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 14.139.124.114 (talk) at 06:22, 21 November 2015. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Wikipedia according to Kelapstick: "Nothing, it's a collection of templates."[1]

Well done!!

"…and that's why my moustache is woven from asbestos."

In the end, you'll probably regret it, but maybe, in the end, you'll also have made a difference damn fool of yourself. I hope so. Best, BMK (talk) 03:22, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Make a difference"--I detest that cliche! Drmies (talk) 03:35, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry about that. I've edited it, and I think I've still captured the essence of what I was saying. BMK (talk) 05:48, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good job. You truly made the world a better place. There's no I in team. Stop making excuses. One game at a time. Time to make a play. We just have to keep following the process. Drmies (talk) 04:26, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • About damn time. You got my vote. Capeo (talk) 04:11, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • WARNING:Comment from bitter, disillusioned former arb ahead: Don't worry, you won't make any real differnece. You can stem the tide of insanity, but pushing it back and restoring sanity (if indeed it ever existd here) is too big a task for just fifteen people, no matter how good they are and what superpowers they have. I do think you will make a good arb. On the other hand, I thought Newyorkbrad was a good arb, and he was on there forever and yet... here we are. The best part is when it's over. Normal Wiki-drama seems so easy to deal with afterward. Now, I am off to compose the most complicated "gotcha" question for you I can... Beeblebrox (talk) 04:16, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please don't. I'm only running because Kelapstick made me (I made a big mistake sending him naked selfies a few weeks ago). I equally foolishly volunteered to head a search committee so I can't handle too many questions. Drmies (talk) 04:19, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
too late sucka. Beeblebrox (talk) 04:25, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Always knew you for a B-Boy. I'm watching some Sherlock Holmes movie on TV cause I couldn't watch CNN and MSNBC anymore. Well, they end up in Paris and there's a bomb. I click on Recent changes and on almost every page there's something related to the Paris attack. I vainly hope to wake up tomorrow and it was all a dream. Drmies (talk) 05:15, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Can't blame you for turning off the 24 hour news. Filling space, needing something to talk about every second, has turned these supposed reporters into ghouls for years now. I'm not that old, just broke 40 now, but I do remember an ole days when a witness spoke for themselves and when they say something was horrible the horror spoke for itself. It was obvious. That's not changed because people are people. What's changed is these networks essentially following up with, how horrible was it? Give me sound bites. Ugh, digression. Glad you're running for Arb even given that most ex-Arbs say your soul is going to be left desolate after your tenure. Capeo (talk) 06:19, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The selfies I didn't mind. It was that brown suit coat. You deserve the punishment for that alone. --kelapstick(on the run) 10:11, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Drmies, you're making Gerda's revolution much more difficult! MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 08:27, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Returning from singing the Fauré Requiem, written in Paris: I love opera, such as Falstaff and this operetta, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:53, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hard to believe but I once sang in that. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 16:02, 16 November 2015 (UTC).[reply]
In minor despair, you won my support by the answer to my second question. Kindly try to win my neutral also. Your present answer to #1 claims done for what you undid on my request. For the general reader who will not study the editing history of that "obscure" opera, please copy your reasoning to the answers and perhaps explain how you arrive at disagreeing with Gamaliel who won my support ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:37, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yngvadottir (talk) 11:53, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for putting your head on the block. You'd better get elected because if you don't and I do, there will be hell to pay and I'll never talk to you again. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:37, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm going to stop complaining, Kudpung. I'm reading about people at a concert who were pleading with killers so their wives could live. What a world. And here we are writing Good Articles on Meghan Trainor and hurricanes. Drmies (talk) 15:18, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is the kind of election that makes me glad I'm old enough to vote. And I'm extremely glad you're willing to do this (and not just because I'm enjoying reading Marie de France on your recommendation). - Macspaunday (talk) 18:50, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Macspaunday, you are clearly leaving me this friendly note as a reminder. I believe I mentioned that BooksAMillion was all out of books that didn't have BDSM or vampires in them, and I need to find a decent copy from a colleague. I promise you I will, having just finished Miles Davis's autobio, and Paul Kingsnorth's The Wake. Yes, Marie de France, what a blast. Let's all play a game, one about me since this is my talk page: what do you think my favorite lay is? Drmies (talk) 21:31, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The chickens have come home to frito-lay your sugar bowl. Or something....
