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 Festermunk (talk | contribs) at 00:54, 9 November 2012 (→‎RT). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Wikipedians

You joined the Category:Wikipedians who are not a Wikipedian, which is being discussed at its entry at Categories nominated for deletion.

You may wish to join the category Category:Wikipedians working towards even enforcement of civility.

Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:28, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hilbert's tomb:
Wir müssen wissen
Wir werden wissen
Department of killing the goose that lays golden eggs: Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:33, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About a year later, Hilbert attended a banquet and was seated next to the new Minister of Education, Bernhard Rust. Rust asked, "How is mathematics in Göttingen now that it has been freed of the Jewish influence?" Hilbert replied, "Mathematics in Göttingen? There is really none any more."[1]

  1. ^ Reid 1996, p. 205.
Then, blessing all, 'Go, children of my care!
To practice now from theory repair. 580
All my commands are easy, short, and full:
My sons! be proud, be selfish, and be dull.
Guard my prerogative, assert my throne:
This nod confirms each privilege your own.
— Alexander Pope, The Dunciad

Kiefer.Wolfowitz 16:10, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should instead join the Category:Wikipedians who are members of deleted categories (forever to stay red). Bongomatic 11:50, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Generalized abstract nonsense

My favorite Wikipedia category. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:54, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting article needing DYK help

Myra Clark Gaines was the plaintiff in the longest lawsuit in U.S. history. It ran 58 years and appeared before the U.S. Supreme Court 17 times. She finally won six years after her death. Bgwhite (talk) 23:32, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's winning?--Bbb23 (talk) 00:11, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do right, please

Hey Doc,

Please forgive me for arriving at your talk page somewhat fashionably late, what with you having archived the conversation you were having with my better half not so long ago. Yes, I tend to stay away from WP when I have work commitments. As in I am turrrble at multitasking. Also, I’m still very much addicted to getting together with my real-life friends. And yes, I was angry with you for saying that you don’t like “Kolbe” anymore without looking at the context. Then again, you probably don’t know what a fine person JN466 is when you’re around him on a daily basis, and I should have taken that into account. Also, I did resent how, in my opinion, you were trying to get some kinda groveling apology out of DC on their talk page. I can’t say I know DC, but I don’t think they’re the groveling kind. And why would they have to be? Their heart seems to be in the right place, and they are more than willing to take risks in order to stop this place from turning into a pit of corruption. I don’t participate much, but I do observe. My gorgeous hubby and the equally lovely DC seem to be among a small minority who, while caring deeply about the project, will catch flak over and over again for being honest about its flaws. You are among the better people I’ve come across around here. Sometimes the better people will have to take a stand, and that includes giving the benefit of the doubt to folks who may not always seem to be toeing the party line but are a net benefit to the project in the long run. Thank you also for removing those horrible pictures from the article on you-know-what. And for bumping up Pym from a C to a B. Just in case you’re about to get serious about literary fiction, “Hunting in Harlem” is still my favorite by Johnson, so you may want to get that one first. And no, I didn’t come here to make a name for myself on the internet this late in my life. But you’re probably wise enough to have figured that out already. I am however still fascinated by people’s life stories, hence my interest in BLPs and in protecting living people from the darker elements that are drawn to this project for their own sordid reasons. You’re in a position to do a great deal of good. Please use it while you can. DracoE 21:40, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Draco, just a quick note before I leave this place to its own devices again: I was not looking for a "groveling apology". If DC had said they'd observe the interaction ban, that would have been good enough. Heart is one thing, but there was an interaction ban, simple as that. Now, I'm not going to claim to be lovely or useful, but I do find it remarkable how much flak I get for sticking my neck out: you may have noticed that I was the only one, at least for a while, who even paid attention to DC. And for all that YRC defense, you can go check my RfA: he opposed it, in the silliest of fashions, because I refused to consent to a block for another editor, one who didn't tow the party line (that's all water under the bridge and is here to serve as an example--I have since defended Rob in various places, until recently). Guess who the other naysayer on my RfA was? The other editor. So if anyone knows something about getting bitten by the cat and the dog, it's me.

