User talk:Drmies: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 02:34, 4 May 2017

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120
121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130
131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140
141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by when more than 1 section is present.

Jag är Ikea.

This user stands with Sweden.

Je suis Ikea.

Holiday card

Wishing you a Charlie Russell Christmas,
Drmies!

"Here's hoping that the worst end of your trail is behind you
That Dad Time be your friend from here to the end
And sickness nor sorrow don't find you."
—C.M. Russell, Christmas greeting 1926.
Montanabw^(talk) 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

Iryna Harpy (talk) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec16a}} to your friends' talk pages.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sha Tin College

Speedy keep as per SCh.OUTCOMES, do you think? — O Fortuna^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 18:03, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, I'm not sure what that guideline says anymore, haha. But colleges (if it's post-secondary) should still be notable, no? Hey, why don't you run for admin, and then you don't have to bother me so often anymore--plus you get discounted gin tonics at the admin club! Ritchie333, have we upgraded yet to something decent, like Bombay Sapphire, instead of that cheap stuff we used to get? Drmies (talk) 18:25, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) If the Wicked Witch of the Westminster has her way, we won't be able to drink anything not brewed in the UK - fortunately that includes Shepherd Neame so I can cope. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:27, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) "British eggs for British people", if you don't mind. See... just one big happy family on this side of La manche. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:04, 18 April 2017 (UTC) [reply]

OK now read between the lines and answer the other question. ;) Drmies (talk) 18:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As long as I have access to Thornbridge and Otter products I'm happy. Black Kite (talk) 18:33, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Mrs May doesn't answer the question she's asked, and answers the one she'd like to answer, so why can't I? Anyway, the school article - if there's a reliable source confirming it exists, then it's probably notable, though if the article's crap, parking a redirect to the town / district may be an alternative. If Black Kite's serious about copyvios, chop them out ASAP and revdel the revisions that have them in. And for FIM wanting to be an admin ... well he's never asked if he wanted to be one, simples. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:35, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You'd need to ship in something closer to a decent single malt than that Blue Sapphire you've been bootlegging, Ritchie333 :p I've filleted it of its most problematic aspects, although I'm not sure it needs much of what's left either. As for bothering Dr.M; ...I haven't posted here for nine days. — O Fortuna^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 18:55, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So that's why my heart felt so empty... Well, can you still run for admin please? Drmies (talk) 19:03, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The school is notable. The article is crap, though - most of it is unsourced and at least some of it is copied verbatim from the school's website. Black Kite (talk) 18:30, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Black Kite, can I just add that the only reason that you didn't get a card for Easter is that I somehow misplaced your address? Drmies (talk) 18:33, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - No problem, we moved house last December anyway ;-) Black Kite (talk) 19:05, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tomas Gorny

What led you to make the final decision to delete this page? It didn't appear that you weighed in on the conversation at all, and the majority of the talk during AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tomas Gorny (4th nomination)) was in favor of keep. JonathanBentz (talk) 13:19, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That is called an independent decision by an uninvolved admin. The Banner talk 14:48, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was actually just about to make a new section on this topic. I disagree with the decision to delete the article, partly because the "keep" !votes vastly outnumbered the "delete" !votes. Several reliable sources, some of which you acknowledged, exist about Gorny [1], [2], [3], [4] (the latter I don't think was brought up in the AfD). At the least, this article may be borderline GNG, but it meets GNG nonetheless. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:44, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1990sguy, it's not a vote count: as I noted, many of the "keep" votes didn't present evidence, only statements. That Entrepreneur article was brought up. The sourcing is a lot thinner than you suggest, as was argued well in that AfD. Drmies (talk) 21:11, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Michelin Guide

An IP-hopper is adding some sour grapes and irrelevant info to the article Michelin Guide. Okay, I remove that but Ymblanter refused to protect that page. But now I am loosing my cool, after being named as sour grape The Banner, faschoide michelin fanatic. What can be done about this IP-hopper as I start to get angry about his comments. The Banner talk 14:07, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I took the liberty to place this under pending protection level 1 (not enough disruption for semi-protection imho) ; this will at least stop the edits of going "live". I do not know if it will stop you from getting angry, @The Banner:, but I hope so. Lectonar (talk) 14:33, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A rap on his fingers would help to calm be down. The Banner talk 14:46, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: not a block or something like that (although..., etc.), perhaps a polite type of roaring can do the trick. The Banner talk 14:59, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think he is unhappy: User talk:178.197.227.208 The Banner talk 23:06, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the edit summary, as "faschoide" and derivations as "fascist" is of course reserved for me as a German :). I have watchlisted, and will rap on their ip-hopping knuckles the next time. Will be eating at Restaurant Mirazur next month, btw. Lectonar (talk) 15:47, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lectonar, I really do not want to know that kind of information. OMG. Drmies (talk) 18:24, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have Loam on the cards pretty soon... The Banner talk 19:23, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This has happened before, a long time ago - I remember dealing with it then. Someone's got a long-term grudge. Black Kite (talk) 19:05, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Tomas Gorny

