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 Kelapstick on the Run (talk | contribs) at 11:48, 12 December 2015 (→‎Smartphone editing: c). 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]

Oh, what fun ...

The Beauty and the Beast
"A man in the street, overcome with emotion, on hearing the 2015 ArbCom results"

The dog breed articles are really looking well without Hafs or me around - goodness only knows what's been happening to the weights/heights etc as I haven't bothered to look. This is a nice example though - look see, ClueBot even reverted it back. We also have some nice images back in the Maltese article. But no, Wikipedia doesn't need content editors, does it? SagaciousPhil - Chat 19:05, 6 December 2015 (UTC) PS: Yes, I am truly pissed off with WP at the moment.[reply]

Well I've done the Malteser. Think of WP as a beehive- it has worker bees and wanna bees and droooonnnneeeessss. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:41, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was responding when Mrs. Drmies came in the room so I had to pretend I was working, haha. No, Wikipedia doesn't need content editors--we need a newsroom. Drmies (talk) 15:01, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm reading a certain AN thread right now. Drmies (talk) 15:20, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Place your bets...

Step right up ladies and gentlemen. Will this accurately mirror Drmies expression in 4-7 days? --NeilN talk to me 00:12, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You mean kinda like a deer caught in the headlights, except smaller, more innocent, and more vulnerable? EEng (talk) 02:45, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Apprehensive bewilderment edging towards terror. I think a year from now, I'm going to post to this page: remember you volunteered for this. --NeilN talk to me 04:08, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
My bet is on Drmies, Casliber, Kelapstick, Opabina regalis, Callanec, Keilana, NE Ent, Kudpung and Gorilla Warfare. But I could be wrong. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:43, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have a candidate ranking based on the election guides on my talk page. I was interested to see if they were a good predictor of election outcome or whether they influenced the election but this election has such a high turnout, I have no idea what the results will be. Liz Read! Talk! 00:58, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You haven't? It's obvious: yet more of the same crap, enabled by people who spend far too much time doing stuff that really doesn't matter that much, seemingly because they like the sound of their own voice. - Sitush (talk) 01:01, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sitush, I resemble that remark, and I apologize to you for still not having looked at that GA. I'm sorry, and I don't have much of an excuse--besides, you know, the SEC championship game, my netbook being broken for a week now, and my daughter's stupid f***ing Alabama history project. I haven't even started grading term papers for my lit class. You know what else takes up a lot of time? Reading Vanity Fair... Drmies (talk) 02:32, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I read VF 30 years ago or thereabouts. Not bad, as mid-Victorian novels go. I read some other Thackeray stuff but, alas, some pointed tutorial comments to the effect that I needed to read the entire of Trollope's oeuvre didn't achieve the intended outcome. I actually quite liked Trollope but, hey, there is a lot of him and in the context of my course it was mostly background/ambience stuff. As for the GA, don't sweat it. It's actually at FAC but I took your advice (for which some idiot with a grudge has apparently slammed me at WPO) and am working through it. - Sitush (talk) 02:40, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, that dear Mr Thackeray! I remember so well when I dedicated my Jane Eyre to him — it was innocently done, but had some unintended consequences! [/me cackles anciently.] Bishonen | talk 21:15, 7 December 2015 (UTC).[reply]
'Cackling anciently'? Oh mother of Ireland! Geoff | Who, me? 21:23, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Bishonen | talk 21:42, 7 December 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Congratulations

The Gators made it look closer than it was. That game could have easily been 36–0, rather than 29–15. I look forward to seeking Bama in the College Football Playoffs. Theirs to lose, given the competition. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 04:55, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't know, Dirtlawyer; they played us pretty good and managed to rein in Henry pretty decently, until the end. Bama fans on Facebook were making fun of Gary and Vern commenting on that Florida run defense, but I really think they had Henry's number for at least part of the game. Did you watch MSU? They have one hell of a running back as well. And our defense giving up a couple big deep plays, that had me worried some. But we're in--now we need to not screw it up like last time. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:00, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
better than the gophers or vikings. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 16:37, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regarding your message on the other discussion, I'll just post that I saw your response, on your Talk page. I watch my granddaughter 4-5 times a week and this is one of the days. She's a delight. Have a good one! Dave Dial (talk) 20:30, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Isn't it amazing, (grand)fatherhood. I had to take both of them to the dentist today, and my six-year old was all hanging on to me--wonderful. Anyway, there was this really old guy, resting on his walker, in the waiting room, and when he left he said I was being a great father. It was just kindness, of course, and a terrible lie, but it felt really nice. Nice man. Thanks again for your note, Dave. Drmies (talk) 01:58, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

