Could you treat the request [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:K.21lluminati_reported_by_User:Panam2014_.28Result:_.29 here] ? Regards. --[[User:Panam2014|Panam2014]] ([[User talk:Panam2014|talk]]) 18:38, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Could you treat the request [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:K.21lluminati_reported_by_User:Panam2014_.28Result:_.29 here] ? Regards. --[[User:Panam2014|Panam2014]] ([[User talk:Panam2014|talk]]) 18:38, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
:I wonder were you intending to add the "Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning"? And have you made any attempt "resolve dispute on article talk page? But are you sure you have the right venue, as "Pov Pushing" doesn't necessarily mean "edit warring". [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123#top|talk]]) 19:39, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
:I wonder were you intending to add the "Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning"? And have you made any attempt "resolve dispute on article talk page? But are you sure you have the right venue, as "Pov Pushing" doesn't necessarily mean "edit warring". [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123#top|talk]]) 19:39, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
::For more, you could see [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Panam2014 reported by User:K!lluminati (Result: Restriction in lieu of block)]] and [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Panam2014 reported by User:K!lluminati (Result: Restriction in lieu of block)]] and [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#Pov pushing of Kiluminati in Module:Yemeni Civil War detailed map]]. The problem is very serious. --[[User:Panam2014|Panam2014]] ([[User talk:Panam2014|talk]]) 20:57, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialogue, people's rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension.
... my own personal permanent fixture tribute... You turn your back for a just a second and some strange Swedish person sneaks in and steals your records!!
... [5] ... then peace will guide the planets and love will steer the stars
... jus' coz... (most favouritist Jankel guitar solo(s) evva evva) (and even more brillianter live)!!
... an incessant driving backbeat, jazz syncopated piano (mmmm, those trills), sly vocal, soaring blues harp... just funk bliss ... and news just in: [6]
I claim no knowledge of the English judicial system, but are you absolutely certain English High Court judges are called "Judge Mr/Mrs Justice"? From what I can tell, the court document on for Sweeney's remarks on Rolf Harris and on High Court judge (England and Wales), they just use "Mr/Mrs Justice", and don't have an extra "Judge" in front. Cannolis (talk) 17:59, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's how I've always seen it, at least on first usage. If it's already clear, by means of context or explanation, that he was the judge, maybe it could be omitted. That source looks pretty clear and official. I won't revert you again, but it might be better to raise the question at the article Talk Page? Cheers. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:04, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think it might be a combination of the American title with the English one. This is the first mention of Sweeney in the article so I completely agree with you that it's helpful to clarify that he was the judge. Would you be okay with leaving it there but de-capitalizing judge so as to make it not sound like part of his title? Happy to go to the talk page of course, but this doesn't seem so controversial that two people can't just hash it out easily. Cannolis (talk) 18:15, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks! I guess I can claim a tiny bit now after reading the the wiki article on English High Court judges. That show looks amazing, and now I will imagine all English judges to be this fantastic. Cannolis (talk) 13:55, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Could be a er... "cunning stunt" to attract publicity. (Though they may need to prepare for a 'pubic lice' outbreak if they're still using Google Translate...) JezGrove (talk) 11:06, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Hey, I could have sworn I ordered a cheeseburger... "Come now, girls and boys - "EEng, Softlavender and Martinevans123 enjoying some impromptu Halloween apple bobbing"
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited George Boole, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cork (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.
I recently ordered, and am starting to receive, box sets (very cheap, c. US$10 each) of the music of Pomus, Shuman. Mann, Weil, Goffin, King (I already have a good Lieber, Stoller collection) - each is 3 CD, about 25 songs per, but there are no notes. So I am going through them all writing my own notes. Every now and then I get diverted into wikipedia to make some edits. Like now. so . . . ... welcome to my life. Carptrash (talk) 20:51, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm Chris Peter. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. --Chris Peter
Hi Martin, a bit of a strange one... I’ve rather haphazardly come across a page but happen to know its subject socially. (The circles I move in…!) We’re absolutely by no means 'besties' but she's a close friend-of-a-friend I'm still occasionally in touch with (and have known since infant school! - I'll be posting a birthday card later this week...) and I’d feel uncomfortable tagging the article myself (single reference, and perhaps on the promotional side of encyclopedic) but maybe you’d be able to give it the benefit of your much vaster experience? Or maybe I should just channel my inner child and let it go?! JezGrove (talk) 22:53, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Bizarrely, I happen to live in Royston Vasey - we even have a (very recently-opened) shop that says it's 'a local shop for local people', though I'm not sure how well they thought that marketing slogan through...! (And I knew the cartoonist Royston, who occasionally appears in Private Eye, at our mutual unprestigious university - in fact he's married to an ex-girlfriend of mine, so I guess it's official - I'm the least famous person I know!) JezGrove (talk) 23:25, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In between kicking lumps out of each other chez Sibelius, I have RVW at FAC, and any comments you might care to make would be welcome there. Also, having had productive dealings recently on Peggy Mount I wonder if I can interest you in Sybil Thorndike, who is my next candidate for an overhaul with FAC in mind? Pray ponder. Quite understand if you aren't interested, natch. Tim riley talk21:17, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I leave anything cube-shaped to your discretion, but a waspish view of any article at FAC is ideal. One wants the most rigorous scrutiny. But there is no hurry, and if you like to look in a day or so hence that will be excellent. Tim riley talk21:31, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
p.s. if you have any ideas of how you'd like to be insulted, at this Talk Page or any other, please email usual PO box - "I carry a xylophone and I'm not afraid to use it".
Precious again, your comment "it's a challenge to reach an intelligent compromise for the benefit of the reader"!
Haha, what a challenge. I think we both know that, of all the meaningless statistics at Wikipedia, that one is one of the most meaningless! (.. won't stop me trying, of course). Allen Toussaint a really nice guy. Notice to Appear with John Mayall one of my favourite albums. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:16, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[17][reply]
Hi P-123. Sincere apologies, it was a random error, so please ignore. I often get a late jump in my watchlist/ edit history at the moment I make a mouse insert. I put this down to slow rendering on my computer. Or maybe it's caused by a slow update from the database, I'm really not sure. Some of my unintended reverts are much more embarrassing - a partial bi-product of having a watchlist in dire need of pruning! So again, sorry about that. :) "M-123" (talk) 11:44, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I remember doing work with you before here and found you quite helpful.
What are your thoughts of the Skyfall page saying the gross is 1,100 million instead of 1 billion?
Four editors claim for it that it was to avoid any confusion from people who use the old billion (million million) in the UK, instead 1,000 million like the US, which the UK adapted 40ish years ago?
There has been a little fight for a while to get it moved back to a billion, just like loads and loads of other pages have it. But currently at a mild standstill due to four editors on one side, and four on another.
I am for the change back to a billion in gross, would you be interested in helping to be a fifth? I for one, was taught 1,000 million to be a billion, and not a million million, which most of UK would have been also due to billion being adopted as 1,000 million 40 years ago.
Would be greatly helpful to move discussion from more than a 'talk' but to an actual finalised consensus which can be used, and let that be the end of it.
