" disguised as an apology is not allowed here. And if Hafs had really been on a three-month crusade during which they were persecuting you, *cough cough*, then maybe you should have done something about it, something within our guidelines. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 00:17, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

I am sorry but the typo excuse fails when later Haffy clearly placed on her page the People in the US go around shooting each other, but that does not happen in Sweden (I am paraphrasing here) further substantiating what the intent of the original comment was designed to do. I in no way apologized so I have nothing to disguise. I have tried to be civil and work as a team at all times. I have NEVER considered any of my contributions to SP FC, as final drafts, this is all about my being a co editor on SP FC section. No one requires a invite to join that group. I have been contributing to the section in the way of photography now for 6 years and felt that I could assist. Haffy was at one time grateful and during a prior issue asked me to continue,. Enough is enough and I have washed my hands of this. If Haffy wants to have a online convo via Skype with the editorial staff of the signpost the invite is wide open and I would be glad to join and have dialog, off site but with this post I will not address this, or the user again, on this site, in the hopes that we are all able to continue productively contributing to the site. Thank you and I am sorry if anyone was offended, I would love to chalk it up to cultural differences and just go back, but clearly Haffy seems to want me to dis continue contributing to the SP, something any of us can do and she is clearly set on her dramatic exit. So be it. Cheers! talk→ WPPilot  00:33, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

There's also the deliberate correction of "shoting" to "shooting." In any case, it would probably be best to back away from all this and let tempers, mine included (I'm a "bully" now?), subside before entering into a dialogue. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 00:47, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Ed, I read that correction quite differently from how you do, but hey. Pilot, nothing personal here; I understand everyone's on edge and short-tempered, and so am I--please forgive me for being straightforward. I've let Hafspajen know where I stand as well: sort of in the middle, I suppose. I kind of want everyone to get along, of course, and I don't know if that's possible here, but I'd like a reduction of response and commentary. I think Hafs could also have done a better job at containment, but seriously, Pilot--if you think that the other party is at fault, or trolling, or whatever, then there's little point in going to their talk page to scold them... Drmies (talk) 01:06, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Pilot, I think what Hafspajen might want you to do is stop yelling, and take back some of those comments. Pot, kettle: there's plenty of drama to go around here. Drmies (talk) 14:55, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes. I wanted you to do is stop yelling, maybe I shouldt use that sho--- word, since I obviously can't spell it. You are completely out of line looks like your favorite expression. Sorry Drmies, that now it was you who got that thrown in your face. WPPilot, I have a suggestion, take this matter to ANI. Say that I was directing non stop aggression directed at you, several month, provide diffs and go and launch your case, please. Hafspajen (talk) 15:12, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like an excellent idea. Otherwise, it's just a lot of he said she said. On two different talk pages. Each with its own version. No one wants to dig into three months of anything to find out what is going on. Let's just chalk it up to built-up personality differences, or bad moments/days/week/moods/whatever. And take some time to chill out. Softlavender (talk) 15:28, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

*@Hafspajen: I am super and extremely sorry that you and I had any indifference, and that my comments have offended you. We were working well in the past, and I think of you as a friend. You have previously been supportive and I was grateful for that support. Please forgive any miss understands that we have had, and please please please, forgive me, and any frustrations that I may have caused you, that was NEVER my intent. Sincerely: "WPPilot" talk→ WPPilot  16:08, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• Why do I have the feeling that I am talking to two different persons suddenly? You say you are sorry, you think about me as a friend, and never intended any frustration that you caused. Just above you said something very different, plus on number of talkpages around Wikipedia. Those are pretty serious accusations, and you succeeded to convince like almost the entirely Sing post redaction about it. They all think about me as a totally crazy unreliable person by now. Witch part did you really meant?