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Tomas Gorny. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. I appreciate your response to my post, but I respectfully disagree with your decision to delete. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:11, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

normally when an article like this is at Del Rev, I undelete the history, as a matter of course, but perhaps you;'d rather do it yourself. There's no real way to judge the reasonableness of the close without seeing the article. DGG ( talk ) 03:57, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks on behalf of my RSI. Drmies (talk) 04:03, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sock of account banned as vandalism-only

These three accounts were created by this editor, whom you blocked. See here. Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 14:33, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. This is some childish racist who keeps clicking the same buttons. Boomer, if you have a moment, can you write up a (pro forma) SPI? It all starts with User:Ryanbrooke2222; if you check my contributions you'll see all the others I blocked after CU. Thanks! Oh, Oshwah, you blocked a few of these and I added a CU block to them. Drmies (talk) 14:53, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
They geolocate to Islington in the UK. Ritchie333, you're British--do you know this person? Y'all eat kippers together and wash it down with warm beer? Drmies (talk) 14:55, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is an pro forma SPI case necessary? I only ask as filing SPI cases isn't exactly forte. Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 15:04, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's good experience for when you run for admin. :) Drmies (talk) 15:05, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Islington? That's Corbyn Country. You won't find many kippers there. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:05, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Boomer Vial: Use Twinkle. It cuts down on the grunt work. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:09, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which account is the sockmaster? Drmies? Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 15:08, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ryanbrooke2222. Look, all the admins are watching--you know why? Cause they want to see how real work gets done around here. Drmies (talk) 15:28, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do not use Twinkle unless you know how to the manual process inside out and can perform it blindfolded while standing upside down in shark-infested custard. Otherwise, you are editing the encyclopedia without actually knowing what you're doing, which can come back and bite you. It's not so bad for AfDs, but I would never, ever, use Twinkle when blocking. It is too dangerous. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:17, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously I disagree with almost everything you've written here. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:19, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No you don't! Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:21, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Meh. It seems Cyberbot I agrees with you as I've been desysopped by them - User:NeilN. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:40, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And so many are complaining that desysopping has been become sooo difficult; easy as pie, just use the bot. We have all been desysopped, btw, happens from time to time, remember you are mortal and such...Lectonar (talk) 16:16, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

V clever, NeilN, how'd you do that?! — O Fortuna^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 15:52, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I pissed off the bot overlord. [5] --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:57, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, DarthBot :) well; you won't be doing that again will you... does this mean we can all throw things at you now?! :p — O Fortuna^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 16:00, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Now? There was something stopping people before? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:16, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Ritchie333 Unfortunately for me, I've only gotten to as far as piranha-infested custard. Got any fish fingers? Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 15:22, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No. Go fish. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:25, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apropos of nothing in particular, I find that I perform the actual block manually, but then use Twinkle for the block notice (using the Twinkle block interface, but unchecking the "block user" box). Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:27, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Since Twinkle has them, I use them. Why not? Drmies (talk) 15:29, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I explained my reasons here. The most common block I do is a vandalising IP, which gets no message at all per WP:RBI. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:31, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get the "Twinkle took me to..." part. Drmies (talk) 16:08, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sensebased (talk) 20:14, 20 April 2017 (UTC) : Bot Colony article - deletion of recent changes

As I don't contribute frequently, I'm not sure exactly where and how to declare COI. I am the author of the book and designer of the game, so of course there is potential for COI. This said, I believe that my recent edits to the Bot Colony article and to the Laws of robotics article to be factual, objective and informative. Therefore, I respectfully request to reinstate them OR to edit them to some acceptable form considered neutral.

Factually, the Bot Colony videogame was updated on February 21, 2017 and sold quite a few copies since ( ref http://store.steampowered.com/app/263040/ and this press release http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20170221006827/en/Bot-Colony-Videogame-Leverages-Advanced-NLU-Technology ). The older version of the Bot Colony article, which is back now, states it's been discontinued. While this is true (it was discontinued for a while), it's not discontinued any longer, so if that statements is left to stand alone, it's misleading.

