Jump to content

User talk:Eric Corbett: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
→‎Quoll Help?: THANK YOU!
Line 249: Line 249:


:I think you've done a very fine job with that, and it's close for GA I think. Let me look through the whole thing again this evening and I'll post up at the peer review anything I think needs attention. For instance, this is a bit unclear: "Females have six nipples and develop a pouch which opens toward the tail only during the breeding season". The way that sentence is structured makes it look like the pouch opens toward the tail only during the breeding season, and toward somewhere else at other times of the year. But presumably it doesn't have a pouch at all except in the breeding season? In which case something like "Females have six nipples and develop a pouch during the breeding season that opens toward the tail" would be clearer. But from what I've looked at so far I don't think there will be anything major, so I think you could reasonably be looking to have a go at GA in the next day or so, by the weekend certainly. [[User:Malleus Fatuorum|Malleus]] [[User_talk:Malleus_Fatuorum|Fatuorum]] 16:21, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
:I think you've done a very fine job with that, and it's close for GA I think. Let me look through the whole thing again this evening and I'll post up at the peer review anything I think needs attention. For instance, this is a bit unclear: "Females have six nipples and develop a pouch which opens toward the tail only during the breeding season". The way that sentence is structured makes it look like the pouch opens toward the tail only during the breeding season, and toward somewhere else at other times of the year. But presumably it doesn't have a pouch at all except in the breeding season? In which case something like "Females have six nipples and develop a pouch during the breeding season that opens toward the tail" would be clearer. But from what I've looked at so far I don't think there will be anything major, so I think you could reasonably be looking to have a go at GA in the next day or so, by the weekend certainly. [[User:Malleus Fatuorum|Malleus]] [[User_talk:Malleus_Fatuorum|Fatuorum]] 16:21, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I am absolutely bursting with excitement! I will make that change ASAP! Thank you sooooo much for helping me reach my goal! :) --[[User:Savetheoceans|Savetheoceans]] ([[User talk:Savetheoceans|talk]]) 16:30, 10 November 2011 (UTC)


== GA ==
== GA ==

Revision as of 16:30, 10 November 2011

There are many aspects of wikipedia's governance that seem to me to be at best ill-considered and at worst corrupt, and little recognition that some things need to change.

I appreciate that there are many good, talented, and honest people here, but there are far too many who are none of those things, concerned only with the status they acquire by doing whatever is required to climb up some greasy pole or other. I'm out of step with the way things are run here, and at best grudgingly tolerated by the children who run this site. I see that as a good thing, although I appreciate that there are others who see it as an excuse to look for any reason to block me, as my log amply demonstrates.

DYK?

After reading this (on today's DYK section), I'm afraid I still don't know. Parrot of Doom 09:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An absolutely pitiful DYK. Who runs these things? The FA of the day is also about as big a piece of shit (complete with shameless canvassing after it was "guaranteed" DYK insurance) as I've ever seen. Doc talk 10:05, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Really interesting subject, really badly written. Could've been an excellent article. (Edit: oh hang on, I've just seen who wrote most of it. Give me a couple of days, I'll fix it.)Black Kite (t) 16:09, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hopefully Hammersmith Ghost murder case is at least readable now. Too late for the poor sods who clicked it off the DYK page though. Black Kite (t) 18:35, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You've done a very nice job with that. Just a pity, as you say, that it was almost unintelligible yesterday on the main page. Malleus Fatuorum 23:19, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There's a late-night early-morning series running on one of the freeview channels on "Great British Ghosts", so I guess that's maybe what inspired the article. But actually I don't see a problem with an article on alleged hauntings in Hammersmith, or anywhere else for that matter. Malleus Fatuorum 16:07, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I considered taking it aside and rewriting it but couldn't be bothered. It's rare though that I find an article so badly written that I have to read each sentence several times. Parrot of Doom 23:26, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And neither could I. DYK checks for ... well pretty much nothing really, not even that the article is written in comprehensible English. Malleus Fatuorum 23:53, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting to note that that article's main contributor is one of those calling for V for Vendetta references in you-know-what. Parrot of Doom 00:15, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Surprise surprise. It's a pity that I have no power to drive away the crap editors, only the good ones. Malleus Fatuorum 00:20, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The whole thing on the main page had made me start looking for another obscure and offensive (to Americans) article to expand :) It's a shame there isn't more to say about Gong Farmers, just imagine an FA-quality article on that :) Parrot of Doom 00:29, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Gong farmers probably can't go much further than it has, as I haven't managed to find any more material: it's still a nice article though IMO, and I think it could be a GA. But it's unfair to consider Americans as a homogeneous group, much as I'm accused of considering administrators as a homogeneous group. Neither is of course, but American administrators by and large are just the fucking pits. Or perhaps there's some correlation between how far west they are and their corrupt incompetence. The truth is though that finding articles to offend the vocal crew of offended Americans is frighteningly easy. Malleus Fatuorum 00:41, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