1,000 million and 40 years ago is a very long time, isn't it. So I'd certainly go with that. But I'm all for standardisation, so maybe a global conversion to Indonesian rupiah would be the way to go - a much more impressive 15,099,221,156,740 IDR?? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:05, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't care whether the peaches were to Sir Henry's liking or not, as it's far more critical to know whether the consignment of cucumbers was to Lady Henrietta's satisfaction. This message will not self-destruct without assistance from the recipient. Tlhslobus (talk) 08:11, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
After a rummage in the archive, I found this photograph of Ghettopoly which I took at an open air market stall in 2005. It points out that the game was banned on eBay as it was considered to be racially offensive. It was £10 which I thought was a lot at the time, but today I wish I'd bought it, as mint condition examples are worth a lot of money. Don't expect to see it on Antiques Roadshow though.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me)09:10, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, how wonderful. "He said ______* was “run by a system, by robots, with no brain who probably just vet the content without looking into anything properly”, adding: ”It's moronic." (...* please fill in encyclopedia name of your choice.) Martinevans123 (talk) 09:50, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a more detailed look at the Dad's Army board game from 1974. The triangular flags are clearly based on the opening sequence of the show. Even the ultra-politically correct BBC has not banned the opening sequence of Dad's Army and still shows it in its original form. The only Dad's Army episode to be banned (sort of) was Absent Friends from 1970, which sat on the shelf until 2012 because it featured a member of the IRA as a character. It Ain't Half Hot Mum has been less lucky, as the BBC has declined to show it for years, much to Jimmy Perry's annoyance.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me)18:04, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Murder in the Red Barn - Please explain why you have removed my edit. Peter Maggs Peter Maggs 15:49, 3 December 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Maggs (talk • contribs)
No, but I did not understand it; as a very occasional Wikipedia editor, obviously I have missed something. What do you mean by a secondary source? Peter Maggs 16:55, 3 December 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Maggs (talk • contribs)
My edit summary said this: "don't you need a secondary source, especially with a user name like that?" So I had two points. 1. With a new book I think it's usual to use a secondary source, not just the book itself, to establish its notability. 2. As you have the same name as the author I was guessing there might be some kind of conflict of interest, in terms of promoting your own book. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:09, 3 December 2015 (UTC) p.s. I see you have been editing here for ten years - did you know you should sign your posts using four tildes? Cheers. [reply]
Thanks, useful comments. Actually I always sign my post with four tildas and I always, nevertheless, seem to get the message 'unsigned'. I don't understand what I am doing wrong...Peter Maggs 22:13, 3 December 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Maggs (talk • contribs)
I only ever eat Basmatti rice... Here's an idea: clearly you have an interest in the Red Barn murder. Why don't you check out my website www.mirlibooks.com where there are some extracts from my new book; if you think it merits it, link it to the Wikipedia page. I believe my research significantly adds to the knowledge we have on the murder of Maria Martin. Peter Maggs 17:28, 5 December 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Maggs (talk • contribs)
Hello again Peter, old chap. Charmed, I'm sure. That all looks very intriguing. I think it would only be fair to open a discussion thread at the Red Barn Murder Talk Page, where any interested editors could discuss the merits of including your new book. If not, they might always consider buying a copy as useful last-minute silk stocking-fillers. I don't know about you, but I could murder a good burger.Martinevans123 (talk) 14:50, 6 December 2015 (UTC) p.s. I must say how dapper you look in that blazer - didn't we see you on that recent Essex edition of Antiques Road Trip?? [reply]
I can do whimsy; I was never sure about that jacket though ... an impulse buy in Southwold. --Peter Maggs 17:59, 6 December 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Maggs (talk • contribs)
Thanks for your help on this; much appreciated. Peter Maggs 07:08, 7 December 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Maggs (talk • contribs)
Hilary Benn
Hi Martin, thanks for the thanks. I see you just added the 'however' that I was thinking of including! Another (!) old girlfriend of mine lived next door to Hilary in Chiswick in the '80s when she was a student (there was even a connecting door upstairs, and she used to babysit his kids). Though she didn't get the use of the garden, because it had been amalgamated with Hilary's - we often saw Tony playing football in it with his grandchildren (yup, and smoking his pipe at the same time). JezGrove (talk) 00:23, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, I've gone to bed so I won't reply! As you know, I have been a firm fan of the pipe and still think it should appear in his article! Blimey, these old girlfriends of yours are a force to be reckoned with, aren't they. I thought Hilary's speech was one of the best I've heard in years - word perfect and delivered at exactly the right pace, sincere, thoughtful, candid. A slight echo of his inspired father. I found it quite moving. After hearing that, I honestly think he might be the next Labour Leader. Martinevans123 (talk) 00:31, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Eddie Mair played it in full on PM yesterday and it was excellent - Tony would have disagreed with the viewpoint, but been very proud nonetheless. I was with the girlfriend for about five years, and she was Hilary's tenant in the house next door to his own for the last three of them when she was at college in London - I probably stayed there almost every other weekend until she dumped me during her final year. She actually broke up with me in the living room there - almost thirty years on and I can still remember the record that was playing on the stereo! JezGrove (talk) 09:28, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly, it was side 2 of Bat out of Hell - not my choice, though I don’t think that was the reason for the break-up! I think the turntable must have been set to repeat play but it’s possible that neither of us had the emotional energy to turn it off, or even turn the disc over – either way, every twenty minutes or so Meatloaf was singing, "And she kept on telling me, she kept on telling me, SHE KEPT ON TELLING ME…". Haven’t thought about that evening for an extremely long time – and this is the first time it’s occurred to me that maybe it was deliberate. (I catch on v-e-r-y slowly, if so!) JezGrove (talk) 12:35, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently he harnessed the incredible power of the invisible mind-controlling Jackie to his own evil ends: [22]. Not to be trifled with, obviously. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:27, 4 December 2015 (UTC) I always found that magazine a fab fun read... But I never realized it could blow your head off![reply]
As a Japanese Scouser myself, I can assure you that to help fit in with the locals it is advisable that one chooses a suitable name. -- Nick Yamōta
Hell's kittens, EEngie! Have you fully taken leave of your senses?? I suspect you've been overcome with a fit of the vapors. Dai Saiko, (Ystalyfera) 15:24, 6 December 2015 (UTC) ... or maybe you are just decidely "unhinged".
I said I won't pass individual Christmas greetings, but as the cantata was mentioned on the Main page today, one moar dose of laughter for you - details on my talk -and thanks for your lovely composition!
Accidental revert
Martinevens123, I accidentally reverted one of your edits to Tyson Fury. Sorry about that! I restored the edits back to page (i am editing wp on a really crummy android tablet and I hit the revert button for you instead of the vandal above you in the recent changes feed). BlAcKhAt9(9 (talk) 17:17, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Martin, I'm just after a bit of advice. I've added my suspicions about copyright violation (looks like it's been there for a while...) to an article's talk page - is there anything else I should do?! Thanks in advance - BTW I see England are in the same group as you in the Euro 2016 football finals - will we never learn...? JezGrove (talk) 00:01, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
laser
The gene subject is posion by chickenfears, but have fun, it is a lie your/media will perhaps enjoy.
what is to dificult for you. To understand.
The gene subject is posion by chickenfears < "the shalow inheritance" search for liberman etc, scientific wishful crocery
but have fun - they will have fun - we are serious.
the stupid will have fun based on lie
your/media will perhaps enjoy. <those who propagate the lie will maybe ejoy it.
To understand more you newed to know more about each part of the sentence. Start form paleontropolgy ... if you like realy understand, ask., If not do not expect we will lower to your understanding. most coherent is laser. if you look at it you will be blind. 70.214.34.97 (talk) 00:24, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Can we lure you, I wonder, to comment on the development of William Sterndale Bennett and Albert Ketèlbey, both of which are up for peer review? I am just carrying the bags for both reviews, with others taking the lead, but I hope I can do a bit of judicious whipping-in. Not in the least compulsory, natch. Tim riley talk16:42, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Make sure to click on both pictures to see them full size Martinevans123 as they will give you a chuckle. May your 2016 be full of joy and special times. MarnetteD|Talk04:12, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Pick and choose according to taste: Have a Wassailing Winter Solstice (Gwasaela Heuldro'r Gaeaf), Merry Christmas (Nadolig Llawen), Grey Mare (Mari Lwyd) walkabout, or Happy New Year (Blwyddyn Newydd Dda).