Grats! I'll just leave it at that. User:Volunteer Marek 09:15, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be in the area. Memphis is actually good this year so it might be another disappointment.User:Volunteer Marek 20:18, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Auburn has something to prove. This season could have gone quite differently. Stop by if you're in the area and come over for a beer. Ha, I might have some Putin-sponsored vodka left, from my last job! Take care, Drmies (talk) 02:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't you two college kids be focusing on studying, finals, etc. instead of wasting time on Wikipedia? Or does the White House pay its shills a pretty penny to spread its propaganda? ;-) --93.199.17.114 (talk) 21:30, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Heh.User:Volunteer Marek 21:48, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorted

Appears to be an attack page. Can you kill it? Cheers. Simon Irondome (talk) 20:40, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked very swiftly. Sorry you were the first admin on my watchlist! Irondome (talk) 20:44, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I very stupidly put sensitive info where it should not have been. Apologies to all concerned, and thanks to the admin who wiped it. Lots to learn before I make that distant RfA run. p.s. you will make a fine arb Dr ;), you were an obvious choice for my voting slate. Simon Irondome (talk) 02:04, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's not a big concern--everyone makes mistakes. It's important to recognize them. That someone else helps out and picks up the slack, well, I have been helped by so many people here who picked up the slack for me... Thanks, BTW, for your vote, I suppose! Let's talk RfA one of these days: you have a pretty cool name, it has an admin ring to it. Irondome is online...! "Shoot, I'd better make some quality edits!" Drmies (talk) 02:20, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just make a positive difference, try to be wise even if you are not feeling it, follow your humanity. and the WP:IAR thing sometimes. Simon, or the reprobate known as Irondome (talk) 02:36, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Question re: opening sentence in a bio

To Drmies and his learned talk page stalkers: I'd long though that this sort of thing isn't included in an opening [2], but can not find the guideline that applies. Would feel silly reverting this again without a leg to stand on. Any help will be appreciated. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 04:04, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PEACOCK may have some useful steers. (Is that a group of horses?) The vastly unlearned Irondome (talk) 04:10, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I just checked a couple of MOSs, but couldn't find reference to that specifically. --kelapstick(bainuu) 04:12, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
WP:LEDE maybe? Irondome (talk) 04:14, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Closest I could find is WP:LEADSENTENCE; Try to not overload the first sentence by describing everything notable about the subject. Instead use the first sentence to introduce the topic, and then spread the relevant information out over the entire lead. Not sure if that is enough. --kelapstick(bainuu) 04:15, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't sound terribly promising, especially since mention of a Grammy nomination is hardly overloading. Unless I slid over it, I couldn't find specific reference to not doing this in the MOS pages referring to bios and ledes. It strikes me as a bit peacocky, but one would like a stronger rationale. Thank you for looking. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 04:18, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably buried on some specific artist's talk page. --kelapstick(bainuu) 04:25, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
One of five nominations for "Best Rock Performance" in the 58th Annual GRAMMY Award (2016), the other nominees being gneiss, schist, slate and Florence and the Washing Machine ("Florence sings against a rhythmic backbeat, building to a crescendo as the rinse cycle kicks in"). Voting's in February. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 09:16, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Come on y'all. MOS:INTRO. "The reason for a topic's noteworthiness should be established, or at least introduced, in the lead (but not by using subjective "peacock terms" such as "acclaimed" or "award-winning" or "hit")". Drmies (talk) 04:49, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

soapboxing or legit?

Hanging arround.

On Talk:Christopher Columbus an anon IP has added this to Columbus Day. It looked like classic soapboxing which I was sure would start some unwanted conversation so I removed it as such. It was put back with rewording to it's current state. It still looks like trouble to me but I don't want to revert again. Maybe I'm wrong so could you look at it and see if it looks ok to you? Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:20, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tad soapboxing, but I would let it stand for now. Mention of protest by ethnic and faith groups may be useful to the articles POV. A bit of self flagellation appears to be the fashion in any case nowadays. It may well be challenged but that is what T/P's are for. Doesn't look too bad at this stage, unless it is expanded to silly length. You tube as a source is deffo unusuable. Maybe there are some balancing sources out there? Sorry Drmies, if i'm talking crap in your space :/ Irondome (talk) 04:34, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd let it stand, but I don't see how much of that material is going to go into the article. In the case of Columbus, a much more valid topic for an encyclopedia than many an internet celebrity, we can afford to take the long view and base our text not on newspaper articles. The Google Scholar link can lead us there, but such link drops just aren't very helpful. One could respond and say "yeah, great idea", but until there's content to discuss there's nothing specific to discuss. Drmies (talk) 05:58, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Legit soapboxing: DYK that Wikipedia celebrated the birthday of Sibelius (150!) one day early because apparently some rulez prohibit his name in DYK once he is mentioned in the TFA (which is about a piece we can't hear)? - Which day, watchers, would you propose for GA Jean Sibelius (by Ipigott) to appear if not the person's birthday? Also needs a review. End of boxing, otherwise happy --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:39, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rose-sniffing in Arcadia