<--Nice work on the ghost, Malleus and Kite. How is your Dutch? The term "irreparably improved" comes to mind. Also, a similarity with an article you're familiar with was suggested. Drmies (talk) 21:55, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In a word, non-existent. But strangely I was taught a Dutch nursery rhyme by my mother, who lived in Holland as a kid before the war ... something to do with tying your shoelaces I've been told. Malleus Fatuorum 23:30, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FAC review request

Hi, I'd like to request that you take a look at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2010 Nobel Peace Prize/archive3‎. The nomination doesn't seem to be attracting much interest for reasons I cannot fathom. Tony says he prefers to stay away because he's copyedited it, albeit lightly and before I undertook a rewrite. Anyway, as I'd ideally like to put it up for TFA soon, I'd appreciate it if you could have a look and perhaps comment as to its meeting FAC or not. Cheers, --Ohconfucius ¡digame! 02:22, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that won't be possible. But why not ask User:Kaldari, or perhaps User:Georgewilliamherbert? Malleus Fatuorum 02:46, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
oh my ... thanks a lot ... I'm the one who has to sort that ya know. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:17, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
They won't show up, no worries. Malleus Fatuorum 04:17, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
... unless anyone is imprudent enough to use the word "fuck" of course, which I don't think I've ever seen at FAC. Malleus Fatuorum 05:18, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Pay attention, you dork. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:58, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well well, what an article that is. I might even pay money (not much though) to see it on the main page. Malleus Fatuorum 01:40, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom case

You aren't a named party, but you asked to be informed when (/if) I filed the Arbcom case re the unblocks. It's been filed. WP:RFAR#Unblocks and Enabling. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 08:09, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good. I may have something to say there. Malleus Fatuorum 08:46, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I guess this means you can start editing again?---Balloonman Poppa Balloon 19:27, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Might do. It's very interesting to see the predictable characters like User:MONGO turning up in search of their pound of flesh. The vindictiveness of Wikipedia has to be seen to be believed. Malleus Fatuorum 19:31, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And there was me thinking that page was supposed to be about the rights and wrongs of admins ignoring other admins. Half the people there are just using the occasion to have a go. Parrot of Doom 19:55, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What did you expect from the usual suspects? Although, to be fair, a number of people have actually thought about it and come up with some reasonable responses. Black Kite (t) 19:58, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just as I anticipated PoD, it will end up being about me. Malleus Fatuorum 20:04, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I never realised. I really missed this place. Quick question whilst I am here: is Websters the US equivalent of our OED (subscription required) and if so is there a safe on-line version of it? --Senra (Talk) 21:52, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid I don't know, but I'm sure someone who does will be along soon. Malleus Fatuorum 21:55, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Webster's is the oldest of the dictionaries in the US, but it's not quite the same as the OED. For that matter, a lot of US folks rely on the OED (I have a copy that I use occasionally). Random House is often used as a dictionary here also - Webster's is actually Merriam-Webster's now, I think. I use dictionary.com for online stuff. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:16, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I have had trouble using Merriam-Webster's; at least from the UK. My Chrome version of BT NetProtectPlus (McAfee) blocks content from that site with the frightening text: "We [McAfee] tested this page and blocked content that comes from potentially dangerous or suspicious sites [the US?]. Allow this content only if you're sure it comes from safe sites". That is why I asked if there was a safe on-line version of [Websters]. No matter. I will look for my word elsewhere. Thank you anyway --Senra (Talk) 22:34, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here's an American dictionary: New Oxford American Dictionary [1]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.112.248.154 (talk) 22:43, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well until I changed it the wikipedia article suggested that Webster's is the generic term for comprehensive dictionaries across the English-speaking world - what a cheek! Richerman (talk) 22:49, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Until Britain can consistently win the Ashes, I think you'd better edit that in at Macquarie dictionary. I eagerly await the upsurge of West Indian test cricket and academic dictionary projects. Fifelfoo (talk) 23:50, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
When are the Yanks going to realise that they don't speak English, they don't speak American English. What they speak is American, and that is what Websters is all about. If you want to look up proper English words then one uses the OED. #justsaying --The Pink Oboe (talk) 00:05, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(od)"From Juba to Jive"- black Americans speak American, the others American English. Ning-ning (talk) 09:31, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greater Scaup Help