• Do you really think that I was directing non-stop aggression towards you, and months of passive aggressive and intentional attacks, or not? Hafspajen (talk) 18:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• @Hafspajen: Hur säger man "Chill Out" på svenska? I am going to stick to myself. I have said I was sorry and have in the past when you took things the wrong way. I do not want to put any further time into this. My comment about you acting childish was something that I would say to my 73 year old mother if I felt that way about something she was doing, so I was treating you as anyone else around me and it is not cause to have a digital meltdown or create a section of your talk page dedicated to the drama. Communication is key to any group and its ability to be productive. That is what I am about, working as a part of a group for a common objective. I am not going to address your comments above. I have not convinced anyone of anything, we are all free to make our own judgments and using reasonable logic come to a conclusion. I have decided not to dredge up every interaction in the historical archives and have made a point of keeping my comments to a minimum. Please take a break, go have some Aquavit & Pittapanna (yummy). Don't forget to put the shot glass on your head, as we do in Norway. Ha en bra dag, smaklig malted, tack så mycket. (Ett språk är aldrig nog) talk→ WPPilot  20:03, 13 April 2015 (UTC

• You say you are not not going to address your comments above. The next sentence you say communication is important. That is a contradiction. Either way, you see, before this I was seen as a valuable editor, not a problem editor. That is kinda gone now, thanks to your comments. You say it was me who took things the wrong way? It's only four(?) -weeks since you last apologized to me - and the same thing happened all over again.

Also all this was forcing me to disclose my gender, something that I never wanted to do. I promised myself if this ever happen, I will quit. This was indirectly caused by you, here, with this comment, that made Ed reacting. Ed was going by your comment. You did at least convinced at least one person, who never really knew me much before that I am making personal attacks. these attacks are going to continue to disrupt the process and by design my ability to contribute unless this is brought to the attention of Admins.. This is something you wrote only a day ago. You also said like 5 hours ago above that this is about 2 months of drama ... I am not the source of the drama... I know all the SP editors feel the same way. That leaves me as a reason, according to you.

Yes, I feel that not only my personal honor is compromised, but my personal integrity as well. I am not taking this easily. It is nothing that it can be fixed with alcohol or chilling out. ^{The comment about putting a shot glass on your head - could be misunderstood too, whatever that means, but never mind.}.

I feel that first posting around accusations and than taking them back just as easily is kinda confusing. I still feel that if you think I indeed was directing non-stop aggression towards you, and months of passive aggressive and intentional attacks, than please provide diffs. Those are serious accusations. And if you make them please provide diffs on them, at least a couple. You say: I have decided not to dredge up every interaction in the historical archives .... why not? Because if you come up with these accusations than at least you can support them? Hafspajen (talk) 20:50, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• Or maybe you simply didn't meant all that seriously? Hafspajen (talk) 22:37, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• Or maybe because there is no such thing as me causing 3 months of drama and non stop aggression directed towards you and months of passive aggressive and intentional attacks? Hafspajen (talk) 23:19, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• Here is the song I suggest: "Joe Jackson - Breaking Us In Two", I think this says it all, lets see how the end plays out. - User:WPPilot

• Don't start templating me. According to your edit summary, you say : I will not address this again on Wikipedia, ciao. Well, I think you should address it. You made these accusations here, address them here. We are all here, right now. You tried to compromise my person here, do address it here. And, actualy I don't agree with the practice of an entire group of editors go off Wiki to discuss issues.

I say, your previous I am sorry was coming after this discussion, where several editors were discussing with you temper, here: User_talk:Ahunt#User:WPPilot. It was BilCat and Ahunt who were discussing your edits and attitude with you. You had similar issues here, User_talk:Castncoot #Learning to Fly, too. I think that then, a month ago; by apologizing you hoped that you removed the seriousness of the issues directed to you. I did forgive you then. But now, it started again.

Now I want something else. Please, if you made such accusations as me causing 3 months of drama and non stop aggression directed towards you and directing months of passive aggressive and intentional attacks please provide with diffs and don't try hiding behind Skype discussions designed only for Signpost editors. Remember, that I am not joining that discussion, so it is unfair of you to tell me to discuss it on Skype, when I am not there and neither will be. Our security thinks there are serious issues with Skype, so forget Skype. I am not there, I am here.

