Jump to content

User talk:Drmies

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Softlavender (talk | contribs) at 00:54, 25 December 2016 (→‎Heartfelt thoughts: bah humbug). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


That's right y'all.


Request for protecting Kumhar from persistent vandalism

Hi Drmies, hope you are doing great. Honestly speaking, I try to avoid disturbing admins with requests, and possibly I am knocking you after a long time. I would request you to check the article on Kumhar, and protect the same. This has been a subject of persistent vandalism for quite some time now, which is evident from its Revision history. Thanks & Regards, Ekdalian (talk) 07:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Applied a combination of 1 week semi to chase off the disruptive editors, and 1 year of PC protection to make sure they stay away. Vanamonde (talk) 09:30, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Great.. Thanks, Vanamonde. Regards, Ekdalian (talk) 10:43, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's interesting, because I'm actually somewhat a fan: I've used it often where disruption is infrequent. I'd be curious to hear your views, if you have the time/inclination to explain them. No rush. Vanamonde (talk) 16:04, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In a nutshell, those changes have to be looked at and judged, and in the meantime they're in article space. That's a real small nutshell... Drmies (talk) 17:19, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
WP:GS/Caste was formulated based on the kind of disruption in these articles. It doesn't make sense to waste good editor time in just cleaning up messes. Of course when this still doesn't work, we also have the ARBIPA 500/30 that can be used, though those of us that admin in that area have been very conservative with applying that. —SpacemanSpiff 05:35, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Every time we invent something new, we have to rewrite the manual, enlarge the various drop-down menus and other options, etc. By now I can see the advantage of 500/30, but I'm still not a big fan, and PC--yeah, not for me. Drmies (talk) 02:18, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Posting this here since I don't want to undermine your block but am legitimately curious

Technically, if I say to someone that their comment looks like it was written by an eight-year-old, isn't that an attack on the comment itself and not the person making it, hence a violation of CIVIL rather than NPA? It would be a personal attack if the user actually was eight years old and they were being attacked for that.

That said, if you know WCM is not a racist/imperialist, then I guess their other comments were out-of-line and meriting of at least a short block. Personally I'm inclined to take accusations of racism very seriously these days, given some of the shit that's shown up on ANI over the past few months, which is why I was saying AGF on the accusations themselves until some evidence is presented that they are unmerited.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 22:00, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Accusations without evidence are not OK. The burden of proof is on the accuser. MPS1992 (talk) 23:36, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think that's not the same thing as saying "your comment was racist". One can make a racist comment without being a racist (out of ignorance, for instance), but this is not the same thing. That comment, if made to an 8-yr old, would be an accurate observation. To anyone else it's an insult. Drmies (talk) 01:42, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • The whole "it was an attack on the comment, not the person" excuse has just been a lame way to get around being a dick. If you want to be a dick and call someone an 8 yr old, have the courage to own it.--v/r - TP 02:25, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

LOL

LOL what was that XD I had simply copy pasted the exact text from ""NYT"". Anyway, doesn;t matter. Can you have a look at my user page and delete it. Have been trying since 3 hours Pppooojjjaaa (talk) 04:20, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It was inside double apostrophe "--". Anyway, what do I have to do to completely remove any trace of connection between my gmail account and me and wikipedia? Pppooojjjaaa (talk) 04:30, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and I also want, if possible, my login credentials to be removed from wiki database- such that I am automatically logged out and my login credentials destroyed. Thanks again Pppooojjjaaa (talk) 04:37, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's above my pay grade. It just occurred to me you could do suicide by admin. Say a terrible thing about a living person, say Miles Davis or John Milton, and I can block you indefinitely. But maybe it's best to wait for some smarter person than me to show up; plus, occasionally I have very clever visitors here. Drmies (talk) 04:38, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I can do that. But that will still keep me logged in? I don;t want that. I want my username/id and even if possible my IP address to unable to access wiki. Pppooojjjaaa (talk) 04:40, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
By the way really appreciate your help on this. It's probably the first time I have help herePppooojjjaaa (talk) 04:41, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppooojjjaaa: Hmm, well, if all you want to do is remove your email address from your Wikipedia account, so that you can't receive or send emails from Wikipedia, that's easy enough to do. Just go to the Special:ChangeEmail page (Wikipedia might ask you to log in again, just to be sure of your identity). That should take you to a page that shows your currently-associated email address, and prompts you for a new email address--just leave the new address box blank and hit the "Change Email" button. That will remove the email address from your account.