  • No conscious motive of a reminder, though I admit there may have been an unconscious one... So, you ask: which is your favorite? I'm only halfway through, but I would say "Le Fresne": you prefer things to end in harmony. How is that for a guess? (Incidentally, I finished reading the Decameron straight through for the first time a few months ago, so I feel as if I'm in familiar territory here.) - Macspaunday (talk) 03:20, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • The Decameron...a dirty mind is a joy forever... No, sorry. Le Fresne is great, and I do like a happy ending, but it reminds me too much of The Clerk's Tale, and I just cannot do that Christian patience. No, it's Laustic. There, I said it. Drmies (talk) 04:25, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Laüstic, eh? It's next on my list, and will read it with special interest. Today, however, I'm marking up student papers, for better or worse. Will be back soon! - Macspaunday (talk) 13:37, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Genuinely enjoying reading your answers so far. Best of luck as the campaign goes on. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:17, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks--some of those questions are tough. Others are much better at answering--I've been thinking of just copying Keilana's answers. Except for that EMT part--I couldn't fake that. Drmies (talk) 04:23, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • If you can dodge projectile vomit, you're off to a pretty good start... Keilana (talk) 05:12, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • I don't want to get into a vomiting contest with you, but I got three kids, you know... Drmies (talk) 05:14, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Some of those questions really nearly made me vomit and I won't provide answers that pander to their pompous arrogance just to get their vote. Arbcom election is not supposed to be RfA Mk.II It’s a shame that some editors are turning the question section into a farce. They are either fishing for opinions on their own actions in the past, or fishing for answers to general knowledge that they didn't learn in grade school or can’t be bothered to look up themselves. Some are just veiled PA designed to disparage the candidate.
Like RfA , it’s hardly surprising that not many people out of our thousands of editors and admins are prepared to step forward. Perhaps it would be a good idea to abolish the questions section for future elections, and give the candidates more than only 400 words. Voters should do their own research and vote as they think appropriate. A secret poll is quite different from RfA and the community needs to understand that an Arbcom election is not an RfA re-run and another venue to throw shit at people with impunity. I'm in the running but I'm still not wholly convinced that a seat on the Committee is what I really want and I'm fully capable of withdrawing at the drop of a hat before or even after the event. Anyway, knowing that Drmies is almost certainly going to be elected, I would be quite happy to continue to wield my wicked block hammer at ANI. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:36, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Kudpung, I don't know. I made plenty enemies here, I think, what with my continuous enabling of notorious longterm-chasers-away of good editors, my refusal to block certain editors and my willy-nilly blocking all over the place, with my declining to block for insulting language and my simultaneous insistence on Political Correctness Run Amok. I'm reminded of my RfA, where one oppose vote was for not supporting an indef-block on someone, and the other oppose vote was from that someone I didn't want indef-blocked. Also, there are some really good candidates who come with a lot less baggage than yours truly, and who may be in a better, more youthful spirit. Yes, the loaded questions are a bit bothersome, but hey, that's how Wikipedia works. Those who are really interested in making this a better place don't save up their diffs for that one occasion where they can publicly humiliate a fellow Wikipedian; I'm particularly disappointed in Spartaz's loaded question. What's funny is that such behavior immediately puts the lie to this "blue line" accusation: admins are perfectly capable of stabbing someone in the back in a very public venue. Drmies (talk) 16:11, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I consider the q-pages at arbcom to be a good dose of what the actual arb-case-pages are kinda like. Lots of people with lots of extremely convoluted question, trying to influence you to see the world a certain way (usually their way). Backstory behind every question. No simple answers. Plenty of outright incivility, and VAST reservoirs of nominally-polite yet fundamentally not-very-damn-nice commentary, phrased in a way to avoid NPA by a hair, or a fig leaf, or whatever cliche you wish to utilize. Hard to make a difference (heh) under such trying circumstances, but a lot easier if you have a strong *group* of arbs and arb-candidates. In other words, don't quit now Kudpung, por favor. But do be fully aware, that probably the q-pages are just a taste of what the next two years will be like. WP:CHOICE applies as always, o'course. Best, 75.108.94.227 (talk) 09:23, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Drmies, dunno about youthful. I've come across some extraordinarily intelligent young people in my time - linguists, mathematicians, medics, chess players, but it didn't always mean they were able to exercise the judgment of an adult. And that's why I think it's a good idea to have some not-quite-so-young people on the Committee like you, and some really old people like me and DGG. There's no denying the fact that a long and active RL brings with it it a baggage of useful stuff. . I don't think I'll be voting for really young candidates or young ones who are running for a second term. I've tried to give those questioners a dose of their own medicine. My answers are designed to demonstrate that while I do at least have a sense of humour, I'm a no-nonsese kind of gu, take things very seriously, and don't suffer fools gladly - and that's exactly how I would work on Arbcom if elected. Some of them won't see that though, because the answers are not the submissive crawllng they expected; nor are they to help them bridge deficiencies in their own general knowledge, nor to tell them that they handled past cases correctly. I won't be sent on fool's errands for hours like the old French expression used by parents to their pesky children: 'Va dehors, voir si j'y suis' . I'm glad someone asked me about the anti-admin brigade - they must have been looking in the mirror when they wrote that. It's funny, every morning when I have a shave I tend to see a familiar face... Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:41, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Recently, I’ve been plowing through ANI as if I were a blind alien touching an elephant. The resulting hypothesis was that Wikipedia is a grand experiment to identify nasty people. I could be wrong. I’ll go back to touching articles and let those with the required fortitude deal with the underbelly.:) Good luck. Objective3000 (talk) 01:03, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, I thought I'd show Ealdgyth where it's at, and make an article edit for every edit to ACE. And wouldn't you know it, I run into a geographical article on some community in Spain with 283 people (though the Spanish wiki had 350...strange...) so I can do nothing, and then I get summoned at ANI again. I managed to make a few edits on a soccer player. Yes, article space is infinitely more rewarding. Also, "backstory"--there's some editors trying to get some old wounds reopened (or resutured, I don't know); Kudpung, you know those editors are not going to be convinced. Like DGG says, one can only hope to convince their audience.

