I never thought I'd see a section anywhere called "block of Drmies" and now my history is full of such references. Time to re-evaluate what I'm not doing right here. In the meantime, happy new year to all, including IP vandals, socks and masters, IP99, abusive admins, non-abusive admins, allegedly enabling admins, abusive content contributors, bots, vandal bots, dramahmongererers, ArbCom members, Jimbo, Badmachine, the Lady, Mandarax, Bbb, Ironholds, Dennis, Mandarax (again), MF, Floquenbeam, MONGO, Scottywong, Dougweller, and everyone else. Try to keep it clean and remember we're supposed to be here to write articles and help others write articles. Drmies (talk) 15:58, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I see you've been around this morning handling a Boobnipple. Take your time mending fences (and I mean that only in the literal sense). Enjoy your break, and I know you realize that there are tons of people (and yes, you can take that literally too!) who want to see you back on regular duty. HAppY NЄW YЄAR! • !ЯAЭY WЭИ YqqAH – MANdARAX•XAЯAbИAM21:58, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To continue my support of your attempts to gain youth cred, I have to point out Aymatth2's and Dr Blow-Dry's mistake with Riin Tamm (AfD discussion). Everyone knows that doing articles on scientists isn't hep and in the now, man. As you can see from User talk:Aymatth2#A New Year's present for you., Aymatth2 is even doing very dead scientists, which is even worse. And as you can also see from User talk:Aymatth2#Joseph Colt Bloodgood there's a whole load of very dead fellas, grandfathers and grandsons, with the same name that are leading Aymatth2 astray yet further. Very dead mayors aren't popular; and all these are only serving to lead Aymatth2 into contact with Poms who read noticeboards. Poms on noticeboards are things to be avoided.
Now you could do some more work on a K-Pop sub-unit of twee, and counter Pommiepedia bias. But that would be missing out on the Wikipedia editorship's mission to get every reality/talent show winner into Wikipedia. Rimas Valeikis, cartoonist, painter, and winner of Baltic Robinson, is absent, for example. As is his nieceMiglė Vilčiauskaitė, better known by her stage name of Migloko, whose album is reasonably priced. Lithuanian pop culture is what you want if you want effective youth cred. Not that science, history, geography, and philosophy dren.
After all, the Wikipedia editorship at large wants pretty pictures of young pop singers, not boring things for squares. Only a square, man, would have Wikipedia tell the world (or at least tell Greg Bard) that Arvydas Juozaitis was a prominent member of Lietuvos Persitvarkymo Sąjūdis and a scholar who did his dissertation on Wilhelm Dilthey; and that his withdrawal from the 1989 election led to Algirdas Brazauskas winning his seat. Lithuanian history ain't where the cool cats are at, man.
Kloek, Els; Teeuwen, Nicole; Huisman, Marijke, eds. (1994). Women of the Golden Age: An International Debate on Women in Seventeenth-century Holland, England and Italy. Uitgeverij Verloren. ISBN9789065503831. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
But you are sneakily leading Dr mi estas into doing non-pop-culture topics, M. Cripes It's 1942. Next, you'll be having xem writing about Judith Leyster's The Proposition, which Amanda Cross turned into a short story. Then you'll be getting xem to write about bottom wiping in Dutch art, such as Jan Miense Molenaer's The Sense of Smell and Adriaen van de Venne's illustration of Johan de Brune's Emblemata (1624). I suggest that Dr mi estas rightly cast your begilded and beguiling temptations aside, as the insidious distractions from the pop culture of Lithuania that they are.
