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 LiquidNix (talk | contribs) at 16:41, 3 July 2018 (→‎PSG.LGD & LGD Gaming). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

"Drmies is the only rational editor here."

Note to self

Category:Articles with a promotional tone from December 2017

Hard times (?)

Mies, how are you faring? Hopefully well...

Don't know if you remember this IP address (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/109.180.164.62). Apparently, they are known for they confrontational manners with their various addresses, and I was on the receiving end with this particular one, which resulted on they having the nerve of reporting me (if you see the list I sent you above, the report was filed on 15 SEPTEMBER 2017, don't know if it will be easy to find the thread for you). Not for that, but they were eventually blocked, for more harassing; they dedicated some very harsh words to me in their talkpage until I left them talking to themselves and removed my entries (here is the complete flow of conversation before I did so https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:109.180.164.62&diff=820748178&oldid=820747575).

Now they have returned with this other address (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/87.54.9.210), and in one of their articles of choice, Quique Sánchez Flores, they already wasted no time in commenting my ineptitude in the summary. Of course, I reverted! Could you please check both versions to see which is more correct, before this escalates AGAIN?

Kind regards from Portugal --Quite A Character (talk) 09:41, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • UPDATE: if you notice, I have now reached a compromise in the wording, it did contain some glaring errors that were quite possibly written by me as I edit massively there. Good job on the IP, thus (but they had no way of knowing who wrote what and still poked fun or whatever in the summary). --Quite A Character (talk) 10:57, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, hard times? Depends. If you're Dutch and you like soccer, yeah. That IP, I have an inkling who that might be and I think some other admins do as well. They know their language pretty good, but manners, less so. Take it easy AL, Drmies (talk) 16:45, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • They did it again even though I tried to reach a compromise (at least this time no insults, an improvement of sorts!). If you notice, the WATFORD section was written entirely by an English editor with whom I interacted heavily (TheAlmighteyDrill, blocked in the meantime), can you please tell me what's wrong with it because I can't see it? in the VALENCIA sub-section, they wrote "In his first season, Flores guided the club to third place, and then to qualification for the UEFA Champions League...". It's implying the third place in the league and the Champions berth were totally unrelated; I wrote "In his first season, Flores guided the club to third place, which qualified for the UEFA Champions League...", because one was a DIRECT CONSEQUENCE of the other, isn't mine more logic (not blowing my wiki-horn or anything)? Last but not least, for no apparent reason except fuck all, I arranged the display of the references from Goal, they reverted it!

Can you please see that the article is protected? Thanks (but I will try again to engage in more compromise in wording, along with one or two refs). --Quite A Character (talk) 09:28, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They reverted AGAIN, new refs included!! If i remember it well, you told me at the ANI report "(My name), i am not going to block, etc, etc. But please don't be so quick to revert in the future (something to that effect, can't remember the exact words)". What, patience with a guy who refuses to engage in compromise (i am trying my bestest), continues to taunt me in summaries and now also removes sources?! Difficult man, quite difficult... --Quite A Character (talk) 00:59, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Vasco, I have never found fault, really, with their English. I don't quite know what's going on with the references. Starting that one section with "In his first season", for instance, is helpful because it clearly indicates chronology, and giving that bit of information to start the sentence is an advantage over the mere repetition of the name to begin the sentence. And I don't know, removing that reference from /www.mundodeportivo.com in that Beginnings section--is the information also in the later reference from www.elmundo.es? At any rate, Oshwah blocked them... Drmies (talk) 01:59, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SOOOOOOOOOORRY, only checked out your reply now (I remember checking your page in the hours that followed to my original message, but after seeing no reply I forgot)! I have (hopefully, if I understood them well) followed on your editorial suggestions grammarwise. Regarding the ref issue you ask in the last lines, sometimes refs may contain similar content, but what I tried to do was use the article from MD to source him signing for Getafe (oddly enough, could not found a direct one though I tried and tried) and do the same with the one from ELMUNDO to source him signing with Valencia (that one is a direct "hit"). Isn't that what WP is all about, source your choice of wording?