    Anyways, I got beets roasting and the dishes are done, so I got some time to make some Quality Edits to our Beautiful Project.™ Drmies (talk) 01:37, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good heavens alive, I nearly fell off my chair. But tally ho, by Jove! Who knows, I might even vote for you. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:58, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What do I have to do to win your vote? How about I don't block you for that first video, clearly a BLP violation? (Poor guy--you hear the first leg crack, and you know he's using all kinds of butt muscles to keep balanced, all the while talking...don't know what he's saying, but I think it was grammatically correct and all that.) Drmies (talk) 19:40, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, remarkable poise I thought. (Sorry I couldn't find the clip I really wanted). I'm sure a block for my first video would win you quite a few votes, although not necessarily one from me. But then at least folks could enjoy the second one all the more! Martinevans123 (talk) 19:57, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, he's a real misogynist.

Having exposed one questioner's set of questions for being posed on a political platfrm with an intent to brand me as a mysoginist and the rest of their questions as grossly inapprpriate just because I don't actively fight females' battles for them has obviously got me a place on the 'Oppose' section of their voter guide. But to put Drmies there as well is simply beyond me. Now that I have experienced an Arbcom election first-hand, I must say it really is a farce. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:22, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the election is just a taste of what a two year term is like. As WTT says, you can expect to be a target, whether you are too activist or are considered not activist enough. And there are 14 other people you need to work with who you may or may not get along with...reading the statements of former arbitrators, this can be what causes individuals to end their term early. Liz Read! Talk! 20:15, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kudpung, I don't rightly know what voter guide you're talking about, and please don't tell me--it's just a distraction. Sorry to hear you're such a woman hater. Sorry to hear that I'm one too. It's a good thing none of those people actually know me. Drmies (talk) 16:31, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is just another excuse not to grade papers, isn't it? Professors are all alike. Softlavender (talk) 15:35, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

Believe me, you're gonna need many of these since you're a shoo-in at ACE. Wizardman 15:20, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I should perhaps be absent more often, first your RfA and now ACE. Maybe next time I take a break you'll get founder rights? —SpacemanSpiff 15:26, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think I should figure out what that expression really means, but for now I'm just going to say yes, absolutely! Drmies (talk) 21:33, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

4280 edits to ANI???? REALLY. Ouch. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:22, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Still not even close to the top contributed there. (Baseball Bugs last time I checked). --kelapstick(on the run) 20:36, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • True, but, in my defense, most of my comments there are to troll. :) Ealdgyth, I haven't looked at your guide yet, and you can say whatever you like about me: your having raised Middle Ages to FA status makes you a saint. You can ride that one single accomplishment for the rest of your life, even if you hadn't done all those other things that make Wikipedia good. Drmies (talk) 21:41, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ealdgyth, looking at your opening statements fills me with shame: the longer I'm here the fewer article contributions I make, it's true. Drmies (talk) 23:32, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Technically might be true, but 10k+ edits to mainspace per year, for the past seven years...[2] presumably some of them are content-contribs, not just vandalism-reverts and such. Could be mostly NCAA fancruft though, I suppose.  ;-)     If you wanna get back above 60% mainspace-contribs, you'll have to shut this usertalk page down, though! 75.108.94.227 (talk) 10:02, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
DYK that the Arizona defense has three players from LSU, one from Auburn, one from Alabama? Drmies (talk) 01:40, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

sorry?

I have no idea how or why you got dragged in [3] Sorry? — Ched :  ?  21:06, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oh, it's diversion. And let's bring in the gender gap, and Eric of course, and the Balkans, and etc. etc. Nothing but tactics, and maybe they'll work. Drmies (talk) 01:39, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Moar choices?