Some people actually might believe what you say. I don't want apologies any more, I had apologies from you several times before, I accepted them, here, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hafspajen&diff=next&oldid=651295545 and nothing changed. I want the Truth. If you don't do that, but you start evading it again by refusing, by templates, and referring to do it only on off Wiki discussions - I declare here and now that those accusations were false. So at least I can leave Wikipedia in a different way, not with a compromised character. Hafspajen (talk) 07:52, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

@Hafspajen: do not contact me again. talk→ WPPilot  14:21, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

• Thank you. Than I take it as I said above. ^{(No I never e-mailed him, everthing is in the diffs, each and every interraction, just make this point very clear)} Hafspajen (talk) 14:36, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Ashura processions in Kashmir

FYI Though I have little hope by now that the user will get a clue and discuss, instead o edit-warring. Abecedare (talk) 03:36, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• Yep. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 03:38, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

New user doesn't seem too new to me

Hello yet again. You had a little break from me but never fear, I'm here to harass/beg/whine again. =) Bradley sniper seems off. It's a new account, and has already voted at least twice on kpop-related AFDs (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hani (singer), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Style for You), going so far as to actually revert the blanking/redirection of a page whose AFD was closed as "delete and redirect" (here). His edits on various anime pages don't look very "new user" to me. Could be a new name for an existing user, all totally legit, but in kpop, well, you know how it typically goes. It just doesn't pass the smell test to me, but I cannot offer evidence of wrongdoing. Any opinion or advice? Shinyang-i (talk) 04:02, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

I just realized he reinstated that deleted article three freaking times ([1]). Doesn't that merit some kind of action? Shinyang-i (talk) 04:13, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• Well, if they had been warned earlier, maybe. This is a remarkable edit for a newbie, but it doesn't rise to the level of that other editor, what was it, that Purplebomb or whatever. That they stopped editing is suggestive, but I cannot in good conscience argue "returning editor under throwaway account avoiding scrutiny" like I could for Cherrybomb. I'd let it go, and see what happens: my guess is they're gone. What we really need is a few SPIs and a ton of CU evidence, since (as you know) I have a hunch that there's only a few dozen K-pop editors and a million accounts--but until Bbb23 gets out of their heavy involvement with other editors, that will be hard to come by. Drmies (talk) 14:25, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
• Shinyang, maybe you want to add Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tistory: Special Live Tour and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scream (TVXQ song) to your K-pop list? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:44, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• Actually the user just commented on an AFD yesterday. But I understand the predicament! It's all baffling to me ... all this over kpop! :) Will add those two items to the Korea-related discussion page - thanks! Shinyang-i (talk) 14:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
• Every single by TVXQ (the group whose song you AFD'd) has an article (see Template:TVXQ singles). Most look long but say pretty much nothing. See what I mean when I say this never ends? It takes a ton of work and fighting to AFD (or merge) even one of them and then there are a thousand more remaining. There's got to be a better way... Pleeeease? :) Shinyang-i (talk) 15:22, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• I don't think there is a better way: as long as editors keep writing all that stuff up we have no choice but to deal with it the proper, policy-valid way. Drmies (talk) 19:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
• Holy shit. Is that more than Template:U2 singles? Holy shit. Drmies (talk) 19:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

WP:INVOLVED?

