User talk:EEng: Difference between revisions

June
cornflowers
	... with thanks from QAI

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 00:49, 18 September 2019

You may want to increment {{Archive basics}} to |counter= 14 as User talk:EEng/Archive 13 is larger than the recommended 150Kb.

↓ Jump to bottom of page ↓

Now jump to the other bottom.

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:EEng.

> > > Welcome to "the only man-made talk page that can be seen from space." < < < But there are no signs of intelligent life.

Wikipedia Must Be The Saddest Place on Earth

I have had EEng's talk and userpage on my Watchlist for two months because they are the most fun places on Wikipedia.

—Softlavender [1]

FDA Warning: Pagescrolling-related unilateral musculoskeletal asymmetry

My friend told me that the best way to get a man would be to impress him with my ability to crush a can so forcefully that the contents shoot out, fly up in the air and land in my mouth, so every morning I do yoga, swim and then come here for 40 mins scrolling to the bottom of EEng's talk page; my right forearm looks like Popeye's now and it's done wonders for my love life.

—Belle [2]

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9
Archive 10	Archive 11	Archive 12
Archive 13	Archive 14

(a/o February 2, 2016: 131 stalkers, 81/89 "active" [3])

Don't be a tease

You recently teased some trivia questions about MIT in this thread at ANI. I tried using Google, but Mr. Google and I have a love/hate relationship and he offered no assistance (maybe he's tired of being used and tossed aside). Will we ever find out what the answers are now that the thread has been closed? Or will I have another sleepless night wondering why Mr. Google refuses to answer my questions?— Isaidnoway (talk) 21:26, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Surely you don't imagine I'd pose a shibboleth you can look up on Google. I'd like to give him a day or two to show off his knowledge [4] before I open the secret envelope. For some reason these poseurs often think they can get away with an MIT imposture (this one was a "professor in the MIT system, with a JD in IP and a PhD in molecular biology and supercomputing" who had "armies of grad students and PhD candidates who work in my labs" – "I'm a computer lawyer" seems to be a common fantasy) but rarely, for some reason, Harvard. You can always tell a Harvard man, I guess. E Eng 05:54, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am hoarding all of the juicy secret information that I hold close to the vest, known only to the select few who attended the City College of San Francisco, San Francisco State University and the glorious University of San Francisco. These Cambridge nerds like my brother-in-law must be put in their places. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:03, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're going to think I'm making this up, but UCSF's Laurel Heights Campus is build over the cemetery where ol' Phineas Gage was originally buried. Cross my heart. E Eng 06:21, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As a very young man (after high school but before college), I worked at Kaiser Hospital on Geary Boulevard, where they were digging up Gold Rush era graves during relentless medical center expansions. Mind you, I was not there during the actual Gold Rush. But they needed to create a special city, Colma, California, to accommodate all of the exhumed graves. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:04, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed. Colma has 1800 living residents and 1.5 million dead; the town's (unofficial?) motto is "It's great to be alive in Colma!" For the full story see the source cited here [5], and there's a nice map of the four cemeteries that used to surround Lone Mountain here [6]; Gage was buried in "Laurel Hill Cemetery" (which was itself called simply "Lone Mountain Cemetery" until its name was changed in the mid-1860s). E Eng 18:27, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(Attention, Isaidnoway...) Our ex-lecturer–lawyer having demurred to respond, here are the answers to the four posers posed at WP:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive999#Personal_attacks_by_User:BostonBowTie:
- (1) Immediately as you leave MIT for Harvard there's a sign that famously provides an unintentional pun when seen from just the right vantage. What is it? Answer: The metropolitan storage warehouse — fire proof next to the railroad tracks, which if you stand in just the right place reads rage warehouse — ire proof. Photo at [7]. It's now student housing.
- (2) According to tradition, one MIT president had some famous last words. What were they? Answer: "Bituminous coal", according to legend the last words of MIT founder William Barton Rogers before he dropped dead on the commencement dais. See [8].
- (3) What MIT library makes you go around in circles? Answer: Barker Library, inside the Great Dome; see the map here [9].
- (4) What was kept overnight in a car trunk during the Apollo 13 emergency? Answer: MIT's copy of the Apollo guidance system's gyros, to verify their performance at very low temperatures. Search "trunk" in [10]. (If you like that sort of thing at all then this book [11] is outstanding.)

E Eng 20:16, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some falafel for you!

For striking a balance between humor and insight, and for having the only page on Wikipedia visible from space

cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 19:40, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Submission to the Museums

Describing the planning of the Suez Canal as "he planned to penetrate the feminine Orient with the masculine Occident in a consumation of progression" is such a gem of machine translation I don't even have the heart to remove it. ‑ Iridescent 21:46, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Curator has adjoined your contribution [12] to an existing item also relating to unusual foreign adventures. E Eng 23:25, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't the heart to remove this, either. ‑ Iridescent 15:32, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[13] No matter what, they're preserved in perpetuity here in The Museums. E Eng 15:49, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

talking

You need to control your temper and language. There is nothing wrong with my edits. Hmains (talk) 04:17, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Interested stalkers may wish to visit User_talk:Hmains#For_the_last_time. E Eng 04:28, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Hah! You should have heard the words I had for Trump after reading this. THAT's a NPA violation! Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:57, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Big Telecom conspiracy

I've just got new, faster, wizz-bang high speedier internet installed. Guess what I did to test the speed? -Roxy, the dog. wooF 07:57, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Like my new laptop? This baby can do 10.8 EEngtalks!" E Eng 10:17, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You made a cup of coffee but managed to drink only half of it before this page successfully loaded? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:35, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't as fast as I would have wished. Honestly, it really is the most practical speed test I've ever found! -Roxy, the dog. wooF 22:07, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

With my Ye Olde Worlde UK internet, I can usually manage a whole cafetiere. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:18, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That skeleton

That skeleton image isn't some unknown long-forgotten burial, but a photo of the exhumation of the cemetery of the Catholic graveyard of the Church of St Michael the Archangel in Sanok. Sanok is somewhat politically sensitive—it lies right at the meeting point of traditionally German/Austrian, Polish, Ukrainian, Russian/Belarussian and Jewish areas—and the EEML gang are pretty much guaranteed to take offense (or at least, to feign offense) once they make the link. Given that Commons is in no danger or running out of photographs of skeletons, you might want to use one a little less sensitive unless you have a blinding urge to be scraping assorted East European nationalist editwarriors off your talkpage for the next six months. ‑ Iridescent 16:42, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, all the good skeleton pix – to be effective it's got to give the impression that the subject dropped dead in harness – seem to be from someone or other's sacred burying ground, so since I've been using this one for years (and so have other people – I'm an influencer, apparently) I think I'll just stay the course and take my chances. But I appreciate the heads-up. E Eng 17:40, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2019

Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy 2019

begin it with music and memories

Not too late, I hope ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:44, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I did spend two full sessions with my psychiatrist dealing with the fear that you'd abandoned me. E Eng 14:00, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
... did they find that part of is the reluctance to have to wait for an edit here to be saved? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:29, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That would be a lack of patients, which could be quite a problem for EEng's shrink. --Tryptofish (talk) 15:51, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
He's an imaginary shrink, so he's got all the time in the world. E Eng 18:26, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
So if someone thinks that they see a psychiatrist who isn't really there, does that mean that they actually need a psychiatrist? --Tryptofish (talk) 18:44, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Awe...

Your "I rest my case" video at the top of your user page links to an unavailable video. Bummerrrrr. Nice user page, btw. Leitmotiv (talk) 04:34, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Curator appreciates your bringing this matter to our attention. Information Adjustments has taken appropriate steps. E Eng 05:10, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Dermophis donaldtrumpi

On 17 January 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dermophis donaldtrumpi, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the man who named a nearly blind amphibian Dermophis donaldtrumpi did so to raise awareness of Donald Trump's policies on climate change? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dermophis donaldtrumpi. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 00:03, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I had looked at the DYK discussion early on, but didn't stick around. Seeing it now, good grief, it looks like death-by-overthinking, or maybe by something else. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:30, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bunch of fraidy-cats. E Eng 23:43, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We have all the best fraidy-cats. We have so many fraidy-cats that soon you'll be getting sick of so many fraidy-cats. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:49, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for reverting my edit based on misunderstanding about the article size. (I'm sure that I had concluded this by being led there from somewhere else, but that was yesterday...) While we're both here, would you please assist this relative ignoramus by informing her how to calculate/assess/find automatically the actual size of the finished article? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 06:52, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The usual tool for this, I think, is the one at User:Dr pda/prosesize. It provides a link in the sidebar that you can click to calculate any page's size. You have to save first; it won't work while you're editing. But because Wikipedia:Writing better articles is somewhat official (part of a guideline), it would probably be best not to add unofficial user page software links to it. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:56, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Great and Powerful Oz prefers the "Page statistics" link found on any page history page; then once you're on the page stats page, search the string prose. Since it's linked from page histories I think it counts as official, and it doesn't require installing anything (plus it gives a lot of other useful stuff). E Eng 07:04, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ah - thanks to both of you. Any chance of including this (as a footnote to the 50KB size guide perhaps) in the style manual? As a relative newbie to anything more than occasional small edits, I seem to find myself wading through pages of Wiki help trying to find what I need sometimes. (I must admit that I'm usually more focussed on content than the tools and should probably dedicate more time to the latter sometime!) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:24, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and add it! But stop fo-cussing; it's impolite. E Eng 07:37, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I was just brought up that way (-cussing)! Will do. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 11:53, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I have made a few changes to several pages where article size and splitting are mentioned, and did find that Prosesize tool referred to as well as another user one - so I threw caution to the winds and copied them onto another page as well...

Now, on a related but separate matter, talking of size - back to where my enquiries into size and splitting articles started. Long story short (having originally being led to some work on a "great-great-great-grandchild" of the Immigration article), does anyone reading this feel inclined to contribute to a discussion I started on the Immigration talk page here? Someone at the Teahouse suggested that I post a query on some of the related Project pages to attract interested editors, but looking at those pages, I'm not sure they're the right place to post. Any other suggestions? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 06:43, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I took a glance and the only thing I'd say is that I wouldn't get too focused on size as a reason to split an article. I'd look first for ways to trim excessive detail throughout. E Eng 06:59, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I probably didn't make it clear, partly because I got temporarily diverted by wrongly calculating the size of the article and then wondering if it needed further splitting based on its apparent size. I wasn't really considering doing any further splits myself, just mainly trying to initiate discussion on what gets left behind in the parent article, and (related) how to deal with the same topic being dealt with in multiple places - which sometimes start off the same and then someone adds or changes something in one place and not the other, etc. etc. And (as a side issue) there's inconsistency amongst articles which deal with the relationship between immigration and crime. Perhaps I should delete and rephrase most of what I wrote in that section on the talk page to make it a bit clearer (and shorter). Laterthanyouthink (talk) 08:03, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. For better or for worse, I've re-worded my post over there. I know I get too wordy sometimes - but I think I have clarified the issue for myself a bit, anyway. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 03:29, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck. Bear in mind that the topic is a controversial one, so while WP:BOLDness is still the order of the day, be prepared to back off and discuss if there is resistance. E Eng 04:14, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've been doing a bit of editing on the two pages, as per my comments on the talk page there, but have confined myself to the mechanics of transclusion and the principle of which bit to include in the parent article at this point. I do intend to review some of the structures and content of related articles, but don't worry, I'm well aware of the potential for controversy so will be treading carefully. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:22, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible?

Hi EE. Do you think we could dub over Steve's voice here to say "another wrestling thread at ANI?" :-) In another bit of fun they have a festival where they reenact that scene every year. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 02:18, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! It's even better in Spanish! E Eng 02:35, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Reliability of news outlets in general

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Reliability of news outlets in general. ^Leviv_ich? ! 01:16, 23 January 2019 (UTC)Template:Z48[reply]

Also: my computer had four microprocessors but after loading your talk page I'm now down to three. ^Leviv_ich? ! 01:16, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Editors at this talk page have discussed, from time to time, various content issues pertaining to how recent events are covered. Editors interested in those issues may perhaps be interested in Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Current events noticeboard. Thanks. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:17, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
To draw attention to Tryptofish's message just above, pinging parties who have shown an interest in current-events stuff: Drmies, Softlavender, Ritchie333, David Eppstein, JFG, User:TheGracefulSlick, User:Masem, User:L3X1, User:TonyBallioni, User:El_C,User:Atsme,User:BU Rob13,User:Mandruss, User:K.e.coffman, User:Rhododendrites. E Eng 01:14, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping. Indeed, saw it via CD. Interesting idea, though haven't really had time to process it. As a friendly albeit frustrated aside, it took multiple tries to read and respond to this message. As someone who sometimes connects via lousy wifi , lousy computer, mobile, etc. (and who has had trouble even with none of the above) I find this talk page often unusable for its [arguably, I guess] intended purpose. Maybe 500k would be a reasonable already-quite-large compromise? :) FWIW. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:35, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why do I not see you at RfA?

There's an RfA going on right now and I'm wondering. Why do you never !vote in RfAs? SemiHypercube 01:37, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(a) The fawning nominating statements make me want to vomit.
(b) My only criterion for adminship is that the person not be an idiot or an asshole, and if you oppose you have to say why, but you're not allowed to say someone's an idiot or an asshole.
(c) They're like super-serious over there and don't allow jokes.

E Eng 07:38, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to nominate EEng, so he can block himself. ^[FBDB] --Tryptofish (talk) 00:47, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

EEng wrote about a guy with a large iron rod through his head. It wasn't his autobiography. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 23:56, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Tryptofish: I'm not sure if nominating EEng for adminship would be a good idea. I might support him if this page gets created, but I can hardly imagine what absolute chaos would ensue if he were nominated, let alone actually be promoted. SemiHypercube 02:28, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disappointed!

This is very disappointing. The header turned up on my watchlist, and I took it to mean "Why do I not see you as a candidate at RFA?" So I came here fully expecting to see either a good excuse for not standing from EEng, or (better) an abject apology followed by a prompt self-nomination. (I agree about the fulsome nominations, and always give extra points to the few who self-nominate. Let's have some self-reliance and independence at RFA, people. What are the admins? A mutual admiration society? An exclusive country club?) Anyway. Please do nominate yourself! I'd certainly vote for you. (Yes, I'm too proud to use that "!vote" jargon.) Bishonen | talk 03:04, 25 January 2019 (UTC).[reply]
If Donald Trump can become President of the United States I guess anything's possible. E Eng 03:51, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I will vote for you if you make Wikipedia great again. PackMecEng (talk) 03:58, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please use that as a slogan and campaign theme. MWGA ^Leviv_ich? ! 05:41, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Of one thing, I have no doubt: It would be the best illustrated RfA ever. Imagine the images! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:06, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I know that Bishonen prefers self-nominations, but that doesn't mean that Bishzilla does too. If Bishzilla nominated EEng, I'd definitely support. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:14, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All the bullhonky aside...HELL YEAH!!! EEng proudly wears the battlescars that were inflicted upon him by years of clueless [fill-in the blanks]. He knows what it means to be [fill-in the blanks]. He has years of experience, incredible knowledge and the wherewithal to [fill-in the blanks]. Any editor who ever doubted his ability to craft the ^almost perfect encyclopedic article...[fill-in the blanks]. He would be the WP symbol of the Phoenix rising...the mystical Unicorn...the ultimate [fill-in the blanks] that would attract hordes of news media. ^{And I would damn sure vote for him because [fill-in the blanks].} 🦄 ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 00:48, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

While I appreciate the compliments, I have not the slightest interest in becoming an admin – not that there's a snowball's chance in hell of that actually happening anyway. I feel I can do more good as a member of the loyal opposition. E Eng 21:14, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of accordionists

I was just editing List of accordionists (as one does) and suddenly thought I about you, for some reason. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:52, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That video is hilarious. E Eng 13:46, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

👏👏👏

--Tryptofish (talk) 22:58, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that list be compressed. E Eng 23:28, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is when it is compressed, then expanded, then compressed again, and then expanded again. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:32, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Donald's got a squeeze box, Melania never sleeps at night": [14] Martinevans123 (talk) 23:42, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"And now a word from our sponsor, A Stable Genius." Martinevans123 (talk) 19:08, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User conduct

This and this, although I'm sure you'd already figured that out. Even without those facts, it's still blatantly obvious isn't it? ;) Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 22:42, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the irony of my ANI comment didn't come across. E Eng 23:06, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Consider that this is the internet and irony that relies on prior knowledge of a person or signals such as body language and tone of voice should not be assumed. Mrspaceowl (talk) 19:04, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, uh, duh, Mr. Pedantic Ass, thanks for filling me in! That's a great tip! E Eng 19:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Questions asked around your "snore" edit summary

Please help to improve the article to make it more interesting as per WP:BLUE WP:NPOV etc and where your comment is simply snore, please look to expand so it is not just "snore". Particularly, articles and edits that are not just "snore" may actually address complex social issues in new and innovative ways. Can you help with this mission? Mrspaceowl (talk) 10:58, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Snore" refers to the soporific effects of dealing with someone who keeps reinserting the same silly stuff against consensus. For those playing along at home, this refers to Talk:Farmers_and_Fishermen:_Two_Centuries_of_Work_in_Essex_County,_Massachusetts,_1630-1850#Good_Will_Hunting_reference. E Eng 15:43, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I can testify that EEng often drops off when conversing with me. Sometimes he seems to be asleep for weeks at a time. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:10, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Do this again and you'll be blocked"