And surely, you don't imply the IP removed the sources for aesthetic reasons, no ("repeated refs", "not needed", etc)? Nope, they did it to TAUNT ME! Take care, sorry for the late reply --Quite A Character (talk) 09:54, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agenda

It's the second time today a determined edit warrior has accused me of having an agenda. I'm on a roll! I do indeed have an agenda, but it has nothing to do with repressing bearers of Truth - more likely let the dog out into the warm evening, a snack and sleep. Acroterion (talk) 03:14, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ha, my agenda is to drink this entire big bottle of St. Bernardus Tripel! And then get the girls off to camp tomorrow... Speaking of Truth with capital T, I happened to run into another warrior here, so now I'm reading all the sources. Dumpster fire! Yay! Drmies (talk) 03:17, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's one hell of an edit summary there. I think I'll go find a genre warrior, or one of our many Disney trolls instead. Acroterion (talk) 03:31, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • Whose idea was it to allow these essay-length edit summaries? Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 03:37, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        • When I first saw one I thought it was a glitch. Kind of like some recent election. Drmies (talk) 03:42, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
          • Twitter goes to 280 characters, then WP has to be like all the cool kids. What ever happened to the "summary" part of "edit summary'? Acroterion (talk) 03:46, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
            • It's a clue for lazy admins (i.e., me) who don't want to go through all the changes in their watchlists. The longer the edit summary, the greater the chance something needs attention. --NeilN talk to me 19:12, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
              • I've always leaned on that technique too, but once the summary passes 50 characters, another 500 are just a waste of screen space. Acroterion (talk) 02:13, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't know what this "summary" thing is you guys are talking about... ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:05, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • User:MPants at work, that thing which you made is a pretty thing. You're smart. But what I see in there also is a veiled critique of Acroterian's signature's expansive mechanics, no? Drmies (talk) 21:25, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're smart. To avoid ruining that perception, I'm just going to pretend that I know exactly what you mean by "Acroterian's signature's expansive mechanics" and agree with you. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 02:04, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hell, I don't know either. I just copied somebody else's signature mechanics and changed the color. At least it doesn't have shadows and unicode characters like some people I could mention ... Acroterion (talk) 02:10, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, totally different "them". Damn, I need to be more specific in the era of Trump. On the bright side, I now know what you meant! Thought it took me much mental sweat, it eventually occurred to me to notice the blindingly obvious 5 full lines of Acroterion's signature in that image. Seriously man, you need to tame that thing. It's really over the top. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:40, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em;">[[User:MPants at work|<span style="color:green;">'''ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants'''</span>]] [[User_talk:MPants at work|<small>Tell me all about it.</small>]]</span>, right on! Drmies (talk) 16:12, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Recognize

Your recent edit over at United States anti-abortion movement has the (I'm sure unintended) effect of taking part in an edit war that had already appropriately moved over to the talk page. Please engage in the discussion rather than further warring. --Nat Gertler (talk) 18:12, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 28

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 28, April – May 2018

  • #1Bib1Ref
  • New partners
  • User Group update
  • Global branches update
    • Wikipedia Library global coordinators' meeting
  • Spotlight: What are the ten most cited sources on Wikipedia? Let's ask the data
  • Bytes in brief

Arabic, Chinese, Hindi, Italian and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:33, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration evidence

I reverted your addition of evidence as it was a week after the close of the evidence phase. My edit summary directed you to the workshop page, but as that has since also been closed I've taken the liberty of moving the content you added to the 'analysis of evidence' section. I hope that's okay. If for some reason you'd rather it just be left out let me know and I'll self-revert the change on the workshop page. GoldenRing (talk) 10:44, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey that's fine--I couldn't rightly tell when it was over/I don't always check deadlines etc. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:25, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

is always a good 'un :) —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 08:50, 22 June 2018 (UTC) [reply]

Editor English ability

Hi Drmies. I'm going to post this here because your talk page tends to have lots of watchers, so I figure it's probably a good place to ask. I came across Asim543 while checking on an image file. Looking at some of their other edits, it seems as if they are making quite a lot of basic errors that might be because English is not their first language. I understand WP:IMPERFECT and WP:CIRNOT and I don't want be seen as WP:BITEing a relatively new editor. Correcting the mistakes is not a big deal, but I'm wondering if it would then be appropriate to bring this up for discussion on the editor's user talk. My goal wouldn't be to discourage them from further editing, but just to make them aware of the simple errors they are making. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:19, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • That is one of the most difficult things to deal with. Want to stand in front of my class this summer, to see what it's like in real life? ;) Drmies (talk) 14:30, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure what to tell you. They seem to be a good-faith contributor, but yeah, there's problems--though I've seen worse. Drmies (talk) 14:33, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you for taking a look at this and for the comment you left on their user talk page. Asim543 does appear to be making good faith attempts at improving articles, and there are now other editors trying to help clean things up; so, it appears that things are sorting themselves out naturally through collaborative editing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:26, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

RIP again

Now, it's Barry McDaniel. Something nice was written about him in Dutch. Can you look if it would add what we already have, especially if it would serve as a reference for something that still needs one, to make him fit for RD? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:58, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Gerda, I don't think there's anything in there that isn't already in our article. Drmies (talk) 14:55, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking. I through out several details which I couldn't source, though. Nominated anyway. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:04, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question about WP:ARBPIA3#500/30

Since Kigelim is not qualified under WP:ARBPIA3#500/30 to edit articles about the Arab-Israeli conflict, why is he allowed to nominate them for deletion? See WP:Articles for deletion/Racial profiling in Israel.

