User talk:Drmies

• I may have pinged you in a response to a recent message; please see User talk:Drmies/Archive 81. Thank you.

What emptiness.

Cafe Couple

Ideallandschaft bei Mondschein 17 Jh

Hafspajen (talk) 12:02, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

What is this place?

Fukurokuju- God of Wisdom

Opehlia

Me thinks I'm lost. It was hard enough being a talk page stalker knowing where I was, but now I don't know where I'm not. Atsme☯^{Consult Agent 99} 15:56, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Join the club [1]. EEng (talk) 16:10, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Shall we al sit here and feel the Emptiness? Hafspajen (talk) 16:26, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

• May I ask Technical 13 what was the point to put this picture in an archive from 2007? Or why archive somebody else's page? Hafspajen (talk) 20:14, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Archived RfC at Slavic Speakers of Greek Macedonia

If, after having read the comments again, you still disagree with my synopsis (in particular, that 6 out of 7 respondents agree that in some cases it's permissible to make a specification), please let me know why (about this). Thanks! Tropcho (talk) 23:25, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

• Tropcho, that "the motivation had nothing to do with questions of ambiguity/difficulty of verification" is immaterial: it's a serious problem. In addition, you do not seem to acknowledged that "ethnic/language affiliation" is not an easy yoking together of two terms, which is a serious (BLP) problem recognized by Pmanderson and Taivo. I do not agree with your synopsis, and I do not understand what exactly the problem is: if you have a person, and you wish to include their nationality, ethnic background, linguistic affiliation, mother tongue (or stepmother tongue), blood group, etc., you can propose it on the talk page. You may think that "it's important to state explicitly in the summary that in unambiguous and reliably verifiable cases where ethnic/language affiliation is part of the notability (e.g. national activists, ethnicity researchers, etc.) a specification is permissible", and that six out of seven agreed with your wording, but I disagree, and I'm not going to stick something in the close that I don't see consensus for. Six out of seven? As I said before, there are three NOs, and how that gets turned into 86% support for your statement, I don't know. You have a way to get the things into the article that you want in, if you have the evidence for it and get the consensus for it; I don't know what more you want. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 23:38, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Should I do the count?

Comments 1-3: yes, it's OK.

Comment 4 (Taivo) no

Comment 5 yes, if they unambiguously and verifiably stated it themselves.

Comment 6 (PMAnderson) bad idea. Comment finishes with "If a person was a leader of a Bulgarian or Macedonian ethnic movement - and for some of the history involved these would be the same thing - that's a biographical fact. Include, and source."

Comment 7 In general no, with exceptions for those where that ethnicity is a significant part of their notability (activist, researcher specifically in ethnicity, etc).

So (depending on how you interpret PMAnderson's remark) either 5/7 (comments 1-3, 5, 7) or 6/7 (1-3, 5-7) people think in some cases it's permissible. Two of the "no's" have an important except.

And this is not a BLP problem, because 1) most people on that list are dead 2) we are not talking about the ambiguous cases where we can't know or verify; let me emphasize this: the question is whether it is permissible to do a specification for some people on the list (those where we have a way to know unambiguously), not whether it is permissible to specify everyone's identity. I agree that it's in fact impossible to do the latter. Tropcho (talk) 00:04, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

And to answer your question, I'd be happy to see a summary that somehow reflects the 4 (or more) YESes, not only the 3 (or less) NOs. Tropcho (talk) 00:20, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

It's not a vote. If there's so much math involved in your summary, perhaps you were asking the wrong question. You can take the matter up at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard (with the other commenters) or at WP:AN (to get this close overturned). Thank you. Drmies (talk) 01:58, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Very interesting. How much math is counting up to 7? And who said it is a vote? I just suggested a summary that reflects all comments, not the minority. And in case you didn't notice, Taivo's concerns were addressed. Perhaps the question could have been phrased better to avoid any misunderstandings, but even as it is there's no reason to have a summary that completely ignores a significant number of the answers, in my opinion. Tropcho (talk) 07:16, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Good luck in the next state, if that's where you're going. Perhaps there they will recognize that, for instance, "Taivo's concerns were addressed" simply must mean that a universal truth is uttered. Drmies (talk) 16:42, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Huh? What made you think I implied that? Or was this a taunt? If you have difficulties assuming good faith or staying civil, perhaps take a break. For the rest, I do think your summary isn't accurate, for the reasons stated above, and will probably pursue further. Take care. Tropcho (talk) 12:33, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

"Failed at AN"

So far as I can see, the only two admins with any objection are the two admins that abdicated their responsibility to supervise an editor that they unblocked over the strenuous objections of multiple parties. I really am at a loss here: what was the purpose of placing a 0RR restriction on an editor if you did not intend on reblocking when the restriction was violated? What did it mean if it could be violated without consequence?—Kww(talk) 23:49, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

• There is no formal ban, and you're not at a loss: I'm sure you were quite pleased you could drop a three-month blockhammer down after that edit warring report. Maybe you should learn to see farther than "block"; two sides can be at fault, and you never seem to look at the other side. Why should you? That guy from Chile is just an asshole who refuses to get an account and who, for some weird reason, gets pissed when they get reverted. I am not claiming that I was right here just because you're so wrong, nor that the IP didn't deserve a block of sorts--but the glee with which the vultures come swooping in, yeah, that's a distasteful spectacle. And what you're trying to enact on that LTA page isn't just distasteful, it's also wrong, and if you want that enshrined you're going to have to get it certified, in triplicate, from AN. Drmies (talk) 01:55, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

• What reason do you have to believe that the IP will ever reform his behaviour? That's the point that you seem to miss: the quality of his edits doesn't matter when judging his behaviour, and his behaviour is unacceptable. And I actually am at a loss: while I disagree with you on many things, I don't tend to see you as dishonest. What was the point of the 0RR restriction? Why are editors having to take him to the edit-warring noticeboard instead of you blocking immediately on the first reversion? If you weren't intending to do that, what did you mean by a 0RR restriction?—Kww(talk) 05:15, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

• Kww, I don't think I swore a blood oath to start blocking. If I remember correctly, the IP quit pinging me, and Yngvadottir responded on a number of occasions. Yngvadottir, like me, also doesn't seem to think that blocking is the way to go. And again, this ANEW thing was preceded by a number of reverts on the other editor's part, reverts that were in themselves at least open for censure. So I chose not to block either one, yes. The point you continually miss is that it always takes two to tango: the editor who took him there was themselves guilty of edit warring, and that's not the first time something like that happens--and pardon me for not believing a block is always the answer. But I'm done with this, Kww. The IP doesn't seem to want to discuss this with me or change their behavior to suit your desire (which is, I believe, for them to just roll over the first time someone hits them with a revert, no matter what the edit was), and your side seems to be winning in this fist fight. You also seem to miss that Y and I attempted to be in the middle, to mediate, to improve the project for everyone, and all we get as thanks is a bunch of shit. So now I should have blocked. I'm "enabling". I let someone chase people off the project. (I don't see who left, but OK.) I gladly admit that this attempt (which I have been in on for years) was an abject failure, but at least I tried, and maybe there is life and hope for future years in there. You can be all righteously angry, but I can only be sad. Drmies (talk) 16:42, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Drmies, Sorry you're getting so much grief over the IP. While I do have issues with the way they conduct themselves, and with their judgement on occassion, their editing of articles is normally (but not always) beneficial. I think you and Yngvadottir have done a worthy job in trying to curb some of the behaviourial excesses, and I am truly sorry that your efforts have not led to a satisfactory conclusion for all. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 19:48, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

• SchroCat, thank you very much. A bit more help from their side could have made all the difference. I appreciate your note, I really do. Drmies (talk) 21:03, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Good... goooood!