On Farmers and Fishermen: Two Centuries of Work in Essex County, Massachusetts, 1630-1850 you reverted to an edit with a sentence ending in a comma that removed notable information. The reason given was 'do this again and you'll be blocked'. However, you give no reason beyond this for reverting to a sentence fragment from one that makes sense, nor have you said what you consider 'silly' about information on an academic book referenced by a major motion picture which is factual beyond doubt and supported by the most credible source imaginable. You seem to be here for WP:NOTHERE in this case. Mrspaceowl (talk) 18:50, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mrs. Pace Owl, your cluelessness act is nearing perfection. Feel free to correct the comma to a period. That way at least something you do will be productive. [15] E Eng 18:58, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your tact, respect and commitment to improving Wikipedia in this case. However, I must demur, as the subclause removed seems likely the only interesting thing about the article at present, and should be restored. Mrspaceowl (talk) 19:08, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is this another example of confusion over "and/or"? Logically, "do this again and you'll be blocked" says both of two things should happen: you should do this again (phrased as a command), and you will be blocked (regardless of whether you do it again). "Do this again or you'll be blocked" would make more sense. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:16, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OED: "Introducing the predicted consequence or fulfilment of a command, or of a hypothesis put imperatively, or elliptically", giving the example Spray with Sanfect and you're safe. E Eng 20:05, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How about "if you wanna be blocked, just do this again"? (I think "ya schmuck" is an optional modifier in this construction?). Martinevans123 (talk) 19:22, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Meanwhile, this schmuck has fixed the comma and some other things. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:24, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your tact, respect and commitment to improving Wikipedia in this case. :) Mrspaceowl (talk) 19:26, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, no problem (although some editors think that I should be committed). --Tryptofish (talk) 19:33, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, wasn't one of your great Presidents called Tact? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:38, 2 February 2019 (UTC) [reply]
No. But one of our many mediocre ones was. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:46, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Murder of Rachael Runyan

Hi, can you please have a look over Murder of Rachael Runyan? Thank you in advance. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 15:35, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Took a stab at it. E Eng 16:17, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Stab? --Tryptofish (talk) 22:34, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In all honestly the unfortunate background meaning did occur to me as I typed, but I was too lazy to backspace. E Eng 22:37, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK. We all appreciate your cutting sense of humor. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:36, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Prince of Comedy

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For this nugget of comedy gold. I laughed heartily. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:55, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

Scrolling through WP:DRAMABOARD, appreciated this. SITH (talk) 17:19, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Added bullets altered threading style

Hi EEng, fairly minor point, but I'd like to understand your addition of asterisks in front of my post of 07:57, 9 Feb two posts prior. This change also converted Nil Einne's properly threaded column 1 ':' into an asterisk as well, thus stylistically unifying our two posts and making the threading harder to follow, imho. Such alterations are sometimes helpful and I do them myself on occasion, but in such cases I like to see an edit summary with something like, "Technical TPO violation to improve threading, for <reason>." As I say, nbd, and you probably had a good reason, but I'd just like to know what it was. Mathglot (talk) 19:57, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It seemed like a series of parallel comments was accumulating so I bulleted them to bring out the parallelism. However, not having had my coffee I apparently put a separate bullets on each of your paragraphs. I've fixed that now. E Eng 20:15, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent behaviour on the Jeanne Calment page

For your information, see below.

Help wanted for references to Garoyan's thesis

A large part of the sections on Jeanne's Calment daily routine at the nursing home, and about her medical history there, are cited to Georges Garoyan's 1990 thesis: Cent-quatorze ans de vie ou la longue histoire de Jeanne Calment, doyenne d'âge de France, published at the Aix-Marseille university. Does an editor have access to this document? We should review the citations, provide exact pages and quotes, and perhaps improve translations. — JFG ^talk 11:52, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Remember, you are what you eat. --Tryptofish

In other words, you, with the support of EEng, have randomly trashed the article without first reading the single most important source on Jeanne Calment. You have thereby deprived researchers of valuable Wikipedia information (most researchers, whether supporters or critics of Calment, cannot read the French sources). You ask belatedly for help, but why should anyone now trust you and work with you? This once-excellent article is a lost cause. Both of you, take this as a lesson for the future how not to behave on Wikipedia, please. 86.162.86.5 (talk) 09:23, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why do I get all the nuts? E Eng 12:43, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that's bad, try closing a longevity-related AfD, particularly as "no consensus". Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:55, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ritchie has been there, done that, and gotten the t-shirt. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:45, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You should also see the flat-earther nuts that came out in email to support their POV on what Auguste Piccard saw in his balloon ride, after I semiprotected it. "Cling to your water pear religion as best you can ... The lengths the ball cultist will go are hysterical" !? —David Eppstein (talk) 19:35, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Snodgrass is willing to chat

Hello, dahling! How do yew dooo! Really, my deah, I am SO happy yew recognized me from across that crowded room. Happy to make your acquaintance. I have no hard feelings of cawse! (We are all in the madcap environment togethah, right?) Toodles! Your new friend, you know, the one who has BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 17:11, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh look, there's that call I've been expecting! Sorry, gotta take this. There are canapes in the fridge. E Eng 17:18, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Once more

Requesting your expertise as it relates to engaging the reader...please see Dax Cowart. I tweaked it a bit and was hoping you could help add the finishing touches for Phase 1 of what appears to be a potential DYK/GA/FA article. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 02:55, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I know this case (looks like I did some editing myself a year ago) and am happy to help. I assume by now you realize that I'm likely to whittle down the detail a bit. E Eng 03:51, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would not expect anything less. The article needs to be encyclopedic but in a way that the prose is engaging. What good is an article that doesn't capture an audience? I know my flaws in relation to this particular article, and I'm quite confident knowing that your exceptional writing ability (example: Phineas Gage) is exactly what the Cowart article needs. Please...perform your magic. There are numerous RS that can be cited. I truly believe the subject of this article is worth the extra mile or two it will take to get it right. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 04:09, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As you know I specialize in gruesome accidents. E Eng 04:20, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't intend for my ulterior motives to be that obvious. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 00:20, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nice little Wikipedia article you have there. It would be a pity if anything happened to it. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:26, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to have a little protection. Otherwise, something might just get broken. We wouldn't want that to happen, would we? --Tryptofish (talk) 00:29, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Beginning with "a little protection", I've determined that it's much safer to not respond. I've been practicing safe hex. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 14:21, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nowadays everyone wants to be non-binary. E Eng 14:25, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nah...you must have forgotten. I'm tri-hexual. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 14:33, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Words matter

I don’t mind corrections here and there in stable featured articles, but I’m troubled by your words towards other users, which are often contemptuous in tone and on the verge of xenophobic. You shouldn’t go around insulting their language skills, especially when you don’t know their background. You want to help? Help, but don’t overreact. --Lecen (talk) 05:28, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For those playing along at home, we're talking about a series of edits culminating in this one [16] and this one [17].

Well, let's see ... Here's the entirety of the section you think should carry the heading Decadence:

During the 1880s, Brazil continued to prosper and social diversity increased markedly, including the first organized push for women's rights. On the other hand, letters written by Pedro II reveal a man grown world-weary with age and having an increasingly alienated and pessimistic outlook. He remained respectful of his duty and was meticulous in performing the tasks demanded of the imperial office, albeit often without enthusiasm. Because of his increasing "indifference towards the fate of the regime" and his lack of action in support of the imperial system once it was challenged, historians have attributed the "prime, perhaps sole, responsibility" for the dissolution of the monarchy to the Emperor himself.

After their experience of the perils and obstacles of government, the political figures who had arisen during the 1830s saw the Emperor as providing a fundamental source of authority essential for governing and for national survival. These elder statesmen began to die off or retire from government until, by the 1880s, they had almost entirely been replaced by a newer generation of politicians who had no experience of the early years of Pedro II's reign. They had only known a stable administration and prosperity and saw no reason to uphold and defend the imperial office as a unifying force beneficial to the nation. To them Pedro II was merely an old and increasingly sick man who had steadily eroded his position by taking an active role in politics for decades. Before he had been above criticism, but now his every action and inaction prompted meticulous scrutiny and open criticism. Many young politicians had become apathetic toward the monarchic regime and, when the time came, they would do nothing to defend it. Pedro II's achievements went unremembered and unconsidered by the ruling elites. By his very success, the Emperor had made his position seem unnecessary.

The lack of an heir who could feasibly provide a new direction for the nation also diminished the long-term prospects of the Brazilian monarchy. The Emperor loved his daughter Isabel, but he considered the idea of a female successor as antithetical to the role required of Brazil's ruler. He viewed the death of his two sons as being a sign that the Empire was destined to be supplanted. Resistance to accepting a female ruler was also shared by the political establishment. Even though the Constitution allowed female succession to the throne, Brazil was still very traditional, and only a male successor was thought capable as head of state.

While in obsolete usage decadence means a decline of any kind, in modern usage it always connotes moral decay, usually including self-indulgence, and there's no suggestion of anything like that in the text. After three go-rounds on this I guessed that you're not a native speaker of English, and as it turns I was correct.

I have great admiration for Dom Pedro and am glad he's well covered in WP, but featured or not these articles are prolix and repetitive. It's big of you to allow for "corrections here and there", but phrases such as

even taking a train journey solely with his wife

and passages such as

Upon his sons' early deaths, the Emperor's faith in the monarchy's future had evaporated. His trips abroad now made him resentful of the burden destiny had placed upon his shoulders when only a child of five.

show there's more than a little room for improvement. (Among other things, it's hard to imagine destiny as a child of five.)

Oh, and as it happens my boyfriend of 13 years is Brazilian so you can take your xenophobia accusations and stick them up your bunda. E Eng 07:57, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

it's hard to imagine destiny as a child of five. My 5 year old has a classmate named Destiny, therefore everything you said here is wrong. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:58, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Next you're gonna tell me your daughter's friend has children of her own. E Eng 14:07, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm now convinced...the burden solely rests on the shoulders of destiny. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 14:27, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone really wants to see decadence, then think of EEng getting a Brazilian. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:33, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My boss was standing behind me, looking at my monitors when I accidentally mouseovered that link.

On another note, I actually got a brazillian, once. Just to see what it was like (and to win a bet because, come on, of course there was a bet). I still have nightmares about it. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:53, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I got you ~~into hot water with your boss~~ into trouble at work. If that was how you won the bet, I hate to imagine what the loser had to do! --Tryptofish (talk) 21:05, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But the edit summary of your most recent edit at your user talk page is now my favorite edit summary. ;) --Tryptofish (talk) 21:07, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My boss thought it was funny. I was looking at a different monitor, and when he started laughing was when I noticed it. I really should know better than to let this talk page sit in my browser while I'm not paying attention to it. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:14, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Manzilian wax Only in death does duty end (talk) 21:56, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

From that page: Hair may be removed from the penis too. I'm wondering whose hair. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:00, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I commend the brave souls willing to suffer that more than once. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 23:56, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

... stick them up your bunda - shouldn't that be "stick it up your Junta"? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:27, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's Argentina, not Brazil, you ignorant xenophobe.^[FBDB] E Eng 17:12, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

6:00 am inspiration

I think it might be a good idea for those who watch the various MOS pages and are active on their talkpages to stop answering general style questions and instead refer them to the language refdesk. My reasoning is that a lot of the negativity directed towards the MOS and its "regulars" comes from seeing the talkpage of a style guideline being used for answering style questions that are not covered by said guideline. This gives the answers the appearance of consensus-based legitimacy and any critisism of that is, I think, totally valid. The talkpages should be for improvement-based suggestions and clarification of existing guidance. No? I'm sending this to several people so please respond on my talkpage. Thanks. Primergrey (talk) 14:34, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you might appreciate...

this. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:25, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I had to thank that edit just for the sheer absurdity of it. Only in death does duty end (talk) 16:09, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:16, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if he did become chairman the caption could read "Guy Standing in the chair". E Eng 16:27, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Or "Guy Standing in the "Stand Up..." chair. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:30, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's outrageous. I wouldn't take an edit like that sitting down, if I were you! Martinevans123 (talk) 16:48, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but will he leave the post in good standing? ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 17:43, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's my understanding. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:54, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For the sake of brevity...Standing, he rose to the occasion. (I shudder to think where this might lead us). ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 18:37, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Custer's Last Stand (allegedly). Martinevans123 (talk) 18:52, 19 February 2019 (UTC) [reply]

Why do you believe this?

May I please know why think like this of User:EEng#EEng's half-serious list of topics on which WP should just drop all coverage as not worth the drama? Do you think these are against WP:GNG? THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 20:04, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Because we get an inordinate amount of traffic at ANI on these topics. As an ideal, Wikipedia treats all knowledge as worthy, but after the 100th weekly ANI thread asking the community to referee some stupid argument emanating from the "pro" wrestling walled garden, I'm bound to ask whether the loss to humanity if we simply didn't cover all those idiotic "matches" isn't outweighed by the gain in freeing editor time for building content in other topic areas. E Eng 20:15, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Whether you like it or not, it's not gonna happen. Don't you think you should try to look for patterns of where these conflicts come from? Maybe just alternatively over protect those pages to avoid disruption? THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 20:26, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Whether you like it or not, it's not gonna happen – <rolls eyes> What part of "half-serious list" do you not understand? E Eng 21:11, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Audio to go with your 🙄. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 02:48, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is it too early to set up a sweepstake over how long it's going to be before somebody blocks ImmortalWizard? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:02, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Richie333: a block for this comment? No. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 12:09, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, not for this comment, but if you carry on inserting yourself into conversations and being a bit of a pest, chances are eventually some admin's patience will snap. I don't suspect you'd be blocked for very long, and it would probably be overturned quickly, but still .... Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:13, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ritchie333: that has nothing to do with this page or EEng. If you want, come to my talk page instead. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 12:17, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But, ImmortalWizard, it does have to do with your bouncing around making odd comments in random places about things you don't know anything about, and often misunderstanding the thing you're reacting to (witness this thread). Multiple people (here and at ANI) have been gently suggesting that your time at ANI would be better spent elsewhere. You are a relatively new user, and ANI is not a healthy place for anyone, most especially those without a lot of experience on the project. E Eng 17:53, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Me bouncing around does not have to do anything with ANI. I just wanted insight to your peculiar opinion. Am I the only one who stalks your userpage and make a comment about something? THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:56, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I am a member of WP:PW which I know much about. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:58, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That counts as knowing much about nothing. E Eng 21:36, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Inspiration is not striking

Can anyone give me a good DYK hook for Nickey Barclay? There must be some way of linking Fanny and Barbra Streisand in a humorous way; I just can't see it yet. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:46, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh, I'm drawing a blank as well. Sorry. E Eng 18:48, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't come up with anything particularly good either. I don't think any puns on "fanny" would be a good idea, especially with BLP. Might be best to go with "...that musician Nickey Barclay collaborated with..." and list some of the famous names. By the way, there are a lot of duplicate links. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:11, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think any puns on "fanny" would be a good idea – Why, because Barbra Streisand might sue us to keep people from knowing about it? E Eng 01:44, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

True, I've been proven wrong, or at least unfunny. I'm glad to see that I inspired some better ideas. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:40, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ritchie333 - I got it!! Barbra Streisand had Nickey Barclay’s Fanny on the album, Stoney End. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 23:07, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good work! I must be off my game today. Let me sharpen it a bit:

... that one of Barbra Streisand's albums has Nickey Barclay’s Fanny on it?

E Eng 01:44, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Brevity is the soul of wit. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 02:29, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There are ENGVAR versions of "fanny" east of the Atlantic which make the hooks more risqué than in the Americas. Not necessarily a showstopper, but something to be aware of. - Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 04:24, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The more risque the better, I always say. Happy to give those uptight Brits a thrill. E Eng 04:41, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone with ... that two of Barbra Streisand's albums have some Fanny on them? Incidentally, a few years back there was an ANI thread where a bunch of IPs were edit-warring on Streisand's main article and calling anyone who disagreed with them a "Barbra hater" but I can't find it now. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:17, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If that's what you're happy with, then suggest moving the wlink as "... some Fanny ...". - Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 11:25, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK although Nickey Barclay played with Fanny, Cocker and Ball she never performed for Barclays Bank. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 12:20, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'd leave the bank out of it but the cocker and balls have potential. E Eng 14:59, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Navigating the museum

I was hoping you might consider some form of organized classification system in the Museum - easy to remember key word searches at the top of the page, and possibly use anchors? Just a thought. I was wondering what section I might look to find a situation where someone is ridiculing another for making a mistake but then makes a bigger mistake when correcting it. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 00:31, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you're looking for WP:TARAGESLAW2. As for a classification system, you mean like the Library of Congress system, something like
AA - Sarcasm, personal

AB - Sarcasm, topical

AT - Sarcasm, theory and techniques

AZ - Sarcasm not otherwise classified

BA - Beatdowns, ANI

BB - Beatdowns, they were begging for it

BE - Beatdowns, editsummary

BT - Beatdowns, talkpage

--? Or were you thinking of something more like an index in a book? E Eng 01:08, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing complex. Just easy to remember keywords - example above would have keywords like errors, mistakes, blunders, humiliation, ridicule, etc. The keywords would fit in the 1st line under the section title. That would allow for a "find" operation. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 01:17, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't realize this page was such a resource for others. Well, let's think about it. BTW you'll see some anchors if you open in edit mode. E Eng 01:27, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I confused what you guys talking about? Subliminal metaphor about a wikipedia topic. Atsme approached argument different than I did. More than one way to get the right answer. Brian Everlasting (talk) 22:26, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes one simply doesn't know what to say

...and so one posts a picture. I thought you might enjoy these. Cheers, BlackcurrantTea (talk) 05:57, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Your contribution will be used to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. [18] E Eng 06:35, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hurrah! I'm honoured. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 07:51, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Dumber than a rock in the toothpick factory

This just blew in on the slush pile and I thought it would raise a smile if I reposted it here.