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Amalie Sieveking, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Enlightenment (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:14, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 10:23, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
An internet celebrity

Review Request

Hey Drmies, could you do a peer review of the WABN article for me? I'm wanting to take it to GAN. Thanks in advance. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:26, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. There is no rush on this review. Whenever you have a free moment or three is fine with me.
Yes, "consummated" is the word used by the FCC (see here, midway down). I typically used "the sale was closed" or "the sale was finalized" but I didn't want all the articles to sound the same, so I went with the "proper", if some-what dirty, terminology. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:25, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you have time (again, no rush) could you give the WACL article a PR as well. I would greatly appreciate it. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 20:37, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My first Article.

Hi dear Drmies, I have ventured myself into the article-creation of Wikipedia. I am working on the article "Homeless services in Utah", and I think there might be things that will need to be corrected, as I understand you mentioned. I am not an english native speaker, but I appreciate corrections as to improve on it. I do not represent an organization. The article I am working on is the product of a research we did at Salt Lake City with my fellow students. Would you please help me understand what could be improved as to have this article approved? I think it could be of great benefit for individuals-or even organizations-looking to help homeless people.

Thank you. Ejventura (talk) 06:28, 9 December 2015 (UTC) Ejventura[reply]

(talk page stalker) I think Drmies has signed off for the night. I would give a look-see at WP:FIRST, which has a lot of information about creating a new article. I notice the page is up for speedy deletion. I would recommend copying the entire page and moving it to userspace. Typically people use a "sandbox" for creating articles, which you can do here. There you can create, tinker and work on the article without worrying about it getting deleted. Then, once you have it completely done (to Wikipedia standards and rules, of course), you can move it back to mainspace. I also recommend reading WP:N, WP:V, WP:RS and WP:GNG. These articles will help you to create your article. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:34, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ejventura, the problem (thanks Homer) is really with WP:N--there is no real good reason to suppose that this organization is notable by our standards. That it exists doesn't mean it's encyclopedic. So it's not a matter of writing style or anything like that; there should be secondary sourcing that helps establish that the organization is notable, and in cases such as this that is usually hard to come by. You really want something that's a bit more, let's say, special than a (local) government organization. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 15:07, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see that SLC's Housing First initiative has garnered some attention in the press ([3], [4], and there's some mentions in this book; see also this Google search; here is another book), but I don't think that makes the department notable. I was looking around to see if there was a program, a person, a homeless shelter related to your topic that had attracted some press attention. Drmies (talk) 15:15, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you Drmies and Talk. I will be working on it as request some help for my fellow team members. It is good to see that Wikipedia has such a good (and quick) revisions. Thanks again. Ejventura (talk)
    • Ejventura, see the talk page of your article. Also, I found that we have one article on homelessness in a city, Homelessness in Vancouver. It's not a very good article (the lede needs to be rewritten), but it suggests that the topic of homelessness in a city could conceivably be called notable by our standards--that is, the Vancouver article hasn't been deleted yet. You could see if you can gather up enough sources to write such an article on Salt Lake City. Drmies (talk) 17:25, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

File:Moi, moche et méchant 2, Minion au Paquier d'Annecy.jpg
Striking? No. Coherent? No. Numerous? Yes.

Results.[5] Doug Weller (talk) 19:32, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The new Arbitration Committee
No need for commiserations Irondome, the important part was taking part and providing some competition. With Drmies there the Committee won't be needing me anyway! I'm actually quite happy to stay down here in the trenches rather than be bound by the constraints of Committee work. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:41, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hey, thank you all. BlueMoonset, I don't have my cabinet ready, but you stand a good chance of becoming chief of staff. NorthBySouthBaranof, it is my understanding that you and I are not supposed to talk since, you know, well you know I'm very strict on protocol, haha. I fully expect to see a number of requests to have topic bans lifted in a month or so. Anyway, again, I appreciate all the nice posts people left here; no doubt I'll get plenty of hatemail once it gets real, hahaha. Good luck to you all, and I hope to never see most of you before the Grand Court of Wikipedia. Drmies (talk) 06:03, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Congratulations, wow....and thank you!...Modernist (talk) 23:36, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations (and you've got email)

Welcome to the 2016 Arbitration Committee. A few moments ago, you should have received an email from me asking you such simple questions as what email address you want to use for committee business. Welcome! Courcelles (talk) 19:51, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My sympathies...

