User talk:Dr.K./Archive 12

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Clue Bot III prompt

Clue Bot III test prompt. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 19:03, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for your recent discourse and civility concerning this article: Murder of Travis Alexander. Thanks, also, for your insights and your assistance. Best, Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:36, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much Joseph for your kind and eloquent words. It was a pleasure talking to you at the article talk and at BLPN because I understood from the beginning of our discussion that you are a knowledgeable and civil editor. This realisation made it easy and enjoyable for me to talk to you. In the process you created a nice new article. It was a win-win situation. :) Keep up the good work. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 17:47, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Steady on

User:Michael Frind recently made a series of good faith edits to Air France Flight 447. Most of these were helpful, the other two you chose - rightly - to revert. You then left a message on his talk page accusing him of edit warring. Look again, and you will see that the two edits you reverted, though similar, were different edits, made in different parts of the article. There is no reason to suppose that Michael even saw your revert of his first edit before making the second. His edits clearly were not part of an edit war. 86.5.176.168 (talk) 05:05, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

The editor you mentioned made three additions all of which intended to blame the pilots. I have bolded his edits for clarity:

1. inappropriate control inputs (i.e. pilot error) with edit summary: Minor clarification. I don't know how can one describe an edit as Minor clarification when one places such serious and direct blame on people this way, all without any reliable sources to back it up. Then after my first reversal he made the second alteration in an almost identical manner:
2. followed by inappropriate control inputs (pilot error) with edit summary: Improved clarity. Then five minutes after he got my 3RR warning he made a change designed again to blame the pilots by adding "inappropriate" to the "inputs":
3. The pilot continued making inappropriate nose-up inputs. with the misleading edit summary: Minor punctuation. Clearly the edit was described in a misleading way. I also don't believe that adding "pilot error" in every occurrence of "inappropriate control inputs" is constructive. So even if we assume that the editor did not see my first reversal of his edit (and that is a big if), his second edit was tendentious by seeking to pollute the article with multiple occurrences of "pilot error". In addition his third edit, added with a misleading edit-summary, was a clear indication that he wanted one way or the other to add the explicit notion that the pilots were in error. Given that the article does not officially accuse the pilots of such a thing, the repeated insertions of material designed to blame the pilots explicitly, even in different article sections or wording, constitutes edit-warring by effectively undoing the versions of the article which were clear of officially blaming the pilots. In addition we also have competence issues. If an editor edits an article and is unaware of edit summaries and talkpage discussions they should not be editing sensitive articles in the first place. I left a clear edit summary with my first reversal advising him to take part in the talkpage discussion. Instead he chose to keep adding material directly blaming the pilots. Also don't forget (italics are mine):

   Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert.

I was reverting the article to its neutral state; he kept adding material blaming the pilots. Classic case of edit-warring.

Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 06:14, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Parkour revert

Thanks for the revert on the 190. IP edit. --Izno (talk) 13:18, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem at all. You are very welcome Izno. Glad to have been of assistance. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 19:07, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Fixing bridges

We seem to have had a (rather large) error in communication in this discussion. I thought that when you said "The least I expect from you is to AGF" in your comment, you were noting that I did not AGF, hence my "I thought that we had interacted enough to know that we both are interested in improving the encyclopaedia", which was intended to mean that I had thought you would AGF of me. However, in your reply to my reply, you noted that you still AGFed, which rather voided the premise of some of my reply. I think perhaps you may have in addition taken my reply as a lack of AGF on my part.