About the 5th law of robotics - its consequences have been explored thoroughly in a 'serious' sci-fi work https://www.amazon.ca/Bot-Colony-Novel-Present-Future-ebook/dp/B00K7O6BSE that anticipates the verbal abilities of robots circa 2021. I believe it deserves to be mentioned in the same article that starts with Asimov's 4 laws, among other contributions. Many people are interested in machine cognition, and their ability to empathize (quasi-emotions are also mentioned there), and that's what the fifth law is about.

Ha, that's more than "potential"! Seriously, thanks for your note--I'll respond at some length when I have the time, or maybe some of the friendly talk page stalkers can point you to the right place in our policy, where and how to declare. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 21:54, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sensebased (talk) 12:54, 21 April 2017 (UTC) *I'm in a bind here. I can't be the source of the information because of COI, but the information itself is pertinent. Could you help edit it to make it neutral? That would be a nice resolution. Another question: I was toying with the idea to write an article about the book and link to Henry Fong's paintings here http://botcolony.com/media.php (to which I hold copyright, but I've now published). It looks like I CAN'T do that. Anyway, I'd appreciate a resolution re: Bot Colony article and laws of robotics. Thanks![reply]

Having a COI doesn't mean you can't supply information. It just means you have to be extra careful. As for the things you presented here--well, the Amazon link makes clear that the book is self-published; if the book is good and valuable, it's to be proven by way of secondary sources. Your other links: the one is a press release, the other an online store. None of those are good.
This is an encyclopedia, Sensebased, not a marketing venue. Content here needs to be proven noteworthy by way of secondary sources--before we even start talking about COI, we have to have secondary sourcing. Drmies (talk) 14:37, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) @Sensebased: I know pretty much nothing about video games, but I found two independent reviews from this year and stuck 'em on the article talk page before leaving for work, partly because I have no way of evaluating the websites in question. After looking at the existing sourcing, I went ahead and added them today, and I've done some other nipping and tucking too in the bits where I understood. Perhaps you and others who know about video games can weigh in at Talk:Bot Colony on evaluation of sources and on how far I mucked up? Yngvadottir (talk) 15:44, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Passing through and wanted to encourage the list of vetted video game reliable sources and WPVG custom Google search as references czar 16:32, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sensebased (talk) 17:05, 21 April 2017 (UTC) Thanks for that. I've updated https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bot_Colony#Third_law_of_robotics with a mention of the fifth law of robotics in Communications of the ACM, March, 2013. Would that be sufficient to prove that the content (my deleted post under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_robotics ) is noteworthy?[reply]

Thanks :-)

TL;DR - I didn't realize that his edit was only one out of a series of edits he's been making to the article. I appreciate the comment, the link, and for making sure that I understand what he was actually doing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:41, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. That's one of the problems when editors don't leave edit summaries. Question is, do we need a 240k article on translations of Homer...? It's better than 240k of rasslin', but still. Drmies (talk) 03:26, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable action

Why are you asking me to "Lay low/lower" on Singora's talk page? If this person wasn't making foul PAs against me and others, I wouldn't be there at all. You are barking up the wrong tree by offering me advice. I trust you'll now be refusing the block based upon the diffs I've highlighted? Cassianto^Talk 13:21, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think all he's saying is you've just got to pick your battles. I could go all round the internet screaming about how Donald Trump is a danger to the human race, but all the Trump voters in Podunk, South Carolina wouldn't listen and I'd just get hoarse. Or, as the old saying goes, "never try and teach a pig to sing - you just waste your time and annoy the pig". Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 09:47, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More succinctly, one of the best pieces of advice you'll see anywhere is at the top-right corner of User talk:Beyond My Ken. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 10:03, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Shut up, suck up, survive"- Soviet labour camp saying. Best advice from there is to wear diesel-soaked underpants (to prevent lice), never take off your winter clothes in the summer, eat from the garbage, and lie down, curl up in a ball and squeal like a pig when you're being beaten. Also wear mismatched felt boots. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 12:54, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that explains it. I forgot the diesel oil this morning. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 14:54, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah that's all very sound advice. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 15:45, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cassianto, there are better ways to point things out to admins. If you want the editor to remain blocked, it's probably best to be more discreet about it. That you are right is, in a way, beside the point. Also, I'm not going to decide on an unblock, certainly not now.
Update: unblock request has been denied. Cassianto, why are you yanking my chain when I (also) clearly criticized the other editor for their behavior, in pretty clear terms? How about this: if I'm barking up the wrong tree when I give you some well-intended advice, please don't involve me in any of your conflicts anymore. Drmies (talk) 15:45, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Eleni Antoniadou

