Wikipedia talk:Reference desk

Skip to the bottom

[edit]

To ask a question, use the relevant section of the Reference desk

This page is for discussion of the Reference desk in general.
Please don't post comments here that don't relate to the Reference desk. Other material may be moved.
The guidelines for the Reference desk are at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines.
For help using Wikipedia, please see Wikipedia:Help desk.

Continual personal comments from JackofOz

I have reopened this discussion to retain context of my actual statements- μηδείς (talk) 02:48, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

goodfiath but preamture closing
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I'm BOLDly collapsing this thread, because it's clearly pointless. I apologise to those that have attempted to be constructive. If people wish to discuss the correct names of certain kinds of cooked potato, please do so in the relevant section of the ref desk itself, not the talk page. If anyone wishes to complain about the conduct of another user, please link to the relevant diffs and explain what policies those diffs violate and how. Vague, unsubstantiated complaints are not going to achieve anything, so don't make them. --Tango (talk) 15:48, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Can someone besides myself or 86:163:1:168 suggest to JackofOz that his continual personal comments about his opinion of me on the reference pages are not in comportment with their goals or the suggestion that we remain polite and refrain from personal attacks? I don't think anyone cares what his opinion of my ignorance is, or reaally wants to hear me respond to him once more. Given that I talk of events and facts and give links, and in response he talks of me and my faults in his eyes, I think some sort of advice that he lay off is in order. μηδείς (talk) 04:00, 9 October 2011 (UTC) [bolding added, μηδείς (talk) 02:48, 11 October 2011 (UTC)]

I have advised Jack here [1] that assuming he simply ends his comments this is all over so far as I am concerned. If her makes no comments here, on my talk page, or on the reference desk pages I will do the same. I am unwatching this page in the hopes that will be the case. μηδείς (talk) 04:18, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

And I have challenged Medeis here to substantiate these charges or withdraw them and apologise. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 08:15, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

potato diversion
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I originally replied to the thread but finding this discussion have moved it here. As much as it pains me to agree with an Aussie, I do agree with Jack here. (Although to be fair come next Sunday, Aussies are going to be the ones in pain so it isn't that big a deal.) Bubba73 started the thread with this question: What do you call "French fries" that are baked instead of fried? I've heard them called "baked fries", which doesn't make good sense. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 14:26, 7 October 2011 (UTC) Some discussion followed concerning what they are called in the UK and US. μηδείς's first reply was a direct reply to this question by Bubba73 where μηδείς said They are called oven fries. μηδείς (talk) 19:00, 7 October 2011 (UTC) However as is obvious from above, Bubba73 never said in their original question they only wanted answers for one region. Bubba73 did later indicate that they are from the US but that was in a followup thread that μηδείς did not reply to. More importantly, they still gave no indication they were only interested in answers concerning the US. Any reader unfamiliar with μηδείς was therefore left guessing what location 'they are called oven fries' applies to. Greece for example? Or is μηδείς claiming that they are called oven fries everywhere? StuRat later asked a follow up question Do they sell them pre-fried and then frozen to be reheated in the oven ? If so, what do they call that version ? StuRat (talk) 00:13, 8 October 2011 (UTC) StuRat is also from the US, although did not say so in the thread and did not specify that they are only interested in answers from the US (again it's obvious they did neither in their question). Once more, μηδείς's reply was direct to StuRat and they said: Oven fries? Why is this so difficult? μηδείς (talk) 02:14, 8 October 2011 (UTC) Which again left the reader guessing what location this refers to. The astute reader may make the assumption μηδείς was intending to refer to the same location as their earlier reply (although they may still be unsure which one). However, the tone of the reply seems to imply that it was a dumb question. The reason here may be that what StuRat referring to is basically what the earlier discussion was mostly concerning. But this would not be obvious to everyone, an easy thing which could happen instead would be to re-enforce the view that μηδείς is implying that they too are called oven fries in most or all places (and therefore there's no reason to query further). It's clearly not an inferiority complex on the part of those asking, that people are clear if they are giving an answer that likely only applies to one region, when there is no way to know from the thread what location is being referred to. We cannot expect everyone to know or remember where each contributor comes from. Even if that info in someone's user page, it is unnecessary for people to need to check a user page to know where an answer is likely to apply to. This is of course not something that is a problem for all those from the US, as this thread and plenty of others can atest, plenty of people from the US do understand that it is helpful to everyone if they indicate where their answer is likely to apply to, or where their experience comes from if they are giving an answer from experience rather then sources. I acknowledge that there have been some cases when people have perhaps gone a bit too far, e.g. asking people to specify where an answer concerned when it was fairly obvious from the thread but that's not the case here. Sometimes of course it may not occur to someone that their answer likely only applies to one region or they may just forget to do specify what region, mistakes do happen and it's no major deal if people are willing to offer an explaination when questioned. However it is obviously a bigger problem when someone later tries to claim they did not give an answer which likely only applies to one region without specifying what region; or implies that others are somehow at fault for not understanding their answer was only intended to apply to one region when they didn't specify this at the time. (It is of course also a silly thing to do when it is clear to anyone reading the thread that this is not the case.) P.S. There's a small chance I may need to ask for this thread to be oversighted on Sunday to save my life, so I hope this is resolved before then. Nil Einne (talk) 14:09, 9 October 2011 (UTC) If you want 'inferiority complex'.... On further consideration I realise we are in fact at fault. No human is interested in hearing what we subhumans (people from outside the US) call the mythical things in our grunting camp fire chats in-between sacrifices to the sun and moon god, and pillaging other caves. It's not like we have potatoes, or ovens anyway let alone freezers. Therefore it should be obvious to all any answer is only intended to imply to humans. Nil Einne (talk) 14:09, 9 October 2011 (UTC) Had anyone bothered to look, they would have seen that Bubba73 is American. So an assumption that he was talking about the US would be reasonable. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:55, 9 October 2011 (UTC) You seem to be missing the point. We all know Bubba73 is from the US since they said so in that thread (but not the part μηδείς replied to). No one has ever denied this. However at no time did they say they only wanted to know what they were called in the US. StuRat incidentally while also from the US doesn't say so on their user page, nor did they say so anywhere in that thread. Nil Einne (talk) 18:33, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