Does that sequence of events sound correct? If so, I apologise for my part in the miscommunication. As you noted, that discussion was going nowhere fast. I did see your reply, but I'd left the discussion (and indeed that entire page) at that point, and had no desire to rejoin it to respond to you (or anyone else for that matter, it wasn't anything personal). If the sequence of events above is wrong, please inform me of any corrections, so I have a clear picture of what happened. Sorry this is coming so late, I've been rather busy. Regards, CMD (talk) 05:13, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you CMD for the clarification. Now I understand what you meant by "I thought that we had interacted enough to know that we both are interested in improving the encyclopaedia". At that time I thought, mistakenly as it turns out, that you were implying that I was not trying to improve the encyclopaedia because you added "Clearly I was mistaken", a point which I found really surprising. Now, after your explanation, I can see what you meant, especially after reading again your reply to me about "muddying the waters" on the Cyprus talkpage. Indeed it was a rather large miscommunication between us. But as you so aptly named this section "Fixing bridges", this misunderstanding is a thing of the past; water under the bridge as they say. :) Thank you for thinking of this matter as important enough to clarify to me. It is a very nice gesture and I really appreciate it, especially coming from an editor whose opinion I always valued and respected. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 05:49, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Name change attempt

Re: Cypriot intercommunal violence article.

Hi. I hope I didn't muck things up too much with my redirect attempt at the above article address. I was simply trying to correct the spelling in the article name. It should be "Cypriot inter-communal violence" using proper English. The "Move" button won't work for some reason on that article. So, what should we do? Again, sorry for any problems I may have inadvertently caused. GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 03:30, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi GenQuest. It was not a big deal. I actually agree with your move. I just requested a deletion of the redirects and when they get deleted I'll move the article to the new name since your move button did not work. Best regards. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 03:43, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

On second thought I checked the terms and "intercommunal" seems to be the more common term. So I reversed the speedy deletion request. If you disagree you can propose a move at the talkpage of the article. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 04:21, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank for your help. GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 04:31, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

It was a pleasure. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 04:37, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Murder of Travis Alexander article

Maybe you'd be interested in commenting in a discussion I started on the talk page about the tags an editor added?[1] Halo Jerk1 (talk) 20:44, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Halo Jerk1 for the invitation. I'll have a look. Best regards. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 20:57, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!

For this. Interesting username and choice for replacing my userpage from that one..although I would have preferred one of these stories - as a real bff would have known... :) Dreadstar ☥ 04:41, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

You are very welcome Dreadstar. Lol. I see. You have a preferred userpage version, in case of mild alteration. :) That guy obviously was not such a great bff. He actually was a vandal on the side and he was part of a pair of (almost) matching Dreadstar socks. He also had a "bro" version. Quite a setup. However, if not a real bff, he must have been a real fan. :) Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 14:25, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

User talk:Devanampriya

Just a suggestion, I'd let this user take his ball and go home. The protection he requested (which I fully agree with your assessment about it being a preferred version that he is trying to enforce by hammer) has been denied and I believe he is not capable or willing to listen constructive feedback or the concept that Wikipedia is a community of editors and he is resorting to attempts at using block logs as a manner of attempting to discredit opinions (which he is calling personal attacks and harassment) and not actually basing them on rationale arguments. So in this case save yourself the frustrations of trying to work in good faith and let him dig his own grave. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 07:32, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you HiaB for your advice, which I think is right. My main motivation on getting involved in this unpleasant minefield, was the combination of many factors: chronic edit-warring, use of OR and SYNTH, use of unreliable sources (just look at the RSN discussion currently under way), false statements about other contributors and ceaseless, vicious personal attacks. In my experience here this combination of factors is a sure indicator of hardcore POV-pushing. In addition to that, this editor edit-warred to alter comments which I had already replied to, so as to make it appear that I was replying to something that did not exist, because he had retroactively, deleted it. How can one communicate with an editor of such editing habits and ethics? It is pretty hard, if not impossible. I am glad therefore that this matter has been taken to DRN and RSN so that the rest of the community can become aware of the problem. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 17:42, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Whoa