As for the login thing, that should be pretty straightforward, at least where your user account is concerned: just go to Special:UserLogout, and you'll be logged out; from then on, you'll be signed out of your account. Just don't sign back in, and you're good to go. Nothing we can do about IP address, though. (By the way, Drmies was kidding when he was talking about suicide by admin. Please don't do that.) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 04:46, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • I was? Yes I was. Of course. BTW, today is John Milton's birthday: Happy Paradise Lost everyone. Thanks for the advice WK. Pppooojjjaaa, see you later or, if you're successful, not. Drmies (talk) 04:49, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I changed my email id. If i delete that email id, will it delete my wiki username? Also, my edits for example on protected pages like Akshay Kumar and Alia Bhatt's nationality are permanent? I do not only want to log out, but remove my username from Wiki's system Pppooojjjaaa (talk) 04:58, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It will not delete your account; Wikipedia accounts cannot be deleted. The best you can do is have it renamed, per the advice on courtesy vanishing (instructions on requesting this can be found on that page), but even that will not remove the edits you've already made: it will just attribute the edits to the new username. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 05:05, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What crap :( Anyway, how do I care. I will log out and do some work. I will download a chrome extension to block wiki. ;) It works well. Thanks bbye. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pppooojjjaaa (talk • contribs) 05:07, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Manjima Grandhasala

I think the article has been improved!

Anas647 (talk) 04:53, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of warning

Hi, why did you remove the warning? Asilah1981 has stood out not only for his personal attacks, but for his breach of basic cooperative guidelines like edit summary. Iñaki LL (talk) 09:35, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Because dropping a warning template about a relatively minor point right below a blocking template seems a bit cold to me. Don't template the regulars, really--unless it's with a block template, of course. Drmies (talk) 03:16, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if irregular editing is not reminded to an editor, he will just keep on, and no record remains of the community noticing it (!) Regards Iñaki LL (talk) 20:54, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Respect

Well while you're no longer on my list of wonderful wikipedians, you still have my respect (but no, I don't luv ya like a brother). I still voted for you when you stood for arbcom. WCMemail 12:29, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's complicated, there is more to this but it's difficult to explain. WCMemail 08:58, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please protect Lars Kruse?

Lars Kruse (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Another IP adding "Derp" to the article. Probably same person. Thanks Jim1138 (talk) 03:13, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Jim1138 (talk) 05:37, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Trackers

Martin Trackers (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Seems to be a dead ringer for the last one My name is Justin Anthony Knapp (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Much appreciated! Jim1138 (talk) 05:37, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Already blocked by Widr. Jim1138 (talk) 05:38, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ME???? Soft and cuddly??!!??

RROOOOOAAAAARRRRRR! --Randykitty (talk) 16:17, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

Thank you. I wanted that the insults stop and thats is the case. The solution is OK for me. Best regards. --Ms10vc (talk) 19:05, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I want to that Wikihounding would be stopped. Ms10vc purshase me in Commons and en wiki and came here just to continue te fightenning against me. For the word "trolling", it was not against this acts here but about his acts in Commons, who is clearly a trolling because he used a very loaded argument but the action didn't occure here so you couldn't take a decision. Enough is enough. Could you tell Ms10vc to stop his actions against me ? Regards. --Panam2014 (talk) 20:21, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Update : A deal was reached in Commons and now there are no problem. And I recognize that I have commited errors like Ms10vc. Best regards. --Panam2014 (talk) 20:33, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • (talk page stalker) I'm not fast enough, I wrote a comment about Pannam2014 probably meaning to write the English equivalent to "perseguir" (i.e. chase, follow, harass, in this case on Commons), and not "purchase" as they wrote (= which means comprar in Spanish), but when I was about to post it, Pannam2014 had already posted their update. But I guess being too slow and too late is the 2016 version of me in a nutshell... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 20:41, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • You and me both, Thomas. And can I just point out that it's been 3 1/2 years since Wikipedia:ANI 2.0 was deleted? And lo and behold, what do we have here? Pannam, one more time: this is the English wiki. You exported a problem from another wiki onto this one, by way of Jean-Jacques Georges' talk page. That's not OK, and it's certainly not OK to do so by way of insults. Whether you call someone a troll over something on Commons or something here is of no concern to me; what matters is that you made a personal attack here. Please don't do that again. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 03:46, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's okay, but the action of Ms10vc which consists of coming back here just to hunt me down is to be deplored. How could a contributor who was absent for a year find a message where he was not even notified and knowing that the message in question dates from November? This shows that his general attitude is to harass me. --Panam2014 (talk) 12:58, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Pannam2014: Look, I don't know how to be clearer: do not ever mention Ms10vc on en.wiki again, on any page, or I will block you indefinitely with no further warning. If you understand, signify it by not mentioning Ms10vc anymore --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:19, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Floquenbeam: It is clear, I understand, I will not quote him anywhere but why threaten me? I was just saying that it is impossible to believe that the "administrator noticeboard" posted yesterday is the result of an innocent action. But suddenly, if I am harassed again, what do I have? I go back to my work and do something else. I wish you a good day. Greeting. --Panam2014 (talk) 13:28, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Pamman2014, Floquenbeam, whose word is gospel truth (it bears repeating), used the words they did--I assume--because it seems you didn't hear us the first three four times--twice here and twice in the ANI thread. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 15:48, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Breitbart