reopened

I have reopened the above comments to restore the request that opened this matter. I don't think I should have to explain why constant ad hominem responses are inappropiate or prove they shouldn't continue. Here is exactly what I said on Jack's user page, after warning him to stop following me around making personal remarks, which he has conveniently deleted[2]:

You are quite aware one need not template the regulars. This is very simple. I am sick of your personal comments based on race, sex, sexual orientation, nationality, native tongue, and your opinion of my knowledge, ignorance as an American, etc. It can all stop now with your doing what I shall do--refraining form further comment in public space. I am unwatching this space. Don't comment here and don't make personal comments on the ref desk spaces and this all ends now. μηδείς (talk) 12:14 am, Yesterday (UTC−4)

Note that none of this amounts to a charge of "racism" or "homophobia" on my part. Only a desire that the personal/ad hominem comments cease toward me. Besides the side issue of this race joke made on the ref desk [3] "Alcock and Brown? Wasn't that Sammy Davis Jr's nickname?" (obviously meant as a joke and not directed at me, but nevertheless offensive to me, loved ones, and family) there are repeated incidents of ad hominem behavior towards me including such things as:

• Jack arguing that since I am not a native speaker of English (even if he knew this as a fact, which he doesn't, it is ad hominem) that there is no accounting for my opinions on English grammar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Language/2011_July_8#Verbs_that_take_dative_.28in.29direct_objects
• Jack "explaining" in a thread above discussing gender and orientation http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Reference_desk&diff=453966914&oldid=453965972 that my being female (even if he knew this as a fact, which he doesn't, it is ad hominem) explains my comments.
• Jack, once again, turning a discussion that has nothing to do with nationality into one about supposed American (and my) bias when the question is not even related to WP:ENGVAR (fries versus chips) but whether said potato food is described as "oven" versus "baked". [4]

This is a very simple matter. I am not asking for an apology, a cease to joking, that any editor be convicted of any sin, that there be a witchhunt across WP talk space, or that Jack in any way be punished.

I am merely asking that it be suggested to him by a third party that his personal comments toward and about me cease.

