User talk:Bishonen

Lollipop lollipop
Jolly Roger i topp!
Kapten Kross han vill slåss
- snart så brakar det loss!
(Lennart Hellsing, 1919—2015)

This user has been blocked from editing Wikipedia 3 times. And the last admin blocked by Jimbo. The LAST. Don't trifle with her.

Userbox barnstar

Awarded by DHeyward

10:19, 2 September 2015‎

Hamster-powered barnstar created for this user by User:Penyulap 24 June 2013

only back

for a few things. i pretty much gave up on wiki. CrazyAces489 (talk) 20:45, 11 October 2015 (UTC

I kinda feel that he is following me around. IMHO. Even nominated one of my articles for deletion out of nowhere. [1] CrazyAces489 (talk) 20:53, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Gabbygate

Hi. I noticed your comments on Gabby Merger's Talk page, so I thought I would also draw your attention to this discussion, starting from here. Though I have frequently disagreed with Gabby in the past, she sought to draw me into her dispute with Jeppiz, continued the 'discussion' after I clearly indicated I was not interested in continuing, and then finished with a 'reminder' about my 'typical hasty arrogance', my "horrendous attitude", my "cold attitude" and how my "brain and biases won't allow" me to be 'nice' except "Maybe only with fellow anti-JWs, or anti-Bible types, and atheists perhaps". If you think any of my comments in the discussion were not appropriate, please let me know. This is not a specific request for admin action.--Jeffro77 (talk) 14:14, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. Your typical hasty arrogance? Hmm. I'll take a look. Gabby knows now, or should know, that she's not allowed to attack people. Bishonen | talk 14:19, 12 October 2015 (UTC).

If you get particularly bored, you could also review the discussion now archived at User_talk:Jeffro77/Archive2015b#edits (and that's without the four time I had to prune it at the end[2][3][4][5]).--Jeffro77 (talk) 14:43, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm fine, thanks — the recent stuff will do me. I have posted a final warning on Gabby's page. In an attempt to fix the {{hat}} business, I tried to add a {{hab}} to close the hat, but that only made everything worse, presumably because there are other hats on the page. Groan. I don't really feel like spending the best years of my life straightening it out, especially considering I don't even know what kind of hatting she was trying to achieve, and may merely disoblige her if I try to help. So now my final warning post is invisible on the page along with everything else ... I hope she reads it through the history. I suppose my kind talkpage stalkers wouldn't like to help? But please note I don't guarantee you'll get any thanks from the user. Bishonen | talk 15:11, 12 October 2015 (UTC).

PS, John Carter took care of it. Bishonen | talk 19:42, 12 October 2015 (UTC).

Thanks. Yeah, there was one {{hat}} nested inside another. I think she saw a 'hatted' section on my Talk page and decided to do the same, but maybe didn't realise you have to {{hab}} them. I had some trouble following Gabby's reationale of deleting two large seemingly arbitrary blocks of discussion and then hatting other large chunks, but I shall leave that for her to sort out. After the recent rollercoaster of, essentially, 'I don't like you, but I want your opinion, and I still don't like you', I'm a bit worn out trying to work with her.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:56, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Oh, you shouldn't try. That's definitely my advice. I understand you may edit the same pages and their article talkpages, but if I were you I really wouldn't encourage her to come to your page any more, or post on hers. Bishonen | talk 09:08, 13 October 2015 (UTC).

I've deliberately stayed out of any contact with the user for days, hoping it would lead to tensions cooling down. Unfortunately the user continues making their WP activity mostly about me by the discussion this afternoon at Jeffro77's talk page. [6]. Their continued posting at Jeffro77's talk page after Jeffo77 has told them repeatedly to stay away follows the same pattern. Jeppiz (talk) 15:13, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

I know. I just warned her to leave him alone. Bishonen | talk 15:17, 13 October 2015 (UTC).

Feedback

Hi Bish I was wondering if you could give me some feedback on my ANI report [7] that I feel was not dealt with properly and was closed unfairly. I took alot of abuse on that ANI that I feel was wrong and unacceptable. I'm not asking you to comment on ANI, I'm asking for feedback on what you think and how you feel on it because I really do not understand it at all. Thank you. Caden ^cool 18:15, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

A thorough review of the history of that section, and the comments related to it elsewhere, would probably be reasonable if you are to do so. John Carter (talk) 18:21, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Bish is a trusted admin who is fair and does her job properly. You have no need to worry. BTW could you please stop following me around John and stop commenting on my ANI report? I do not like it. Caden ^cool 18:38, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Caden, it's too complicated for me, and basically I agree with Sarah here. Bishonen | talk 23:14, 12 October 2015 (UTC).

Its ok Bish, I no longer care anymore. I feel like quitting for good. Thanks anyway. Caden ^cool 23:18, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

I understand it's no fun, Caden. I hope you cheer up in a bit. Bishonen | talk 08:03, 13 October 2015 (UTC).

(watching:] Caden, read in the spirale of justice wisdom from 1510, and don't expect it to change, certainly not in the WP:Great Dismal Swamp. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:27, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Well Bish its very hard to do that when the same crap from yesterday has continued in to today. And Gerda thanks for that link. It was interesting. Caden ^cool 19:44, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Which link? Or both? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:50, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

ps: for an educated cry you may quote my latest cantata, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:54, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

It was the first link Gerda. Caden ^cool 20:01, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

You may be interested in the DYK hook on the talk, which I kept on my talk. Every time I look at your talk, I think you look like that pictured person ;) - I have a cat instead - also crying out, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:16, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

For crying out loud: now we can use a Bach cantata also, and a template. The cat returned. I made my appearance Jimbo's talk, with this

Fight the gender gap: write articles on women

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:06, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

		The Guidance Barnstar
		Thanks for steering me in the right direction re Benjamin Genocchio. Penelope1114 (talk) 14:34, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Neat barnstar! Thank you! Bishonen | talk 15:21, 13 October 2015 (UTC).

Thank you

Thank you very much Bishonen. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 00:53, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Question for you

Bishonen, why would my revision to Benjamin Genocchio be reverted when the content is factual, reliably referenced and an improvement to the stub that previously existed? Other editors could improve upon those statements which could be more encyclopedic in tone while leaving a more informative article in place. Really appreciate your time and thoughts here. Penelope1114 (talk) 01:37, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

It's a lot to ask of other editors that they follow you around and tweak your additions on the page itself. And so, instead, they revert. I can understand that. I mean, you realize they're not being paid for their work. Like several other people, I've been urging you to follow best practice and propose changes on the talkpage, and then discuss them there. I haven't seen you respond to this suggestion, so I'll try to demonstrate with an example why the necessary discussion can't be carried out via edit summaries (and absolutely not via reverts back and forth); it needs to be hammered out on talk.

Here's one point: it's not only a matter of style, but of proportion. In how great detail should facts and opinions be covered? As an example, I'm concerned about the section you called "International focus and art criticism".[8] I don't doubt that Genocchio has said that his art evaluation process begins with his belief that “artwork can channel the spiritual, challenge the mind and stimulate the senses,” or that “making art is one of the final arenas where there’s true freedom of expression". He's said it in interviews, these are quotes. But should they be reported in his Wikipedia bio? Not in my opinion. Also, when you describe these views, you often do it as it were from inside Genocchio's head — "Genocchio’s art evaluation process begins with his belief that" — "When Genocchio critiques a work of art, he considers", etc. As opposed to "Genocchio has said that his art evaluation process begins with his belief that “artwork can channel the spiritual, challenge the mind and stimulate the senses,” "Genocchgio has decribed.." etc. The sources are reliable, for statements that Genocchio has made in them, but interviews in, say The Weekend Australian, a lifestyle magazine, don't exactly tend to show the notability of such self-descriptions. In my opinion. I would remove the second and third paragraph in that section altogether. (As well as change the "meaningless-variation" artsy word "penned" in the first.) Please present your overhaul a section at a time on the talkpage. Also, it's better to put more general discussion on the talkpage too. I mean, you are absolutely welcome on my page, but the question you have asked me would actually go better on article talk. For more eyes. I think I'll go there now and put a link to our interchange. Bishonen | talk 08:46, 14 October 2015 (UTC).

Hi Bishonen. I proposed a few updates to be made to the introductory paragraph of Genocchio's article. One editor has replied with a very good alternate suggestion. What would the best next step be? Thanks so much. Penelope1114 (talk) 00:43, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Penelope, BMK may not have realized you were asking for somebody else to make the changes. I suggest you ask him to please make the change he proposes — point out that you don't want to, because of COI — and also prompt him (and others) to assess your other suggestions. For the next time you propose changes: if you use the {{request edit}} template — click and take a look at it — people will know where they are from the start. Just paste {{Request edit}} above your request. Using the template will also add your request to the Category:Requested edits, which is useful, because some editors patrol that category, and will be drawn to the page to assess your proposed edit. (So I'm told, at least.) Bishonen | talk 10:16, 18 October 2015 (UTC).

Thanks so much Bishonen. BMK went ahead and made the edits as I believe you saw which is great. Last question for a while, I promise... Should I propose changes first and begin a discussion and then use the {{request edit}} you speak of above to request that the edit actually be made after a consensus has been reached on the talk page or do I use the template from the get-go? I think you are saying to use it when I propose a change right away but I'd just like to confirm. Thank you again in advance for helping me become a better contributor. Penelope1114 (talk) 23:57, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

(May I? I've got Bishonen's talk page on my watch list.) If the article talk page is active, it's probably enough to just propose the changes there and leave it up to the regulars to discuss and decide. If there's little or no recent activity on the talk page, you might as well use {{request edit}} when you post your proposed changes. The point is to try to minimise your use of the volunteers who patrol the {{request edit}} category - they've got a lot on their plate and will likely be less familiar with the topic than the talk page regulars. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 00:43, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Anthony. I think it's probably good for the regulars too if Penelope uses the template right away — then they'll see at a glance what it is. Also Talk:Benjamin Genocchio isn't a particularly lively page. A request doesn't become any more formal because you use the template, Penelope — it can be discussed afterwards. Once there's a consensus, you don't have to use any formalities to ask for your changes to be added; somebody who was part of the consensus will surely just add them. Consensus may be a bit of a highfalutin term for such a low-traffic page anyway — the changes will be added if there aren't any objections. Thanks for your help, BMK. Bishonen | talk 09:57, 20 October 2015 (UTC).

Bishonen and Anthony thank you for providing insight here. And thanks too, BMK for your work. Much appreciated. Penelope1114 (talk) 00:16, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

No problem. I don't know how often I'll be around the article in the future, though. If you post something and get no response after a while, feel free to contact me on my talk page. BMK (talk) 00:20, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Bishonen, really hope you are doing well. What are the best next steps to take if no one responds to my requested edit? This is a pretty straightforward one too. Thank you! Penelope1114 (talk) 16:24, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Wow, the article isn't very well watched, I guess, Penelope. But you see BMK's offer just above — why not profit from it, and post on his page? Also, quite a few people watch this page, mine. Dear talkpage stalkers, would somebody like to help? Incidentally, Penelope, it may seem counterintuitive to abandon this thread, but the fact is, most people only look at the bottom of a page for new stuff. So the next time you have a question for me, it might be more effective to create a new section at the bottom. Bishonen | talk 18:52, 27 October 2015 (UTC).

Creating a new thread is more likely to happen when the old one is archived. Cluebot and Lowercase sigmabot are looking to earn their pay btw. —SpacemanSpiff 19:04, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

No bots ripping my beautiful page apart! No! I like a good long TOC. Which reminds me... time to reinstall the hardworking hamsters next to the TOC. They earn their pay! Bishonen | talk 19:26, 27 October 2015 (UTC).

I did indeed take BMK up on his offer. I am sure he is quite busy. Bishonen thanks again. Next time, you'll find me at the bottom of your page! Penelope1114 (talk) 20:27, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Entirely coincidentally, I made the change you suggested just moments ago. See the talk page. BMK (talk) 20:30, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks so much BMK. Penelope1114 (talk) 00:39, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

ugghhh

Hey Bish - how the hell ya doin? Miss talkin to ya. How's the kids? Little ankle biter still got those sharp teeth? How's the honorable monster? You talked to Floz? . he ok? I saw Giano poked his head in a while back - but I was so busy that I didn't talk to him myself. Anyway - just wanted to drop by and say hey. hugs. — Ched :  ?  05:09, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Cheddie! Florence is good in himself, just pissed off with Wikipedia. I'm thinking of sending the anklebiter to visit some editors I've been, uh, "interacting" with recently. Or Bishzilla, but she tends to be too mellow for my purposes these days. Bishonen | talk 12:47, 15 October 2015 (UTC).

Discretionary sanctions alert

Hi Bishonen. I wonder: is user:Joshua Jonathan being investigated on the same grounds?

I mean, I am denouncing harassment coming from this user only to I find that is me who is being investigated. All of a sudden editors appear on his support even using awkward statements and being so hasty, taking decisions in very little time, when the issue at stake is a complicated one. Mauna22 (talk) 06:27, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

The DSA is well-known to me. Actually, I considered myself to post it at your talkpage. I think you should familiarize yourself with Wiki-policies, instead of abusing terms like WP:HARASSMENT. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

• Investigated? What makes you think you're being investigated? Perhaps you didn't notice the line at the top of my discretionary sanctions alert: This message ... does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date. Italics and bolding in the original. But what I see on your page after you got the alert forces me to warn you: the more you assume bad faith, and the more you follow the lead of User:Dseer, who I have just blocked for the personal attacks on your page, the more likely you are to be sanctioned, up to and including a topic ban or an indefinite block. As for Joshua Jonathan, he's well aware of the discretionary sanctions in the area in question. Your talk, here and on WP:ANI, of "harassment" by him is absurd. Please click on the policy links in this message, you will find them informative. Bishonen | talk 09:56, 15 October 2015 (UTC).

Hi! I didn´t mean harassment towards me myself but rather to the article at stake.

"What makes you think you're being investigated?" This [9]

As for User:Dseer commentaries I understand I cannot/should not erase them. Not even my own user talk page. Mauna22 (talk) 10:51, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

1. You protested, with reference to my discretionary sanctions alert, against being investigated. It turns out you're referring to a checkuser investigation (not performed by me) of your account, mentioned at a sockpuppet investigation that's nothing to do with me. Ask Bbb23 about the investigation of your account, if you want to ask somebody. The reason seems clear to me from the SPI, but if it's confusing to you, you should ask. I've no idea why you bring that here.
2. Only people are capable of being harassed, not objects such as articles. Look up the word, or, as Joshua Jonathan has already suggested, read the harassment policy.
3. Your understanding about removing comments is mistaken. You may remove any posts you like from your own talkpage, see WP:REMOVED. But I haven't been blaming you for Dseer's comments, or suggesting you ought to remove them — have I? No, and I'm not now. I was warning you against following his lead. That was because you explicitly expressed appreciation of his words,[10] with reference to a post that included the word "Nazi" (thrown at specific editors). He has been blocked for that post. I'm glad to hear you now sounding as if you've had second thoughts about throwing in your lot with Dseer. I'm sorry you got such poor advice from him; that wasn't your fault. Bishonen | talk 12:43, 15 October 2015 (UTC).

Whatever mate, whatever... Mauna22 (talk) 14:33, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

? How old are you..? No, don't tell me, I don't really want to know. But why reply at all if that's the best you've got? Silence is golden. Bishonen | talk 14:56, 15 October 2015 (UTC).