If you reject Breitbart as a news source, tens of millions everyday would disagree with you and see you as politically partisan. I find your edit unfair and your threat aggressive.

She caused further controversy in April 2014 by claiming on NBC's Meet The Press that the Arkansas accent lacks sophistication and therefore was inappropriate for an Americans For Prosperity advertisement about Obamacare

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2014/04/06/washington-posts-kathleen-parker-attacks-people-with-southern-accents-as-not-smart-or-sophisticated/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rpafitzpatrick (talk • contribs) 00:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Rpafitzpatrick: Community consensus on reliable sourcing is that Breitbart is too partisan to be considered a reliable source by itself (if at all). Biographies of living persons require the highest quality sources. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:43, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree with Ian here. There are a lot of other sources that "millions of people" would disagree with us about regarding matters of policies and guidelines, but that is one of the reasons we have policies and guidelines. We aim at using the best, most reliable sources, not necessarily the most popular. John Carter (talk) 01:15, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • If it matters, I also agree that Breitbart shouldn't be used as a reliable source for anything other than the opinion of the alt-right.--v/r - TP 02:03, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks TParis. I'm used to disagreeing with you, but here, yeah. User:Rpafitzpatrick, it doesn't take a liberal to see that Breitbart is over the top and unreliable. And besides, but I suspect this is not interesting to you, we need to be very careful with "controversy" stuff in the first place, and personally I need a lot more than one comment, one source to get something into a BLP. As for Breitbart, but maybe you're also not interested in this, I don't look at it very much since they got too much video and too many ads; one is reminded of those sites where you get the Twenty Funniest Tweets by Fathers, with a huge picture and a short sometimes funny caption. Not news.

    In this particular case, it's actually not a caption, it's a completely misleading observation: it's false, deceptive, and damning. She is obviously, obviously, directing her criticism at the makers of the ad who, in her opinion, seem to have taken a guy with a Southern accent to play on a stereotype about Southerners. She is criticizing that stereotype, and if you can't see that then you can't see much. (So your version of that in our article is also completely wrong.) Finally, it may be that "millions" may disagree with me; I can live with that. I also think that AC/DC without Bon Scott is just totally mediocre, and millions disagree. I can live with that too. Drmies (talk) 03:21, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

...but how about a Hanks/Ryan movie from a time before the internet was as mainstream as it is now? Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:38, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm waiting on Mrs. Drmies to have a night off from grading so we can watch the latest Jason Bourne. And I can't watch a Hanks/Ryan movie twice cause I just cry and cry. Drmies (talk) 03:40, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

As an uninvolved admin, could you have a look at this? I'm already close to 3RR territory, although I think that's justified because of BLP concerns. Thanks! --Randykitty (talk) 09:38, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Indeed it is. I already had applied my machete, but you're right that more could go. Thanks for having a look. Perhaps it'll need protecting at some point, as that "controversies" section keeps getting added (looks like somebody didn't get the award they coveted and now is disgruntled...) I don't really feel "involved", but having edited there, I rather err on the side of caution. --Randykitty (talk) 16:25, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, just another example of an article being written (likely) by an involved editor who is not aware of Wikipedia's guidelines. It happens, esp. with organizations. BTW, it can be hard to write up notable organizations, like trade associations for instance, since they frequently don't get a lot of coverage in mainstream sources. Drmies (talk) 00:01, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Umm.