Hi Dr. K! Saw your name in a history somewhere and thought I'd share an edit with you. You may know that I'm not much given to hyperbole and exaggeration--but this edit summary is motherfucking priceless: [2]. Happy days! Drmies (talk) 03:53, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Doc! Nice seeing you here again. :) At least you can never claim that the K-pop machine doesn't produce a lot of hot air. On a more positive note, edits like this one give us a chance to chat from time to time. :) Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 06:51, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes it does. Really, I come here for a breath of fresh cold air after trimming that jungle. You doing alright? Drmies (talk) 15:25, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Drmies. I always enjoy talking to you and seeing your refreshing perspective about K-pop or any other subject for that matter, so feel free to drop by anytime. :) I'm doing well, thanks for asking. I hope everything is ok on your side as well. Working in the K-pop jungle, as you so aptly put it, is really challenging and it really helps to see your work trying to uphold encyclopedic standards in such a difficult area. Thankfully there are more admins like yourself who are aware of the issues and are actively involved in this area than in the past. That makes a lot of difference and I have seen a visible stabilisation and decrease of the overall edit-warring. It also helps encourage others, like myself, to keep contributing there. So, keep up your good work. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 17:22, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Well, thanks, but I have to correct you: to my knowledge I haven't had my admin hat on in that jungle; I'm just an editor and while I'd love to hand out blocks like bubblegum to those who keep turning those articles into fan pages, I can't really do that while I have such a heavy hand of editing there. One of the problems is that the sheer number of tag teams is overwhelming: any time you get into a back and forth there's a dozen IPs and other accounts that revert as well. And these editors have no interest whatsoever in Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, or in editing anything but their fave bands (if "band" is even the word). Note the ubiquity of "pre-debut", which means nothing but a company testing the waters for a new product. Maybe they're all clones, those artists and their editors. Who knows, maybe it will blow over, like Linsanity. Drmies (talk) 18:21, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Lol. I love your imagery of all these clones producing these overhyped articles. It actually fits well with my assembly-line pop-idol manufacturing ideas about K-pop. As far as mentioning admin involvement in that area, I stand corrected. :) Obviously since you are actively editing these articles you are actually wearing your editor hat and not your admin one. I don't know how I could have conflated these two issues but I guess it is because every time I see you, apart from seeing a friend, I also see you as a capable admin and, at the time, I considered it unfair not to mention you as well. Is this a good explanation, or am I digging myself deeper into a logical hole? :) Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 18:45, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Arapian DYK

Hello Doctor, I provided ALT1 and ALT2. Please pick out which one is more appealing for you. Proudbolsahye (talk) 22:13, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much PB. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 23:24, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Editor review/George Ho

I created a request of editor review on me. Just to let you know. --George Ho (talk) 23:13, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much George. I'll drop by as soon as I can. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 02:26, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Gary Connery

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:03, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Your mentorship with me

In the past years, I had very little interest in improving Wikipedia. In fact, I've hurt people more than I did not intend, and I was a fanatic deletionist. However, since I was unblocked with mentorship agreements, I thought I could do anything I want, but then I realize there is more to helping the cause than just stand there and do nothing except nominating for deletion. In fact, I have to reluctantly agree with terms, and so far I have interests in improving pages about topics more than just deleting material. Lately, I have requested renaming of Chandra Levy, and I created season pages, like Cheers (season 6), and improved Fab Five: The Texas Cheerleader Scandal.

However, I haven't used User talk:George Ho/Mentorship discussions for half a year (or something like that) because I no longer have interest in recklessly requesting deletion on things that need a lot of improvement. Neverthless, I think that List of Curb Your Enthusiasm directors must go. Lately, I've not been receiving replies. I would hope that the page is in your watchlist, isn't it? I wonder if you want to continue as my mentor. If not, then surely I can find your replacement if necessary.

Note: This post is intended for only active and semi-active people. --George Ho (talk) 06:01, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

FFD of File:Junta swearing-in ceremony.jpg

Hi. FFD isn't really the forum for what you are asking. Wikipedia:Non-free content review may be better. But for what it's worth, I have opined. --B (talk) 00:41, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you B for the advice and your opinion. I agree with your second point, although I could search for RS that cover the matter which is missing from the article. As for the first point, if the omission of the picture lessens the understanding of the subject matter etc., if we follow this to the letter there should be no fair use pictures at all on Wikipedia, but this discussion is for another time and perhaps place. BTW, do you think I should move it to Non-free content review or should I leave it where it is? Just asking for technical reasons. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 01:05, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I can close the FFD request (since you aren't really asking to have it deleted) and then you can re-post your request at Non-free content review. --B (talk) 02:35, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much B for your help and your time. I am not an expert in this process and I really appreciate your expert advice. I'll attend the Non-free content review and I will take the advice given there. If a plan of action can be formulated with a view to saving the image, that would be fine. If it cannot be saved, that would be fine too. Given that I respect your advice, even when you think deletion is appropriate, at the end of the day, so be it. But thank you again for making this process so agreeable. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 02:48, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Kostas Tournas