"Dumber than a rock in a toothpick Factory" ie; this is a phrase that was created by myself for saying that someone is unintelligent; not smart; uneducated. this phrase can be used as an insult or a derogatory remark. Use this saying with caution as it will offend and hurt feelings. In fact it could even cause lasting pain an turmoil if not used with extreme caution. But if used in good company this could cause laughter and hilarity and may even cause a peeing incident. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:56, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but peeing incidents are unacceptable, unless...by design. I have also concluded that EEng's TP may well be the only true "safe place" to say what one thinks, depending on one's perspective, of course. ^Atsme 👂🏻 📧 19:03, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand the rock-toothpick imagery. E Eng 19:17, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also a bit confused by that imagery. In fact, isn't that draft a bit like the opposite of that old saying: "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me"? SemiHypercube 15:50, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's supposed to say Denser than a rock in the toothpick factory. The idea being that the density of a rock would stand out against a group of toothpicks in uniform density. In which case it should be "relatively denser". Or perhaps it just sounds silly, and trying to get a discussion out of it here is dumber than a rock in the toothpick factory. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:18, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I would have gone with "blunter than a rock in the toothpick factory". But then folks have often said that I'm "one slab short of a full patio." Martinevans123 (talk) 10:24, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how to get this video to open at 2:18.

^Atsme 📣 📧 16:32, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Going to the other end of the spectrum, let's start a "vivid folksy imagery" contest. Here's my favorite:
There hasn't been so much excitement around here since grandma got her tit caught in the wringer!

E Eng 16:43, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that was Auntie Mabel? —David Eppstein (talk) 00:23, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

And here I was expecting Dick Cheney or Andy Dick. RickinBaltimore (talk) 21:00, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You mean here [19]? I prefer Dick Classic. E Eng 21:09, 8 March 2019 (UTC) That Andy Dick guy looks like Anderson Cooper after a few years on meth.[reply]

I will never unsee that now. RickinBaltimore (talk) 21:22, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dick pic

Better than your average bear. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:51, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Aaron Molyneaux Hewlett

Hi there -- I'm afraid I don't totally understand the message you left on my talk page. If there are issues with the sourcing I'm more likely to leave this article as-is and just aim for some other DYK options in the future. It would be super helpful if someone could look at whatever is in the actual print archive at Harvard because I think there is some primary source stuff there that might allow me to cut out Family Search as a source entirely which would be great. Jessamyn (talk) 19:50, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jessamyn: I have a soft spot for nonacademic Harvard staff (see Charles Apted andn [20]) because they're usually characters. I've tagged some of the sources for further improvement. Not for a while, but sometime in the future I'll pull up his material at Harvard Archives and see what we can do with that material. Ping me in a few months if I haven't done it yet. When we've done all we can we can get a WP:Good article review and thence to DYK, for which there are a number of good hooks -- and the photo with his equipment, cropped a bit, would be good on the main page. E Eng 21:18, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I forgot to add a section header

Saw this and it reminded me of you. Well, one bit did. I'll leave it to your readership to decide for themselves which bit. nagualdesign 16:55, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

all of these discussions are old, and don...

...'t need to be on my talk page anymore.

My typing is not as accurate as I'd like, and sometimes I hit the enter key when I meant to hit an apostrophe (maybe I'll hack together some custom Javascript so it doesn't post an edit when I press enter in the edit summary box; it doesn't do it in the main edit box after all.)

Hey EEng! I've just returned, but I've noticed a hundred or so edits while I was on my hiatus, but I decided to give myself some time away from the wiki to reflect. I've planned them in .txt documents, and I'll be back and post them after I get them organized. I haven't lost my passion yet! Hopefully I've got a bit more sense now.

But I must sincerely thank you. E to the Pi times i (talk | contribs) 00:09, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Scrolling through your talk page discussions, I was wondering why has everyone left only section headings on your talk page – and then I realised that was just the toc :D Has anyone asked you ever to consider archiving your table of contents because they took a long time scrolling to the bott? (No, I'm not asking you to do that) :D Lourdes 01:25, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

First time anyone's mentioned it. ;P BTW, there's a "JUMP TO BOTTOM" button at the top of the page. E Eng 01:39, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One time I accidentally clicked on EEng's talk page on my mobile. Luckily I was able to throw the phone a safe distance before it exploded. Leviv ich 02:02, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's only 1941 kB of pure fun. ^Atsme 📣 📧 03:02, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, archive your talk page! It's reaching ridiculous DGG-lengths. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:13, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

No not Luke's dad. I wanted to make you aware of this thread Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Incivility from EEng since the person who started it failed to do so. MarnetteD|Talk 03:57, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard regarding incivility at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style#MOS:GENDERID_and_death. The thread is Incivility_from_EEng. .

I don't know what the history is there, but you're not being constructive in that discussion. Nblund^talk 03:59, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

Hello, I'm Liz. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style that didn't seem very civil. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. This feuding between you and Fae has to stop tonight before it goes too far. Please refrain from responding to bait. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notification

I'm not sure if you are aware of this, because there are only three separate notification sections above and you might not have noticed them all, but it seems that some people want to notify you about something that I'm sure might have been important but the thread has already closed. Maybe it was on AN, or ANI, or one of those places. Anyway, consider yourself notified of the notifications. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:20, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Roger, Roger. E Eng 10:39, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Another notification

I don't know whether it's a policy change or new convention, but I'm just writing here to notify you I've posted on your talk page. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:29, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please send my your address so I can have you strangled. Thank you for your cooperation. E Eng 21:47, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Buddhist notification

There is. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 10:47, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:The NeuroGenderings Network

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:The NeuroGenderings Network. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have an unerring instinct for starting trouble, Legobot. E Eng 09:31, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to archive your talk page

WP:ARCHIVE. --Jax 0677 (talk) 20:56, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'd never heard of this "archiving" concept before. E Eng 21:01, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Theresa May may want to resign. Donald Trump may want to remove his hand from the "send tweet" button and engage brain before posting. However, we can't always get what we want. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:27, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe Trump will declare my talk page a national emergency. E Eng 21:46, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Does no one notice this irony: one of the things that makes your talk page so big, is all the notes from people complaining that your talk page is too big? (BTW the reason you were graced with a custom "archive this" notice instead of a template is because the user got a lot of grief for templating me to archive my talk page. Even though mine is a tiny seedling compared to your magnificent tree here.) -- MelanieN (talk) 22:49, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Hey you Mexican kids, get off my 1,000 mile long lawn!!" --President James. K. Veto (too late for Talk) 23:12, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

What I want to know is why do your talk page archives cap out at under 100 threads but your main talk page is 300+? This is completely backwards and against all conventions of decency. It's like you're thumbing your nose at the universe. Leviv ich 16:22, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Enrico_Fermi

I am very grateful for your explanation. Thank you :-) Vikom (talk) 04:43, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You caught me in a good mood. E Eng 04:58, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Milman Parry

The following continues a conversation begun at User talk:AndrewFeld:

If my grandfather had killed himself, that wouldn't bother me in the least. He died 25 years before I was born. I couldn't care less if he died by autoerotic asphyxiation, Russian roulette, eating Tide pods, falling off a cliff while taking a selfie, or by shooting himself in the heart. What bothers me is that after many years of speaking with people who knew Milman Parry, including Albert Lord, I have been told repeatedly that a) no one who knew him considered suicide a possibility b) there is no evidence that he killed himself (no note, etc.) and c) the basis for the theories about his suicide (that he had been denied promotion at Harvard) have been disproved. I assumed that in editing a Wikipedia page, it was important to remove unfounded speculation and errors. Perhaps I was wrong. Although I do wonder at your need to keep this rumor alive. Perhaps you're just generally pro-gossip?

Oh--and I'm sorry that your section leader in Albert's class was an idiot. You should have told Lord at the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndrewFeld (talk • contribs) 00:13, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're right that Wikipedia strives to avoid unfounded speculation and errors, but what we count as founded is tied to what reliable sources tell us. As you implicitly acknowledge, the idea that Milman Parry may have killed himself is a common one, and since there are sources mentioning the possibility the article cannot simply ignore it.

Of course I would very much like to see the treatment of this point improved, but that can only happen if we have more sources, and I haven't been able to find any on my own. Your personal knowledge we can't use, unfortunately – I'm sure you understand. But I'll tell you what, I'll contact some classicists I know to see if they can point me to something. If you know of any sources, please do say. E Eng 01:20, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. A biography of Milman Parry is currently in the works, by Robert Kanigel, and an article about his death, by Steven Reece, will be published in the journal, Oral Tradition, this Spring, so there will soon be a great deal of new information available about Milman Parry's life, and his death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndrewFeld (talk • contribs) 01:41, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well why didn't you say so? I'm sure those new sources will allow us to give this point the high-quality treatment it deserves. So I can attend to that as soon as possible, please drop me a message here the moment either source becomes available. E Eng 02:10, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing ANI question

Why would removing a valid comment to any editor requesting edit summary comments need to be let go? I actually want an answer as to why deleting someone else's talk page request should be considered acceptable.

When did no discussing become an acceptable behaviour on Wikipedia: both from editors and admins? Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:23, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An IP with an extensive contribution history and long user talk page makes one edit without an edit summary, and you go leaving them a warning? WTF? When Serial Number removed your warning, that should have tipped you off to the fact that you were off base. E Eng 23:53, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Devin Nunes

Hey EEng, per the policy on content requiring inline citations and per WP:BLP (etc.) you can't call Devin Nunes an idiot based on the source you provided (which seems to be broken, btw). Please change "idiot" to "dumb asshole" per this source. Cheers. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:24, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ivanvector - the source you cited is also an excellent example for Streisand effect per: @DevinCow has jumped from having around 1,000 followers when the suit was filed to over 134,000 since the time of this writing. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 14:36, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DevinCow must be over the moon about that. E Eng 18:35, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Phineas Gage, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.

The "show preview" button is right next to the "publish changes" button and below the edit summary field.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Using the preview button can help avoid embarrassing mistakes (diff, diff). You may wish to try making practice edits to your sandbox first, only making the edit to an actual article once you feel sure you know what you are doing. The Wikipedia Adventure may help you learn these basic skills. As a reminder, please do not refer to edits as "dummy" per WP:CIVIL–such language should be reserved for editors only. I understand today is your favorite day; let's try not to ruin it with poor editing. Leviv ich 04:33, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of one picosecond. Once the block has expired, your peers are welcome to make slightly more useful contributions.
In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been dunked on. If you think there are literally any reasons for being unblocked, nevermind.

Cards84664 (talk) 21:39, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, please...it's too difficult to separate the April fools day blocks from the real ones. They get lost in the latter. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 00:24, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

When is it safe?

Is it safe to presume the biological gender of a certain IP based on their edit summary? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 03:36, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ask Fae. E Eng 17:12, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Block quotations

Re "if you'll tell me what to use instead of {quote box} I'll be happy to start using it": MOS:BQ covers this already; use {{Quote}}] unless there's some really, really compelling reason not to. If you're sure there is, then I suppose pick any template from Category:Quotation templates, other than {{Quote box}} with it's inconsistent attribution formatting, or the pull-quote ones that use decorative giant quotation marks. Several have placement and other layout options. Seriously, though, more than 99% (quite literally) of instances of {{Quote box}} and other "decorative" quotation framing templates in articles are misuses and should be converted to plain {{Quote}}. I did a cleanup spree a while back (about 150 articles, before I got worn out), and of those only one single case was using such a template in a manner appropriate for an encyclopedia (and it not for a quotation in the usual sense, but an image-like presentation of an entire short statement, kind of a "document in a box" (and the section was about the document, so the function served was that of an illustration). In every other case it was either pointless decoration of block quotations, abuse of magazine-style pull quotes, or WP:UNDUE-violating over-focus on some particular party's quoted statements. There are thousands of quote-template misuses like this in mainspace, and I expect the ratio to hold, since the ones I dealt with were completely random selections. I find that when I do cleanup of them, the reversion rate back to something decorative is also around 1%. Someone back in 2007 or whene ever just felt like decorating, and no one else cares.

This is one of the reasons I want to get most of these templates re-coded to do nothing in mainspace but emit the same code as {{Quote}}. This would auto-fix most of our quotation problems (though not the UNDUE ones, nor our rare instances of real but inappropriate pull-quoting). But {{Quote box}} having inconsistent formatting would have to be fixed first.

I've said it before many times: If people are convinced that our normal and traditional block-quotation style is somehow sub-par for a 2019+ online publication, they're free to propose a replacement style. They're not free to go inject whatever weird quotation formatting "magic" they like at their own blog (WP:NOT#WEBHOST, and we do have a our own MoS for a reason). I've already successfully TfDed some experiments of that sort (e.g. ones that looked a lot like {{Talk quote block}}, with a dark vertical bar on the left, a style borrowed from threaded message boards and some e-mail programs like Eudora, but virtually never found in print or print-mimicking material).

I'm sure you understand all of this, but I'm laying it out in detail for your TP stalkers. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 05:49, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me what template to use on these: Phineas_Gage#Exaggeration_and_distortion_of_mental_changes; Twenty-fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Section_1:_Presidential_succession; Memorial_Hall_(Harvard_University)#Conception_and_construction. And please don't tell me they should be regular block quotes (though secretly I'm hoping you will so I can argue with you about it). E Eng 17:22, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Phineas Gage article (about which I care) is turning into a train wreck. Those definitely should be block quotations, integrated with context into the material. The current presentation is "magazine style, on crack", filtered through "my first blog" sensibilities of how to present information. Just awful. The urge to begin a section with a quotation is a magazine "feature writer" impulse that needs to be strongly resisted in encyclopedia writing. We have no need to "hook" readers. We don't care how long their eyeballs are on the page, and we aren't weaving a dancing narrative for them, just providing information that they can use how and in whatever portion they desire. The 25th Am. page looks fine. These are really being presented as document fragments for analysis, not quotations in the usual sense. Here, it actually makes sense to lead the sections with this material (for reasons completely unrelated to why people want to do so with "juicy" personal or organizational quotations, magazine-style – sometimes called "quotoids" when they're not technically pull quotes, i.e. not repeated in the main text). Here, the mis-coding of {{Quote box}} isn't really an issue, since its inconsistent attribution code is not being used. However, the "safe" replacement template is {{Quote frame}}. I may just propose merging the former to the latter, though it'll take a bot or something to fix all the attribution. It might not even be bottable. (Bot would have to look for every possible combination of dash and hyphen encoding, with and without spacing also encoded in various ways, and strip it from the attribution parameters before changing the template call to point to {{quote frame}}.) The Harvard case is also unencyclopedic, magazine-style use of "quotoids", which should be integrated into the prose, with context. The present display looks reasonable, but is poorly coded (it's using <br /> as a layout tool, etc.). If there were consensus to retain this as a sidebar, I suppose it's not fatally bad, but should probably be done in some custom <div>...</div>, because presently is's marking up the entire content, including attribution and citations, as quoted material, which is wrong. That template isn't a general layout tool, it's something that emits quotation markup around whatever content it is told is a quotation. PS: I just did another random cleanup run on the results returned by "What links here" for one of the decorative quote templates, and out of 20-ish cases that showed up in the first page of results in mainspace, 0% were appropriate. They were all either normal block quotes that should be in {{quote}}, or they were non-encyclopedic, magazine-style pull quotes. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 08:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC); copyedited 04:48, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm interested in We don't care how long their eyeballs are on the page – Really? We don't care whether the reader thinks, "I don't know where this is going -- I guess I'll just quit" versus "Wow, I'm gonna learn something interesting from this article/section. Tell me!"? E Eng 15:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think you know what I mean. We wouldn't have an MoS, Writing Better Articles, WP:NOT, and all these policies on producing proper enc. content if we didn't care whether readers could understand the material (as to both wording and logical arrangement), or care whether they believed it was accurate and worth reading. But we don't use visual, emotive, lead-burying, teasing, ambiguous, and other psychological trickery to try to steer and latch onto reader attention (we do pretty much the opposite, using plain and detached English, and providing links that help get them to what they're most interested in, which may be nothing at the current page after all). There's a big difference between a sensible article flow (and ToC), versus trying to cajole, shock, amuse, mystify, or otherwise lead the reader around manipulatively (which is actually a subtle form of WP:SYNTH, weaving a "can you believe it?!" narrative from bare facts, the connections between which really have to come from sources, not from our own editorial perspective). Decorative quotations almost always serve such an unencyclopedic purpose (and are a technique borrowed ultimately from fiction, as foreshadowing or plot twist depending on the quote and its relation to the rest of the material).

The only exceptions I regularly see are document snippets for analysis, as in the 25th Am. case, and actually famous quotations, like the opening of MLK's "I have a dream" speech, that are part of the subject of our own article. The ultimate solution may be to fork specific templates for these with separate documentation (e.g. so it's clear that using {{Famous quote}} for a non-famous quote can be reverted), and have all other quote templates just emit blockquote markup if used in mainspace. I mean really, if the only difference between a section starting with an out-of-context quotation (a non sequitur, and most often some form of teaser) in case A and case B is that in case B it's got a box around it and is moved rightward, then the problem and solution are clear. Any random editor would fix the first case, without the box, by either providing context or moving it to where the already-provided context is (or removing it if inappropriate for reasons like UNDUE or because it's actual, redundant pull quote). Our fix-it impulse often gets a bit short-circuited when people box quotations, because we've become desensitized to them by magazines and tabloid journalism using pull quotes and other forms of teaser (which most of us probably actually ignore, having also self-trained to avoid big flashy noise on the page as usually advertising). But it's still the same non-encyclopedic article content flow. This will be especially apparent to users of screen readers, and anyone else not using our default CSS and JavaScript (which is where that boxing layout comes from); quotoids are also a WP:ACCESS and WP:REUSE problem. Basically, a WP article needs to make perfect sense if you copy-paste its text into a plain text editor without any formatting left other than line-breaks. With quotations in particular, this demonstrates why introductory contextual material identifying it as a quotation is important, because it'll lose its indentation when used as raw text. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 04:47, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion continued below

SMcCandlish – Followup: It doesn't look like {quote frame} can substitute, because there doesn't seem to be any way to control the width of the box. I'd still like to hear your response to my point just above here. E Eng 03:25, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. All the parameters of {{Quote box}} should just be ported over to {{Quote frame}} for merger. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 04:47, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I hate to say it but it still looks awful, at least because (a) there's too little margin between the box and adjacent text and (b) the text looks like it's at 100%, where I'd expect 90% (and 90%, IMHO, looks way better). E Eng 05:17, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Continued discussion re quote boxes

OK, let's take an isolated example, involving a subject with whom I suspect you're familiar. What do you think of the boxed quotation at Herb_Caen#Honors? Do you really think it would do its job better if run into the text as a block quote, introduced by something like At the ceremony, Caen said to the crowd: ? E Eng 05:17, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I presume this is a joke

[21]. I did chuckle a little. --Jayron 32 13:36, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No joke. Coy circumlocutions for boomerangs are verboten. You're right on the edge. E Eng 13:50, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, I crossed the edge years ago. If you're only getting to the edge now, you've got some catching up to do. --Jayron 32 14:22, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Upage

Hi, I appreciate the nice humor on your pages. But I noticed the picture of Donald Trump, and the picture further down of a finger with text about Donald Trump, However I would like to point out that the pictures and the captions of Trump were offensive to me, and could be too with other users. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:52, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I take it you're talking about images such as the ones shown here.