Obvious from this unproductive dialogue why I am retiring my user account after 10 years and why I warned Mauna about consequences. If we responded that way we would be sanctioned so it makes the point for me; thanks. Exactly why I abandon my account unapologetic and unmoved by being "lucky" there were not more severe sanctions for blowing the whistle. I knew the consequences going in. Silence here IS golden. Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source academically anyway. Goodbye. Dseer (talk) 18:59, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Protection in the comments section

I noticed that you protected Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Newsletter/20151007/Feature, which seemed to have been after an IP address pinged you. I don't agree with your reasoning of it being because of sock puppetry. If that's the case then shouldn't there be a case to see if they're all sock puppets? GamerPro64 15:33, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

I came here to say the same thing. The discussion was hardly out of hand, and as far as I know there have been no specific allegations backed by evidence against anyone. We shouldn't forbid IP editors from contributing just because a topic is semi-controversial, especially on a relatively backwoods page that is specifically there for discussion of the subject. To put a finer point on it, there's not really anything to disrupt. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 15:38, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry I've been taking a while to answer, but I had to think. There are some disruptive IPs, but I regret throwing out the baby (meaning 97.103.154.125 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)) with the bathwater. I've unprotected. Thanks for your input. Bishonen | talk 19:18, 15 October 2015 (UTC).

Thank you for responding and unprotecting the comments. GamerPro64 19:54, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Tired of Harassment

Deteriorating copyvio discussion. Open a new thread if you must. Bishonen | talk 07:10, 17 October 2015 (UTC).
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
This and this are pure acts of vindictiveness and mean-spiritness. I will not joust with him. The fact that he even approaches me or has anything to do with my actions (under the guise of protecting the encyclopedia) is pure crap. As I say on my User page: "I don't vibrate at that frequency". Buster Seven Talk 06:18, 16 October 2015 (UTC) This too. I think this is called stalking. I'm at a loss....! Why does he even care what I'm doing? Buster Seven Talk 06:29, 16 October 2015 (UTC) I just noticed [dex.php?title=Talk:Arthur_Herschel_Lidov_(artist)&diff=prev&oldid=685944242 this and this. All Articles I created and I am still working on. If it were anyone besides Collect, else I could collaborate and work out the problem, if there is one. But this is ridiculous. I refuse to be a passenger on Collects "flights of fancy". I'd rather leave. Buster Seven Talk 07:50, 16 October 2015 (UTC) Buster, I'm afraid Collect is right about Rainey Bennett. Nearly the whole paragraph "Education" is lifted word-for-word from the source. That's not "a brief quotation used in accordance with Wikipedia's non-free content policy and guideline", see WP:COPYVIO. You have to rewrite that paragraph from scratch using your own words. Further, you have used very specific expressions from other sources in other places in the article, such as "modernist-leaning" and "whirlwind exhibition". Those are brief quotations, but they show such "substantial linguistic similarity in creative language"[11] that you must credit them as direct quotes from the sources, with quotation marks and naming the source in the text, if you want to use them. Of course that would get pretty cumbersome, so it's better IMO to simply not use those "creative" expression. There are other similar issues wrt other sources, so please consider these things carefully when you rewrite the article, and stay away from the language of the sources. Good luck. I also think Collect's note on Talk:Richard Haines is reasonable. Look at the similarities, where this extract is practically identical with text in the Marion Times article: "Amongst his many murals was one of the more colorful in Iowa Farming, which he painted for the Cresco, Iowa post office in 1937. In it, he harkened back to his days in Marion and produced a scene depicting the farm and two generations of family that had lived there. It shows horses, cows, pigs, chickens, and family members performing chores as his mother reads a letter just delivered by the postal service." Also it's not attributed: you haven't given the newspaper article as a source. That needs to be put right, too. (I realize the newspaper may in its turn have been ripping off some other source, that you have cited. But whatever the source, somebody surely owns the copyright, and you can't use the text without rewriting it.) I know there's history between you and Collect, but no, I wouldn't call that stalking. The "User contributions" button is there for a reason. Once somebody has spotted a copyright violation, it's reasonable for them take a look at the author's other articles — because it may be suspected that the author is not well aware of how much text they're allowed to quote or semi-quote, and how it's supposed be attributed. P.S. I got an edit conflict, and haven't looked at your latest addition. But you can probably work it out yourself, considering what I have said about the rest. I have to go now. Bishonen | talk 07:59, 16 October 2015 (UTC). Was watching Stan and Ollie, and when I finished, you'd said what I was going to say, only nicer, and more comprehensively. -Roxy the dog™ (Resonate) 08:05, 16 October 2015 (UTC) I tried to finally create some article on a subject I enjoy. I may have made some errors but....Collect is a stalker and a trouble maker. You know it and I know it. I Quit. Buster Seven Talk 08:11, 16 October 2015 (UTC) Please take a break and come back refreshed, Buster. You're a valuable editor, and I'm sure you know your contributions are appreciated. As for Stan and Ollie, Roxy, it's certainly a concern if they hypnotize people so much they're unable to post here. ;-) There's an animated gif of Bishzilla radiating her atomic deathray (or possibly throwing up, it's a bit hard to tell); perhaps I should put that in the edit notice instead. I like to frighten people. Bishonen | talk 09:23, 16 October 2015 (UTC). If there is any "stalking" it is shown by a vast array of posts on the ArbCom case against an editor whose last "interaction" was a vote on an RfA - which failed. I arrived at the pages here as a result of their connection to Philately - so any claim of "stalking" is not only silly, it is a personal affront. Cheers. Collect (talk) 19:34, 16 October 2015 (UTC) "Whirlwhind exhibition" is hardly a particularly unique phrasing -- here's [12] an example from 1992. NE Ent 22:43, 16 October 2015 (UTC) Try looking at [13] and tell me that an editor writing almost an entire article from an uncited article is proper ... or that such turns of phrase as "His parents, Fred and Hattie, were pioneer farmers at the turn of the century and Richard began sketching scenes of cows and the countryside as a child. ", and "Amongst these is one of the most colorful of murals in Iowa, which he painted for the Cresco Post Office in 1937. In it, he harkened back to his days in Marion and produced a scene depicting the farm and two generations of family that had lived there. It shows a joyous site of horses, cows, pigs, and chickens, as family members perform chores and his mother reads a letter just delivered by the postal service." etc. would strike you as normal edits on Wikipedia where the same wording is found in a source ... Cheers. Collect (talk) 22:56, 16 October 2015 (UTC) NE Ent, I explained the situation and the policy to Buster, who I'm sure will understand it when he's less upset. How about you, did you look at the texts and the sources in question (easy to find for an experienced editor if he takes the time), and do you genuinely disagree with me? Or do you just genuinely think trollish nitpicking is helpful? Collect, I agree with you, and you needn't rise to purely silly comments. I'm going to close this thread now. Bishonen | talk 07:10, 17 October 2015 (UTC). I did not look at the texts and I do not disagree with you -- based on prior interaction, if you said it was a copyvio, the probability that you're correct is sufficiently high I don't consider it a good use of my time to independently evaluate the situation; if I disagreed with your viewpoint, I'd state so explicitly and I'd be much more likely to being discussing it on the article talk page than here. It was merely meant as an observation on language, nothing more. NE Ent 14:07, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Sock

Hello, Bish. Would you mind taking care of Arsalan Kiani (talk · contribs · count)? It's an obvious sock of someone, making unsourced edits promoting Punjabi on multiple articles related to Pakistan, and pasting lots of totally frivolous warnings on my user page in retalation for being reverted, clearly showing that they're not a new user (I don't know who the master is yet, though, since there are several masters doing similar things). They have received up to and including a level-4 for unsourced POV, and have been reported to AIV, but nothing has happened there for a while. Thomas.W ^talk 09:31, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

At first I'd have said NAB, but then I thought Kmrhistory, then I got confused...—SpacemanSpiff 09:43, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm leaning toward LanguageXpert. Thomas.W ^talk 09:48, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

LX is Punjabi dialects, a bit different, if Materialscientist is online now he'd probably be able to pick the tells of Kmr. —SpacemanSpiff 09:49, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

I've taken care of AK for now. I'll take a look later. The editing is so, hm, special, that it ought to be possible to relate it to a master. This, for example. Have either of you guys seen your suspects doing anything like that? And Space, could you ask Materialscientist, please? I'm on my way out. Bishonen | talk 09:54, 16 October 2015 (UTC).

Arsalan Kiani edits through Opera Mini, which is a kind of proxy, thus CU data are inconclusive. Kmrhistory didn't use Opera Mini (in the past). Materialscientist (talk) 10:12, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

• On second thoughts, why worry about whose sock he is, when he's so eminently WP:NOTHERE under his own steam? I've amended the block accordingly. And now I am going out. Bishonen | talk 10:29, 16 October 2015 (UTC).

Your weekend leisure reading

First this, and then this. I think that you will find each enjoyable in its way. -- Hoary (talk) 22:52, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

LOL, the first was great with my Saturday breakfast — where's my Beluga, though? And who's the "Seal" character referred to, besides being a well-known expert on the international hospitality industry? Seal (musician)? As for our article, how could you have the heart to remove the entire elegance of an enchanting past? (As you and I know, sometimes it just feels good to have a block button.) Were you tempted to add the Guardian feature as a reference? Seriously, it's perfectly informative. It could replace this, for instance. Bishonen | talk 07:47, 17 October 2015 (UTC).

Perhaps "Seal", whoever he or she is, is to international hospitality what Paris Hilton is to music. ¶ I know, I know, I removed from the article all that was beautiful. This gave me the sads; perhaps I'll recover and, as you suggest, replace crap sources with good ones. -- Hoary (talk) 13:21, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Hoary, if it's leisure reading that you're looking for, may I suggest The Adventures of Odin Singh in the Land of the Blue Eyed Blondes? —SpacemanSpiff 13:09, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Holy intercourse. Incidentally, although a couple of the blogs I follow refer to Florida as variations on "America's flaccid appendage", it wasn't till I saw a map of Jutland in this context that I noticed how the peninsula, er, jutted. -- Hoary (talk) 14:23, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Problems

Hi Bishonen. I just wan't to apologize for putting a problem in your plate, but this IP (who's hard to track since he/she keeps changing IP addresses) there is a dispute between me an the IP in the article of Pound sterling as seen in the edit history, the IP didn't agree with me at first, and he was right, but now that I point out to a given source by the IP that the new edit doesn't have anything in regards to a misleading data (something about a 40% data), he thinks I'm morphing the source to my POV and posted a complain here in the Administrator notice board. I tried looking for third parties, but none respond. (N0n3up (talk) 00:35, 17 October 2015 (UTC))

Never mind, it's all good now.... Pretend this doesn't exist.. like it's invisible. (N0n3up (talk) 03:32, 17 October 2015 (UTC))

OK. See also the top of this page: I'm not doing ANI at this time. Bishonen | talk 06:56, 17 October 2015 (UTC).

I never said anything about getting involved in the ANI, just a third party. But like I said, pretend this doesn't exist... please... sorry.. bye. (N0n3up (talk) 08:18, 17 October 2015 (UTC))

File:Nell Gwyn.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Nell Gwyn.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 14:26, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

The next day…...

In Dec of 2014, Editor Carptrash and I created List of United States post office murals and started to fill it with info and images (when available). While creating the list and doing research, etc. we realized that we were by-passing a lot of interesting information that might come in handy for future articles about the muralists. So, later that same month we created User:Buster7/The List - Women Artists and User:Buster7/The List - Men Artists and used them as a file drawer of sorts for names and information and sources and whatever was interesting. Most of it was via cut-n-paste in a random, quick, rather loose system of fact gathering from varied sources. Over time I created about 7-8 articles using one of the two Lists as my starting point. Just the other day I decided to start creating more muralist articles and made a personal vow to do one a day.

I regretfully admit that I should have been more careful and concerned to paraphrase and use my own words. But I was eager to create content. I kind of knew I was stretching the copyright issue and plagiarism but I figured the articles were about remote individuals; they would be “out of the way” , unseen, and I could get them into namespace and edit them as time allowed. I didn't expect much traffic (if any) at the articles so I thought I would create them, with what I had, and I could fine tune them later.

And then, behold, surprise of all surprises, an old nemesis shows up and dis-credits my content creation. I won’t get into the long history that he and I have but I challenge any editor to compare our general history everywhere on WP. Compare our talk pages over the last 6-7 years. See how many complaints come my way compared to his. I stay out of trouble: he searches it out.

Somewhere, twice, you say that he was right. O! How it pains me to admit that that may be correct, technically. But, what could have been a warm cuddly moment of olive branch entwining and a future of peaceful co-existence was sacrificed for a never-before seen and rarely used template; used against a veteran editor of long and exemplary service to the encyclopedia and the WP community. That would be me. I won’t stay retired. I love WP too much. Also, my wife has started to add jobs to the honey-do list now that I have extra hours in the day. Buster Seven Talk 14:28, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm glad you find yourself drawn (and pushed, by your wife) back, Buster7. As you probably recollect, I'm aware of the long history, and I hope I've been supportive when that was called for. But I won't play favorites, and I don't think Collect did anything improper in this context. Best regards to Buster3.5. Bishonen | talk 15:02, 17 October 2015 (UTC).

Being named a person of interest here I think I will weigh in. My guidelines are, if I cut-and-paste then I just use quotes and reference where it came from. One thing I am always trying to do with articles is to use a variety of sources anyway, so I don't view this as being a problem. We need those articles so don't despair. Carptrash (talk) 15:32, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Annotating block logs

Check recent block history of the notorious bad guy User:ThisIsaTest, to see how you could have squeezed a permanent link to an Arbcom decision into a block log entry. It uses the Special:Permalink/123456 notation. EdJohnston (talk) 23:52, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Jonathan Oakey

Can you do me a favour and correct the move from Jonathan Oakey to JayJay Oakey. It was a copy paste rather than a proper move and the edit history was lost.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:35, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Sure, a little later today, after I've been to get the groceries. It'll involve the dreaded history merge, since there has been a little further editing at the new location, so I need to gird up my loins first. Bishonen | talk 09:49, 19 October 2015 (UTC).

Never to get in the way of a good loin gird - no rush. The speedy deletion of the new article was declined because of the article history and if further action is to be taken the history will be important.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:56, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't seem to remember this trick very well.. I made a bit of a meal of it, and misspelled the name in several ways. But finally the history goes back to 2010. Now let's take a look at the talkpage… Bishonen | talk 11:09, 19 October 2015 (UTC).

I was watching the change. I have had days like that too - thanks for the effort.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:12, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't seem able to stop the talkpage redirecting to itself. It's funny in a way, but not... a good thing. Talkpage stalkers please help!! Bishonen | talk 11:16, 19 October 2015 (UTC).

Sorry, now we're both doing it — I'll stop! I'll leave it completely to you. Just let me know if you need some version deleted. Bishonen | talk 11:25, 19 October 2015 (UTC).

Yes I should have left it alone. In any case the talk page is not that important. Let me deal with that and I will send you any deletion requests.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:27, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

• I'm on mobile so won't do tool stuff but you have to undelete oakLey and move to oakey (talk pages).—SpacemanSpiff 11:30, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Good job - it all looks good. Thanks.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:41, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I will not. I've lost my nerve. And I thought that was what I did before? Oh well, one more time on the roundabouts, it's not as if I've got any more face to lose. Why do they give the admin tools to these fumblers? Bishonen | talk 11:46, 19 October 2015 (UTC).