The DYK project (nominate) 01:09, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Admin

Hey. I've seen you around quite a long time now, and noticed your name come up as an admin possibility. While I'm sure you've been asked before, I'm wondering if you've given the possibility of running for adminship any thought. Wizardman 03:20, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Wizardman. What a nice surprise to see you here. :) Thank you very much for your nice comments. As far as thinking about running for adminship, yes, I considered the idea in the past but I didn't really examine it in depth. I know adminship is not supposed to be a big deal but it can act as a magnet for political issues and I'm not sure if the risks outweigh the benefits. So the short answer is, uncertain. Thanks for asking. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 05:23, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Well, I would support if you were to run. Maybe I could even write a co-nomination. I've found that the stress of adminship depends a great deal on what you actually do as an admin. When I spend time patrolling AfD, I get quite a few angry messages from (mostly new) users whose articles I delete. On the other hand, patrolling WP:RFPP and CAT:EP involves very little stress. And even if you just wanted to move the odd page over a redirect that had a history, or just wanted to update DYK occasionally, I think that would be enough reason to give you the tools. So, what do you say? :) — Mr. Stradivarius on tour ^{♪ talk ♪} 03:18, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Wow! What have I done to deserve these accolades from such respected editors? Especially in a short period of time, arriving one after the other. :) Thank you very much for your nice comments Mr. Stradivarius, which I appreciate very much. I also appreciate your advice regarding potential admin tasks. To paraphrase a popular expression, the temptation is in the details, and you are not making it any easier for me to keep being uncertain about this venture by reminding me that it can also be fun. :) I still remain uncertain, but you just made me to at least consider examining it a bit more closely. All the best and thanks again. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 20:49, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Also, what Wizardman says. Give it some thought, and give some thought to the skeletons in your closet. And do it Gangnam style, of course. Drmies (talk) 22:14, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Et tu Doctor? Given the amount of attention that I have received I guess I must have reached the pinnacle of my career here. Definitely. Either that or my Andy Warhol moment has arrived. In any case thank you very much for your kind comments and your always sage and welcome advice delivered in great style. And I don't mean Gangnam. :) Meanwhile I am going to check on the decomposition status of the mummified remains in the closet. :) Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 00:45, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Ha. I'll have a look in your closet, bwuhaha. Actually, it might be a little while--it's spring break, and doctors need expensive beers in such times. Also, I'm working on a totally exciting thing: Saint Boniface already figured heavily in my dissertation, and now he is an occasion for a movie as well, which I'm dying to see: Amsterdam gangsters! So bear with me. Drmies (talk) 04:05, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Please take your time Doc. There is no hurry. Looks like you are involved with a great project and the movie plot seems very interesting and funny with many facets to it. Have fun. :) Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 04:31, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Arapian

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:03, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Helen Vlachos

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:04, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Thank you for Helen Vlachos's article. It was an interesting read. I hope you continue working in this under-edited part of Wikipedia. Cheers. ComputerJA (talk) 20:40, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much ComputerJA for taking the time to give me such nice feedback about the article. I really appreciate your kind comments. It is nice to know that someone cares about such an obscure, for many, part of history and it is even nicer to know that they care enough to comment about it. Take care. Cheers. :) Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 20:50, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Leslie Finer

Hello! Your submission of Leslie Finer at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! NinaGreen (talk) 23:05, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Leslie Finer

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 00:02, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