Donald Trump with shithole in open position

I appreciate the friendliness of your message, but predict that in five years you will be wondering how you could have ever found such things even remarkable. E Eng 03:13, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is uniformly excellent, clever, and dare I say genre-savvy. Post more of these, please. Thanks.--WaltCip (talk) 17:03, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The "virtual reality projector turned off" image is quite clearly a picture of Reggie Perrin's mother in law. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:15, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image

Hope you don't mind, but I removed the porta potty image from the ANI thread with my name in it. I don't feel it's fair for the thread which is about me to have this image in it, and could have an effect of subtly serving to portray me in a negative manner. Hope you understand. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:57, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oversensitive. E Eng 10:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A quickie

FYI...if you had clicked on pointy in the caption of my Madonna picture at ANI you would have had a conical experience...or perhaps you did. I tried to find a similar image at Commons but never thought to keyword "cone". Good find. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 02:30, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Conical, comical -- I get it! My 9-y.o. nephew, who has been learning about polygons in school, told me a joke last week. "I was taking the bus to Harvard SQUARE but I got lost because I got on the RHOMBUS. Get it? WRONG BUS." My nephew's wicked smaht. E Eng 03:04, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A funny bone tickler indeed, although not my intended joke. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 22:52, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MOSNUM date ranges

Based on your edit comment when you reverted my edit, I did not realize that you made other changes. I apologize for reverting the rest of your edit. I don't understand what you mean by "please leave this near the bottom of the pile".—Finell 19:42, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I meant that the note about word-or-dash-but-not-both belongs near the end of the list of bulletpoints, not first. E Eng 22:03, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wow

Your userpage. 108.26.206.64 (talk) 00:54, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I get that a lot. E Eng 00:56, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	Thanks for all you do here on Wikipedia! Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 23:40, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Thegooduser, I appreciate it! E Eng 14:11, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The other thing I LOVE about your page and talk page, is that it kills my 2.4G network, and I need to use 5G network in order to avoid kills to my wifi :-P --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:51, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

^{( Buttinsky)} I just read "kills my 2.4G" and it reminded me that I forgot to share this link with you, EEng - it's the companion to "clean underwear" in the Museum of I Shouldn't Laugh but I Did. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 21:19, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't 2.4G some sort of bra size? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 22:40, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Airport malaria and portraits of the Queen

When you (and your merry band of talk page stalkers) have a mo, could you nip over to User talk:Whispyhistory#Flies and mosquitoes and suggest some fun hooks for airport malaria and Queen Elizabeth II (painting). Please excuse me from not having a sense of humour today, I have chronic ANI fatigue. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 22:21, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Refer to EEng's research in the image above. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 22:49, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	Thank you for your ideas and attitude Whispyhistory (talk) 22:11, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I live to serve. E Eng 22:13, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notre-Dame de Paris fire: Difference between revisions

You make me laugh ~ mitch ~ Mitchellhobbs (talk) 01:13, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vive la différence! E Eng 01:24, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Notre-Dame_de_Paris_fire&diff=next&oldid=893358254 Revision as of 20:57, 20 April 2019 EEng
I was just seeing if you were paying attention I knew it wouldn't lasted long Mitchellhobbs (talk) 22:48, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Notre-Dame_de_Paris_fire&diff=893648089&oldid=893646972 Latest revision as of 18:40, 22 April 2019
188.108.153.142 moved it ~ but I think it flows well there ~ what do you think? Mitchellhobbs (talk) 18:47, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think the IP is preoccupied with making images in a vertical stack all have the same width, which is a good thing in general, especially when they're vertically adjacent, but not so important if there's substantial distance between them. IAnyway, it's OK either way -- too early to spend much time on layout because the article will grow a lot over the next few weeks and then it will become clearer where to place the images. See my comment here [22]. E Eng 18:58, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A fitting tribute on Good Friday, perchance.

Protector from Heretical Pareidolia

You saved us from misinterpreting the fires of Notre Dame.

Herewith, you receive the Map of France.
Or you can see O'Keefe, Kevin (January 21, 2013). "Beeville Man Sees Jesus in Breakfast Taco". Texas Monthly. Retrieved April 19, 2019. Ernesto Garza said that the image of the Christian Messiah in his tortilla was "a miracle."
Remember: don't eat the Icon.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:01, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see you again, and thank you. E Eng 21:41, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I note you are still on patrol. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:41, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you know how I get once I taste blood. E Eng 01:53, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"...merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy, nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams." --Thomas Jefferson

I could not help^{[Citation Needed]} noticing that your so-called "User Page"[23] mentions a "Cabal".[24]

There Is No Cabal (TINC). We discussed this at the last Cabal meeting, and everyone agreed that There Is No Cabal. An announcement was made in Cabalist: The Official Newsletter of The Cabal making it clear that There Is No Cabal. The words "There Is No Cabal" are in ten-foot letters on the side of the 42-story International Cabal Headquarters, and an announcement that There Is No Cabal is shown at the start of every program on The Cabal Network. If that doesn't convince people that There Is No Cabal, I don't know what will.

BTW, here is the source for the Jefferson quote above:[25] --Guy Macon (talk) 03:58, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

coach

Re [26] - [27]. -- Netoholic @ 10:28, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Should all instances of 'tbd' in this article be changed to 'TBD'?

Hi, in the article List of aircraft carriers in service, the abbreviation 'tbd' is always used with all lowercase letters, instead of 'TBD' in all caps. They can be seen in the Carriers ordered and Other planned carriers sections. I propose changing them all to 'TBD' as this form is much more commonly used and is widely considered the correct format. JACKINTHEBOX • ^TALK 13:00, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So, changing tbd to TBD is Tbd? --A D Monroe III^(talk) 17:28, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That remains to be seen. In answer to the OP's query: personally I'd use all caps, but if there's resistance to change I don't expect this is a hill worth dying on. E Eng 19:17, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Those are now much improved. To be honest, I'm slightly annoyed at how quickly you were able to improve them, and by how much, but I'll take solace in taking full credit. Re the lawyer one: I think it's a good punchline, but the set-up feels contrived. The idea is the lawyer keeps "appealing" until he gets to the constitution, which he edits. Maybe he should go to different courts? Maybe it should start with the jury being polled and "not a vote"? Maybe the whole joke should be much shorter? Leviv ich 03:02, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well I wasn't planning to get into it, but since we're here I'll tell you what I think needs doing in that joke, though it's not a coherent plan. A successful joke must incorporate some kind of incongruity in the punchline, usually (though not universally) in the form of a reversal or change of point of view. This is partly why jokes so often have three parts: two set a pattern, direction, or point of view, and the third breaks the pattern or reverses the direction. (The desert island / raft joke breaks the "3" mold, but that's OK because part of the joke is the tedious multiple chances we give vandals.) Now I think the right thing to do in the lawyer joke might be to have the judge do all the citing of shortcuts (to set the pattern) and then at the end the lawyer rewrites the book or something and invokes ANYONECANEDIT, thus turning the tables. I don't have the details worked out, and honestly it's a tricky story to sustain unless the ripostes are truly bang-on to the various shortcuts that get cited, but I think that's the right framework. Having said that, the opening call by the lawyer to REVERT the verdict is the best line of the joke, and I don't see offhand how to put that into the mouth of the judge. E Eng 03:31, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What if they both cite shortcuts. What do you think of this, quick and dirty:

Jury: Guilty

Lawyer: WP:Revert

Judge: WP:0RR, the jury is sending your client to jail

Lawyer: WP:Move review

Judge: affirms WP:Consensus

Lawyer: (Notavote? IAR?)

Judge: WP:PAGs

Lawyer: {{citation needed}}

Judge: shows him the book

Lawyer: WP:ANYONECANEDIT

Alternate ending: the defendant edits the book and cites ANYONECANEDIT Leviv ich 20:38, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that has possibilities, because half of essays and PAGs have a corresponding essay or PAG that tends to say the opposite. They're not all coming to mind though. Here's something:

Jury: The result of the discussion was delete. (Jailify? Leviv ich)

Lawyer: Poll the jury?

Judge: WP:NOTAVOTE

Lawyer: Rv?

Judge: 0RR

Lawyer: DRV?

Judge: FORUMSHOPPING

Lawyer: IAR? (CONSENSUSCANCHANGE? Leviv ich)

Judge: DROPTHESTICK

Lawyer: [...something...]

Judge: [...something...]

Lawyer: [...something about editing a PAG...] WP:ANYONECANEDIT

Defendant: <bolting for the door> WP:Wikipedia does not need me

E Eng 22:32, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I like it! Some suggestions above and also: WP:TTR/WP:DTTR, WP:NORUSH/WP:NOW, WP:SPADE/WP:NOSPADE Leviv ich 00:41, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I like jailify. You take it from here. Let me know when you're ready for me to look again. E Eng 00:47, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Has the jury reached a verdict?" the judge asks.
"Yes, your honor," the jury fore~~man~~person replies. "The result of the discussion was jailify."
The wikilawyer jumped from his chair. "NOTAVOTE!" The judge shakes her head, "CONSENSUS has been reached."
"REVERT!" exclaims the wikilawyer. The judge shakes her head, "0RR."
"DRV!" the wikilawyer demands. The judge shakes her head, "No FORUMSHOPPING."
"There is NORUSH!" argues the wikilawyer. The judge shakes her head, "The deadline is NOW."
"DTTR!" the wikilawyer asserts. The judge shakes her head, "TTR."
"NOSPADE!" pleads the wikilawyer. The judge shakes her head, "SPADE."
"IAR!" the wikilawyer shouts. The judge shakes her head, "DROPTHESTICK."
"NOTBUREAUCRACY!" retorts the wikilawyer. The judge shakes her head and points to a book on her desk, "PAGs."
The wikilawyer grabs the book and tears out all the pages. "ANYONECANEDIT!" he cackles.
"BLOCK!" orders the judge. The court officers to take the wikilawyer into custody.
Seeing the officers occupied, the defendant bolts for the door, yelling, "WP:Wikipedia does not need me!" Leviv ich 02:27, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty good, Levivich. I think you've pulled it off for this month. But in the future I think it's a bad idea to commit in advance to producing a humor column. I'd suggest making it an "occasional feature", so that when it's ready it's ready. I must say I admire your ability to produce stuff on deadline. I certainly can't do that. E Eng 03:37, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"...if you display any knowledge of our products we'll fire you" made me LOL. Thanks! Do you think you could like, you know... check my contribs every day and just follow behind me and improve everything I do? Can I send you some work emails to look at before I send them out? Leviv ich 20:44, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good sir, this has gone too far

Talk about "distorted". Eman 235/talk 11:05, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TILT! E Eng 15:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some gravestones for you!

Seeing as the world's most petulant grave sparked off an almighty thread about sewer lions, have a couple more oddities I found while transferring assorted clutter to Commons from the smouldering wreckage of Flickr. Zoom in to read the inscriptions. ‑ Iridescent 17:21, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your contribution has been duly entered in the Great Register. E Eng 17:52, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A complaint about that M2HSS section (well, aside from the one about your support for that crank who demanded it be retitled away from "list of…" because it needed a standalone article and then never bothered to actually write said article, so we're now left with an "article" that has no text whatsoever other than the existing brief summary of the parent article); the quaint identification of the actors' stations in life wasn't some kind of quaint Victorian snobbery, but was done very explicitly by Watts to make it clear that people from all walks of life were equally capable of doing good deeds—a very radical sentiment for the time, when the two main schools of thought were one-nation toryism ("well-educated people have a duty to do great deeds, because the great unwashed are too stupid to do them for themselves") or proto-socialism ("the rich are all crooked and in it for themselves or they wouldn't be rich, so only the poor are capable of decency"). I do keep meaning to get around to doing Watts's biography—he was a fascinating character who pretty much invented radical chic a century early, as well as the guy who Barack Obama cites as his reason for entering politics (all that "Hope" stuff was explicitly a reference to Hope (painting), even if hardly anyone got the reference)—but that's another of those articles that's in such a poor state it would need a complete nuke-and-rewrite and consequently treading on multiple toes. ‑ Iridescent 16:14, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I've never been a fan of the article–list distinction anyway, but I will eagerly support you in whatever reform you propose on that score. If you need any help getting obscure sources on Watts (there certainly are a lot) let me know.

I did not know about Hope -- interesting. E Eng 17:05, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have a lot more stacked up to do before I even consider Watts (although I may do some of the more interesting paintings; at the moment we have an odd situation where Hope, Mammon and After the Deluge are at FA quality and everything else is a redlink). If I go back to doing biographies (I don't really like writing them) Zachariah Pearson and Albert Joseph Moore, two Victorian chancers who deserve better coverage than their current atrocious articles, will probably be next.

It's not the article/list distinction that's the issue; it's the fact that the list was intentionally on a subpage so people wanting to read about it would be directed to the page that actually has the story of the monument on it (the histories of the park and the memorial are inseparable, as the former was created to accommodate the latter), but because the redirect has been deleted and the list moved over it, anyone searching for the memorial (thanks to Closer there's a slow but steady stream) now lands directly on the list subpage and assumes that Wikipedia doesn't have anything to say about the topic. ‑ Iridescent 17:36, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well I'm always ready to help. I can get just about anything with no trouble. E Eng 17:48, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see your almost everything and raise you everything, with a backstop for those oddities that don't make it into copyright libraries. The South East may be filthy, overcrowded and eye-poppingly expensive, but it has certain advantages. ‑ Iridescent 17:59, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Meanwhile I have to rely on Nationallizenzen and Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library as I seldom get time to go in a library and the topics I write about are usually better covered in academic journals. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:02, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jo-Jo Eumerus, my offer extends to you too. E Eng 23:08, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Maybe I'll ask for something in the future. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:23, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well please don't ask in the past. E Eng 12:15, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well I visualized this not as a competition, but rather a teaming of complementary collections (British and American). Since I'm at Harvard several times a week it's especially convenient for me, and their stacks are open so I can skim unlimited numbers books and journals for relevant material. Two other points: I wonder if your relationship with BL gives you online access to all their journals, as I have through Harvard (e.g. [28]); and (and it really pains me to say this) I spent a substantial amount of time at BL some time ago and was shocked -- SHOCKED! at the really low quality of the research staff there. I mean astounded. E Eng 18:23, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:ANI flu

I think it's high time we had an essay on this. Feel free to add humour to taste. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:50, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Surely you mean "humor to tasteless"? E Eng 16:21, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:GPS Hospitality

Good morning E Hope you had your coffee,

I sent this draft for review, If you are the reviewer please let me know what I have to do to improve in order to be accepted, also there is a section in Burger King franchises (at the bottom) and GPS Hospitality for ref of why I started this article ~ thanks ~ mitch ~ Mitchellhobbs (talk) 12:55, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mitchellhobbs. I'm afraid I don't do much draft reviewing and don't know the procedures. Perhaps someone watching this page will step in to help. E Eng 16:28, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, Thanks E Eng Mitchellhobbs (talk) 16:51, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GPS Hospitality ~ Thank you Mitchellhobbs (talk) 20:31, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 April 27#Uncontrollable_shitting - I think it should be redirected to potty mouth. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 10:47, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Russians, I tell you!

Your Highness may want to lend an amused eye to Talk:Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections#Disputed pre-2015 content, by theme, wherein your humble worshipper attempts to argue that the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 was not an obvious precursor to Donald Trump's election in 2016. Neither was Trump's heroic attempt to sell American vodka to Russians. Oh the humanity! — JFG ^talk 03:17, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I try to stay out of American politics articles because sooner or later someone will drag in my talk page and there will be gnashing of teeth and tearing out of hair. But I think I saw my notes on useful idiot the other day. E Eng 04:15, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your help needed

This pioneering attempt at a wooden gravestone dating from the early 1970s reminds me of something, but I can't put my finger on what it is. Are you able to help? ‑ Iridescent 15:26, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Penis or mushroom, IMO. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:12, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I get asked that regularly. ‑ Iridescent 16:42, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So does Trump. From what Arid Desiccant says, the last erection was in the 1970s so there's a parallel there as well. E Eng 17:35, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

While we're on the subject, have the world's least sentimental gravestone. ‑ Iridescent 15:06, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"In loving memory of GEORGE HARRISON who died in great agony ... aged 5 1/2 years ... Also SARAH HARRISON grandma of the above who died after long suffering ..." YIKES!

I saw a very touching marker the other day in St. Paul's Chapel, NYC:

Beneath the Altar of this Church are deposited the Remains of Mrs ELIZABETH FRANKLIN, Wife of His Excellency WILLIAM FRANKLIN Esq: late Governor under His Brittanick Majesty, of the Province of New Jersey.
Compelled, by the adverse circumstances of the Times, to depart from the Husband she loved, and at length deprived of the soothing hope of his speedy Return, she sunk under accumulated Distresses and departed this Life on the on 28th Day of July 1778, in the 49th Year of her Age.
SINCERITY and SENSIBILITY
POLITENESS and AFFABILITY
GODLINESS and CHARITY
Were, with SENSE refined and PERSON elegant, in her UNITED.
From a grateful Remembrance of her affectionate Tenderness and constant Performance of all the duties of a GOOD WIFE, this Monument is erected in the Year 1787, by Him who knew her Worth, and still laments her Loss.