Please note that Sandstein has topic-banned me from "anything related to the Arab-Israeli conflict" so I can't discuss this further, but I will note that racial profiling in Israel affects African-American tourists and is not strictly related to the Arab-Israeli conflict.[1] — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:22, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Your last paragraph is way too long for me this time of night to process. Topic ban? Anyway, I see you read The Root also--they ran an interesting opinion piece on XXXTentacion the other day. Take care Malik, Drmies (talk) 03:29, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Blocking the vandal who vandalized one of my favorite articles. HorsesARENiceRide me to my talk page 04:53, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don’t delete my user page

You had no right deleting my user page. It was hurting anybody, and it’s MY OWN USER PAGE. You had no right to delete it. So please undelete it. Apolloe (talk) 19:15, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • You don't own it. You don't have the right to user our facilities to play some imaginary game. Do you understand that this is an encyclopedia, not an amusement park? Drmies (talk) 20:06, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Just an FYI the user has recreated the page with similar content on it just a lot smaller than before. TheDoctorWho (talk) 00:33, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Kudpung/What do admins do?

Hi Drmies. I would really appreciate if you could take a moment to participate in this. Your comments would be particularly valuable. It's not an RfC or anything like that. It would only take 5 minutes of your time. There are only a few days left. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:27, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BLP

Hi, I think this is a BLP violation, but I'm not sure if it's severe enough that it needs to be revdel'd [2]. Wasn't sure where to ask ... Seraphim System (talk) 18:57, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks Seraphim System--good call. Drmies (talk) 01:45, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian kerfuffle

Pretty sure that's a kid trying to get a leg up by claiming to be the principal. One would assume that a person in that position would be educated enough and experienced enough at writing to know that "principal" is not a proper noun. Especially if it were their title. Damn, now I want to go listen to John Mellenkamp on my new speakers, but mini-me is sleeping. Gahhhhh. John from Idegon (talk) 03:43, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • But that's what's on their website too, "Principal's message". Or did they use it with a capital or something? A lot of people get those wrong. Plus, they've been here for so long, and their edits seem consistent with someone like that. But we'll see. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:00, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Adding my two cents; in my experience with COIs they tend to be very formal during discussions and don't use short forms like "BTW". However, the fact that they have been here so long did throw me off too. I guess we will have to see. If they aren't the principal I assume they are at least some kind of teacher or administrator. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 04:02, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
True, that formality is often there. Then again, a Catholic principal on a Sunday night... Drmies (talk) 04:04, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit conflict!

Beat me to it! TonyBallioni (talk) 01:01, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • I want to say I'm usually on the losing end of those, but then if you're on the winning end you wouldn't know. Yeah, I read someone something on ANI about the user page, but I don't see the problem. I followed a few of the links, and Alex Jones's voiceover for Doom is kind of funny, if you like watching moving things on YouTube. Was the editor really a fan of Hoxha? I've never met one in real life. Drmies (talk) 01:03, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hoxha's regime had a shop north of the river in London, with a stock of Albanian Communist tat and windup gramophones. On a dark autumnal evening I entered the shop. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:21, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey!

I'm glad that someone missed me. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:04, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Only every other day, Gogo Dodo. Drmies (talk) 14:21, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
=) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:16, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I heard the shock wave from that SPI blockhammer work and came by to say Hi and keep up the good work :) cinco de L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 18:05, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A request

You deleted User:Geo Swan/Eyad Alrababah.

I am not sure I agree with your interpretation of BLP, but I am not going to argue with you about it. That discussion would be very one-sided, when I don't have access to a copy of what I wrote, and you do.