WPGR barnstar

		The Barnstar of WikiProject Greece
		Very surprised this has not already been awarded to you, so let's remedy it: for your excellent work on Greek and non-Greek articles, coupled with unfailing civility and commitment to Wikipedia's ideals, I am happy to present you with this token of the high esteem in which you are held. Constantine ✍ 09:08, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Kostas, what a nice surprise! It is always great seeing you on my talk, especially after such a long time. :) Thank you very much for your kind gesture. It is an honour for me, which is greatly amplified because, as you know, I hold you and your work in very high esteem. Take care and thanks again. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 09:26, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

George Papandreou

Sorry for our dispute over the GAP entry. Also my apologies for making it personal. I hope that our exchanges do not become a confrontation of academic egos, and look forward to a productive exchange. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oxon 1800 (talk • contribs) 12:33, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

I have replied on the talkpage of the article. In the Socratic dialectic there are no egos, only logic. Hopefully, as his spiritual descendants no less, we can emulate that. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 18:31, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for John the Violent

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 08:04, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

"Calm down"

[3] Bishonen | talk 09:57, 16 April 2013 (UTC).

Hi Bish. What a nice surprise to see you here. :) Thanks for the visit. Too bad I can't offer you some real coffee or any other drink or desert from the real café pictured at the top of my talkpage. :) But who knows. And yes, you are so right. Wikipedia is a very subtle medium and messages can carry all kinds of hidden context and presumptions. This enables a subtle kind of ad-hominem messages which are put to frequent use by editors predisposed to trying to weaken and discredit their perceived opponent. It's unfortunately a common occurrence with some editors and it flies well below the radar of the civility policy unfortunately. I think by making that page you are on to something very valuable and hopefully it can raise the awareness of the editors here regarding messages with hidden context. Thank you for that. Take care and send my regards to a few well-known Chthonic monsters. :) Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 16:23, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

FWIW (I had other things to do while you were duking it out), if I see an unjustified template I remove it also. You shouldn't have edit-warred over it, of course... Now calm the fuck down. :) Take it easy Dr. K, Drmies (talk) 04:21, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, I try to keep this an expletive-free zone but what the fuck. :) As far as being calm, that's a given seeing friends like you Doc and Bish on my talk. And yes, I still regret my reversions so I am not going to try to justify them. I should have known better but sometimes you learn the hard way. Take care and thank you for your kind words. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 04:51, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Byzantine Empire#"Continuation"

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Byzantine Empire#"Continuation".
DIREKTOR (talk · contribs) has proposed a modification to intro sentence for Byzantine Empire (from: "The Byzantine Empire was the predominantly Greek-speaking continuation of the Roman Empire during Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages." → "The Byzantine Empire was the Roman Empire during Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages"). As you participated in the revising the lead, you may be interested to weigh in.  —Sowlos  14:09, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

*gasp* You don't like that creepy eye?! D:  —Sowlos  22:59, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

No. :) It's an old story back from the days of the reviewer userright. When they granted reviewer they used to slap you with a notification carrying an even larger eye than your notice. It was even worse. Luckily the admin who granted reviewer to me spared me the notification. But I did make my views known back then in various discussions trying to eliminate the eye from the reviewer notification but to no avail. Since then I decided that any kind of stylised eye was not for me. They have a large creep factor imo. :) Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 23:07, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeoberry

Has been blocked for 3RR before. And if asked if he has any relationship to John Carpenter just deletes your post. He created an article on Carpenter's Church deleted by AfD and one on Carpenter himself which was speedied. Dougweller (talk) 15:57, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much Doug for the information. He has all the hallmarks of a POV-pusher, including the rapid-fire edit-warring, and the personal attacks on his edit-summaries. Meanwhile there is no trace of the paper or the author on Google Scholar. This is clearly not a recognised work. Thanks again and take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 16:01, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I believe that I've confirmed my suspicions about the genesis of the Carpenter article as I posted here[4]. At the beginning of August 2012, Yeoberry was posting this text across multiple Wikipedia articles. and was rebuffed on the basis of WP:OR and WP:FRINGE, etc.[5] In mid-September 2012, roughly 6 weeks later, Carpenter was posting this at "The Puritan Board" [6], writing he had joined that board for the purpose of publishing his views on the subject, noting that it needed some work, and that he was "working on polishing this for possible publication". Then, Carpenter's article was published by JISCA in 2013, and Yeoberry began adding text referenced to it across Wikipedia, leading the the recent denouement at WP:AN/I. Given the indefinite block and Yeoberry's "retirement", it's all water under the bridge, but I thought that you might be interested. Fladrif (talk) 23:38, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much Fladriff for the courtesy. Fascinating. That's some piece of outstanding detective work on your part. Well, be that as it may, I'm not surprised. What we have at hand is nothing else but the bust of a fairly sophisticated idea-laundering operation, very similar to a money laundering scheme, except that instead of bad money we have some really outdated, discredited and recycled ideas which, through the illusion of their publication in an alleged academic journal of an obscure society, were attempted to be recycled through transplanting them to Wikipedia. The scheme, if successful, would have converted this encyclopedia into a surrogate idea laundering enterprise for infusing these ideas into the wider culture. Thankfully through the teamwork of the local outstanding editors, including yourself, the scheme was busted. The scanner also worked well in detecting the bad money. As would befit any proper idea-laundering scheme some ideological violence to enforce it was employed to force opponents to comply and not question the illicit provenance of these ideas. To that end, the religious denomination of the opposition was used to pose the question to the opposing editors in a manner very similar to that of the Holy Inquisition. Except, that instead of a sin, the editor was asked to confess to COI: [7]. Brilliant but nothing new. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 02:35, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

He has found a place more compatible with his objectives, where he can vent his frustration over his ban from Wikipedia. Unfortunately for him, they promptly deleted his earliest submissions and imposed a block for simply copying content previously deleted from Wikipedia, so this may not go much more smoothly than did matters here. Fladrif (talk) 12:43, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Fladrif for the interesting news. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 18:48, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

No Source

Hey. I wrote this message to Drmies but he can't do it right now that's why I write you the same message. Maybe you can help.

I would like to ask you if it's ok to add rumors etc. without a source? There are users who keep add rumors and stuff like that on these sites: S.M. Entertainment discography or YG Entertainment discography for the part "Upcoming". An admin told me once not to add something without a source that's why I removed these sections of the sites but someone always undo it. Maybe they will listen if an admin tells it to them.

--77.184.226.26 (talk) 11:20, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll have a look. Take care anon. BTW, I am not an admin. :) Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 15:57, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks for letting me know. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 18:24, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh you are not an admin? Anyway thank you (: --77.184.226.26 (talk) 11:03, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

No I am not. :) And you are very welcome. If you have any further problems please let me know. Best regards. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 16:59, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Ashoka's Hell

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:04, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

My sincerest thanks for cleaning my talk page. I'm sorry you had to dirty your hands with such garbage. Judging from the difference in IP locations(Istanbul, Turkey & Toronto, Canada) , would this constitute an off-wiki mailing list? --Kansas Bear (talk) 13:59, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

It was the least I could Kansas Bear. It was also my pleasure. :) Interesting IP locations. It does look like coordination, except if they are proxies. Perhaps you should ask for semi-protection of your talkpage. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 14:15, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Cows

I'm afraid this request [8] was udderly futile. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:54, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Lol!! This is what you get when you try to reason with cows. This is very un-cow-th behaviour and he should be locked in the barn before he creates udder (ok, I stole this from you) chaos. Btw, you gave me the inspiration yesterday with your edit-summary that he was not being a very smart cow. That was really funny. :) Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 18:08, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Starstruck

Hi, Dr K. I told Black Kite that Omnipater reminds me of indefblocked Theodore7 (talk · contribs), so I mention it here, too. You started editing in 2006, the year Theodore was RFAR'd, but I hardly suppose you recollect it. I remember him merely because I was quite involved in both the RFC and the RFAR, and they made an impression on me. Possibly the angriest user I've ever met, always in combat mode from the word go. But the rebarbative manner may be typical of true believers in astrology, and the similarities fortuitous. Bishonen | talk 19:35, 27 April 2013 (UTC).