Look at the history of All India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar. It so happened that Abecedare and I came across the same set of disruptive moves at around the same time and edit-conflicted in moving this article back and in the process deleted the article and its entire history and made it a redirect to itself. Luckily Bgwhite or his bot figured it out and got me to fix it. Talk pages are ok to mess with after that. —SpacemanSpiff 13:16, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

I am sorry I put you through that. I would suggest deleting Talk:JayJay Oakley to tie everything into a pretty knot. A little latter today I will start concentrating on the article. Thanks again.Peter Rehse (talk) 12:00, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

more plagiarism noted

Talk:Paul Theodore Arlt demonstrates what appears to be specific and deliberate plagiarism - using a Washington Post source in the first place, grabbing more than 150 words from it, and then not citing it at all. [14] is the initial edit. There is a pattern here - but I was perfectly happy to be cordial until the editor then accused me of "plagiarism" for quoting his post about being a sleuth seeking information about me personally, as though it were the same problem as this plagiarism (far worse than a mere copyright violation) of taking a source, quoting it extensively, and then not citing it whatsoever. With warm regards, and noting you will see others also note that using 150+ words from a source which you used in the first place, and then did not cite as required by Wikipedia policies and US law is a major problem for an editor. Collect (talk) 13:19, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, [15] is the initial edit of the article while it was under construction @ User:Buster7/Paul Arlt. Yes, it was a direct copy and paste from the Washington Post Obit which I then chiseled down during construction. It was a starting point. Yes, its quite possible I may have inadvertently used some few of the many thousands of words available in the Obit and then forgot to state it as a reference. Buster Seven Talk 14:26, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

In fact, though, you quite specifically removed all mention of your primary source.[16] I believe that is the essence of the offence. At this point, I am becoming unwilling to accept "accident" or "inadvertently" or "some few" words where your edit summary was simply "copy edit." The more I look, the worse the offence appears. Collect (talk) 15:10, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

I suggest you stop looking. You see a devil behind every tree. My mistake is how I construct articles. My method creates pitfalls that I tumble into. Buster Seven Talk 15:27, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Then I suggest you no longer routinely delete the actual source you use - especially when you simply lift entire colorful sentences. I think you might not appreciate just how important the issue of plagiarism is to Wikipedia. Copyright is not an area which tolerates accidental "pitfalls" nor do I "see a devil behind every tree." Your problem is that your area of editing overlapped an incidental area I looked at - nothing more. But when you shout that "he is out to get me" it is also possible that you created your own "pitfall". If we wish to retain editors, we should also be an example for them. Warm regards. Collect (talk) 15:46, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Collect, you've made your point. The plagiarism/copyvio issues are real and it was appropriate to bring them to attention, but the way you're going about it is petty, mean-spirited, and distasteful, and smacks of using the issue as leverage to bludgeon someone you dislike. Bishonen told you the same thing in the last thread you opened here, although she used nicer language. You're even doing your typical thing where you post aspersions on your talkpage, an unproductive habit which has gotten you in trouble in the past. If you identify copyvio or plagiarism issues, then you can either edit the article directly to remove them, or bring them to another editor's attention. If you think there is a deeper issue with Buster7's editing, then you can raise it in the appropriate venues, for example WP:AN/I (if you believe it requires immediate administrative attention). Otherwise, let people with less of an axe to grind handle the issue. The copyvios need to be fixed, but this whole exercise on your part has a very distasteful and vindictive feel to it. MastCell ^Talk 16:43, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Amazing. I note I have found plagiarism by others as well. You might have had half a point had I not found other plagiarism/copyright violations, but as it is, you appear to be much more interested in following my edits than I have ever been in following yours. Am I on your watchlist perchance? And I fins your characterization of my varied posts as "aspersions" to be an aspersion in itself. Cheers. Collect (talk) 17:18, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Well, I find your description of my description of your aspersions as an aspersion to be a third-order aspersion! What a productive thought process. But to be clear, you're not on my "watchlist" and I literally have no idea what you've been up to since your most recent bout of ArbCom sanctions. You posted to Bishonen's talkpage, which is on my watchlist, and I responded. (In contrast, I don't believe for a moment that you just happened upon Buster7's edits, but it's not really important either way). Fix the problem, or ask someone else to do it, but at this point you're just being gratuitously mean-spirited. MastCell ^Talk 17:25, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm a first-order aspersion...the mere presence of MONGO casts a very dark shadow. Other editors usually recoil in disgust when MONGO appears. Everyone better play nice or BISHZILLA is probably going to open up a giant can of whoop ass! --MONGO 22:24, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Protection for the Dino Charge pages due to persistant vandalism?

Hey there! Please protect the Power Rangers Dino Charge pages from this persistant vandilism from a person who keeps changing IP's. I understand you've already banned one of him (and he's been banned for this before), so it should be easily justifiable. Cheers! Also, he has a new IP. 174.236.98.199 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) and 174.236.97.134 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) He keeps cycling through IP's. He also is responsible for this dubious activity. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism&diff=prev&oldid=686779403 . Thank you for protecting the main page, though please do List of Power Rangers Dino Charge episodes as well! It's much appreciated. Cheers! Kitsunelaine (talk) 07:35, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, good point, please stop edit conflicting me! Yes, I saw him on WP:AIV, that's what got my attention. It's been semi-protected for three months before, so I've done the same. I'll see if maybe I can do a range block as well. Bishonen | talk 07:40, 21 October 2015 (UTC).

Hahha, sorry. I get nervous when writing about stuff like this and I try to make my points as concise as possible, which means editing. My bad. I'll be more careful in the future! Also, there's some vandalism going on WP:DRN from the same user as well.Kitsunelaine (talk) 07:42, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

It happens! I appreciate your report. The range is much too big to block, so I've tried doing 4 very small rangeblocks for a week (they're static IPs). He may well find his way out of those, though. I'll see if DRN can work as a honeypot! Bishonen | talk 07:56, 21 October 2015 (UTC).

Thank you so much! Cheers! Kitsunelaine (talk) 07:59, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

a fabulously trendy British hairstylist

Hi Bish! It's a tale of a horrendously spammy draft for a fabulously trendy British hairstylist, Daniel Galvin, who "did" the hair colour of Princess Diana and Twiggy, amongst others. It turns out (surprise, surprise) that the creator of that little beauty, works for Galvin's PR agent and has:

1. a username which impersonates Galvin, i.e. DanielgalvinOBE
2. claimed on two separate occasions that she was not Mr. Galvin but two different people, the owner of the PR agency (Jessica Psalia) and one of Psalia's employees (Sonia Lall).

I cannot get a straight answer out of her/them as to whether the password to this account has been shared. If it has, it's going to have to be blocked. If not, at the very least there has to be a name change. I told her/them that I'd ask an administrator to sort it out. Can you help?

The main discussion is at User talk:DanielgalvinOBE#Paid editing. There's more background at Sam Sailor's talk page here, where Ms. Lall/Ms. Psalia claims that despite their being the PR agent for Daniel Galvin, there is no paid editing involved. Righty-O! Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:29, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

PS As a preemptive strike, I created a puffless Daniel Galvin article. Voceditenore (talk) 15:29, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

PPS Me again. It now transpires that Ms. Lall and Ms. Psalia do share the password to that account [17]. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:38, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

• Well, I've blocked that account, with a nursery word about paid editing and terms of use in the block notice, for when they create new account/s. Are you saying they don't understand that editing when they have Galvin as a client is paid editing, by definition ? 'Strordinary. Bishonen | talk 16:35, 21 October 2015 (UTC).

So, I looked at your article. Where did all the renowneds and famouses and classics go? It's nice and clean, but it's not going to shock the general public into reconsidering hair colour as something creative and expressive, is it? Boring! Let me know if there's anything else I can do. Bishonen | talk 16:45, 21 October 2015 (UTC).

You're a brick for sorting that out, Bish. Yep. They did indeed claim that this was not paid editing because it was "no profit" and done of their own... er... free will. [18]. As for my article, I too am quite impressed with its utter boring-ness. It's a veritable masterpiece of boring-ness, if I do say so myself. Needless to say, both Sam Sailor and I have it on our permanent watchlists in case "someone" tries to make it more "interesting" . Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:58, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

I'll just discreetly add something about his hair colour vision and what it did for women all over, when you guys aren't looking. Hi, Sam. Bishonen | talk 17:12, 21 October 2015 (UTC).

Oh will you now? In that case, you might want to add that he is "the man responsible for some 32 million Japanese women now colouring their hair". Damned impressive that! There are lots more fab suggestions at User:Colourguru2015. (Another of his minions?) Voceditenore (talk) 18:04, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Bad, bad Bish - Running with scissors is too dangerous for Wikipedia! in Voce's exquisite hair parlour. -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 09:39, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Advertisement-eating chameleon in a feeding frenzy. Zap zap!

No suggestions on that userpage any more. Explain to me why I haven't speedied the draft you link to, again? It's just as much an advertisement. But it sounded like Sam was in favour of letting it (and the other drafts) languish until G13 gets them..? I don't mind either way. They're drafts, and the article exists. Bishonen | talk 19:37, 21 October 2015 (UTC).

Ah, but you missed Draft:Daniel Galvin, Bish. These folk have been very busy. That one could definitely be deleted as G11. As to the latest (very slightly toned down) version, Draft:Daniel Galvin (2), in the past drafts have been deleted as G11 (blatant advert), but I gather they have to be very blatant. If you think it is, just zap it. I'm not sure if A10 (existing article on same subject) applies to draft space. Voceditenore (talk) 06:26, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Zap zap! [Looks hungrily around for more.] Bishonen | talk 07:51, 22 October 2015 (UTC).  Well done. -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 09:39, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Hmmm. You don't hang out much at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk, do you? Loads of tasty pond life there. I'd say about 80% of the queries are "Why did my flaming advert draft get rejected?" Of course, it's blindingly obvious why to everyone else, and even when they're told yet again why, they still don't get it. Voceditenore (talk) 08:22, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Advert, nah! This is an advert. Bish bring bucket. -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 09:39, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Brits who stalk may ask why there is no page for Laboratoire Garnier and yet there is one, a whole paragraph, for Garnier -Roxy the dog™ (Resonate) 18:17, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

But there is a redirect to Garnier from Laboratoires Garnier. You forgot the "s", Roxy. Voceditenore (talk) 06:26, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

An indication, I'm afraid, of the quality of my editing. -Roxy the dog™ (Resonate) 08:43, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

HallKeen Management

Who was the master? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:01, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't know who the master was. I do know a user who calls themselves User:Justlattersandnumbers has been around the block. Actually I meant to refer to both socking and advertising, but for some reason the opportunity to add a second reason to the deletion summary didn't come up (as it normally does). Feel free to recreate the article and delete it per G11 instead, if you think that would be useful. I have warned the IP who removed the speedy template, btw. I think it's very obvious that it's yet another incarnation of the same person. (And I doubt their butt is actually in Morocco.) Bishonen | talk 20:25, 21 October 2015 (UTC).

Deletion was fine. Would have been useful to know who Justlattersandnumbers was in case they pop up again. As it stands, it's a username block so they're free to create a new account. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:39, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, it's hard to tell — the real user, Justlettersandnumbers, chases vandals and promoters quite a bit, so I couldn't guess who it is he has disobliged to the point of impersonation. Anyway, it's a "hard" username block, so I don't think they're any more free to create another account than people are after any block — are they? If I've understood the concept of a hard vs a soft block, which isn't necessarily the case. But I don't want to fall foul of WP:BEANS, so I'll say no more. Bishonen | talk 21:07, 21 October 2015 (UTC).

Rosie

There is currently a question at the reference desks "Italian gesture" where an esteemed colleague brought up the notion that Rosie might be implying a bit more than "We can do it" in her gesture ... As Rosie is one of very few images currently illuminating your page, I thought I might point this out. And say hello. (And look at Laurel & Hardy). And wish you a happy Halloween in advance! ---Sluzzelin talk 21:15, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Lovely sound effect with the gesture in I vitelloni! I'll always imagine that now, whenever I catch sight of Rosie on my page. You know, I once got a similar image from Soviet Russia on my page (as a barnstar?), long long ago. An older image, I'm pretty sure — from the twenties. Not sure if there was a gesture… it's got to be in my archives somewhere. Bishonen | talk 22:51, 21 October 2015 (UTC).

Come Into the Factories wasn't a Soviet poster, but is arguably more Soviet Realist than anything the USSR ever came up with. ‑ iridescent 23:03, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

That's evocative of old memories: "Ask at any employment exchange" - do other folks still remember labour exchanges? There's stubby information on Wikipedia at Employment agency, Public employment service, and Labour Exchanges Act 1909, but nothing that really does the topic justice. --RexxS (talk) 15:10, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

There's an at-least-adequate summary of previous incarnations at Jobcentre Plus. Remembering the hassle Eric and PoD had trying to write Workhouse, I'd be extremely reluctant to touch anything similar with a barge-pole, especially since in the current climate anyone writing on such things will have a flock of assorted Corbynistas ranting about your being a lackey of the neoliberal war machine for not explaining that unemployment is part of the global plot hatched up by rootless cosmopolitans in Wall Street and Brussels (I was accused of using offensive language for using the term "lower classes" recently), right-wing cranks accusing you of being a commie agent trying to legitimise government control of what should rightly be left to the open market, and nationalists of all flavours accusing you of being an English/European (delete as appropriate) stooge for failing to mention some arcane difference between how they operated in Carlisle, Carmarthen, Carstairs and Carrickfergus. ‑ iridescent 15:54, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

I thought "rootless cosmopolitans" (especially combined with "Wall Street") was antisemitic code, Iridescent? Either I've got that wrong, or you're suggesting the "Corbynistas" are worried about a jewish plot for world domination … really? Perhaps I've totally misunderstood the subtleties, or I'm simply fifty eighty years out of date with the phrases. Bishonen | talk 16:54, 22 October 2015 (UTC).

In current British leftie-speak, "rootless cosmopolitans" means American bankers; the code for "Jewish plot" is "oligarchs of east European origin". (See for yourself.) ‑ iridescent 16:58, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

This one!. Only friendly helpful gestures depicted! And at the time we translated the bottom text (in grey) as "Say NO to the oppression and Babbittry of the household work!" (meanwhile changed) ---Sluzzelin talk 16:00, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Sluzzelin. It warms the heart to see the unfortunate Marta being helped out from under a crushing mountain of samovars and Primus stoves! Bishonen | talk 16:12, 27 October 2015 (UTC).

A cup of tea for you!

With this ever dramatic world including WikiDrama, here's a cup of tea to alleviate your day! This e-tea's remains have been e-composted SwisterTwister talk 07:27, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

• Thank you, that looks like the delicate Keemun tea in a Meissen cup. Just what I needed. Bishonen | talk 13:12, 22 October 2015 (UTC).

User:Kajit paron

FYI - I have renominated User:Kajit paron for speedy deletion: like you I believe this was perfectly ok as a user page but IMO this subsequent version is not; it was previously deleted when it was the same or broadly the same as the latter. RichardOSmith (talk) 19:23, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, quite, Richard. I've reverted the additions to the userpage and in doing so removed the speedy again... and replied on the talkpage. I hope he gets it. Bishonen | talk 19:41, 22 October 2015 (UTC).

Many thanks! RichardOSmith (talk) 19:48, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

500/30 enacted for four caste articles and a talk page under DS

500/30 enacted. I'm leaving you a note since you reminded me to close it. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 00:09, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Ed, that's great. A much-needed tool for the overworked editors and admins in this area. Are you going to log it at WP:AC/DSL under India-Pakistan, page-level sanctions? Compare Zad's note under Gamergate. Bishonen | talk 08:27, 23 October 2015 (UTC).

Done. EdJohnston (talk) 13:45, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Userfy

I went to Sandstein to userfy an article. He won't, but he said go to another admin. [19] . Can you please userfy it for me. Thanks. CrazyAces489 (talk) 19:52, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm not looking up those Google searches, CrazyAces489. Please convince me that you really have significant new info — stuff that's not already there — and I'll put it in your userspace for a limited time — say a week.

I'm not going to encourage you to sock, though. What do you know about the IPs who supported keeping the article in the AfD? Do you have any theory about how they happened to find it? Bishonen | talk 20:10, 23 October 2015 (UTC).