"In 2009, a crowd wearing traditional costume, met at Stonehenge on December 21st morning to mark the rising of the sun on the shortest day of the year. But unfortunately their calculations were slightly out meaning they had in fact arrived 24 hours prematurely." Martinevans123 (talk) p.s. a seasonal poultice is fine by me, thanks.
Hi, you have added a link for lactose intolerance to the early life section on Gavin Esler. Had you found a source that named his illness, or had you inferred this? The references that I had seen didn't put a name to the condition, hence the vague wording that I had used. (For example a condition such as pyloric stenosis would commonly present at such an age and could lead to surgery). Drchriswilliams (talk) 20:52, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
My inference and I expected a revert. The source is a paper one and I have never read it. I didn't see any direct mention of milk at pyloric stenosis, but I had assumed that lactose intolerance was a generic term. I will self-revert if we can't find an online source. But not sure about "thought he might die". Martinevans123 (talk) 21:01, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it looks like I omitted to include the url to that Guardian reference, I agree that it should be added. I liked your change to the wording that described the episode in terms of his parents' fears, I thought that it fitted in the article a bit better than the way I had put things. Drchriswilliams (talk) 21:16, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've now added the url. For some reason I had assumed no url meant no web source, and that a medical link was better than what appeared to be somewhat lazy reporting. But it was Esler's own account and it's not explained. So I have now reverted. I've not been able to find any better source on-line. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:20, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Gaining the trust of the community
The comunity
Hi Martinevans123, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Mjroots (talk) 22:52, 29 December 2015 (UTC) Mjroots (talk) 22:52, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Gained the trust of the community"?? Ffs! how much did that cost you?? What a shame. I always looked forward to those "article has been auto-patrolled" messages, as it proved at least one person had read the article! (only joking). Thanks for telling me. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:05, 29 December 2015 (UTC) p.s. didn't you ask other more senior editors if I can be "trusted"?? [reply]
As Henry Crun once said "Thank you for your support, I shall wear it always."
It is minimal on purpose, - you can reach any movement from anywhere without having to deal with German spelling. Tomorrow --- will be too late, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:47, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
5 times expanded (within last seven days) is quite a lot, isn't it. Is that a strict criterion? I can see that you've some some excellent work improving that article. And it would be a shame if it missed out on DYK just because that technicality. But I don't know how to get round it?!Martinevans123 (talk) 23:57, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
15K worth of and", "if", "but" and commas might be pushing it? Fortunately the relevant criterion is "Promoted to good article status" so size is irrelevant. And I'm glad to see that Montanabw has now reviewed and found it to be fine.Martinevans123 (talk) 21:02, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(GA status is the criterion, easy. - Still needs an admin with a soul, who dares to push it into a full set...) Thank you for your support, also musical Welch wishes, returned with my review, and the peace bell by Yunshui! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:53, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Now on the Main page, - Casliber had the soul! (The alleged owner of all horse articles couldn't promote as she had reviewed.) Click on bell for the soft sound of peace (and jest) ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:05, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You realized that I have a soul! OMG! Don't let THAT get out, it will totally destroy my street cred as a "Serial defender of assholes, serial holder of grudges, serial accuser of socks, serial owner of horsey articles, and serial denier of Wikipedia's chronic issues with retaining sane, normal, humans as editors" and "a thin skinned dictator who OWNs all horse articles." LOL! Montanabw(talk)19:23, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This barnstar is awarded to recognize particularly fine contributions to Wikipedia, to let people know that their hard work is seen and appreciated. Hafspajen (talk) 18:31, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are questioning the link at [28]. I've looked at it twice today since it has been in question. Possibly I am able to view it so easily because I am registered at this site. If I am, it certainly didn't cost anything or take much to register because I don't do paid memberships for wikipedia sourcing. I am guessing it is a cookie stored somewhere in my browser. Now to your request to fill out wiki source format. I explain in my user page, I resist doing that. Its an awkward, time consuming process, but more particularly, it serves no purpose. You ask "What?" but that is not solved with the format. What we want here is verifiability. I provided that with the source, albeit a weak message board link in this case. It is there for you and anyone else to read (as I said, perhaps requiring you to do a free registration). Filling out the wikiformat does not make it any more or less verifiable. It doesn't capture or repeat the text. It does nothing. You are welcome to run reflinks if you think it is necessary. Trackinfo (talk) 22:25, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Trackinfo, thanks for your note. Filling out the wikiformat allows other editors, like me, to know that "registration is required". The first thing I did was to run reflinks. But of course it can't parse the page without the prior registration. I'm not sure you're aware how baffling the page looks if you're not registered - in fact, have you ever seen it? I've also looked for a better (and non-registration-required) source, since message boards are not generally considered to be WP:RS. But I can't find one. I have no problem with removing the "What", as it was added to prompt this discussion - although it might have been better to have had it at the article Talk Page. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:36, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Happy New Year!
This-Is-The-Army gals wishing you a Happy New Year!!!!!
A classic that one. "Mor falch o weld eich bod wedi dal y clefyd y Gymraeg." Lucky we don't live in Delhi where you can "even drive odd cars" every other day: [30]. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:04, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please tell me you used a computer to come up with that. That there might be human minds capable of devising something like that is too awful to contemplate. EEng (talk) 15:49, 3 January 2016 (UTC) Even worse if it was a non-human mind.[reply]
Not encyclopaedic? Are you aware of what the Greek words that are the source of the word mean? en kuklos paideuein , to educate in the round, something like that. Eliot has been consulted by the investigators, but not good enough for 'martin evans123'. ugh. ugh ugh. little things please little minds, enjoy your revert power 'martinevans123'.92.3.17.204 (talk) 00:05, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I see that according to WP, "Punning has been credited as the fundamental concept behind alphabets, writing, and even human civilization"! (Just as well I wasn’t there with my terrible ones back in the day, then….) WP also claims that "Chinese is a tonal language with a comparatively small inventory of permitted syllables, resulting in an exceptionally large number of homophone words", so it's a shame that the noble pun is shunned in China – and they certainly take their aversion to extremes! JezGrove (talk) 12:15, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's just totally freaky! Loved the mythical creatures - and the fact that the Chinese government censored the word 'censorship'. JezGrove (talk) 16:40, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Very good! And cracker jokes could be the right level for my puerile sense of humour - I wonder when the deadline is for the 2016 batch? JezGrove (talk) 23:29, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. Let us known when you're done on this. I've got a couple of sources to clear up the "citations needed". Reminds me to get on with Llanfrechfa - really should have an article. Diolch. Robevans123 (talk) 15:29, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
How strange! My personal favourite actual anagram is 'A man, a plan, a canal - Panama' for what it's worth (very little, as it happens...) JezGrove (talk) 20:13, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
An anagram of "a man, a plan, a canal - Panama" is "Pal, Mañana, A Manna Alpaca!" Unfortunately I'm not clever enough to make an anagram that's also a palindrome. Eman235/talk20:29, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Editing a novel for me can be a hilarious experience
Like when I wrote "When Rudy was through talking to Crystal, he walked into the nearby elephant." The word I meant to write was elevator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof?19:39, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Martinevans123. I thought it would be more appropriate to reply to your question "privately" rather than extend the discussion at AN/I.
When I nominated Malcolm X for FA, I was surprised when another editor expressed copyright concerns about File:Shabazz Gravesite.jpg, an image I had uploaded to Commons. See WP:Featured article candidates/Malcolm X, about two-thirds of the way down the page (under the heading "Significant image concerns") -- concerns I addressed by removing the image from the article.