Hofrichter, Frima Fox (1975). "Judith Leyster's Proposition: Between Virtue and Vice". Feminist Art Journal. 4: 22–26. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Hofrichter, Frima Fox (1982). "Judith Leyster's Proposition: Between Virtue and Vice". In Broude, Norma; Garrard, Mary (eds.). Feminism and Art History. New York: Harper & Row. pp. 173–181. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Kahr, Madlyn Millner (1978). "Judith Leyster: The Rejected Offer". Dutch painting in the seventeenth century. Harper & Row. pp. 65–66. ISBN9780064335768. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Schama, Simon (1988). "In The Republic of Children". The Embarrassment of Riches: An Interpretation of Dutch Culture in the Golden Age. University of California Press. ISBN9780520061477. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
van der Weij, Marleen (2003). ""A Good Man, Burgher, and Christian": the intended reader in Johan de Brune's Emblemata". In Adams, Alison; van der Weij, Marleen (eds.). Emblems of the Low Countries: Book Historical Perspective. Glasgow Emblem Studies. Vol. 8. Librairie Droz. ISBN9780852617854. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Westermann, Mariët (2005). "Texts and Images". A Worldly Art: The Dutch Republic, 1585–1718 (2nd ed.). Yale University Press. pp. 55–56. ISBN9780300107234. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Sure thing. I appreciate your note, given that the close (which is a bit muddled given the discussion) didn't really go your way. Drmies (talk) 16:36, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, I had my opinion, but the issue wasn't nearly as important to me as it seemed to be to some other contributors. It was better to get it closed. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:44, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dr mi estas: Dear Onion Lady, fain I would cast off this veil of old age, and ugly hat and beard, and appear as young as the editors of K-Pop articles! But Providence stands athwart my efforts to gain youth cred, despite the sagely counsel of Uncle G. I find myself thinking about the 1960s and Noam Chomsky. Couldst thou write Rimas Valeikis, Miglė Vilčiauskaitė, and Migloko for me? Here's $5 for your trouble.
Onion Lady: Sir! How daredst thou approach me for such? I am a humble and Christian onion lady, whose onions are not tainted by the foul infamy of paid editing. Direct your elderly and infirm hands at the harlots, trollops, and bottom-wipers of Nederland, and trouble me no more for such base purposes as the popular culture of Lithuania.
Hi guys. This is not a chronic BLP issue. I've followed all rules and sourced and cited all quotes and comments. Mr. Hammond is simply not happy with posts if they have any negativity at all despite their validity and being sourcedWalledro (talk) 03:36, 3 January 2013 (UTC)walledro[reply]
Oh, sorry, I thought you were referring to yourself. You're blocked, of course, for edit-warring, and being a repeat offender means this time it's indefinite. Also, I don't believe that the IP editor, Red Pen of Doom, and any of the other editors you've been duking it out with are dramatists. Drmies (talk) 03:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Drmies. Now a follow up question, which can be taken to apply more generally than in this instance: does a talk page thread like this belong, or does it constitute another avenue for introducing BLP violations Talk:David Hammond (director)#old_allegations? As for formalities, I'm dressed in a tux. And just because I'm not a dramatist doesn't mean I don't like the occasional drama. Alas, poor Yorick, etc. 99.156.64.147 (talk) 03:59, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OH WILL YOU PLEASE KNOCK IT OFF WITH THE F***ING SHAKESPEARE ALREADY? See, I can do drama too. I've deleted the section, simply. I don't think it's so bad it needs to be removed from the history. Did you ever raise hell about that 3R warning? I'll be glad to support (though it is old news, of course). Thank you kindly for this excursion, and my best wishes to you and yours, Drmies (talk) 04:05, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hiding behind my lack of JSTORrery, eh? What are you doing mis-spelling Zinnewerck anyway? As you can see from the hyperlink in the section above Rimas Valeikis has made a statue of an angel with the horn in Vilnius. This is important pop culture that will garner you youth cred. Uncle G (talk) 16:26, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As you've no doubt seen, your source probably meant page 17. But here you are falling into M. Cripes It's 1942's trap.
Fortunately, we won't have to look around for an expert to translate Dit lijf, wat ist, als stanck en mist? into English. It's translated on Schama 1988, p. 481. ☺
It seems fairly obvious to this onlooker. Drmies took the "List of" off the front of the title, exactly as stated in the RM nomination, but didn't take the "s" off the end, which wasn't explicitly stated and is easy to miss. Uncle G (talk) 13:37, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to help, and for linking this topic ("My mom I love her 'cause she love me / Long gone are the times when she scrub me") to previous sections, where the need for the creation of Category:Bottom wiping is implied. Drmies (talk) 15:56, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reliability
Hey, Drmies! I hope the Manchester Star was palatable, although since J. W., Lees stuff usually travels no more than 70 miles or so, the impact of a cross-Atlantic journey might have been considerable.