I am entitled to make contributions without constantly having another user make ad hominem statements and explaining myself on his (rather bizarre and largely baseless, if not entirely irrelevant) view of my personal identity. μηδείς (talk) 02:48, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh really, or as my mother says "the camel only sees the hump of his brother, never his own". Near the beginning of your reference desk career the two of you must have rubbed each other the wrong way, and ever since we get to witness this mini-feud. If you want it to stop, make the first step by completely ignoring anything he posts that has nothing to do with you. ---Sluzzelin talk 03:08, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

In case wikipedia policy on adhominem is unclear: (See Wikipedia:No personal attacks

• Using someone's affiliations as an ad hominem means of dismissing or discrediting their views—regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream. An example could be "you're a train spotter so what would you know about fashion?" Note that although pointing out an editor's relevant conflict of interest and its relevance to the discussion at hand is not considered a personal attack, speculating on the real-life identity of another editor may constitute outing, which is a serious offense.

I am sorry, Sluzzelin, what do you mean I should completely ignore anything he posts that has nothing to do with me? Is there some example of me butting in to comment on his personal identity? The oven fries thread is a perfect example of the problem. He was not involved. In a thread where it was clear that the subject was set in an American context, and the question was about the adjectives baked versus oven-, he leapt in arguing bizarrely that as an American I shouldn't be insisting that the word for chips is fries. (!) read the collaapsed section above, if you care.

In any case your easy retreat to moral relativism would be helpful if you could show where I go around interrupting threads in which I have not been involved to say that silly Jack's comments are what you might expect from an Australian and a male. I seriously don't think I'll have a problem not using Jack's gender, nationality, or other matters regarding his personal identity to criticize his comments, but I promise not to do so nonetheless. μηδείς (talk) 03:31, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Bad news everyone!

I mentioned the possibility oversight may be needed to save my life in the comment on potatoes above. I'm happy to report this won't be necessary. Well JoO and HiLo may not be happy but that's somewhat beside the point.... Nil Einne (talk) 13:48, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

medical diagnosis

request removed [5] μηδείς (talk) 23:40, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Direct personal insult

So now, in addition to this question, which is at best a request for a medical opinion and, more likely, just plain trolling, we have a direct personal insult with an editor being called a jerk, outright. [6]. 00:31, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Most editors' responses have treated the question as a pretty silly one by using humour. What you see as an insult, I see as just another attempt at humour. The point is that he wasn't called a jerk outright. HiLo48 (talk) 00:54, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

"You, name, are a jerk" is not an outright insult? It also be should be noted that you are the one who restored the thread. μηδείς (talk) 00:56, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

It was a conditional insult, built on the statement of the other editor. I still believe it was intended as humour. I didn't restore the thread. I responded to its restoration with attempted humour. I guess I failed. HiLo48 (talk) 01:00, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

It's clearly meant to be a joke. And I don't at all see the original question as violating our policy on medical questions. Have a look at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Guidelines/Medical_advice. It's quite clearly not a violation if you look at the examples. It's maybe a dumb question (though not necessarily). But it's not a violation of the medical policy. --Mr.98 (talk) 01:37, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

It cannot be a dumb question, since there are no dumb questions. Quest09 (talk) 13:57, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

So our grade school teachers have drilled into us, but I'm not sure it's true. --Mr.98 (talk) 15:36, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, they probably meant that it's dumber not to know than not to ask, but OK, some questions take us further and others have obvious answers.

I think the OP has been overusing the ref desks for questions he/she does not really needs answers to, and I wish we could figure out something to do about it, but I don't see anything horrible about the specific question or the responses to it. Looie496 (talk) 02:27, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

I think it's irrelevant how many questions someone asks or if he really needs the answers. Questions could simply go unanswered, if they are too much. And even if in many cases it's obvious that no answer is needed, since the questions don't have any practical use, there is no rule about "only useful questions." Remember also that the RD is not just to help the posters of questions, but also those who answer obtain some benefit and those who just read the questions and answers. Quest09 (talk) 12:15, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but until you have consensus to overturn the policies on such things as WP:CIVIL and the ref desk guidelines you can say all you like that we should ignore out of bounds comments and you are free to do so, but others are entitled simply to remove them. μηδείς (talk) 03:04, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

In saying that you have chosen to ignore those of us who believe the comment was a joke, and hence not intended to be a personal attack. HiLo48 (talk) 03:29, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