Yes Bish, I agree. Anyone who pushes his original research with such verbal violence is very likely to have had a few past incarnations. I don't recall Theodore7 because in 2006 I was a noob and for me Arbcom was a Galaxy in outer space. But with a a username implying he is god, or at least the father of everything what do you expect. Come to think of it "Theodore" means gift a god. I guess after his initial incarnation in 2006 as the gift of God he now gave himself a promotion. Talking about space, he also pushes applying Bernoulli's equation as an aid to understanding the cosmos. Unsourced of course. I can't imagine what act II of this drama will bring. I guess we'll just have to wait and see. Take care. It is always nice talking to you. :) Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 21:39, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to you let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You do not need to participate however, you are invited to help find a resolution. The thread is "Istanbul". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot ^{operator / talk} 18:41, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

About Icons

Hello and I hope all is well Dr K. Since this is an English wiki and the sources for some concepts have to be English. I was wondering how the issue of pre-Constantinian church art and icons might be added into the Eastern Orthodox article. As I have from time to time experienced Protestants making very biased and uninformed statements about Eastern Orthodox icon, art history. Case in point the Dura-Europos church clearly show pre-Constantinian portraits and icons. Some sort of distillation of this article section Aniconism_in_Christianity#Early_Christianity should probably be considered as the actual wording that is added to the article about this issue. Thank you for your consideration. LoveMonkey (talk) 16:10, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

This would be outside of and or parallel to the Orthodox approach which would be represented in some degree or another by people like Vladimir Lossky and or Spiro Kostof. LoveMonkey (talk) 16:38, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi LoveMonkey. Sorry for the delay in replying but there was some unexpected activity on wiki today I had to attend to. You make some very interesting points and I think you should go ahead and add this information to the article. If you need my help at any stage of the process I would be happy assist in any way I can. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 00:42, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Peloponnese

technically it is an island being completely surrounded by the sea .... I think it's clear, you could write "was" a peninsula--Τάρας (talk) 18:34, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

ok Τάρας. I can see your point. Except the word "insula" in English does not mean island. Not to mention Peloponnese is still widely considered a peninsula so we can't change that overnight. Take care. Btw I will fix the warning I gave you. I see now it was a misunderstanding. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 20:42, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

excuse me, I was wrong the word. But I do not think that a concept "geographical" may be replaced by a "popular", however I've got tried ....χαιρετίσματα --Τάρας (talk) 21:07, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

No problem Τάρας. You are technically right but it takes time for the reliable sources to catch up with calling Peloponnesos an island. So we have to wait. Take care. It was nice meeting you. Arrivederci. Ciao. Xαιρετίσματα. :) Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 21:16, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism suppression drive?

I noticed the mention of a "Vandalism suppression drive" in the edit summary of an edit you made to an article on my watchlist. (Good job catching that section blanking, by the way!) However, I can't seem to find the drive in question. Would you mind satisfying my curiosity, and pointing me towards it? Thanks! Sophus Bie ^(talk) 12:52, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Why would you be trying to find it? That would presuppose that it is a general drive as opposed to an individual one. I think you are conflating the term "drive" with the term "wikiproject". Also don't forget the "WP:QUALITYCONTROL" link in my edit-summary. It provides the context for the "Vandalism suppression drive". In other words, vandalism is suppressed to maintain "quality control" on Wikipedia by an individual editor-initiated drive. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 15:34, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

I was always under the impression that the noun "drive" as used on Wikipedia was derived from "drive" as in a charity event such as a fundraiser, bake sale, or toy drive, which would imply some sort of group effort (Not necessarily a WikiProject). But anyway, that explains why I can't find it. Have fun beating off the vandal hordes, and happy editing. Sophus Bie ^(talk) 15:38, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

From the same wictionary entry which you linked above, the word "drive" can also mean: "(military) A sustained advance in the face of the enemy to take a strategic objective." If you substitute the word "enemy" with "vandal" and "strategic objective" with WP:QUALITYCONTROL you can see what I was trying to say. Thank you and happy editing. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 18:13, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Istanbul

Could you maybe get Cavann to stop adding things to the article that aren't in the sources they provide? I'm at 3RR's. Ta. — Lfdder (talk) 19:35, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