They be stealing mah cheezburger! ...an actual redirect
File:Cheezburger Cat may has - drawing.jpg
Note use of proper grammarz

Drmies, I'd like to be able to vote for Diannaa and Anna Frodesiak as well as for you, Kelapstick, NE Ent, Opabinia regalis, Timtrent ... can you think of any way we can get them on board? Yngvadottir (talk) 14:16, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Time left for self-nom to occur:
Git yer arbcom candidates, WP:TIAD, git 'em while they're hot. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 15:14, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
it's hard to convince people to nominate. And I don't know who I recommend. I think everyone I thought of is already up there. Or wouldn't run. --kelapstick(on the run) 15:17, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
MQS, you and drmies both thought would be good -- User_talk:Hafspajen#activeAdmin50kList -- did either of you ever ping them? I don't recognize that username. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 15:29, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
MichaelQSchmidt. I did now. --kelapstick(on the run) 15:34, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen him at AfD, actually, something about User:Dr. Blofeld and a film-related AfD. Don't know much about him. Is MQS wise and calm like Anna, and depth-based and cool-headed like Diannaa? Competition is stiff this year. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 16:28, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
MQS is about as much of a content admin as you can get. And spends a fair bit of time at afd, and always does his research. He's also my go to guy for film related stuff. It's getting to be a good pool of candidates this year. --kelapstick(on the run) 16:34, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, what K-stick said. I'd love to see Diannaa and Anna on it. They are cool as cucumbers, know their policy, and have more patience and humanity in their little fingers than I do in all of my body. Drmies (talk) 16:11, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • "If any rule prevents you from improving the encyclopedia, ignore it." Quoth unquoth. Perhaps you can suggest, that if they don't run, you and kelapstick will wheel-war to keep indef'ing them both?  :-)     Or maybe you can just appeal to their better nature. Either way it will obviously improve the 'pedia if they can be made to run. But they've both been pinged before, and they are resisting the light-touch approach, because they are not sure they will be good at the job, which is of course a big part of why they would be great. Go twist their arms a little, please. Use your persuasive-ness stuffs, you know, to English them into running, eh? 75.108.94.227 (talk) 16:28, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bit excited?

...or pissed at being accused of turning the discussion into something that it already was? This was a dispute over someone's behaviour; sex had nothing to do with it. But as a result, Ched has had it away on his toes, forced into doing so by the feminists and soapboxers who hijacked the discussion. CassiantoTalk 18:39, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sure, but...I'm trying to find the right cliche, can't come up with it right now...let me ask in the copy room. Drmies (talk) 19:31, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • lol, I'll waited with bated breath... CassiantoTalk 19:33, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, that was very unhelpful. I asked two people and both came up with something about slow and steady winning the race. I was looking more for "he (or she) who remains calm and collected and refrains from showing all too much excitement is more likely to gain the upper hand in a heated conversation"--but that doesn't have much of a ring to it. BTW, I'm kind of at a loss what that whole thread is about, so thanks SlimVirgin for pulling me in there. Pshaw! Seriously, Cassianto, slow and steady wins the race, and it's not "feminists" who are hijacking it; after all, I'm one myself, though I'm still struggling between French and "regular" third-wave feminism. Drmies (talk) 19:37, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon me, but HUH? Schmidt, Michael Q.

  • I don't think I brought up your name, but ACE 2015 seems to be turning into one of these cocktail parties where no one remembers who arrived with whom and who is likely to leave with whom. Swellegant, in other words. Drmies (talk) 19:30, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • A lot of good people on that list. Ask King of Hearts. Tedder. MQS. Jayron. Bencherlite. Ed. Gatoclass. Ponyo. Guy. Don't ask me--I don't know. Drmies (talk) 23:42, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

    • MQS I never thought of, would be a fascinating member to have eon the team. Big fan. --kelapstick(bainuu) 00:01, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

    • Pants. On. Fire. Doktor.[4] I tried to armtwist User:Ponyo, to no avail. Dennis Brown suggested we all armtwist User:Anna_Frodesiak, but she is "WP:IDHT" about becoming an arb. Maybe when he gets over his shock and alarm, User:MichaelQSchmidt will kindly provide us with his own self-nom, or failing that, with the names of two other people that ought to be running? 75.108.94.227 (talk) 19:46, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Another example of clever impersonation, no doubt. You can tell it wasn't me, because I would never cite Ozzy Osbourne. Drmies (talk) 20:11, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Another one

I'd just listed the one you deleted and please look at Muff (hair) too - zero inbound links. Legacypac (talk) 02:17, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

☒N Deleted. I guess I owe you one for that ACE question. Are we even? Beeblebrox (talk) 02:53, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Beeblebrox, is that more body bashing? Now you know why I didn't take that category and its contents to deletion! —SpacemanSpiff 05:44, 18 November 2015 (UTC) [reply]
No worries, Beeblebrox. You're always good in my book. Yes, Legacypac, I saw your nomination go by on Recent changes and thought I would take care of it. Muff (hair)? That's dumb. Drmies (talk) 02:59, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It really is just dumb. Who would type that in as a search? Beeblebrox (talk) 03:17, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Simple. Someone who gets a kick out of it... Drmies (talk) 03:40, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is actually a very common slang term in the UK so I am surprised it gets no incoming hits. Although I can't think why anyone would search wikipedia for it... Only in death does duty end (talk) 07:03, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Muff", maybe--"Muff (hair)", very unlikely. Drmies (talk) 15:23, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I suppose it's nice to have hair. Really, posting that link here is a microaggression. Drmies (talk) 15:08, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Copyright violation

In the short article Apame (concubine), I may have violated a copyright. The final sentence of the article mentions a painting. The second footnote is a link to a page which has an image of the painting (which is not in the public domain).