In saying what, I have done what? I am guilty of what now? Not of disobeying you, but disagreeing with you, of "ignoring" you? Do you think my belief is a matter of debate and consensus? I don't, and I hope your beliefs aren't. I said that until you can overthrow the policies the policies stand. Do you disagree they stand until overturned, Hilo? On the other hand, I haven't deleted the "joke" again since this began--have I? That is what is subject to debate here, the action to be taken, whether consensus supports deletion or not. Not my opinions or what you think they should be. Arguments and actions are separate things and if you not only want me to follow the majority but to think like the majority your moral metaphysics is messed up. When we become Borg and you become the Queen stop the world and let me off. μηδείς (talk) 03:49, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

It says up the top "This page is for discussion..." A few of us thought the comment was a joke, and raised that possibility here. Can we discuss that possibility please? HiLo48 (talk) 04:32, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

What do you want discussed? I am not reverting and have not but for the first time ever reverted the edit. What does it matter that I happen to think that what looks like a direct personal {"you are a jerk") insult is inappropriate? Even if it is really a joke, a supposition which I find plausible? Please be satisfied by the fact that I am content not to revert the edit. I am happy to physically refrain from pushing the buttons to revert the edit. Are you not happy with that? Or do you insist on my conforming spiritually to the idea that the edit is a worthy thing I should endorse? μηδείς (talk) 05:08, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Meh. I just thought we could have a chat. But whatever. I certainly don't want a fight. HiLo48 (talk) 05:36, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Uh, Medeis, it was you who posted the intial comment [7] with a sub-heading title. On Wikipedia talk pages, that is pretty universally seen as a signal that you wish to discuss something. Even if you say right out that your staement is for the record only, people are still going to comment. There is no such thing as "having the last word" here, and I would posit that one of the very fundamental WP rules is: if you don't want to be disagreed with, don't post anything. You opened a topic on a discussion page. What discussion were you hoping for? Franamax (talk) 09:14, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Everyone other than you is a member of the refdesk Borg collective, Medeis, and HiLo is our queen. You can tell by the way we agree on everything, do not need to discuss any action we take, and never argue. You will be assimilated. 86.163.1.168 (talk) 08:39, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I am sad that my joke got deleted as spam

But it could have been worse. Dualus (talk) 10:09, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

I can't speak for the IP but to be fair, your joke barely relates to the question. It can be considered a followup to μηδείς's reply but if that was the intention it's location and indenting doesn't lead to the conclusion. Nil Einne (talk) 13:38, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

"the intention it is location"?. You speak English good. --Belchman (talk) 15:00, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry Belchman, Nil Einne's sentence is completely almost right. The same cannot be said of yours. Quest09 (talk) 15:14, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

He's got an extra apostrophe in there for his "its" but this is completely besides the point. (The apostrophe in "it's" is not possessive. One of English's nice quirks.) --Mr.98 (talk) 15:33, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

OK, that apostrophe makes Nil Einne a complete illiterate, Belchman is right. Quest09 (talk) 19:17, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I always thought my English wasn't that great as I only got a C3 in my 1119 Nil Einne (talk) 13:44, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Can we just delete all of the above from Belchman down? It's an idiotic side-distraction that verges on trolling and troll feeding. I had thought we were of the agreement that pointless grammatical pedantry should be zapped rather than argued over. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:52, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

As noted in Possessive pronoun, all of them that end in "s" lack an apostrophe: his, hers, its and so on. I had an English instructor who said that a phrase like "the farmer's field" was actually short for "the farmer his field" (still a common form among the less educated). I can't find verification of that, though. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:44, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

There are examples of music from the time of Elizabeth I of England, called "Lady Rich Her Galliard", "Queen Elizabeth Her Galliard", etc. Today, we'd say "Lady Rich's Galliard", "Queen Elizabeth's Galliard", etc. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 08:44, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Blut und Ehre

Is this: "I also apologize for only having had the opportunity to defend mine and my own by stabbing or pummeling people into submission, rather than ever having had the honor of shooting anyone to death" an acceptable comment by a regular contributor to the reference desks? It may be found on the discussion page and was written by user Medeis.
If so, I ask for my account to be disabled by a suitable administrator. I feel revolted by the thought that a human being can express such a barbaric sentiment without instantly being banned for life. Under the circumstances, I wish to disociate myself from Wikipedia. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 13:47, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