I believe he passes WP:MANOTE. As per http://ejmas.com/jcs/jcsart_fields_0901.htm
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:q1i72pyM-RwJ:https://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/101466676/Judo-Sadaki-Nakabayashi-1965+&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
https://books.google.com/books?id=adkDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA45&lpg=PA45&dq=judo+japan+nakabayashi&source=bl&ots=jVPy3l_GB5&sig=sjfyZhvlpfEh2UoHLxN3rkn7BlM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAmoVChMIvoO4qtHVyAIVwnk-Ch3QCg4Q#v=onepage&q=judo%20japan%20nakabayashi&f=false
http://www.usja-judo.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/USJA-Story-V2-5-69.pdf
Also he was a 2 time college champ in Judo in Japan. This was before there was Olympic Judo and any judo world champion He is an author of a number of Judo books. He held the highest rank in Judo in the United States. 173 is mine. Anyone else, I don't know. I won't put any other article in userspace for a bit under a year. So a week won't mean a thing. I could simply start from scratch and use the links I currently have (until the year is done), but I wanted to see some of the information and sources in the old article. CrazyAces489 (talk) 21:48, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Well, the consensus at the AfD was that he doesn't. I notice you don't answer my question about the IPs, btw. If you won't answer, I've got to assume they were all you. :-( Anyway, I'd rather not put it into your space, especially since you say a shorter period is no good to you. But I don't mind e-mailing you the last version. You can get the information and sources from that. Most conveniently if you paste it into Wikipedia and use preview to look at it (without saving, please). OK, I'll do that.

..sigh. No, I guess I won't. I can't, since you don't have wikimail enabled. That really is not convenient. Oh well. If you'll give me a temporary e-mail address in some way, I'll send you the article. That's the best I can do. Bishonen | talk 22:58, 23 October 2015 (UTC).

I said 173 is me. The other I dont know about. I didn't log on. Please send me the latest version. I will put up an email. CrazyAces489 (talk) 03:22, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, CA, I missed where you said that about the 173 IP. I apologize. (But I don't much like to see that that IP removed the AfD template. You're an experienced editor, you know not to pull stuff like that.) I've mailed you the last version of the article. Good luck. Bishonen | talk 08:50, 24 October 2015 (UTC).

The AFD of an article i wrote drew me back in. When did an IP remove an AFD template? I will see what I can do with the new information. CrazyAces489 (talk) 22:08, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

(Do you ever thread your posts?) The 173 IP that you say you is you removed the AfD template on Sadaki Nakabayashi on September 24. Bishonen | talk 22:17, 24 October 2015 (UTC).

Prob an accident. IT's pointless to remove them. IT won't take away the AFD. CrazyAces489 (talk) 23:09, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Your edit to my page!

Please do not mock! it is important for other editors to know the education and experience of those to whom they speak and address. While some lesser educated Japanese people may experience difficulties when conversing with me in Japanese; this is largely due to a lack of concentration on their part. Indeed. the manager and staff at my new favourite restarant are all very complementary about my Japanese and have no problems taking my orders. My aunt and I will both be displaying our accomplishments for all to see. Not to do so, is false modesty. Giano (talk) 15:57, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Mock? Never — I celebrate you as a Renaissance man. But do I have to do it two metres down in the right-hand corner of your page? @RexxS: You see the problem, Dino? Bishonen | talk 16:30, 24 October 2015 (UTC).

Yes Chère, there were two opening box-tops, but only one closing box-bottom. Speaking of the Renaissance, did you know I was born 500 years to the day after Leonardo da Vinci? Spooky, huh. I like his Excellency's new reastaurant in Knightsbridge, but it has a sign on the door

No Dinosaurs Allowed

(Guide Dinosaurs Excepted)

and I haven't finished my training yet. --RexxS (talk) 17:20, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Oh that's all too confusing for words. More excitingly, I have just found this:

This editor is Grand Gom, the Highest Togneme of the Encyclopedia and is entitled to keep the floor plan of The Great Library of Alecyclopedias, including its ancient access keys.

, so I think we'll all have one each. Giano (talk) 20:13, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Ha. That really is handsome. Bishonen | talk 22:18, 24 October 2015 (UTC).

• No, no, no, no. I think that's quite horrid and possibly full of bookworms and suchlike, we had a lot of ghastly Egyptian type things in the library at Scrotum Towers brought back by my father in the 1920's (he was very close to dear Lord Carnavon) - nasty little cats and things. They upset my darling Pekes, so I burnt the lot of them for hygiene reasons. Oh yes, My Dear, I am back too - one can't play bridge during the winter, especially as all foreigners cheat. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 18:33, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

• Dear Lady Catherine, prepare to be shocked: I've been credibly informed that your nephew, whom you (deluded no doubt by affection and family pride) have so often referred to as "a saint", is actually a misogynist who ought to be "topic-banned" from anything to do with gender. A woman-hater! Please have a nursery word with him. And topic ban him from something or other, perhaps? Bishonen | talk 22:38, 25 October 2015 (UTC).

{{Gom}}

Not sure I approve of an image that just provides a link to the crappy main page. I'm sure we could do a lot better.

This editor is Bishonen Incarnate, the level to which all editors aspire, yet naught but one can reach.

Ah, that's better. --RexxS (talk) 20:56, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Aspire to be little 'shonen? Ha, unlikely. See better box below! (Little Rex perhaps line up all the boxes horizontally? Too much whitespace on page!) bishzilla _ROARR!! 22:30, 25 October 2015 (UTC).

This editor would like to be more like User:Bishzilla, but it is beyond their reach.

Closure box at WT:AE regarding submissions from IPs

Please see this closure where I boxed up the WT:AE thread for which you implemented the result. Yesterday an IP filed a new request at AE and couldn't recall whether IPs were allowed to post. Now it appears that you and a few other people settled the matter in September. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 22:02, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Yep, with some arb input, and after a well-attended ANI discussion. I note the IP is edit warring to reinsert it; I went to warn them, but I see you already did. Also, it looks kind of reasonable to remove that request no matter who filed it; it's hardly a proper AE request. Bishonen | talk 22:17, 25 October 2015 (UTC).

Hey, question.

Someone I reverted on Wikipedia contacted me on Reddit and I don't know what to do about it. Can you offer advice? Cheers. Kitsunelaine (talk) 23:00, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I got nothing, I don't do Reddit. Talkpage stalkers please assist? Bishonen | talk 23:09, 25 October 2015 (UTC).

@Kitsunelaine: Without looking at Reddit the usual rule would be don't feed the trolls. It's conceivable that a new and naive user might contact someone at another website in order to discuss some point; in that case, you might post at the user's talk page here to say that if they have a question, please ask at the article talk page [or your talk if it's specific to you]. However, it's much more likely that contact at Reddit is a first step in a campaign. I would not reply because each reply is another step into a trap. It's less clear what should be done if someone posts hostility at another website. If you don't mind linking your Wikipedia account to Reddit, you might post once at the Wikipedia user's talk and ask them if they wrote the comment [link here]. Don't offer an opinion about the comment, you merely want to determine the authenticity of the comment's author. The fundamental point is that replying to someone on a campaign is always counter-productive—your aim is to be as boring as possible. Johnuniq (talk) 01:09, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Cheers. I won't talk to him unless he brings it to my talk page, then. Kitsunelaine (talk) 01:29, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Clarification

Hello, would my editing Kalinga (India) and removing Mahabharata content be in violation of ban? Someone has mixed history with mythology, as there is already a Kalinga kingdom. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 13:45, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Please ask before you edit, Capankajsmilyo![20][21] Are you talking about removing the whole section "In Mahabharata"? That's 75% of the article! (Mind you, I suspect all those other subsections aren't actually meant to be part of "In Mahabharata", but the way the headers are currently formatted, that's how they're presented.) @SpacemanSpiff and Abecedare: Could you guys take a look, please? It doesn't look very religious to me, more like mythical history, so I think it would be OK as far as the ban is concerned. But please wait for input from Space or Abece first. Bishonen | talk 15:05, 27 October 2015 (UTC).

Anything related to Mahabharata, Ramayana etc would be covered under Indian religions as they are religious works. Whether this merits an exception from the ban itself, I'd suggest not at this point as this sort of thing is where the original problem started. If the content is bad, I'm sure there are other editors like Kautilya3 or Cpt.a.haddock who edit these areas and are bound to identify problems sooner or later. —SpacemanSpiff 15:11, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply Bishonen. The edits you mentioned were on Kalinga (India) which is a historical kingdom and I think is not covered in my ban (Please correct me if I am wrong). Further I asked, when clarity faded for Mahabharata. As regards SpacemanSpiff comment, well (no offence meant) they haven't been able to do so till now. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 15:23, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

The historical kingdom is not covered, but any edits related to Mahabharata are covered by your topic ban.—SpacemanSpiff 15:27, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

OK, with that information, I'm with SpacemanSpiff: you need to leave Mahabharata alone, in all articles, Capankajsmilyo. I do remember, indeed, that it was the uncertain, shimmering, vague borderland between myth and religion that started all the trouble where you're concerned. Bishonen | talk 15:50, 27 October 2015 (UTC).

@Capankajsmilyo: I'll take a look at the Kalinga articles.--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 19:32, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Captain Haddock, much appreciated. Amphitryon! Misérable ectoplasme! Nom d'une pipe![22] Bishonen | talk 19:43, 27 October 2015 (UTC).

Billions of bilious blue blistering barnacles! You really know how to get my goat, you bashi-bazouk! :P--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 20:04, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Need your opinion

Hi Bishonen, I need an outside opinion, I'm discussing whether the British Empire was a "Superpower", whereas the other editor disagrees, but c'mon, look at these: [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31]. They all call the British Empire a superpower> Not to mention, these dictionaries applied to the Empire's position during it's heyday [32], [33]. (N0n3up (talk) 16:43, 28 October 2015 (UTC))

Clarification

Hello, can I use tools like chrcklinks on pages like Jainism? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 10:37, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Don't do anything that will or could result in an edit. Please just leave the article alone. Bishonen | talk 10:46, 31 October 2015 (UTC).

OK thanks -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 17:13, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Warning

I have received another warning, please help me in getting clarification. In BLP articles, do we have to state the whole lineage upto great grandfather? Also are tools like checklinks act with POV? Please help. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 17:13, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Also do we have to discuss an edit on the talk page of article or user? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 17:14, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Bish, this is related to my warning to Capankajsmilyo. He was soapboxing at Narendra Modi and was warned for it (not by me) and then he went to the political opponent Rahul Gandhi to make pointy edits by removing contextual content and tag bombing with cn tags (because sentences and not phrases are cited!) and stuff like that. I left a warning that this sort of editing is likely to get the scope of the topic ban expanded or editing privileges revoked altogether.—SpacemanSpiff 17:28, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

• Capankajsmilyo, at the Teahouse, I noticed you were trying to gather some support against SpacemanSpiff's, in particular his latest warning on your page. That hasn't profited you any, as the uninvolved users replying there didn't see any "bullying" (as your section header called it). I don't either. Look, I've seen you do good work, for instance at Faridabad — your tagging and removal of tourist-y promotion there drew me in to do some further cleanup — why can't you stick with that kind of useful editing? Your questions above are highly pointy. You merely make yourself look foolish with a question like "In BLP articles, do we have to state the whole lineage up to great grandfather?" — as if you had been removing any old greatgrandfather — and not giving me any context, so I have to dig out that you were talking about removing Indira Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru from the Rahul Gandhi article! Please don't try to tell me you're not aware of the importance his descent from them has had for his political career, or of the relevance of that descent in his biography.[34] Also I don't altogether understand your question "are tools like checklinks act with POV?" — it's strangely put, and of course a tool isn't POV in itself — it's always about how it's used. As for "discussing" an edit — yes, that should be done on article talk — but a warning should be placed on yours, to make sure you see it. I'm frankly having trouble seeing any of your questions as asked in good faith; they're tendentious in themselves. In short, I agree completely with SpacemanSpiff that you're editing tendentiously and cruising for a wider topic ban or a block. You should listen to him. Bishonen | talk 20:53, 31 October 2015 (UTC).

May I request both of you to go a bit easy on Capankajsmilyo this time? Yes, he was soapboxing at Talk:Narendra Modi, but he wasn't the only one doing it. The edits he did to Rahul Gandhi may be pointy, but again they may not be, because he was doing similar edits at a whole lot of other pages. Pankaj, please take the warning seriously and be very cautious in editing topics that may be influenced by your political views.

Bishonen, can I ask you to keep an eye on Narendra Modi and its talk page? There is some new critical material coming and the fan club is not able to take it objectively. I think most other admins I know think they are involved with the topic and so can't intervene. But the discussions are likely to get quite inflamed. So, a watchful eye would be welcome. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 22:35, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, as Kautilya pointed out, Pankaj was not the only one doing soapboxing at Talk:Narendra Modi, I was also blamed for the same, though I usually don't do these things, still if there was any kind of soapboxing I will take care next time. As far as Pankaj is concerned, he is relatively new and as of now he is like any other typical new user who usually joins Wikipedia to push own political/social/religious views. I think he may need more time to settle because as per my experience same kind of users usually convert themselves to more sensible user once they spend some more time on Wikipedia. Kautilya said to "take it easy" on Pankaj because "he is not the only one", it is an argument like WP:Other stuff exists. There are many very experienced editors on India-Pakistan arena who are involved in some kind of POV pushing. Bishonen can keep many other India-Pakistan conflict related pages on their watchlist and should endorse discretionary sanctions for POV pushers (whatever their experience) on this arena (including me obviously). POV pushing by experienced editors usually goes unnoticed but new editors usually becomes victim of bite. Pankaj needs more improvement, he should keep his political views aside while editing Wikipedia if he want to become nice editor someday. --Human3015^TALK  23:52, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

"New" can only go so far Human, a lot of leeway has been provided here, but pointy editing on BLPs is not something that can be easily excused. Context matters, you may also have indulged in soapboxing (I'm not saying you did or didn't -- just a follow on from your statement) but that did not affect your editing behavior elsewhere. And to Kautilya's point, the deadlink thing (which is what was being done on multiple articles) by itself is fine and welcome -- it's all that surrounded it. In this case, the behavior has already been sanctioned in one area, if instead of being used as an opportunity to learn and modify that behavior the user indulges in similar behavior elsewhere then that is problematic. There are always going to be good-faith errors and some leeway provided for some sort of behavioral issues, but not again and again because it's new to a particular article or topic. —SpacemanSpiff 05:42, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

@Kautilya3: I should probably have linked to the recent Teahouse discussion in my post above, for the benefit of the watchers. Did you see it? Note the header Capankajsmilyo gave it, "Admin Bully", and the advice from an uninvolved admin, RockMagnetist. As for watching Narendra Modi, I do realize that uninvolved admins are thin on the ground there, since the knowledgeable and interested admins understandably tend to dive in and edit. This is something of a systemic problem on Wikipedia, with only the ignorant and less-than-interested admins left able to perform admin actions on a topic. ;-( This is my case here. I'm frankly not sure how much use I'd be on Narendra Modi, and also I have a lot on my plate. But feel free to alert me if you see major problems. Bishonen | talk 10:07, 1 November 2015 (UTC).

Hi Bishonen, I didn't see the teahouse pose earlier. Now that I have, it seems to be a good sign that Pankaj is going to the teahouse to get another opinion. Some people have to go through a painful learning process. What can I say? I will try to say a few words to him on his talk page. As for the Narendra Modi page, all that I would need is to remind people about policy periodically. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 14:10, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Now that you've seen Caps' posts at the Teahouse you think they're a good sign, really? In that case I have no more to say to you on the subject. Bishonen | talk 14:30, 1 November 2015 (UTC).

Well, I think Caps did feel "bullied," rightly or wrongly. I see his reaction as immaturity rather than malice. That is my reading of it anyway, having seen his work pretty much every day. How much of it can be tolerated is up to you folks to decide. - Kautilya3 (talk) 14:47, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Pizza - Mafia (Mandolino, Spaghetti, etc. :-))

Ciao page stalker :-) did you understand what happened on my talk page about mafia? I found myself in the middle of a dispute about pronunciations of Italian words on Wikipedia, but at the end I was overwhelmed by the Northern Cyprus issue... :-) I tried to answer to the ip on his talk page, but I disappeared. Who was right, who was wrong there? (Except myself, of course :-)). Cheers, Alex2006 (talk) 17:32, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

@Alessandro57: Who was right or wrong about putting in the pronunciation for those well-known loanwords, you mean? I don't know. I can't face researching it. But if there's consensus about it, as I believe you said somewhere, then the consensus is right. (Sorry to hear you disappeared — what happened?) Bishonen | talk 13:57, 1 November 2015 (UTC).

