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 103.1.153.206 (talk) at 21:58, 17 January 2014 (→Page protection at Superpower article). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.



Burton-on-Trent Editor

Hi Drmies--the problematic IP editor that MarnetteD mentioned to you last week is still at it. Your block of him apparently has expired, and he immediately began trying to revert to his preferred (incorrect) versions of article ledes. I've reverted those I'm keeping an eye on, but I thought you'd like to know there was no change in behavior--at all. Grandpallama (talk) 19:28, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

He's back at it--editing under a couple of different IPs.[1][2] Can you take a look? Thanks. Grandpallama (talk) 19:50, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like he's using a third IP recently, too, [3] and even had the audacity to scold another editor. Sheesh. Grandpallama (talk) 19:53, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Grandpallama, every time I look at these edits I wonder what's wrong with, for instance, this. Can you explain? Drmies (talk) 21:45, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And that IP is no longer active so there's no point on blocking it. Is 90.211.104.222 one of them too? Drmies (talk) 21:48, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, 90.211.104.222 is also one of the IPs, as is 90.198.30.134. He's mostly been using 90.196.0.132. The problem with his edits is that they invariably change info presented in the ledes without getting consensus; if you look at the various talk pages associated with the different IPs, you'll see he's racked up numerous warnings about this behavior--numerous. In the example you bring up, you'll see that he changed the classification of the film--and while there may be no problem in calling Machete an exploitation flick, he insists on erasing the comedy classification in doing so. Any attempts to replace that info, or get him to discuss his desired changes, meets with a brick wall of silence. Most of his edits, though, also incorporate unnecessary rewrites that introduce grammatical errors into the text [4] [5] [6] or unduly emphasize certain pieces of information in the lede (he particularly has a penchant for discussing the participation of any member of Asian or Hong Kong cinema in the lede). I know there are other editors who are annoyed at how he arbitrarily (and incorrectly) changes some of the categories attached to the films, but all of my concerns are tied to these lede changes. Grandpallama (talk) 14:58, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
He's now on the cusp of violating 3RR with his 90.198.30.134 IP. Grandpallama (talk) 17:11, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
He's on the cusp of not being blocked anymore--well, in 36 hours. I hit mass rollback. I agree that this is disruptive. Ask Marnette and Doniago what they think is best: semi-protection probably, since a rangeblock apparently can't be done. Sorry, I gotta go: the kids need their apples cut and the heating guy is coming. Drmies (talk) 17:23, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If absolutely nothing else about their edits was an issue, the fact that they're not providing edit summaries nor opening Talk page discussions regarding their edits would still be problematic. DonIago (talk) 17:30, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Apples belong in pies! :) Semi-protection might make sense, but we're talking a lot of different articles, and he moves to new ones all the time. Maybe MarnetteD will have a different idea? Grandpallama (talk) 18:12, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
With the cold snap that the US is experiencing you also need heat so your hand doesn't freeze to the knife while cutting the apples :-) I agree with Doniago's assessment. As I've said before (somewhere though maybe not here) not all of this persons editing is problematic. But, since they never respond to messages there is no way to get them to stop the damage they do. This edit removed cats without rhyme or reason. Whack-a-mole blocks and checking the edits and keeping what is productive and removing what isn't is all I can think of. As ever my thanks to everyone for their time in dealing with this. MarnetteD | Talk 18:35, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another - 90.212.5.172 (talk · contribs) DonIago (talk) 14:47, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Amazon Proxy Server

Hi, Drmies.

I see you were involved in a prior blocking of a proxy editor IP 54

54.224.35.46 (talk · contribs)
54.224.206.154 (talk · contribs)
54.242.221.254 (talk · contribs)
54.224.53.210 (talk · contribs)

who was involved in a campaign against Baseball Bugs on the Ref Desk talk page, See Steve Ummit's comment at end of thread and who has now shown up at ANI

diff

to spread further bad news about BB. I am hoping you will see fit to revert this single-purpose editors action at ANI as prejudicial, and to take whatever action seems appropriate.

Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 03:11, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Medeis, I'm not sure what you're asking of me. That comment was irrelevant and out of line and I removed it; if they come back again I'll gladly block. I blocked one of the four IPs you mentioned, but I don't know much about proxies (if that's what you were referring to) and I'm not the person to ask for a range block, unfortunately. I am averse to the trolling that Bugs is subjected to and will do what I can, but with limited technical skills my powers are very limited. On a side note, I did have a look at that Arb request and I can't say I agree with you and Bugs; I hope Bugs will stay on the safe side of the topic ban. If that editor returns, please let me know and I'll see if I can act in any useful manner. Good luck, and my regards to Bugs, Drmies (talk) 03:43, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I notified you personally solely because you were the first admin I saw on their records who had blocked one of the IP54 incarnations previously. The user's comment may or may not have been relevant, but when you get an anonymous "witness" saying prejudicial things to a jury you tend to think they should be excluded regardless of the possible truth of their accusation. It's quite obvious someone isn't happy just to let the process work out without manipulating it; the proxy status of these editors (i.e., the fact that they are actively hiding their true identity and location with a paid service) can be seen by doing a geolocate on them by clicking on the geolocate link at the top of their talk pages. If this comes up again it's on Bugs to notify the proper authority. Thanks for helping in this instance. μηδείς (talk) 04:04, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, for reporting a troll I count as a proper authority, I suppose. This one came from Seattle, apparently, by the way. Drmies (talk) 04:23, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, "Seattle", but that's the tricky thing with a proxy. You get the provider's name (in this case Amazon corporate) and the location of their forwarding IP servers, but not the user's actual home location as you would with a normal ISP. The user himself could be anywhere. In this case the goal, making BB look bad, and the MO, using a single-purpose proxy account to do it, are the interesting facts. Amazon doesn't give this service away for free. It is very telling that someone is willing to use a pay service to avoid a fair fight. Thanks agani for your help, and I hope not to pester you further. μηδείς (talk) 04:34, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, this isn't pestering at all. I'll admit I'm out of my league with the proxy stuff. But I cannot so quickly decide that it's all the same person. Anyway, that's neither here nor there; I'm keeping an eye on ANI, but you know better than I where this person can show up. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:40, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi, you recently blocked an editor (indef), and following that, another editor came along, blanked the blocked editor's user page, and added the "{{blocked user)}" template. The template's guidelines state that that should be left to the blocking admin. I'm wondering if you have an opinion on this. Thanks - theWOLFchild 13:22, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • That editor, I think, is a bit of a busybody. I personally don't care so much about who places that template. As far as I'm concerned a blocking template on the talk page is enough, and I see it more as a badge of shame than as a useful identifying mark. I'm not bothered by someone else placing it; whatever the guidelines on the template say I don't take as policy or law. Ha, I just read the instructions: "typically" it's placed by the blocking admin, and " If the blocker doesn't think it's needed, the odds are it isn't." So it doesn't say others can't place it, but I think the guideline is pretty clear. Drmies (talk) 15:07, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AfC help