Allen Frantzen. Allen J. Frantzen. <looks around for a volunteer>. Yngvadottir (talk) 03:21, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Grab your balls! Drmies (talk) 03:26, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • My ben-was, you mean? <smiles innocently>. No but really, this is covering up the references I'd need. Where's a queer studies person to cut through the fog? Yngvadottir (talk) 04:05, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • There's no fog. There's just bafflement. Frantzen was our god for a while (Beowulf and Angels in America and the closet...), and then he got all MRM, gay and all. Very strange. The ripples have died down a bit but still. Fun fact: I occupied Eileen Joy's desk chair for a little while. Anyway, he's as notable as a scholar can be, and the recent...eh...stuff shouldn't outweigh his scholarly accomplishments, though I'm still not sure how his critique of Boswell should be valued. BTW this is how it goes--write him up and you'll find that our material on penitentials may need updating, and the next thing you need to do is write up Rob Meens. Oh, I already did. How about Marco Mostert? Drmies (talk) 06:05, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mousanonyy

I'm involved because I edit India (not just related topics) and have engaged with the sock on the article. If the socking disruption was just at Alia Bhatt then I'd have gone ahead with the blocks, but the major portion of the socking was at India where I've spoken against the sock edits. From the teahouse post that I'd linked to I assumed there were more, definitely evidence of IPs doing the same, guess no other accounts that's all. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 03:21, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Student Initiative Rahel

Hello Drmies! Why you have placed the Template:Primary sources in the article. I'm not a member of the project I didn't use use sources from the project but also other sources like from the Frankfurter Rundschau newspaper.--Urmelbeauftragter 16:58, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello Urmelbeauftragter--the template says "This article relies too much on references to primary sources"--too much, not exclusively. But I see only one single secondary source in there. Drmies (talk) 17:02, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hello Drmies. There are more:
    :
  • "Bekämpfung von Fluchtursachen (=Fight against becoming a refugee)" (in German). Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung (=Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development). Retrieved 12 December 2016.
  • Jonas Göcke (28 August 2016). "Stadtkirchenfest Frankfurt - Mit dem Schiff zum Gottesdienst (=City Church Festival - With a ship to the church service)" (in German). FR-Online. Retrieved 12 December 2016.
  • Editorial department of Frankfurter Neue Presse (15 June 2013). "Hochschule St. Georgen öffnet zum Sommerfest die Türen (=St. Georgen University opens the doors to the summer festival)" (in German). Frankfurter Neue Presse. Retrieved 12 December 2016.
  • Doris Wiese-Gutheil. "Netzwerk Frankfurter Eine-Welt-Gruppen (=Network of Frankfurt One world groups)" (in German). Kath.

Stadtkirche Frankfurt of the Diocese of Limburg. Retrieved 12 December 2016.