Got a query for you. I'd take it to WP:RSN but they now only deal with specific "is source A suitable for statement B in article C" stuff, rather than the more generalised issues. Can you take a quick look at this? It is hosted by the Govt. of India but, honestly, it reads like a poor hagiography to me and it cites no sources. I've also got no idea what merit attaches to the author and am pretty concerned about seeing it used at, for example, Kakori conspiracy and related biographical articles. Stalkers welcome! - Sitush (talk) 16:24, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I would say it's unacceptable for precisely the reasons you mention. Tone is hagiographical, sources are missing, editorial oversight is not indicated anywhere. If you need me to back you up on RSN I'll be glad to. Oh, we haven't had the Star yet; I'll let you know how it traveled. Drmies (talk) 16:30, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You can find that text in volume 100 of the Encyclopaedia Indica, Sitush. It's also in the Encyclopaedia Of Indian War Of Independence (1857-1947), also published by Anmol. It has done the rounds, somewhat. It's even on User:Manoharshivum. You can read it here as well. Uncle G (talk) 17:15, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I have raised issues concerning plagiarism by EI on a few occasions, and by Anmol in general. There have been some clear instances where EI has printed stuff that had appeared elsewhere previously - eg: see this thread - but I only have a pretty limited view of EI content and so cannot do extensive checks to support an entry at WP:MF etc. That is, Mirrors and Forks, not Malleus. - Sitush (talk) 17:56, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
When a user has already reverted without discussion, then makes a statement like "And I'll be reverting your last edit tonight..."[1] while still not discussing the actual issue (or the alternatives presented), does that sound like a little system-gaming and intent to edit war? Or just my imagination? Niteshift36 (talk) 19:15, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose BRD mandates that your opponent take it to the talk page and not revert (the second time) until there's a consensus. They didn't, and then you reverted their revert and removed some more. Your last move was either a 2R or a B in a new BRD cycle which could be followed by their 3R or the R in the next BRD cycle... I don't think their revert was the best way to go, and announcing a next one is not productive, certainly. I don't really want to weigh "Enjoy ruling your little realm, drill sergeant" against "sunshine", though I think the former is a bit worse than the latter, but it's best to not call names in the first place, of course. What this discussion needs is another set of eyes. FWIW, I think linking "water" (and the other terms) is completely overlinking, and I personally think that there's entirely too much detail ("trivia") in there, but I'm not familiar enough with the subject matter to have a really strong opinion. Can you (two) find some folks in MilHist to weigh in/mediate? Drmies (talk) 20:18, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Happy New Year!
Best wishes for the New Year!
Here's wishing you and yours a joyous, healthful, and productive 2013!
Please accept a belated thank you for the well wishes upon my retirement as FAC delegate this year, and apologies for the false alarm of my first—and hopefully last—retirement; the well wishes extended me were most kind, but I decided to return, re-committed, when another blocked sock was revealed as one of the factors aggravating the FA pages this year.
Maintaining standards in featured content requires vigilance, dedication and knowledge of people like you, who are needed; reviews are always welcome at FAC, FAR and TFA requests. Somehow, somehow we never ever seem to do nothin' completely nice and easy, but here's hoping that 2013 will see a peaceful road ahead and a return to the quality and comaraderie that defines the FA process, thanks to many dedicated Wikipedians!
I thought about it, but there's more stupidity in that comment than determination, in my estimation. If it happens again, feel free to drop me a line and maybe report it at RFPP at the same time. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 06:31, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, that's before I saw this one. I blocked that IP as well, but my shift has come to an end. So, if it does happen again soon, report them and ask for protection; maybe the next admin is a proxy expert and can see if there's really something to it. Elockid is an expert in that matter. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 06:33, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Party!