I'm looking at this submission, which I find is already in the mainspace at Ferronigerite-2n1s. What do I do with the draft? LadyofShalott 01:13, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) What I would do is redirect the AFC page to the mainspace as it appears that the same editor created both. Hasteur (talk) 01:57, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Lady, thanks for spending time at AfC. Hasteur, isn't there a button to click in the pull-down menu that says something like that? Drmies (talk) 02:02, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I can't really take credit for that. My ignorance is because I don't really spend time there - I probably should start doing it some. Someone dropped a note on a project talk page about this particular AfC that caught my eye. LadyofShalott 02:07, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hasteur, thanks for the tip. I've done that now. Is that it, or are there beaurocratic checkboxes somewhere to be completed in triplicate? LadyofShalott 02:12, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orville by Gibson

(these are knock-offs--there is no reason whatsoever to have a directory of models (remember, these are copies) or an extensive discussion of serial numbers. also, rm spam)

The Orville by Gibson page is not about "knock-offs".

Orville by Gibson was a Gibson product.

The history of Gibson and Yamano Gakki is part of the Orville by Gibson and Epiphone Japan guitars.

Guitarspecs (talk) 06:04, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks to me that the section on serial numbers is either original research or a violation of someone's copyright on their original research. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:50, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Guitarspecs, besides the matter of original research (and Xanthomelanoussprog makes a very valid point), this is simply excessive information with no encyclopedic purpose. A list of instruments made by the factory is directory/catalog information and that's not of any use to anyone except for the factory itself and the odd fan. Now, if this information is indeed verified in one of the links you added, then a note can be placed in the article with that link. But without such verification, and without a better rationale for its inclusion in the first place, this simply bloats an already poor article into a terrible article. We are not here to provide a company or factory catalog, and one could argue it's promotional, besides excessive, poorly verified, and possibly original research or a copyvio thereof. So I'm going to revert again. Drmies (talk) 17:15, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Olivier Brousse Page Submission

Hi,

Thank you for your comments regarding the above page linked here -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Olivier_Brousse

I have updated the page with a few more links to interviews with him. The interviews he takes part in are all about his job therefore moaning about Saur, Veolia or Connex. The reason I am setting up this page is to translate his French Wikipedia page which is now up and running - the link to the page is here https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olivier_Brousse.

This page has less references than I have given although it has already been approved. I do hope these edits are now sufficient and you can publish my page for Olivier.

Many thanks

Laura — Preceding unsigned comment added by LauraGeaves (talk • contribs) 13:00, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Laura, I don't think it is likely the article will ever be accepted, and if it was, it would only be deleted later on. The problem with AfC is the way articles are declined it strings you along to the next step "find more sources" when in most cases the quality of sources we need (like a profile story in The New York Times) are not available. It would be more accurate to say that Wikipedia just doesn't want an article to exist on the topic. The French Wikipedia accepting it is most likely in error if they did not review the sources closely enough and the proper next step would be to bring the error to their attention so they can nominate it for deletion there as well.
OTOH, I am surprised you are writing about the CEO, when the topic of the sources appear to be the company itself. It is rare that a CEO warrants their own article, except in rare cases where the CEO is the founder of a very notable company or CEO of a Fortune 100, etc. I don't think pursuing this further with more submissions will end up being a worthwhile way to spend your time. CorporateM (Talk) 19:18, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks Corp: I couldn't have said it better myself, though I think I tried in a previous thread on the same topic, now in my talk page archives. BTW, would you believe I'm typing this from the classroom? Business and Professional Writing? Never too old to set a bad example! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.157.121.192 (talk) 19:42, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Are you a teacher or just brushing up? Where can I sign up for this class :-p CorporateM (Talk) 20:49, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I was teaching, and had five minutes to kill during an in-class writing assignment. I tell you what, it's one of my favorite classes to teach. I don't have to prepare, and can speak freely, for the most part. Drmies (talk) 01:59, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lenght

No more flyers please, this page is long enough!

I don't understand why people complaining about the lenght of MY talkpage, when this is much longer. Hafspajen (talk) 16:22, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I shortened also, even sent "uneinsichtig, unbelehrbar und beratungsresistent" to the archive ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:26, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tea houses!! for Cullen 328 and Drmies
Why are these people walking up to Mount Tai do THIS? Hope Mrs Drmies will not force you to do things like this ! (Warrington)
  • Mrs. Drmies saw something about a path up a mountain in China with a teahouse on top--I'm not sure if it was Mount Tai or not. Part of the path up was along the face of the mountain, where you walk on wooden boards and hold on to a chain. She wants to go there now. Drmies (talk) 17:36, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ps: we were in Marzahn in 2013, beautiful, and had different teas next to the lake, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:45, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nice garden Gerda Arendt! Needs some work, that article. You leave the kids with you uncles and aunts and mothers, because now it is your turn to visit China , yes? Hafspajen (talk) 17:58, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Next country will be Greece, and I have an invitation to sing the Mass in B minor in the US in April! - Drmies translated Move Like This (Sad Song) to Dutch, you could do Chinese (or Swedish) ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:26, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, in Swedish, but not Chinese (can't speak Chinese...) if you give me the English text. I can't speak German very well. Hafspajen (talk) 01:47, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What do you think how you get from Dutch to English? Right: "Languages". In this case you could also replace nl by en in the url. We did German. Move like this, like this move, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:52, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, yes, sure. Kind of escaped me. I will, not quite now, but as soon I get some time to dive into a bigger thing. Hafspajen (talk) 12:14, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Lovely! You could start with a stub if Swedish WP can take it, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:48, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wooden boards, Drmies? Holding onto a chain? Take her instead to the Italian Alps, for a vigorous hike on a Via ferrata. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 08:04, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cullen, that plank-chain road was very much like a via ferrata, except that it would never pass safety regulations in the EU. Plus, it's difficult to belay when you have to click in to a chain, rather than onto a cable, as you can imagine. I've done wonderful via ferratas in the French Alps--I'll try to find where they were. One was near Argentière. Drmies (talk) 15:21, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV template