Should I remove the footnote which links to the image? (I have encountered this situation before so I would like a little advice please)Rdmoore6 (talk) 14:42, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clarifying the factoids... please correct me if I am wrong...
So there is no copyvio happening on-wiki, at any point, which is good. But there is a link to an off-wiki website which is hosting an imagefile that replicates a painting from the 1600s. Nice for the readership, to be able to see what the WP:NOTEWORTHY painting actually looks like. Now, is such a link, some kinda DMCA violation? Partly, that depends on whether the off-wiki website is engaging in a copyright violation. Obviously, if akg-images.com is NOT infringing upon any copyright, then we can link to them -- wikipedia pages link to copyrighted off-wiki material all the time. The question is, can a wikipedia article link to an off-wiki copyright-infringing location? See WP:CONVENIENCE for some pros and cons. If the answer is nay, the question becomes, is this specific computer imagefile copyright-infringing? Ping User:Diannaa, who knows more about copyright than moi. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 15:29, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The official position taken by the Wikimedia Foundation is that "faithful reproductions of two-dimensional public domain works of art are public domain". I also found this on the Commons: commons:Commons:Reuse of PD-Art photographs, which says that use of such images is restricted in some jurisdictions. -- Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:27, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you all. I was thinking--but had to run off to class--that since this site is selling these images they most likely have a right to publish them. Drmies (talk) 17:10, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clicking on the "about us" link on the AKG site brings up a page of Lorem ipsum-type text. But their van Gogh "Flying Fox" seems to be an original photo of the painting- I can't find anything similar, so they might be kosher. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 18:34, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Allegory of Prudence, 1645

Please help. How do you change to title name of the Congregation of Maronite Lebanese Missionaries to correspond to the Official name Congregation of the Lebanese Maronite Missionaries http://www.lebanesemissionaries.org/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by KreimMissionaries (talkcontribs) 21:24, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Go to the talk page and start a discussion. That kind of edit is a major change and should be discussed first. CassiantoTalk 21:27, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Cassianto. Have you looked at it? What do you think? Drmies (talk) 23:45, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's not great, but with a bit of work and a snatch of reliable sources, there's no reason why it couldn't work well. CassiantoTalk 08:58, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well now, this is interesting. First of all, , your name is not OK with our policy and I'm going the account so you can request a user name. Likewise, KreimSecretary is not OK since it does not denote a specific person; rather, it's a role within the organization. I'm sorry about that, but that's the way it is. Request a new username please.

    Second, the name, I see plenty of reason to change it, including this, which in my experience is pretty reliable. So I'll just go ahead and move it.

    Third, Cassianto, you've edited a Wikipedia article or two in your time, and I think that rascal Dr. Blofeld has too. Can y'all help me out a bit and clean it up? It needs a bit of work, and maybe you can find some things that I can't.

    Finally, Master Kreim, you may not like what we're going to do with the article, at least not initially, but we need to bring it in line a bit with our policies. Once that's done, though, you'll see that it's better to have a decent article that's according to our guidelines than a chatty article with a bunch of tags on it. Leave it to the experts, and feel free to help out--from your new account. Drmies (talk) 23:52, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you for the change on to the Official name Congregation of the Lebanese Maronite Missionaries. Now I have - User:MyNewAccountName, from my short-lived User:KreimMissionaries. —Preceding undated comment added 00:11, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • Sure. It's surprising that that name hadn't been taken yet. I'm sure you feel a bit alienated, perhaps, but at least you're legit now. As for improving that article, we really need reliable secondary sources. I was not able to find many of them but I'll keep looking. Drmies (talk) 00:41, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Signpost email

    Dear Drmies, I've emailed you via de.WP, since my dialy limit at en.WP has been reached. Tony (talk) 04:50, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • I'll answer you in German, then. Drmies (talk) 05:01, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Drmies, German numerals will be most acceptable. Just a reminder that there's a copy-deadline on this, and the stats can't really be done until we receive all responses that are going to come in. Can you let me know if you're not participating, so we have a better idea of when to close it off? But I do hope you will participate—it's a different angle from the normal onwiki pages, and past electorate surveys have proved to be of interest to readers. About 8–12 hours, I guess. Tony (talk) 03:05, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Shaping up…

    …to be Wikipedia's longest list. List of cricketers who have scored a century in all formats of cricket. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 10:29, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    We're getting a lot of trivia loaded cricket lists and templates over the past few weeks. We've just had a bunch deleted, but apparently a lot more people who don't follow cricket like to have stats like this kept. —SpacemanSpiff 16:53, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • You know, there are some who say that trivia and cricket...never mind, I shouldn't alienate anyone before An Important Election. All this reminds me that I've been neglecting Crisco 1492 for far too long. Drmies (talk) 04:04, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Sharing