In the interest of gender equality, you have been given a room full of MEN sitting around and typing, you insensitive clod.
I really think typewriters are too advanced a technology for ArbCom

Heh. Sorry, sucker! Ealdgyth - Talk 19:53, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations ... I think. When can you start? Yngvadottir (talk) 20:37, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

At 0:00, 1 January 2016 (UTC), I believe. Although last year, I think I saw some arb-elects voting on arbitration requests before then where it was clear that it would become effective when their term started. Mz7 (talk) 22:09, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As soon as you confirm things with the back office, you get subscribed to the mailing list and get the extra bits. Actual particpation in cases is a bit more blurry. I think we had close to thirty arbs at once for a moment when finishing up with GamerGate. Here's hoping you don't have to deal with anything that awful. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:13, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's interesting. I dug around the archives and found what I was remembering at this request in December 2014. Lots of "provisional accepts" to "come into effect on Jan. 1". 30 voices on the committee at one time does sound awful. Mz7 (talk) 22:45, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was looking for one of those images from the 1930s or so, of one of these huge rooms with a hundred desks and ladies typing behind them--couldn't find it. Maybe Hafspajen can dig one up. Yes, thirty, that's a lot. GamerGate was a lot too--good thing that, just like racism, it disappeared. At least, I haven't heard about it on the news for 48 hours, so it must be gone. Beeblebrox, I commend you on your service, as much as on that magnificent beard you used to sport. Ealdgyth, I understand you are what we call a "vested content contributor" or something like that: please keep on being that. My first act will be to put you on payroll. Well, second act--a corner office is first, of course. Drmies (talk) 22:56, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Gamergate controversy will be a contested article for the near future. Maybe by 2017, interest will have ebbed. But, it's true, many of those most passionate about the article have given up on Wikipedia as a lost cause for presenting their perspective of this incident. It took over a year though. The 500/30 editing restriction really helped a lot. Liz Read! Talk! 23:03, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes ... and no. Liz, you frequent WPO and it cannot have escaped your attention that there is much criticism there regarding that the perspective has swung too far the other way. I neither know nor care much about the subject matter but the article is quite obviously a set-up, even if not perhaps the set-up that once it was. Two wrongs do not make a right. - Sitush (talk) 00:40, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Are you working on your inauguration speech? I hope it's a doozy .... Softlavender (talk) 00:33, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, and I object to the word "doozy"--it sounds like the opposite of what it means. I cannot possibly approve of it, esp. since it's like, you know, totally unfair to L2ers such as me. Drmies (talk) 06:06, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I just finished watching Ken Burns' Civil War (avoided it for so long because I thought I would hate it but of course I was smitten). Just take a cue from Abe and throw in some nice phrases like "the better angels of our natures", and such. Razzle-dazzle 'em. They'll never guess. Softlavender (talk) 06:12, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some bubble tea for you!

Congrats on your ArbCom victory! I wish you the best of luck. GABHello! 22:03, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, congrats and good luck (you are going to need it). Kierzek (talk) 22:56, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Same from me, Drmies. Good luck being part of the establishment now. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:37, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Great news. Way to go Doc. :) Dr. K. 23:42, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You've never had bubble tea? Man, oh, man - that's my caffeine fix of choice. --NeilN talk to me 00:10, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I tried it once. I thought it was a carbonated tea, not iced tea wih weird lumps of goo in it. I wished I had ordered coffee instead. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:37, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh! I looked it up--that looks awesome! I love tapioca. Thanks GAB--I should not have assumed I knew what it was. In other news, the kids and I are rather charmed by the instant Atole we get from The Greatest Grocery Store In Alabama--which specializes in Oriental, Mexican, Jamaican food. True grocery fusion on South Boulevard. Drmies (talk) 02:55, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • In Crazy Ex-Girlfriend, Rebecca asks Josh: "do you want some boba? It actually horrifies me personally. It's like drinking little tumors." In spite of this, they frequently end up drinking them at the local boba stand. Incidentally, Rachel Bloom, the actress who plays Rebecca, just received a Golden Globe nomination for her performance. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 08:02, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing/block evasion

Since you blocked this IP, the same user has been making disruptive from this IP. Please block. :-) Robby.is.on (talk) 22:38, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

:D Thank you! Robby.is.on (talk) 23:15, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is another fine mess you've gotten yourself into!