Have one too, this one from my bar called "The Anonymous Doofus"! Sorry to be out of glasses, big brawl last night, you'll have to drink from the keg :)
Vasco, Crisco is being poisoned by the remains of Dutch culture which, as you know, is a know-it-all kind of environment. Very bothersome sometimes. Drmies (talk) 16:23, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well folks, i really thought it was D-O-O-F-U-S, but i can't be sure 100%, and that coming from the guy who "OWNS" the bar!! On the other hand Mies, in the words of this great man, "Can't we all just get along"? :)
Uncle, you may want to close that discussion. Mandarax, charming! I like the hell bit in there. But there's enough pale ales for me to enjoy, and it is probably opined correctly that it won't show up here anytime soon. Drmies (talk) 19:48, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note that I said "extremely expensive to obtain". That was figuring either importing or international travel costs into the equation. But I guess my perception of you desiring to try every expensive brew was an overestimation. MANdARAX•XAЯAbИAM20:00, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
But here the cost isn't anything to do with the quality, unlike the PBR 1844 (I was certain it had an article! PS: it's China Pabst Blue Ribbon), where, ahem, all the money goes into high-quality ingredients (it was a tasty beer, I have to say). What I want is to win the lottery and buy the Westvleteren brewery. Drmies (talk) 20:04, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, good mood overall people. Makes me wish i DID HAVE a real bar to invite you all for a couple (dozen) free rounds! From what i see Mandarax, lots of fans of this guy at that Austrian village ;) --AL (talk) 21:43, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I have noticed your recent, very large, edits to the T-ara Wikipedia article. I don't see how having a chart of the members with a little bit of information about them is turning the page into a "full-blown fan site". Do you even read other Korean idol groups' pages? Almost all have charts like these. Anyways, I hardly see how those little bits of information turn the entire article in a fan site, it's not like it's hurting anyone and the information is confirmed by credible sites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.67.123.88 (talk) 07:33, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well then, let's agree to disagree. And yes, I do read other K-pop articles and have edited dozens if not hundreds of them. On average, they're worse than Pokemon. Drmies (talk) 15:07, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
When you closed out the discussion on the format changes, you also closed out a huge section with a completely unrelated discussion going on about notability requirements. There is actually a request on another admin page requesting a mediator come in to come to a compromise on WP:NMMA.Willdawg111 (talk) 17:44, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just FYI: Edit notices can only be edited or removed by admins. I've gone ahead and blanked the editnotice. (Maybe I'm supposed to delete it? I dunno.) Writ Keeper⚇♔21:03, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Psst, Writ Keeper, between you and me: I couldn't find it. You know I only recently discovered the user (talk) page edit notice, and Senra is smarter than me; I didn't know it was admin-only. Yes, blanking strikes me as appropriate. Drmies (talk) 21:29, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it's technically admins and account creators that are allowed to modify editnotices. How that makes sense, and what account creator has to do with editnotices, are questions way above my pay grade, I guess. Writ Keeper⚇♔15:49, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Block of Drmies
Now that I have your attention... User:Roger Ellory has posted a pretty convincing unblock request on his talkpage, and after reviewing the history I'm inclined to oblige. He's agreed to stop editing his own bio, which seems to have been the only major issue with his editing, so I see no reason not to let him have another bite at the cherry. Is that cool with you? Yunshui雲水10:34, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yunshui, thanks for asking--I have no problem with you lifting the block. Crisco and Ed, these days I buy the 4-pound packs of Wright's (no relation to this guy, I believe) so I'm always ready to go. Drmies (talk) 15:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm seeing this on my lunchbreak, and I'm having a BLT. I have to say, I didn't really like seeing "block of Drmies" in my watchlist either. LadyofShalott18:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@TREBEK: what's the difference between a mallard with a cold and your mother? One's a sick duck and I don't remember the rest of the joke but your mother's a whore. Sean Connery⚇♔18:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ah that was delicious. I do like that Sean Connery--thanks for the remix, Dennis. Martin, very thoughtful of you. Let me point out in passing that the Chimay cheese is as good as you would expect. Anyway, I am glad that you all were having a bit of fun while I was slogging away, bringing home the bacon, doing my singing monkey act under the pretense of teaching the early English survey class. Drmies (talk) 20:41, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My heartfelt apologies to all who were concerned by the above header - hopefully a large order of bacon will assuage any bad feeling... Yunshui雲水22:48, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like a mere footnote now, but I unblocked Roger... Yunshui雲水
Hello. I recently noticed your major changes to the page of Wheeling Park High School. I am a school representative and spent many hours on our Wikipedia page. I would like to know your reasoning behind deleting most of my information that I worked on. We at the school do not appreciate this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.186.22.182 (talk) 21:04, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I am sorry if you feel thusly, but this version of the article is not very encyclopedic. There is a controversy section consisting of non-notable incidents, an apparently exhaustive list of course offerings, a list containing non-notable 'notables', and in general the article reads (as the tag indicated) like an advertisements. If you wish to improve the article, there is a set of guidelines available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article guidelines. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 21:15, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Once upon a time, we had an article that for six years looked roughly like like this. A person with a pseudonym had the bright idea of looking in books of anatomy, physiology, and (yes) Aristotle to see whether we could come up with something that was a little less an echo chamber of total ignorance on the subject, and found that there were bones and muscles and nerves and things to write about. Who knew? That person with the pseudonym is, alas, very busy.
So perhaps the people who enjoy the risqué on this user talk page can rise to the challenge and do the same thing with Crotch (AfD discussion). Remember that you may not cheat, like some person who spells xyr name completely wrong did, and write about the groin. Bonus points for the first person to realize that being less of an echo chamber of total ignorance means working in "narrow crotches", "knee timber", "included bark", "veneer", and other humorous words. Double bonus points to anyone who can find an excuse for citing the writing of L. S. Jankiewicz from Skierniewice.