    LATEST ADDITIONS TO German Shepherd: (reverted) On the television series The Bionic Woman (1976-1978), a bionic German Shepherd dog was introduced in the show's third season, named Maximillian (shortened to simply just "Max" on the show). A laboratory fire accident when Max was a puppy led to his becoming the world's first bionic dog, capable of tearing through almost any material with his bionic jaw, running 90 mph (as referenced in the episode "The Bionic Dog" [Part 1]), and leaping several feet into the air. The series lead character, Jaime Sommers, adopted him after she discovered his presence at an OSI lab facility while she was there getting a routine check-up. Max and Jaime developed a very strong friendship bond, and Max was featured in several adventure stories in the last season.

    • Gosh, it was really important, because it is BACK AGAIN!!!

    "(Reverted good faith edits ". Ah, I still have some good faith ...

    • Wait--what's wrong with this? Sounds pretty cool! Drmies (talk) 16:41, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    File permission problem with File:Beatles stage Blokker.jpg

    Thanks for uploading File:Beatles stage Blokker.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

    If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

    • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
    • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

    If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

    If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

    File:Videosong.jpg
    R.I.P. screencap of Lady and the Tramp
    Hope Stefan will not delete this... although he might.
    "He's-a not-a speak-a English-a pretty good."

    If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:17, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Do I recall correctly ... was that photo taken by your mother?
    And, while we're on a Dutch subject, you mentioned during your candidate grilling that Paris is the second most beautiful city in the world. Is Amsterdam number one? MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 21:52, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Mandarax, there is nothing wrong with your memory. Yes, this is correct. DYK that Drmies's mother turned seventy this past October and still rides her bike to the grocery store? OK, it's an e-bike now, but still. Stefan2, really? Really?

      Yes, Mandarax, you were right on both counts. I miss it dearly, but right now I miss Paris as much. I used to...well, let's not get too personal. Let's just say I spent a lot of time in Paris, going there by train, hanging out with the American ex-pats, strolling all over town with nothing better to do than enjoy it. Musee d'Orsay, the old Opera, theaters all over town...hipsters and artists, and my French was really good in those days. If I close my eyes I remember the smell of the subway. If I close my eyes and I'm in a bad mood I can even remember the smell of the RER. Drmies (talk) 03:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • Wow, that's great! I hope she had a good birthday. (I see from the e-bike article that in the Netherlands, they're "particularly popular among people aged 65 and over"). Yes, Paris is beautiful. Alas, I've never been to Amsterdam. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 08:24, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    "Make room for the mushrooms!" they said…
    • À propos de bottes: I'm re-reading The Sorrows of Young Werther (this time in English because nicht sprechen zee Deutsch pretty good, to paraphrase Lady and the Tramp), and I just learned that the Netherlands was called States General prior to 1795. WTF? Softlavender (talk) 09:25, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    WONDERFUL. Beware for the Werther effect. Hafspajen (talk) 14:17, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm keeping pistols away from me for the time being. Though I must say my eyes welled up at the ending just now, even though it was obviously no surprise. Such a pretty book. I wish I could experience the ending again. Now I'm in a book hangover and can't read anything else for the time being. Softlavender (talk) 15:33, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I always thought it was about suffering and temptation. Hafspajen (talk) 17:43, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Is it comfortable? All that sand in the nose... Hafspajen (talk) 15:31, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • It says that you received the file File:Beatles stage Blokker.jpg from Nellie Besseling by e-mail, so it seems that Nellie Besseling is someone other than you. Is that your mother? --Stefan2 (talk) 19:55, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes she is. Drmies (talk) 20:53, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • You should withdraw that nomination Stefan. Have a heart. -- Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:54, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • I've removed the template, but I suggest that you ask your mother to send an e-mail to OTRS to avoid confusion in the future. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:19, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Drmies: All you have to do to satisfy wiki copyright policy is have your mother re-email the photo to you (either in the body of the email or as an attachment), with the statement I, Nellie Besseling, the copyright holder of this photo, hereby publish it under the following license: CC-SA 1.0. and a link to the existing file on WP, and then you forward her email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. And you add a {{subst:OP}} ("OTRS pending") tag to the file. (Should do it soon because the file is set to be deleted on 25 November 2015.) Softlavender (talk) 07:42, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Oh, someone changed {{subst:OP}}? In the past, it was a Harry Potter template. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:19, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Let me know when Ms Besseling's email hits OTRS, I'll verify the ticket (You may just want to send her this template filled out and ask her to forward that email to permissions@wikimedia.org). Alternately Kelapstick whose stellar OTRS work is a feature of ACE guides may swiftly act on this. —SpacemanSpiff 15:56, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I've personally found that if you do not use the correct precise email address, OTRS can't find it, or find it promptly -- for instance, an email sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org will never get to the EN-wiki OTRS people, and an email sent to permissions-en@wikimedia.org will never get to the OTRS people at Commons. For that reason, since the file is on EN-wiki, and the correct email address for those OTRS tickets is permissions-en@wikimedia.org, I recommend sending it there. I also recommend that the email contain a link to the existing file so the OTRS folks can find and OK it promptly. Softlavender (talk) 18:18, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you all. Spiffster, I did what you said. Let's hope she can figure it out. Drmies (talk) 18:32, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Hidden sic tag