Best, BMK (talk) 00:15, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

Very pleased on your behalf, Dr! Now, when you've had quite enough celebrating with exotic ales, could you and your talk page stalkers keep an eye on The Regency, Denver? I don't wish to have my engagement there seen as edit warring, but a COI account has taken possession, and is treating Wikipedia as a useful venue for free advertising of real estate. Oh, and congratulations! 2601:188:0:ABE6:D538:9C0E:BF78:37A3 (talk) 01:14, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That account has been indeffed - user name/promo only. --NeilN talk to me 01:43, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neil is an "old fielder" (as John Adams was described in 1797) – a tireless workhorse. He can handle it. Softlavender (talk) 02:28, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Let Neil take care of this as well, then. I'm a bit out of patience; the backstabbing has started, or continued. Drmies (talk) 02:34, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Now you can't get involved in ANI due to the potential of hearing the case at Arb. You're just trading one drama for another, however, so don't worry. And I reverted the massive WP:OR that lacked a single reference myself. Jeepers. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 02:49, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Aren't you reading WP:INVOLVED a bit too strictly there, Master Brown? Wait--hold on, I was thinking of closing stuff; you're talking about yakking along (or against). But you know, there's a ton of other Arbs, so in the unlikely case that an ANI case actually makes it to ArbCom, there's plenty of others available. I mean, that's why you voted Kelapstick and Keilana and other dramah-avoiding admins in! Drmies (talk) 02:52, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Damn straight. The only reason I used my "oppose all" ruse and unleashed my sockpuppet army for you was for the money, however. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 03:06, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Dennis handled it. And this old nag is about to go out to pasture for the next week and a half. Don't set fire to the place while I'm gone. --NeilN talk to me 02:55, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Since Drmies will probably recuse himself from sending me any more Girl Scout Cookies, on account of my talking him into running, I don't see why he shouldn't recuse himself from all cases over the next two years, on account of being an AN/I aficionado.--kelapstick(bainuu) 02:57, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Mrs. Drmies just put the first order in this evening. May God and the gods have mercy on us. What was your liking again, K? I'll send you some free of charge, as a token of appreciation for your invaluable grilling advice. NeilN, we're gonna miss you when you're gone: you are one hell of an admin. Enjoy the break. Drmies (talk) 03:00, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Mrs. Kelapstick is partial to the lemon ones, I am partial to the Thanks-A-Lot. Make of that what you will. --kelapstick(bainuu) 03:03, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, amigo! I'm happy for you! --Rosiestep (talk) 03:11, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks, Amiga. Let me know if there's ever anything I can do for you--Lord knows I've relied on you often enough. BTW, I did write up two women in red, but it's slow going. (Actually, I'm writing this while taking a break from grading final exams...) Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 03:18, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Congratulaitons and a simple request: May you treat your colleagues on Arbcom exactly the same as you do everyone else here. Most of Arbcom acts like their shit doesn't stink, and yet most of their decisions reek like a seaport whorehouse the morning after the fleet returns. And for fucks sake, please don't use any Latin-Lawyer speak. That is the path to douchebaggery. I will be sending you massive juju mental vibes. You're gonna need it.
Indeed congrats, though it came at a price.. ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:15, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WikiLove

Erpert blah, blah, blah... has given you a WikiCake! WikiCakes promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cake, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!


Spread the tastiness of cakes by adding {{subst:GiveCake}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Congratulations. Erpert blah, blah, blah... 04:30, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A word of advice...

Get current on your Prius jokes. CONGRATULATIONS!!! I know you'll make a big difference. HAPPY HOLIDAYS Bah, humbug! Atsme📞📧 05:25, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Make that a Westvleteren...

Hope you enjoy that much more work.... Lectonar (talk) 15:16, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats!