There's an on-going discussion at NPOV Noticeboard regarding circumcision's neutrality here and here. We've been having numerous content disputes at Talk:Circumcision for months now with no progress being made at all. User:Jmh649 has been making unconstructive edits and generally has been stifling any progress at addressing the NPOV issues the article has been facing. He's removing the NPOV template to stifle the discussion we are currently having at the NPOV Noticeboard. ScienceApe (talk) 04:21, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not knowing the ins and outs of the discussion I cannot comment, at least not now. At the same time, I don't see how removing a template stifles discussion, but maybe that's just me. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 15:16, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strange comment on the templates

Hey Drmies. I must say I find this comment strange [7]. Usually people complain when you use templates with "don't template the regulars" and all. I was always under the impression that a more personal message was superior. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 05:52, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If "This is your final warning. Next time you may be blocked." (diff) is a "more personal message", what does an impersonal threat look like? Johnuniq (talk) 06:12, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
With some large graphics and a bunch of bolding such as this.
Stop icon This is your last warning. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.
I am unclear why the latter would have been better? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 06:45, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Jmh649. Hey Doc James, maybe you could have added, "I won't block you myself, since I am involved", or something to that effect? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Of course I wouldn't. That would get me justifiably blocked in short order. I am not that stupid :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 07:01, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Of course I know that and also know that you do too, Doc. But perhaps ScienceApe doesn't know, or might possibly pretend not to know, so adding a disclaimer of that type makes it unambiguously not a threat that you will block that editor yourself. Since you're writing a personal warning message and all. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:09, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay good point. Will adjust my notes going forwards to avoid any possible confusion. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 07:31, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
People complain .... period. Anyway, WP:TTR discusses the advantages of templates (basically what Drmies said). NE Ent 10:11, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you all. Nothing personal, Doc--my thought is that the formalized, standardized template (which are used by editors and admins alike) take the "personal" out of the warning, making it less a threat than a warning. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:15, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Y

R people shocked by this salient point?

DLOH:Exists camera right, shaking head and mumbling quietly. Dlohcierekim 17:34, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's pretty amusing. LadyofShalott 21:29, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for De Scheepsjongens van Bontekoe

The DYK project (nominate) 08:01, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:45, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jaggee

Looks like I was right about them being here simply to stalk me and disrupt my edits... check out their latest post on the Allard J2X-C talk page. The only way they'd find that out, as a "new account", is to be stalking things I'm involved in. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 16:36, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Luke, take it easy, there is no imminent destruction. Your concern is noted and your efforts are appreciated, but you don't have to worry that your work will be destroyed. Do keep me posted, if you like, as long as you realize, as I'm sure you do, that I don't swing the banhammer around as easily as some others might. You're a content editor in good standing and that means that pretty much automatically I'm in your camp. Best, Drmies (talk) 17:09, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, and that's why I'm here. The main thing that's pissing me off is the named user here, who is clearly here just to stalk me and try and disrupt things in whatever way they can. There is simply no way a new user could have made the jump from this article to the Lavaggi LS1 issue without being a sock of someone who is already here, or who has been banned from here; sadly, without any idea who the master is, I can't ask for a CheckUser. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:27, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are you here to create policy compliant articles, or are you here to boost your own ego? If the former, then you would be thanking me for spotting the potential contraventions and deficiencies. However, the way you are attacking my concerns as "disruption", and worse, I suspect you are more likely here for the latter. I had a concern about the website you linked to, and so has someone else by the look of things. You said that if I found a problem I should not flag it in the article, but raise it on the talkpage and you would address it. So I did just that. Now please apologise and keep to yur side of the bargain - or were you perhaps hoping no-one would notice the question raised over the reliability of that website as a source? Your bluster is not helping your case I'm afraid, neither are your very bad-faith allegations and neither is your attitude here to other users.
  • And, just in-case you thought I had some sort of magical powers or underhand methods of tracking you here, may I draw your attention to the field on top bar, just to the right of your user name, with the tool-tip "Your notifications", mine glowed red and told me to come here to see what you were saying about me know. Jaggee (talk) 21:10, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Potential contraventions and deficiencies" my ass. Perhaps there was an issue with the magazine article, perhaps there wasn't; it's a grey area. You know for a fact that I was already aware of the RSN discussion, and of the DYK issue; you coming back to "contribute" to the Allard J2X-C page was purely to be disruptive, and you know that for a fact as well. And you have way too much knowledge of the workings of this place to not be a sockpuppet. Kindly own up to who you are, or go away and never return. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 21:23, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • You need to stop indulging in these bad-faith rants and defamatory personal attacks before you get into trouble with an administrator who is prepared to stand up to you. Jaggee (talk) 21:37, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • And I note that you have got no explanation for how you found out about any discussion on Lavaggi LS1. So you're very clearly stalking me (and I'm well aware of how you found this particular discussion; I never queried that) - particularly as you hadn't edited for four days. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 23:08, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Surprise surprise, they're not heading your advice, Drmies, and are now trying to edit-war their hijack of the RSN thread, despite me telling them (twice now) to file another one if they're so desperate to discredit the source. In the process, they've made it even more obvious that they're a sockpuppet as well, by digging up a long-dead account related to one of the sources. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:23, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Or the Lady's advice. Listen, I have to disagree with the edit on RSN: the subject matter does pertain, in my opinion, even if mildly. Such a content matter, for now, can be dealt with regardless of the person involved, and edits and references should be able to stand on their own merit. But that's not to say that I don't agree with the spirit of your removal, because I do, and I do find evidence of hounding here. What I think you should do is go to ANI. For now, given their edits, I would confirm such a charge, and you could, for instance, ask for an interaction ban--or, more simply an "action ban" on their part, so to speak: that the Lady's advice be mandated. That's no problem for you ("separate corners"), since you have plenty of corners and their only corner is you. Drmies (talk) 17:37, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you, or someone reasonably level-headed, opens the thread with a proposal, I will agree to it, assuming that means that Jaggee will immediately have to disengage from the things involving me where they've already edited. If I propose the case, I'm going to end up ranting and destroying my own case in 5 seconds flat. So please, propose it. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:54, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Steven Defour

Hi there my friend, how's it going?

Can you be a sport to WP and insert translations to the references i added in this guy's article please? The "table" has already been set for you, you just have to "sit and munch". The courses are: three in the incredibly unsourced (thus far) hot section of GENK (his "transfer" to AJAX), one at the beginning of his STANDARD one and another in his international career bit. It'll take you much less than five minutes i reckon; ah, and i already took the liberty and translated two of those, don't know if correctly though.