E Eng 04:45, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is why we have COI rules. I wonder what it would have said if she had written it. Leviv ich 13:21, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There's probably a decent book—or essay at least—to be written on why pre-industrial England (and the assorted other nations in its sphere), and the late-Victorian death cult, produced such peculiar graves among the middle and upper-middle classes to an extent that was never replicated anywhere else or in any other period. When it comes to truly weird gravestones, the undisputed champion is that of John Renie, in the otherwise totally godforsaken town of Monmouth. ‑ Iridescent 19:56, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Update

I just found out that Dax Cowart died a little over a week ago, April 28th. I updated his bio. Thank you for your help in improving the article. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 22:35, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. E Eng 04:18, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notre-Dame fire

Well, I understand you guys prefer disorder in images... I otherwise like order in images layout... Why too much empty blank spaces in page ? when my way could resolve a better approach all images together... Then a space between symbold like € of currency and numbers give a better reading... https://imgur.com/gpJRc6y --88.70.23.126 (talk) 15:25, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your screenshot shows you're using an unusually wide window, so what you're seeing is atypical. Whatever your personal taste, WP house style is that nonalphabetic currency symbols are not followed by a space -- see MOS:CURRENCY. E Eng 21:18, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's amazing

Kevin Hart - has to be something here for the Museum. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 20:29, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit summary

MOSbloat = The grossest thing I've heard today. Primergrey (talk) 01:16, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well then my nascent essay WP:MOSBLOAT will most certainly make you lose your lunch. E Eng 03:01, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think it belongs in The Museum as "meritorious" and perhaps even a "behavioral trendsetter" but most certainly as a remedy. ^[FBDB] ^Atsme _Talk 📧 18:52, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And if that doesn't, this will! --Tryptofish (talk) 21:00, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

STFU?? Ah yes, we know a song about that, don't we, boys and girls... : [29]. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC) Note: other, equally offensive YouTube STFU song memes are readily available.[reply]

Well, poopers. I added the right link but to the wrong discussion (although it could relate to bloat) so I just fixed it...even worse, I was thinking bloat referenced this discussion, so EEng's comment has widespread merit, broadly construed. Hmmm, me thinks I may be in WP:TARAGESLAW2 territory. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 22:10, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Derrick Morris

On 23 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Derrick Morris, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when Derrick Morris received a new heart in 1980 his chances of survival were slim, but he lived another 25 years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Derrick Morris. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Derrick Morris), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Help talk:Citation Style 1

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Help talk:Citation Style 1. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Video games

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Video games. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Hope Ryden

On 27 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hope Ryden, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that before she became an expert on wild animals, Hope Ryden was an international flight attendant and used her long layovers to observe wildlife in Africa and Asia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hope Ryden. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Hope Ryden), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I just wrote the hook. It's good to see hookers getting some respect. E Eng 18:18, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User page

Enjoyed your comments on Trump. Although I am from Canada, I do watch the ABC Evening News and feel slightly nauseated by his behaviour! We feel your pain. This is a real test to see if your Founding Fathers put enough checks and balances in the Constitution to protect America against tyranny. - Ret.Prof (talk) 14:22, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, would make a great gameshow.... Tyranny! Martinevans123 (talk) 14:40, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

LOL Agreed. - Ret.Prof (talk) 15:08, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tyranny? Do you mean Trudeau? Sir Joseph ^(talk) 15:14, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, isn't he that dishy young pop singer?? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:20, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

LOL...Remember hate, lying, greed and bragging about your fornications, adultries and sex abuse are not Christian regardless what the Religious Right says! In any event with all the evidence of wrongdoing Impeachment now seems inevitable. I plan to tune in! - Ret.Prof (talk) 14:05, 30 May 2019 (UTC) PS I am planning a WP article on this topic.[reply]

Archiving mayhem

I was wondering how this archiving happened, but Guy Macon beat me to fixing it. It turns out this was the culprit. Fixed now. Retro (talk | contribs) 00:30, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Guy Macon, editor Retro says you beat him. We try to avoid violence here at Wikipedia, so please refrain from beating other editors. E Eng 00:50, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who beat other Wikipedians? —Paleo Neonate – 00:59, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I have been called a shill for pretty much every company, service and product mentioned at User:Guy Macon/Yes. We are biased. (and a paid shill for the "Twisty Bulb Cartel" when I mentioned that compact fluorescent bulbs use less energy than incandescent bulbs, but LED bulbs use less than either), So a special "when did you stop beating your fellow Wikipedia editors?" award seems like it would fit right in on my shelf... --Guy Macon (talk) 01:56, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving

Hello. It appears your talk page is becoming quite lengthy and is in need of archiving. According to Wikipedia's user talk page guidelines; "Large talk pages become difficult to read, strain the limits of older browsers, and load slowly over slow internet connections. As a rule of thumb, archive closed discussions when a talk page exceeds 75 KB or has multiple resolved or stale discussions." - this talk page is 1101.3 KB. See Help:Archiving a talk page for instructions on how to manually archive your talk page, or to arrange for automatic archiving using a bot. If you have any questions, place a {{help me}} notice on your talk page, or go to the help desk. Thank you. Interstellarity T 🌟 17:05, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I want to thank you on EEng's behalf for providing him with this helpful advice. Since he is a new editor at Wikipedia, I'm sure that he has never heard any of that before. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:24, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can we can safely say that EEng's page has too much shit? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 11:34, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And now, there is Russian interference with EEng's talk page! ^[FBDB] --Tryptofish (talk) 19:18, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OMG, how very dare you!! Trypto you're Finnished here. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:02, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Martin beat me to the punch or did he Finnish me with a punch? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 20:08, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I believe EEng has made the following offer.

Mail, with a SASE, a 64 GByte thumb drive, to EEng, requesting the most up-to-date version of this talk page. Should 64 GBytes be insufficient, a 120 Gbyte solid-state drive will do. Before chosing your media, check the current page size.

— Neonorange (Phil) 02:39, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ridiculous! It's only...oh my...2MB! Eman 235/talk 03:23, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tiddlywinks, not Tidles

"Enclosed Instructions for Use: Each player receives a large brand and a corresponding number of small brands. At the beginning of the game place the opened cup in the middle of the table, which is best covered with a thick blanket. Each participant places the small marks on the tablecloth at the same distance from the cup. In turn, each participant is then snapped once, i. with the big mark is pressed on the edge of the small mark so much that the latter falls through a jump in the cup. Anyone who has brought one of his brands in the cup, may snap again. Once a mark falls off the table, it must be returned to its starting point. Who brings all the brands in the cup first, has won." (Google translation from German)

Apparently (see section header), we expect such typos. Thanks, as always, for giving me a tittery, tiddly, tickly giggle.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:36, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not archive this page because of its size (above section). To save my edit above, it took me 1h30m52s, during which time I read War and Peace twice. Thanks!--Bbb23 (talk) 17:39, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah fine, whateva, but who wins the saucer of Vollmilch?? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:57, 5 June 2019 (UTC) Please do not archive this page because of its size (above section). To save my edit above, it took me over 6 hours, during which time a wandering senile beachcomber was able to agree two phenomenal trade deals, one with the Drug Enforcement Administration and one without.[reply]

Size does matter. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 01:58, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but EEng does have the most beautiful hands. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:13, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing that holds true about hands applies to measuring a horse. And speaking of horses...a gal entered a bar in Texas, and noticed a cowboy with his feet propped up on a table. She marveled over the size of his boots and was inspired to approach him. She boldly asked him if what they say about Trump's small hands is true, then could the opposite be true about men with big feet? The cowboy grinned and said "Shore is, ma'am," and invited her to his bunkhouse. She was curious enough to accept his invitation. The next morning as she was leaving the bunkhouse, she handed him $300. He blushingly accepted the money and with a big grin thanked her saying, "Ain't nobody ever paid fer mah services before." She retorted, "Oh, don't be flattered. Use that money to buy yourself some boots that fit." ^Atsme _Talk 📧 15:44, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

With all the money Trump claims to have, it would seem he's been on the receiving end of a lot of those payments over the years. E Eng 01:32, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Heza blue collar billionaire. Great name for my next gelding. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 12:55, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blue collar? Maybe. Billionaire? No reliable sourcing! --Tryptofish (talk) 18:14, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the real question here is..... "does the Donald wear big gloves?" Martinevans123 (talk) 13:22, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose those would be little mushroom gloves. Which, wouldn't you know it, are actually a thing: [30]! --Tryptofish (talk) 18:12, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, how tasteful. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:19, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's the first time I've seen "Trump" and "tasteful" in the same thought. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:23, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of "tasteful"... ^Atsme _Talk 📧 15:53, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And the first time I've seen "Republicans making jokes about a Democrat" and "tasteful".... --Tryptofish (talk) 21:47, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Yabba-Dabba-Democrat"!! Martinevans123 (talk) 21:58, 8 June 2019 (UTC) ... thank you, Private Eye[reply]

Tussle over pronouns in a dark alley in East Berlin

Ah-ha! Mister so-called EEngFram! I knew it was you all along. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:27, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am unmasked! E Eng 20:29, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ah shucks. Never mind. I knew the "Eric Honecker in drag" theme would never really catch on. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:34, 13 June 2019 (UTC) ... still it's comforting to know that we are a lofty encyclopedia and can rise above all this[reply]

You shot first

[31] Mostly, I'm annoyed by the reverts. Consensus position here is not yours, so if you really think it belongs, get some people together to agree with you instead. --Izno (talk) 23:16, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In articles, where there's doubt about inclusion of material the consensus principle calls for exclusion by default in the absence of agreement. On talk pages the reverse is true: within very wide bounds the default is to retain things, and the only person who seems to actually object can't formulate what his objection is [32]. There Izno tedious pun on your username coming to mind just now so we'll have to leave that for another time. E Eng 15:10, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose you should be thankful that I'm actually your father, otherwise you would have ended up at AE rather than EWN per the below notification. --Izno (talk) 16:36, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I wouldn't subject EEng to AE for trying to have some fun. I'm a monster, but not THAT kind of monster. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:44, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So, not a rancor? Maybe the Sarlacc pit? --Izno (talk) 17:01, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really more of a Trade Federation sort of monster. I'll subject you to endless bureaucracy! Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:08, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

How do I know?

Quoting EEng, June 14, 2019
“I actually know ... well, not everything, but I know what it is I know, and I know this.“
And that quote inspired me to add a self-quote:
"I don’t know how much I don’t know because there’s no way to gage how much I don’t know when I don’t know what it is I don’t know, so stop telling me I should've known.
And then comes the day you finally realize you don't know shit." ^Atsme _Talk 📧 12:30, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:32, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some father you are. E Eng 03:58, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MOS discretionary sanctions alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the English Wikipedia Manual of Style and article titles policy. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Template:Z33

Please note that, technically, you are perpetually aware of discretionary sanctions in this topic area because you've been previously sanctioned. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:15, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated. It's clear some people are having trouble respecting others' talk page contributions, so this should help. E Eng 02:03, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Contribute if you've a mind to. j/s ^Atsme _Talk 📧 17:41, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I gave up on understanding or worrying about DS long ago. I'm just me and if I get in trouble, I guess I get in trouble. E Eng 19:44, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notre-Dame de Paris fire

EEng ~ thanks once again for your help and your humor ~ Mitchellhobbs (talk) 03:07, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank goodness someone still has a sense of humor. [33] E Eng 04:00, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ironic. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 11:48, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again ~ mitch ~ Mitchellhobbs (talk) 15:08, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Herbert Schachtschneider

Thank you - sorry, a bit late - for the hook help for Herbert Schachtschneider. You are very welcome to go over my stalled nominations and help further to increase attraction. Two of "mine" made the stats in June without help, one for the exquisite pic (the second), the other because she starred as the Buhlschaft, but there are countless others ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:46, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An encouraging word

	Moo v along
	Timely and pithy food for thought, Well done! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:25, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This undeserved praise regards this modest edit [34]. E Eng 02:49, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June 2019

Hello. I wanted to let you know that in your recent contributions to Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, you seemed to act as if you were the owner of the page. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. This means that editors do not own articles, including ones they create, and should respect the work of their fellow contributors. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Apparently, the article needs to be only as clear as you deem appropriate. SMP0328. (talk) 05:16, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We've worked together too long for you to template me. Your edit summaries -- please look at them -- were somewhat fractured so that they didn't really explain why you were adding all that verbiage. I've made a new change -- far more concise -- which I think you will find satisfactory. E Eng 06:26, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A link

Morning - I was hoping you'd remember a link you posted a while back to a YouTube video showing a group of scholars talking about creating an encyclopedia. I started scrolling your UTP from the rock-toothback discussion back to discussions in Dec 2018 and didn't see it. Perhaps it was in the museum? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 13:47, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[35]. And to think they say I'm disorganized. E Eng 14:10, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(And that's about the kindest thing they say... lol.) Harvard graduates... know your limits! Martinevans123 (talk) 21:09, 30 June 2019 (UTC) [reply]

Call T&S! Martin is harassing EEng and me! --Tryptofish (talk) 21:11, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For those who don't know, Harvard graduates are a protected group against discrimination. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:23, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FRAMBANNEDSANFRANDAMNEDARBCOMJAMMED

Wikipedia:SANFRANJANBANSFRAM listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:SANFRANJANBANSFRAM. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:SANFRANJANBANSFRAM redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Oshawott 12 ==()== Talk to me! 01:30, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear

Everyone is very busy discussing where to draw the line on being rude and unpleasant, but making lame jokes is completely unacceptable. Triptothecottage (talk) 03:28, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's the lameness that offends. These are highly cultured people, after all. E Eng 03:56, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What is the meaning of it? KoopaLoopa (talk) 06:18, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nvm I think I figured it out - San Fran's Jan Bans Fram. KoopaLoopa (talk) 06:20, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All this time we never knew you were Pastis. Your secret's safe with me. Dlohcierekim (talk), admin, renamer 16:13, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Watch your step lest T&S disappear you for outing me. E Eng 18:24, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gulag-apedia. I hear Siberia is lovely this time of year. Dlohcierekim (talk), admin, renamer 18:44, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One Year in the Life of Ifram Denisovich. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:53, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everybody. I read that book about fifty years ago at my boarding school. It has come flooding back. particularly the bit about the bread and the ciggy for goodness sake. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 21:26, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Since this is clearly your first time editing and I am in no way templating a regular, we hope you will choose to stay here and contribute positively. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not do on the redirect discussion for Wikipedia:SANFRANJANBANSFRAM by assuming I am creating a hostile environment by mocking people with peanut allergies. Please remember that even peanuts have feelings, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you and have a nice day. ^[FBDB] --WaltCip (talk) 18:42, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

EEng's talk page gets all the nuts. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:57, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"My T&S BANFRAM brings all the nuts to the yard....": [36] etc. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:36, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just a heads up that Ivanvector supervoted and speedy deleted the redirect per G10. WaltCip (talk) 23:26, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously considering my future here. Dlohcierekim (talk), admin, renamer 01:57, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Next?

Is WP:CANFRAMFANSBANSANFRAN next on your list? Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:22, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FRAMBANNED,SANFRANDAMNED,ARBCOMJAMMED —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 10:36, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

^^^^ Definitely the best yet. E Eng 17:51, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

FRAM FRAMED, JAN NAMED, ARBCOM AIMED. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:49, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WHOA BLACK BETTY, BAN FRAM, JAN.--WaltCip (talk) 17:32, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"I have gotta Admin name of FRAMA-BANA-JANA-LAMA-DING-DONG": [37] Martinevans123 (talk) 17:38, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia:CANSANFRANBANFRAM?

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Wikipedia:CANSANFRANBANFRAM? requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Anne drew (talk) 21:57, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And speedily declined. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:03, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Speedy declined. Not the same as the version that was deleted previously. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:05, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Brad, for speedily edit conflicting you! --Tryptofish (talk) 22:07, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:CANSANFRANBANFRAM? listed at Redirects for discussion

Shortcut

WP:ANNEDREWGETACLUE

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:CANSANFRANBANFRAM?. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:CANSANFRANBANFRAM? redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Anne drew (talk) 22:08, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WTF? The moon must be in clueless. E Eng 22:17, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"CAN JUNEMOON SHAKE SPOON MOONEY SOON"?? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:26, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How much rue do Anne drew Andrew and Drew rue if Anne drew Andrew and Drew do rue what they do? —David Eppstein (talk) 22:35, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Moo. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:38, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know. I just didn't feel up to the challenge. Congrats. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:42, 1 July 2019 (UTC) [reply]

He's a foo. E Eng 23:22, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Partial list of images needing deletion because they attack or disparage:

Delete: Presents Jimbo as a seagoing mammal

E Eng 02:41, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wham Fram Thank You Jan? Martinevans123 (talk) 08:59, 2 July 2019 (UTC) Note: no snowflakes were intentionally harmed in the construction of this piped link.[reply]

^^^^ This one is quite good too. E Eng 17:57, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Hey man, well she's a total blam-blam"! Dlohcierekim (talk)

Greetings from Dr. Seuss

Improvements and extensions welcomed!

I AM FRAM. FRAM I AM.
THAT FRAM-I-AM! THAT FRAM-I-AM! I DO NOT LIKE THAT FRAM-I-AM!
WOULD YOU LIKE A BAN OF FRAM?
DOWN ENWIKI'S THROAT TO RAM?
WOULD YOU BAN HIM FOR A YEAR?
ISSUE RATIONALES UNCLEAR?
PERHAPS TRANSPARENCY YOU FEAR?