I voted for you. Merry Christmas, you filthy animal. And a happy new year. Icarus of old (talk) 15:34, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Filthy? What have I done this time? You sound like someone I married. Same to you, Icarus. Let's work up some German articles one of these days; perhaps Elise Averdieck can attract your attention. She was totally into Biosphere, I hear. Drmies (talk) 15:52, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Congrats. :) --Tito Dutta (talk) 21:20, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Aye! Congrats from me too. I hope it's a blast. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 21:35, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure if to say congrats, or commiserations... Now, seriously, I am very glad your nomination was successful.- Cwobeel (talk)
    • Thanks! Aren't you and I supposed to be fighting? The advantage of my advanced age is that I always forget who I'm fighting with. I *think* I'm still in a feud with Collect, but I'm not sure. Oh yeah, you got blocked the other day--I was sad to see that (that religious identification issue will always remain a hot potato, I'm afraid, and like you I prefer us to be reticent). Ha, I think I frequently disagree with you, but I admire how you're not afraid to stick your neck out. Now tell me how you got to Ecuador and the NL and France and Brazil and Morocco and Lebanon and all those cool places, and what you were doing there. Slovenia is beautiful, I hear. Drmies (talk) 23:05, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sometimes in WP you make best friends with "supposed" enemies. Maybe it is because you get to know them better than others and eventually learn to respect them over time :). My work has made it a requirement to travel, so there you have it. I still have a few countries in South East Asia that I would love to visit, though. Yes, Slovenia is wonderful. If you look at a map, you will see neighboring countries all contributing the best of food culture, and the landscape is gorgeous.- Cwobeel (talk) 16:12, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A Head Full of Dreams tour

Hello there,

I thought I'd talk about this first before undoing your edit. Given the fact that many other tour pages (including Coldplay) have promotional shows, I thought those tour dates had justified a place on this page. These promotional shows also feature a new stage setup and/or songs from the new album. Having more shows for the reader's sake ≠ a downgrade in quality of the article. There was no need to delete all the shows. Also, your sarcasm was not appreciated. Ramres1 (talk) 20:29, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How does removing all tour dates or removing major landmark announcements accomplish what you are trying to get across? Sure, as I've read in what you have linked, merely listing tour dates is not enough to justify an tour article's existence, but removing all tour dates doesn't do much either. Not trying to argue here, and I think we have a common interest in making a good article, so I appreciate your intentions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramres1 (talk • contribs) 23:56, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Two things, Ramres1. First, see WP:NTOUR. There is no reason whatsoever to assume that your tours, or in fact most tours articled on Wikipedia, are notable. Mere existence does not mean notability. Second, there are decent articles on tours. Look at Confessions Tour and see what it has. It has a background, notes on the production, on the reception, etc. It has a list of dates and a setlist, but they don't dominate the album.

    This is an encyclopedia--text first. A list of dates can be found anywhere, including here, but verified text from secondary sources cannot--that's our job. So try and find articles that discuss the tour. This is something, but not much. This gives you half a sentence, and this maybe a whole one. But look at the Madonna article to see what meaningful text is here--it's not "band Y announced they'd play city X on that date", that's all boring facts. Like, "In March 2006, Madonna, along with her then-husband Guy Ritchie and with their kids, moved to Los Angeles, to begin rehearsing for the tour". And "The two secondary runways were raised up into the stands and also had view screens inside the construction." And Madonna returned for the Glam-Punk segment of the show and strapped on a guitar for rocked-out versions of "I Love New York" and "Ray of Light". Hard to do for you since the shows haven't started, which is another reason it just may be too early, but that's the kind of thing one can write. Good luck. Drmies (talk) 02:46, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha, thanks for your help. Ramres1 (talk) 04:08, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I ran into an Articles for Deletion debate about Aerosmith's Back in the Saddle Tour in April, 2011. My gut instinct was to recommend deleting, but I did a good faith search for coverage in reliable sources and found plenty. I expanded the article, and it is still around. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:05, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ha, the advantage of that one is that it already happened. Cullen, you'd be surprised to see how many tour articles we have now; it has really exploded in the last five years or so, same as the old List of awards and nominations for artist X. (I'd love to see some qualitative analysis.) In many cases, I think it is turning us into what we were not supposed to be--another repository for factoids. I think NTOUR should be read strictly: if there's no in-depth discussion of the tour as a tour, it's deletable. Drmies (talk) 22:41, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I guess that it may be surprising to some people that an article about a notable tour that has already happened would be more appropriate for an encyclopedia than an article about a 2016 tour, since it is still 2015 according to my calendar. After all, somebody could get hit by a bus. I see that currently, A Head Full of Dreams Tour is referenced only to the band's website. I did a quick search for significant coverage in reliable, independent sources, as is my wont, and found nothing other than rote regurgitation of official band announcements. That leads me to believe that this tour is not yet notable, but I am just one little editor. OK, not so little in real life. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:54, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Jeff the Diseased Lung

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Jeff the Diseased Lung. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Sometimes the sky is blue (talk) 20:51, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Green famine