The issue is whether the gravestone is just text or whether it's a "work of art" that incorporates creativity, so whether there is a copyright issue depends on the specific gravestone (as well as its age, of course). — MShabazzTalk/Stalk23:32, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note to thank you for your work on this article, which deserves some good effort. I like your additions, which complement my own. Cheers, Easchiff (talk) 02:10, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
for weighing in at Money (That's What I Want). Feel free to undo the last edit and add my comments about the British Invasion versions back, I have been warned that I will be blocked if I do it, though the admin who issued the warning seems to have backed off, agreeing that my edit is okay. However the chap that I had the initial disagreement with does not seem to be under the same constraint. Oh yes, I was slow getting here because I was waylaid by the quiz on your user page. it seemed to cover rather well everything that is going on at this article. And so it goes. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 20:03, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Einar. I think what you put is quite right. But it might be over-ruled by WP:SONGCOVER, which is quite clear, isn't it? But no point editing until some kind of consensus has been agreed at the Talk Page there. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:08, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Martin, Many thanks for all your help regarding vandalism on my Talk page. Due to a few problems at home, I do not have all the time I would like on Wikipedia and your intervention is much appreciated. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 22:29, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, it is just mindless trolling - although I think it should be stopped very soon. In answer to your question: no, have never visited DLR, Malta. Best David, David J Johnson (talk) 22:40, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Anytime I see a IP talk page blanked. I take a look & never revert. I leave that up to who ever issued the warnings. I do like that people believe that making the warnings disappear helps their case. Krj373 (talk) 22:56, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Hello. In case of a sonic attack on your district, follow these rules, dears. If you are making love it is imperative to bring all bodies to orgasm simultaneously. Nice.""Steeleye Spaniel? or would sir prefer something more classical?
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Stockholm syndrome may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
is kidnapped by the story's villain "A", played by [[Charlotte_DiLaurentis|Charlotte DiLaurentis]]). Charlotte holds Sara captive in an underground bunker, which she has built to resemble a human-
You've lost me with the bendy spoons I'm afraid - btw, I think Bracketbot might be sending you less welcome greetings soon, if I'm not mistaken! JezGrove (talk) 22:29, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Those Llanelli multistorey car parks are so romantic...! I remember Geller bending spoons and stopping watches, I just don't get the Welsh connection...! JezGrove (talk) 22:49, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was slow on the uptake there - I should have asked Lyn (Llyn?) - she spent quite a few years in North Wales (getting a music degree and qualifying as a climbing instructor - apparently 'portfolio' careers aren't so new after all...) JezGrove (talk) 23:11, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have added to all of their Wikipedia pages to give a more detailed description of their places of birth only to have them taken down by you. I have given reasons for the edit which you seem to have ignored please tell me why? Hackinghobb (talk) 23:32, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's not just me. It's plenty of other editors. As I have reminded you on your Talk Page, you were warned about this exactly one month ago following the Administrators noticeboard discussion here. You chose to make no input whatsoever to that discussion. The reason why your edits have been reversed is very simple - you have no consensus to make them and all the reverting editors think they are unnecessary. If you make another similar edit I have no doubt at all that you will be blocked. Is that now totally 100% clear? Martinevans123 (talk) 23:47, 26 January 2016 (UTC) p.s. if you wish to continue this discussion please do so at your own Talk Page, where I left you the reminder. Thanks. [reply]
I hope you don't mind the further revision I made to your Canada edit today. I was trying to make it more objective (after I thought about it more, as the other guy said), more accurate with the periods, but also less specific with the hits because it is the article summary. Regardless of all this, the Canada topic probably should have been addressed more specifically in the article body itself (by whoever originally added it) before it was even added to the summary. Shortage of time for me is an issue at the moment though. Regards, AusChartMan (talk) 17:44, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi AusChartMan, many thanks for your considerate note. I think your edits are a big improvement, although as you say, the intro section should only ever summarise the article. I'm also unsure that such comparatively moderate success belongs in the intro. As you may have guessed, however, the article is no longer on my watchlist. I wish you the best of luck editing there. I'm busy enjoying a little fish with lemon. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:47, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe they’ll ‘Go West!’ until they fall off the edge, if we’re lucky!
Hi Martin, it appears that there is a growing number of Flat-Earthers - most of them the citizens of one particular country, of course. No wonder Trump is doing so well! (But then such stupidity goes back to the country's origins: after all these are the people who despite declaring that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" then elected a slave-owner as their first President….) JezGrove (talk) 12:32, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please advise on best course of action RE 'Former Denomination - Roman Catholic"
Hi, please forgive my ignorance of the correct procedures/rules etc when it comes to resolving a dispute or disagreement on Wikipedia. As you know, I have included the 'Former denomination - Roman Catholic' information in a number of Wiki entries in the sincere belief that it is highly likely to be relevant, useful, interesting and informative to many readers, providing valuable context, perspective and clarity on the history of many important religious buildings. I should also add that, as an atheist, I have no interest whatsoever in elevating or promoting the role of the Roman Catholic church, historical or otherwise, within the pages of Wikipedia. Clearly, however, the inclusion of the 'previous denomination' has 'ruffled a few feathers' but that in itself does not sufficientIy persuade me that this information is 'superfluous' or in any other way lacking in merit for inclusion. Please advise as I would really appreciate your insights and expertise in helping to resolve this matter. I am more than happy for this to go through any kind of wider-community dispute resolution process so it can be settled once and for all. I feel that the editors who have reverted my edits (as well as myself) really need some final clarification on this issue. Many thanks. (Woodseats44 (talk) 13:05, 29 January 2016 (UTC))[reply]
Hi Martin - long time, no see. Really sorry that you've been dragged into this nonsense, although I think, from reviewing the Lincoln Cathedral pages, you've encountered this chap before. Personal stuff has distracted me from Wikipedia for quite a while but I hope you are well and still enjoying it. KJP1 (talk) 19:04, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello KJP!! Great to see you around, I am very well and "enjoying" most of my editing (although I'm not sure everyone else is, haha). I had no idea (i.e. forgotten) that I had ever seen this two-litres-of-whisky character before. He's very eloquent, for a vandal, isn't he. But he's left a small trail of POV in his wake and I was asking at AN/I how best to revert it. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:09, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi girls, sorry to interrupt your frankly embarrassing 'love-in' but I think you will find that (Woodseats44 was not engaging in 'vandalism' as you put it but was, as you will no doubt eventually see for yourselves, actually trying to address a glaring historical oversight in reference to Wikipedia's information on churches built in Pre-Reformation Britain. By systematically reverting all of the edits made by (Woodseats44 and then trying to silence them for all time by applying a permanent block, you have simply served to reveal yourselves as people who happily support and collude with each other in abusing their editorial privileges, censoring key facts whenever they conflict with their own agenda. One is led to believe that editors on Wikipedia are as impartial in their judgment as possible but this is self-evidently not true for all of them. Rest assured, this is by no means the end of the matter. (Oh and the casual use of homophobic statements and thinly-disguised insults like 't@sser' does nothing for your credibility either.) I personally think Wikipedia is a fantastic project but, as this whole episode seems to indicate, it is, one fears, in great danger of being hijacked by a bunch of hysterical, self-aggrandising, self-important social inadequates with nothing better to do all day than misuse their pathetic 'power' in between j@cking off to Cliff Richard videos. Truly heartbreaking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.120.89.44 (talk) 12:01, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The DYKcheck tool indicates that it has about 1000 of the required 1500 characters – another 50% required. Ritchie seems to have found all the low-hanging fruit but I'll keep my eyes open. Myself, I have created a couple of spinoff stubs: Hanwell Band and Leverett & Frye. They would be an even bigger struggle to get to DYK level so I'm content to leave them as buds on our tree of knowledge. Note that what's interesting about Chuffer Dandridge and the other TOG stuff is the extent to which Wogan's material was crowd-sourced. Just like Wikipedia... Andrew D. (talk) 12:13, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, how how lovely. But this was before strict BBC compliance, wasn't it. So, just like Wikipedia, there were probably just a few regular staff with multiple sock-puppet email accounts, haha. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:27, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think a source is available (but one might well have turned up in the last few days following Wogan's death), but an explanation of why Dandrige was created and what were Byrne and Slane's ideas would probably get us there. Or just quoting one of Chuffer's whimsical nostalgic looks at prewar music hall. We've also got this that confirms Wogan corpsed at Chuffer's ramblings, but I can't believe we can't do better than the Daily Mirror :-( Some might argue that Chuffer isn't actually notable, but the tipping point for me is that his writing was read out to about 8 million people a day for ten years, and Wogan obituaries at least name-drop him, so I think it can stick. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)12:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Also support keeping memory: a work of the conductor who died will make it with Ilse Gramatzki in the next set, please watch (pictured my talk). Teh points: should there be a penalty for opposing without a contribution to the article? Isn't it interesting that the term "principal editors" didn't yet come up in the project discussion? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:30, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Umm... that was not actually the common capitalisation, or even anything like the common spelling. It will likely soon be reverted to its previous title. Also note conventions such as WP:NCCAPS to assist with deciding upper/lowercase wordings. Dl2000 (talk) 04:53, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You'd think that would be pretty conclusive, wouldn't you? Of course, we can't use the styling as used on the single cover, as it's all lower case. But, yet again, this seems to be a case of the prescriptive title rules of Wiki-land flying in the face of normal usage in the real world. Yes, I know "like" is an adjective here, but to my eye this looks Like a mistake. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:18, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
New Hart's Rules says: "Exactly which words should be capitalized in a particular title is a matter for individual judgement, which may take account of the sense, emphasis, structure, and length of the title. Thus a short title may look best with capitals on words that might be left lower case in a longer title." (2005 edn, page 133) Personally, I agree with you that the capitalized version looks better here - though I see there are many other WP pages also using the weird-looking lower case 'like'.JezGrove (talk) 10:29, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Good moaning. I was pissing by your teck page when I soo this bricketbat wratting ballocks on it agoon. Shall I black it?