Thanks Bish! I meant, he, the ip, disappeared :-). About this issue I asked an opinion at the manual of style TP, but, as it is often the case, it was rather inconclusive... Alex2006 (talk) 04:42, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

I have to idea how to reply to this...

edit summary of "Revert last by Hchc2009: This is an edit controversy between self and Ealdgyth, at 1st revert stage only of 3RR process. Not standard WP procedure for 3rd party to jump in to kill process. Move to talk usually something decided on by editors concerned" - I wasn't aware that there was a 3RR "process" ... and that having a 3rd party step in was bad and grounds for a third revert... Ealdgyth - Talk 18:07, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Ealdgyth, I agree that's a very unusual edit summary. I think you really know what's wrong with it, and what reply to make — indeed, the user in question has been here since 2010, so I rather think they know it, too. But I've posted on their page. Bishonen | talk 13:51, 1 November 2015 (UTC).

I will freely admit to being a grumpy old lady ... so rather than posting what I want to post (which was a bit like Eric Corbett's more intemperate replies), I thought it best to have some outside input before spewing swear words all over. Thank you. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:57, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Gabby Merger

I have been involved in one of the articles in which Gabby Merger and Jeffro77 were at odds, and I was shocked to find that the reason Gabby stopped taking part in the talk page was because he/she was blocked. I didn't see any "personal attacks" against Jeffro by Gabby Merger, but I did see plenty of ad hominem comments by Jeffro against Gabby. I would ask that you please reconsider the decision to block Gabby Merger. GBRV (talk) 07:57, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

A longer block was an appropriate response to a long-term problem of personal attacks, accusations, edit-warring by Gabby Merger, coupled by her utter contempt for the concept of collaboration. This editor's last series of absurdly long, rambling rants shows she just doesn't understand what is wrong with her approach. And God, this Laurel and Hardy gif is irritating. BlackCab (TALK) 08:09, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm sure it's a coincidence that GBRV supports Gabby Merger's position in the editing dispute at The Exodus. In any case, GBRV is possibly unaware of not only Gabby Merger's history of POV edits but also Gabby Merger's long-winded badgering. For example, in the period 22-23 September alone, Gabby Merger made eighty edits to my User Talk page, all the while claiming that I was 'hounding' her. (For clarity: I made a total of 14 edits to my Talk page in the same period; nearly half of them were requesting that Gabby Merger cease commenting at my Talk page, and some were in response to other editors.)--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:18, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for protecting my user talk page

The IP vandal has moved on to User:DeCausa/Articles. Could you protect that too (although my "mother was a slave of my shoes" was entertaining). And also, User:DeCausa/sandbox and User:DeCausa/Shortcuts and templates. Thanks. DeCausa (talk) 11:24, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

The great and good User:WritKeeper created a script for semiprotecting everything with a particular prefix with one click, at a time when I was getting my userspace vandalized a lot. I just tried to semi yours, but the script didn't seem to work this time. :-( What happen, Writ? Anyway, I've done the three you requested by hand. No doubt they'll move on… but I have to go now, for my part. Bishonen | talk 11:55, 3 November 2015 (UTC).

Thanks. All my other pages were protected yesterday, so that should be it for now. Thanks again. DeCausa (talk) 12:48, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

User: Help me edit

Hi Bishonen, Thank you for reverting personal attacks on my user and user talk pages by this user. He personally attacked me because i reverted a vandalism edit by his IP address on Tanki Online. He then created an account just so he could attack my pages. I have also told another admin, Anna Frodesiak who helped me a couple of weeks ago, but since you restored my pages, i decided to tell you about it. Could you please protect both my pages or do i have to send a request for that?

Thanks Class455fan1 (talk) 20:42, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

No no, I'll protect them for a couple of weeks (semiprotect), no problem. Since that was how it was, I've blocked the account (on second thoughts; as you probably saw, I warned them at first) indefinitely, and the IP for a few days. Bishonen | talk 20:46, 3 November 2015 (UTC).

Thats what i meant, semi-protect them. Thank you very much for your help! Class455fan1 (talk) 20:53, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	For semi-protecting my pages from personal attacks and vandalism. Thank you very much! Class455fan1 (talk) 20:55, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Very pretty! Thanks! Bishonen | talk 20:57, 3 November 2015 (UTC).

Query of DS sanctions

Last time I had seen the request to topic ban Swamiblue and had read your comment.[35] Knowing that you had previously told that you can topic ban disruptive editors from the subject if they have been alerted with DS notice, I wanted to know if you are still willing to take review such requests for DS sanctions. D4iNa4 (talk) 16:08, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, D4iNa4, I don't think I can. I don't understand the area well enough. Actually I never said I could topic ban them, but that they could be topic banned. By an admin who understands the ins and outs of it — not me. In my WP:AN post that you link to, I was giving advice, and pointing out that I had handed out a DS notice. When users have had the notice, an uninvolved admin can topic ban them if they're being disruptive. I suggest you request review at WP:AE. Sorry to be so useless. Bishonen | talk 17:21, 5 November 2015 (UTC).

Margaret Sanger

Slow motion edit war with anti-birth control activists, trying to plant argument that birth control is racist. Centers on minimizing importance of web du bois. Page needs semi-protection or full. Thanks for watching. MarkBernstein (talk) 03:10, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi for two weeks. I see the account that removed the same content has been alerted to discretionary sanctions. Bishonen | talk 05:14, 6 November 2015 (UTC).

Danish?

Bish, was your assertion that you could understand Shouroff because you understand Danish a joke? I know many Danes who do not understand Danish. OP Curious. μηδείς (talk) 04:45, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Gosh, I must have been unclear; I was trying to say that I could not understand Shourov, and that I understood him even worse because I can read his Danish sources. (He used the sources in an incomprehensible way.) That wasn't a joke — a bit of hyperbole, maybe — I probably don't actually understand him worse than the people who can't read Danish; just, it doesn't help any. So you know Danes who do not understand Danish? Well, I have in fact heard it's increasingly the case that Danes themselves don't understand their own spoken language, which is getting more and more blurred. I'm not Danish, and I sure as hell don't understand what they say, but I can read the language. I come from one of those other little countries up north. Bishonen | talk 05:16, 6 November 2015 (UTC).

Er dette en dobbelt, tredobbelt eller endnu mere kompliceret negation? I don't understand Danish too, but I'm Dutch. Some people don't understand Dutch either. But there are some nice Dutch people who do understand Dutch Danish. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:57, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Joshua, did you know Scandinavian and Dutch people share a unique bond, or so I'm told? Apparently we're the only people in the world who like salty liquorice — salmiak. (I love it passionately.) I read somewhere on the internet a theory by an American, who had been so appalled when he tasted the stuff that he decided we must be eating it out of masochism, based on our puritan heritage. His idea was that we're ashamed of enjoying sweets, so we ruin the nice liquorice with salt (ammonium chloride), and only then will our conscience allow us to eat it. Clever fellow. Bishonen | talk 12:15, 6 November 2015 (UTC).

Salmiak? Ja, lekker! Americans play American football, instead of soccer, and they have Santa Claus, instead of Sinterklaas; how can we take them seriously in matters like this? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:59, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

American football is sort of like salt water taffy, the foot is as key to it as salt is to the taffy. —SpacemanSpiff 14:26, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Actually I've just thought of a similar theory of my own to explain the existence of white chocolate: people who're ashamed of enjoying chocolate ruin it by removing the cocoa. The resulting dreary concoction, consisting only of sugar and fat, seems to be very popular in the U.S. It keeps popping up in their cake and cookie recipes. If it wasn't for the internet, we wouldn't know about these strange things. Bishonen | talk 15:36, 6 November 2015 (UTC).

Gah! Our "white chocolate" has as much vanilla in it as your salty liquorice has ammonium chloride. μηδείς (talk) 17:07, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

«I come from one of those other little countries up north.» Did they finally secede then? --Xover (talk) 17:33, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Not yet. Norway has seceded from Sweden, though! In 1905, which is quite recently, as these things go. See Unionsoppløsningen; Unionsoppløysinga; Unionsupplösningen — I think those various words for it sort of hint that the languages are mutually intelligible, right? Bishonen | talk 18:02, 6 November 2015 (UTC).

Norway? No longer part of Sweden? Of all the nerve! Unleash Bishzilla and those other Jurassic creatures of War to put an immediate end to this comeuppance and arrogant action by those lesser Norwegians! They will either resubmit to their natural subservience or perish in a rain of fire!--MONGO 18:21, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict)A language is a dialect with an own army and navy. I.e. it's purely political. The difference between Swedish, Norwegian and Danish is less than the difference between various dialects of German, as anyone who has had the chance to compare southern highland German (for example Bavarian) and northern lowland German knows. Thomas.W ^talk 18:28, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

It's Icelandic, but understandable for a Dutchman. Just like "horse", either Englishor Danish. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:10, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Well, sure, except they're kinda long and multisyllabic, and have funny characters in them, so they might as well be Urgic for all most folks on here are concerned. No, if you want to demonstrate mutual intelligibility you want to go with something short and that most people here can relate to. Like Øl, Øl, and Öl. I wonder though, what can be read into the fact—in anthropological terms, obviously—that of the Scandinavian Wikipedias, only nowiki and fiwiki have an entry for that one (apparently) entirely unforgivable word that is the proximate cause of the latest bout of drama on here, and on fiwiki that article is even featured content (GA-equivalent I believe). I feel certain something quite profound about folkesjela may be understood by careful study of this phenomenon. --Xover (talk) 19:02, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Ask Hafspajen|Hafspajen about Scandinavian Wiki's... Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:11, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

User:Karabakh Quebequization

I notice that you deleted the user page and blocked the above user. Apparently, it was just the tip of the iceberg, as I've found a whole lot of similar accounts/pages, where "Abbas Nurrollahi Diba" -- as he or she signs him/herself -- creates a new account (seemingly as a title) and posts yet another rambling bit of discourse. I think I've found a couple of dozen, going back a year. --Calton | Talk 09:26, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

The aforementioned user pages I have come across, so far, in no particular order:

• Non Scientific Merit Politics (talk · contribs)
• Mindless Political Neuroethics (talk · contribs)
• Rabbi Abraham Herhsberg (talk · contribs)
• Bioethics Fritz Jahr (talk · contribs)
• Bioheredity (talk · contribs)
• Neuropseudology (talk · contribs)
• Biochemistry in Global Politics (talk · contribs)
• Carteronomics (talk · contribs)
• Political Moralnomics/sandbox (talk · contribs)
• Geriatric Economics (talk · contribs)
• Dignity Neurochemistry (talk · contribs)
• World Diseases Economics (talk · contribs)
• Carter Jimicracy (talk · contribs)
• Karbakh Neuropolitics (talk · contribs)
• Finpolitical Neurodiplomacy (talk · contribs)
• Tetonia Diplomacy (talk · contribs)
• EDIDS (talk · contribs)
• Biohaustus (talk · contribs)
• Abourezk Kennedy Diplomacy (talk · contribs)
• Glucopexiology (talk · contribs)
• Dyscognitive Diabetes (talk · contribs)
• Global Aylan (talk · contribs)
• Spinal Neuronomics (talk · contribs)

--Calton | Talk 10:07, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Wow. Great work, Calton. I see User:JohnCD has recently written advice on a few of the talkpages, such as User talk:Neuropseudology and User talk:Rabbi Abraham Herhsberg, explaining about userpages and articles, and he has also moved the essays to draftspace. I've just pointed John to your list here. Maybe WP:AN is the place for this, to try to do something for the future. And about the others probably left out there that you haven't come across... Bishonen | talk 11:57, 6 November 2015 (UTC).

I feel loved

Whenever I see such lovely comments about me like this one I feel much endeared. Fun times!--MONGO 21:52, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, that turned up on my watchlist, I enjoyed it, too. Bishonen | talk 21:55, 7 November 2015 (UTC).

Note the timestamps: the lovely comment at 21:37 UTC, the block at 21:38. Under ideal circumstances my banhammer is pretty fast these days (thank Twinkle). Bishonen | talk 21:59, 7 November 2015 (UTC).

Yes...the speed and violence of that block made me think it was done by Bishzilla...it was thunderous!--MONGO 22:02, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

ha ha ha, yes, I get a steady stream of love letters from that guy now that he's out of jail. How to begin to describe the subtlety and range of delicate feeling expressed. How do I love thee? let me count the sockpuppets ... Antandrus (talk) 22:02, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Hehe. Do they all begin with "Antbrain"? @MONGO: Oh, right, I should tip off Bishzilla about Twinkle. You see how slow she was here. If she'd had Twinkle, the little arb would surely have been reduced to a crisp before I could intervene. Bishonen | talk 22:08, 7 November 2015 (UTC).

I think giving Bishzilla block ability as your avatar makes more sense than ever giving MONGO block capabilities...just my thinking.--MONGO 22:24, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Hey hey!

I have already seen the new version of Template:Uw-spamublock used by seven different administrators. (There may be more, for all I know.) None of them has objected to the change. If I had known it would be so completely uncontroversial, I would have done it years ago. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:43, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah. I suppose, with Twinkle, people may tend to use existing templates without question, as if they were the stone tablets brought down from Mount Sinai. I know I did, when I started looking at the new user creation log not long ago and became hooked on blocking promotional usernames. (Only if they've posted something objectionable — if it's just the name, a block seems unnecessarily blunt, IMO.) But after a while I became worried about the templates. Thanks for composing this one — now we can all use your version! Bishonen | talk 18:38, 9 November 2015 (UTC).

PS: and now I have also used it. It felt good. Bishonen | talk 18:49, 9 November 2015 (UTC).

As Someone I Trust

Hi! Hope you are doing well. An editor seems to really be impressing things upon my on my talk page re paid editing disclosures. I feel as though I am complying with ToU and the directions you have given me. When you have time, would you please give me your take on what they are asking me to do. Thank you so much! Penelope1114 (talk) 19:28, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Excuse dropping in here, there's discussion of the policy and compliance at Wikipedia_talk:Paid-contribution_disclosure#Disclosure contradiction (several sections). Widefox; talk 00:01, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Widefox, I wasn't aware of that. There do seem to be some contradictions in and between the policies and guidelines, and I hope the discussion is ironing them out; I'll try to get my head around it all as it affects Penelope. It may take a day or two, Penelope1114, sorry. In the meantime, please feel free to join that discussion. You don't, IMO, have any reason to mistrust the people there, even if they can occasionally sound impatient. Bishonen | talk 07:45, 10 November 2015 (UTC).

I must add, that the integrity of my communication with Penelope1114 has been compromised, as detailed in the full-circle journey at Talk:PAID. Best I withdraw from discussion due to patience vs WP:PAYTALK. Widefox; talk 09:30, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Bishonen, as always. The general nonacceptance I receive from the majority of editors due to my sometime paid research and suggestions make me hesitant to join a discussion about it. Thus far, the only editor who has acted on any of the suggestions I have made is BMK (a big thanks to him). Numerous editors are happy to advise/drill me on how they think I should disclose my paid suggestions. It feels like a bit of a witch hunt when I comply, even disclosing paid editing from before June 2014, am not a PR person, and yet have proposed edits to improve articles just sitting there with no discussion beginning. I really appreciate the time you are giving to me. Best Penelope1114 (talk) 16:23, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Penelope1114 has been generally, but far from fully or without prompting, responsive to requests for disclosure. The matter that caught my attention was that she removed disclosures from her talk page as being 'no longer current'. I see she has fixed that now. A huge problem that I see looking at her talk page disclosures is she has added "Penelope1114 is an independent Wikipedia editor." to {{Connected contributor (paid)}} on Talk:Benjamin Genocchio and Talk:Melissa Chiu. An editor can not by by the definition of COI be independent and paid, Widefox has brought this up on her talk page.