My plan is working puhrrrfectleeee. <rubs hands, laughs diabolically> [2]. EEng (talk) 02:36, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

• Broken clocks and all that... :) Drmies (talk) 02:47, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
  • LOL, but even "broken clocks" can be fixed. Broken psyche's on the other hand... :) --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 20:31, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

But the dreaded greengrocers apostrophe is forever. EEng (talk) 04:59, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Green groce the rushe's O. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:53, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm back!

Thanks again for looking after my talk page and wondering what rock I was hiding under. I dropped 10 spots on Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits during the time I was under the rock. While you might have passed me, I'm still leading you on User:JamesR/AdminStats by a wide margin. So there. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:56, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

• Dammit Gogo, what do I need to do? Block more? Delete more? Write less? Hey, nice to see you. Really, I didn't mean to twist your arm, trying to make you come back--but you were one of the old guard, one of the ones with a cool name who got their admin tool by emailing Jimbo and sending him ten bucks via PayPal. (No?) And the ranks are thinning: the latest admin to leave, it appears, is Coffee--ANI has insightful reading material, if you have nothing better to do for a half an hour. Anywayz, thanks for dropping by: not everyone gets a visit from a dodo. That reminds me! Dodos came up before dinner today--must have been something silly one of the kids said, but they played dodo until they realized that would mean they're all dead, extinct. Well now. Drmies (talk) 05:08, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
• Oh man, you got me by a factor 10... But you gotta watch out for that Materialscientist dude, who's been on a tear ever since he got the tool. Ha, I'd be proud if I had any kind of ranking in the unblock and undeletion list. Drmies (talk) 05:14, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I think I really just wanted to get off of Wikipedia:List of administrators/Inactive. I paid 15 bucks for my admin bit. Still wondering if it was worth the investment. I read ANI and the Signpost article. I see that nothing much has changed during the months I was hiding under a rock. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 19:35, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

• I'm like halfway down the list. Drmies has thrice as many actions as I do, almost. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:45, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
  • That's still nothing compared to the high hitters. Hey Crisco, India Against Corruption is after me now--maybe that means that Sitush gets a breather. I'm pretty sure it's just one disgruntled person, from their language and tone. Hey, are you at a thousand Featured Pictures yet? Drmies (talk) 02:59, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

An article that you deleted

Bombardier Innovia APM has been recreated. You had deleted it before? Or atleast the talk page. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 13:58, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

• Yep, as spam. I see that RHaworth and I likely disagree on what the threshold is. Drmies (talk) 20:39, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Expert admin advice sought on canvassing quandary

I nominated Category:Wikipedians with red-linked categories on their user talk page for deletion. I'm wondering if I should notify the ten users who have put their pages in that category. While it seems courteous, I don't want to appear to be inappropriately canvassing, as I believe all of those users would be in favor of deletion (unless someone's just striving for irony). MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 21:26, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

• The moment irony may be involved there's no telling who might swing which way, so I wouldn't worry. Appearing to be courteous is always good, unless you're on ANI. Drmies (talk) 00:05, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

• Thanks for the reply. Now that I've thought about it some more, I don't think there's any reason for notifications. Given my logical argument (in honor of Leonard Nimoy, I always try to be logical), I don't see how it could possibly fail to be deleted no matter what anyone says. There's only one user for whom the category is currently applicable, and even in the unlikely event some other people who use it wanted to keep the category around for the irony, I don't think it would be acceptable for other reasons, such as joke categories not being allowed. (And in this case, the mere existence of the category ruins the joke anyways.) MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 01:11, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Live long in Prosper, Mandarax. EEng (talk) 04:59, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Did you know ... that when Zachary Quinto portrayed Spock, he was unable to perform the Vulcan salute, so his fingers were glued together? MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 19:51, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Of course, the real logic bomb is Category:Wikipedians who do not have a redlinked category on their userpage, to which I've just added myself. If you belong to it, then categorizing yourself as such means you are no longer eligible for it, but as soon as you remove it, you belong to it again and so need to re-add it. I knew Wikipedia was good for something. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:14, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

No article

Pieter van Hanselaere

Hafspajen (talk) 16:56, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

re: Talk:Age_disparity_in_sexual_relationships & blocked user 143.176.62.228

Note: Three more IPs that geolocate to the Netherlands have appeared:

• Talk: 08:13, 27 February 2015 188.88.30.50 (+157) (A brilliant solution, just brilliant)
• Talk: 08:15, 27 February 2015 188.88.30.50 (-218) (A brilliant solution, just brilliant)

Note: claimed to "have been blocked without a valid reason"

• Talk: 11:09, 28 February 2015 31.20.100.191 (+343) (Abraham and Sarah or Joseph and Mary.)
• Talk: 10:21, 3 March 2015 178.224.233.23 (+93) (Moving forward)

Note: Within 14 minutes after that posting, a new account was created:

• Commons account: Commonismus (Created on 3 March 2015 at 10:35)

3 images were created at 10:47 (UTC), each described as "Dirty old man with much younger woman. By Lucas Cranach the Elder", and source as "Own digitalization of ancient painting".

• en.wiki account: Commonismus (Created on 3 March 2015 at 10:50)
• Talk: 10:53, 3 March 2015 Commonismus (+218) (File:Lucas Cranach Elder 1.jpg)

I doubt that those images were digitized by Commonismus since they seem to be crude modifications of a work which is actually by Albrecht Altdorfer, not Lucas Cranach:

• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Albrecht_Altdorfer_-_Loth_and_his_Daughters_-_WGA00206.jpg
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Albrecht_Altdorfer_046.jpg
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lot_and_his_Daughters,_Altdorfer.jpg

---

• Disclosure. I made a previous edit to the above talk page 12:21, 25 February 2015 using a different IP number 172.164.43.160, and 1 edit to the article using present IP number after semi-protection expired. I don't know if any of the above is block evasion, but those newly fabricated pictures need to be deleted. Thanks for your time. —172.162.6.142 (talk) 05:52, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
• Where do I come in? Isn't SlimVirgin a better person to ask? She's semi'd the article before... Drmies (talk) 16:16, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

The above was re: your blocked user 143.176.62.228 and possible block evasion, as well as false image making. –172.162.6.142 (talk) 11:02, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Vietcong nuturlizer

Dr Mice wonders where he put those "Abr - a - hams" to go with his with his gator-eggs?