I request you email me the last version. I spent a couple of hours on this. If it doesn't fit here, I will port it to a non-WMF wiki with different inclusion standards. Geo Swan (talk) 22:34, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • You worked on this for a few hours but you don't remember what was in there? I left a pretty detailed note on your talk page, but maybe now some more admins with admin glasses and their copy of the BLP will take an interest in it. This is not the first time that someone raises a BLP issue with you. Drmies (talk) 00:26, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nick-D, Fram, you've had opinions on this matter. Drmies (talk) 00:39, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Geo Swan should have been banned from BLPs years and years ago. This one was far from the worst (borderline speedy, but I certainly would have voted for deletion at AfD anyway). Things like User:Geo Swan/Fa‘iz al-Shanbari (from 2009) or User:Geo Swan/Hesham Mohamed Hussain and User:Geo Swan/Mohammed Quayyum Khan (from 2012) should not remain in userspace indefinitely, and have no chance of becoming articles anyway, so a major cleanup of Geo Swan's userspace seems necessary. Fram (talk) 06:49, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • I agree completely with Fram. In regards to the example here, it failed WP:BLP1E. As Geo Swan must have had dozens of such articles deleted, and has been lucky to have never been banned, I'm very surprised that they're still producing articles like it and don't get why this is not OK. Nick-D (talk) 09:00, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        • DGG disagree with me on the deletion, but besides the other problems I deleted it primarily because of the improperly verified claim that he's "routinely characterizes as an 'al Qaeda associate'" associate, which is a rather damning thing to say about a person. The Chicago Tribune article makes it clear he claims he didn't know what they were and doesn't use the word "associate" to describe him (GeoSwan put that in quotation marks), and the Fox article (these are the two that are cited in the opening sentence, with "was described as an al Qaeda associate") uses "associate", but for another person--and the article is nothing but speculation from detectives and some commentary from, of all people, Andrew Napolitano. Calling him something he's not called in reliable sources is already a BLP violation, and putting false quotes around a term makes it even worse. GeoSwan's says "Alrababah was convicted of playing a role in identity theft" but without a source--a bit of due diligence with the help of Google shows he was convicted in 2002--but "Non-terrorism related", which GeoSwan conveniently failed to mention (I do not believe in their good faith anymore). Drmies (talk) 18:00, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Overblown neutrality

Do understand that the out-of-nowhere defeat of Joseph Crowley by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was a screaming-headline shocker. Time (magazine) notes that on the afternoon of the vote his allies were dismissing the possibility of his losing and questioning the need to cover the race. Don't err on the side of indifference in how it is presented. LE (talk) 06:02, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There you go again Drmies pushing those right wing POVs, for shame! [FBDB] PackMecEng (talk) 15:13, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see FBDB is still in use among the elite. EEng 13:29, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Only the best of course. PackMecEng (talk) 13:31, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The BBC's headline suggested that the only important thing about it was that Alexandria is a millennial. We millennials will soon be agitating for recognition as a discriminated-against minority. Is this something to do with American politics? I don't think I'd ever heard of either of them before today. MPS1992 (talk) 16:42, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
MPS1992, I suppose you had if you lived in NY. I don't. PackMecEng, guilty as charged--actually, I'm not sure what the first post was about at all, so I can't really confirm which viewpoint I'm pushing today. I took out a few sensational words...does that count? Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 18:00, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest I have no idea what they are going on about either, just having a little fun PackMecEng (talk) 18:07, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That story is so two hours ago. Justice Kennedy just announced his retirement. O3000 (talk) 18:10, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh gzz, that's going to be.... interesting... PackMecEng (talk) 18:56, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just wait till the media gets wind of whomever Trump is going to nominate to replace him. That's when things will get interesting. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:34, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, everyone is still angry about the last guy. PackMecEng (talk) 19:37, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
PackMecEng, I don't think you are reading the temperature correctly at all. I don't know anyone who is upset at Gorsuch per se. What's being loathed is McConnell's tactics, that excuse that he so obviously didn't even believe himself. Gorsuch, I don't know--I can't help but wonder how he would have swung in Obergefell; I don't think it's a done deal he would have sided with the anti-gay marriage side. But seriously, no, not everyone is still angry about the last guy. "No one is angry about the last guy" is more likely to be correct. Drmies (talk) 03:47, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's a done deal he would have sided with the anti-gay marriage side. I agree with this. I think Gorsuch was a bit of a flashpoint, though. But just a little one. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 05:44, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No I don't think they were angry at the man, but the process as you pointed out. I do however think we will see it brought up more in the coming weeks when Trump announces and tried to get confirmed whomever he nominates. Everyday I get to listen to Bill Press, Stephanie Miller, Thom Hartmann, and Norman Goldman, and since it was announced yesterday the McConnell situation has been brought up quite a bit. Now if it will make it to the midterm, by which time I would assume Trump would have his pick confirmed well before then, is a big speculation. Crazy times we live in. PackMecEng (talk) 12:34, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I hear he's torn between two possible nominations: Robert Bork and his chauffeur. O3000 (talk) 12:39, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That would be a tough call, I hear his chauffeur is the best most big league chauffeur around! PackMecEng (talk) 12:57, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I heard David Duke had been briefly considered, but was dropped when a reporter asked about it and Trump promptly forgot who he was. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 12:59, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The joking not-joke I saw on reddit was Giuliani... --Izno (talk) 13:05, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I can’t beat that. Unless he offers the position to Mueller in exchange.... O3000 (talk) 13:10, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure I'm not the only one who's just flabbergasted at Giuliani's descent into whatever it is he is sinking into. Drmies (talk) 14:06, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Having lived in Manhattan for three decades, it doesn’t surprise me that much. His popularity before 9/11 dropped to 37%. Although, he really has outdone himself lately. O3000 (talk) 14:11, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this is the best response to that possibility. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:11, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On Gorsuch. I don’t know whether it’s the weight of history, an epiphany about the function of SCOTUS, or interesting gases emanating from the bowels of the court à la the Delphic Oracle; but the actions of some justices cannot have been predicted based upon their earlier careers. Gorsuch is highly intelligent and learned. We won’t know for a time if there is a Gorsuch 2.0. O3000 (talk) 15:42, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"hmm fetishist alert"