Been reading up on North Korea offwiki, ran across this term, and see it is a very widely used term to describe a very specific thing. Being an uneducated Texan, it is probably beyond my pay grade, but thought I would drop it off here before you get your new job. I hear they have a pool table, open bar, and hot tub in the Arb Clubhouse, which will come in handy. Until then, maybe you or someone might like to take a stab at this ugly redlink. I think it would be fine for stand alone, and Famine doesn't even mention the term. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 02:37, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Don't ask me to write those articles, Dennis. Did you see the article I added, with the story of the 12-year old girl? Yes, winter is coming for those poor North Koreans. Drmies (talk) 03:24, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dennis, how about North Korea? Now is the time for some article improvement. Drmies (talk) 03:39, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm really close to really, really breaking for a while. Break the cycle of political interest and get back to editing. The tanning season is upon us, so soon all the pasty people in the south will be wanting to give me money (it is very seasonal) so I won't have much time anyway. I've been watching a lot of documentaries and reading a lot on NK, so that might be a task when I get back. And NK is one of those topics that get my blood boiling as well. Not our handling of it, but the reality. This is one of those situations where you hope someone over there would give the dicktater a case of high velocity lead poisoning. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 15:03, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A Crack Pie for you!

A Crack Pie for you! Because 'Tis the Season ... and because I hear you love pie!

~~ Softlavender (talk) 03:02, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A rose is a rose is a rose

(And because if I ever get hauled up before ArbCom, I need an Arb in my pocket.) Softlavender (talk) 03:11, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are these personal attacks?

"You are establishing a link between the word chief and Indian which is racist and sourceless to say the least".

"No. I just thought it was a bigoted comment to make".

Over a translation of Hawaiian words. I am Native Hawaiian and he is calling my arguments "racists" and "bigoted" over content no one agrees with him on. He is also on Commons accusing me of harassment because he can't name the source that sent him images. This, all the outcome of an FA review of KAVEBEAR's article.--Mark Miller (talk) 06:24, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hmm. If I understand it correctly they're using ancient and now deprecated terminology coined by white missionaries? "You are establishing a link between the word chief and Indian" strikes me as uninformed, the kind of easy criticism one hears too often. I can't really follow their second comment.

    I was blocked today on a side street because another driver on the main street blocked the intersection. When I could have gone, her car was right there in front of me; she should have stopped ten yards earlier, seeing the line of stopped cars, and left the intersection open for crossing vehicles. She was wrong, I was there for another two minutes, and I have no doubt she thinks I was wrong. What can I do? Ram my car into hers, get out, and explain traffic rules ("don't block the intersection")? One cannot argue things easily with someone who is or chooses to be uninformed; you can only hope you find enough patience until the intersection clears. Good luck with that... Drmies (talk) 06:34, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. As always it was your wisdom, opinion and quick wit that I was looking for here to sort of (OK outright) guide me.--Mark Miller (talk) 06:41, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]