I !voted to keep but recognized this one was a hard call. Thank you for being willing to make a tough close and explain it fully and clearly. David in DC (talk) 14:00, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate that--yes, this was not an easy one, and I went over the article and the commentary a few times. Your fellow David argued his case well, and I did note your comment: that's the right spirit to have in an AfD. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:43, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Question about user

Drmies, what can I do for this, specifically the last sentence? AnneMorgan88 back at it again and you've warned her once or twice (even in your archives others had concerns of her being WP:CIVIL). Quite honestly, I'm sick of it. She's gone back to Softlander for this same reason. All I've been doing to the Northern Illinois Huskies articles was changing to sport-specific logos and changed the Northern Illinois Huskies men's soccer and Northern Illinois Huskies women's volleyball article names to be consistent with other Northern Illinois Huskies articles (she created them using "NIU".) She has now requested a move which as of this moment, she's the only one for the change. I've been nothing but nice, I've asked her to quit being rude, and I've done lost my patience. It is time for someone else to step in. Thanks, Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 22:16, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Would WP:ANI be a better place for this? Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 22:26, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didn't get to this earlier; in the meantime, the move request is closed, and NeilN left a warning for a different insult. Let's hope that the closure of the move request puts this matter to rest. If their namecalling continues I'll be happy to block. Drmies (talk) 14:24, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! Thanks for reply, I'll definitely keep this in mind! Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 15:41, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Two days right now. I've ignored the SUBSEQUENT VENTING. Obviously a longer BLOCK will be forthcoming if the same behavior continues after the block EXPIRES. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:14, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kris Wu

I wish you would take a look on this article: Kris Wu. Seriously filled with fans' bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2404:E800:E610:1D5:5D2:8361:A218:3A09 (talk) 23:02, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah Drmies I've had gnaw at it too; oversee it if you wish. But the fan seems pretty keen to reinsert the material, so action might be needed at some point. Cheers, — O Fortuna^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 11:02, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

Hi Doc, hope you are well. I'm having a look through some unblock requests that haven't had any attention for some time, and I came across User talk:Mchirico3489. Mchirico3489 seems genuine and is clearly not an actual sock, and I think could be trusted to not make any further similar edits until it's all been sorted out, but any unblock would require someone with CheckUser rights. Did you get any further with Prof Jones? Do you have any thoughts on what we should do now? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:44, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine, thanks--you too, I hope. That's the NIU folks? No, I haven't heard anything from him--tried to call, left messages... Hold on. Drmies (talk) 16:54, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK, so nothing's changed. I think it's pretty clear that this was a class, and future similar disruption from one or more of the accounts is unlikely. I don't know if they're still interested in getting unblocked, but I'm not opposed. I looked at the SPI--{{U|User:Timotheus Canens}, do you have an opinion? Drmies (talk) 17:00, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That ping to Timotheus Canens was malformed and wouldn't have worked. I'm in two minds - either decline the unblock and suggest making a new one should future course work need it (after proper organization) or (preferred) just unblock. I am not allowed to do the latter. (And yes, I'm fine too, thanks ;-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:55, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I remember this one, another student had also contacted arbcom about this. At the time I was going to just unblock them, since they're not socks, and it'd be easier to deal with the coursework issues that way. But there's a bunch of students and that's too much clicking and I never got around to looking for or writing a mass-unblock script, and then they didn't follow up so I forgot about it. I think unblocking is fine, though I'm not sure there's still any interest. Opabinia regalis (talk) 18:56, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tomas Gorny, redux

Well, it's finally over! The DR closed by reaffirming the close. But isn't it peculiar that it took 3 AfDs & a DR to finally be rid of this blight of an article? Who knew that minor businessmen had such a fan base? :-)

In any case, thank you for the thoughtful (and dare I say, brave) close; the DR failed in part due to the strength of your closing statement. Nice work! K.e.coffman (talk) 07:28, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, is that so? Thanks for keeping me posted--I kind of forgot about it. I don't know how "brave" that close was, and I suppose I could have expected a bit of a backlash. I don't really like commenting on a DR, but in this case it seemed necessary. Still, these are community decisions and if it had gone the other way that would have been fine. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 21:46, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

YGM

Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

~ Rob₁₃^Talk 01:28, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Berkeley AfD notice