    In case you're curious, the reason I said on Template talk:Sic that you have discussed the hidden sic tag is that you participated briefly in a discussion of its use in the Stuart C Lord article a few months ago, on that article's talk page. Bryan Henderson (giraffedata) (talk) 16:50, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • I'll have a look--when I was typing that I started remembering something. :) Drmies (talk) 16:55, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Right. Thanks for the reminder. As Bbb indicated I was more interested in other aspects, but I'm happy to see that I still think more or less the same thing. Drmies (talk) 16:57, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Regarding your recent RFD closures

    I've noticed that recently, when you have been closing RFD discussion, you have been providing notes in the deletion log with broken links (both the fact that the discussion is not linked, and the fact that the summary refers the reader to the RFD base page instead of the daily subpage.) The entries have closure links that produce automated deletion summaries, but due to how the functionality of Template:Rfd2 works, these links can only appear when viewing the subpage directly, not from the RFD basepage. (The way I would go around this, and I'm guessing some RFD closure regulars do as well, is to click "edit" on one of the section headers in that day, and on the next page, click "Project page" at the top; then, you should be at the daily subpage where the links appear.) Steel1943 (talk) 19:21, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • Maybe this will make sense to me when I do it again. When I deleted a whole bunch the other day, individual redirects were bundled together and had ... can't remember, something with "@" in front of them, but it wasn't clickable. Drmies (talk) 21:01, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Wait--so RfDs now are individual templates. Yes, I was looking at the wrong page, I suppose--I was wondering already why it was different. But you know, I still don't have a clue how this works. If I click on "close" (I tried for the one on Sir Hart Davis, which will be a keep), I go to the article where...what? I guess I'm removing the RfD coding? I'm so used to closing AfDs, now automatically, that this is just, well, complicated, and I've been relying on the kindness of strangers to close these things for me. (Believe me, just deleting them is already a drag.)

      Anyway, if I want to continue the way I've been doing it, I should have something like "Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2015_November_19#Sir_Hart_Davis", right? Drmies (talk) 22:53, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • Yes, i.e. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 November 19#Sir Hart Davis goes straight to where the discussion will be preserved. RfD is broken up by day on subpages, which is transcluded to the current list on the main page, as opposed to being individual templates per entry like AfD. Editing from the current list through the convenient edit button provided edits the subpage. The closure links are on the subpages, assuming each is listed and linked individually, some recent listings have not been unfortunately [they seem to have all been fixed, some weren't listed properly at one point, see Greenisholives for example]. WP:RFD/AI shows specifically how to close the discussions.Godsy(TALKCONT) 23:20, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, I've been there before--it was not fun. Fortunately, there are a few editors, like I said, who help me file the paperwork. Deleting all those redirects is a drag to begin with, and it forced me to learn D-batch, which makes it go a bit quicker but it's still a lot of handiwork. Drmies (talk) 01:16, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry, it not WP:CANVASSING

    • It is so disruptive, no one bothers, to maintain the policies. I had not other ways to draw your attention that way. Naked breaching the policies, the bunch of editors demonstrating the strange behaviour. Please take a look WP:CREDENTIAL. Mohammad Iqbal/Allama Iqbal if I am wrong? dank U. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justice007 (talkcontribs)
      • Justice, who is supposed to be canvassing and where? Drmies (talk) 20:59, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • No one, I mean that a user does not understand me and I do not want to discuss if there is the lack of understanding even basic policies, most of the editors from that part of the world have some kinds of the fan phobia behaviour. I ask your assistance relating to the article Muhammad Iqbal that you contributed too, but it is moved to as Allama Iqbal violating the WP:CREDENTIAL. The editor is already engaged in edit warring, he thinks, I am playing the ownership of the Wikipedia, that's why I need your assistance, please take a look at it. Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 21:41, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • No problem if it stays 007, but not 07, and thanks for songs. Ik ga lekker slaap.Justice007 (talk) 23:35, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Legitimate site or years of linkspamming?