LOL! Thanks for the laugh regarding this. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 04:50, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be a theme recently. EEng 13:23, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, Doc Mice, you're such a wet blanket when it comes to rock chicks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:33, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm glad you enjoyed that, Flyer. Really we should stop meeting at/over these kinds of articles. Fun fact--no, fun guess: how did I meet The Lady? Drmies (talk) 01:21, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • No intersection tools allowed: I'm curious where this will go. LadyofShalott 03:45, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • Surely you remembered. I thought I did a nice job saying it in emojis. Drmies (talk) 03:00, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm guessing a Deicide concert. Drmies strikes me as the type to have a secret "Fuck your god!" tattoo. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:03, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Nope. Never heard of the band, and my tattoos have 800 years of literary history, and 17,000 years of art history. ;) Drmies (talk) 03:00, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That actually sounds rather more interesting, although to be fair, "Fuck your god!" has at least 2,300 years of history behind it. ;) ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 03:30, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Another version of the ibex above" Drmies (talk) 15:54, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
An ex girlfriend of mine has the great black bull on her thigh. Damn fine tastes, there. Personally, all of my tattoos are my own artwork, but if I were to choose someone else's, the Lascaux paintings would be on the very short list of contenders. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:00, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
An ex bullfriend of mine has a great black girl on his thigh. But that's a different story. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:06, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And one best not repeated in polite company, I would guess. ;) ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:40, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Flagcruft was immediately removed

Hello Drmies. I happened to come across this diff of Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort/Evidence. If I'm interpreting your remark correctly, you are saying that nobody had a problem with the addition of these flags. That's not true; perhaps you did not notice that I removed the flags within the hour. Subsequent discussion also resulted in the removal of excessive detail in the awards section. Cheers, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:52, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Diannaa, thank you for that (the edit and the comment here)--what I meant (I didn't realize it wasn't as clear as I thought it was) was that the MILHIST editors active on that article didn't seem to think it was a problem. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:40, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's not correct either, as I objected immediately and repeatedly, and I am a MILHIST member and the author of the current version of the article, which I completely re-wrote top to bottom as GA prep in 2012. User:Kierzek (also a MILHIST member) also supported removal of the flags. See the talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:53, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • Oh, I didn't even know that. I was thinking of the usual suspects that are all over that history. And now I see in Peacemaker's comment what it was that prompted my remark. I'll clarify. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:57, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thank you Dr. Mies for the clarification on the Arbcom page. Just want to add that I know several users who were/are upset about the edits of user:K.e.coffman. However I am not one of them, as they found little or nothing to amend on the articles I re-wrote for GA, which includes pretty much all the top brass and a lot of heavily viewed articles. See the top of User:Diannaa/Barnstars for the complete list (listed in order of promotion to GA). So we've got plenty of heavily viewed material on this topic that is neutrally worded and ready for use by our readers. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:16, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
          • Diannaa, I like to think that I knew pretty well how much you had done for our beautiful project, but the last time I stumbled on your user page (probably to check yet again how many ns and as...) I was just incredibly impressed by the number of stars. I don't think I ever thought of you as a MILHIST person, but I am glad you are. As for Coffman, yeah, and that's all I'll say. Drmies (talk) 19:39, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        • You'd better move your new edit from the evidence page (which is closed) to Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort/Evidence before a clerk does. You'll probably move it more the way you like it if you do it yourself. Or shall I ask superclerk Bishzilla? Bishonen | talk 19:33, 30 June 2018 (UTC).[reply]
          • Wut? wut? I'm wrong again? Drmies (talk) 19:39, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
          • Haha yes please, esp. since it seems I picked a fight with a clerk somewhere. Thanks Bishterix. Drmies (talk) 19:40, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Yes, the credit for "Flagcruft" belongs to Diannaa. I did find it a bit funny that a MilHist coord accused me of using this word, He sometimes deletes cited material in his effort to remove (...) what he describes as “flagcruft”, while I merely linked to the Talk page thread that Diannaa had started [3]. In any case, I'd like to share a story. After my article was published in the Society for Military History's newletter, I received a number of unsolicited emails. One included:

Maybe 10 years ago I tried to edit the article about Manstein to include his anti-semitism and role in atrocities. As fast as I made a change, someone came in and took it out. Eventually, I gave up.

I looked at the article today for the first time in long while and it now has a complete picture of the man. The article includes discussion of a letter in which Manstein argued with the SS over who should get the wristwatches of murdered Jews, an especially grotesque incident that was new to me.

People outside of Wikipedia do notice when articles provide a neutral representation, and I thank Diannaa for having rewritten the Manstein page. BTW, it was one of the articles targeted by the subject of the ArbCom case, where he planned to fix "everything" and "rehabilitate" it: source. That's why, in part, I felt that the case was needed. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:00, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you all, especially you, K.e.coffman, for keeping it neutral, and especially you, Diannaa, for so kindly setting me straight, and especially you, Bishzilla, for looking out for me. Drmies (talk) 20:04, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)(reply to K.e.coffman) It makes me nauseated to even think about it. The first thing he did on Manstein was pop in to question sourced content where two historians had opined that Manstein most likely lied at his trial. Thank you K.e.coffman for taking on this stressful task, both the clean-up and the Arbcom work. Thank you Drmies for your kind words above. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:16, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot thank Bishzilla ! Perfect work as always ! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:18, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Plurals

Have another look! Metron (talk) 03:17, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was was sure that it said "the couple have" and wanted to correct it to "the couple has", somehow this went wrong.Metron (talk) 03:22, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AE

You may wish to check in at WP:AE, as User:GoldenRing is doubling down on his disparaging comments about you, to the point of suggesting you be warned for your remarks. --Calton | Talk 10:50, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks, but I'm going to pass. This isn't a big enough matter and I'm not really interested in this pissing contest with them. Thanks Calton--I hope you're doing well. Drmies (talk) 15:45, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PSG.LGD & LGD Gaming

You, at Wikipedia have a "don't bite the newcomers" policy. i felt not only bitten, but raped by you and Dissident93. I am a newcomer, I saw your information is wrong, I wanted to fix it. For me, an experienced web designer wikipdia is extremely hard to navigate and edit. I want to update the LGD logo, but I don't know how to do that. Forum BB codes are more intuitive than this. I can fill you with lots of information about Esports, Dota2 since I work closely in that sphere, i wanted to contribute with factual information, because the page move from LGD Gaming to PSG.LGD is simply NOT JUSTIFIED, PSG don't own and didn't buy LGD, it's a partnership for 1 team only, out of 6 others. I revised what I could, and it got changed back for no reason by Dissident. it felt discouraging. I'm now not sure if I should even help you any further, since I wanted to help and got a 31 hour block for it. Where's the fairness in that? For wanting to correct your incapable moderator? LiquidNix (talk) 16:28, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hmm. I blocked you for calling another editor a "retard" and now you come here with some hyperbole about being raped. If you ever wanted to discuss the content of some edit, you should have maybe paused before you started venting. Drmies (talk) 16:33, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I call things like I see them, I'm factual and don't spread information I have no source or proof of. Good luck editing on your own then. I'm sure your moderator will do a good job *wink wink* It's amazing that I can name at least 3 wikia-type sites who are light years ahead of wikipedia for gaming and esports. You're the big dogs, you shouldn't let others surpass you, ever. But seeing how you treat newcomers, who want to help, can't say I'm surprised.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drmies&oldid=848688878"