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The Moody Blues may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
are Coming! The British are Coming!: With an emphasis on Donovan, the Bee Gees and the Who. [Part 6] : UNT Digital Library |publisher=Digital.library.unt.edu |date=2015-08-21 |
They released a new compilation album called ''[[Timeless Flight (Moody Blues album|Timeless Flight ]]'' in 2013. On 19 July 2013, it was announced that the band
There is a policy discussion in progress at the Manual of Style which affects the capitalization of Adele and Van Morrison's songs "Someone like You", a question in which you previously participated. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — LlywelynII17:06, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your efforts over at the policy discussion, Martin. I took a look the other day and thought we were heading towards a sensible outcome (silly me). Given that WP seems to be able to accommodate the erratic capitalization insisted on by e.g. CinemaScope and K.d. lang (although admittedly the latter page name itself starts with a capital 'K', the page title and body text use her preferred lower case one) surely it shouldn’t be t-o-o controversial to accept a policy that WP matches the capitalization in titles of works used by the original publisher on title pages or liner notes etc? Do you think that there’s a case for arguing that adopting such a policy for capitalization would in fact bring it into better alignment with the policy on spellings of titles of works, where artists’ preferred unconventional spellings such as Nothing Compares 2 U or Cum On Feel the Noize seem to be accommodated (also, presumably, on the basis of the publishers’ versions)? JezGrove (talk) 10:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Far too sensible, I'm afraid. What's on the liner notes obviously falls into the "who puked up on the tour bus" category of meaningless factoids. Why bother having silly arbitrary rules unless we all follow them slavishly forever. This is a worthy and grown-up encyclopedia not the gutter press, you know!!!Martinevans123 (talk) 12:21, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
...Back to original intent, you can join the discussion about the section's subject just to improve consensus. Also, you may want to read comments there. George Ho (talk) 19:04, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not that it would have stopped some people claiming him regardless - Oliver Sachs was American, for a while. (And let's just hope that Assange doesn't pop his clogs any time soon...!)JezGrove (talk) 20:54, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you took out "seven grand pianos" to Ludwig Wittgenstein ? Is something bad with seven? They removed seven mice to. I put seven mice, Thomas removes seven mice, at comma article. Put back as it was. Somebody puts back seven mice again. Or is no reason? But I know how to sing pages now. Talk pages. Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk) 23:52, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You are funny man. Listen, I can not make the word empiricism normal. It is too black. Can you help at Ludwig Wittgenstein?
It is like when on article I am in the front of text, here I am behind. The blue works if copied. I copied word "Western philosophy" so that is blue, it is nice. Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk) 00:24, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody removed logical empiricism. But is no factual errors! No, it is a well known fact. Not incorrect. Not false at all. The Vienna Circle were the circle of philosophers who introduced logical empiricism in Western philosophy. and the base was exactly Tractates. Read logical empiricism. It is a very well known fact.
This is from article: "In this theory of knowledge, only statements verifiable either logically or empirically would be cognitively meaningful. Efforts to convert philosophy to this new scientific philosophy were intended to prevent confusion rooted in unclear language and unverifiable claims.[1] The Berlin Circle and the Vienna Circle propounded logical positivism starting in the late 1920s."
You must read about it and you notice it's true, because it is true. This is one very important thing. Exactly WHY Wittgenstein is so important in philosophy. Not piano or brothers suicide, but the develop of logical empirism. The scientific mind!
I said:"The ideas in the Tractates were an important influence on logical empiricism," and it was the Wienna Circle supported ideas. This what I said. Exactly this. Never said he was member of Wienna Circle. Like One many think, or others. No I cannot speak English very good, true. I learn now. But I can think. That is different thing. It was nice meeting you. Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk) 16:45, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding Benjamin Disraeli article and the Balkans
Greetings!
The exact quotation from the 1879 Annual Register is: “Although the country inhabited by the Bulgarians extends far to the south of the Balkans, the Berlin Congress decided, chiefly in consequence of the firm attitude maintained on the point by the British plenipotentiaries, that the Balkans should form the southern frontier of the Bulgarian principality, and that the remainder of the Bulgarian territory should be constituted a province of the Turkish Empire under the name of Easter Roumelia, with an autonomous administration under a Turkish governor.”
A much more recent publication – Salisbury, Victorian Titan by Andrew Roberts (1999) – states that: “On 17th June the Congress got down to the meat of the Bulgarian question, with Salisbury proposing that Bulgaria be split into an autonomous principality north of the Balkan mountain range, whilst the territory south of it would be called the province of Eastern Roumelia and left under the military and political control of the Sultan...”.
It will take a special kind of talent to hold that the best thing to do in order “to maintain peace in the Balkans” (as this is what I am contesting) is to divide a nation into two different neighbouring states. The inevitable consequence of this brilliant diplomatic solution was their unification just seven years later – in 1885, after a rather peaceful revolution. As this event is a historical fact I do not think that quoting a particular publication is necessary, but at the same book Mr. Roberts describes the complete chaos that followed (pages 352 to 356) and, amusingly, the new development that since in the meanwhile Bulgaria became anti-Russian, now Salisbury favoured big Bulgaria.