    Now, I don't believe I can do a lot of good. I created one little category, for user space only, and the next thing you know a bunch of folks who don't even know what an article edit looks like are accusing me, in one personal attack after another, of tearing up this beautiful project. I'm sick to my stomach of it, and I'm not the only one. So, if there's anything good to be done here it'll have to be done by others. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 14:56, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Pooh, you'll continue to do good for this project or I'll haul your ass to ANI/ArbCom or some other lofty forum and ask that your tools be refreshed (an admin spa treatment accorded only to a select few, much better than botox).--Bbb23 (talk) 15:27, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You know, Bbb23, I’ve been considering getting botox of late, just to know what that feels like, given that I seem to be the only one among my circle of lady friends who hasn’t had any “work” done yet. Alternatively, I could just get more involved with this here project, cos that’s bound to stop me from acquiring any more smile lines.
Doc Mies, don’t you dare slink away at a time like this ;) DC didn’t technically break their interaction ban (a ban that they’d asked for to begin with), since they never mentioned the other party’s name. What DC said needed to be said. And ain’t it funny how it’s always DC getting hit with the block stick while the other party gets away with a gentle slap on the wrist whenever they break it. There were other examples on Elen of the Road’s talk page at the time, if memory serves, but they seem to have magically disappeared. Or maybe that's just me growing old, losing marbles, as they say in the UK. And Doc and Bbb, please don’t think for one second that I’m here to defend YRC. I used to believe that YRC was a good egg until recently, when an account on Wikipediocracy whom I believe to be YRC (I may be wrong) posted an incredibly homophobic rant involving Cirt that's since been mercifully deleted. I have no warm feelings about Cirt’s trolling of various Wikimedia sites, but I care deeply about my fabulous friends and the rights they are being denied to this day in various corners of this world. I believe that DC does, too, but then again, what do I know. Doc – I very much appreciated you sticking your neck out, but I wish you’d have been a little more bold. Please don’t leave now. DracoE 17:07, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • drmies, don't let the current shitstorm sour you on the whole project. I know you aren't one of these divas who just flies off the handle so that people will ask them to come back, so I assume the reaction to this whole incident has really gotten to you. But you already knew things were far from perfect here, and that sometimes the smallest thing gets blown way, way out of proposrtion and becomes a forest fire of epic proportions. This nine-days-wonder will fade soon enough into the background noise of endless wiki-drama. I find it best to just unwatch any discussion that is causing me to feel wiki-stress. Practice not giving a flying fuck and such things are much easier to deal with. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:31, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have a second look

I've removed nearly all the crap from Natural breast enhancement, and replaced it with reliable sources with significant coverage. Can you have a second look at the AfD, to either confirm your choice, or change your mind? Cheers, IRWolfie- (talk) 23:12, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sort of a Barnstar!

Hello Drmies. I've been stalking your talk page ever since it came to my watchlist. Quite an interesting place you have here; it's only missing a Dylan record playing in the background. At any rate, you seem stressed, and I'm in the mood to advertise my favorite god. So perhaps you'd like to wind down with a little read about a "vigorous, young, graceful and athletic deity marching forward." ;) Cheers. Yazan (talk) 15:11, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update

Today, Mrs. Kelapstick found our five-year-old reading my (c. 1960s edition of) DuPont's Blaster's Handbook. Fortunately all the detonators are hidden. The good news is for $2.50 DuPont will send me an updated copy of the book. Or so it reads. --kelapstick(bainuu) 11:59, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to help out...

I'm inviting you to help out in my Channel Listings Wiki. I tried to invite Plasticspork and Magog to help, but they didn't come and most likely refused, so I'm asking you to help instead. ~~LDEJRuff~~ 20:50, 5 November, 2012 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld has retired.

Dr. Blofeld has retired. Bgwhite (talk) 21:49, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Chonga

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Chonga, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Illia Connell (talk) 13:52, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy was declined by Nikkimaria. Regards, Syrthiss (talk) 14:04, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Election day has come and gone

But I just wanted you to know that you got my vote. more as a protest against the electoral college system, which makes non-battleground-state votes meaningless, but still. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:45, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Either you accept our way of life or you go back to another country that is Muslim," Potts said.'
God damn it. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:43, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Take it easy, Writ Keeper--just another Alabamian speaking. It means little once it crosses the Mason-Dixon line. The grammar of "go back to another country that is Muslim", that's the real crime. I have a student this semester who, it appears, might be writing on depictions of Muslims in Western lit (e.g., Inferno 28.22). Change comes one reader at a time, but will probably never come to James Potts. Drmies (talk) 20:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Chonga for deletion

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

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chonga (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Illia Connell (talk) 17:45, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


"civil war"