Hi, Im working on the Greater Scaup article for the Wikipedia: WikiProject AP Biology 2011 project. I would greatly appericate it if you would help by looking over spelling and grammar errors. Thanks--Haydenowensrulz (talk) 16:24, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A pie for you!

Thank you for your generous contributions to my Spotted Eagle Ray article! The help is greatly appreciated!!! Marissa927 (talk) 16:43, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Give me a nudge before you nominate it for GA, if that's where you're headed, and I'll look it over as a GA reviewer would so you can eliminate any last-minute kinks and minimise stress. The same offer extends to any of your colleagues as well. A few years ago while on holiday in Lanzarote I watched a group of rays swimming around the harbour, which isn't very deep; lovely, elegant animals. Except if you're a mollusc I suppose. Malleus Fatuorum 00:54, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be sure to let you know before I put it up for GA, I hope to put it up around Thanksgiving. I'll make sure I let my classmates know. Thank you for the offer. As for the seeing the rays, that sounds amazing. I really do like this animal. They are so pretty! I would love to see one. From a distance maybe, the barbs at the end scare me! I've seen the uglier gray rays up close while swimming, and I ran out screaming. I suppose if you were a mollusk that would be a problem.... Marissa927 (talk) 04:26, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. I'm not sure molluscs can scream can they? Malleus Fatuorum 18:11, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I hope so, the bastards are always slithering around my milk bottles. I must buy more salt. Parrot of Doom 18:13, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You still have your milk delivered? How quaint. ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 18:26, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to mention that I was in a submarine at the time, so no danger of one of them jumping out of the water. How cool is that, eh? :lol: Malleus Fatuorum 18:25, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm sure mollusks cannot scream. And good thing about being in a submarine. Several people have been hit by the jumping rays! Not to mention the venomous barbs. They are pretty but dangerous(: Marissa927 (talk) 04:06, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Finally

[2]. Drmies (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Long overdue. Malleus Fatuorum 23:27, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's really f'd up. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 23:38, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Careful, Dr. K, or I'll block you for civility infractions. Feel free to join; the more the merrier. Drmies (talk) 23:59, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the offer, and I don't mean the one regarding the block. It may be time to adopt a new designation; I'll seriously consider it. I don't know but I think the more I visit here the more I seem to pick bad habits. It must be in the atmosphere of the place.:) Dr.K. λogosπraxis 00:07, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there's always this one. Drmies (talk) 00:14, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Out of this world! Dr.K. λogosπraxis 00:17, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder why User:Jaguar's in this category? IIRC it was set up after I said something like (to whom I can't remember) "If you're a (whatever it was they were claiming) then I'm a Chinese whore from Mars". But obviously though I'm not Chinese, so that was a little hyperbolic. Malleus Fatuorum 00:30, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would join, but I suspect that since I only get paid in the sense that the cat gets shut out of the bedroom, it doesn't really count. Black Kite (t) 00:38, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Jaguars, Mars, exotic workers. Sounds more and more like a cosmic menagerie. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 00:41, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm at my place in Wales this weekend. Baaa. - Sitush (talk) 01:56, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll spare you the sheep shagger comment then Damn, it just slipped out when I wasn't looking! Malleus Fatuorum 02:09, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sedgley Park R.U.F.C. had a tour in Wales a few years back - the Shamlaggers Tour. I still have the shirt, in a fetching daffodil shade but with a spot of what looks like laundered blood. I cannot recall a thing that happened (aside from my world-class try).And that may or may not be a pun. - Sitush (talk) 02:34, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