What followed from the 1885 unification, which followed the decision at the 1878 Berlin Congress to split the nation in two autonomous states, was the Serbo-Bulgarian war from November 1885. The official casus belli was the violation of the Berlin Congress. That was a rather brief war, that lasted a couple of weeks, but due to the surprising Bulgarian victory, it ended with the acknowledgement of the unification of Bulgaria. Nonetheless it deeply divided the two Balkan nations and that would have implications later, during the First (1912-1913) and Second (1913) Balkan wars, when Bulgaria fought first, along with the other Balkan states against Turkey for liberating the remaining provinces populated by Christians and then against its former allies for dividing the spoils of war.
To wrap up – my argument is that: 1) you cannot state that there was piece in a region (the Balkans) when a war broke out just seven years after the Berlin Congress (followed by further conflicts few decades later) and 2) this turn of events is directly influenced by Disraeli’s government that demanded the separation of one of the Balkan countries (Bulgaria), that ultimately led to that war. I hope that this would suffice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.199.196.106 (talk) 01:00, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"This morning I had another talk with the German Chancellor, Herr Schrocat, and there is a new discussion thread which bears his name upon it (but thankfully not mine as well). Some of you, perhaps, have already heard what it contains but I would just like to read it to you: "It’s piece in our time". Hoorah! (... waves graciously to general kindly cheers and flag-waving ...) Nev Chamberpot123 (talk) 12:01, 22 February 2016 (UTC) Modern translation: "looks like we’re gearing up for a real humdinger..." [reply]
Weirdly, my dad was in a TV dog food ad with John Noakes back in the '70s - Noakes had the line "My dog Skip...", with the copywriters hoping that no one would notice it should have been Shep (who belonged to the Beeb, of course). And because he said "My dog..." he was contractually obliged to keep the dog for six months (I think) because otherwise it would have been a breach of the regulations on honesty in advertising! JezGrove (talk) 22:06, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this looks like the '70s Noakes ad as I remember it, though I’m not sure where Dad fitted into it all! It wouldn’t have been the first time he ended up on the cutting room floor, but when it came to ‘commercials’ he never minded because the Equity rules at the time meant that he still got the recording fees and repeats (plus if you were seen appearing in an ad for one brand, it effectively ruled you out from being used in one made by their rivals, so not appearing on-screen bizarrely worked in his favour). Dad appears a couple of times in the background here in an advert with Nigel Mansell and Eric Idle – the original storyline had him getting his tie stuck in the (then) new-fangled electric window, but that meaning is lost in the broadcast version and all that remains is one of those ‘blink-and-you’ll-miss-it’ appearances his nearest and dearest fondly remember looking out for back in the day! Believe it or not, that got him over £20k all told – quite a bit at that time, and one of several occasions when he earned more in a couple of days than my poor old mum did slaving away for a whole year… And for some reason they filmed it in Paris, so he had an all-expenses trip too… Not bad for a lad who left school at 14 to go down’t pit - I’m definitely in the wrong line of work! JezGrove (talk) 23:28, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect that Peckham lacked some of the tax advantages that Paris offered some of the dodgers and divers involved. Plus ca change... JezGrove (talk) 23:50, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That must have been one of the roles that he missed! He appeared in the first Smash ad as a caveman, but was replaced by the Martians - and was also in one of the ill-fated 'PG Tips - The tea with the 3D taste' campaign commercials before PG quickly reinstated the chimps... Absolutely true! JezGrove (talk) 22:01, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, you’re right I ought to find this stuff while he’s still with us but seems to be easier said than done – lots of chimps but no 2D chumps in the teabag ads that I can find online. Ditto not having any joy with the Smash caveman ad from 1968/9. I thought his RSC days would be more fruitful / better documented (he was with them for over a decade from about ’72 onwards) but so far have only dug up credits from audio recordings of performances from the first half of the 70s. And dodgy sites like this one – it’s definitely him, but equally most definitely not a reliable source! Though an external link from Dead on Course backs up the weird transvestite nun photo! Will try and find some actual clips when I have some free time! JezGrove (talk) 14:07, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Rod Hull was a bit miffed that I didn't recognise him, but still made me a nice cup of tea – in the house Charles Dickens’ Miss Hamilton 'lived' in!
The evidence is very circumstantial, but the story is true. My mum – a Dickens obsessive since childhood and who was eventually elected (joint) Honorary General Secretary of the Dickens Fellowship – was for many years the Branch Secretary of the Fellowship's branch in Rochester, Kent. As such, she was actively involved in all the Dickens-related activities in Rochester, and so in the mid-'80s met the new owners of Restoration House, who happened to be Rod Hull and his second wife Cheryle. On discovering that Cheryle was a professional portrait painter mum duly commissioned a joint portrait of myself and my sister. (Without asking us first - we weren't best pleased and in the event, for complicated travel reasons, were never actually in the studio at the same time.) Anyway, as a result, early one morning I found myself knocking on the door to the house but didn’t immediately realise who was letting me in because 1) I was nervous and apprehensive about the whole damn thing, 2) even though I knew he lived there I hadn't actually considered the possibility of Rod opening the door to the mansion himself, and 3) I’d never seen him without Emu on his arm! Anyway, despite his obvious disappointment at my failure to look suitably starstruck he was very sweet, made me a cup of tea and then led me along the labyrinthine route through the house to the attic where his wife had her studio. JezGrove (talk) 17:39, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it was a tragic death. Perhaps if the satellite channels had snaffled up the rights to Champions League matches sooner (!) Rod would still be with us. But just in case you think the Rod Hull instalment is weird… just this Sunday mum was talking about her regular chats with the deputy head of Abbey Court school (again in Kent) which she often visited both as part of her then day job and also her co-founding of a new sign language for children with special needs with some of its staff (we're back in the late 1980s again, btw, although the link I found was for the 1994 7th edn of the first book from the Signalong project). Anyway, just before one of mum's visits the deputy head was outed by the tabloid press as a notorious murderess who as a teenager had killed her own mother, and who was working at the school under a new identity. My life truly is a box of chocolates (well, WAS - I’m sincerely hoping all the weirdness is in the past! JezGrove (talk) 20:52, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Jezza, how amazing. I am truly humbled. In my opinion, both of your wonderful parents are eminently worthy of a mention in this "esteemed" encyclopedia. And weird is nothing to be ashamed of! ... in fact, please treat yourself to one of Al's best (I've always found him a real and essential kindred spirit). Martinevans123 (talk) 21:19, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think she gave up on all three of those some time ago! But I obviously DID need to mention I was joking - although we've had our differences, as families do, I was just clumsily trying to say that they'll only be missed when they're gone (and no offense was intended to "Weird Al" or anyone else). BTW, I’ve just remembered that dad was also the foreman of the jury who sent James Willmott-Brown down in EastEnders (although admittedly you have to scroll a v-e-r-y l-o-n-g way down through that unreliable external link to find him)! JezGrove (talk) 22:53, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, you reverted the pic in Viola Beach. It's tricky since the pic is from the last venue they played at in Norrköping (Where's the Music?) so it really belong in the previous section "Deaths", but the only way to place it there would mean "sandwiching" the text and that is a no-no according to MOS, hence my placing it a bit below. Suggestions? Thoughts? Cheers, w.carter-Talk23:13, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'll try that. But if it's reverted again I will not put it back up. I was looking for another Norrköping pic when I came across it and thought it might be something for the article. Best, w.carter-Talk23:45, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week for your determination and dedication to help the encyclopedia grow. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)
Coming up to 9 years of service and 77,000 edits, Martinevans123 is truly one of the unsung heroes of Wikipedia. On the surface, you may know him for his witty banter and Private Eye-esque visual humour, which I always enjoy, but beneath the surface lies someone who toils away day in, day out, on keeping articles in better shape. He doesn't go for the big awards like GAs and FAs, but he really does make the encyclopedia better without much reward. This nomination was seconded by User:Yash! and User:MelanieN.