2011! I didn't even know we had a working relationship, fragile or otherwise. I once asked an editor who complained about another editor on my Talk page whether the other editor was being disruptive. The editor graciously and candidly said, no, not disruptive, just annoying. Afterwards I thought to myself what would happen to Wikipedia if all annoying editors were blocked. It would be so much easier to administer, wouldn't it? And then I thought what would happen if all annoying administrators were also blocked. There'd be only one bland sweet unproductive editor and one laid back robotic administrator chatting about what they're going to do today. After hours of discussion, they finally decide: we'll do the same thing we did yesterday. Cheers.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:37, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• Wait--whether you and I have a working relationship? We're like two peas in a pod! Wait--you involved with Flyer? Well, everyone is just about involved with everyone else. BMK knows I'd block him in a heartbeat if he starts talking musical comedy one more time, even though he and I share a condo in Jersey. And this edit, yeah, I find that potentially blockable as well. I believe that the blood of rattlesnakes should water the tyrant tree of liberties as much as the next guy/gal/zebra, but that sort of thing is asinine and I've blocked editors for similar edits also. Drmies (talk) 14:22, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • I had angelotti with morel mushrooms and fava beans for lunch. Not exactly peas but fava beans are soooo pretty, and the dish itself was lovely (taste-wise).--Bbb23 (talk) 22:31, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
    • You are SO lucky. Mushrooms fall under a topic ban in my cooking room. Drmies (talk) 01:43, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Our house.jpg

Our house. Note the absence of mushrooms in papa's cooking room.

• Wait, block me, I am annoying. My user page (head line "Hallelujah" because He was despised premiered on a 13 April, see OTD) shows "general hostility, stirring and accusations", and my talk the annoying image of monkeys, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:56, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• Well, on the Swedish wiki you'd have been indeffed already! No monkey business! Drmies (talk) 15:48, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• Who, I? - monkeys yes, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:02, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
• ps: advice wanted, what would you do if someone described your user page like that? I tried to ignore so far but am not sure it's the right thing in this case, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:04, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• Eh, I don't know--I guess I also would say nothing, or I'd say they were wrong. I actually don't see it because...well, it's rather cryptic (in the "workshop" section?). I clicked on two links, and the second one was to me, me! when we were merrily chatting about Saint B. So maybe there are links in there that Ernst think display all that, and maybe it's not a good idea to have such links on there, but it's hardly an open display of hostility etc. Given the atmosphere, it's probably best to say nothing. I sound like a broken record--there are many, many things that it seems we should just say nothing about. BTW, Ernst suggested I consider starting an RfC, but that's not going to happen: I'm on the fence on the general topic, sure, but I have the feeling that there is no neutral question to ask in the first place, and RfCs aren't typically "general". Drmies (talk) 17:32, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• Thank you for supporting what is easiest: nothing. An RfC is not useful because it seems rather a narrow corner of the project which can be avoided. The "logic" that I must be hostile because I have been restricted is easy but wrong ;) - I have not been in a single edit war in my career here (I mean: I have not made 3 reverts of the same thing in a day) and plan to keep it that way. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

  Well, I can be a bit more explicit: Ernst, I don't think that comment was really warranted and it's not in the best interest of the project. The content I think you were pointing at is clearly (IMO) not inflammatory enough (if at all) to be characterized thusly. Please consider striking it: it will make you look better in the eyes of ____ (fill in the blank). Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:43, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• (after rehearsal, Brixi - Pärt - Mozart) clarifying: there is nothing to strike because it is part of a declined arb request which I had said to unwatch during the Holy Week. - It strikes me as odd that I had to apologize for having told someone that he made my day. Obviously my idea of hostility is different. - The links on my user page help me to remember nice chats, - "pride and prejudice" is simply factual, - look for "laugh" for a laugh, and the infobox wars best remembered as a farce (which takes us back to here) ;) - Sadly, there are real victims, some listed under the monkeys. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:00, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

  Gerda, I'm sorry, but I'm not following. I don't see where someone forced someone else to apologize for something, but more importantly, I don't see how that relates to "this", and by now I'm not even sure what "this" is: it was a comment by Bbb about someone altogether different, not related to ArbCom or infoboxes, as far as I'm aware. Too many things are starting to sound like marital disputes, and old age is becoming something of a blessing for me: I am beginning to forget, and that is not always a bad thing, unless one is in the classroom. I think back of my own disputes, my own inveterate enemies: I forgot most of them, and some of those enemies, I have no doubt, I get along with quite well because I forgot, they forgot, water under the bridge, who knows. Does anyone still remember I got blocked? Shouldn't I be saving diffs, maybe haunt the involved parties? If I wasn't this forgetful and shallow I might have bailed out long ago. Drmies (talk) 01:41, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