From what I saw now he has a new source from Reuters which supports the Black Sea location. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 20:02, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

I meant his claim that a new airport is planned because of the "cost of further expansions". — Lfdder (talk) 20:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

In the zaman source it is stated : Building a new runway is not the solution. The cost of the planned parallel runway is TL 5 billion. This could account for the "cost of further expansions". Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 20:20, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

It's a big leap from that to "cost of further expansions". Anyway, it doesn't really matter. — Lfdder (talk) 20:25, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

True. It isn't specific enough. I'll have a go at it. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 20:29, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

I did. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 20:44, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

That's a lot better. Thanks. :-) — Lfdder (talk) 20:57, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

It was a pleasure. :) Thank you for letting me know. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 21:07, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

By the way, maybe you've missed it, but I've made an edit request to replace the type param in the a/c occurrence infobox if you'd like to add your input. — Lfdder (talk) 01:16, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I'll have a look, even though I can accept any proposal now, given that the main issue of "pilot error" has now been cleared. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 01:25, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Gaze of the Gorgon

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Yogurt

HEy I saw what you said abaout Yogurts origin but in the Encyclopedia of Helaing Foods it says it comes from Turkey and also Yogurt,the word is Turkish. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Texan013 (talk • contribs) 20:33, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

I would have no problem with such an edit if you used a reliable source to support it. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 22:44, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

An award for you!

	The BAFTA Award for Wikipedia Editing
	Great job on Prometheus (1998 film). Would like to see you edit many other British films on here! ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 21:13, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

First, I didn't know that such an exquisite-looking award existed. Second, to receive it from you my dear Doctor is an added bonus. Ironically, I may have to safely retire from editing now. I don't think it can possibly get any better than that for me here. Thank you very much Doc for the honour. Take care. :) Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 22:14, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Golden Balls

Hello! Your submission of Prometheus (1998 film) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:29, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Film-poems

Hello, I saw that you created Prometheus (1998 film) so I moved Prometheus (film) to Prometheus (2012 film). I noticed that you call the 1998 film a "film-poem". I'm wondering if this is synonymous with experimental film? If so, we can create film-poem to point there. Unless you think it should be a stand-alone article? I think it is an uncommon term that would benefit from linking. Erik (talk | contribs) 20:16, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Actually the reliable sources call the film a "film-poem", not I. I don't think it is related to an experimental film and it appears it is Harrison's specialty as he has also created other film-poems. It is rather a video-poem, i.e. a poem which is narrated through a film. As far as "film-poem" being a standalone article, I am not certain. I am not sure if it is covered separately by RS as a standalone film genre. BTW thank you for moving the other film. The titles of both films are more consistent now. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 20:25, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

I have no problem with that topic being called a film-poem; I just mean that most readers may not be familiar with its meaning. I was proposing [[experimental film|film-poem]] based on the search results in Google Books, which connects the term to experimental film and the avant-garde movement. See this. Erik (talk | contribs) 20:34, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

In that case it may be a notable topic to write an article on. If you are interested, it may be a worthwhile article to write. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 22:25, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I started film-poem based on one source so far. There are more like this, just that it is kind of challenging to summarize a rather nebulous concept. Hopefully what exists so far can give the reader a sense of the experimental film style. Erik (talk | contribs) 17:57, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Erik for letting me know. So far it looks good and it is very informative. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 18:11, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Prometheus (1998 film)

Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:12, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

I have to thank you for your recent initiative. It's really nice to know that you are not alone in such unlucky instances. Nevertheless, I would be very happy if you can sparre some time and check the articles that caused this sequence of event, especially the Yalova Peninsula massacres. Alexikoua (talk) 05:50, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Alexikoua. There is no reason to thank me. I did nothing. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 09:13, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

The Trackers of Oxyrhynchus

Thanks for this.  davidiad { t } 15:24, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your subtle and encouraging message. It was a pleasure meeting you. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 15:29, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Training Dogs the Woodhouse Way

Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:51, 19 May 2013 (UTC)