Great painting by Goya on your userpage, almost as creepy and eerie as this one! Cheers, thanks in advance --AL (talk) 23:11, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Christopher Karas

Hi Drmies, may I please request your experienced eyes at Draft:Draft:Articles for Creation/Christopher Karas. The article was previously deleted for lack of notability, but there has been a recent duo (an IP and a registered user) insistent upon making it an article again. I'm concerned with the POV-pushing being demonstrated by these editors, and how they both seem apathetic about Wikipedia rules, and adamant to make the article happen. They've deleted AfD nominations and speedy delete templates and have taken to moving the article with duplicitous edit summaries. I've attempted to contact the fine folks at WikiProject LGBT studies to get some feedback from that community, but we're still waiting. I think we need some admin eyes over there. (And oh crap, I realize I might have accidentally moved the article to "Draft:Draft:Articles For Creation"--geez, these people! Anyway, thank you in advance, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:40, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, I don't know what to say. I did some cleanup (not just your mess, haha) and found that there was a redirect from main space to this draft space, which struck me as irregular/uncalled for/disruptive, so I deleted it. I made sure the categories don't make it show up--and what is that "no index" or whatever thing, that suppresses searches? Do you know how to do that? Now, I know next to nothing about this draft space. The draft is significantly different from what was deleted in December, so that's not a reason for deletion. As far as I'm concerned this should be deleted via a deletion discussion, the sooner the better. Drmies (talk) 03:45, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Drmies. The thing is substantially better than before. However, is the subject notable? The editors are earnest and intent and not knowledgeable about our rules. I think we can excuse their earlier removal of tags as panic at the idea of the new article being deleted. They seem desperate to bring the article to an acceptable status now that the initial terror has warn off. But we return to the question of notability. I did not see any significant coverage in mainstream media. Should we leave it where it is and let them struggle on? Should we move it back to article space and hope the community can fix it? Can it be fixed? Thanks Dlohcierekim 04:07, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
To speak the plain truth, I actually kind of didn't look at any tag removals, and I'm not opposed to anyone working on it. But I still see this as a BLP1E issue involving a very young person, and I don't feel good about having those kinds of things around for too long. But it hasn't turned negative or tendentious (yet), so that's alright for now. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:28, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, as long as it's in Draft space, it's a draft. I think the same rules as AfC apply. As long as they edit it they can work on it for as long as it takes. The purpose of draft space is to let editors develop potential articles. The thing should not show up is searches. I think it's safe to give them free reign in Draft space or at AfC. And maybe the horse will sing. Dlohcierekim 04:15, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for helping to clean up my mess, Drmies! It was a distracted copy/paste move by me, but my attempts to fix it failed. Anyhow, I agree with Dloh, the article needs some participation from users who can help guide the notability determination. The users are earnest, and, well, maybe are TOO earnest, since they seem to have a deadline they are trying to meet. But anyway, eyes. We need eyes. Thanks again! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:12, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And now it's gone per G4. Dlohcierekim 17:56, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if the WikiProject ever got a chance to look at it. Slow WikiProjects!! Okay, I'm outta here. Bye all! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:06, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Coral Island

The Coral Island is back at FAC. No more sighs, we're going to nail it this time, if I can just keep my big mouth shut for long enough. ;-) Eric Corbett 20:35, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Onfim

Allen3 talk 10:45, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A comment

I am jusst curious to know howmuch you know about Indian Classical Dance or Gaudiya Nritya? How could you delete an article without knowing the topic properly? moreover you sentenced a comment that the citations are poor!! just for the shake of editing and getting credit on wiki one should behave such!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by RupalDel (talk • contribs) 17:24, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • You need to add properly written and properly verified material. "Citing" a horribly scanned translation of the Natya Shastra is not going to cut it: if all this is correct, certainly you could cite something more recent than that. In addition, you restored a YouTube video link claiming it was a reference; that and your "cowardly act" comment indicate that for now I don't have to take your comments too seriously. Drmies (talk) 17:32, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you think that way then all other Classical Dance forms are not Classical.Then why some people are behind Gaudiya Nritya only. I think some are insecure with their own art forms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RupalDel (talk • contribs) 17:44, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you, but I'm quite secure in my art forms (and it requires no YouTube link to a low-quality video with terrible sound), and your objection is ridiculous. I have no doubt that you will be blocked soon for running a disruption-only account. Have a great day. Drmies (talk) 17:48, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I believe with the emergence of Sogkol, we are past coincidence and perhaps into bothering a checkuser territory. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:01, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, Sogkol is exciting. What I think is happening here is a kind of marketing effort. Look at this Facebook page, which I found after browsing around for a possible source for Sogkol's image. I think we have a professor here who has done a lot of work resurrecting something (whether built validly on a tradition or not, I can't say) and who is now popularizing it--that's the common thread among the edits, the publications, and even the video that was linked in the article. I'm not saying that Mahua Mukherjee has anything to do wit this stuff, but it's done to promote her and her work also, that's for sure. Thanks all, Drmies (talk) 01:13, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • She's doing good work and I hope the article on her is kept, but what they have been doing here will not help one whit. I've put back my gnomish improvements, since I had not yet reached 3R. Thanks to Hafspajen and to Obiwan Bish :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 05:17, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Biggest Loser Germany