You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:
{{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Recipient user box}}
Right, that's it! Please accept my resignation! 19:43, 27 February 2016 (UTC) p.s. but many thanks, anyway. That was really unexpected. I am deeply touched. (allegedly)
The award is usually distributed on Sunday. Due to the unexpected amount of touching displayed on this page you have been penalized with an additional day as Editor of the Week. This matter has not been discussed with the other WER clerks (Are there any other WER clerks?) and cannot be rescinded or changed in any way. Buster Seven Talk20:08, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It has come to the attention of the Editor Retentions' Board of Clerks that you may, perhaps, could be, in possession of a much desired and rarely displayed Official Wikipedia T-shirt. The report states that it is black with the The Wikipedia Globe prominently displayed. The report further states that you may have had your name imprinted on the front (potentially an act of vandalism). This would imply that you have already received accolades and "pats on the back" for your efforts. If that is, in fact, the case you may suffer the misfortune of having an additional day added to your week. The issue is under review. You will be advised ASAP. Buster Seven Talk22:07, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Um....the baseball bat is more of a fungo bat, actually. It's used to hit fly balls to the outfielders during batting practice. And the Bavarian jockstrap is, um, obviously for someone that is well-endowed. Plus, its a Fool card. Not a Complete Fool card. I thought you would like it. The tights have a "slimming" quality, don't ya think? Buster Seven Talk07:14, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Martin, thanks for the thanks at Reynolds Stone - I really hope his alleged 'Englishness' isn't going to be controversial... Sorry to not send you a greeting for St David's Day – I was worried that it might come out wrong. Oh, and congratulations on your latest WP gong! JezGrove (talk) 22:32, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(sorry there's no "omfg brilliant button" yet... )
That's only the start! I’ve just realised we could actually out-source Trident! So... now all we have to do is find some mugs to pay the bills and face the fatal consequences if it ever gets used, and the problem's sorted! JezGrove (talk) 23:48, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If we are any good, we make waves. But your presence and the way and weight of your contributions is itself worthwhile. Little piffles don't change that. 7&6=thirteen (☎)17:28, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, not multiply, Stan! I said "sum of" i. e. add. Before we changed to decimal currency in 1972, we had pounds, shillings and pence. See [44]. "Seven shillings and sixpence" or, as we used to say, "Seven & six" Cheers! — Gareth Griffith-Jones | The Welsh | Buzzard | 08:57, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the contribution towards clearing up the Alley Oop issue in the Herb Alpert article. I appreciate your effort!THX1136 (talk) 17:18, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Martin, your source at Dylan Thomas#Early life looks more specific/detailed than the one I used - I guess his age at the time of his victory should be changed in the article to 14? (I'm in no position to make judgments about the reliability of the City and County of Swansea, of course!) JezGrove (talk) 19:17, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I guess so. Although in the photo he looks about 10 years old! (and not totally unlike someone else just born). I was surprised to find such a good source, especially with that image of the Sports Day programme. Except that, on 19 June 1928, he was still 13, of course...!?Martinevans123 (talk) 19:25, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Uh-oh - so either way we go with a 'reliable source' and get it wrong, or get shot down in flames for indulging in a bit of commonsense 'original research', then...! JezGrove (talk) 19:45, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, you’ve sorted it already – that’ll teach me to take a 10-minute Wikibreak! I liked your comment on the Talk Page, btw: "Maybe we need a reader tick box at the bottom of the article for ‘Drinker / Poet / It is hard to split the two’?" Dorothy Parker put it very aptly (as usual): "I'm not a writer with a drinking problem, I'm a drinker with a writing problem". And it seems you have to be especially careful with your writing in Wales! (Though no drink was involved with that case, obvs… - thanks to my legal team for that qualifying remark.) JezGrove (talk) 20:49, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Don’t underestimate the value of the blank slate, and all that philosophical poo! (On the other hand, a friend recently reminded me that: PHILOSOPHY is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat; METAPHYSICS is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat that is not there; THEOLOGY is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat, that is not there, and shouting "I found it!"; but SCIENCE is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat using a f----- torch".) JezGrove (talk) 22:31, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, Martin I didn't see your reply until just now. (Though I don't think I've missed out on not having the Duff debt management advice!) I just popped over here to say 'Thanks' for the thanks over at Dylan Thomas. The Poetry Foundation source extract that I used started: "Like James Joyce before him, Dylan Thomas was obsessed with words—with their sound and rhythm and especially with their possibilities for multiple meanings. This richness of meaning, an often illogical and revolutionary syntax, and catalogues of cosmic and sexual imagery render Thomas's early poetry original and difficult. In a letter to Richard Church, included by FitzGibbon in Selected Letters, Thomas commented on what he considered some of his own excesses: "Immature violence, rhythmic monotony, frequent muddle-headedness, and a very much overweighted imagery that leads often to incoherence."" It seemed potentially useful, but I couldn’t quite see where it might fit… It has to be said, Thomas is THE best poet to read out aloud (his Elegy is probably my personal favourite in that respect, for what it's worth...) JezGrove (talk) 23:03, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You've added some good stuff over there. Yes, it does sound good. And he could read it pretty well himself, of course, which is why the US lecture tours looked so attractive to that leech Brinnin and his cronies. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:23, 8 March 2016 (UTC
(Suggested substitute image): showing the dazzlingly popular "Trump comb over" effect
I can't comment at the article talk page since the image I have found will mislead and confuse since it is about someone else and the "joke" gets lost but the file name fits exactly (and is not a joke). Buster Seven Talk12:35, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, as long as I'm here, I want to say what a fun time I had during your tenure as Editor of the Week. The box of chocolates and the daily flowers were special and really un-necessary. I'm just doing my job. A new awardee will be notified tomorrow and your reign will be over but your term in office will be a memorable one for me. Thanks for being unique and creating that opening. Buster Seven Talk12:54, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for removing the hidden "Why, if he was Jewish?" buried away in a comment when it is explained that Emeric's grave bears the only Star of David in that Church of England churchyard -- SteveCrook (talk) 03:11, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's wurst than that, the Mary Rose was a certain couples' post war love - nest cleverly converted by the bloke who would later found Ikea. He/she/it wishes to bury that fact. Hence the attempt to cover up the truth by the rediscovery edit. (Twitch). Is it not clear? (twitch). Irondome (talk) 21:59, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Any chance of moving the article on Keith Emerson's old band The V.I.P.'s in order to lose that horrible apostrophe - it doesn't appear in the band's name in the lead paragraph? JezGrove (talk) 23:32, 11 March 2016 (UTC) JezGrove (talk) 23:32, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, looks dreadful, doesn't it. The Grocer himself would be proud, I'm sure. Although some people do advocate apostrophes for plurals of abbreviations and acronyms. There are probably huge discussions archived over at MoS punc. But one issue I've just spotted is that it's currently disambiguating with the film The V.I.P.s. So maybe we'd have to move to The V.I.P.s (film) and/or The V.I.P.s (band)? So I'm guessing the admin over at Wikipedia:Requested_moves might well post it out for discussion. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:40, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
March 2016
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Keith Emerson may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
153711 |title=Online Community for Keys, Boards, Gear, Lessons, News, Video, Tabs & Chords > Home |publisher=Keyboardmag.com |date= |accessdate=11 March 2016}}</ref>
[[Billy Sherwood]], [[Steve Porcaro]] and [[Vinnie Colaiuta]], on ''[[Back Against the Wall]]'') (2005)
Hi, thanks to you too for helping to fix up Keith's article. I wasn't a huge prog fan backintheday but I happened to see ELP at HV in 2010 and was impressed despite myself (and despite some of their olden fans saying it wasn't a very good show). Just letting you know I found a few more cites for the Instrumentation section and am trying to fix that up with some better refs and general tighten up this morning. Cheers, TheBlinkster (talk) 16:05, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, my pleasure. Myself always a bigger fan of the Nice, which seemed to me to be much more exciting. Emerson Lake and Parker often a bit too sterile for me, although Tarkus and Brain Salad Surgery still personal favourites. Keith was kind enough to reply to me in 2014, through social media, about St Mark's Church - see Talk:Tarkus#St. Marks? I guess that, with the very many improvements made, the article may get to the front page. It's only two days since we learned of Keith's death. Unless of course someone who has "no interest at all in this individual" and who "won't be working on it" simply decides the article is "tremendously far from ready". Martinevans123 (talk) 17:39, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fascinating discussion on St. Mark's Church. I too was trying to figure out which St. Mark's it was, especially since there was a post somewhere that said Rick Wakeman almost used the same organ for something else but didn't like the sound. Found plenty of sources saying "St. Mark's Church" (I believe it's also on the record jacket credits) and one saying Flentrop organ but as you discovered the Flentrop St. Mark's seems to be in Seattle - bit far from London recording studios - and no clue on which St. Mark's or whether the place still existed. Very cool that Keith answered back on the query. Thanks again. TheBlinkster (talk) 09:04, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. You also a fan? I see that the good old Daily Mail has gone all out for a suitably trite and lurid headline for this morning's coverage (but still good pictures). He seemed like a genuinely nice guy who still connected in a meaningful way with his fans - perhaps too meaningful. It's very sad that his life ended like that. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:38, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was too young to see their show back in the 70s and I had a bias against prog for a long time, partly because I was a punk when I came "of age" and partly because the musical establishment back then, such as radio, did not make it easy to hear the best moments of the British 70s bands (or in many cases, any moments at all). In my middle age my musical taste got way more eclectic, plus I played classical piano for many years as a kid, so I got a little bit into Emerson. After spending 2 days in his virtual presence now I'm really interested in him. Wiki is good for creating little obsessions like that (last week it was Martin W. Littleton - super famous in his time and so forgotten today all he had was a stub with a picture). TheBlinkster (talk) 00:08, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A kitten for you!