<--I don't think anyone's given you credit for this yet, but I admire its elegant simplicity and its unexpected turn. Bravo. Drmies (talk) 16:51, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There needs to be a minimum entrance fee for RFA, possibly something like "has turned a stub or start article into a GA" - and the GA should be reviewed by someone with a lot of GA experience. Parrot of Doom 18:05, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
But...but...then the NPP can't make admin! Well, GA, that is a lot to ask. It took me forever. "Significant content contribution" (even if unquantified), that is something one could ask, or "meaningful article creation" (maybe past the stub level, and "meaningful" meaning "not redirects"). Drmies (talk) 18:21, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
GA is harder than a lot of people give it credit for, largely thanks to the constant nagging of editors like SandyG, who were (justifiably) very critical of it until it cleaned up its act. A lot of us put a lot of effort into getting that little green blob into article space. Malleus Fatuorum 18:32, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

How've you been? I wanted to show you my latest work, Dumfries, Lochmaben and Lockerbie Railway. What do you think? Could it be expanded? I lack the time to look for book references at the moment. Take care, --John (talk) 05:35, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not so bad, beginning to calm down a little now after recent events. Looks good to me, but where's Iridescent when you need him? He's the man for railway articles. Malleus Fatuorum 18:22, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I know. Any clue what happened there? --John (talk) 19:27, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
None at all, except that I don't for one minute believe any of the "official" accounts. Malleus Fatuorum 19:44, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I followed the incident and noticed your name mentioned. Perhaps the real story will never be known. Scary to think their security was so poor. --John (talk) 02:36, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No reason to suppose that it's any better now. But the truth has a habit of emerging, eventually. Malleus Fatuorum 03:08, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone see anything DYK worthy in ...

Henry fitzGerold? I can't... Ealdgyth - Talk 23:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jeez, any old sentence will do for a DYK hook, ask Sandy! Personally I find it interesting there were people called "Warin" around then. It's a name you hear a lot of at any magistrate's court today. Johnbod (talk) 23:28, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's a tough one. All I can think of is something like "... that Henry fitzGerold was responsible for paying all the knights in Kent from 1166 until 1168?" But chasing up some of the linked articles I came across this. What a crock that is. I just hate these articles copied across verbatim from ancient out of copyright sources. Malleus Fatuorum 00:01, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, Eudo's on my list of things to "fix"... I'm about burned out for a while on bishops, so I'm probably going to be working on some layperson's articles for a bit... not everyone can look like Urse d'Abetot but they can all look better than Eudo. Thanks for the copyedit to Henry, by the way! Ealdgyth - Talk 00:04, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's a weakness I have. I find it almost impossible to read something without seeing where I think it might be improved. Sometimes even I wonder just who the Hell I think I am to be so presumptious. :lol: Malleus Fatuorum 00:12, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I never worry, you usually leave them better... Ealdgyth - Talk 00:16, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
BTW. I'm sure you already know this, but Henry's article pings around between calling him "Henry" and "FitzGerold". Malleus Fatuorum 00:31, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh, who writes these things? Take a look at "on this day". I've already complained about it. Parrot of Doom 00:36, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Since when was Guy Fawkes an "explosives expert"? Malleus Fatuorum 00:38, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Those millions of monkeys clearly haven't been typing anywhere near long enough. Parrot of Doom 00:40, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Moving along, I'd completely forgotten about this. Worth a punt at GAN do you think? Malleus Fatuorum 00:43, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid I know little to nothing about that book, but if you like I can check the sources I have to see what they have to say about it? Parrot of Doom 00:48, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As ever, all help gratefully received. Malleus Fatuorum 00:58, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I have a busy day tomorrow, which consists of cycling, beer and curry. I'll see what I can do. I'm also thinking of making my own version of this, and hanging it on my talk page. Parrot of Doom 01:06, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, I've got a busy few days coming up myself. Is that the Duke of Edinburgh's crest? Malleus Fatuorum 01:20, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Did you know that Henry's brother was an ordinary postage stamp? Yes, he definitively was! Ning-ning (talk) 03:21, 5 November 2011 (UTC) (no-one's spotted it yet) Ning-ning (talk) 18:28, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Synthesis?