You fully-protected The Biggest Loser Germany last year. Please add a pp- template to the page. Thanks. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 07:25, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto Upendra. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 07:27, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Could you please take a look at this comment to me from user The Ramlbing Man. I do not know what has happened to that user he used to be such a great one but now he is [xxx--redacted by talk page janitor] calling me sick for some reason unknown to me. The Monica Spear discussion at ITN seems to have been rough on him because comments like that are so unnecessary and frankly rude. [8]. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 11:27, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well. Yes, I've seen TRM get a bit hot and bothered here and there. But I don't see the big problem here, besides the "you're sick" comment which I think isn't bad enough to warrant a block or some templated warning--YMMV. I do see where they come from, though: you said the comment was unnecessary, which can be taken to mean that you're saying she did not die tragically. I don't see any trashing of any dead woman either, and I read the entire discussion. He's not trashing anyone there, and in pointing out that one woman died tragically he's not saying that the other died comically, for instance. Now, personally I wonder what it means when someone says "X died tragically", but that's also because I'm teaching Oedipus next week, and that's real tragedy. I'd simply try to shake this off, if I were you. Drmies (talk) 15:03, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
First of all I did not seek TRMs blocking or similar only your input. Well, honestly I do not see how TRMs point about Eva Ekvall as I havent even mentioned her in my original post. I ment it was unnecessary as he tried to diminish the death of Spear in comparison to Ekvall a totally unrelated case. But that was in no way a reflection of Ekvalls importance or non-importance. Still the "sick" comment was beneath him as an experienced user, as a user you also has to be able to take criticism. I think the user saw in the message what he wanted to see to justify being rude but anyway I have better things to do than to argue with someone who is unlikely to change. Regards :)--BabbaQ (talk) 15:15, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)Maybe we can delete that one? Hafspajen (talk) 15:26, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is more tragic with Wikipedians bitching about which article subject is more or less tragic :) that is a big LOL.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:28, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well Drmies, thanks for trying, but it seems neither you nor I can get the point across. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:58, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move on TRM please. I have. Sympathy hunting is kind of sad.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:01, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Get lost BabbaQ please, I never invited you to my talk page to tell me that suggesting a young girls death through cancer as being tragic was "beneath me". This message was for Drmies, not you. You completely got it all wrong. That is very sad. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:12, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is comments like "Get lost BabbaQ please," that gets you into trouble. You are willingly or unwillingly uncivil in your comments. But I will not argue with you as you are unwilling to keep this discussion at a mature level since message one. And Drmies talk page is hardly the place. Move on now. Swallow your pride.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:37, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You misunderstood, as Drmies told you. Move on now. Time to learn to link to discussions properly and stop pestering every admin you can find. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:38, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alright, we're done. Babba, I think what we had here is a failure to communicate that got out of hand in the usual back-and-forths. Admins can't solve all problems, and while I enjoy the cut and thrust of debate myself, nothing productive can come out of this one. Diplomatic enough? TRM, one more thing, it's high time that a real editor (not a charlatan) looked at the recently written up Danilo Kiš articles, nicely linked from Template:Danilo Kiš. Much appreciated. Drmies (talk) 18:49, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

HASP award

HASP
How refreshing to see an editor step in, act, speak and leave with Humour-Action,Sense and Perspective. Hence H.A.S.P. Hope you enjoyed your walk and thanks for the bucket of cool refreshing water chucked over us bickerers. The rocket (oh no i meted my mixaphors!) is you. — ⦿⨦⨀Tumadoireacht Talk/Stalk 16:31, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • While I appreciate it, I think what's really happening is an inability to really accomplish something. I can't make people behave, cause typically the person who asks me to make another person behave leaves out a few words--"make them behave like me". Besides, I'm a terrible and uberbitchy bickerer myself, so I can't take credit for something I sometimes preach but usually fail to practice... Still, yes, we had a nice walk in the forest, and at lunch all the kids ate all their food, so nobody's complaining. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 18:56, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of power metal bands

Aloha. Yes, I'm back. Apparently in my absence some of the list articles have gone to pot. A new editor has decided to hit the list of power metal bands (and created a number of new articles for borderline-notable bands). I'm assuming good faith in that their newbieness means that they haven't realized that you need to provide a reliable source before including a band on a list, and similarly haven't realized that webzines and the band's record label fail WP:RS. However, I want to avoid a WP:3RR situation, so was wondering whether you could take a minute to have a quick look... Cheers, Blackmetalbaz (talk) 17:25, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

  1. You recently asked my help with Move Like This but to be true, I don't really understood what you wanted. Article here seems quite ok. So , how can I help you?
  3. I get some itchy feeling at the edits of an IP], throwing in Brian Norton and his book everywhere. This is rather unbelievable that the book is a source for so many articles (only issued in 2013) so I think it is book promo. What do you think?
  5. Some essential youth sentiment: Kunt u ons de weg naar Hamelen vertellen, meneer?. For the non-Dutch: Hamelen (TV series).

The Banner talk 18:29, 12 January 2014 (UTC) Howdy, Banner:[reply]

  1. I was working on the Dutch version, on the Dutch wiki, and any help there is appreciated.
  2. I'll have a look, after naptime probably.
  3. Yes! You know, I thought I had worked on that article--I think I wanted to but got sidetracked with some other Dutch TV articles. Crisco 1492 and I did a couple of them, including De Kris Pusaka. I never saw much of the Hamelen show, I was just a bit too young. If you want to improve that article I'm all about it. But it's difficult to find the sourcing, with some Dutch newspaper archives not being free or easily accessible, Google News archive being less accessible, not a great many Dutch books being viewable, etc. I had a hard, hard time with all the articles in Template:Wim T. Schippers (I wrote almost all of those); even for things that seem so obvious and were so popular (like We zijn weer thuis) it's really hard to find quality sources. Drmies (talk) 19:16, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ow, the Dutch version. I will take a look. The Banner talk 20:20, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
1) You can't find a non-existing ratings template, sorry. 2) I did find an archived version of Spinner, and added it again. 3) I translated most of the comments in the reception section, but I fail in translating "clunkiness". The Banner talk 20:56, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Banner! Drmies (talk) 18:42, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

pram full of butter

And speaking of prams, I'm going to ask Mr Wadsworth to recite his latest offering, a little pram entitled 'I wandered lonely as a crab' and it's all about ants.[9] Bishonen | talk 18:42, 12 January 2014 (UTC).[reply]

ANI regarding Hans

Hi Drmies. Just letting you know I've started an ANI about Hans, I really feel his personal feelings have made his involvement disruptive. As your involvement has been important I'm hoping you will comment. Thanks. Thread is here. Zad68 21:34, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I understand, Zad, and thank you for writing a detailed and neutral report. I don't support a topic ban at this moment, as you may have seen, but I thank you for your efforts in keeping the house clean. Drmies (talk) 23:59, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weird enough, me too. Was thinking hard about pursuing a career as a veterinarian. But I realised that I would never manage to take an animal's life, so that's it. Only flyes. Hafspajen (talk) 14:48, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unicorn

I love your editnotice. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 02:11, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Green wind

Wikipedians, ugh the unicorn is gone

Green wind. Green branches.
The ship out on the sea
and the horse on the mountain.
With the shadow at the waist
she dreams on her balcony,
green flesh, green hair,
with eyes of cold silver.