For clarification the comment was made Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language#Klingon vs Esperanto. I've collapsed the discussion as it had little to do with the question at hand even if the diversion was started by the OP (μηδείς). George Soros was simply given as an example as a native Esperanto speaker, not as a reason for the existence of the Esperanto wikipedia and his character was not brought in to the discussion before then. Also once again I would like to remind people discussions on living people should be carried out with care particularly when they don't relate to a question. While the facts here may be supported, our personal opinions of them should be kept to a minimum per WP:BLP. I won't say this is a clear cut violation since we do usually allow some leeway and it does happen particularly with controversial people (e.g. quite a few current and former world leaders including those from the US) but still something to keep in check. Nil Einne (talk) 13:58, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I do have to question Medeis' reason for participation. He/she seems terribly unhappy here, sees conspiracies behind every comment, see offense in every answer, feels the need to respond with anger and harshness at every opportunity, and generally does not seem to be too interested in cultivating or preserving a very civil atmosphere. I am a bit confused as to why he/she continues at this, what he/she is getting out of it. I might humbly and honestly recommend he/she takes a little break and get a little distance and perspective, rather than starting a fight every other day for now over a week. There will be no joy for anyone if he/she continues in this direction; just more squabbling and probably an eventual banning for trolling or incivility. (I have no power to ban; this is not a threat, just an observation from having been around these parts for something like 7 years now.) --Mr.98 (talk) 15:05, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM, do not allow the abject follies of other editors to cause you to consider cutting yourself off. Those follies will all receive due treatment, as will their creators. What goes around comes around.

Only yesterday I advised the editor in question to stop being no one, start becoming someone, and to grow up. I appreciate your concern is way beyond a mere lack of maturity, however. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 18:54, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I should add that the possibility has occurred to me that Medeis may be a highly troubled individual who, under the guise of insults and hostiities may call out for help. The obvious problem is that neither I, nor anybody else on the ref desk, can provide such help. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 19:24, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

To me, it seems that Medeis merely has a rather dark sense of humor. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:29, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Many of us here have and/or can appreciate a dark sense of humour. But most of us are not fronting up at ANI every second (metaphorical) day, pleading for forgiveness yet again, and then immediately going out and committing further egregious atrocities, often against their fellow editors. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 19:52, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Could people post links to things they wish to discuss, so it is possible to see the context, rather than simply quoting something which is obviously excerpted from a longer contribution? Making a threat against another Wikipedia user is a far more serious business than expressing an idle wish to kill a third party whom you may never come into contact with, so it is very relevant in exactly what context the statement was made. If we banned anybody who had ever expressed the desire to shoot, stab, or otherwise do away with a human being, there wouldn't be many people left, but equally there are contexts where it would be totally unacceptable and even illegal. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:33, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I see Nil Einne posted such a link above, which merely proves my point that the statement was taken out of context and refers only to the vaguest wish to kill evil-doers. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:41, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

"Egregious atrocities against their fellow editors"? Oh, my''. My thanks to Colapeninsula and Baseball Bugs for their reasoned and exactly spot-on reactions. (Although my response to Cookatoo was literally true in all points in this case, not an example of my sometimes irony). μηδείς (talk) 21:39, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I do sometimes wish there was some kind of ignore function in Wikipedia. Medeis sole purpose on the ref desk seems to be to write generalising bigotry thinly disguised as elaborate jokes (while himself being amazingly fast to pull the generalisation and PC card when called out on his behaviour). I don't know if the purpose of this is to steer questions off topic, but it certainly is the result (as the American Potato thread is a good example of). The petition for a troll-ref desk he posed above is perhaps a good pointer as to his objective? --Saddhiyama (talk) 17:32, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

If you are going to accuse me of bigotry you'd do well to point it out. μηδείς (talk) 01:17, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

I thought I already did. Are you asking for difs? The numerous threads on this page alone points to some. I have taken the time to gather a collection here: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. --Saddhiyama (talk) 01:00, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Not much "bigotry" in those diffs, just dark humor. The first one reminds me of a couple of things. Mark Twain, speaking on some outrage or another, said, "That is un-English! It is un-American! It is French!" Then there's this comment from Tom Lehrer's "Who's Next?": "France got The Bomb / But don't you grieve / 'Cause they're on our side / ...I believe!" ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Ein Volk! Ein Wiki! Ein... oh wait, this isn't about that at all! Can't you guys just chill out for once? I thought that Wikipedia was one of the few places on the internet that had the drama under control, yet it seems like being in high school again or some idiotic gaming forum. Everyone needs to stop fretting over small things and minor indiscretions and making big deals out of nothing. You're supposed to have fun doing this, being refdeskers and all (when you also answer the questions ofc), but it seems like a lot of people here let little things turn into huge problems and then they allow these problems they have aggrivated to wreck their experience when they start fighting. So can't you all just relax? Seriously, why do you want to add yet one more stressful element to your lives? Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 24 Tishrei 5772 05:40, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