  • Internationale Christliche Rundfunkgemeinschaft (ICR) e.V. (7 December 2014). "Radio Horeb Tagesprogramm (=Radio Horeb Program of the day)" (in German). Radio Horeb. Retrieved 12 December 2016.
  • Judith Breunig. "Rahel – Ein Bildungsprojekt für Adigrat (=Rahel - An educational project for Adigrat), on website of the Initiative Teilen im Cusanuswerk e.V." (in German). Cusanuswerk. Retrieved 12 December 2016.--Urmelbeauftragter 17:06, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
{{re|Urmelbeauftragter]] how many of these are independent of the Catholic Church? I see Radio Horeb, the Cusanuswerk, a Diocese, a network of One World groups. None of those are independent. ""Hochschule St. Georgen öffnet zum Sommerfest die Türen" is simply promotional, inviting people to an event, and even though you say "editorial department" it says "The Philosophical Theological College Sankt Georgen, Offenbacher Landstraße 224, invites you to the Sommmerfest" and is written in a promotional tone. I'm guessing the Stadtkirchenfest piece is the same. Doug Weller talk 17:54, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Urmelbeauftragter: pinging correctly this time. Doug Weller talk 19:12, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Do you really mean local newspapers in Frankfurt have only promotional articles? Are you really sure? If the haeadline would be "President Obama invites to a economic conference" it would be promotional, too?--Urmelbeauftragter 21:01, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Neue Press article is from a secondary source. The rest are from organizations (from what I can tell) which are not news organizations, let alone books etc. BTW, the citations are quite lengthy. I encourage you to condense them a bit. Drmies (talk) 21:24, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The Frankfurter Rundschau (Online version = FR-online) is a social-democratic newspaper. What is the diffrence to a news organisation?--Urmelbeauftragter 22:02, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, whatever--you are totally missing the point, which is obviously about ALL THE OTHER sources. Drmies (talk) 00:38, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Thank Cthulhu that's over! prmcd16 👽 (u)•(t) 02:51, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Au contraire. If people like that don't understand the enormity of their error, this nightmare will only get worse. Drmies (talk) 03:06, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • My experience has been that that kind of editor is incapable of such an understanding either through bigotry or ideology or both, and that trying to confront them with the awful reality of history is a waste of time. But you get credit for trying. On that note, is a visit to the Anne Frank house a standard Dutch student field trip, and does it make an impression on, say, 12-year-olds? I took the tour 35 years ago when I was 22 and studying for a year in Europe - it was profoundly sobering, and I was glad I did it. Acroterion (talk) 03:14, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • Nope--I've never been, though I lived across the street for a while. Tell you the truth, I never even read her book--I don't know why. I don't think we had booklists, or mandatory readings. Mrs. Drmies went there a couple of years ago and was impressed. Anyway, the editor upped the game to complete Holocaust denial so I removed TPA, after a ping by a colleague. Today, I saw a whole bunch of comments in that vein in, of all places, the comments on an Amnesty International post on Facebook, where commenters denied everything that came out of the mainstream media, and instead cited all kinds of weird cites--and RT. Drmies (talk) 03:48, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        • Ignoring the MSM is what all the cool kids are doing nowadays. Contrafactual history is all the rage, which makes for puzzled or outraged "skeptics" or "investigators" appearing here to muddle things even more. Bah. Acroterion (talk) 03:56, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
          • I wonder if Wiktionary has an entry for "self-investigation", which is--I believe--a fetishistic, masturbatory exercise fueled by conspiracy theories. Drmies (talk) 04:20, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
            • It's a way to feel intelligent and knowledgeable and special without putting in the grunt work to achieve - for example - a PhD in a specific area of expertise in which one has made a distinct contribution to knowledge through rigorous study and documentation. It's way easier to just make shit up. Acroterion (talk) 04:34, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Salad talk

Hello Boss,

I saw that you were wandering around in my sandbox for some reason, so I just wanted to let you know that I have expanded the previously mediocre Salade niçoise by about eight times. My swelled head tells me that this article is now by far the best online resource about this topic and is also much better than the French Wikipedia version. But I could be wrong. What do you think? Sorry, it contains neither cheese nor bacon. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:48, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, that's a mighty fine article. Good work Cullen. Way superior to the French one, whose image--pshaw!--has some boiled, sliced potato on the plate. BTW I'll take mine with seared tuna. And in a pinch, leave out the salad and just give me the tuna. Drmies (talk) 01:39, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Heaven of Sin article

Hello, I don't mean to be rude, I respect your work in keeping a high quality of this site. However, I don't understand why my article about Keep of Kalessin's EP Heaven of Sin was removed on the basis of providing no sources of notability (which I can understand, even though my personal opinion is that any work, even self-published, by a notable artist is inherently notable), but the article Introspection (EP) was allowed to stay despite not citing any sources. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slampisko (talk • contribs) 07:59, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Block Evasion?

[1] From what Asilah1981 has repeatedly stated he believes the "UN position" to be, I would say that its a pretty definite case of block evasion. What do you think? WCMemail 08:36, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Apartheid Museum

Hey Drmies and friends,

Apartheid Museum needs attention from an administrator, since some heavy axe-grinding is going on there. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:25, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this at the Teahouse as well, posted a message at the Teahouse and again at Talk:Apartheid Museum#CORRECTIONS - LEGAL AND VERIFIABLE. I also asked about it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject South Africa#Apartheid Museum. The edits were made by a new editor who probably doesn't understand what Wikipedia is about. I think there probably should be a revert back to the last stable version before the editing began, but wasn't sure if that would be appropriate. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:55, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural issue regarding potential academic COI

I am throwing this out there for you and your TPS-arazzi; I've observed a situation that is new for me and I'm not 100 percent sure how to handle it. I am suspicious that an academic user is engaging in WP:REFSPAM by adding very detailed "Further reading" and "external links" blurbs to academic articles and book chapters that all seem to have been written by the same author. I reverted one of these instances and left the user a note asking him to discuss on the talk page why there should be an exception to the usual "Further reading" model of a link to a particular resource, rather than a couple of sentences regarding the noble academic intentions of the author of the linked book chapter. Before I finished my note, the user reverted my reversion and has gone on to expand the "Further reading" blurb even more.