"Garcia Lorca" ("Ballad of the Sleepwalker)"

Hafspajen (talk) 22:26, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • You are a married man, darling. Sherlock Holmes could have deduced this, - easy - Crisco was talking about [ Wikimacarena] so I presented him with a song about Macarena [10], which made me think of Garcia Lorca, because one of the singers looks a little bit like him, and this made me think of You. Hafspajen (talk) 22:53, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
O, gosh. Hafspajen (talk) 04:19, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of rape victims from history and mythology

In the wake of the category's demise, an editor has just added Andrea Dworkin to that list - an addition not quite in keeping with how you created it. Perhaps we need a discussion of scope for the list? LadyofShalott 03:12, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In related matters, I just learned that Category:Mythological rape victims and Category:Mythological rapists now exist. LadyofShalott 03:21, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Being discussed here; I left them a note about the deletion of the previous category and will now re-add Rind. I'm not proud of that detail of the story but, geographical inclusivity. Yngvadottir (talk) 03:46, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
List of rape victims from antiquity and mythology? List of rape victims from ancient history and mythology? I'm wondering if we need more precise terminology in this matter. I'm not sure this it fully formed enough of a though to put on the article talk page yet. Maybe those are too restrictive. (Also, I didn't mean to irritate (if I did?) with the "arbitrary" comment.) LadyofShalott 02:57, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
List of rape victims from pre-modern history and mythology? LadyofShalott 03:21, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator help needed

Hello Drmies,

A pal of mine from my radical teenage years died this morning - no surprise, as he had been in declining health for a long time. He was quite a talent and his name was Gary Grimshaw, and I have been expanding his biography considerably today. During that process, I looked over the biography of another wild man from my youth, Lawrence Plamondon, who was a close associate of Grimshaw. I didn't really know Plamondon well personally, since he was a fugitive during most of that time, but his name was frequently invoked among my social circle in those years. In any event, he has always been known by his nickname, Pun Plamondon, and that is his byline and the name he uses on his website. I want to move his biography to Pun Plamondon, but I am running up against a redirect. I need an administrator to move it to Pun. Thanks if you can help with this. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:18, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gay wheels

Who knew? I drove here straight from the speeedyway.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:24, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Moosezilla

also effectful
Saying hello from Afra

I can't help wondering about Moosezilla's fewmets. Do you think Moosezilla hangs out with the Questing Beast? LadyofShalott 03:23, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Me? No, the terrifying Möösezilla is the unholy creation of User:Georgewilliamherbert. I expect he means to use her as a sock. Anyway, it's cruelly alarming to all and sundry to have her haunt your edit notice. Bishzilla ran like a deer! Bishonen | talk 05:02, 15 January 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Bwhahahahhaaaa. urp Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 05:17, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I didn't know it would have that effect. Can you please tell her it's just a drawing? (Sorry Georgewilliamherbert, I don't mean that disparagingly.) Drmies (talk) 17:53, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A drawing? [Peers closely.] Well… all right. I see what you mean, but I'm not sure that helps. How is Bishzilla herself not just a drawing? just several handsome drawings and impressive animations as found under the heading "Personal images" here? As such, she has good reason to be scared of Moosezilla. There's no scan of driver's license or passport as required by WMF as proof of existence, and no authentic-certified photos whatever. Is Bishzilla perhaps just in your head, Drmies? No offense. Bishonen | talk 19:06, 15 January 2014 (UTC).[reply]
That's ridiculous. So is Bishonen perhaps just in her own head? Honestly. (P.S. Look out, Bishzilla's eating the horses!) darwinbish BITE ☠ 19:11, 15 January 2014 (UTC).[reply]
I had a dream within a dream the other day. The content of both dreams is X-rated, so I won't tell you (Zilla, I sent you a note via carrier pigeon), but it sure was interesting. Most interestingly, I was aware within my dream (the "top" one) that it was a dream within a dream. Drmies (talk) 20:45, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'll just say something completely straightforward to you at this time, then, Hafspaj: those are wonderful horse photos. [Starts to eat the cheesecake factory cheesecake assortment. It's a little off-topic in any case, isn't it? Not a horse.] Bishonen | talk 01:17, 16 January 2014 (UTC).[reply]
(e/c, hello, Drmiesen) I thought you'd like it. Since I'm not The Bishonen (or, in Swedish, "Bishonenen"), why would you be The Hafspaj? Bishonen | talk 03:38, 16 January 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Try some horses?

  • Arabian horse
    Arabian horse

Hafspajen (talk) 19:07, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Impersonation

It's a violation of policy for a user to choose the name of a famous person unless they happen to have the same name. Is it a violation if the famous person is dead?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:29, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(inb4ping) I think it depends on the person. The metric I would use is basically: is it plausible for someone to mistake the username as an official account of/representing that person, and/or is it recent enough for the username to possibly cause offense? Someone naming their account Gottfried Leibniz is not going to be an issue, but someone naming their account Ariel Sharon would be. It's a judgement call, I think. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:44, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This person hasn't been dead for anywhere nearly as long as Leibniz, but long enough that no one would think the user is that person. However, naturally, our policy leaves wiggle room in a parenthetical ("or is related to"). Thus, someone might think that the user is related to the dead person. However, I strongly suspect that the user has been following my edits because he has now added to his user page language like "I am not that person", which is all the policy demands. In any event, I posted the question here more out of idle curiosity. I had no plan to block the person based on their username or even to request that they do something about it. Just musing.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:52, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What

I don't understand this discussion, Writ or Drmies. Since when Wikipedia sees pictures a a distraction in an article? I fail to understand the whole thing. Hafspajen (talk) 22:38, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, too many isn't good, but I haven't looked in any detail yet--access to Wikipedia via thee iPhone at the YMCA is very limited. Drmies (talk) 00:33, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK. Well, somewhere it says that we use images to explain or enlighten things that are difficult to do by way of text. I don't think your dining room, as nice as it is, adds anything to the text of that article (Restaurant rating). Now, The Banner, in his customary not-always-so-diplomatic manner, called it a spammy picture; I disagree with that, though I would support the removal of it (sorry). For a somewhat related article that does have a very helpful image, have a look at Bristol stool scale--and whenever I think of that article, I think of SandyGeorgia and her merry male companion. Now, whether Noma should be in the Restaurant article, I don't know. My taste in images (quantity and quality) is probably less austere than Banner's and less exuberant than yours. Drmies (talk) 01:07, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Doctor M. You know, You know, I was personally and actively involved into the Wikipedia Image Use Policy, back in 2009, and this came somewhat like a surprise to me. I do remember it says that we use images to explain or enlighten things that are difficult to do by way of text. Also, did notice the not-always-so-diplomatic manner, also the topic shifting. IF, we agree that the image was not spam, than I can explain why it would add to the article. That restaurant at the picture illustrated a restaurant that had two Michelin stars, and this is indeed very rare. And Restaurant rating has only 1 picture, showing a picture of a chef who took his life after he was rumoured to be in danger of losing one of his three stars. Well, but I can see it is his/hers article, so I leave it where it is. Hafspajen (talk) 02:35, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edits