Looking at the other articles she has disclosed; Stephen Messer (entrepreneur), Heidi Messer and Tad Martin (entrepreneur), I see she has not disclosed at all on the talk page as is required. In addition she has not disclosed anywhere the full "employer, client, affiliation" as required both bu WP:PAID and the ToU. This requirement has been explained to her many times. Proper disclosure is very easy {{paid}} and {{Connected contributor (paid)}} exist for a reason, they have all the fields needed for talk page and user page disclosures all that must be done is fill them out properly and the matter is closed.

@Penelope1114: your input would be valued in the discussion over at WP:PAID in particular it would be nice to get a paid editor's view on why not simply use the proper templates and disclose on your user and talk page. Why the resistance? I know paid editors can be treated poorly but paid editing is a huge problem here and disclosure is required and wiki-lawyering the minimum disclosure sets off alarm bells. Jbh^Talk 16:47, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

I too brought it up on her talk page, Jbhunley. My comments there received no reply or acknowledgement from Penelope1114. She hasn't removed that dishonest (yes, it's dishonest to claim to be "independent" when in fact you are editing for pay) claim from her paid editing declarations, nor has she added such declarations to the other pages she's created. Our terms of use require disclosure; but what's the remedy when the editor refuses to comply? As Widefox correctly points out, this is just a time sink for everyone; but only one person here is getting paid for her time. Bishonen, I can't imagine you want this to be thrashed out here – do you want to re-open the COIN discussion, for example, instead? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:44, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Maybe, but since Penelope1114 came here because she trusts me, I'll take a shot (at last) at outlining my opinion here, and if that isn't effective, I suppose the COIN discussion had better be reopened. Penelope, quite frankly, you are being treated with suspicion because people get the impression you will only comply with the minimal absolute rules of the WMF's Terms of Use. You should comply with best practice (an important concept on this site): COI editors should follow Wikipedia policies and best practices scrupulously. Best Wikipedia practice is outlined in the policies and guidelines Widefox put on your talkpage. To summarize them: please disclose your affiliations, including the specific client involved for each article on a) your userpage (not your user talkpage) and b) on the talkpages of all the articles affected. WMF may theoretically be satisfied with either a or b, but it's surely clear by now that Wikipedia is not. And what do you have against it? How is it onerous?

Why do you call yourself "an independent editor"? Are you referring to the editing you do without being paid for it (if I understand you, that's mostly copyediting)? It does run the risk of being misleading. A statement about you being an "independent editor" should absolutely not appear on the talkpages of articles you are or have been paid to edit, such as Benjamin Genocchio. I don't even understand what it means there, because you're not independent in relation to those articles. Please remove it from those talkpages.

These things seem obvious to me, but your complaint that you make suggestions on talkpages and nobody responds is quite different; it's a problem that shouldn't be ignored. WP:COI states that it's best practice to only suggest edits on talk, but it doesn't say what you should do if the suggestions aren't answered. For instance, I see you suggested an update on Talk:Melissa Chiu on November 7, and your suggestion is still the last post on that talkpage. :-( In an ideal world, all articles would be well-watched, but the actual fact is that some are obscure, and nobody watches them, or nobody can spare the time and energy to respond. (People mostly edit Wikipedia as an unpaid hobby, so that happens quite a lot.) Now this is my opinion: provided you comply scrupulously with a) and b) above, and if nobody has responded to a talkpage suggestion within say 48 hours, then I think you should go ahead and make the edit. Indicate your COI status in a simple way in the edit summary, for instance with "See COI disclosure on talkpage". What do you say, guys? Pinging @Justlettersandnumbers, Jbhunley, and Widefox: is this reasonable? Bishonen | talk 19:53, 10 November 2015 (UTC).

I disagree with the idea she should go ahead and make the edit after 'some time', in fact if she does so she will very rapidly end up back at COIN. It can be easily gamed and most articles for hire will have very few, if any, page watchers. What she should do and what COI editors are told to do, is fill out an {{edit request}}. The list of pages with edit requests is displayed at WP:COIN. If it is time critical she can post a message at COIN about the request.

While she may want to see action in a matter of days, she is the one getting paid not the ones assessing her requests. She should expect response times on the order of a week or so. If there is some critical matter @Penelope1114: is welcome to {{ping}} me {{ping|Jbhunley}} from the article talk page. My email notifications are on and, if I am able to, I will take a look at her {{edit request}}. Jbh^Talk 20:24, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

I have filled out the paid coi template at Talk:Melissa Chiu properly as an example[36]. Note employer = 'who is paying you' and client = 'on whose behalf you are making edits'. If they are the same place the same name in both fields. Also, use first and last names. Do not add anything like 'to edit the article to be factually accurate' or 'independent editor'. That is all public-relations dross and meaningless. You already must edit the article in a factually accurate NPOV way; You already must follow Wikipedia's rules; and you are not independent. So saying those things is either redundant or false. In neither case should they be in a disclosure.

Please now go and place proper disclosures on the article talk pages. You also should, in my rather firm opinion, also simply fill out a {{paid}} on your User: page in the same way for each article. Jbh^Talk 21:00, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

• PS I took a quick look at Talk:Melissa Chiu there is something going on between that article and Benjamin Genocchio which she has also been hired to work on. For some reason someone thought is appropriate to edit the article to include " In September 2015, The Washington Post reported that Genocchio had edited the content of this article to remove controversial material regarding her activities at the Hirshhorn and to add a laudatory statement."Heil, E. Reliable Source: Hirshhorn museum director’s husband scrubs her Wikipedia entry of controversy. washington Post, September 18, 2015.[37] so there is more than meets the eye going on here. Jbh^Talk 20:33, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Just a minor point, in agreement with User:Jbhunley: there's a guide for "likely waits"..."no guarantee of response" for editors in response to a COI edit request at Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide#Steps for engagement which details 1 week. Widefox; talk 21:16, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

I'll try to answer all your questions.

1. I refer to myself as an independent Wikipedia editor because I am self employed and have offered to help folks who wanted to see their articles improved but did not want to do so because of COI and/or did not know how to navigate Wikipedia. I am not in this as a PR person. I edit independently from those who hire me, notifying them the entire time that all edits or now, proposed edits will be made adhering to the guidelines that run Wikipedia. That meaning, I will do my best to adhere to strictly factual, highly referenced, NPOV edits, etc. Sometimes I fail and I appreciate especially how Bishonen and Jlan have pointed out where I can do better.

2. I thought I was complying by doing one of the following options as per ToU the options being, a statement on the user page, a statement on the talk page accompanying any paid contributions, or a statement in the edit summary accompanying any paid contributions. I disclosed my COI on the talk pages for Benjamin Genocchio and Melissa Chiu. The pages I wrote a while back Tad Martin (entrepreneur), Heidi Messer and Stephen Messer (entrepreneur) were written and disclosed on my talk page, as I now understand needs to be the main user page(!), from the beginning. Widefox, I was simply updating the format of my talk page and I think it looks much better. I am also happy to comply with best practices Bishonen, I only wanted your and others feedback on Widefox's check list.

3. I am happy to discuss the situation with Benjamin Genocchio and Melissa Chiu. They hired me to help improve their pages in a proper way. They themselves do not want to have anything to do with Wikipedia as per COI. They just hope to have factual information represented in their BLP articles instead of some nonfactual, damaging, potentially libelous sentences. The Reliable Sources Washington Post article written by gossip columnist Emily Heil is out there and is referenced currently on Melissa Chiu. A good example of why their articles need improvement can be seen in the Hirshhorn Museum section for Melissa Chiu. The section contains mostly negative references and does not provide much information about Chiu's position, the direction she is taking the museum, major curations, etc. That section does not offer a balanced POV.

Thanks for everyone's input. I appreciate it. Penelope1114 (talk) 22:03, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) (with above) @Bish - It is because of edits like [38] which show the least possible compliance that people are continually posting on Penelope1114's talk page. She added the last name and left the disclosure saying "Penelope1114 (talk · contribs) has been paid by Benjamin Genocchio to help make this article factually accurate while adhering to the guidelines for editing Wikipedia. Penelope1114 is an independent Wikipedia editor.". This stretches my AGF to the breaking point and I think it is past time she see that there is some teeth in our paid-coi policy and gets a bit of a time-out. Jbh^Talk 22:07, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Bishonen makes a fair point about the possible wait time before requested edits are looked at (Widefox, I suspect that in practice it may often be a good deal more than a week). Though Category:Requested edits is not as over-loaded as I had expected to find it, requests (like everything else that needs doing round here) are handled by volunteers. They get handled when someone gets round to it; and anyway, what's the hurry?

My guess is that Bishonen's 48-hour wait idea would be unlikely to gain much support if it were proposed as a modification to our COI guidelines. It's one thing to say "you are strongly discouraged from editing articles where you have a COI", and quite another to say "you are strongly discouraged from editing articles where you have a COI – unless you wait a little while first". And unless the guidelines were radically changed, I believe I would in most cases revert such edits on sight. COI editors are discouraged from directly editing articles; but how? In practice there's only one way to discourage those edits, and that is to revert them.

Penelope1114 is a particular problem: her persistent failure to respond to advice is a massive waste of everyone's time; more seriously, the material she proposes for addition is poorly written and dubiously sourced (at Benjamin Genocchio I had to remove a BLP violation, unsourced material, and a Wikipedia mirror used as a ref, all added – entirely in good faith – at her request). Any request she makes should be examined with the greatest care – another timesink! I don't know when a paid editor crosses the line into being considered WP:DISRUPTIVE, but I note that Jbhunley seems to think it's been crossed here, and I'm inclined to agree. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:00, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Justlettersandnumbers, I have to agree she takes too much volunteer time. Penelope1114, I understand your explanation of why you call yourself "independent". But you should also understand that in the context of Wikipedia it's misleading: self-employed or not, you're still dependent on the people who pay you. (There's nothing to stop you from explaining about being self-employed on your userpage, but it should be a separate and really explanatory section.) You're not independent here. Please remove all statements where you call yourself "an independent editor". They're at best ambiguous and mysterious, and have no business at all on article talkpages. But I've already told you that. I'm flattered that you trust me, but I was hoping it would result in you taking my advice. I'm an unpaid volunteer too, and repeating this stuff is not the most fun I can have on Wikipedia. I now think I should give you the full version of the sentence from WP:COI I quoted above: COI editors should follow Wikipedia policies and best practices scrupulously, and may be blocked if they cause disruption.. My italics. (BTW I'm going to bed now, it's night in my timezone. This had probably better be continued at WP:COIN, in fact. Bishonen | talk 23:32, 10 November 2015 (UTC).

Diwali greetings

		Happy Diwali!!!
		Sky full of fireworks, Mouth full of sweets, Home full of lamps, And festival full of sweet memories... Wishing You a Very Happy and Prosperous Diwali. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 06:36, 11 November 2015 (UTC) Send Diwali wishings by adding {{subst:Happy Diwali}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

Thank you, Pankaj, that's very nice. Especially the mouth full of sweets! Bishonen | talk 16:10, 11 November 2015 (UTC).

bish for arbcom?

it's that time of the year again! I say we elect Darwinbish to arbcom. bishzilla too busy pocketing users. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 02:48, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I think I've got a better idea: let's have 'zilla keep the entire little committee in her pocket, and keep 'em in order. Perhaps consider adding special pocket annexe, or lean-to, with round table, for their cute deliberations. Without catflap — don't want 'em scarpering and running around the project! And very nice to see you on my page again Aunva, you've been quite a stranger. Bishonen | talk 03:16, 12 November 2015 (UTC).

"Without Catflap?" I'm shocked at your blatant attempt to unduly influence a pending case! Newyorkbrad (talk) 04:20, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

All right, without rope ladder, then. Bishonen | talk 08:26, 12 November 2015 (UTC).

[DB goes off to register User:Rope ladder. High time she had her own sock!] darwinbish ^BITE ☠ 08:29, 12 November 2015 (UTC).

yeah, I kinda burned out, plus RL stuff, job, school, and herding cats on an Internet forum. I still hop on from time to time, make a few edirts, beat backa few vandals. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 04:40, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

You should try herding evil fish some time! darwinbish ^BITE ☠ 08:29, 12 November 2015 (UTC).

that's kinda like working retail. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 00:51, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Welcome in Victorian parlor, little clan! (As a delicate attention towards the little Confederate guerilla, Bishzilla uses American spelling today.)

Current and some past members of the arbitration committee looking rather dour and defensive about the prospect of Bishzilla joining their ranks. Image taken a few days ago in front of the Wikipedia Arbitration Courthouse in Pigs Knuckle, Alabama.--MONGO 19:03, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

[Pleased, Bishzilla sticks the cute little Hatfield clan in her pocket.] Sit in Victorian parlor, little Confederate guerilla! Hang out with Bigfoot, have some tea! [Bishzilla considers also inviting hoppity-hopsy arbcom version from Giano's page, but can't go there today — all girls banned! Giano may fear being tempted by Bishzilla sexiness!] bishzilla _ROARR!! 19:32, 13 November 2015 (UTC).

Yep, sorry Sweatheart, you too are banned from my talk page. Apparently, I am a danger to womankind - I suppose it's a certain Latin charm and all those hours spent in the gym. Whatever, it seems it's entirely my fault that no women edit wikipedia (apart from you, of course, and about 4 million others). Therefore, I'm becoming a virtual cyber celibate, and then Wikipedia will suddenly blossom into a green garden of butterflies and pretty maidens editing. Oh vomit! It's just all too silly for words. Giano (talk) 19:46, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Laid-back

Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 17:47, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Jakeleereed

Jakeleereed (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

... is back. 208.54.4.204 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) General Ization ^Talk 02:44, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! What a stubborn character, and, with the earlier 208.54.4.246, what a nice blockable tiny range. I've blocked 208.54.4.192/24, which is slightly more than covers the two IPs we have so far, for a month; I really doubt anything useful is likely to come from it. Please let me know if it turns out more is needed. Bishonen | talk 10:49, 13 November 2015 (UTC).

Help

I am trying to improve Haryana and have added some info and references. Can you please refer me to someone who can help in peer review of the article. Thanks -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 04:41, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't know. You probably know more about Indian editors than I do. Just pick somebody or -bodies with a good reputation. Bishonen | talk 10:53, 13 November 2015 (UTC).

An unintended grin

Hi Bish. I know you were just performing a normal admin duty but the thought that the mafia needs protection is a delightful irony. It gave me a chuckle and that is a good way to head into the weekend. I hope that yours is enjoyable. MarnetteD|Talk 18:36, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

It was simply an offer they couldn't refuse. Bishonen | talk 18:46, 13 November 2015 (UTC).

That is excellent - and thus the chuckles increase. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 20:23, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbComm?

You know you want to. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 16:34, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

+1 Giano (talk) 16:38, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, you are needed. —SpacemanSpiff 16:43, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes. Drmies (talk) 21:19, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

I would not wish it on you, but if it was of your own choosing, then I would surely support it. (BTW - I like your heart better than the ribbon I chose. Very nice, but very sad.) Best always. (and my very best regards to the honorable Giano) — Ched :  ?  17:06, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

A lark soaring like my heart at the thought I don't have to be on arbcom! Poor Drmies! Bishonen | talk 20:31, 14 November 2015 (UTC).