I am very concerned about treading appropriately to avoid WP:OUTING but the obvious question has got to be, "Dude, what is your relationship with this academic author?" What is my appropriate course of action here? I guess it'll be a moot point if he responds to my note on his talk page, but if he doesn't, what then? At what point do inquiries regarding a potential COI cross the bounds into Wikihounding and threatened outing? I appreciate any advice; I'm not one to flail blindly into the void before asking for suggestions. Bedankt! - Julietdeltalima (talk) 01:31, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't perceive any risk of outing. Any editor who appears to be systematically adding reference to the work of a single author across a variety of articles would be in the same boat. I assume you are referring to Special:Contributions/Vertigo737. So far three articles seems to be affected (at least in 2016). He could be warned for edit warring if he persists in restoring his material whenever others remove it. EdJohnston (talk) 02:27, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Spam is spam, and obvious spam is obvious spam. Who adds it and where it originated is immaterial, unless the spam starts to infiltrate the actual text of the articles, in which case a COI warning notice does need to be given. (I've just now removed the spam from Something Evil.) Softlavender (talk) 03:31, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • And we have a sockpuppet ... how charming: Lostboyaus. -- Softlavender (talk) 03:51, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's a tough one. I'm usually inclined to let the edit stand if the edit is valid and the source reliable, even if it looks very much like a COI edit. Some of the edits are just not OK--this is not doing what "Further Reading" should do--it's actually giving detail/judgment about the movie and should go into the main text. I don't like Further Reading sections anyway, since they invite such PR. You don't have to worry about outing, because you don't have to name names in any accusation. Ed is right about the edit warring, of course--and the socking seems to clear as well. But there's a year in between the edits, and I'm guessing it's a lost password or something. By the same token, it would be a good idea for Vertigo737 to start talking here. Drmies (talk) 04:25, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's clear COI spam, from both accounts; the non-notable author of the works the user is spamming lives in "Aus", just like Lostboyaus. The user is clearly not here to build an encyclopedia, but only to spam links and mentions of Adrian Schober. Softlavender (talk) 04:56, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
But spam is an intent; spammy content need not be irredeemable. Wasn't one of those books published by Palgrave? Drmies (talk) 04:59, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have absolutely zero patience for spam (especially spammers who add spam all around the site), as it's obviously completely non-objective and willfully chosen without perspective, good faith, or common sense. The author is utterly non-notable (I Googled him). I have once seen a spammer write some good content (a biographical article they created on a Greek person they had some knowledge of), but outside of that I have never seen someone spamming the works of a non-notable author and wannabe film expert do any good to the encyclopedia (unless they refrain entirely from that author's works). Softlavender (talk) 05:13, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lexington Books seems to be a legitimate academic publisher. I have no opinion at this point on the notability of its author, but, of course, the book can be a reliable source, even if the author is not notable. As for adding the links, I think this should be judged on a case by case basis. That something was added by a (possible) COI editor does not make it automatically inadmissible. If the link is helpful, it should stay. (BTW, I agree with your opinion of "further reading", Drmies). --Randykitty (talk) 16:37, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings!

Hello Drmies: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Mona778 (talk) 05:00, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Christmas is near, enjoy to the fullest my dear! Best wishes for this holiday season. Mona778 (talk) 05:00, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya

Hope you don't mind that I'll ignore his attempt to create drama for now. Merry Christmas in advance, (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:19, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We potatoes are potato-shaped anyway, no-one notices if we overeat! Shetland Black (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 17:59, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Right. I enjoy quixotic topics. Drmies (talk) 18:05, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Saturnalia!

Happy Saturnalia
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:37, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think that wish will be torn up and blown about by the winds, but I appreciate the thought and wish you the same. Thank you Ealdgyth; you are one of our finest editors and I thank you for sticking it out so long. Drmies (talk) 16:38, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Knowledge can be disruptive