You blocked Vietcong nuturlizer (talk · contribs). I attempted to remove the personal attacks (don't worry, being called gay isn't the worst thing!), but was reverted. You might want to go ahead and revoke their talk page access. DYK I'm a lesbian? I'll have to share that breaking news with my husband. APK whisper in my ear 12:23, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

• What an enormous loser. Also, I'M NOT GAY! Drmies (talk) 16:08, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
• That interview with Shaud Williams is still totally cringeworthy: "we have no one like that on the team". One of my friends was on the field for that game, and apparently it was worse than the clip even suggests. Drmies (talk) 16:11, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of our dear friend, and yes, that clip is awkward. (I laughed and cringed) APK whisper in my ear 16:42, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Chick meets alligators.jpg

Must be how Drmies feels at times

Atsme☯^Consult 20:24, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Maybe Dr Mice likes "Alabama ham" with his gator-eggs? Don't worry Doc, you're probably just a gayer. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:31, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

What is a "Bumblefoot" ? Hafspajen (talk) 20:39, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

- That's the feeling you get when you unwittingly add something to an article that six other editors have atready taken out. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:44, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Excuse me, but I respect Drmies, and don't want my little pokes of fun to be misconstrued. And I especially don't want anything I've included for the purpose of bringing a smile to this happy place to be misrepresented. Atsme☯^Consult 21:41, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Why? Hafspajen (talk) 22:47, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

A smile?! Goodness me, that's the last thing we need. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:16, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

An Elegant Company Playing Music

7+6 Found this on User:The Interior talk page. Had to share it.

21:09, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Hafspajen (talk) 21:32, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Hafspajen, any idea why Safari won't play videos and audio on Wikipedia, but Firefox will? It's really irritating. Atsme☯^Consult 21:42, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Because Elizabeth Green the Stork Woman has forbidden it. Hafspajen (talk) 22:45, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Wow, is that really Jimbo singing?? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:19, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Ploughing in the Nivernais

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 22:11, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

thanks

glad you pinged LoS ... I wanted her view, but wasn't sure I should ask. — Ched :  ?  00:04, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Ched, what made you hesitate? You can always ask me! LadyofShalott 17:43, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Mainly because I never see you in anything even the least bit controversial. You always just go about improving the project. :) (and thank you for your comments!) — Ched :  ?  17:48, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Hah, that's because since I don't care for the fighting that occurs, I just tend to avoid those areas. :) That said, I'll reiterate: if you want my opinion on something, always ask! If I'd rather not get into it, I'll say so. LadyofShalott 17:52, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

You know, I just saw a job posting in Knoxville, I am going to try and get it so we can all hang out more (don't worry Ched, I will stop in on my way down there). :) --kelapstick^(bainuu) 18:10, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Knoxville is a great town, unless you have asthma. Drmies (talk) 18:31, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Fortunately I don't. The best pizza I ever had was when I was traveling through Knoxville, we spent the night on our way to Florida. Pity I cant remember the name of the place, although that was probably 25 years ago.--kelapstick^(bainuu) 20:47, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I haven't visited Knoxville in a long time, but go for it! LadyofShalott 20:51, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Regarding Deletion of Page Angry_Engineers_Entertainment

Re: Page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Angry_Engineers_Entertainment, please see the page talk page for a reason why it should not have been deleted; I was also given absolutely no time or indication before the page was deleted to actually contest it. Citation: http://store.steampowered.com/app/243300/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nommyface (talk • contribs) 00:24, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

• Sorry, that's not enough of a reason. Existence does not equal notability. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 00:55, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Notability? Various articles around the internet reference the game. Rock Paper Shotgun: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/07/08/space-station-titanic-centration/ / PC Gamer: http://www.pcgamer.com/the-early-access-report-contraption-maker-broforce-and-centration/ / The first game on Steam using Unreal Engine 4 that's available for Linux: http://store.steampowered.com/curator/6857821-But-is-it-on-Linux/ Gaming On Linux: https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/centration-fps-space-simulation-released-on-steam-for-linux.3437 - I can also come up with -VARIOUS- other pages on Wikipedia with smaller companies with even less significant games on Steam; and will gladly provide a list of necessary - delete them all or put the page back up.
    • I don't do ultimatums, but I'll do advice. Rewrite your article and submit it through WP:AFC, and when you do, put all your references in. Whether any of them count as reliable sources, and whether any of those mentions constitute significant discussion, I'll leave that for you to decide. Drmies (talk) 01:37, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
      • I was working on adding the references and formatting the page correctly when it was deleted. Like I said, I was given essentially no time to contest or even update the page before it was deleted; I thought you (or page patrollers) were supposed to observe a minimum time before you go all elitist egotistical delete crazy? You know nothing of this subject by your comments, so why are you even in a position to judge the notability of a game developer? nommyface
        • Yeah, good question. Now, I gave you some valuable advice; go spent your time writing up a draft. And next time, consider writing something decent before submitting it. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 01:57, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
          • Nommyface, if I may offer my advice (as an angry engineer). The article was tagged quite soon after creation (probably too soon I will grant you, and I will discuss that with the editor in question), however the page was deleted about a half hour after it was created, which is generally long enough to sit before being deleted. As Drmies says, you should recreate the article through Articles for Creation, and have it reviewed prior to submission. You should also stop calling people names, it isn't very nice. I would be happy to restore and move the article for you (if it hasn't been done already). --kelapstick^(bainuu) 02:01, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
            • Thank you Kelapstick, I'm sorry for reverting to childish behaviour; kind of up to my eyeballs in a lot of different things at the moment. I'd like to have it restored - however I'll work on a new article that's done up properly before. Can I confirm the process for doing this so I don't get yelled at again?
            • K, thank you for being so much nicer than me. Nommyface, my apologies. Drmies (talk) 02:21, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
              • Not at all, I owe you a jar of our mustard pickles. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 02:27, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
                • You don't have to apologize for anything, I'm sorry for being rather rude about the whole situation; it's kind of more than a little insulting to have everything I've been working towards for the past two years called 'not notable'.