May I point out that editor The Banner is in the field Wikipedia:Service awards not entitled to the Master editor II level of contribution title, as he displays it on his userpage, since that requires 51,000 edits and 7 years of service. User:The Banner has been editing only 5years, 1 month and 15 days, and has 36, 444 edits only. Hafspajen (talk) 03:15, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't tell you He started this account on 1 Dec. 2008. I changed my name from Warrington to Hafspajen, but the first edit is still the edit under Hafpajens name that was the Warringtons first. If you change the name the edits are still the same. Don’t know if you can add different accounts, but why should that be allowed? But if you are allowed to add all your edits lets say from all Wikis, well - possible. But can you add time? Hafspajen (talk) 03:51, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you add up all your edits, as Warrington and Hafspajen and all your IPs and socks, and you get to a certain number and years of service, and it earns you a copy of The Communist Manifesto with a coffee stain, power to you. It seems that all his edits were renamed to the new account; I don't know, Warrington, you'd have to ask him. It's usually not a matter that most admins care for, and that includes me. BTW, there's been some discussion concerning those Tutnum and Labium titles, and my old friend Mandarax may have something to say on the topic. Drmies (talk) 04:12, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
All I know is that for the first time, I won't be able to upgrade on my upcoming Wikiversary. In about a month I'll have been registered for nine years, and there's no award for that. Maybe I can claim an award between the eight and ten year awards. What's "Most Plusquamperfect Looshpah Laureate" plus "Looshpah Laureate of the Encyclopedia" divided by two? MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 05:40, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think those titles, while recognizing a certain amount of work to achieve them, are mostly for fun. It's not something anyone enforces. LadyofShalott 04:15, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I just made myself a Looshpah. Edit count-wise, I'm the guy who taught Lord Gom how to edit. Drmies (talk) 04:17, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I made myself a Junior Wrangler at the Teahouse quite some time ago. (Probably soon after they introduced Maître d' as a rank there in addition to Host, Guest, Founder and Awesome Founder.) I've been waiting for anyone to notice or object. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:44, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)It's not power, but sincerity. And if I go counting ALL the edits from all Wikis, including the Swedish Warrington and Hafspajen, I might have to add at least 3000-2500 more. Eh. But do you remember Writ saying that if merging two accounts you will lose the ones edited? So they are probably lost. But if it doesn't matter att all, then, I can take the highest level, 16 years of editing. The problem is that this will show the real amount of edits and time. And that might be confusing for everyone.
150 00+This user has made more than 150 00 contributions to Wikipedia.
Hafspajen (talk) 04:24, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Still The Banner has been editing longer time than you, Drmies, he claims he is one level above you, the Master editor II level. (51,000 edits and 7 years) Hafspajen (talk) 04:33, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, you don't add years--come on, old timer. This business of merging accounts, it's above my pay grade. I remember Writ saying that, but I don't remember understanding it very well, haha. Drmies (talk) 04:52, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's not me who say so, it's him. His level requires 51,000 edits and 7 years of service. Now that is not possible for someone who started 2008 Dec., or my math is gone bad. Hafspajen (talk) 04:56, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But you added yourself up to 16 years--three years before Wikipedia was invented. No, I see your point, but it's not something I'm going to delve into. Drmies (talk) 04:57, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, 16 years, that was a joke. I said that if it obviously doesn't matter how we count, so... why not take the highest level, ...? But I added all the edits on other wikis, and I have 6 years, 4 months, and 7 days. That means Rhodium Editor Star for me. And I removed all the pictures I added to the Restaurant article. Since what Wiki is not, I will stay away from the ->WP:BATTLEGROUND -> battleground-Restaurants. Now it is exactly like it was minus my edits, now that will make the gastronomers happy. And put back the " spammy" Noma and Per Se in New York City has three Michelin stars, written in the caption (not my edits) They can now go on owning Wikipedia:Ownership of articles the article... - as much as they want. Warrington (talk) 05:07, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • By the way, the Banner pointed me to a Wikipedia:Image dos and don'ts, and that is NOT Wikipedia policies or guidelines. I was personally and actively involved into the Wikipedia Image Use Policy, back in 2009, and essays are not Wikipedia policies or guidelines. I don't think this Image dos and don'ts should be used as an argument, since it does NOT correspond to Wikipedia Image Use Policy. Another thing that is not quite is as it is. Hafspajen (talk) 14:47, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
To quote Drmies: in my customary not-always-so-diplomatic manner what kind of BS is this to start whining about a userbox? As you can see in my userboxes I started editing on Wikipedia almost 8 years ago, indeed on the Dutch WP. I made more then 36 000 edits on the English WP and more then 40 000 edits on the Dutch WP. As the page states: How to count your edits is up to you. It is generally assumed that all edits, even including edits by bots and deleted edits, are okay to count. If you want to count edits on other Wikimedia projects, that's okay too. (Wikipedia:Service awards). All the rest (former bot account, other WP-versions) is not counted. In fact, I take this as an attack on my credibility!
Ow, and I don't have a copy of "Het Kapitaal" (Dutch version of "Das Kapital") any more. I am not an economist, so I found it difficult stuff. So I sold the book when emigrating. But I still have the Dutch version of The Communist Manifesto, not with coffee stains (as far as I know) but with orange markings... The Banner talk 22:01, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, I took the service awards as a bit of fun. Not so deadly serious as you seem to take it. The Banner talk 22:06, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ha. I had to check out my copy from the library. I don't think I ever made it past page 3 or 4 or so. Drmies (talk) 04:54, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I remember very well, Warrington. We met through CoM, of course. It seemed like a friendlier place at the time; becoming admin and getting to know all the feuds and their participants took some of the fun out of it. I'll tell you what a novice I was: you had a bouncing Jimbo Wales head on your user page, and I thought that was a picture of you. Drmies (talk) 15:18, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Really? It was by com-courtesy, that picture, I wish I was sure where com is now. Don't you notice anything unusual at Cultural depictions of dogs#16th and 17th century? The caption is : Painting by Hendrik Martenszoon Sorgh, Drmies sitting with his parrot. Has been there for some days. Warrington-Hafspajen (talk) 15:24, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ha! that's cute. Sadie looks a lot different, though. I'd take administrative action, but that would be admin abuse since I'm invooolved. CoM is still out somewhere in California (or Florida, what's the difference), as far as I know. Imagine how many more articles we'd have on all kinds of topics if he hadn't gotten too involved with Barack Obama and Ayn Rand. Drmies (talk) 22:58, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't want to jump in here, in between friends, but Banner, sometimes you are a tiny but on the curt side, just a little. And that's all I have to say. Both of you, let's drop this matter, at least on this here page, please. I value you both. Drmies (talk) 22:58, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Possible mistake