Is it synthesis for me to write 'Blakeman even goes so far as to say that "Grouped around [the cathedral] ... is the largest collection of mediaeval [sic] buildings still in daily use in this country"'? The full Blakeman quote is "Grouped around, it is claimed, is the largest collection of mediaeval buildings still in daily use in this country". Your experienced opinion, Malleus, would be very welcome --Senra (Talk) 11:16, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is a tad, as it doesn't seem to be Blakeman making the claim, he seems merely to be reporting it. Malleus Fatuorum 13:27, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I have reworded—Blakeman 1990, p. 13 reports the claim that "Grouped around [the cathedral] ... is the largest collection of mediaeval [sic] buildings still in daily use in this country" --Senra (Talk) 14:33, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The claim, or a claim? Parrot of Doom 14:34, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You people rock as always—[3] then [4]. Thank you --Senra (Talk) 17:18, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Original Cragh account...

Has been published in Studia Celtica: The Bulletin of the Board of Celtic Studies volume XXXII (1998). The transcript is provided by Michael Richter and the title is "William ap Rhys, William de Braose, and the lordship of Gower, 1289 and 1307". Pages 189-209. Only a Latin transcript is provided, no translation. The original manuscript is in the Vatical Library, ms Vat. Lat. 4015. Might be worth adding in as a footnote or similar for the article. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:36, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could I put upon you to add that Ealdgyth? You've got a much better handle on how to format that kind of thing than I'm ever likely to have. Malleus Fatuorum 00:45, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Added. Fiddle as you like. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:51, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'll probably start some serious fiddling with your fitzJonny tomorrow, even though that does sound slightly rude. Malleus Fatuorum 01:59, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, look at Robert de Chesney instead? I've got a line on another book for the fitzJohn's and until I can figure out whether I can get it through ILL, I'd rather deal with Chesney. World cat listing - it always scares me when the third result for a book on World Cat is in Scotland... Ealdgyth - Talk 02:05, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK, although it's rather disappointing that he doesn't offer the same opportunity for double entendre. I'd best press on with this, because I sense that ArbCom are girding their loins to try and teach me a lesson. Fat chance. Malleus Fatuorum 02:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to work on Pain also... it just might get some additions ... and I think I've about mined Chesney totally out. (For those watching behind the scenes, yes, I have ILL access now - turns out we are no longer in one library district and am now in another so I can abuse a much smaller and nicer library for ILL.. yay!) Ealdgyth - Talk 02:20, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Really disappointing

I am truly disappointed in your lack of will to cooperate, as shown by your responding to an edit summary with an irrelevant statement and undoing an entire edit without addressing its explanation because "dowager is not a proper noun" (which itself is dubious). I know this will not achieve anything but I simply had to tell you. Surtsicna (talk) 15:59, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt you could be more disappointed than I am in your surly intransigence, which is all too common here. You ought to have discussed your proposed change on the talk page instead of edit warring, and I hope you will learn that lesson for the future. Malleus Fatuorum 16:07, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to the page history, everyone can see that I was not the intransigeant one. After you reverted the first time, I suggested other options. You simply reverted with a summary that made no sense whatsoever. I then attempted to compromise by making another edit but you reverted again and again with a petty remark. It was a minor change in wording; had you produced any counter-argument, there is no doubt I would have started a discussion. It was also not edit warring as I was not the one blindly reverting every change the other editor made without (sensible) explanation. That was you. All I wanted was to make it clear that she was not Queen of Aquitaine; all you did was revert and revert. Surtsicna (talk) 16:23, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you were to follow your own advice to me, you would retire from Wikipedia - as you clearly don't understand how it works. Surtsicna (talk) 16:29, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please carry on digging your hole, but please do it elsewhere, preferably somewhere I don't have to watch it. Malleus Fatuorum 16:43, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]