401

Hah! Dlohcierekim (talk) 01:53, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The 401 is the busiest talk page in North Wikipedimerica, by Annualized Average Daily Talk page visits. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 01:59, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Contractions

Um... "Can not" is considered incorrect too.CuteDolphin712 (talk) 06:46, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CuteDolphin712: I realize that, but Wikipedia's Manual of Style doesn't attempt to teach general English. E Eng 06:57, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is it time to call the obstetrician? --Tryptofish (talk) 19:38, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Once more unto the grammar breach, dear Prince Hal, once more!" Martinevans123 (talk) 19:47, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

EEng, I'd follow you anywhere, even not on Saint Crispin's Day. Dlohcierekim (talk) 20:58, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re: ping

I couldn't think of any betters lines myself, but hopefully something will come to me before NYB's limerick contest starts. I think there is a joke in here, though, about the WMF's "light touch" nearly bringing down the house. Something like The WMF released a new tool for laser-focused, surgical interventions. It's a less drastic version of the global indef ban. It can be limited in time, it can be limited to a specific project, and it only removes from that project the target user and three bureaucrats, two interface admins, two global renamers, a template editor, twenty-four administrators and a couple dozen veteran editors. – Levivich 03:52, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

yeah

such a cockup. Dlohcierekim (talk)
....coming soon to an airport hear you

but look at all those airports he helped liberate from the British during the Revolution. It was yuge. Dlohcierekim (talk) 18:28, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case other TPSs are confused. I think Dlohciere kim Jong-un may be referring to this "embarrassing mess". How amazing. But let's be kind and just call it "a narcissistic travesty". Martinevans123 (talk) 20:29, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:EEng#Museum_of_Trump_is_So_Fucking_Stupid_He_Inhabits_a_Special_Galaxy_of_Fucking_Stupid_All_His_Own E Eng 20:46, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And let's face it, a galaxy is pretty big. -- Clevor Trever 123 (talk) 20:57, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You know I tried to get to the white house on a self guided tour months ago ~ all I got was a letter ~ REQUEST DENIED ~ it's true ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 21:03, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The U.S. of A. is "cocked and loaded" to be able to "ram the ramparts" (real quotes). --Tryptofish (talk) 21:08, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Better call Dr.Bracket and Dixie McCall ~mitch~ (talk) 21:18, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Holy American pop culture, Batman! E Eng 21:43, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Style

Amazing looking user page! Thank you. ♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ ^{♥ Talk♥} 00:34, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tu sais ~ Je pense que je me souviens de toi quand le monde a été créé ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 01:32, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WTF? (= "What the French?") E Eng 02:55, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

LOL ~ you had me scared ~~ ~mitch~ (talk) 03:04, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Community response to the Wikimedia Foundation's ban of Fram

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Community response to the Wikimedia Foundation's ban of Fram. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Stalkers may wish to take the time to comment. E Eng 04:58, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This stalker's sense of masochism has strict bounds. — JFG ^talk 23:09, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So your safeword is FRAM? E Eng 13:43, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm allergic. Dlohcierekim (talk) 14:01, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

do you give objective

3rd opinions on user conduct? Dlohcierekim (talk) 03:30, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dlohcierekim, um, well, I'll do my best to help. I suspect the glitterati assembled here will offer their wisdom as well. Or, if it's your idea to send me an email, I prefer not interact off-wiki unless there's a really good reason; you can do that but I'm likely to keep our interaction to the minimum necessary to help you decide what to do. E Eng 04:09, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Glitteratic assessment could not hurt. I just don't want to cause needless drama if I'm wrong. I'll put it together and come back. {At least it's not about your favorite subject.) Dlohcierekim (talk) 10:01, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently I glitter at multiple user talk pages, but I'm guessing this is related to what is at User talk:Doc James. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:01, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Tryptofish:Maaaaaaybe. Still awaiting feedback and busy getting my pipes worked on tomorrow. Yes, that is a metaphor. Dlohcierekim (talk) 21:10, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem, I was just trying to let readers here know. I wish you and your pipes all the best. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:17, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

| | | | | | <-- in case you need more pipes, Dlohcierekim. It's uppercase back slash (Mac keyboard), but you must've known back slash is what you'd get before you came here. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 21:38, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dlohcierekim: You must have stalked me for more than a week to catch me posting a comment in response to QuackGuru not realizing that I have a longer history on that page than the editor you're accusing me to stalk. I don't have much time and nerve for things like that so again I'm just kindly asking you to cut it out and let be. I don't appreciate your threats and the harm it is doing to my personal well being.--TMCk (talk) 22:09, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well so far this is going swimmingly. E Eng 22:38, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You know I went to a swimming hole ~ just the other day ~ hole ~ the water looks nice and refreshing ~ on a hot summer day ~ until you jump in ~ and find out it's spring fed' and 56° ~mitch~ (talk) 22:47, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Be careful where you swim. Calm waters aren't always as calm as they seem...especially AN/I during the weekend. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 22:54, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I stand corrected ~ ? ~ très froid ~mitch~ (talk) 23:07, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Never swim in Florida. If the gators don't get you, the flesh eating bacteria or the brain eating amoebas will. Dlohcierekim (talk) 23:26, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is all moot now. Let the swimming continue. Dlohcierekim (talk) 03:23, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You see now why I'm in such demand as a mediator. E Eng 03:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

😂 ^Atsme _Talk 📧 03:52, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mitchellhobbs - are you an enterprising WP editor? If yes, and you're swimming in Hamilton Pool, then you're close enough to recruit. I've been trying to round-up some WP editors to help me start a WP Group or Chapter (was advised to start with a group). Any interest or know others who might be? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 03:52, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Eeng: Hah! I wish. To continue the "pool" motif, we've jumped in at the shallow end, struck our head on the bottom, and swum, dazed as it were, to the deep end. Now foundering but for the help of a whiz with an ice bucket. Dlohcierekim (talk) 10:35, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well D, that explains everything. 😂 ^Atsme _Talk 📧 19:54, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

From the latest in glitterati, I see per User talk:Bishonen that this has now been resolved. --Tryptofish (talk) 16:55, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Atsme Hmm ` I don't know if I am a enterprising WP editor ~ I do let my girls use my computer some times ` why what did you have in mind ~ I don't go to Hamilton pool very often it's kind of out of the way ~ I find myself closer to Mills pond ~ I have to give the water a chance to warm up a little ~ I guess by the time Saturday rolls around I will grab my bottle of Olay ~ sun screen ~ it seems to work pretty good ~ and the girls seem to laugh historically when I go in for my weekly dip ~ so hey I'm up ~ what do I have to do ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 19:16, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Zu gross thread 99--

With sincerest apologies to Rammstein

So cut this back it's not to late
Life's too short and I can't wait (for the page to load)
Please cut this back, oh don't see
It can't be read; i t j u s t w o n 't l o a d. Dlohcierekim (talk)

High quality content alert

You might enjoy the box at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Korea (oldid: [38]), which seems to be the relic of a long-running edit war with a bot —Nizolan ^{(talk · c.)} 14:53, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Destroy the Robots. E Eng 15:13, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

William Wallace Lincoln

You deleted "Abraham Lincoln cared for Tad, who was still very ill and was heartbroken over the loss of his brother." with the edit summary of "a personal nurse was a commonplace at that time, and while no doubt the president was very attentive to Tad, he didn't care for him alone". Nevertheless, no personal nurses are mentioned in the cited source ("Lincoln"/David Herbert Donald) which states on Page 336 "The President gained some respite from his suffering by caring for Tad, who was still very ill and heartbroken over the loss of his brother. Often Lincoln lay on the bed beside his sick son to soothe him and give him comfort." The source doesn't seem to state that Lincoln was the only caregiver/nursemaid for his son but it does state that he provided a large measure of care for Tad. Anyway, was wondering if you'd consider restoring that content or something close to it back into the article. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 05:59, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for stopping by. Re the nurse, I was talking about Mary's nurse -- I removed mention that Mary had a nurse because had the bereaved bedridden wife of the president NOT had a nurse, that's what the article would mention; that she did have a nurse would be a commonplace. I added back that AL found solace in caring for Tad, but not the broken heart because, again, if Tad had not a care that his brother had just died, that's what we'd need to mention. E Eng 07:29, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BLOCKED

I was just about to block you for being so fancy. The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 18:34, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nice shirt, though. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:47, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I hereby dub thee Sir Less-filling-with-no-taste.18:59, 22 July 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlohcierekim (talk • contribs)

No usurpers, please... LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:27, 9 August 2019 (UTC) [reply]

It seems to me there's a good pun on usurpers in there somewhere, but it's just not coming. Below is the best I could do. E Eng 12:48, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Uburpers!

Ah, not just tasteless-filling-with-no-Sirloin, then. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:56, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

E-e-e-e-w-w-w-w! Dlohcierekim (talk) 16:05, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not a Brit, but that canned meat pie looks like low-grade dog food. Woof. Jip Orlando (talk) 13:42, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Women In Red, fill your boots": enjoy. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:11, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

24 hour block

Hi, EEng. I have blocked you for 24 hours as described Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Block_of_User:EEng. Would you kindly commit to not restoring the material and we can put this behind us immediately? Haukur (talk) 18:38, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for posting the ANI message first and this message second. It would have been better form to do it the other way around. Haukur (talk) 18:50, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have lifted the block as per the ANI thread. Looks like you were right that this would not fly and I apologize. Haukur (talk) 18:56, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apology accepted, and you are to be commended for not digging in your heels. I will be commenting gently (relatively gently, anyway) at ANI in a bit. E Eng 19:10, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For the record: WP:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1014#Block_of_User:EEng. E Eng 13:45, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It would have been within policy to do it the other way round? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:54, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Damn, I thought we would have a little break :P - FlightTime (open channel) 19:25, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Damn from me too. I log out for a few hours to do some errands, and I miss all the fun! Go clean out your garage. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:26, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ugh ` hmm ~ ugh ~ ugh ~ never mind ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 17:02, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For your collection

Stackable WTF blocks	You've been around the WTF block
	Remember how much fun you had playing with blocks as a kid? Now that you're ~~a mature~~ an adult, you can collect blocks with adult letters, and they're not only stackable, they're collectable. How many more to equal the height of the Empire State Bldg? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 20:13, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I hope...

...that your 24 minutes in the wilderness weren't too unpleasant. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:27, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

...What you need, EEng, is a good disguise. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:02, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Infamy, infamy...

Hello. You have been mentioned in dispatches at Auggie's gaff. There'll always be an EEngland! (talk)

"Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people." E Eng 16:57, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I followed that link, and at first my antimalware software didn't want me to go. I bravely persevered, and I noticed that they call the page in question Phineas Cage (sic). Somehow, that seems fitting for a site like that. I wonder if he's related to Nicholas. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:03, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Glad someone was braver than I. Dlohcierekim (talk) 19:14, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Braver? Maybe just stupider. (Why is my computer screen telling me to give it my credit card numbers?) --Tryptofish (talk) 19:42, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I'm not so interesting as others. Boring, that's li'l old me. Dlohcierekim (talk) 19:49, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That is weird. I think you're getting the security messages because you're using https in the address. As far as I know, there is no certificate, so you should just use http. Sole Flounder (talk) 22:12, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And talking of "Infamy, infamy"... wow, things are already hottin' up in the search for a new Hilary. That's the kind of hype that, in the UK, we reserve for something really tacky. Almost as exciting as the recent UK Final of Love Island. My money's on that Chickenlooper. Alistair-Cooked-to-a-frazzle-already-123 (talk) 18:49, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Russian interference in the 2020 United States elections

Is it paranoia or just curiosity to wonder if visitors from the Internet Research Agency will show up there? XOR'easter (talk) 23:34, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of geography initiatives

Is any sort of clean-up required here? 80.41.128.7 (talk) 18:54, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's quite enough out of you, Mr. Smarty Pants. E Eng 19:56, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mm-hmm. 80.41.128.7 (talk) 21:56, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Frivolous commentary

Yes, we know you're clever, EE, but for you to take prime space at the top of a discussion to insert your witty cartoons is not OK; just annoying. Dicklyon (talk) 04:44, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's now in a less-prime point in the thread. Always good to hear from you. E Eng 15:48, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How does one distinguish prime Wiki-real estate from sub-prime Wiki-real estate?--WaltCip (talk) 12:19, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One must consider the possibility that the presence of an eyesore may produce a significant negative impact on the value of any real estate and adversely deprecate its resale value, thus lowering "prime real estate" to "not-so-prime-as-it-once-was real estate".-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 18:33, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone know where I can get the Wikipedia version of Monopoly? --A D Monroe III^(talk) 17:46, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't you know it: User:EEng#Monopwiki. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:40, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Go Directly to Jail. Do not pass Go. Do not collect £200." Martinevans123 (talk) 22:00, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In today's environment it's risky to forget the ^[FBDB]. E Eng 02:34, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You know ~~ ~ I met a frivolous python one time ~ she was very friendly ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 02:58, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Another visit from Dicklyon

A whole fucking month! Wow! You can imagine how I felt when my uncontroversial work of the last four years was used as reason to try to indef block me. And all you did was post your stupid little cartoons instead of looking at the evidence or shutting the fuck up. Practice what you preach, man. Dicklyon (talk) 22:06, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It took me a bit to figure out what you're talking about. [39] I wasn't taking sides and neither did the joke. Try to look on the bright side.

If it means anything to you, I hope you don't get blocked, really I do. E Eng 22:55, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, I guess. They already let me off with "no collusion, no obstruction"; in other words, not exonerated and with the cloud of BMK still hanging over me. Per not taking sides, see my remarks there about neutrality cowardice. Dicklyon (talk) 23:13, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Circular reasoning

It might be circular, but it's very neat and self contained. Koncorde (talk) 12:39, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Have you visited The Museums lately? E Eng 13:01, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Will the Circle Be Unbroken?-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 13:03, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I find museums, like circles, leave me feeling tired and emotional. Koncorde (talk) 15:57, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For those playing along at home, the reference is to Talk:Moors_murders#rfc_on_consensus_version_to_return_to. Editors of all stylistic stripes are invited to partake in the fun. E Eng 13:13, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Archive much?

I don't mean to be a bit rude, but your talk page is a bit annoying to scan through, maybe you can fix it? Cheers! Govvy (talk) 12:16, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Research shows that 15% of it is people asking me to archive. Now and then I do make a pass. E Eng 12:22, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

HeisenbEEng's Principle: it is impossible to add a note to EEng's talk page commenting on its size without changing the size. Disclaimer: this phenomenon is actually closer related to the observer effect than Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 18:33, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'd guess it's more like 25-40% of editors who are annoyed. But, we are fond of you DESPITE your long talk page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:25, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of making a pass, Liz: Will you marry me? E Eng 02:29, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) As to me, I actually appreciate its length. It doesn't load instantaneously, which forces me to slow down when reading stuff on my watchlist. It's a reminder to savor every moment in life, and to appreciate the fact that I don't have to use a dial-up modem anymore. I praise the length of this page! —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 02:31, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Surely a most thoughtful and philosophically sophisticated attitude. E Eng 03:13, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my God, Mendaliv, you'll even defend the length of EEng's talk page. Is nothing beneath you?^[FBDB] – Levivich 03:52, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Zu groß, zu klein, [Sie] könnte etwas größer sein" --Rammstein-- Dloh cier ekim 10:04, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Synchronicity

Original heading: "Archive this page"

Please, EEng, archive this talk page. It's hilarious if you're on a fast connection; otherwise it won't load, and is quite aggravating. It also isn't particularly fair to people who may want to contact you. Make your userpage as long as you want, because nobody's required to look at that; but this page needs to be usable. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:35, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vanamonde, as you can see, I am either clairvoyant or able to read your mind [40]. E Eng 15:47, 14 August 2019 (UTC) Correcing ping: Vanamonde93. E Eng 16:05, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A commemorative poem

Sections were archived,
one by one, like tears falling,
but saved forever. – Levivich 07:03, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That is truly beautiful. Will you agree to recite it at my funeral? It's tomorrow. E Eng 13:54, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Simple solution...User talk:EEng1, User talk:EEng2 and so on...that way, it's non-stop entertainment with user determined breaks inbetween. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 20:01, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent work

I don't think your unmitigated torrent of genius content gets enough credit around here. Keep up the good work. Cosmic Sans (talk) 02:03, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to believe you're talking about

but I fear you're actually talking about casting of aspersions. See below. E Eng 02:33, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Today's puzzle: What could this mean???

Unhide for answer
Casting of ass persians

I was wondering, "How did he find a picture of a butt anyway?" So I looked, and, of course Commons has a c:Category:Female buttocks in sculpture, one of several sub-categories of c:Category:Female buttocks in art, which in turn is a sub-category of c:Category:Female buttocks, which–of course–has hundreds of examples. Behold: the sum of human knowledge. – Levivich 02:12, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Moors murders talk page

It remains to be seen where the AE complaint re Eric will end up. But reviewing your contributions on the talk page, I'm just wondering, WTF? I always thought you were cleverer and betterer than what I see there. Can't you manage to disagree without insult and mockery? GoldenRing (talk) 09:33, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GoldenRing: Thanks for the kind words, and I appreciate your taking the time. The phenomenon of "civil POV pushing" is often talked about, but less talked about is "civil article ownership". Swarm put it very well at AE:

Obstructing bold edits without citing a specific rationale is disruptive editing. "Specific" means "policy-based". Arguing that "this is X's article, and X needs to have a say" is a policy violation, not a reason to personally attack the editor making the edits. FA's require "stability". But "stability" does not mean "absence of editing". "I don't like your edits", or "this is X's article, don't change it" is not a legitimate content dispute. Illegitimate stonewalling is not what's intended by "FA stability".