Some popular tripe.
Note: not powered by fusion

You don't appear to be sorry, you appear to be just censoring information because you don't like it; there are highly reliable sources in the content I added with provable physics experiments that match both theory and what is being observed. Do you have definitive proof of a fusion powered sun? From the original article, clearly the people that believe in the popular theories are completely at a loss for an explanation. Please direct me to reliable sources on the Red Square Nebula and how it formed... the article says that the Nebula shouldn't exist: "How did all this beautiful, crisp structure form?" asks Peter Tuthill of the University of Sydney in Australia. "This is the million dollar question." Why is a quote from Peter Tuthill acceptable, when it says nothing and adds nothing to the article? Plasma theory explains the Red Square Nebula rather simply and provably. I am truly sorry, but please explain your position, or I will have to block you for continuing to edit an article with information that is unreliable and misleading; we are trying to build an encyclopedia based on reliable sources, not popular tripe or conjecture, but provable theories that match physical experiments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hhowardroark (talk • contribs)

(talk page stalker) You are blocked, and not a moderator. Drmies is a moderator. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 14:01, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Actually he is merely a sysop, although he could perhaps be this sort of moderator? MPS1992 (talk) 03:22, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Actually actually he is a fusion powered ostrich. I have definitive proof, and if you do not believe me then I will have to block you and Jimbo. But yeah, I know, moderator is a bad way to describe it, he is basically a janitor. Sysops have root. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 03:34, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Moderator" suggests I'm moderating. Sometimes I do that, but I don't claim to be good at it. "Sysops" is awesome--I have no idea what it means (and please don't explain) but it sounds very powerful and robotic. Intergalactic planetary, even. Hhowardroark, I don't think Wikipedia is the place for you. Drmies (talk) 04:01, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, wikipedia is clearly not he place for me as I am seeking and sharing real provable science that makes sense, not indoctrinated regurgitated nonsense. I have made other options; have fun maintaining your non-sense on the Red Square Nebula; I had already heard through numerous different sources of the censoring and flaws in Wikipedia, long before I tried to post something factual, and it is even more clear to me now, how untrustworthy Wikipedia is.. congratulations, on make an encyclopedia that prevents people from learning new thing! Wikipedia will become extinct very soon, if it continues on this course. Hhowardroark (talk) 16:44, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PM

I, uh, think he's back at it again, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Parsley Man/Archive. He's admitted to "70.95.186.49" being a sockpuppet of his. Uncannily similar interests as well [2]. I do have a question, as I did interact with PM regularly, what was the smoking gun connection that you saw at User talk:A1b2C3d4. Blanking the page is all I see as happening, how does that draw the link to PM? or did you refer to IP information - CU's can see that as I recall - ? Mr rnddude (talk) 23:33, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Honestly I don't remember, but CU confirmed it. Maybe it was something that I saw EvergreenFir do. Much of what I do these days is prompted by what I see go by on Recent changes. Now, a problem is that some of their edits ([3]) are just solid. Drmies (talk) 03:51, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • And seriously, I can't figure out what the hell they thought they were doing, and why on earth they thought that socking would do anything useful for them. I suppose you think I should block the IP? *le sigh* Drmies (talk) 03:56, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think you should do whatever you think is appropriate. Dont have to do anything, theyre not being disruptive. Socking yeah probably. Thats cause enough on its own. I can keep my eyes on the IP and see what they do. Personally id block, and I see you did. If they come back after ill keep my eye on them. Thanks though, Mr rnddude (talk) 04:09, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I left them a note but I doubt it'll do much good. Thanks for the note, BTW. Drmies (talk) 04:27, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Real shame. PM's edits were majority constructive and enforcing policy/guidelines. Sad they decided to sock and continue to pick edit wars. EvergreenFir (talk) 02:40, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eutaw riot

Hello Drmies,

Eutaw riot mentions Grant's win in the 1869 presidential election. There was no presidential election that year. Grant won in 1868 and 1872. I suspect from the context that you meant 1868 but will let you make the correction since I do not have access to the source you cited. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:01, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Gotcha--thanks Cullen. Strange that I made it and didn't subsequently catch it--and neither did the other (careful) editors. Strange, huh--but thanks for setting it straight. (Pity you can't read the source: it's an interesting book. When I'm done with Their Eyes Were Watching God, I'm starting on Bryan Stevenson's Just Mercy.) Drmies (talk) 04:05, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of Stevenson, I heard a story about The Memorial to Peace and Justice on NPR yesterday. Fascinating and worthwhile, though also unsettling in a good way. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:34, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
aaaaand, I just looked at the edit history and was not surprised at who started that article. Warm holiday greetings to you and your delightful family. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:38, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you know, we got some making up to do down here. And I did not start Azalea Trail Maids, haha, who caused quite an uproar (again) cause they welcomed our president-elect in Mobile last week--I'm shocked, shocked! to see no liberal has yet added that controversy to the article. Did you read about the tree they cut down to use as a prop for the Mobile show? I haven't met Stevenson yet, BTW, but I'd love to shake his hand. Some members of my supposably lovely family helped fill some of those urns in the monument with dirt from the places where people were lynched, and yesterday's paper reported that some business brothers had donated $10 million to the memorial. Hey Cullen, old friend, my best to you&wife&child&diminutive dog--keep warm in those cold days, and may all your countertops remain straight and true. Drmies (talk) 00:14, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good Yule!