"Wikipedia - as you clearly don't understand how it works"
This reminds me of Ed Wood, wearing an angora sweater, giving advice to Orson Welles.
 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:24, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Better?

Eudo Dapifer. Blech, I hate reworking those PD-text things. They are so often wrong and the prose... Ealdgyth - Talk 17:02, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Much better. At least it doesn't now look like it was written by a 19th-century clergyman with too much time on his hands. Malleus Fatuorum 00:49, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
James Planché Dramatist - close enough. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:20, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quoll Help?

Hello Malleus, I was wondering if you could possibly make your way back to the quoll article. I think you will be impressed with the amount of information that has been added since your last visit. Then again, that means a lot of grammar mistakes probably hiding within the article. I would greatly appreciate your help and hope that you will consider revising the article. Your work with the AP Biology wikiproject is not underestimated, as you are, to our class, a Wikipedia God. Thank you so much for the time and effort that you put into the project and I hope that you will help the quoll article progress to GA, and maybe FA one day. Thanks! :)--Savetheoceans (talk) 03:39, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll be glad to help; I'm fascinated by the idea of a marsupial cat! I probably won't get to it until tomorrow though. Malleus Fatuorum 22:57, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Any help, anytime is a blessing in itself. I'm so excited that you think the quoll is fascinating... If there is one thing this research taught me, it is that there are some interesting animals out there :) --Savetheoceans (talk) 00:36, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are indeed. Just remind me, are you in a part of the US where it's allowed to teach evolution without giving equal weight to intelligent design? I only ask out of interest, nothing to do with the quoll. Malleus Fatuorum 00:42, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We try to keep religion as far out of our AP Biology classroom as possible.--Savetheoceans (talk) 16:37, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I was thinking about putting my article quoll up for GA. Do you think that is a good idea?--Savetheoceans (talk) 15:59, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you've done a very fine job with that, and it's close for GA I think. Let me look through the whole thing again this evening and I'll post up at the peer review anything I think needs attention. For instance, this is a bit unclear: "Females have six nipples and develop a pouch which opens toward the tail only during the breeding season". The way that sentence is structured makes it look like the pouch opens toward the tail only during the breeding season, and toward somewhere else at other times of the year. But presumably it doesn't have a pouch at all except in the breeding season? In which case something like "Females have six nipples and develop a pouch during the breeding season that opens toward the tail" would be clearer. But from what I've looked at so far I don't think there will be anything major, so I think you could reasonably be looking to have a go at GA in the next day or so, by the weekend certainly. Malleus Fatuorum 16:21, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am absolutely bursting with excitement! I will make that change ASAP! Thank you sooooo much for helping me reach my goal! :) --Savetheoceans (talk) 16:30, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA

I was thinking of putting my Spotted eagle ray article up for GA. I am waiting on the range map still, but somebody I know is willing to help so that should be up soon. After that, I think I can put it up. but I was wondering what you think of it. I'm not sure if the feeding and diet section is a bit too small? Any thoughts about it, just let me know! Thanks! Marissa927 (talk) 03:44, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed this has been nominated at peer review, so I'll add my comments there. Malleus Fatuorum 23:04, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Marissa927 (talk) 04:20, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My new hero