If you don't like that users crazy plan for reform you may appreciate this alternative approach. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:21, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • It had to happen, didn't it, that ArbCom things would pop up on my talk page. If there's a lot more of it I might jump back into my sock drawer again. I noticed that Count Iblis makes 250 article edits per year--that's one reason I closed that thread. Beeblebrox, take me to the nearest watering hole please. Drmies (talk) 01:40, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unfuckingbelievable. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:38, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, it makes you wonder. Or me. The Count did create a half a dozen articles, some of which in English (the others are in math). Ent, that movie, Cover Story, that's possibly the least notable movie ever made--your Amazon link is the most reliable and informative source I could find. Drmies (talk) 05:06, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Rats!
I thought this was about comic books!
;)
Lately, WP has reminded me too much of Dark City, which is a great movie, btw.
My marriage still stands, despite passage of issue 6 in Maryland. I trust yours does too. Maybe it's time to develop glaucoma and work on the West Coast.... Kiefer.Wolfowitz 18:58, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Voting yes for question 6 was the only reason I voted at all; the good doctor here got my vote for President, despite his astounding lack of flattery. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:01, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's good to hear. You could just move to Colorado, or Amsterdam. My marriage stands as well; let's hope Roy's Rock won't be an obstacle for too many Alabamians. I love Dark City--great movie, though it must have suffered commercially in comparison with The Matrix. We watched it in a graduate seminar on Lacan. Congratulations to Maryland! And Maine! Condolences to us. Writ Keeper, I wrote an incredibly flattering sonnet dedicated to you: I have no doubt it will receive high marks and great popularity when Poetry.com publishes it. Drmies (talk) 19:06, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Carly Foulkes

Let's discuss each of the 5 sentences that you are suggesting removing separately. I will put up a fight on sentences 1 and 2. They both are very descriptive and encyclopedic. In general, I think using twitter as a source for familial relationships is tenuous. This is especially true in an environment where unrelated celebrities are constantly talking about each other as brother and sister. In this case, I think we have a WP:RS documenting familial relationships. Since we seek that encyclopedic content and we have a decent RS, sentence 1 should stay. This is a rare case where Twitter is actually a RS, IMO. Sentence 2 is clearly encyclopedic content regarding her upbringing. I'll listen to cogent arguments against 3 through 5, but I don't see any reason to remove them.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:46, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Many thanks for the barnstar and the kind words – they're very much appreciated. SlimVirgin (talk) 20:38, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RT

I see that you closed my discussion on ANI...which is fine b/c at least I have the attention of an administrator to whom I can explain this situation. You say that the changes I've discussed on the ANI are a matter of WP:CONTENT and should be discussed on the relevant talk page, but not only has the content in dispute already been discussed on the talk page already but I've already went through DNR. The problem is that when I tried to add the material back in the RT article, I was handed a block of one week for edit warring, even though most of the content I was putting into the article already had consensus. At this point, I'm at a loss for what to do, I've went through the dispute resolution process and came out with consensus for my edits, but if I put the content back in the RT article again, I run the risk of getting blocked indefinitely. Is this something you can help with? Festermunk (talk) 23:38, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The reason why I went to ANI once my block expired was because I thought that that was the next step in the dispute resolution process for the kind of issue that I'm encountering.
You're right overall there was no consensus reached on DNR, but consensus was reached on individual points, especially the ones referred to on the ANI. The problem is that if I follow your advice that I, "follow the advice given at the closure of that thread" I'll risk an indefinite block...thus the catch-22. I'm not sure how to proceed, perhaps if I make the changes on the RT page and then you go through the edits to make sure they conform to the DNR and points raised by User CarolmooreDC? Festermunk (talk) 23:56, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that's a good approach. On the article talk page there is a section you started called "Reception section", which seems to relate to the individual points on which you think some consensus was reached. Why don't you list the points, with some support as to consensus, and get some confirmation of consensus there? Editing the article itself and asking Drmies to review them is (a) too much work for Drmies and (b) the wrong way to resolve a content dispute that Drmies isn't really a part of.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:07, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But that's exactly what I'm talking about, the changes that I propose to add (as explained on the ANI) already have confirmation via the DNR or the talkpage As the DNR itself was initiated by this paragraph, I really can't see what the point of trying to reach the consensus again. Festermunk (talk) 00:54, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Bbb--also for your concern for my health. The people to involve in this matter are the original participants in the discussion and any other interested party (that's not me--not yet anyway), and follow the suggestion of the last thread--which is to start a new thread or a new forum. ANI is never that forum. Bon appetit and cheers everyone, Drmies (talk) 00:28, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drmies&oldid=522095903"