Many thanks for your help and moral support on getting the Keith Emerson article into shape for its RD posting. Kind regards,
Hi Martin, Thanks for chipping in on the Senghenydd article. It passed today as a GA, and I've put it up for PR. Should you have any thoughts that would help it get to FA, I'd be delighted to hear them. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 14:16, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Phew, it seems the tattooists and piercers of Wales have had a reprieve now - though I hope Dor isn't caught short now that there'll be no compulsory local toilets strategy after all. (The heady power of devolution....) Still, no one can say Leanne and her party monsters are a cheap date now! (I didn't get the email wit the dodgy link, btw.) JezGrove (talk) 23:28, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, indeed. Am surprised he didn't include the dreadful colour of his cell blinds as contributing to his breach of human rights. I didn't know it was only in 1979 that Capital punishment in Norway was abolished. Even after the 2011 Norway attacks, it seems, "opposition to the death penalty remained firmly entrenched, with 16 percent supporting and 68 percent opposed." Those PA announcements saying "Now it's time for outdoors recreation" must have been terribly annoying for him. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:18, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's just been pointed out to me that the plot of The Simpsons episode "Bart to the Future", set 30 years in the future, included Lisa becoming President of the United States of America and trying to sort out the economic mess left by her predecessor in the Oval Office, Donald Trump! JezGrove (talk) 16:43, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If only he'd stuck to sax practice sessions in the White House. "I did not have saxual relations with that woman" would never have got him into trouble - except with vocabulary pedants, and he managed that anyway with his "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is". BTW, do you think my source stood up the since-deleted "economic mess" claim over at Trump?JezGrove (talk) 20:27, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, Joe B is a fantastic guitarist - although whenever I hear "Sloe Gin" it always strikes me as an odd choice of drink in the title as I think of it as an old lady's drink and not too rock'n'roll (but maybe that's just me). JezGrove (talk) 12:53, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Martin, since you apparently have Colin Welland on your watch list, could you please keep your eyes out for drive-by editors that change the birthplace from Liverpool (correct) to Leigh (incorrect)? I'm not always on-wiki to catch that (was off for four or five days recently), so the article needs more eyes. Thanks, and anyone reading this, could you please also assist by watching the article? (The main reason the drive-bys try to change it is that all of Welland's obits got the birthplace wrong (see article talk page and the footnote in the article itself.) Thanks! Softlavender (talk) 00:52, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we had quite a discussion about this on the article Talk Page last November, didn't we? After I answered the question you had posted there in 2009! It's the sort of "correction" that many editors will make - especially when in it's in the The New York Times obit which is used as the article's first source! I think maybe a hidden note could be added after the text to explain? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:36, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) OK, I've done that, thanks for the suggestion. Nonetheless, I would appreciate it if you and others could specifically keep an eye out for drivebys who change it -- this is twice in one week it's happened (perhaps even the same person) and I'm not on Wikipedia every day; sometimes I take long breaks, and this sort of information shouldn't be left incorrect like that. Thanks anyone who can help! -- Softlavender (talk) 10:52, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I used to drink with Larkin on jazz night (Tuesdays?) in the Haworth. He wasn't a big drinker - I guess unaccepted oesophageal cancer will do that - but I always made a point of buying him a pint. "Very kind of you", he'd say. "Think nothing of it", I replied, "I'm going to dine out with impressionable young English students for years on this story". The old lecher smiled. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:40, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
At least in later years, he had relatively little interest in his own poetry and his two great loves were jazz and his library (maybe other things beyond my knowledge). I went to Hull, in large part, because of the quality of that library - although there weren't many other places to do laser physics. He certainly detested the Oxbridge sherry circuit and its affectations. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:35, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Martin. In the section "Song versions" seen here [50], would you be interested in sharing your thoughts? I'm personally done with talking to that editor who opened the thread. Maybe you could help by sharing your input? Cadencool23:38, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Okay thanks Martin. And I agree with you the wall of text is overkill. Any input from you would be appreciated so thank you :) Cadencool00:11, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Martin if you have the time could you please go to this [52] RFC and share your opinion? I know you are a long time music editor so I thought you could add to the discussion. Thanks. Cadencool19:52, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was recently experimenting with the clever gadgets on my user page, when I stumbled upon the view history tab. Inflamed with curiosity, I pressed it and was intrigued by a number of watchers tab. In my folly I pressed it. Imagine my horror as I discovered I only had sixty one! In my grief and shame I rushed to my bedchamber, where I suffered a complete Mental breakdown. It may have been days or weeks, but I awoke clutching my poster of arguably the greatest Briton who ever lived. The days have become an unending nightmare. How can I increase this miserable total? Should I start an RfA? Should I start an Infobox war? Is the answer to include the word fuck in all postings? Only you can help. Irondome (talk) 20:47, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder were you intending to add the "Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning"? And have you made any attempt "resolve dispute on article talk page? But are you sure you have the right venue, as "Pov Pushing" doesn't necessarily mean "edit warring". Martinevans123 (talk) 19:39, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Martinevans. I was unable to see more than one page of the book you linked to (the page mentioning Dupree's song). Feel free to revert my edit, but I think it would be appropriate to link to your source for substantiation. I am pretty new to editing Wikipedia articles, but I was a book editor for 30-some years. I may have been overly bold with this particular edit. I appreciate hearing from you. Best wishes from Jim Wicklatz Jwicklatz (talk) 20:09, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. You did a good job at tidying up what was there. I'm thinking that although the book suggests a link between that song and the development of rap, but it doesn't explain why very well. So it is a bit tenuous. I may open a thread at the CJD Talk Page. While we consider, we might want to listen, I guess. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:29, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]