Take lessons. --Moni3 (talk) 23:17, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(Some) Americans may find it hard to believe that that kind of language is not at all unusual in the rest of the world. What I found quite charming though was his addressing the interviewer as "Sir". Quaint. Hard to disagree with his analysis of the bankers though. Malleus Fatuorum 23:49, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Moni3, that's great! I've heard similar in London's financial quarter. You might like Wikipedia_talk:Civility#Civility_Police_need_to_lighten_up. --Philcha (talk) 06:52, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In my personal experience of Aboriginal Australian English, and Australian Englishes heavily influenced by Aboriginal Australian English, cunt is the generic noun. Not sure about verb, but in some Australian Englishes cunt is a generic verb. In these Australian Englishes, fuck is often the standard generic verb, and a secondary generic noun behind dickhead. This is, of course, on top of fuck as a generic emphatic adjective/adverb. Its like eggshells with some. Fifelfoo (talk) 06:58, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, "fuckshites." (Or "fockshites.") Refreshing! Thanks Moni; I'm taking this into my grammar class today. Drmies (talk) 15:08, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I need to start using interesting words such as fuckshites. --Guerillero | My Talk 15:21, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If I used that word I think that User:Georgewilliamherbert would fall into a swoon. Either that or he'd punch the air with a "Yes, I've got the bastard now!" Malleus Fatuorum 15:24, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Piss off, sir, I'm getting a pint. Malleus, please don't put naughty words in another editor's mouth: I'm sure he would never say anything like that. No one would, of course. We don't even think such bad things. Drmies (talk) 17:50, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Two decades back, I was delighted to spend some time in the company of some Italian ladies learning the Queen's English, such that "pass me the fucking hammer" was part of the curriculum. I don't remember that being part of mine, but perhaps I have Herr Doktor Alzheimer to thank for that. And thank fuck for that. Whatever it was. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:33, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia's efforts to stifle honest discourse under the guise of civility really is one of its low points. Why not call an obviously ignorant arse an ignorant arse? In what way is the project improved by the contributions of ignorant arses? Malleus Fatuorum 19:58, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A horse has but one arse. Many Wikipedians appear to have a superfluity of arse-ness. Bring back the horses and the Italian ladies, when life was actually worth living. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:01, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I dunno, but where can I cash in my DIGWUREN warning for calling an editor arrogant for believing their original research amounts to reliable sourcing. Read this comment in the context of my previous comment in this thread. Fifelfoo (talk) 21:39, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
LOL, two decades ago I went skiing in the alps when I heard some foreigners "practicing English." I scooted forward so that I could hear them better and try to decipher what they were saying... it took me about 2 or 3 minutes to realize that they weren't practicing English, they were Brits.---Balloonman Poppa Balloon 21:58, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Reply of the Zaporozhian Cossacks to Sultan Mehmed IV of the Ottoman Empire
Cossacks of Saporog Are Drafting a Manifesto
ArtistIlya Repin
Year1880–1891
TypeOil on canvas
LocationState Russian Museum, Saint Petersburg
  • I know that phrase as "munted," by first preference; though "cunted" makes sense too, other local definitions of "cunted" tending towards "betrayal" or "an attack upon" normally weigh stronger in my mind. Fifelfoo (talk) 03:07, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "I can't stand him any more, he's a liar", said Nicolas Sarkozy of Benjamin Netanyahu according to BBC News. Silvio Berlusconi calls Angela Merkel an "unfuckable lard-arse". Obviously what the international community needs is a good dose of wikipolicing. The wankers who believe that people in the real world are by some mysterious process more polite than those on the Internet are just that, wankers. Malleus Fatuorum 03:28, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I do appreciate your candour, Malleus. I think there is a fine line between telling it like it is and making such an arsehole of oneself that one has to resign. I think you almost always fall on the right side of it. You have definitely sold me on the idea that civility is not always to be measured by the use of particular language. On the specific matter of your last block I think it was a silly one, as I shared your frustration in being lectured on English grammar by someone who was not a native speaker and whose grasp of idiomatic English was visibly imperfect. --John (talk) 07:53, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some stroopwafels for you!