    That's my question to you this evening, Dr., regarding this account, whose only contributions since 2008 seem to be the addition and maintenance of external links, all from the same site [5]. If it's spam, they've racked up an impressive history, which will require an admin's touch to revert. If the site they're linking to is okay, consider this an opportunity to say hello. Merci, 99. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:43, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • Are those rhetorical questions? Feel free to clean up after me. You noted, perhaps, that another editor had warned them--in 2008. Drmies (talk) 02:55, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • From the looks of it I think that site should be blacklisted, it's a hobbyist site. Right up Doug Weller's alley. How do you find these things, 99? —SpacemanSpiff 04:35, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • Remember that this is the Anonymous that got the Neelix ball rolling. 99, we should put you up against ISIS--they wouldn't stand a chance. Drmies (talk) 04:43, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • Yeah, I'm aware of 99's ability to sniff out great problems from the most obscure areas. I think Sadie could learn a trick or two from him on sniffing things out. —SpacemanSpiff 08:11, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
            • I need to look at it more carefully. I've seen it before but left it as an EL, there are so many worse ones out there. But I didn't realise the spam element. Doug Weller (talk) 21:47, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
              • Dr. and Spaceman--ha! It's nothing more than scrolling through recent changes, and picking up suspicious looking patterns. Probably fewer than half I click on turn out to be disruptive (still, that's an enormous percentage), and out of those, a very small sample are impressive for their persistence or longevity. I really wasn't 100% sure on this one, given that the site itself looks pretty decent, not obviously selling a product, but the account's m.o. raised a red flag. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:48, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    DJ Montay

    Why was this page deleted for not being notable? If you need a refresher on what being notable means (music) please read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)

    I clearly covered more than one point and it seems that certain admins just looked at a deletion that was made almost 8 years ago and decided that was the sole basis on deletion. This is concerning and I will be escalating this matter. (Negligence) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbybobbie (talkcontribs) 07:08, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Bobbybobbie (talk) 07:56, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Tenebrae

    The birdie you mentioned on my talk sang louder: I think we should at least have a stub about the darkness in music. Sorry I was not really awake this morning, but now did my operatic homework. Dark humour. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:07, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • Ha, I'd get one it myself, but I need to get back to work: the Apostle of the Germans really needs another article written about him. I looked at that draft yesterday and thought I should let you have a look at it--then I saw in the history that you already did, haha. Great minds think alike! Drmies (talk) 17:04, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Tenebrae condensed and created, please watch. Sources also use ae, expansion best in March, I would say. - I didn't do my homework properly, - for a while the image was there twice, in a FA, o dear ;) - I am so proud: used Alakzi's hint to play with image cropping, created nothing first but then a user box for the cabal with the familiar image which was first used to remind that with wrongly blocked users, we not only loose what they would have created but a little bit of our souls, - look for melancholic on my talk. Received a thank-you for that, didn't know it was the last. Tenebrae. My equivalent to your Notre Dame is its organ, did you see? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:50, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Recent speedy deletion

    Hi Drmies, I noticed you deleted the page BrightInteractive, but I can't find what speedy deletion criterion the deletion was done under. The talk page was removed under WP:G8 which makes sense given page deletion, but at least on my side all it says is "deleted page BrightInteractive" with no explanation. Anyway, thanks! Appable (talk) 13:19, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    When you've done that you might want to look at Bright Interactive (I'll take care of Asset Bank again). SmartSE (talk) 15:26, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    (talk page stalker) I can't speak for Drmies but I'm guessing that it was WP:A7 or WP:G11. And it looks like Bright Interactive is a copy of BrightInteractive, written by the same editor. They probably transferred the article from their sandbox and then when the article was deleted, created another version. Drmies would have to offer his reasoning but that's my guess. Liz Read! Talk! 18:08, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bright Interactive I put the new one up for deletion. there's nothing out there about the company. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 20:40, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks for the Help on the black Brutality thread

    Given you've blocked the UK IP who created the Black Brutality thread at the ref desk, you may want to do the same to the NYC IP who complains here that he created the question himself and is being censored for it. Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 02:31, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi - I noticed the block you made of Joseph101895 regarding edits to California Lutheran High School. I had just declined to block that user since it appeared to me that, while they probably were promotionally motivated, they did have accurate information to contribute, and hadn't had a real chance to learn the guidelines of what information should and shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. It seemed like overall they can have a positive impact. Obviously you disagree, with the indefinite block. I was wondering if you could summarize your reasoning? Might be some background I'm missing. Prodego talk 04:35, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • It's the copyvio bit, and the edit warring. It seemed to me they had ample opportunity to address the matter but all they offered was "I'll get someone's approval." I'll leave them a note; let's see if they are genuinely interested in improving the article. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:41, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sounds good. I didn't realize all the edits were posting the same excerpt from the website. If they are interested in doing it right then they should get a chance. If they paste copyvios and just want to get their text in, then they should be blocked. Leaving the block and adding a note seems like a solution. Thanks, Prodego talk 04:48, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Dear Wikipedia Agent, whosoever you are.. Please don't take unnecessary actions for the page created for Anil Kumar Kohli. Give time as we too are busy here and just do not do Wikipedia like you and a weekend is required to rewrite the content. Kindly discuss. Or I will have to bring this matter to your top management. I hope you understand. Kindly undo your editings and leave the page to where it was. I will do the needful and bring to your notice. Thankfully