I'm having trouble following. PerfectlyIrrational was warned for removing it. Was the warning valid or was the warning editor confused, as I was confused? James J. Lambden 🇺🇸 (talk) 04:35, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't warn him of anything, I don't think: I accidentally nominated it for AfD, and corrected that. You can see that the AfD itself was deleted. Now, please stop edit warring over that stupid infobox. You have no consensus at all for that entirely inappropriate thing. James, I understand your interest in this, but surely you realize that this was not a civil conflict and the listed people not "parties" in some civil war. In fact, listing at least some of them is likely a BLP violation. You can argue your case on the talk page. Drmies (talk) 04:40, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~No you didn't warn him, another editor did. See the warning. That is one reason I was confused.~~ BLP violations should be removed of course and the data could be pared down but the infobox itself is applied correctly per its description. Multiple editors have collaborated on this. ~~Your last edit just broke 3RR – please self-revert.~~ James J. Lambden 🇺🇸 (talk) 05:03, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Striking 3RR. One of your reverts removed the invalid AfD banner, which should not count. James J. Lambden 🇺🇸 (talk) 05:19, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I protected this page, and intended to comment here immediately after when my connection dropped: so my apologies. As has been acknowledged since, there was no 3RR violation (I don't think any but the most wikilawyerish would count the removal of the AfD notice applied in error) and in any case there is a BLP exception to 3RR. There's plenty of edit-warring going on there, though, so I've protected the page for a couple of days: and if that doesn't quiet things down, I'm quite willing to protect it for much longer. Vanamonde (talk) 07:24, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Vanamonde93. I've been away and may have missed some excitement. James J. Lambden, I hope you noticed that I left a note on the other editor's talk page about that warning, left there by another user, and struck the warning. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 21:11, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I thanked you for it in this edit summary. James J. Lambden 🇺🇸 (talk) 21:24, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, you blink here and you miss something. BTW, my daughter has earrings like that emoji in your signature, but she has them heart-shaped; perhaps you can get that as an option? Thanks. Drmies (talk) 02:03, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

SPA account

[6] with that "single purpose" being "revert everything VM does". Perhaps related to some recent blocks.Volunteer Marek (talk) 10:52, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

email

Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:58, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning remark....

[7] Étienne Dolet (talk) 04:09, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

? Drmies (talk) 11:55, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

VM seems to be insinuating that Khirurg has a similar view or is somehow connected with an alleged neo-Nazi of Greek origin. There was no need for VM to bring up Khirurg's old username of "Athenean" in that discussion, and there's also no evidence of Antonopoulos carrying out, for example, anti-Azeri activities. Khirurg, on the other hand, has been active in those topics of Wikipedia so that is a direct reference to him. And even when Khirurg requested such evidence, it was never given. This response signifies that he'll never give it. I've also looked at the Stormfront forum myself, and didn't find anything anti-Azeri or anti-Turkish said by Antonopoulos' account. Now, I know that VM's aggressive language and curses may not enough for administrators to take action, but this is on another level. Étienne Dolet (talk) 20:02, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see that insinuation at all, but you are welcome to ask another admin what they think. In fact, Khirurg's "In addition to the usual incivility, aspersions and character assassinations, VMs post here contains a number of canards" is eminently blockable, and had I seen it at the time I might have blocked for it. You may say that VM's language is "aggressive", and you know he has been blocked for incivility, but I have not seen it rise to any blockable level in quite a while. As for the name change, User:Volunteer Marek's comment is plenty flavored with sour grapes, and I wish they had included an "OK" in their edit summary, but I have no doubt that Marek will abide by that request--which, again, could have been phrased much more diplomatically. Drmies (talk) 20:26, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'd agree with you if it weren't for the totally unnecessary use of Khirurg's old username. There was no need for that, except to associate a certain "Athenean" with that of an alleged neo-Nazi of Greek origin. And the whole anti-Azeri stuff just puts the icing on the cake for me. Antonopoulos had nothing to do with anti-Azeri activity. But you are entitled to your own interpretation of the text, however, in my view, what VM did there was rather obvious. Étienne Dolet (talk) 20:45, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I suppose it is possible to see it that way, as a low blow, but it's just not obvious enough to me. Look, I'm not the sole judge here, and you know that; if you want a multiplicity of views, AN is a better venue. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 21:31, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to note that nowhere did I mention the person's name until Khirurg brought it up first. Also, I know it's a sort of thing that leaves you feeling like you need a shower, but if you read through that guy's posts on SF you can find what I'm talking about, though there isn't as much anti-Azeri stuff as the other "things".Volunteer Marek (talk) 04:46, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