Thank you for all of your help to the quoll article but more importantly, the WP:APBIO project. Your edits are greatly appreciated. Without them the AP Biology project would not be what it is today! :) Savetheoceans (talk) 01:48, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently, the first AP Bio project missed the memo on filling your talk page with baked goods? Glad to see that you are still a guiding light in the project.--Yohmom (talk) 02:54, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hardly a guiding light. I think that's more you and the others who've been there, got the T-shirt, and are still around to help those coming behind you despite no doubt being very busy with your own studies. BTW, what on Earth is a stroopwafel? Malleus Fatuorum 03:18, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A rather nice Dutch biscuit, best eaten in Amsterdam before the genever.  :-)--J3Mrs (talk) 09:20, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
NO! NO! Come on now! (Sorry, haha.) It is a million miles away from a biscuit, and I'm not even sure you can buy the fresh ones in Angstydam. Listen, they consist of two somewhat thin wafers pressed together with a cane syrup/butter syrup in the middle; in lots of medium-sized towns you can buy them fresh, hot out of the press, all sweet and crumbly and gooey! They are delicious. Hey Malleus, I only dropped by to tell you that I posted Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:RIDICULOUS; if that essay gets deleted, the redirect is up for grabs. I thought maybe you'd have an idea for using it. Drmies (talk) 14:47, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Haha.. Glad the stroopwaffels are a hit! I had them once in Europe. The barrissta put them on top of our coffee, and the caramel got warm and melty. They are kind of like the american wafers, like nutty bars, but instead of peanut butter, they have caramel. Needless to say they are delicious! :) Thanks again for all the help!--Savetheoceans (talk) 00:43, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Savetheoceans, be careful now that you don't get blocked for having an offensive user name. Any destroyer of oceans could rightfully claim you're intentionally offending them. (And yes, that's the way to serve them. Glad you enjoyed.) Drmies (talk) 01:17, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Could you or one of your talk page watchers possibly help tidy up the refs on Bob Shaw? I don't have time right now to figure it out. --John (talk) 18:32, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few changes, changing one reference to a template, adding publishers where needed, and making sure the authors' names are presented consistently. Having looked at the Robert Reginald book, I think it's a 2009 reprint of the 19754 second edition, but haven't changed the reference yet. Generally I don't see Google book links with retrieval dates, I assume because while the links may change the books won't. Sometimes I see links to Google books removed althogether because they don't work for everyone and they're still accessible via the ISBN link. Nev1 (talk) 19:00, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your fast work Nev. Please feel free to finish referencing cleanup as you see fit; it really isn't my field of expertise. --John (talk) 19:08, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Think I'm done. I changed the Reginald reference to reflect it was the 1974 edition. I double checked WP:CITE on the guidance for Google books. It says "When a book is available online through a site such as Google Books, it is useful to provide links to the relevant pages ... Although there is no requirement for such links, working links should not be removed once added" so I'll leave them as they are. Nev1 (talk) 19:22, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stylebook

Malleus, I'm having more and more fun reading Fowler. I found another one, though, that's kind of interesting. It has sample sentences like such as "The girl I had anal sex with freshman year has a great set of tits" (for restrictive comma usage), "'I'm going to finish this drink, and then you're a fucking dead man,' he said" (comma inside quotation mark), and "They're too drunk to realize I sold them oregano" (they're/their/there). Happy days, Drmies (talk) 00:15, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks very interesting. I see it's available on Amazon for just £2, so I may buy a copy. Malleus Fatuorum 14:55, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lead writers guild

Would any of your circa 384 page-watchers be interested in writing the lead (lede) of Ely, Cambridgeshire (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) please? I started about a month ago trying to improve the article from what I thought was a rather confused collection of mainly contemporary news. Although I feel I have made progress, I'm just not that good. If the lead could be improved, it might spur me on. See also Ely request for feedback, Ely help request, Ely help offered, Project UK Geo. request and Project UK cities request --Senra (Talk) 12:12, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at it this evening hopefully, if nobody else has before then. Malleus Fatuorum 14:56, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eric_Corbett&oldid=459988009"