At AE you posted only part of my "shut the fuck up" rant, which robs the short bit you posted of context. Here it is more fully:

...by far the easiest thing to do would be to simply STEP THROUGH THE GODDAM EDITS SEQUENTIALLY. In the past 3 days there have been an incredible 110 posts to this thread, totaling 40K of text, all to discuss the abstract existence (but not the substance) of my 150 edits to an article which itself consists, in total, of a mere 65K. Most of these edits are no more complex than

[before-and-after of seven edits omitted]

There, that's seven of them – 5% of the total – right there. They can be reviewed in 15 seconds each, and if you think "officers were drafted to search" is better than just plain "officers searched", or that readers will benefit by knowing about the dog's teeth and kidney complaint, or about how many days past his birthday Keith Bennett was when he was killed, go right ahead and change those things; I'm not married to anything. But in the name of Jesus, Mary, Joseph and all the saints and apostles, at long last you bunch of old ladies stop pearl-clutching and hand-wringing (you gotta love the imagery there) and either look at the edits or shut the fuck up now. I've spent far more time in therapy with you lot responding to your hypothetical anxieties than I did making the changes themselves. Really, it's unbelievable.

(I would appreciate it if, over at AE, you'd substitute the above excerpt for your short one, so that I don't have to clutter the page and confuse the discussion by posting it in my own section.) That was July 12.

For a month -- a MONTH -- my edits sat live in the article without a single modification of what I'd done, or comment on what I'd done, or indication of interest in what I'd done, by any of this bunch -- until EC's block expired. Then the gang assembled and moved in. Too many edits! Too fast! This is an FA! Your edits are shit! I didn't look at them but I know they're shit! You need consensus! What bullshit. And now in the last 24 hours both Cassianto and EC have lied -- blatantly lied -- on the talk page about who said and did what.

Even now, at AE, Cassianto's pretending that I simply told him to "shut the fuck up". That's a lie. As seen above what I said (after three days of begging that this bunch look at the edits and give any specific indication of what was wrong with them) was that he should either look at the edits or shut the fuck up now. That's completely different. I'm not going to engage him on that at AE because he lies so effortlessly and shamelessly that he'll just keep saying black is white, but if you're in a particularly energetic mood you might point it out yourself.

They're just trying to gaslight anyone, such as yourself, who tries to untangle what happened. Smokescreens are their friends. So yeah, I've been pissed off and have shown it. E Eng 17:47, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Extra! Extra! Read all about it! Featured article complete fraud! Content creators exposed as poseurs have feet of clay just like other editors!

Talk page stalkers who have been watching the fun at Talk:Moors murders may be interested to know that it turns out that is "Featured article" is apparently riddled with errors. I've found 22 21 [oops, looks like in one case I missed part of the newspaper story -- The Times has those giant pages in the old days – thanks to SchroCat for catching that] examples of statements in the article not supported by the sources cited – and that's just in the one section (seven paragraphs) I checked. See [41]. E Eng 14:03, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I mentioned this here before, but editors of all schools of writing style are invited to opine at Talk:Moors_murders#rfc_on_consensus_version_to_return_to. E Eng 17:10, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is some Stannis Baratheon level fact-checking you're doing there.

- "A harmless courtesy, Your Grace."

- "A lie. Take it out."[42]

You didn't show up for the duel. Also, if you challenge me I'm supposed to pick the weapon. I'll let you be Ryu if you like. Haukur (talk) 10:29, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

just in case ... Comment

... you weren't aware of it. Wikipedia:Gravedancing is frowned upon by most. — Ched : ? — 09:10, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You'rea talking about You're talking about the header of the subthread just above this one? What gravedancing? I look forward to a productive collaboration with SchroCat, Cassianto, Eric Corbett, and the rest, all working to together to get this article to at least the Good Article level at long last.

Anyway, I've changed ~~the header~~ to something more neutral. E Eng 14:42, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Abortion

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Abortion. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

After Talk:Moors murders I don't think abortion will be controversial enough to interest me. E Eng 13:50, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You can always get in on the fun at GMO pages. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:57, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Join WP:WikiProject Dogs - it puts the others to shame. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 19:02, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In what way? Do they WP:BITE the newcomers? E Eng 19:17, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like Atmse is being catty. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:44, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Grab an umbrella ☔️🌂🐕🐈 - it's raining cats and dogs! ^Atsme _Talk 📧 20:08, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Abortion

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Abortion. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You never give up, do you Legobot? E Eng 04:30, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OMG

	what happened? ~
	Did the world stop? ~ I better grab my children^[1] ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 12:01, 15 August 2019 (UTC) [reply] References ^ Video on YouTube

FYI ~ cygnis insignis' ~~belittled~~ underestimated me it was just an 'opinion' ~ Video on YouTube

Actually, in that video that's me on the left and a certain trio of editors on the right. E Eng 02:52, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I can believe it...and I was one of the 2 females who got up and walked away. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 03:30, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

EEng bears an uncanny resemblance to Jeff Goldblum. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:10, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That either a personal attack on me or a BLP violation with respect to Jeff Goldblum, though I'm not sure which. E Eng 21:29, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely the latter.^[FBDB] --Tryptofish (talk) 21:37, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as a fan of heartthrobs Jeff Goldblum, David Copperfield, Gary Cooper, Gregory Peck, Yule Brenner, Chuck Connors, Richard Boone, and Mr. Peepers, mention of the BLP vio unchained me. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 23:43, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You Know ~ my heartthrobs are The California Raisins their so cool and sexy ~mitch~ (talk) 00:06, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What is the definition of (cygnis insignis) anyways ~ maybe I should go ask El_C ~ oops I just did ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 18:02, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is it's some kind of odd bird. E Eng 18:05, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You know I had a pet once too ~ we called him Taz ~ he died ~ so we just watch cartoons all day ~ Grrrr on YouTube ~mitch~ (talk) 18:15, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is really really tempting to make an article cygnis insignis explaining that it is the motto of Western Australia, is intended to mean "noted for swans", and is in some sense a pun or at least a rhyme. I imagine that our local only-for-the-birds editor has some connection to WA. I suppose I can at least add a redirect. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:34, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you David Eppstein ~ it is very refreshing ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 19:03, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you ought to duck. Or you might get a goose. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:46, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

~ Thanks you'all ~mitch~ (talk) 21:03, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

you

[continue discussion with you]

I tend to state what is invisible to others and not deliberately being obtuse, your "innocent" attempts at humour are not free of disruptive consequences and doubling down when a joke is not flying, I think, shows a lack of appreciation for what is and is not valued humour. How many users might attempt to remove you attempts at wit, tendentiously restored with a "i have no idea why you did that?" edit summary before you take stock of the value of inclusion. Do you want an example, your "trail of tears" quip a little while ago. ~ cygnis insignis 16:03, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For those playing along at home, this thread continues the inscrutable discussion at [43]

"Trail of tears"??? What in the fuck are you talking about? No, seriously, we really want to know. Every stalker here awaits breathlessly a diff. E Eng 16:57, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a talk page stalker and I approve this message. — JFG ^talk 18:05, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? Trail of tears? I'm telling ya, EEng - it's gotta be the full moon. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 19:09, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We're still waiting for your diff so we can know what you're talking about when you speak of my "trail of tears" quip a little while ago, Cygnis insignis. E Eng 02:46, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No answer. Huh. E Eng 11:51, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Categorization

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Categorization. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I might politely suggest that the honourable Mr Eng refrain from commenting on a dispute about the criminality of concise language. Triptothecottage (talk) 05:09, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Eric Corbett and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 02:30, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh boy! My first Arbcom case! I haven't been so excited since I was subpoenaed to a federal grand jury!

Now seriously folks, everyone keep calm. I'll be happy to answer any factual questions here if it will help keep the case page uncluttered. Let's try to keep things serious. Mostly. (But – again seriously – all jokes or kidding are to be kept here; an Arbcom case is a huge timesink for the community, if even sometimes a necessary one, and we don't want to do anything to exacerbate that.) E Eng 02:53, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm proud of you for getting this far and not a single dead baby or where-the-bodies-are-buried joke. Such restraint! – Levivich 03:17, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there's this. E Eng 03:35, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is a golden opportunity for our new skit. I'll start gathering the diffs demonstrating that you show insufficient respect to gravity. Haukur (talk) 08:07, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like they are going to either decline it or accept but suspend it, so I suspect you won't have to deal with much. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:19, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
They should decline it, but the only opinion so far is to accept. And being party to an accepted-but-suspended case is not a helpful state to be in. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:24, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I don't think they can reasonably suspend a case examining the conduct of active users. I read GW's accept to be specifically for a case focused on Eric (and I'm not getting into whether that's necessary or not at the moment). Vanamonde (Talk) 00:15, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Though not an experienced Arbcom watcher I'm guessing it will be declined, but for the record while I wouldn't look forward to the huge waste of everyone's time, other than that instead of fraud I probably should have said careless negligence I stand by everything I've said and done and fear no scrutiny. You know David Eppstein, since unfortunately Ve has apparently bailed out on us, you would be doing humanity a great favor if you could kick off "the list" with any diffs from July you're concerned about. E Eng 05:01, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There are already about six times the people making statements from the peanut gallery than there are actually trying to resolve the dispute that sparked this exciting episode. Wouldn't it be great if ~~anyone~~ everyone thinking about offering their two arbitrary subunits of currency went and verified one of the 50-something red span tags instead? Triptothecottage (talk) 01:14, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Triptothecottage: What we need more than that is agreement that, when protection comes off, the article will be returned to the upt-to-date version it was in before Cassianto reverted to the June 26 version (on the basis that that version's so excellent -- I guess we won't be hearing that any more). If we can agree to that then I can probably fix most of the verification errors myself, but in any event those who want to help fix things will be able to do so. E Eng 05:01, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I note with approval the conciseness of your response but I still think NYB wins the thread. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:19, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
David Eppstein, let it never be said I begrudge credit where credit is due [44]. Now can you PLEASE see if you can list anything in the July edits (starting here [45]) that you think should be reverted out? Somebody. Anybody. Please. I beg you. E Eng 20:28, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gary Null

Once you've cleaned up the Moors, perhaps you could take a fine-toothed comb to this for sourcing/content mismatch.-- Dloh cier ekim 08:15, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Hi. As you probably know but just forgot, it's best to use Edit summaries just to summarize edits. Thanks. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 04:09, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For those playing along at home, this seems to regard this edit [46].

Why? E Eng 04:32, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, I like to use edit summaries to store old passwords for when I no longer need them any more. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:58, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, no! How pallid a universe if we so limited out edit summaries.-- Deep fried okra 06:02, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Taylor Swift

You have opinions about writing, right? What do you think of the Taylor Swift lead? (Hey, at least I'm not asking you to comment on abortion.) Haukur (talk) 09:13, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In copyediting I leave the lead to very last, after I've done (and therefore read) the rest of the article, so I can't say much at this point except that eponymous and buoyed and spawned and (beyond the lead, but an especial peeve of mine) accolades make me want to vomit, and factoids such as "youngest person to single-handedly write and perform a number-one song on the Hot Country Songs chart" and "first act to have four albums sell one million copies within one week in the U.S." are ridiculous. But you gotta love that she spent her early years on a Christmas tree farm. E Eng 10:17, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

'Eponymous' is for beginners - mononymously is what the cool kids are putting in their FAs. Haukur (talk) 18:00, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Monotonously is more like it. I love it that the first outbound link in the article on this Kylie Minogue creature takes you to a page whose lead image is Plato. Her own lead image shows "Minogue performing at The Queen's Birthday Party" – I can imagine Queen Liz thinking, "I'm just glad Winston isn't alive to see this." E Eng 18:15, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

EEng, you are getting too snobby even for me here, and that's pretty hard to do! --Tryptofish (talk) 18:31, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is recognised as her signature song and was named "the catchiest song ever" by Yahoo! Music. – Right. E Eng 18:41, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK, now I'm curious. Where does (did) it say that? --Tryptofish (talk) 18:48, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The lead (or lede, you snob). We're talking about the article linked behind the word mononymously above. E Eng 18:56, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, Minogue! I thought you meant Swift. Yeah, that's BS. Everyone knows that the catchiest song ever is this. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:02, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to say exactly the same thing, so you see great minds do think alike after all (and please do not post the traditional followup to that). E Eng 19:10, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The traditional followup to that. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:18, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Look What You Made Me Do --Tryptofish (talk) 23:20, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All together! E Eng 23:52, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond Belief book

I can't see if the edition is 1967 or 1992. Random House 1st published the book in 1967. abebooks.co.uk has images of the 1967 edition, EEng. I'll be happy to work with you on this article going forward. I have several printed sources on this case (some not listed in the table on the article's talk page). Regards, --Kieronoldham (talk) 22:14, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's OK, I think it's only used once in the article presently, so it's not like we have to correlate page numbers in a lot of existing cites to page numbers in the editions we have in hand. I'm up in the air about the extent we can use it anyway; it tries to be a sort of In Cold Blood, and I thought I read a review saying that it clearly distinguishes fact from fancy. But so far (having only thumbed it) I'm not seeing that distinction being drawn, but I'll have to give it a closer look to decide.

This will be a lot of work, and it will take time. I'm glad you're on board. E Eng 22:41, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. This book is was one of the first true crime books I ever read. I am unaware which review you are referring to, but in several areas of the book, the author clearly uses his imagination to portray events relating to the case.--Kieronoldham (talk) 22:53, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the review I was thinking of [47]:

Williams explicitly distinguishes among fact, interpretation of fact, and surmise ... interwoven in the text. So that the reader may distinguish among them ...

... and at point there's a page break in the review, and I can't see the next page! I'll have to get that. Our own article (Beyond_Belief:_A_Chronicle_of_Murder_and_its_Detection) says that later reviews were quite harsh. E Eng 23:42, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I will look into that. Reviews are rightly harsh (even though much info. is verified in other sources and the book should not be completely discounted). Williams did consult numerous individuals involved in the case (police, neighbours, acquaintances etc.) while writing his book. In Ann West's book, she states he went to their flat in 1966, demanding an interview, and callously (and falsely) stated she slept in the same bedroom as her brothers before saying: "There's not a lot of room in these council flats, is there?" When ejected from the house, he stated either the Wests grant him an interview or he'd just fabricate the content for his book. I am actually glad there are only a small number of references to this book in the article.--Kieronoldham (talk) 23:59, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have no problem getting the review, but based on the severe later criticism I'm guessing we can only use it for a good turn of the phrase expressing something sourced as fact elsewhere. E Eng 00:21, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've thrown my hat in the ring for a few of the minor sources that Supreme Leader here didn't manage to find on his first run. I shan't be following proceedings in great detail though so please ping me if you want something checked. Some of the more pulpy books mentioned here that are unsurprisingly absent from Antipodean institution catalogues are, weirdly, wildly popular in municipal library collections in New South Wales. This confirms everything we Melburnians believe about the psychopathy of our northern neighbours. Triptothecottage (talk) 00:55, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is great! But please, Triptothecottage, do not commit sudoku [48], or if you do at least do not drip on my couch [49]. E Eng 01:32, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Dude, commit is not the preferred nomenclature. It's execute sudoku. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:48, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Reminds me of the username Osama /bin/login. E Eng 01:52, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Double Space Barnstar
	For discovering a use for the double space in the post-typewriter era. – Levivich 20:55, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Beatlejuice

	Beetlejuice
	You know ~ I went to a french museum of Côte-d'Or ~ I kinda fell down on my way out ~Don't worry though~ I have faith I can make it through ~ ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 05:27, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Among the stalkers here assembled, only you could find a way to work in a Journey (band) video. E Eng 05:30, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Harvard's Pusey Library

It has come to my attention that in the depths of the Widener Library, there is a tunnel containing a book collection known as the Pusey Library or Pusey Stacks, referred to by scholars as "Widener Pusey" (as seen here), named after former president Nathan Pusey (of "Latin Si, Pusey No" fame, not to be confused with Phil Pusey or his younger brother, Professor Pusey, who, naturally, was an Oxford man, which, naturally, is near a whole town of Puseys (not to be confused with the town of Pewseys in neighboring Wiltshire)), and that the lads at The Crimson (who are paying nearly $100,000 a year to browse Harvard's Pusey Library, among other enriching activities) have already picked up on this, with varying degrees of subtlety. [50] [51] – Levivich 05:28, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There are still a few cheap jokes you missed: "I've got a date with a library tonight, and boy is it stacked. With luck I'll get my Wigglesworth." Stories of sex in the stacks, like those about peeing on John Harvard and the Harry Elkins Widener Memorial Swim Test, are campus legend only.

For the record, very few Harvard College students pay full price; for example, families with incomes below $65,000 pay zero. One consequence of the school's wealth means that it can guarantee that no one it wants is unable to attend for financial reasons. E Eng 06:56, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

From the Department of NOR Violations, I remember very clearly that at the beginning of my freshman year (which would be Fall 1974), there was a (sort of) required swim test for all incoming undergrads. I got excused from it for (exaggerated) medical reasons, but I am very sure that the test did happen (and not just in my feeble mind). --Tryptofish (talk) 20:57, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

From the Department of Jesus, Try Following the Link Supplied To See What The Article Says,

Though Harvard has had swimming requirements at various times (e.g. for rowers on the Charles River, or as part of a now-defunct freshman training regimen) Bentinck-Smith writes that "There is absolutely no evidence in the President's papers, or the faculty's, to indicate that [Eleanor Widener] was, as a result of the Titanic disaster, in any way responsible for [any] compulsory swimming test."

One of the article's sources adds that

A Harvard College swimming requirement was instituted in the early 1880s for crew team members wishing to use boats on the Charles River. In 1919, Harvard instituted compulsory physical training, including swimming instruction, for all freshmen; however, the President's report of 1919-1920 describing the new regulations does not mention a graduation swim requirement. A swimming requirement is described in the 1969-1970 Harvard University Catalogue (p. 63), but is no longer mentioned by the publication of the 1974-1975 Catalogue. Currently, there is no swimming requirement at Harvard.