Thank you Ched. Apparently they are looking to increase the number of womenfolk on the Arbcom, so you may as well have a go. They certainly need someone with some common sense and experience of writing here. Looking at some of the candidates so far, one's heart does not soar like a lark, but festers like a sore. Giano (talk) 18:11, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

• (Where's your ribbon, Ched?) ArbCom no, I'm not motivated. The disadvantages seem to outweigh the perks by a mile. But it's about time people started to ask, I must say! I get huffy if nobody asks! Also, the people in this thread would all be an adornment to the committee, but especially Anthony and Giano, because I do feel the committee needs a non-admin or two. Mind you, if you run and get elected, I expect you'd find yourselves forcibly adminned, because it's just impractical for an arb to not be able to see deleted pages and such. But that's something else — you could remain non-admins at heart. Come on, self-nom page is thataway! [Looking…] Hey, check it out, suddenly Drmies is on there, how cool is that! Drmies, be careful, you'll sweep the board, you know! Then what're you gonna do! Bishonen | talk 20:18, 14 November 2015 (UTC).

Have you seen the discussion at wP:BN#Admin bit for non-admin arbitrators and Jimbo's page? I don't see why anyone elected to the committee who isn't an Admin shouldn't be given the tools. Doug Weller (talk) 21:49, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

My days of hoping to be an Arb are long gone. Even if there were enough people to vote for me, I wouldn't trust the Foundation with my initials, lat alone my name and address. Have you seen the type of people they employ? Giano (talk) 20:25, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

[39] is my ribbon, but I'll likely replace that with yours. Giano - you don't have to even supply an address, or even a "real" name: See: here. I went through that "Phabricator" thing, and the most it did was require a valid email address. — Ched :  ?  20:29, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Oh, right. I missed your ribbon because it's not French. It's a little unfortunate that my heart (not the lark, but the French heart up top) comes from the Eurovision Song Contest. But I still rather like it. Bishonen | talk 20:36, 14 November 2015 (UTC).

No, seriously, I looked at it a few years ago - they practically want a scan of one's passport. Giano (talk) 20:32, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

I think I sent a copy of my driver's license (well, I borrowed a DL from a student who needed to pass a class) a couple of years ago, when I was gonna be a Trustee and get an expense account. So far no one has asked me for anything so I assume I'm still good. Giano, I think non-admins have to sent copies of two IDs, plus a stool sample of course. Drmies (talk) 21:21, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Ah, that explains why so many people have been posting stool samples to Arbcom members this year. Oddly, they usually forgot to include the ID's... -- Euryalus (talk) 23:02, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

You should not ban people for providing neutral, factual recitations of the salient points of the topic. Therefore, I request you unban me.

Bishonen, the lede paragraph which has been reverted to is entirely self-interested opinion, with not a single source cited. And it completely ignores the explicit factual findings of multiple courts- who are the legitimate triers of fact. Neither it is consensus, since I and others disagree with it, and have said so on the talk page.

There's no question here that Wikipedia is simply unaware of what the neutral and objective facts of this case are. I have provided them. With citations attached to my edit, and, additionally on the talk page, direct verbatim quotations. Rather, you are knowingly allowing a de facto public relations proxy with an ax to grind to suppress the findings of fact made by the South African courts. This is not to Wikipedia's credit. You should revert the fair, neutral, and salient edit which I provided, or, alternatively, you should delete the article entirely if you're unable to provide a factual/neutral article. But to allow an article titled "Murder of Anni Dewani" to function as a platform for a public relations manifesto is disgraceful.Lane99 (talk) 16:50, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

You have not been banned for misstating facts per se, but for warring to present them in the lede in an unbalanced way (in September[40][41] and again today[42]) that implies Shrien Dewani's guilt. Organizing facts in a certain manner to make a certain implication is not neutral, let alone "fair" or "salient" (well, I'm not sure about the "salient" part, because I'm unsure what you mean by the word). There has never been any question, in a court or out of it, of anybody else hiring the assassins, as you well know. See Talk:Murder of Anni Dewani. Your slow edit war to insert a lede that states it was a murder for hire, and thereby hints Shrien Dewani is guilty, after he has been found innocent in a court of law, is a BLP violation that could get the Wikimedia Foundation in hot water legally. Naturally the accusations about murder for hire should be mentioned in the body of the article, but placing them in the manner you have done in the lede gives them undue weight. In the two months since you first inserted your preferred lede (twice) you haven't made any progress that I can see towards getting consensus for it; and yet you inserted it again today, word for word, with the same edit summary. Therefore, I decline your request for an unban. Since this is an arbitration enforcement ban per this ArbCom decision, I suggest you appeal it at WP:AE. You can also appeal at WP:AN or WP:ARCA, if you prefer. Bishonen | talk 18:23, 14 November 2015 (UTC).

Bishonen, my edit of the lede paragraph is not unbalanced. It is a neutral summary of the salient facts of the topic. By "salient" I mean facts which are fundamental to an accurate understanding of the "Murder of Anni Dewani". It may be a fact that the victim's dress was fashioned from linen and silk. However that is not a salient fact. It is a trivial one and there is no justification for including it. The fact (and it is indeed a proven fact, as found by MULTIPLE courts, and not merely an "accusation") that Anni Hindocha was killed by a hired assassin carrying out a planned hit IS salient. And there is no justification for excluding this fact from an article which has any pretense to accuracy and balance. For clearly this goes directly to the "Five W's" (which, as Wikipedia will tell you, are the basic questions that MUST be answered for any story to be complete).

So it is the currently published article which is unbalanced and unduly weighted. As it handwaves away most of the relevant and salient findings of fact about the article's topic and resorts instead to opinion-based editorializing and rhetoric. Now, I'm sure no one would quibble were such to be contained in a publicity agent's spin-doctored press release. Everyone knows that's what press releases do. However that is not, as I understand it, what Wikipedia articles are supposed to do.

If Wikipedia is so worried that truthfully reporting the salient facts of a topic will get it sued, at worst you should just delete the article entirely rather than allow it to not only suppress those facts but, at the same, disseminate biased, self-serving opinions that are belied by the facts you are suppressing. It would be better if you told the truth in the article. If you're not willing to tell the truth, it would be better for Wikipedia to say nothing rather than lie by omission. Anni Hindocha and her family have suffered enough. You should not permit them to be further victimized by offering up Wikipedia as a platform for polemics and propaganda that ignore the South African courts findings of fact about the "Murder of Anni Dewani".Lane99 (talk) 09:24, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

My answer stands. You've done a good deal of ignoring yourself, such as my point about balance, due weight, and implication. It's been made to you several times before, on the article talkpage, and you simply don't seem willing to engage with it. For more eyes, please take your appeal to one of the boards I have indicated. There's little point in persisting here on my page. Bishonen | talk 10:03, 16 November 2015 (UTC).

Bishonen, I addressed balance and due weight. I ignored "implication" because it's a absurd argument for a number of reasons. For brevity, I'll only mention one: something like "acquitted of the charges, even though he probably did it" would be implying guilt. OTOH, stating, as I did, someone was acquitted of charges due to insufficient evidence does NOT imply they were guilty of those charges. It's simply fairly reporting the facts. For that essentially precisely mirrors the wording the judge used in her judgment. Incidentally, many news outlets reported the decision in a manner similar to my offering.

The current article on the "Murder of Anni Dewani" is exploiting Anni Dewani's name, and I find that unconscionable. Hopefully, I can get it corrected on one of the boards you introduced me to. If not, I'll be content that there is a record that the obvious biases in the article had been brought to Wikipedia's attention. One final question, and then I'll move on: assume- strictly hypothetically- that it were true that: a) multiple courts have explicitly found it is a fact that Anni Dewani's killing was a murder for hire which was staged to appear as a random carjacking in order to conceal the fact it was contract killing, b) no court has ever ruled or found as fact that it was NOT a contract killing. If (a) and (b), hypothetically, were true, are you willing to assert that the current "Murder of Anni Dewani" article is fair and balanced and written from an unbiased, neutral point of view?Lane99 (talk) 08:54, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Lane99 How about including other salient facts in your little hypothetical? (c) The two key witnesses who told the "murder for hire" story in the S V Mngeni trial, turned out to be self confessed liars and repeat perjurers. Puts a very different complexion on the findings of that court. Renders those findings worthless, and in fact makes them no longer salient. That is why the later court (S V Dewani) explicitly excluded "murder for hire" when the judgement declared "It is clear that Mr. Tongo, Mr. Qwabe and Mr. Mngeni (and Mr. Mbolombo) acted in execution of a common purpose to commit at least the offences of kidnapping and robbery and possibly also other offences". There is no ambiguity there. The "murder for hire" story was not proven and was not regarded as factual by the court. If the court did not seee fit to ascribe credibility to the "murder for hire" claim, then why would Wikipedia present it differently? The effect would be to grossly mislead readers whilst implying that the crime was a contract killing. We know that this was not the case and that it was a robbery/kidnapping that got out of hand. Three of the four conspirators admitted as much in their initial confessions. There is no consensus for your viewpoint, and no consensus for your ridiculous suggestions that the article is somehow "exploitative" of Anni Dewani's name. Dewanifacts (talk) 08:31, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

As for your continued false claims that "multiple" courts have found the crime to be a a "murder for hire", this has been explained to you many times. There were not multiple judgments that made such a finding. The convictions of both Qwabe and Tongo occured as a result of Section 105A plea hearings. No judgement was made in either case and no evidence was heard. The court documents were simply formalisations of a plea deal reached between the criminals and the National Prosecuting Authority. Those plea deals were based solely on the later discredited versions of events given by those same criminals and were not verified or tested in any way, let alone subjected to proper cross examination and scrutiny. The NPA and court took the word of the criminals and signed off on the deal. That leaves the finding in S V Mngeni. In this matter, the court did in fact convict Mngeni on the basis that the "murder for hire" story was grounded in truth, the judgement based largely on the testimony of two key witnesses - Qwabe and Mbolombo - who were later found to have perjured themselves. This is all detailed and verifiable in the court's judgement in S v Dewani, where the "murder for hire" story was dismantled and shown to be fiction. Dewanifacts (talk) 08:45, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Dewanifacts, there's not much point in continuing to comment on this here on my page. You may as well keep your gunpowder dry for when/if Lane99 appeals the ban at one of the aforementioned noticeboards. Bishonen | talk 14:30, 18 November 2015 (UTC).

Sorry. Will cease. Just thought that if Lane99 wanted to throw silly hypotheticals at you, he should not omit salient facts! Dewanifacts (talk) 14:38, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Bishonen. Dodge noted. And not unexpected. For you couldn't really answer the question truthfully without it leading inescapably to proving my point- that Wikipedia's article is rigged and biased. And shame on Wikipedia for rubbing salt in the wounds of a murder victim's grieving family by, knowingly, permitting a deceitful article to be published under that victim's name.Lane99 (talk) 19:21, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) = "worthy of note, pertinent or relevant". Thomas.W ^talk 18:31, 14 November 2015 (UTC):::As a user that has followed the edits at Anni Dewanis article for several months, I have to say that I fully support this topic ban for the user in question. The edit warring has been going on too long. --BabbaQ (talk) 20:44, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Bishonen Could you please clarify the implications of being "topic banned". Specifically, if someone is "topic banned" are they still permitted to edit the Talk page of the topic in question? I ask because Lane99 is still attempting to insert his BLP violating rhetoric onto the article's Talk page. Dewanifacts (talk) 13:41, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Question

Did you read the exchange over at User talk:AusLondonder#Absurd claims? After the AfD for the International reactions to the November 2015 Paris attacks article things did get very heated over at the article's talk-page. I am kind of curious what you would have done to defuse the situation? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 05:02, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I had not read any of that before I unblocked, no. It was enough for me to see an admin warning the user against further personal attacks, and then blocking them without any further attacks having been perpetrated. (Incidentally, I misspoke when I said Sitush hadn't edited the page again after the warning; he had; I missed it. But he hadn't made any attacks, so I stand by my unblock.) How would I have tried to defuse it? The usual, I suppose: making a speech, closing the hottest thread, telling a few of the people not to post on each other's pages, asking everybody to take a break away from the computer and have a cup of tea and submit a selfie of themselves drinking/making the tea privately to me by e-mail or face an indefinite siteban… like that, the usual. Defusing is hard. You can't talk to strangers of unknown age as if they're children; being an admin doesn't mean being a parent. I sure as hell wouldn't have done it by blocking any editors. Bishonen | talk 10:31, 16 November 2015 (UTC).

My paws wont handle the boss's iPad, so no pics. I like builders tea, with lots of milk and no sugar. The boss prefers the same, with just a splash. -Roxy the dog™ woof 11:36, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I love builders' tea! I was in England for a couple of years in the seventies, and I've been making it ever since. My friends look askance at the barbarism. :-) Bishonen | talk 13:25, 16 November 2015 (UTC).

Fair enough, thank you for answering my question. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:36, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Love in a Tub.png

Thank you for uploading File:Love in a Tub.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:49, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Doesn't specify who created the content? I'm not surprised. It was in 2004! I was eight! Well, maybe a little older. But I was very new on Wikipedia. Today, eleven years later, I really, really have no idea. You'd better delete it, Sfan00 IMG. Unless you can find the copyright holder yourself? Bishonen | talk 23:21, 16 November 2015 (UTC).

It is {{PD-art}}, so I found a suitable source. - Cwobeel (talk) 23:34, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

That's a wp mirror. The Comical Revenge, or Love in a Tub, 1715 engraving, Montague Summers, Restoration Theatre (1934), Plate X - The Comical Revenge; or, Love in a Tub, a comedy by Sir George Etherege, produced at Lincoln's Inn Fields, March, 1664. The scene represented is Act IV, Scene 6. The engraving is taken from an edition of 1715 in the author's Collection. A higher resolution image can be seen here (Corbis is notorious for "licensing" public domain works.[43]) This illustration appears as the frontispiece for the 1723 and 1735 editions. http://i.imgur.com/zkV1WiL.jpg, http://i.imgur.com/t3QiZsl.jpg The illustrator is Louis Du Guernier. 106.51.28.175 (talk) 18:41, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Courtesy notice

Hi Bishonen. Just a note to let you know I mentioned you in a thread at the main drama board: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#List of targeted articles. It's about some ne'er do well IPs -- Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 04:57, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Please see notice at top of this page; I can't go there. But I'll take a look (through binoculars). Bishonen | talk 05:34, 18 November 2015 (UTC).

DudeWithAFeud

Eh, just thought I'd "assume good faith" for once :) He only made those two redirects as far as I tell. Adam Bishop (talk) 19:26, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

No, he has made more; look at his deleted contribs. But what worries me is that there may be more, not deleted, out there. That's why I threatened him about coming clean. Bishonen | talk 19:40, 18 November 2015 (UTC).

Because it's BLP-related, I looked through all of their undeleted page creations to see if there were more. There are multiple dumb redirects from unlikely misspellings (for example, Say guh --> Sega), and lots of unlikely chemistry misspellings (Rhode Ium) - I started deleting these, but then realized it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, and was a waste of my time, and stopped. There was only one that I thought was problematic, not in a BLP way, but in a political POV way: State-sponsored Columbine --> Kent State shootings. No one calls it that. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:10, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Your long ago block of self-admitted sock Paway2

Back as another self-admitted sock User:Paway3. See edit history for more. Meters (talk) 03:24, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

See, this is the trouble with all the different timezones. That User:Gloquenspiel or whatever his name is probably saw your note while I was asleep, and blocked the sock. (My sock! Reported to me!). Just kidding, Meters. Thanks for reporting. Sock blocked. Bishonen | talk 11:41, 19 November 2015 (UTC).

Sorry, meant to comment that I did that here, but forgot. I'm down to about 17 seconds of short term memory now. -- User:Gloquenspiel (talk) 11:47, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

I love your new name, Gloq, hope you do too! Bishonen | talk 14:59, 19 November 2015 (UTC).

Didn't seem worth opening an SPI when I knew you had been online fairly recently. Meters (talk) 17:53, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Absolutely not worth an SPI. And this page is pretty well-watched while I sleep. Bishonen | talk 17:59, 19 November 2015 (UTC).