Dr mi estas is of course excused games with a sicknote, here. It is well known that the ungrammatical Esperantist is a doktoro, not a kuracisto, and so has not the medical expertise to assist.
Hmm. A challenge indeed. May I point out that, while I don't know grammar and cain't spell my own name, I did clean crotches of both genders (well, sexes, I suppose) tonight and left them pink and clean. But this topic is way too sciency for me: I prefer them in between Aristotle and modern science, which is where we find Dante of course, and references to the groin are rare. Well...who was that, suffering from dropsy, duking it out with another soul? Dante is too interested in the gossipy fight and listen, after which Virgil rebukes him--"to want to hear such bickering is base"? It's a counterfeiter, and he has a groin issue, I believe. Also, groin, isn't that where a certain Catholic team just got kicked by a team from a state that can't get anything right but football and barbecue? Drmies (talk) 05:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sources
The Onion Lady and others may enjoy these:
MacDaniels, Laurence Howland (1923). "The apple-tree crotch: histological studies and practical considerations". Bulletin of the Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station. 419. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Schuessler, Raymond (1952). "Bracing Saves Old Trees". Popular Mechanics. pp. 173–174. Tight V-crotches are a frequent source of trouble …{{cite magazine}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
Gilman, Edward F. (2002). An Illustrated Guide to Pruning (2nd ed.). Cengage Learning. ISBN9780766822719. This phenomenon has led to the misconception that branch angle is related to strength of attachment, which is untrue.{{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Draper, Danny B., ed. (2009). "Crotch". Dictionary for Managing Trees in Urban Environments. Csiro Publishing. p. 36. ISBN9780643096073. {{cite encyclopedia}}: |editor2-first= missing |editor2-last= (help); Invalid |ref=harv (help); Unknown parameter |edito2-last= ignored (help)
Lowe, Judy (1998). Ortho's All About Pruning. Ortho's All about Series. Meredith Books. p. 7. ISBN9780897214292. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Hartman, John R.; Pirone, Thomas P.; Sall, Mary Ann (2000). Pirone's Tree Maintenance (7th ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN9780195119916. Split Crotches After some splitting, artificial supports can prevent further damage …{{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Catsambis, Alexis; Ford, Ben; Hamilton, Donny L., eds. (2011). "knee (knee timber)". The Oxford Handbook of Maritime Archaeology. Oxford Handbooks in Archaeology. Oxford University Press. ISBN9780195375176. … usually made from the crotch of a tree …{{cite encyclopedia}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Jankiewicz, L. S. (1956). "The effect of auxins on crotch angles in apple trees". Bull. Acad. Polonaise Sci. Ser. 2 (4): 173–178. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Jankiewicz, L. S. (1964). "Mechanism of the crotch angle formation in apple trees. I. Crotches in the trees growing in a vertical and a horizontal positions". Acta agrobotanica. 15. Warsaw: 21–50. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Jankiewicz, L. S. (1970). "Mechanism of crotch angle formation in apple trees. II. Studies on the role of auxin". Acta agrobotanica. 23 (1): 171–181. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Williams, M.W.; Billingsley, H.B. (1970). "Increasing the number and crotch angles of primary branches of apple trees with cytokinins and gibberellic acid". J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 95 (5): 649–651. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
If any English Professors are sucked into Wikipedia, to fill the English Professor Vacuum on this user talk page, you might like to tell them the title of chapter 63 of Moby Dick. ☺
Enjoy the fact of the existence of the Instytut Sadownictwa i Kwiaciarstwa in Skierniewice. You're all gobsmacked to find that scientists put serious time and effort into the study of crotches, I expect.