'I thought that Wikipedia was one of the few places on the internet that had the drama under control' - I take it you've never visited WP:ANI or WP:Arbcom or the plenty of other places like that? Nil Einne (talk) 00:33, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I only really look at ANI when I see the words "legal threat"; those are always a good laugh. Outside of those two then. :p RefDesk shouldn't be that way. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 25 Tishrei 5772 00:51, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I see nothing specifically objectionable about this comment, apart from it being chat at the Refdesk, a very common sin indeed. (now [8]) Wars happen and I'm not going to try to judge this person when I don't know where or what or who or how. If anyone here is that intent on being a humanitarian, please find a way to stop the next war. Thank you. Wnt (talk) 14:36, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Favorite questions

what is your favorite question here in ref desk? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.112.82.128 (talk) 20:31, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

The one you just asked. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:13, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

This. 82.43.90.142 (talk) 21:18, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Sadly, that OP turned out to be a sock, and was flushed a couple of days later.[9] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:39, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Isn't it a bit naff to say your own non-question was the best question? Nil Einne (talk) 02:11, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

One question asked by User:Keenan Pepper about the Google hits of the words "daaa...ng" with 3, 4, 5, 6 As. --Belchman (talk) 19:19, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Why can't you answer my medical question? We get those a lot. Dualus (talk) 00:20, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Odd edits

I don't know if it's a problem or anything, I just thought I'd point out that this ip, has taken to making minor edits to a few threads after those threads scroll off the main page. APL (talk) 21:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

I've restored the substantive content (there were some hat templates removed as well; I didn't bother restoring those). There's a pretty clear pattern with these edits, which is to remove material discussing the actions of User:Bowei Huang 2. Regards, Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 22:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Bowei is not currently blocked, but it was nice of him to betray his IP address for future reference. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:08, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm lazy to check the history but I'm reasonably sure BWH has done this before and been told before they couldn't do it. I'm pretty sure when they got in trouble for sockpuppetry or misusing the RTV, it was explained to them that while they can delete most stuff on their user page, they can't hide their edit history in general Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive591#Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive589#User Bowei Huang/A1DF67 (ongoing). Despite some confusing claims at the time, they eventually admited one of the reasons they'd try to change accounts was to remove some edits [10]. In any case, I'm going to tell them they need to stop it and suggest they don't edit if they're going to later regret it and want to remove edits. I know they did edit from an Australia IP a fair while back. Nil Einne (talk) 18:41, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Overt trolling by User:Medeis

Medeis's remarks here, where he/she claims that the Democratic Party is essentially Communist and comparable to the Insane Clown Posse with regards to "policy and civility" strike me as blatant, ugly, unnecessary, stupid trolling. I've removed them before they derail the discussion just like Medeis's trolling comments always do. I'm loathe to begin Wiki-bureaucracy efforts but I feel that this particular user is simply devoted to trolling, debating, offending, and so on, and is completely without regard for warnings, requests for civility, and so on. I'm generally a live-and-let-live sort of editor, but hasn't this gone on far enough, or should we just abandon this page to the troll? I am getting sick of this. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:46, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

It is blatant, but not necessarily trolling. There are many people who honestly believe that Democrats are communist. Just as there are people who honestly believe that Obama was not born in Hawaii. I, personally, find any strong political beliefs of any kind to be a sign of ignorance, so I find all Republicans and Democrats to be rather idiotic. I'm therefore not offended by such stupid remarks about either party. -- kainaw™ 00:57, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

User:Medeis has an obvious pattern of inflammatory, unproductive, and distracting remarks. They spawn threads upon threads (see above) debating whether or not they cross the line, they endlessly distract from the main goal here, which is answering questions. That is a perfectly fine definition of trolling if you ask me, when combined with an unwillingness to engage civilly, spurious accusations against others (see above threads), and a total and complete refusal to adjust the problematic behavior despite multiple and repeat discussions.