...for hatting. I really don't know why I said anything there. If he'd said the editor was rude, or polite, or right, or wrong, or convincing, or his own worst enemy, or had particularly good or bad judgement, or smelled of elderberries, I'd have ignored it completely as SEP. It wasn't even lying, it was just the blatant casual lack of any concern for the truth that got my goat. I'm sensitive to that lately, for some reason. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:22, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well. Before you know it we'll all be in the grave. In the meantime I'm drinking a delicious beer. Drmies (talk) 22:28, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Link to copyvio youtube file

Drmies, at a time when MartinEvans123 was asked to remove all copyvio youtube links from his pages per WP:LINKVIO, you added on his talk page a link to a youtube page whuich seems to be a copyright violation as well: [8]. It is unlikely that you were unaware of the situation, so this seems like a deliberate WP:POINT violation. Please remove that link as soon as possible and refrain from adding such links anywhere on enwiki in the future. if the youtube page was not a copyright violation and actually uploaded by somone who holds the copyright to that song (or if the song was released in to the public domain) then of course you may ignore this post. Fram (talk) 09:12, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fram! Of course. Thank you--and I wish that "Standard YouTube License" was defined, clearly, somewhere. But, eh, "It is unlikely that you were unaware of the situation, so this seems like a deliberate WP:POINT violation"? I'm sorry, but...well, I don't know how to say this delicately, so I'll just say that you're talking out of your ass. Yes, I was unaware, but thanks a lot for the AGF. Drmies (talk) 14:53, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. Yes. I'm sorry that I missed out on Wikipedia_talk:External_links#ELNEVER:_where_does_it_apply.3F, a page I don't remember ever looking at, a page where I haven't made a single edit ever in ten years on Wikipedia. Drmies (talk) 14:56, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for removing the link, and my apologies for assuming that your post was not a coincidence but a pointy gesture. I didn't mean that you should obviously be aware of discussions at EL or COPYVIO, but that you were aware of the discussion at MartinEvans talk page which lead to the drastic pruning of his talk page and user page. To return to his talk page during this discussion to post a copyvio youtube link seemed to much of a coincidence. I'm glad that's sorted out. Fram (talk) 15:01, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fram, thank you--no, I rarely look at other people's talk pages; I'm always scared they're like EEng's and will crash my computer. I did not know of any pruning there, but after reading that discussion (I just pinged you from there) on Talk:EL I understand. Look, forgive me the slip; I suppose I should have known better, though I'll maintain that it's not as clear as you or I would like it to be. Have y'all asked the legal team if they have an opinion? After all, it's their paycheck. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 15:06, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - That's why I tried to make it clearer for everyone :-) I don't intend to make a big fuss about you or anyone posting such youtube links, I'll contact people when I see it happening and ask them to remove it. Only when people start looking for weak excuses about why they should be allowed to keep such links and so on may it be time to take things further. This is not a "you posted a copyvio, you should be desysoped / banned / scorched from the earth" type of problem, it's very easy for people to forget that this is not allowed on enwiki, and of course the more we tolerate it, the more it will happen. Fram (talk) 15:10, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      - Hmm but the "not allowed on enwiki" part--if that's so clear, why have that discussion? Drmies (talk) 15:13, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        if it is not even allowed in articles, why should it be allowed elsewhere? I (and many others apparently) thought that the existing policies and guidelines where clear enough (like the "no excpetions" at ELNEVER), but apparently this wasn't good enough for some people. It is obvious, but it wasn't spelled out enough to avoid wikilawyering. Fram (talk) 15:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

71.255.80.138

71.255.80.138 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

Could you remove their talkpage access...? Thanks. 185.188.6.168 (talk) 02:34, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 220: / Line 220: @@
 ******Hmm but the "not allowed on enwiki" part--if that's so clear, why have that discussion? [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies#top|talk]]) 15:13, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 *******if it is not even allowed in articles, why should it be allowed elsewhere? I (and many others apparently) thought that the existing policies and guidelines where clear enough (like the "no excpetions" at ELNEVER), but apparently this wasn't good enough for some people. It is obvious, but it wasn't spelled out enough to avoid wikilawyering. [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 15:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
+== 71.255.80.138 ==
+*{{IP|71.255.80.138}}
+Could you remove their talkpage access...? Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/185.188.6.168|185.188.6.168]] ([[User talk:185.188.6.168|talk]]) 02:34, 4 May 2017 (UTC)