• (sorry, also not related) I run a list of diffs on which I found (by searching for today's date and following the links):

"No man is an Iland, intire of it selfe; every man is a peece of the Continent, a part of the maine" (2012)

"enjoyment in Wikipedia" (2013)

"Oh my god, how can (blank) not have a Wikipedia page?" (2014)

imagine others complexly (2012)

It helps me, day by day. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:47, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

ps: do you hear me, Hafspajen? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:52, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

• Condo in Jersey, eh? You have to have $7 mill in the bank and agree to pay $170 k in taxes a year for that. Even Bergerac couldn't move there. So that's where all the donations have gone… Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 15:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• Blackmail? Mies is extorting you? How? What vast horrific secret does he know about you? Softlavender (talk) 15:56, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• Can't tell you, or you'll be extorting me as well. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 16:00, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• No worries Xanty. Just make sure you stick to the payment plan, or you'll be going to the shelter for a new hedgehog as well. Drmies (talk) 17:32, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• If all editors and administrators were blocked for being annoying, Jimbo would have a lot of work to do on this wiki by hisself because everyone is annoying to someone... I probably annoy more than not myself (yes, I know I do)... — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 18:16, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Editing restrictions

Hello, Drmies,
I came across an editor who has a clear editing restriction (she can not create new categories) and not only was it imposed upon her account several years ago but it was reaffirmed two years later. But when I look at WP:EDR, I find her case isn't listed in the tables. I'd ask the last admin (Darkwind) who dealt with the situation about it but he hasn't been active lately.

I use to come across instances like this before when I was new to editing on a regular basis and I wasn't sure what action to take. The way it is with these cases, the only way any admin or editor would know that an editing restriction exists is if they went searching back into user talk page archives (and not all editors archive their talk pages) or if they had a very good memory. Any advice on what should be done? Thanks! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:37, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• Typically such restrictions come out of an AN or ANI discussion, so plowing through those archives is helpful. Where was it set up? where was it reaffirmed? Drmies (talk) 17:33, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I haven't gone through the AN/ANI archives, I just saw notices of the topic ban violations on the user's talk page and in their archives. The editor is Venustar84 and I believe that the editing restriction was against creating categories and perhaps creating articles, too. Usually what I see are notes on an editor's talk page with no logging of the topic ban/editing restriction. I guess in future cases, I'll just bring it to the attention of an admin, ideally, the one that imposed the topic ban. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:25, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Here are some related links:

• Venustar84 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Neptunekh2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Neptunekh/Archive

There was not a formal community ban of Venustar84 from categories. But it was an admin warning issued by User:Elen of the Roads, to Neptunekh2 in 2011, telling her not to create categories or mainspace articles. Neptunekh2 has been indef blocked as a sock of User:Venustar84, who can be viewed as a successor account. If Venustar84 is still having trouble after all this time, perhaps an indef block should be considered. Editing restrictions have value only for those who are able and willing to follow them. But I haven't researched the latest edits of Venustar84 to see if there is still a competence problem. EdJohnston (talk) 18:53, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Interesting. Thank you Ed. Liz, what do you think? Drmies (talk) 19:30, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Wow, thank you for doing all of the research, Ed! Elen's words sure read like it was a formal editing restriction as Venustar84 received a warning two years later when she violated it and created new categories. She is an active editor and has created new categories recently but they were valid ones, they were not inappropriate. I brought it up to Drmies not because I was soliciting a block but because of my confusion on why editing restrictions like this one, which other admins should be aware of, aren't logged. The burden shouldn't be on the admin imposing a restriction to forever police the editing activities of an editor and, besides that, admins retire! Talk page messages get archived or deleted. This isn't the only time I've seen this occur either.