I have taken the liberty of restoring and moving the page to Draft:Angry Engineers Entertainment, the article is not suitable as it sits now, it needs much more in the way of referencing in reliable sources, you should also have a read of referencing for beginers, which explains how to reference the article. Cheers, --kelapstick^(bainuu) 02:56, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Sidebar

• On a related note, know what an engineer uses for birth control? His personality. I'm here all week, try the veal. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 01:04, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I hope you get that extra tool so you can oversight your jokes. Nice to see you again, K. Been too long. Drmies (talk) 01:15, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
    • Oh come on, that's comedy gold. You can use that with the engineering students if you like. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 01:19, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
      • Speaking of comedy, DYK that drafts (even this one, Draft:Graeson Scott Cameron) do not seem to be eligible for A7? Drmies (talk) 03:29, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
        • I believe that is what IAR was invented for. Or you could wait six months for G13. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 03:35, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
          • I don't find it surprising that someone who cites the first law of thermodynamics as a deletion criterion is advocating IAR. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 09:10, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
            • Really, because I thought I was on a roll here. Regardless, the outcome is the same. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 11:42, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Your thoughts on resolving the impasse at Landmark Worldwide

I responded to your comments at the Landmark talk page - I probably should have pinged you. I was wondering what you saw as a good avenue for resolving the long-running dispute there. Mediation was recently offered, but many editors ignored or refused the offer. Your thoughts would be appreciated! Nwlaw63 (talk) 14:46, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

• I have no experience with mediation. I always hope for common sense--like with this NRM thing. Let's be reasonable: it's found in reliable sources, plenty of them, it's valid article content, it has a place--a minor place, but still--in the lead. And then we can move on. Drmies (talk) 19:13, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Just FYI, there's an AE thread open concerning Landmark. You and your zebras may or may not want to take a spin over there. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:59, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Opinion needed

Hello, you left me a note a couple weeks ago about revering vandalize... Anyway, you're the only admin I've run into. I was wondering if you could give me some advice. Last week, Wikipedia:CYCLING started working on replacing our notability guidelines. However, a couple editors refused to listen to my points and the dialogue devolved. Could you look at the conversation and give me feedback. Was I too harsh? It's probably not your specialty, but I'd like to know. Maybe I'm not fit for Wikipedia? Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 20:03, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

• Yeah, well, that's a long discussion. A minimum number of words or sources requirement isn't going to work; it doesn't work that way anywhere on Wikipedia (for better or for worse). I agree that "Creating solid/well cited pages are better than nonreferenced stubs" but that can easily clash with any notability guideline. Now, if someone won something in Andorra, does that make them notable? First of all, liquor and cigarettes weren't taxed last time in Andorra, so I'd go there by car and load up. Second, well, yeah--since the sports projects have decided to fetishize nationhood, they have to come up with a rule that applies fairly to different countries (and then they can plant their ugly and inappropriate flags all over the place).

  Now, I read all the way to the "let's start voting" bit--what's the problem? Is it about whether or not someone finished a Grand Tour? If that's the only reason to reject a proposal with many more elements, well, it's your right I suppose. And excluding national champions if they're from a small country begs the question of what "small" is--it's undefinable. If Basqueland ever comes to exist, you're talking about a minute country with a lot of great climbers. Plus, the systemic bias point that Lugnuts brought up is very valid: no one should want to build notability guidelines on "what size is your country". (Well, my country may be small, but my pilum is stronger than your sternum, that Roman guy from Asterix might say.) Telling them you're talking to children is probably never a good idea (though I believe Lugnuts drew first blood on that page).

  See, you made your point, but no one accepts it. We can't force someone into agreement and, as an administrator and an old-time editor who has, for instance, closed lots of RfCs, at this point your opponents really have the stronger arguments (sorry--I'm an equal opportunity offender...); calling them children will make it only less likely that they'll see things your way. You win some, you lose some: it seems you're losing this one. Sorry, but I know how it feels--it's not a great feeling. Thanks, and good luck, Drmies (talk) 21:46, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

• Northern Virginia? Must be a nice bike-riding place... Drmies (talk) 21:47, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I was tying to exclude all national championships; the U.S. to Andorra (so we exclude bias). Only the Worlds and/or Olympics are level placing fields... But it doesn't matter anymore. Thanks for your opinion; it was very detailed. You seem like a very reasonable admin...

NVA is great for biking and running, but the snow is annoying... Need to shovel my driveway... Have a great day. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 22:16, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, if you wanted to exclude them all (did I misread?), that's a kind of fairness--but if it's on the ground that they're not equal, then the charge of systemic bias is applicable again. Anyway, I think there's no way you're going to get national championships excluded: it's the way of the worlds, in sports as well as in singing contests... Drmies (talk) 04:54, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes you did. I think you and Lugnuts had the same thought... I'm outnumbered 2 to 1, so it doesn't matter. Thanks, Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 06:00, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

That pesky Lugnuts. BWMW - Find me any lengthy discussion about guidance/policy change where there is a 100% consensus from everyone, and I'll be an Andorran's uncle. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 08:51, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

• You missed that RfC on whether "Jimbo is an enlightened leader" should be in his article? Drmies (talk) 17:01, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Your equal-opportunity offence

Thank you for your comments and taking the time to look back into the Landmark article and AE threads. I'll gladly accept anything you throw in my direction, as long as it improves the project. Enjoy your afternoon, Tgeairn (talk) 21:23, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Requesting advice

Please see the following exchange on my user talk page here. I also believe it might be valuable to review the subsequent edits of this newly created account to other articles since then. In a number of ways, this seems to me to be a rather obvious sockpuppet, in a number of ways, of Tgeairn, but I think, under the circumstances, it would be best if someone other than me reviewed the matter and filed either the SPI or the AE request. John Carter (talk) 02:23, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Seriously John? Although I must admit to laughing wholeheartedly at the mess you find yourself in, to try to blame me is complete BS. Drmies, I'll buy one for you too - call it payment for the mess. --Tgeairn (talk) 02:50, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

• Dear John, I'm going to give you totally unasked for advice: fewer words, please, everywhere (esp. on the article talk page). Yes, I saw that editor--there's all kinds of possibilities. Maybe it's Tgeairn, or Astynax, playing the bad hand, or maybe it's the other side (your side?) playing the good hand; or maybe it's just a troll. Seriously, I saw their first edits already, including that rather odd congratulatory remark, and I don't really know what to make of it--but I'm not worrying about it much. HJ Mitchell, do you have a CU on call and do you think it's worth a fishing expedition? Because for now, Harry, you're going to have to play the part of the uninvolved admin--I think I gave that up, though I will claim to be an uninvolved editor here. Y'all, settle down. John, Tgeairn, we're going to have to get along. I think I like you both well enough, but all of this is too much. You two, with the very capable assistance of a lot of other editors of course, have filled up 30 archived pages of talk page discussion, and it's beyond...well, it's two steps beyond. John, I think you know Tgeairn isn't the worst; Tgeairn, yeah, I'll take it, but no porter please. Drmies (talk) 04:36, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
• After reading both of y'all's talk page histories and comments, phew, I hope you're enjoying this, cause it's not fun for the rest of us. John Carter, that "warning" was...not a warning. Tgeairn, drop .50 in the sarcasm jar on the way out. If you all keep this up, someone might think that both of you are too caught up on the topic to the point where a. you can't be trusted to edit articles in this topic area objectively and b. y'all's animosity is becoming disruptive--like, I missed a couple of Nightly jokes because I was reading all this stuff. Please. Drmies (talk) 04:43, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