"Hmm. If I understand it correctly they're using ancient and now deprecated terminology coined by white missionaries?" - Hi. I have to clarify here. One the term was coined by Europeans in general not just the missionaries and the word noble is as Euro-centric as chief given that both are English words. Mark Miller's claim (which I believe to be biased and unfound) that the translation is ancient, deprecated and connotates Indians is not supported by majority scholarship or sources in Hawaiian historiography hence my comment that his views can seem racist especially to modern Hawaiians (including historians and a former pastor of Kawaiahao Church) who have accepted or appropriated the term as their own much like how some groups of Native Americans have appropriate the inaccurate term Indian as their own. Saying the term chief connotates Indians is a bigoted viewpoint given the universal usage of the term across many different indigenous society.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 06:49, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) "Chiefess" (and to a lesser degree "Chief") are still retained/used and not deprecated when they occur as pronomimal (that is, adjectival) honorifics (Check out the schools proudly still named "Chiefess ______"; the same is true in documentaries and current writings when referring to any Hawaiian chiefesses). In terms of translating the word "ali'i" as a noun, it is currently usually translated as "noble" or "nobility". So as with many things, the terminology can depend on the usage. In any case, sources should be used to substantiate or back up any statement or assertion, whether in an article or on a discussion page. Softlavender (talk) 07:05, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On this I disagree. Yes, chief and chiefess are deprecated with todays scholars and in some ways even the old, as most explain that the term chief is translated from Alii and that Alii Nui means Supreme chief. Scholars also demonstrate this by no longer calling Kamehameha I "Kamehameha The Great". They drop the nui portion of his name because they have ordinals that are used. But there are two Kamehamehanuis. Nui just means the great. It is a designation for his conquests. Chief does not, in anyway, tell the actual ranking of the ali'i (there are about ten). The native language is used to denote the rank of the nobility class because chief and chiefess were default translations from Americans referring to native populations in general. School names don't really mean much. Sources should not always be used in discussion...especially when it is a moot point. The editors already stated the preference for the Hawaiian Language usage. Referencing at this point to demonstrate such is not required. Especially when faced with this type of opposition. I mean I looked up Hawaiian American.... I couldn't find anything and yet the editor is telling me it is common. The only thing I found was Neo-Hawaiian American Race. I don't see him referencing all his claims...especially in regards to policy and guidelines. When he does it becomes a wall of text that doesn't always substantiate the claim and attacks to discredit. Calling the claim racist is insulting and was meant to be. Doubling up on it and calling my view bigoted is just uncivil and meant to be.
Seems like the car just drove through the living room.--Mark Miller (talk) 07:52, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Sources should not always be used in discussion ...". This is the issue with these disagreements. Instead of using or providing sources and substantiation, and engaging in a formal neutral discussion via RfC (say, on WikiProject Hawaii), two or three editors go around and around getting more and more off track and opinionized or personal, instead of focusing on substantiation and facts. Softlavender (talk) 08:14, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Look, the question was about the accusation of racism and bigotry. Who is focused on substantiating that accusation? Seriously. Also, you took my words out of context. I said it was a moot point. The editor didn't get the support and used personal attacks. This really isn't about the argument of the term being deprecated, the issue is, was it right to use accusations of racism and bigotry.--Mark Miller (talk) 08:37, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What I see is a discussion between two editors that started badly and went downhill from there, simply because sources were not being supplied and facts were not being discussed, and instead opinions and personal comments were dominating. Again, the way to avoid this from the get-go is to stick to sources and facts, remain neutral, and avoid opinion, analogy, inference, or personal comment. Softlavender (talk) 09:00, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Odd that isn't what I saw. I saw a post that someone else made on November 10th that I made one comment to on November 13th. I did not make another for almost a month. Kavebear does not agree. In his approach he made disgusting accusations (a habit of his) that you seem to care little about. The way to avoid all of this is to stay within Wikipedia policy and guidelines that this editor is trying his very best to avoid and still receive an FA listing for an article that should not have passed GA. It should really be reassessed by the community before any RFC over chief or chiefess. That is the actual manner in which to get a discussion on the real issues. I don't have a problem with the editor. The editor has a problem with me. If he cannot collaborate he better figure something out because our interests in Hawaiian history bring us together a lot. I can demonstrate this sort of attack on me, when content disputes arise between us is a true pattern with this editor. With others as well. He has improved greatly in this area....accept for me it seems. I don't care if he likes me or not. I am not looking to make friends with him but to create content within the framework of our guidelines and policy.--Mark Miller (talk) 10:13, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"One cannot argue things easily with someone who is or chooses to be uninformed; you can only hope you find enough patience until the intersection clears." Thanks, that was the advice I needed on this Buddhist argument. Keeping silent was also good. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:12, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I once came across a three-way junction blocked by half-a-dozen drivers who wouldn't give way to each other. I drove past them on the pavement. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:28, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am driving past at this point. Probably not best to be bullied off an FA review in this manner but it is better to walk away than to stand in front of a moving truck.--Mark Miller (talk) 08:49, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Smartphone editing

Congratulations, Drmies, on your election to ArbCom. Soon, you will be so busy with dealing fairly but firmly with the World's Most Disruptive Editors that you will no longer have time for lighthearted banter with those of us who have no desire to poke anyone else in the eye, as opposed to trying to improve the encyclopedia. In this brief remaining window of opportunity, I want to draw your attention, (and the attention of your devoted talk page stalkers), to a personal essay I have written about smartphone editing. It can be found at User:Cullen328/Smartphone editing. Thank you for your consideration. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:50, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Upon a brief perusal, Cullen, it looks very useful. By personal choice I have never owned (or needed) a single cell phone, much less smartphone, so I have no clue how to use one and thus cannot comment any further about your essay. However, should I ever be in a position/need to use a smartphone to edit Wikipedia, this looks like an excellent Help guide. Softlavender (talk) 11:23, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting article Jim. I do a lot of Wikipedia related stuff (a lot of reading discussions and vandalism reverts) via smartphone. In fact I did most of my ArbCom election responses by smartphone (or tablet) this year (due to a lack of actual computer for the most part). This message is done on one as well. I too generally use the desktop site, and while most of my phone contributions are to talk or project space, I have done some main space edits with it as well. Not near to the extent that you have, but I agree it's more difficult but not impossible. Voice recognition software and predictive text (on my iPhone) make this easier too. For the most part. Having said that, My phone thinks I talk about ducks a lot more than I actually do. --kelapstick(on the run) 11:48, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drmies&oldid=694903602"