Good Yule!
Good Yule!


Looking to the sunrise. Wishing you twelve nights and days of warmth, happiness and conviviality this Midwinter, and success in the new year. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:56, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]


You get this a little early, Doc, not just because I value your friendship but also because I wonder whether you have anything to add to Midwinter horn. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:56, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oh I'm sorry I missed this lovely card--thank you so much! As you may know, the academic period is over, and that severely cuts into my wiki time, haha--but I will follow on your suggestion. Still, has there ever been a time when I could do more than you in a given article? I don't think so. All the best, Yngvadottir, and I hope you had a thrilling solstice. Drmies (talk) 04:15, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

86.180.7.217

Could you take a look at this IP's edits again? They have continued to be disruptive after the block that you previously performed. Thanks. 73.96.113.46 (talk) 01:09, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, it looks like Oshwah already took care of it... 2601:1C0:101:235F:3E77:E6FF:FE9F:46BF (talk) 03:00, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Marion Coutts.
Message added 02:06, 21 December 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

North America1000 02:06, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Deletion is not cleanup

See also WP:UGLY Mdrnpndr (talk) 03:26, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And the holidays are upon us!!!


Atsme📞📧 03:27, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas


Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 14:41, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

stalking

Since you've warned this user recently, I'm gonna bring it up here. Apparantly four days ago they decided to become a WP:SPA dedicated to following my edits around and reverting them on sight. They're last 26 edits (out of 27) involve exactly that. They've been making these reverts with edit summaries which repeat my past edit summaries word for word, for example here [4] (compare [5] - I'm assuming that's the edit that prompted them to launch their little stalking/harassment campaign). Trying to discuss issues with this user does not work. They seem to have become "I'm just gonna go around and undo what VM does single purpose account". He's basically going around just making revenge reverts.Volunteer Marek (talk) 18:10, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quviahugvik

Hello Drmies: From high in the Canadian Arctic I hope you enjoy the holiday season, the Winter or Summer Solstice, Quviahugvik, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hannukah or even the Saturnalia, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 23:54, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adapted from {{Season's Greetings}}
  • Thank you CambridgeBayWeather: this is much appreciated. Keep warm, or cold, whichever one you prefer, and all the best in the new year. As a conservative traditionalist and an obedient and happily married person, I celebrate Christmas. Cheers! Drmies (talk) 04:13, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas Drmies!!
Hi Drmies, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,

Thanks for all your help on the 'pedia!

   –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 22:12, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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)

I made a "friend" today

Also pinging @Black Kite:, who protected the article. See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive941#SPLC and User_talk:The_Quixotic_Potato#Strange_comment_at_SPLC_talk_page. A raid channel is an IRC channel used to coordinate troll raids. Unfortunately there is not much we can do as far as I am aware. Meatpuppets (with or without socks) coordinating their actions offwiki is not something we are equipped to deal with, especially not if they are CPUSHing SPA's. I am not a CU, and asking a CU to take a look would probably considered fishing. I thought someone should know this, even though I don't expect you to take action. See also Black Kite's talkpage. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 00:15, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Heartfelt thoughts

Merry Chrismukkah Drmies!!
Hi Drmies, only once in a lifetime do Christmas and Hanukkah fall on the same day.

This is the year you will experience that blessed occasion in your life.

I pray that yours is filled with light, love, and a buttload of gifts.

Thoughts and prayers,

Softlavender (talk)
   


Whoa! I have nothing to do with that. Somebody's playing jokes on you. Sort of... creepy jokes.Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:59, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(If it was really from me it wouldn't be in crimson and white wrapping paper, that's for sure).Volunteer Marek (talk) 17:00, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry, merry!

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:13, 24 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Merry Christmas/Happy Holidays

Merry Christmas, Drmies!
Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. And for all the help you've thrown my way over the years. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 23:49, 20 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drmies&oldid=756541465"