• Dr. M, I swear y'all been in Alabama too long. Next thing we know y'all be feedin' us them grits. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:46, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I swear it's time to get out of here. Our State Supreme Court just turned back the clock, as you may have heard via carrier pigeon. This story was on the radio this morning (did you hear it, Tide rolls?); heartbreaking. I can't believe how callous politicians can be--nor can I believe how we (well, "we"--I have taxation but no representation) keep voting the bastards in office that profit from what is essentially wage slavery. In other news, apparently I'm a state socialist now. Drmies (talk) 15:54, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
    • Cripers. A remnant of the old federal system... too much bureaucracy in place to actually standardize the worker's comp. Also, "Some states even put a value on the loss of a testicle."... So a big toe is worth money, but a testicle is not in some states? I wonder if their “schedule of benefits” was anatomically correct. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:34, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
    • I have not seen that story, Professor. The best I can come up with is...wow. Tiderolls 16:50, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
      • It made me realize that I'm lucky to be in a job with low risk. Oh, from another recent NPR series: the job with the highest rate of work-related injury...drum roll...nursing! Drmies (talk) 17:00, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Maria José Martínez-Patiño at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 06:15, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

 Done. Nominated a few templates away under the same date is a sex-changing fish. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 10:53, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

• Oh, shoot, I forgot to list it again??? Thanks Mandarax... Drmies (talk) 15:48, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Drmies hard at work

What witchcraft is this?

• Bleh. I'm grading midterms. Fool that I am, with three literature classes and nothing but essay-style exams. Drmies (talk) 15:49, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I wouldn't do anything else with a literature class either (especially multiple choice... I hate those, for the humanities). BTW, I'm back doing some editing. Graziella... French lit??? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:31, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
    • Budweiser lit...or is that light.... Atsme☯^Consult 01:28, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
      • Budweiser... one of the reasons I've never extended an invitation for Drmies to come and visit me here. No bacon and no beer make Drmies something something... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:10, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Unsubstantiated claims of harassment

Hello,

On my talk page you left a nasty message saying that I was leaving people "sh***y remark". A couple of things: I don't appreciate you cursing at me on my talk page. I'm sure you can think up a much better and professional way of leaving feedback than cursing at other editors. Second, can you please outline to me what part of my comment constitutes "harassment". Thank you for your time I am sure you are a very busy editor! James "J.J." Evans, Jr. (talk) 16:17, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

• Eh, the proper term you're looking for is probably "profanity". I'm certainly not cursing at you--I pointed out a quality of a shitty remark you made, not a quality of the person who made it, though your response here speaks volumes. You are perfectly content to harass, intimidate, and humiliate another editor, but you can't be held responsible for a shitty comment?

  Second, if you don't like the word "shitty", OK. I think was very appropriate for your disgusting little snarky comment, but we could ask other editors for what they think is a better word to describe this comment of yours, made on ANI in response to an editor who claimed they had received harassing communications off-wiki. Dear talk page stalkers, the comment is this:

  Ok editor x I'm sorry. I totally believe you are a victim of a gang of internet stalkers who are following you around other websites and cyberbullying you. What can I do to make it better for you so we can return to discussing the matter at hand? Do you want me to call up their parents and have a stern talk with them?

  Let the people speak. Drmies (talk) 16:47, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
• Support the use of shitty where appropriate, which it is in this case. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 16:54, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

• This is a shitty comment if I ever saw one. I find it far more offensive than naughty words. Chillum 17:01, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I had no idea that we were going to evaluate comments based in the court of who follows your personal webpage. Is that standard operating procedure on wikipedia? I think it's pretty obvious what the outcome is going to be. Very well. I'm sorry that the comments were "shitty", according to you and people with a vested interest in your talk page. However, I'm a bit confused. How exactly am I harassing, intimidating, and humiliating another editor? On my page you called the comment "borderline harassment", but now I see that the same comment (which you have yet to explain how it is borderline harassment when responding to baiting comments) has suddenly grown into full-blown harassment, intimidation, and humiliation? It seems those accusations quickly escalated in severity when I try to talk them out with you. James "J.J." Evans, Jr. (talk) 17:11, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I think if you did a bit of research instead of assuming we are all buddies protecting each other you would realize that Drmies and I do in fact disagree from time to time and that I have no compulsion to support him. I called your comment shitty because it was a shitty thing to say. If you don't see how mocking someone who has been harassed is a form of harassment then you will just have to believe other people when they tell you that it is. Chillum 17:20, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Whether you are all "buddies" or not, you clearly have a vested interest in watching his talk page and posting within 10 minutes of a question being raised. I can hardly be blamed for finding it suspicious, considering you yourself said the following on your talk page: "if you show up anonymously and jump right into a heated debate and favor one side strongly then you can expect people to give you less credence." While you may not be anonymous in this case, the sentiment still rings true.

As far as 'harassment' goes, you can argue that it was an unkind comment given to an unkind comment in turn, or inappropriate, but claiming that the comment is a "form of harassment" is really stretching the word harassment to its most liberal interpretation. Most definitions, including the one on Wikipedia's policy page, claim it must be repetitive in nature. Calling strong disagreement and dismissal of someone's claims of off-site harassment after they tauntingly tell you they didn't read your post does not meet any of that criteria. Ironically enough I find it more harassing that Drmies repeatedly uses profanity towards me when requested not to, threatens to block my account, and involves other unrelated persons in disagreements over Wikipedia policy but I doubt anyone with a vested interest in this talk page will see that point of view. James "J.J." Evans, Jr. (talk) 17:33, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Chillum, for some reason I couldn't come up with the word, but that's what it is: "mocking": thank you. James Evans, you sought me out here on my talk page, which lots of people watch--some agree with me, some don't. You did that after you mocked someone on the most public of all Wikipedia pages (well, after the front page I suppose). You're then pretending you don't know what was so insulting in your comment.

Sorry, but that sort of belittling, we should have outgrown it, and I am perfectly happy to let this all go, and to remove this entire thread from my talk page, if I can get some recognition of some kind that I don't have to look at more such comments from you. I understand that the context was a website where I guess anything goes, but this is not that kind of website, and while there is little we can do about off-site harassment, we certainly take it seriously, as seriously as we can. Chillum and I may have different understandings on what counts as a blockable insult, and in which context (Lord knows we have plenty of differences of opinion), but we both wish this place to be safe in the sense that someone does not get mocked in public. BTW, Kelapstick, who agreed on my qualification of your comment, is also an administrator. Three different admins in one thread is kind of like a classroom full of monkeys with typewriters, but in this case they all typed the same word.