I wonder why Uncle G likes to drop references here instead of on the talk page of the relevant article (or better yet by adding them to the article). LadyofShalott05:06, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. I have no answer for that. Perhaps he likes the exposure at ANI 2.0? BTW, those chapters from Moby-Dick were never really my favorites, which makes me think I must have missed something. But I got more different reading to do these days. Follow my blog, Lady! Drmies (talk) 05:10, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Everyone settle down. The world is about to stop turning; things will go back to normal again after the Tide rolls over Notre Dame. Should that fail to happen--well, then, I don't know. Drmies (talk) 01:19, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I start to feel sorry for Notre Dame, and then I remember that all the people I've known that have gone to Notre Dame were giant dicks, and I go back to cackling evilly. Writ Keeper⚇♔02:22, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It never goes away. It just reverse-hibernates or something. Besides, it's quickly replaced by some other worthless sport.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ladies, if you can't roll with the Tide, go roll someplace else, like Requested Moves. Ed, friendly smack is always welcome, and it's just a game anyway. </pretense> Drmies (talk) 02:14, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad for all the 'Bama fans, but this game has all the earmarks of becoming ... boring. (Too onesided - I like a game that goes back and forth and stays close.) Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My highlight so far is surely Brent Musberger's going off his nut over A.J. McCarron's girlfriend. Fathers, lock up your daughters, besportcoated septuagenarian sportscasters are on the prowl. davidiad.:τ03:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
He's a terrificallly goodlooking kid. I'm seriously wondering if he's really mine. Oh, wait, you were talking about me! Drmies (talk) 04:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Given your recent edits at the bca page, I'd like to ask your opinion on the pie chart towards the bottom of the page in the "Risks of too much awareness" section. To me, it is pretty clearly logically flawed. I think it's self-evident and I don't have to explain it to you. In fact, I'm having a little bit of difficulty articulating it myself because it's just too obvious. But anyway, here goes: the point of awareness is not to give more funding to the disease than it deserves, it's to increase awareness, lower stigma, etc to a disease that is lacking in those areas. For example, there is no stigma for heart disease. Furthermore, there might be adequate funding for other diseases compared to BC, especially when you consider the effectiveness of funding (eg it might be implausible that research will help another disease, while scientists feel that BC research is valuable). Another complicating factor is the fact that BC is specific to women. Thus, it is considered more important in the context of the women's movement and feminism.
Please just take a look and if you have any thoughts, please let me know what you think. I don't want to be too bold over there, and I feel that your edits would be more effective and they would respond to you better anyway. Thanks. Charles35 (talk) 15:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well--what are you asking? I thought you were going to point out the flaws of the pie chart, but you're talking about the section as a whole, it seems to me. The chart itself is not logically flawed--but there are other things wrong with it, IMO: I don't know where the numbers come from, and the whole thing seems like overload: what it boils down to is that the argument claims that too much money is spent on 2%, right? Again, I'm not sure what you are trying to argue, but if I had to go at it I would a. start a (brief) RfC on whether the pie chart is rhetorical overkill and thus undue; b. propose edits for a more neutral version of the section (terms like "now-regretted" are stated as fact and should be contextualized)--in that entire section it needs to be clear who says what, the weasel words need to be pruned, etc. Drmies (talk) 17:33, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi.. I see you have done large editing in Mnet Media, T-ara, Davichi, The SeeYa, etc pages. I have read your statement that you have read other K-Pop pages. I suppose you are not K-Pop fan. If you're thinking that you did is right and then you are in unfair because you should did the same thing to other K-Pop artists. What you've done has destroyed our K-Pop fans' effort to build comprehensive wiki. – Wihan Tan (talk) at 01:25, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You're totally wrong: I love K-pop. What I don't love is the persistent effort by hundreds if not thousands of editors who try to turn Wikipedia into a collection of fan pages. Besides, if you are truly a fan, you perhaps shouldn't be editing those pages since you have a conflict of interest: there's a problem with neutrality here, as is evident to every objective editor who looks at those pages. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 02:27, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What conflict of interest? What problem with neutrality? Explain me. Please visit Girls Generation, 2NE1, and Big Bang pages. That's what I called an unfair. If you want to sweep what you think is unnecessary things, you shouldn't compromise whatsoever. Sweep all K-Pop artists. May I ask, are you YG Entertainment stan? Also where do we (K-Pop fans) want to read the comprehensive information if not here in Wikipedia? Thank you. – Wihan Tan (talk) at 02:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fans have a tendency to write fan sites. That's a problem of neutrality. No, because I am editing a number of articles I am not obligated to edit all other articles. This has nothing to do with fairness. By the same token, you're being unfair by editing only K-pop and Lazio articles: other articles deserve your attention too. Finally, if you want to read comprehensive information, which includes everything a fan would want, I suggest you read allkpop.com and associated sites (like the company website): Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 03:11, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wihan Tan, there are many, many articles on Wikipedia. That someone edits a certain article or a group of articles does not obligate him/her to edit all other related articles. Even if that person undertakes such a task, it can take a while to get through all those articles. The alphabet soup reference that explains this is WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. LadyofShalott05:03, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