Would you mind reviewing the edits made to List of high schools in Michigan? If only to verify that the claim of disruptive editing by John from Idegon is justified, as I recall seeing somewhere that links are not permitted in section headers WP:HEAD "Headings should not normally contain links...", and it looks as if the unnecessary accusatory tone of his message caused an abrupt end to that editor's contributions. 69.140.115.21 (talk) 23:43, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I left him that warning because A)He left no explanation of why he did what he did, B)The linking in the headers is useful and has existed for a long time. and C)Shouldn't a major change to the layout of an article be discussed? John from Idegon (talk) 16:55, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you can "warn" someone for not leaving an edit summary, but that's a notice, not a warning. Of course we want people to leave an edit summary, but it's not mandatory and therefore one should not be warned for not having done it. And it's not really a major change in the layout: it's a correction of it, in line with MOS:HEAD: "Headings should not normally contain links, especially where only part of a heading is linked." One could argue that a heading in a given article ought to contain a link, but that burden is on the editor who inserts them or re-inserts them. One could argue that in a list such as this one it's helpful, but Allegan County, Michigan, for instance, has no information on the county's schools or school system. Sorry, but I see no valid reason to accuse that IP editor of disruption. Drmies (talk) 17:10, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I second Drmies's opinion. LadyofShalott 17:14, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Luisa Piraquive

How come 5 colombian media sources are "too weak" a reference for a BLP? Take into account that the controversy kind of speaks for itself since the main fact is the declaration of Maria P. (which is the person in the video, no doubt) and its comparison with the religious activities she, her daughter and Carlos Baena (who also appears in the video) are involved into. The articles clearly say that there is a controversy and that is all the contribution says. --Anuj odegi (talk) 03:57, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gambaran budaya terhadap anjing

Someone just copied this article over to an other Wiki. Look at the Dutch picture!!! Lukisan oleh Hendrik Martenszoon Sorgh, Drmies duduk dengan burung nurinya. Gambaran budaya terhadap anjing! Was it ‎Bishonen who copied this article over to an other Wiki? Hafspajen (talk) 00:25, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Shot it all that was a joke. Can you please go over and fix it? Don't know how to fix that. It was in the English article, and I thought that it will ping Drmies, so it will come up as a message for him. Anyway, it got copied over. Hafspajen (talk) 01:04, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank God and Crisco. (Yes it was me - this gallery was at Phil's talk page, and this was there as a joke. And when I put that over into the article it kind of followed.) Hafspajen (talk) 01:12, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan king your help please

Hi, thanks for all your work on this article, it looked a lot better. But over night JK himself has completely destroyed all your work!! 50+ edits. Can you revert it back to your last version please, I dont know how to do it? ThanksDave006 (talk) 10:03, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • It wasn't really my work that was affected. I saw those edits yesterday and didn't see that much in them; there's other editors with their eyes on the matter now, so I'm going to leave it to them. Thanks for your note, Drmies (talk) 13:56, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection at Superpower article

I noticed in your summary you wrote "seems editors can't get this straight. talk it out". But to be perfectly honest with you, there is little to talk about. The recent edit war arose because of an ongoing problem whereby a number of IPs are trying to push their nationalistic POV agendas. These IPs have no desire to adhere to Wikipedia's anti-POV policy and instead maintain a battleground mentality and an unwillingness to behave cooperatively.

I would appreciate it you would create a new thread at the Superpower articles talk page about Wikipedia's policy against POV, and perhaps mention that the current revision (that you protected) is the most appropriate revision as it does not contain any serious POV issues. Hopefully this will convince the IPs to stop their POV pushing. Thanks. Antiochus the Great (talk) 18:47, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • No, I can't do that: as an admin I don't really get to choose (at least not officially) which version the preferred version is. I cannot possibly say which one is more POV free than which other version, and I think there are at least three IPs active: I am also not willing to say that these IPs are pushing this or that nationalistic agenda, that is a matter that should be resolved on the talk page. Or, that is the argument you should make there. There are means of dispute resolution, including WP:DR or WP:RFC, but my intervention shouldn't be one of them. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 18:52, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I understand. I opened an RfC instead, hopefully this will help promote discussion and may result in a consensus of some sort. Antiochus the Great (talk) 21:40, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I made a reply there too. This is a lot of sources on the Superpowers that were removed Dec 28, 2013[[11]] on that article that has been under a lot of heat since Dec 28, 2013. I find it offensive to an editor to call Russian Nationalist for POV pushing (I'm not Russian but the comment made is racist). I stated in my earlier comments on a thread left on Acroterion[12]. The point is, there's a problem with the newer version, it removes too much sources and clearly is sending the message in the wrong direction on edits made by one editor[13] 23:14, 30 December 2013‎ by Antiochus the Great (talk | contribs)‎(37,169 bytes)(-4,976)‎(tidy-up, re structure and paragraphing). I will note, there was no prior talk on these edits, it was push with discussion. Too much at once, is clearly wrong for this article.


Comments here left on Acroterion:

:You can start another dicussion but you appear to be in the mess of the edit war Antiochus the Great. Acroterion I sent Antiochus the Great on his talk page to appear of using another ip and engaged in an edit war using the ip 109.76.220.159 and Antiochus the Great of POV pushing but he quickly removes my comments[14]. I looked at the history of the Superpowers[15] and Superpowers talk[16] but the result has been under edit war since Dec 28[17] and the discussion has been minor on there part. If you start with an edit, then talk first but the action Antiochus the Great has taken has been too much and no real discussion for such. There are disagreements but that is not stoping edit push. I think there is no resolution if this continues like what I see here[18][19][20][21] as this matter was never discussed, it just appeared without any talk, this is a problem.--103.1.153.206 (talk) 19:50, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pushing your Russian nationalistic POV wont get you anywhere. Why don't you accept Wikipedia's policy on maintaining a NPOV? Antiochus the Great (talk) 19:57, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Where did you get Russian national POV? I'm born and live in America. I have read Wikipedia's policy on maintaining POV and appeared to be using as required.--103.1.153.206 (talk) 20:02, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
--103.1.153.206 (talk) 21:58, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

charity

Ok, but the charity with Brian May is noted on Brian May's web site and Twitter, + articles onthe web. So why do you consider there's no source ? There's a link to May's site. http://brianmay.com/brian/briannews/briannewsapr13a.html#07 And by the way, I have no link with the artist. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.19.42.172 (talk) 20:58, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drmies&oldid=591181007"