After your comment: you are more than welcome to bring my supposed harassment of you up at ANI, where someone without any vested interest in me is quite likely to point you to WP:BOOMERANG. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 17:39, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Re-read my comments. I never argued that it wasn't insulting or mocking. I'm also not sure why you're quoting "pretending" as I've been forward about exactly what the comment was. I asked you to clarify how it was borderline harassment, which as linked previously has a specific definition on Wikipedia. You then decided to escalate the accusation to declaring I was full-blown harassing, intimidating, and humiliating another user. If you want to threaten someone with blocking and cite policy then it shouldn't come at a surprise when an editor defends themself and asks for you to show them how they violated the policy you're citing. There is a clear line between snarky comments, as you've certainly gotten in on this page and my personal talk page, and harassment which I do not believe I crossed and you've failed to demonstrate, and I think you've come to realize as well. In regards to removing this discussion you're more than welcome to move on with your life, as I certainly will be. I'm not sure what kind of 'guarantee' you want from me but I feel it's entirely unnecessary. If you want to be hot on my wikipedia trail and trawl through my comments looking for something to block me for or the opening to leave more profanity on my page then be my guest, you're free to spend your leisure time however you like. James "J.J." Evans, Jr. (talk) 18:04, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

RfA needs closing

Hi-I need an admin to close Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/superkid761 as way WP:TOOSOON. Could you? Thanks, Origamite^ⓣⓒ 18:09, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I think you mean WP:NOTNOW, and it's not transcluded yet, so it's not that big a deal (in fact, you probably shouldn't have voted yet, but that is neither here nor there). --kelapstick^(bainuu) 18:14, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Oh. Yes, that's what I meant. I just looked at the guy's contribs, sorry. Origamite^ⓣⓒ 18:21, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

• Well, it needs a crat; I hear Writ Keeper is back in town again. Superkid was one of my top candidates though. Drmies (talk) 18:24, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I see that Yunshui took care of it already, so that's cool. I'm not as who should say back in town; I just get curious from time to time about what's going on from all the emails I still get. Incidentally, I'm not a 'crat anymore; once local renames stopped being a thing, there wasn't much point for me to be one (aside from closing RfAs, which I hated doing, because who am I to judge?). So I turned it in; seems a bit silly to hang on to a thing I have no plans to use. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 22:50, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
    • That's all kind of sluttish, WK--bailing out on us after you had your fill. Don't call us in the morning. Hey, I didn't know you stepped down but you're right. Well, I hope you will continue to visit; I always enjoyed your company. Drmies (talk) 00:49, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Is or Is NOT canvassing?

Hey Drmies, If I message all of the active members of a particular project and ask them to read and comment on a proposal, is that WP:CANVASSing and against policy or is that an acceptable practice? I'm not sure how often the core of the membership checks the Talk page. Thanks, --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:32, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

• Well, there's always someone who can find fault with what one does. If you have an objective, measurable rationale for "active", sure--like, "everyone who's contributed to a project talk page in the last six months" or something like that. Or, "everyone who signed their name on the list". If it is something you can point at, and that something is not like "all those who said 'yes' to proposal X" (duh), then you should be fine. And make sure your message is neutral, of course. Rock on, Drmies (talk) 19:14, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Yep, that's my intention. All 80-some members on the active list for the Firearms Project will get a message asking to come to the Talk page, read the proposal, and comment. That's about it. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 19:49, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Please tell me the message is going to start with "pew-pew". --kelapstick^(bainuu) 19:53, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

LOL, sorry, no... :) --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 20:04, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

No väl

I know when I am not wanted anymore .... Hafspajen (talk) 20:01, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

• Sorry Hafs, but I am interested in bringing the temperature down, not up. Drmies (talk) 21:12, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Another day

Totally in agreement with your comment to 'leave it for another day'. I'm sorry if we got at cross purposes over the 'freely pursues' issue. DaveApter (talk) 20:03, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

• Disagreement is fine; I disagree with that original motivation and the argument, but we're all adults and I'm sure we can figure all this out. Thanks for your note Dave, Drmies (talk) 21:27, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Paid editing

Hi could you please clarify the 20 bucks thing was in jest? Also have I made any mistakes with my ban proposal? 84.51.131.252 (talk) 21:12, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

• Of course that was in jest. No one pays me for what I do. It's their loss, I know. I don't have an opinion on that proposal--I haven't looked at it, but Chillum is on the case, and he's known for knowing what he's talking about. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 21:26, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

In Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justin Bieber on Twitter, I can see "Oh, I'll bet you ten bucks it'll be no consensus, and if it ends in "delete" and I lose ten bucks I will gladly PayPal you the money". Although if you've bought the album I'm happy to call it quits. ;-) Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:08, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

I'd give Philip Glass ten bucks to turn that page into an opera. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 18:10, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, Ritchie, who would have thunk that Fram would come by and lay the smack down (for which I'm still grateful). The other AfD had the misfortune of running into Scottywong, also a layer down of smack (of all kinds). Drmies (talk) 20:57, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

My thanks

Thank you Doc. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 23:28, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

allkpop.com

Based on "allkpop is a celebrity gossip site which publishes rumors and conjecture in addition to accurately reported facts. Information on this site may or may not be true and allkpop makes no warranty as to the validity of any claims", I can't see any case where this site should be used as a source. Got a strong opinion?—Kww(talk) 20:45, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

• Allkpop is awful and should never be used, and it isn't even the worst of them. It reprints gossip and material written by SM and the other entertainment companies. The expert is Shinyang-i, who has taken the bull by the horns on one of the project pages (Shinyang-i, can you point Kww in the right direction?). If I'm not mistaken Shinyang got a consensus from somewhere that Allkpop is discredited as a reliable sources, which has huge consequences for the K-pop articles, their sourcing, and the included material--as you may know, or as you can guess, the fan's argument for the inclusion of every single factoid is "well it's sourced". Also in the know is Materialscientist, who has dealt administratively with the darker side of K-pop editing. This is my word of warning to you, unfortunately. Drmies (talk) 20:55, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

"Isn't even the worst of them"? Seems like a job for the site blacklist. I wandered across some of these while working on the BLP cesspool consisting of every article named "List of awards and nominations received by ...".—Kww(talk) 21:10, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Are they awards like Best album by a band with a hyphen in their name"? Because, given my limited experience with K-pop, that sounds accurate. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 21:39, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Or maybe, Best trainee singer. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 21:41, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

My contribution to the cause. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 22:21, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm worn out from a full day but tomorrow I'll be back with something intelligent(?) to say. There are issues with all the awards pages, and actually allkpop has been on the "non-reliable source" list of WP:KOREA since before I came along. So uh yeah, more from me tomorrow. Will love to chat about this whole situation. :) Shinyang-i (talk) 05:58, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Okay, I'm back, @Drmies, Kww, and Kelapstick:. This is gonna be long, and maybe this belongs at WP:KOREA, but the last time I tried to bring this up I got called a lot of names and accused of some bad things. If you guys wanna join in conversations there, as people who aren't kpop-brainwashed, that would be excellent. For now, in order to avoid this getting lost in Drmies' very active talk page, may I invite you over to my deserted talk page? This is a conversation I really want to have. Shinyang-i (talk) 03:33, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Taiko FAC

Hey Drmies. I've been informed that this 2nd FAC for the article on Taiko is going to close shop unless I can find someone to spot check the sources to ensure that they accurately support the claims in the article. There is a notice at the top of the FAC page, but I figured I'd ask around to see if you were interested. If you're busy, it's no big deal. Thanks, I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 21:14, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

• Well, I don't mind, but it's seriously nap time right now, and there's all kinds of other stuff this afternoon that will keep me occupied. If there's no rush, I can have a look maybe tomorrow, maybe Monday... Drmies (talk) 21:18, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks. I suspect the coordinators won't have a problem with that, I'll just let them know. Enjoy your serious nap.  :) I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 21:23, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Irish language in Britain for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Irish language in Britain is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

DYK for Lulu Wang

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 11:57, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Thirsty, Herr Doktor?