Perhaps the issue is that this editing restriction wasn't sanctioned by the community and maybe WP:EDR only contains those kind of blocks. I think that is a mistake as it is way too easy for these cases to fall through the cracks. And I think it actually makes it more complicated if the editor wants the editing restriction reviewed. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, I haven't looked into it yet--what with this a Girl Scouts evening and all that--but yes, restrictions should be logged; I did not think that it was just for community-sanctioned restrictions. Logging them is kind of a hassle but it's important, and I'm glad you learned me something: "EDR". I remember having to look for it more than once; "editing restrictions" isn't an automatic alternative for "topic ban". Anyway, individual admins imposing bans are typically pursuant to ArbCom-sanctioned discretionary stuff, and that's probably not what we have here. Going to AN is always best. Drmies (talk) 01:10, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, "Except as noted above, individual editors, including administrators, may not directly impose bans." Wikipedia:Banning policy. So, Liz, I guess you can get the ball rolling on AN, if you like, asking for a renewal/formalization of the ban, or you can let it go. As it stands right now, I don't think this can be called a ban under our current understanding of "ban". Drmies (talk) 01:16, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

New proposal

pls see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Ban Chealer from Wikipedia altogether -- Moxy (talk) 16:13, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• An admin should simply assess the consensus (Begoon already asked for it) of the first proposal--surely someone can make sense of it and draw a general conclusion. I'd ask Floquenbeam, who never met a Gordian knot he couldn't cut through. Drmies (talk) 17:36, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Meh, I just restored it from the archives as an ongoing mess that had been archived prior to resolution. I've commented again, supporting Moxy's point. I don't personally think the conclusion is too hard, but I utterly endorse your endorsement of Floq as a Gordian knot cutter. Begoon ^talk 18:07, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

I got this same notice from Moxy but I wasn't sure about the appropriateness of voting on WP:AN which seems, more than AN/I, to be the province of administrators. Liz 18:28, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Liz, can you remove whatever font size thing there is in your signature that disrupts the line spacing on the page? Begoon ^talk 19:41, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't see any problem and this has never been mentioned before to me. But I'll change to a simple signature in these comments. Liz 21:28, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Hmmm I see it but it wasn't really a problem for me--thanks, though, for listening. And now, of course, you're cool and simple like me! Even shorter! Liz...what a nice ring it has, doesn't it...short but insistent... Liz...then what? it suggests there's more to come, like in "listen!" Drmies (talk) 01:04, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Two days ago this talkpage was blank, and now it's cramped again with messages. That's a night-time job beside your normal job! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 20:21, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Requesting your involvement in one of our landmark controversies

, he said, because he can't help himself with silly little plays on words. It looks like the month long article lock on Landmark Worldwide has expired with no real changes. I think maybe it might help if someone who isn't counted as being a POV pusher of one "side" or the other were to maybe help out in framing the dispute for either RfC's or mediation. With maybe one exception, I think most of the editors involved would think that you have displayed some knowledge of the subject and try to come across as being as fair as possible. Granted, anyone else who sees this is more than welcome to chime in as well, but I was wondering if you might be willing to at least help frame the dispute so that mediation can be attempted, and, maybe, willing to take part to some degree in the mediation. John Carter (talk) 20:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

• John, I really don't know. I don't know if I have it in me, and honestly, maybe I have lost the brainpower to deal with these complexities. I look at these disputes and I can't help but wonder, what does it matter? What's the fuss? I appreciate the kind words, and I like to think that I've been a straight shooter (or, equal-opportunity offender...), and I suppose I would like to help get one problem out of the world (our world). Where's all the others? Why isn't NE Ent doing this? You know, I can say I'll look at it, and I might even mean that: but before I can do that I have work to do, real work--I'm teaching 2666 in a semester full of epics and that should come first. In other words, I just can't promise anything except for my good intentions.

  OK. Time to put the kids to bed and get to work. Maybe, maybe. Thanks for the note, John. (And, again, what a TERRIBLE movie you are!) Drmies (talk) 01:55, 14 April 2015 (UTC)