Really, Tfish, I would have thought that by now you'd know I'm not going to get caught with my pants down on a topic like this. I will add that I have it on unimpeachable authority that there was also a swim requirement for graduation from Radcliffe during some period in, roughly, the 1920s to 1950s. But none of this contradicts the article's very careful statement that while there have been swim requirements, they've no link to poor Harry Widener or rich Mrs. Widener. As a note in the article explains (quoting snopes.com):

Harry Elkins Widener didn't die because he couldn't swim: he, like many other Titanic passengers who couldn't be accommodated by one of the too-few lifeboats, died from immersion in freezing water. The ability to swim wouldn't have helped him, because there was nowhere for him to swim to.

E Eng 21:36, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus, EEng, I would have thought that by now you would know that I find the idea of you with your pants off exceedingly distasteful. You sound so defensive, I almost would have thought that you were a Yalie.^[FBDB] I wonder, had they done away with Expository Writing by the time that you got there? So I actually did read what the page said before I made my previous post to you, and I even read the source that you cite. "Training regimen"? Isn't that something for puppies? I've now made this edit: [52]. You're welcome. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:28, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regimen is singularly apt, in point of fact. E Eng 20:56, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Which is apparently why you changed "regimen" to "program", I guess, and otherwise you entirely reverted me, which was so sweet. You really need to show more respect for your betters.^[FBDB] --Tryptofish (talk) 22:29, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I changed to program because you made fun of regimen a few posts above, and I didn't feel strongly about it. E Eng 23:53, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll follow up on this at the article talk page in another day or so, but just letting you know that I found reliable sources that do back up the wording that I put there. Peace. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:44, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's fantabulous. I issue was never the truth of the matter, just the verifiabilitilibility. No hurry. E Eng 22:50, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Next, you’ll be telling us that they don’t actually park cars in the yard! – Levivich 01:40, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Freshman move-in day only, 20 minutes max, enforced from Harvard's smallest building ("The building, approximately the size of a portable toilet, cost the University $57,000 to construct..."). E Eng 02:38, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What's crazy about the gate house isn't the cost, it's that they had Graham Gund design it. Who would hire an architect to design an outhouse?! Harvard, that's who. This one is only $600 and it's bigger. – Levivich 05:17, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, actually; all joking aside, it was an almost impossible design challenge. Personally I don't find the result particularly pleasing, but neither can I suggest a better approach. Someone remind me to do a DYK. E Eng 05:43, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

True, all joking aside, Harvard didn't really choose to do all that. Who would make you hire an architect and spend $800 a foot on a 5x5 gate house? The Historical Commission, that's who. – Levivich 05:50, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

While the Historical Commission's involvement no doubt affected the outcome, I believe Harvard would have spent a similar amount in any event. The Johnston Gate the Yard's traditional ceremonial entrance (see History and traditions of Harvard commencements#Academic_Parade) and an important symbol when selling the product. E Eng

You said to remind you to do a DYK on this. (Did you know ... that Harvard architecture has nothing to do with buildings?) If someone/you finds/makes a PD pic, I'd be happy to put a little stub together in draftspace. It's got to be one of the smallest buildings ever designed by an architect–merely by virtue of being just about the smallest possible building still capable of occupation. – Levivich 04:48, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Princeton had a swim test requirement from 1911 to 1990 and a similar apocryphal story about a deceased alumnus was told there. Newyorkbrad (talk) 06:45, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Who or what is this “Princeton” of which you speak? E Eng 12:12, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
EEng displays the narrowness of his education. By the way, I was born in and grew up in Princeton, NJ. Graduated from Princeton High School. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:29, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond a reasonable trout

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

I certainly appreciate your brand of humor (puns and all), but Special:Diff/913428905 was a bit much (especially putting it in the closure box) creffett (talk) 01:16, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Beyond a reasonable trout" -- that's brilliant. E Eng 01:36, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Templating a regular

Welcome!

Hizzles EEng, n welcome ta wikipedia! thizzanx fo` yo contribizzles . Slap ya self. i hizzy you like tha place n decide ta stay fo' sho'. Here is a few good links fo` newcoma:

I hope you enjoy perpetratin' here n being a Wikipizzedian! Pleaze sign yo name on rap pages using four tildes (~~~~), o' just three (~~~); this will automatically produce yo name n tha date fo' sheezy. If you need help, chizzay out Qizzles ask me on mah rap page, or place {{helpme}} on yo rap pizzle n someone wizzle show up shortly ta brotha yo questions. Again, welcome ta this plizace!

May I introduce {{User:Myrtone86/template:welcome-snoop}}. Can't believe it never caught on. – Levivich 02:55, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can't imagine.-- Deep fried okra 03:30, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome use Bishzilla's template, all! bishzilla _ROARR!! pocket 04:06, 5 September 2019 (UTC).[reply]

Why do I get all the nuts? E Eng 04:31, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You really don't know? – Levivich 04:36, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm trying to put up a brave front. E Eng 04:42, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

baby buggy video

Hi, quick note. Wasn't trying to edit war with you about that video. I think the video is helpful and we aren't here to only show "safe practices" on Wikipedia. But the adding after you deleted was simply I thought I didn't click save right because when I reloaded the page in another tab shortly after adding the video it was gone. I thought I did something wrong, didn't notice until I saw the history that you deleted it so quickly. You seem to feel strong ownership of that page? Didn't try to step on you or anything, sorry about that. Cheers, Nesnad (talk) 05:48, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I assure you I feel no ownership of the baby buggy page. But when other editors tell you that your self-made video doesn’t improve an article, you should listen. E Eng 12:33, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on my technical proposal.

Hi EEng, I was hoping you could share your thoughts on my Edit Values technical proposal before I actually present it. It can be found here [[53]]. Thanks! May His Shadow Fall Upon You ^Talk 19:52, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to. E Eng 22:58, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Duodecimal

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Duodecimal. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What did Dewey do now? – Levivich 05:02, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Believe it or not: Melvil_Dewey#Controversies.. E Eng 05:33, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Who could have guessed that the guy who wrote Classification and subject index for cataloguing and arranging the books and pamphlets of a library, and followed it up with Decimal classification and relative index for arranging, cataloguing, and indexing public and private libraries and for pamphlets, clippings, notes, scrap books, index rerums, etc., would turn out to be an asshole. – Levivich 05:37, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Index rerum" – obviously a pervert. E Eng 06:12, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Elegant variation

Apologies, had thought you had followed me there (I have similar interests to Popcornduff, so do watch) but now see you were already active on the talk page "discussion", which can be best surmised with the three letters...FFS. ps, hope all is well with Martin who has not edited in a while, and is missed. Ceoil (talk) 17:35, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your taking the time to clear that up, but it's really MJL you should be apologizing to. Which Martin do you mean? E Eng 19:15, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unaccepted apology noted. MJL has a lot more to answer for than this, and I'm surprised you are using his nativity to advance other grudges. I meant mr Evans. Ceoil (talk)

For those playing along at home, this concerns the bizarre interactions here [54].

Um, look Ceoil, it seems that every interaction we have immediately goes awry because (a) your English isn't that great (sorry, but you force me to say it – case in point: by nativity do you mean naivete?) and (b) when you misunderstand, you start seeing dark motives in everything.

I said above I appreciated your taking the time to admit your prior misunderstanding; that means your apology was accepted.
You accused MJL of conspiring with me by email, so yes, you should apologize to him regardless of what you dislike about him (not that I'm saying I agree with you on any of that, other than that he should be more discerning in where he pokes his nose).
I have no "grudges", and you're getting me close to doing what I almost never do, which is to have an admin speak to you about your repeated accusations, without evidence, of misbehavior by your fellow editors.

E Eng 20:37, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your not as clever as you think, and poor spelling is a weak defense, given all that has happened in the last two weeks. 'Almost never do'; please - most of your edits over the last decade and a bt are to AN/I. But if you cant defend yourself on your own, thats fine man. Ceoil (talk) 20:42, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[Thank you for the ping] @EEng: pronouns.Just another example of how improbable it'd be for us to coordinate Either way, It's fine really. I don't feel owed an apology. The accusation was very hurtful, but I don't hold it against Ceoil. He has the right to feel whatever feelings he feels. (edit conflict) –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 20:45, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's an uncharitable view, and I'm obviously not going to convert anybody here. But I will say that those that defend Eric dont do so because of his charming personality, it goes deeper than that - he and Tony1 were always to go to guys on how to write correct, and a generation learned from them. The people Eric (supposedly) chased off were not future content people, he always tended to them with kindness and encouragement (I was one), more he was targeted by up and coming admin types. Ceoil (talk) 21:19, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're saying that his personality was charming, that he taught you to modify verbs by adjectives, and that EEng has never created any content and is or was an up and coming admin? Interesting. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:41, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No David, I was being ironic, which fair enough doesnt translate in text only discourse. I said Eric is not especially charming, and never was inclined towards [unspecified, as we are talking about a 12 year span] wannabe admins. But he has my respect. Ceoil (talk) 22:05, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, David, I think Ceoil is saying it's OK that EC called EEng a "guttersnipe", etc., because EC was nice to Ceoil back in the day. – Levivich 21:44, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes exactly Levivich, EC mentored quite a few new editors, including me. I'm not sure how you connected that with the attempt to associate me with "guttersnipe", which for sure sounds regrettable. But to say again, I dont defend Eric for his fatalistically bitter, and unfortunately hurtful, way with words. Yet, when I was learning how to operate on this place, I improved through a school of hard knocks, rather than cuddly safe spaces.Ceoil (talk) 22:06, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

People were mean to you once and therefore it's good for people to be mean? I think you took the wrong lesson there. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:52, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In twelve years I've probably opened two or three threads total at ANI; half or more of my edits there are archiving of resolved threads and so on. Get your facts straight before mouthing off further.
Please don't insult Tony1 by mentioning him in the same breath as Eric Corbett. Tony helps other editors without bursting into schoolyard taunts at the first sign of friction.
Eric Corbett was nice to someone exactly so long as they stroked his fragile ego and scrupulously avoided contradicting or correcting him in even the most minor ways. He richly deserved what he got, and obviously wanted it. This was no Greek tragedy of a magnificent talent brought down by a tiny seed of destruction hidden deep within, but (as I take delight in repeating, now that I've hit on the metaphor) a one-eyed man who managed to surround himself with blind editors over whom he thought to reign as king, and whose blindness allowed them to believe, for a time at least, that he was a deity. His writing was perfectly competent, but by no means brilliant, and like everyone else’s not so good that it couldn't be improved by fresh eyes; and his research and sourcing, in the one example I've probed in depth, was sloppy.
That last point is worth explaining a bit. At some point it suddenly became clear that much of Moors Murders was unsourced, and that that had long been hidden by the fact that E.C. and others inserted new material, with inline cites, into an existing article that largely lacked inline cites; the added inline cites were mistaken for covering the old, uncited material, and no one noticed that until now. Eric Corbett's response was, "Yeah, I was a relatively new editor then, and not really tuned in to the problems of WP:Citing_sources#Text–source_integrity. I'm glad someone's noticed the problem and it's being addressed." Ha, ha, just kidding. He immediately put into action his usual strategy of diversion leavened by insults, painting himself as a victim, and so on [55], the diversion in this case being the claim that citation requirements have changed since he worked on Moors Murders [56], which is false [57]. I conclude, therefore, that he's not interested in learning, that there's no reason to believe he's any more careful now than he was then, and that his research is probably about as good as his writing: OK, but far from great. Combining that with his nasty attitude, I say good riddance.

E Eng 14:17, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well MJL, there were coincidences here, for sure...there is no doubt that ye were coordinating. My long term opinion of you EEng is that you are a low value bluffer. Ceoil (talk) 05:08, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Doubt is the beginning of wisdom, as the wise man said; try it sometime. E Eng 14:17, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To stick my schnozzola in here: I can't work out what the theme is. Tony (talk) 07:29, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tony, it’s themeless in need of a themestress. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 04:16, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Stress has been the theme all summer; now, it seems less. – Levivich 04:20, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I figured you would get a kick out of this

https://www.foxnews.com/health/pressure-cooker-whistle-skull

Cards84664 (talk) 14:33, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Darrell K Royal–Texas Memorial Stadium

Hi EEng ~ can I get maybe a day or two page protection here ~ Thanks ~mitch~ (talk) 17:19, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mitchellhobbs: The best place to ask for protection is WP:RPP. I have made a request there on your behalf. Unless EEng has some mystical power I'm unaware of, he cannot actually protect pages. Though he may act with the impish impunity of an admin, he is in fact just a regular 'ol editor. I think if he ever did run for RfA, the community would devour itself like Ouroboros. Not necessarily saying that's a bad thing... Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 17:45, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I sometimes wonder why God chose me to be the vessel burdened with such awesome power. But I have sworn to use it only for good, never for evil! E Eng 21:03, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks CaptiainEek ~mitch~ (talk) 17:49, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And speaking of Michael Palin...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m00081v8

BMK

IRC

Heya, someone joined IRC today under your username, wanted to verify whether it was you or not. Praxidicae (talk) 12:46, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it's me. Who on earth would want to pretend they're me? Horrible thought.

For talk-page stalkers, here's what I'm asking:

After several bad experiences with numbskull admins at Commons, I decided never to upload files to Commons again, except for PD material. I now want to upload a file and have the person I got it from follow up by emailing an appropriate license. On Commons there's a page I can get the license from, fill in the blanks, and forward to the file donor; then there was a permissions@ address to which the donor could forward the license. I can't find the equivalent stuff here on Wikipedia i.e. the license boilerplate, and the address to which the donor should forward the license after I upload the file. (I don't want to put the donor through creating an account and uploading himself.). Clue me in, please.

Can anyone point me to some page explaining this? E Eng 13:13, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to Praxidicae and Steven Crossin, I think I have my answer: https://tools.wmflabs.org/relgen/ and permissions-en@wikimedia.org . Thanks! E Eng 13:35, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eric

Hi, I certainly have not always supported EC - he's a good writer but, like most of us, sometimes his own worst enemy. My ironic aside to your comment about using real names in the recent AN thread was because it is documented on-wiki that he has been harrassed off it. One example was the Rod Hull and Emu account, although I can't remember the exact spelling. I'm just correcting the record - no need or desire for a contretemps. - Sitush (talk) 07:13, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For those playing along at home, this concerns what I said here [58].

Sitush, I appreciate your taking the time to drop by. Since I am, on reflection, not conversant with all the crazy stuff that's swirled around this Eric Corbett character on wiki, off wiki, in the corridors of power and at all levels of government, I should have simply said, "No, people shouldn't be harassed IRL even if their name is Eric Corbett. I imagine he's got enough trouble in his personal life as it is." E Eng 02:49, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt his personal life at present is any more troubled than yours, perhaps less, but in reality neither you nor I can compare them and you're just poking again. Please stop gravedancing here, there and everywhere. You don't like him, we get it, but you are indeed far from conversant with what has gone on. It becomes tiresome having to correct pure speculation on the part of the self-admittedly ignorant and is an example of the "polite" incivility that we really should not be tolerating if we're to have a level playing field. I am sure you will want to reply - you seem to want to interject your off-beat thoughts and so-called humour everywhere - but please don't ping me in it. - Sitush (talk) 03:29, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have to correct my self-admittedly ignorant pure speculation – I labeled it self-admittedly ignorant pure speculation. E Eng 03:39, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

nudge, nudge

I don't know if/how you missed this

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

but you'rerf really not supposed to edit inside a closed thread. — Ched (talk) 08:26, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

When an RfC has run its course and had a formal close, modifying the discussion encapsulated by the close can confuse things. On the other hand, when some lone editor takes it upon himself to decide that everyone else has had enough to say, then no, that's not binding on the rest of us. E Eng 02:18, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not helping

This edit does not help the discussion one iota, and is extremely aggressive. I suggest you remove it. -DePiep (talk) 16:24, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DePiep, remember all those times you misunderstood what someone was saying and got all upset? This is one of those times. My point is that having redirects WP:FOO and MOS:FOO is a very bad idea. (And no, I’m not advocating that anyone actually be shot. Not yet, anyway.) E Eng 16:57, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No I do not remember, nor do I care nr did "I" misunderstood. You actually wrote to shoot an editor, so I suggest you undo that one. -DePiep (talk) 22:03, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If we're going to start interpreting common hyperboles such as "... should be shot" literally, I'm going to jump off a bridge. – Levivich 22:27, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mountains out of molehills, here. Don't blow your top and throw the baby out with the bath. --A D Monroe III^(talk) 23:25, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

He might shoot himself in the foot if he's not careful. E Eng 00:49, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is EEng agression. DePiep (talk) 22:39, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Shame! Shame!

You aggressive, violent beast, you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:44, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You love it. E Eng 23:51, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BMK, you added an extra "g" to agressive. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:58, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently EEng has friends now, who'd have guessed? creffett (talk) 00:28, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Careful, your comment could be seen as casting aspersions against an entire group of editors. – Levivich 00:43, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Video on YouTube

[1]

@@ Line 1,669: / Line 1,669: @@
 :::If we're going to start interpreting common hyperboles such as "...&nbsp;should be shot" literally, I'm going to jump off a bridge. <span style="white-space:nowrap;">– [[User:Levivich|Leviv]]<span style="display:inline-block;position:relative;transform:rotate(45deg);bottom:-.57em;">[[User Talk:Levivich|ich]]</span></span> 22:27, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
 ::::Mountains out of molehills, here. Don't blow your top and throw the baby out with the bath.  --[[User:A D Monroe III|A&#8239;D&#8239;Monroe&#8239;III]]<sup>([[User talk:A D Monroe III#top|talk]])</sup>  23:25, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
+:::::He might shoot himself in the foot if he's not careful. [[User:EEng#s|<b style="color: red;">E</b>]][[User talk:EEng#s|<b style="color: blue;">Eng</b>]] 00:49, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 ===ANI notice===