Water .... before it was successfully marketed by Genesis 1:21

[3] EEng (talk) 03:54, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Herr Doktor Goebbels? Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 06:13, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Das ist nicht lustig! EEng (talk) 11:06, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Blimey! And the complainant didn't know it was "unser giftzweg" who was the "doktor"? I read the Fanta story in "For God, Country, and Coca-Cola" years ago; how they made some kind of ersatz drink and held a staff competition to name it. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 14:04, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Brrr, such an ugly color for a soft drink (the US version). I had no idea there were this many colors and flavors; you two should do the 100 Ways to Play!: 52 is made for you. Drmies (talk) 14:34, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm not getting the "52" reference. EEng (talk) 18:56, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Well I clicked on the link and it said "Number 17: Schitter als een diamant". No thanks, I've still got scars from the last time I shat one. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 19:11, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

"Schitter" = "sparkle". No. 52 is where you and your friend get into a XXL shirt together and take a selfie. Drmies (talk) 19:29, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I keep telling myself to unwatch this page, but it exerts a strange, inexplicable fascination. EEng (talk) 19:34, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I've got the shirt, now I've just got to find Twiggy. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 19:56, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Wait... shirt or shit? EEng (talk) 05:07, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Try WP:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_February_17# Category:Caterpillars_that_resemble_Twiggy. EEng (talk) 21:14, 9 March 2015 (UTC) Herr Doktor, can you please close the ridulous discussion immeidately next down in the log?

Sorry, don't know how to close a CfD. :) Drmies (talk) 01:50, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I see "Fanta Nazi" now gets 295,000 Google hits. So expect a new wiki article any time soon. Meanwhile.... over in quieter corners... this guy is still waiting for his Oranje hit..... Martinevans123 (talk) 21:35, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

There ought to be a DYK in this, no? Why don't you make the rounds of the lowlife sources you're so accustomed to, let us know what you find, and we'll have a right jolly article? As I recall the campaign made the mistake of invoking "The Good Old Days" or something. That'd make a great hook. EEng (talk) 01:59, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

• Hmm, yeah, sure--but it's a bit too much like a manufactured controversy to me. Then again, I assume Kelapstick already has a draft for Nazi Fanta on Twitter in his sandbox. Drmies (talk) 19:11, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

• Camberwell Carrot- never seen that before. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 19:20, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Blimey, someone's nicked my stash!! Martinevans123 (talk) 19:48, 10 March 2015 (UTC) ..... Obergruppenführer La Rue in action

That Herr Doktor dustup has proven most fertile. EEng (talk) 20:32, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Ray L. Watts

I am trying to add clarification to a bio. Although I do work for the institution represented by this individual, a review of the requested edit should reveal it does not inject bias, but provides for clarification where bias may be inferred.

For the bio of Ray L. Watts, Neurology section.

It now states: In response, the authors of the papers stated that they strongly disagreed with the editor's conclusions, and believe the focus of the two papers are different. The authors also say that the primary author was not aware of the acceptance of the earlier paper during submission of the second paper. The authors state that the Neurology paper was accepted October 24, 2006, and the Archives paper was submitted in December of 2006. The authors did admit "in retrospect, we should have notified the Archives about the complementary article in Neurology" .[9]

I'd like to insert the explanation " Specifically “While the original article reported the primary efficacy and safety results of the SP 512 Transdermal Rotigotine Phase 3 Pivotal Clinical Trial in Early Parkinson's Disease, the second article focused on the secondary outcome variables and plasma pharmacokinetics of rotigotine administered once daily via a novel transdermal delivery system.” between the first and second sentences.

As now presented the similiarity of the titles of the two articles — which are included — may be misleading without the context. The quote is taken directly from the referenced, footnoted article. Lfgunter (talk) 19:07, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

• Please see the Lady's edit summary, here. The article talk page is really for discussing this matter. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 19:31, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

REVDEL request

Messaging you since I know you're active at the moment. Would you kindly consider REVDELing these edits per WP:CRD#2? Thank you. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:35, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

• Sure thing--I got confused and only did the one; HJ Mitchell did the rest. Second time I'm confused: time to bail out. Drmies (talk) 20:02, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you!!!! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:35, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

'Vissersvrijage'

File:'Vissersvrijage' Rijksmuseum SK-A-1181.jpeg

What is 'Vissersvrijage'. Hafspajen (talk) 22:18, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

• Haha, that's lovely. "Vissers" is here both a plural and a genitive--"pertaining to fisherpeople". "Vrijage" is, well, fancy: "vrij" is derived from "vrijen", meaning "make love to" in the old-fashioned way, including the courtship part, and "-age" is the fancy French-derived suffix that makes an abstract noun from a verb. So, "Courtship between fisherpeople" or something like that, haha. Drmies (talk) 22:41, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Oh, than it's a playing around with words. No wonder it didn't translated. Shall I put "Courtship between fisherpeople"as a title for the painting? It's at Albert Neuhuys . Hafspajen (talk) 22:58, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not surprised. No, "fisherpeople" is acceptable only in my household. But "fishermen" strikes me as wrong. "Fishy love"? Martijn Hoekstra surely knows what to do. Drmies (talk) 23:04, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

The problem is the "vissers"; I don't know what to do with that.

I can't put Fishy Love as a subtitle... be serious. Do something yourself, article Albert Neuhuys. Hafspajen (talk) 23:11, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Commandeer je hondje en blaf zelf! Drmies (talk) 23:17, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

The problem is the "vissers"; I don't know what to do with that. Drmies (talk) 23:20, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I am not commanding you... merely was asking to take a look at the article. Hafspajen (talk) 23:26, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Lake Como - 'The Fishermans Fancy' or Dog taxi

Exacly - From that time on, Neuhuys completely devoted himself to drawing and painting needed to be fixed . Hafspajen (talk) 23:39, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Vissersmeisje AND Israels: two for the price of one.

Makes me think of the Dutch version of the Italian song O Marenariello - Het Visermeisje. Too bad there's no article on the nl site. SlightSmile 01:11, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Sippy likes the dog taxi best. I prefer the cool dog. Drmies (talk) 01:17, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Oje né, fa' priesto viene!

nun mme fá spantecá...

ca pure 'a rezza vène

ch'a mare stó' a mená...Hafspajen (talk) 01:18, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I've never heard that song. There's audio on the interwebz but one of my kids made me turn it off since it interferes with their AFV watching. "Ik hou van Holland" is a classic, of course. Drmies (talk) 01:46, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

You could consider dropping the plural. If you go for something like 'The Fishermans Fancy' or 'A Fishermans Flirt', you also retain the alliteration. To me, courtship feels overly formal for vrijage, which sounds more playful to me, but that could just be me. Off course, turning to singular would reinforce the sexist notion that the fancying and/or flirting is done primarily by the male in this picture, but then again, I doubt the painter intended for her to be a visser. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 08:01, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

• Oh, come on, "Fishy Lover"! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:13, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

• Reminds me, when I was in high school, I called one girl a "cold hard fish". It... didn't end well. But at least there were no trouts around.