I think this is all going too far. I don't want to draw a line in the sand, but let me just say: I've seen plenty of great users on here decide "to hell with it" when catering to trollish users goes unaddressed. Medeis creates far more discord than quality for my tastes. --Mr.98 (talk) 01:55, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Then, sick BB on it (I believe we are supposed to use neuter terms to protect this users feelings). BB used to be an ass of a user - which I believe he will admit himself. He eventually took responsibility for the problems he was causing and became a good user. So, he should know best how to handle this type of user. -- kainaw™ 02:10, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

More commonly spelled sic. But that would just be cruel. I agree with Kainaw - Responding to inflammatory posts with inflammatory labels is not productive. Medeis needs to tone down the political commentary, but Medeis isn't the only editor who needs to do so. This is the political silly season in the U.S., and there are a number of editors who could back away from the commentary. Buddy431 (talk) 03:10, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

You know, it's polite to notify someone when you are talking about him. (As for pronouns, that's your bugaboo. I only objected to the ad hominem of having my opinions attributed to my supposed nationality and gender. I don't care whether you like he or she better.) Outrage at a difference in political opinions is not grounds for calling someone a troll. My answer was quite clear and the OP seemed to find it helpful. The insane clown posse comparison (to describe the unprincipled show-boating of the two major parties) aside, what was your problem with my links to Ruwart, Chomsky, the Libertarians, the Dems and the Greens? This is not some sort of PC preserve where opposing political POV is to be shouted down as trolling. Policy allows one to delete personal attacks. That does not include drawing a comparison between politicians and a stage act. μηδείς (talk) 02:45, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and BTW, Mr.98, you need to read the Communist Manifesto. Its planks include a single state-run central bank, a heavy progressive income tax, death taxes, free universal public education, government control of the roads and media, and the nationalization of employment. Those are all standard Democratic policies. You removing my comment [11] for making that comparison is simple vandalism. μηδείς (talk) 02:54, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Many of the communist demands were implemented during that period of the early 1900s when the Democrat and Republican parties in the U.S. hadn't assumed their modern-day positions; in any case, I think few Republicans now seriously oppose ending free public education outright, nor privatization of all roads, nor an end to the Fed arrangement. More to the point, I'm not convinced that agreeing with some more sensible little-C communist demands is the same thing as being a big-C Communist. Still I think that editors are entitled to have opinions, as long as they're sort of aimed at answering the question according to their own beliefs and perceptions. And with that I'll add that personally I believe in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and that property rights exist as a tool to make those things possible, but I don't believe they're a law of nature. New types of property are added every year, for better or worse, - carbon emissions rights, patents on business models, patents on genes. We have the right to roll back certain property rights a bit if we want - we could say, like Finland, that people can hike and camp on private land, or like in the Old Testament, that people can walk onto farmland and eat as long as they don't carry away grain in containers. We could say that stock trades can have a tax placed on them so that poor people have a right to basic housing. We can make up any rules of the game we want, and those rules don't have to kill people, and it doesn't mean we believe in even-steven Communism with giant monolithic apartment buildings and statues of Stalin in every courtyard. It's our democracy and we can do what we want with it. Wnt (talk) 03:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

When you say "oppose" there, do you mean "support"?  Card Zero  (talk) 11:26, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Ooops, yes! I've been finding recently that trying to lose weight quickly causes all sorts of incoherent things to emerge from my keyboard. :( Wnt (talk) 16:45, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I'd like to point out that User: Mr.98 has a tendency to remove content he doesn't like without warning and to insult other users. --Belchman (talk) 09:26, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Not targeted to anyone...

..but the best way to deal with our current "issues" is for each editor to do two things: answer the question as asked with no fluff, and to provided those answers with references. If neither can be done, then don't answer. Mingmingla (talk) 14:32, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

wut happens if i ask too many question

wut if i ask too many question instead of googling or looking up on articles for myself. i like to ask question but don't want to ask TOO MANY. what is the limit and what is the consequences for asking too many question. Can someone be ban from the help desk if they ask too many questions, even if the questions are serious and not joke questions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.228.90.14 (talk) 16:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

The basic principle is to not give the people who watch the Ref desks the feeling that they are being abused. Just think about how you would feel if you were the person answering the questions. Looie496 (talk) 17:00, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

if they dont like to answer question they can do something else because it is a free country (unless they are edit from North Korea), they can go play video games. i do not think this is a good answer, no one is force them to answer question.--24.228.90.14 (talk) 17:13, 26 October 2011 (UTC)