On a completely unrelated note, I am now transcribing a Dutch-language poem and getting confused by all the k's and jt's and what not. "Ik heb ... ik vind nog een knopje van vreugde" or whatnot. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:12, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Watch out for the ij. I think I've seen my name spelt as Martjin more than as Martijn on Wikipedia. Apparently it's tricky. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:37, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

• Crisco 1492, I'm interested in that poem of yours. Also, I think Martijn and I both know what is meant by that "knopje van vreugde"--and if you can't figure it out, re-read the last stanza of Keats's Ode on Melancholy. Drmies (talk) 15:10, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

• Here it is. "Mijn Hart", by Lie Kim Hok, typed out from Tio Ie Soei's biography by someone who really should have gone and taken Dutch lessons. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:13, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

• I'd blame y'all for the diagraphs and diphthongs the Indonesians use, but if y'all hadn't brought them here, I'd be stuck learning Arabic calligraphy. So... thanks? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:05, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Warning: Unsuitable for use as gift-horse!

WEll, I took The Fishermans Fancy. Hafspajen (talk) 12:38, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Hmm. That puts all the agency with him. Drmies (talk) 15:08, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

• Whereas "Fishy Lover" puts the agency on the fish. You know, so long and thanks for all the fish. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:14, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

It does, which gave me pause as well. Grammatically vissers could be plural genitive or singular genitive (compare: Sint-Janskerk), and in this modern, enlightened society we know better than that fishermen would presumably be a male occupation, or that fancying is would be an act undertaken by men and undergone by women, so we would assume this is plural. But in the context of the painting and its time frame, I find it very unlikely that the young women depicted would be a fisherperson (if it's acceptable in your household, I deem it by extension acceptable on your talkpage). If it is a vissersvrijage, and she is not a visser, then the original title itself puts the agency with him. I might be overthinking this. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 15:36, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Martijn, I also doubt that the girl is a fisherwoman the way the man is a fisherman, but what's being depicted here is "courtship in the culture of the fishing community". This calls for a proposal for an Erasmus grant; we need to solve this. Oh, you may have an opinion on this: the other day I had to be friendly with someone who was a Feijenoord fan... Drmies (talk) 00:55, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

The best thing to do is to simply remind them they managed to only score once against Willem II while Willem II was bribed to lose with a two point difference. While chances are they will continue to be a Feijenoord fan - apparently reason has little to do with it - they will almost certainly not mention it again. Also, translating things is hard but fun. I'll trust you'll do the paperwork on the filing for the grant? My knowledge of academic affairs falls short, unfortunately. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:02, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

• "Fisherman Fenestrates for Fair Maiden's Favor"? -- (best I could do). EEng (talk) 15:15, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

The Arts Award

	The Fine Arts Award
	For writing up so many art articles Hafspajen (talk) 13:18, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Revisions to Mirnes Pepic

Hello, I am Bato Lumbardhaj (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) I was wondering t why you made revisions to the page Mirnes Pepić ? Under what conditions do we deem these changes as "unacceptable " ? Especially when reverting the article back to the previous changes that were done by [[[User:Zoupan|Zoupan]] (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) that are clearly solely based on biased revisions? I have discussed with the creator of the page ( which isnt you or Mr. Zoupan) and we have come to terms where I will provide evidence and references to the revision that I have made. My references will be based not by some generic online articles that could be written by anyone... But, by personal interview from Mr. Pepaj himself. You see my dear friend, we are actually family friends and his father is from the same village as my father. When Mirnes Pepaj saw that serbian nationals on wiki where editing his page ( vandalism maybe ?), he made it clear that he wanted the story set straight. Thus I have been attempting to get the appropriate information to reference and cite the revisions I have made. Can you say the same for the "undoing" that was done by yourself to the article, or by Mr. Zoupan himself who edits based on nationalistic biased beliefs ? A person with a credible history such as yourself ( apparent form your user page) is a very reliable source, and as such should perform their due diligence before embarking on endeavors that could cause ethnic tensions. Cheers Bato The Illyrian (talk) 18:31, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

• Hello Bato Lumbardhaj--as counterintuitive as it may sound, neither you nor I are reliable sources for anything, no matter our editing history or our family history. Only what's published in reliable sources counts. Now, you cannot simply reinsert that information in there. First of all, the claim that he's of Albanian descent (whatever that may mean) needs a reliable source but, just as important, so do claims such as "Due to prosecution and discrimination, Pepaj's family have left Tuzi and moved to Podgorica in order to evade being subjected". All kinds of suggestions are being made there about politics and they cannot stand without verification; in addition, claims about living people (not just the subject but also, apparently, his brother) need verification, and our WP:BLP policy dictates that this contentious material (it is contentious) cannot stand without proper sourcing. So we need newspaper articles, for instance.

  I don't know Zoupan, and I don't know why they made the edit, but policy-wise it was the correct decision. You're going to have to argue your case on the talk page and I hope you have the proper sources: good luck! Drmies (talk) 19:09, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Suspicion of Sock-Puppetry

Hello Drmies, as you have so requested I did welcome myself to inquire as why you intruded in my userpage and inquired on an article you know very little about and threatened to block me. I am very suspicious as to your relations with user Zoupan. I am a major soccer enthusiast and happen to know from previous reports as to Mirnes Pepic biography, and as I explained, will cite the references. User Zoupan erased my revisions very un-professionally and I have been awaiting patiently to gather up my sources. So why did you intervene ? It was not necessary.

This is a warning to please not threaten other so arrogantly; don't let the "power" of being a "wiki editor" get to you head. Don't fool yourself. I also need to know if this is a form of sock puppetry ? Are you the same user as Zoupan ? Cheers and thank you for understanding. Duro se po vim ! (talk) 20:27, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

• Eh, no, I am not the same as Zoupan, I suppose--I never checked. Also, I am an administrator here, and I take the BLP very seriously. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 20:32, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Louise Sophie Blussé

I thought Louise Sophie Blussé, another Dutch woman writer's bio, might interest you. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:22, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

• Hmm--see, that's what I like about Wikipedia: you learn something new every day. Haha, Zwijndrecht, I always found that that funniest placename in the country. And that Christian sect, that's fascinating! Drmies (talk) 03:27, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
• OK Rosiestep, we have to write up Maria Leer. Drmies (talk) 04:16, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zwijndrechtse nieuwlichters, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Zwijndrecht and Edam (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Y Done. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 10:06, 11 March 2015 (UTC)