Cookies for you!

		Cookies!
		MarkYabloko 05:36, 20 November 2015 (UTC) has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better!

Oreos! Thank you! I've never had an oreo (not being American). Yours aren't bad! Bishonen | talk 09:05, 20 November 2015 (UTC).

Oreos pale in comparison to Thin Mints!. Just ask any charitable American, it's the best intersection of philanthropy and gluttony. —SpacemanSpiff 11:52, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Apparently not only that, Space, but following your link I learn that "purchasing a box of Thin Mints — our round, mint-flavored cookies with a delicious chocolaty coating — helps a girl learn money management." Not what I expected, but it sounds like an excellent side effect of eating cookies. I'll try it and see! Bishonen | talk 14:35, 20 November 2015 (UTC).

If the good doctor gets a break from campaigning, he might be around to sell you some. You can ensure that MissMies learns money management. —SpacemanSpiff 16:01, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

I have an entire case of Girl Guide mint cookies in my pantry. They're $5 CAD per box but totally worth it in my opinion (as opposed to the classic chocolate/vanilla ones my little one sells in the spring).--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:35, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

My little one eats them all herself. :-( Bishonen | talk 16:17, 22 November 2015 (UTC).

Question

I would kinda like stuff I put last year on my user page to be revdeled (is that the right word?). Not my user talk page, the user page. Is this possible? Juan Riley (talk) 20:16, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Sure. But if this concerns your privacy, don't specify here what it is you would like removed; e-mail me. Bishonen | talk 21:23, 22 November 2015 (UTC).

Hello, Bishonen. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Haven't used the email feature before so in case I goofed and you get nothing tell me. Juan Riley (talk) 21:46, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

In fact, you goofed and I got nothing, Juan. ;-) I've e-mailed you now. Hopefully you've received it and can just reply. Bishonen | talk 23:35, 22 November 2015 (UTC).

It aint a day till you goof at least once. I usually reach at least twice. Think I have responded. :) Juan Riley (talk) 23:49, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Sure. Got it and replied. Bishonen | talk 23:51, 22 November 2015 (UTC).

Some providers like yahoo don't work with sending WP email, so if your email id is from them you get a notification that the email has been sent but the recipient will not get it. There's probably a post on this at one of the pumps. —SpacemanSpiff 02:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

And so is Bishzilla, I see. Cool. Bishonen | talk 17:02, 23 November 2015 (UTC).

Too bad you're not running, Bish. I would have !voted for you... Thomas.W ^talk 18:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Remember: One 'zilla One Vote! Juan Riley (talk) 00:31, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

but we're not !voting, we're actually voting. does it still count? -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 00:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

• Glad to see you are voting to oppose all, same as me. I just oppose the system and this is the only way I can see change happening. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 17:36, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

• Er.. that was Darwinbish. I'm supporting a few people. Bishonen | talk 18:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC).

Thanksgiving

Shout for joy

I supported six, one withdrew. Thanks to all who help here, with pumpkin pie and music, - thanksgiving is a good idea any date ;) Special thanks to Drmies for the diligent GA review of the music ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:12, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

User talk:73.49.33.101

Splat!

You recently blocked this IP for edit warring on flood geology. I see the article has now been semi-protected, which IMHO makes the block superfluous, plus some of the other participants in the edit war have not exactly been nice. Can we entertain an unblock? I could decline the current request as it doesn't address the reasons for the block, but I suspect this would just lead to another unblock request and perhaps a few custard pies thrown in my direction for good measure. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:44, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

You do see them evading the block with other IPs, right? And their singularly unpromising comments on their page? I'd frankly like to keep the individual out of Wikipedia for a longer time, if it was possible — but it's not. As for unblocking the particular IP, sure, go ahead. You don't mind custard pies, do you? Have one (splat!). Bishonen | talk 15:16, 25 November 2015 (UTC).

I do, and I do, but sometimes it's worth considering a slightly unconventional route if it reduces the drama level a bit, and I think leaving the article locked will sort everything out in the long run. I don't know about you, but I need a new arbcom case like the price of beer going up again, to be honest. (PS: Any chance of some ice cream for the pie, though?) Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:41, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, you'll have to put the icecream on your face yourself, I don't have any handy. I'll buy you a beer if they do take it to ArbCom. And a keg if a case is accepted. And an ocean of beer if either you or I need to write "statements" or "evidence" for such a putative case. It's a ridiculous notion. Almost as ridiculous as the notion that I'm "too close" to Flood geology to block an edit warring IP. Bishonen | talk 15:54, 25 November 2015 (UTC).

It's official - we're all taking Bish to arbcom 'cause we're all getting free beer - yaaaaaaaay!

• Hey, incidentally, Ritchie333, as long as you're here, were you talking to Worm or Kevin with this post? Kevin responded — I think — but the threading — you know, your colons — looked like you were addressing Worm. Bishonen | talk 16:33, 25 November 2015 (UTC).

It was Kevin I was addressing, and he did respond. I am concerned he is busy digging his own grave on Wikipedia :-( Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:38, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Your Edit Warring Block

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Thank you. Please sign your talkpage posts. I'm banned from ANI, see the top of this page, so I won't be responding there. I'm quite happy to leave it to others, in any case. They can surely find their way to the IP's talkpage, and all they need to know is on there. Bishonen | talk 18:21, 25 November 2015 (UTC).

The issue at ANI has been dealt with. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:55, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Kudpung. Bishonen | talk 19:15, 25 November 2015 (UTC).

A most useful and perceptive insight into the 2015 Arbcom elections

My dear darling Mrs Bishonen, how are you - well I hope? I do so admire your fortitude and stamina, I just hope when I get to your age, I have the same strengths and brain cells - although they do say that brain cells decline at about a million a second after the age of 80, so I do admire you so much. Why am I here, when I'm so busy and important, I hear you ask. Well I'm after a teensy favour, my very much demanded little election guide is ready for consumption, and you and your guests here are so clever, you'll know what to do with it - no, not give it an award - I merely want it put in the public domain like the other less perceptive and informed guides. Now do take care of yourself, there's no need to be embarrassed if you need to wrap yourself in a blanket when you go out in your bath chair, it's so cold in that nasty country of yours at the moment. Much love. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 18:48, 25 November 2015 (UTC) (currently in the Cayman Islands)

Right. I'll put it in the category. Floquenbeam transcluded mine to the voter guide template (sorry to use these advanced technical terms, they are quite normal to me). I'll try to figure out what he did. Bishonen | talk 19:15, 25 November 2015 (UTC).

Done. Now one and all can benefit from your insights. Bishonen | talk 19:25, 25 November 2015 (UTC).

Perhaps template edits are best left to Rexx? I've fixed it this time, but you generally never know whether I'll be around or not. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:37, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

It's Gloquenspiel again. I beg to differ, you seem to be everywhere! Bishonen | talk 19:39, 25 November 2015 (UTC).

A remarkable document. I believe a copy should be sent to every household, as was the late King George VIs stirring letter of encouragement upon the outbreak of the last great war. I trust this inspiring work would have the same stiffening effect on morale, and to help readers better reflect on quite what we are fighting for. Or indeed voting for. With great respect. Simon. Irondome (talk) 19:43, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

True every word of it. (I'm assuming you clicked on Bishzilla's guide by mistake.) Bishonen | talk 19:56, 25 November 2015 (UTC).

Ah. Irondome (talk) 20:15, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Bishonen! I'm thinking the fine Lady Catherine de Burgh may be off her rocker ah I mean er, no I mean off her meds not be feeling well?--MONGO 04:24, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Of course I'm unwell, you silly man, I wouldn't be editing Wikipedia if I was well would I? Most editors here are grossly unwell - some are even completely bonkers. One Arbcom candidate is even a miracle of medical science. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 17:40, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Please forgive my lowly peon commentary...it is rare that I can converse with near royalty as such majesty rarely ventures forth into untamed wilderness such as Wikipedia.--MONGO 18:23, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Nah, just feeling her oats. Bishonen | talk 09:29, 26 November 2015 (UTC).

The Lady Catherine de Burgh doesn't feel anything. 'They' have never made a single mainspace edit in two years and are most likely the bad-hand sock of another account. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:28, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

I can assure you Kudpung that editing mainspace is not something done by people of refinement such as myself. You will find this approach is taken by most members of the Arbcom and a fair few Admins. Like many others, I am here to share my wisdom and wise opinions, not display my education in a vulgar fashion. If you hadn't realised these basic Wikipedia facts. you'll find life on the Arbcom très difficult indeed. Do you see our esteemed Mr Wales writing articles for the common general public? No, you do not! The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 11:54, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

I fully realise it is difficult for we humble editors living in terraced houses to appreciate what the nouveau-riche socialites like Lady Catherine get up to, but I'm sure I could dig out a reliable source or two that clearly shows the upper-middle class far prefer the maid to do grotty things like article copyediting and adding {{refimprove}} tags. Indeed, I believe m'Lady actually fired a maid for not following up on those tags back in 2007, and they remain there to this day! Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:18, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Her maid? A bit of a faux pas there, young Ritchie333. Lady Catherine's maid (and her au pair and her dog walker) have other jobs.[44] Mundane Wikipedia tasks such as content creation are seen to by her social and diary secretary, User:Vera Corpus (Miss). Naturally. Bishonen | talk 17:48, 26 November 2015 (UTC).

• Furthermore,Ritchie333, and another very large faux pas on your part: Her Ladyship is not "nouveau-riche". Her illustrious family, the Scrotums, are mentioned in both the Doomsday Book and Almanach de Gotha. In fact, there has been a Scrotum at every major world event since Wuffing La Scrotum ruled East Anglia. So please redact your post! Vera Corpus (Miss) (talk) 20:33, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

I take it you're not familiar with the Lady then.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:55, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

• See, that's where you're wrong, Kudpung. She's the good-hand sock of an obnoxious user who'd be embarrassed to show so much wisdom and humanity in propria persona. Bishonen | talk 11:01, 26 November 2015 (UTC).

• Her nephew must be aghast at the notion of being called the black sheep of the family. —SpacemanSpiff 12:40, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Hunch

I had a hunch and reported the user. I was not aware of the actual meaning. After seeing your block level; i had to know the meaning of "Fap for" --The Avengers 16:34, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

So, did you try the Urban Dictionary, The Avengers? I never saw your report, actually, sorry about that. I noticed the username when I glanced at the user creation log. It actually looked as if a couple of admins had missed it, since a few other obscene usernames registered around the same time had been quickly blocked before I looked. Very educational, the user creation log. Occasionally I notice objectionable names in my own language, and I bet indefs like those puzzle people (don't ask, and yes, I now know it's a band also, but it's not going to be a username on en-wiki on my watch). Anyway, thanks for keeping an eye out! Bishonen | talk 17:08, 26 November 2015 (UTC).

Thanks

Thanks very much regarding this. I try not to get hot under the collar about vandalism but there was something really rather depressing about this. Thanks again - best wishes DBaK (talk) 21:16, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, quite depressing, I agree. When I stumble on that kind of stuff, I'm always rather pleased to notice the hammer in my hand. (Wham!) Thanks for reporting. Bishonen | talk 21:23, 27 November 2015 (UTC).

Dewani again

I suggest you might look at the edits thereon - including edits by Lane99, "Advocate BG" and an IP each of whom appear to be disproportionately desirous of pushing what might be a POV as the murder being "proven" as a "murder-for-hire". Was the sanction on Lane99 vacated? Collect (talk) 20:44, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Certainly not. Time to block. I'll consider the socking issue separately. Thanks for the heads up. Bishonen | talk 22:09, 30 November 2015 (UTC).

One of my friends is missing!

Where has that nice little puppy lady gone? I know she pops in here from time to time, for a glass of wine and rubber of bridge, but she seems to have gone missing. I don't like missing people - it takes me back to when one of our housemaids went missing in the shooting lodge, and we didn't find her until the grouse shooting started the next year - it was all very inconvenient. I don't normally care for Chihuahuas (nasty yappy little things), but I quite like her - so where is she? The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 17:50, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Blocking a user who, after only two posts, appeared to be a troll, and removing trolling from my talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:02, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

• No problem, Robert. Sometimes they're easy to identify! Bishonen | talk 21:25, 4 December 2015 (UTC).

Thank you

— Ched :  ?  14:17, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

+1, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 15:27, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

No problem, protecting is easy (as well as being a blunt tool). I wish I could figure out how to block an IPv6 range such as the one your guest posts from. See me making an effort here: pathetic, I'm afraid. Bishonen | talk 16:06, 6 December 2015 (UTC).

Mrwallace05 socks

New socks NickiMinaj4life and 86.133.178.209 are obviously the same editing any pop song pages as previous sock Y45ed. (I think he/she is not doing rock band album or song pages, as well as the Beatles.) Destiny Leo (talk) 23:44, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Destiny Leo, could you please ask another admin, or report directly to SPI? I don't know the sockmaster and I'm no good with the kind of articles. Sorry. Bishonen | talk 23:50, 6 December 2015 (UTC).

User:HomerSimpson543

You shouldn't give up on this user, who is clearly a sockpuppet of somebody. The cartoon/animation subject area is lousy with them. BMK (talk) 04:32, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

But I have such a low boredom threshold these days... did you see the contribs? Oh, very well, I'll watch the user talk, at least. Their removing my post as harassive [sic] wasn't a really good sign. Real newbies don't do things like that a lot. (They do blank their pages, but not so much with ridiculous, or any, edit summaries.) Do you have a notion of who the master might be? Also, BMK, did you ping them on purpose? They can't post here. Not autoconfirmed. Bishonen | talk 11:29, 7 December 2015 (UTC).

No, the ping was a slip of the mind (too frequent these days, alas). BMK (talk) 21:30, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

You know the useful {{noping}} template? Bishonen | talk 21:37, 7 December 2015 (UTC).

No, I did not, so thanks for pointing it out. Concerning HomerS, MarnetteD pointed out to me that it might be this person, who has used similar handles. I'm also keeping an eye on CartoonFan97. BMK (talk) 22:58, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

You shouldn't keep sticking your nose were it doesn't belong BMK, I've read up a history of you and you gave others users a hard time on here, not just me. Don't listen to him Bishonen. I've done nothing to him at all, I didn't say any threats to him, swears, or anything else. He's trying to frame me and cause trouble. He does this to user's all the time. HomerSimpson543 (talk) 04:38, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

@Bishonen: Here's an interesting coincidence:

• CartoonFan97 (talk | contribs) (Created on 28 November 2015 at 18:59) first edit: 18:28, 3 December 2015
• HomerSimpson543 (talk | contribs) (Created on 28 November 2015 at 19:16) first edit: 22:09, 4 December 2015

There's also the use by HS543 of "our" and "us" instead of "my" and "me". [45]

BMK (talk) 08:03, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Take a look at some of the other accounts created in that general time period:

• 18:56, 28 November 2015 User account DisneyPixarFan1995 (talk | contribs) was created
• 18:57, 28 November 2015 User account VideoGamesandMario2006 (talk | contribs) was created

Now take a look at some of the names used in the past by the sockmaster Bigshowandkane64:

• Marionluigi49
• MarioandSonic56
• TheSimpsons98
• CharacterFan876
• Mario Kart is the Best

Sure, it's still a bit boot-strappy, but something like a pattern begins to emerge. @MarnetteD: may have some thoughts. This may be enough to file an SPI, but it'll have to wait til tomorrow, it's late here. BMK (talk) 08:29, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm actually trying to go to bed, but I keep running across stuff. Look at CartoonFan97's edit summary here:

"An actor alway's needs an inbox"

and compare it to HomerSimpson543's edit summary here:

"Adding infobox, an actor/voice actor alway's needs an inbox for there articles".

Note the incorrect use of the apostrophe in "alway's", a trait also shown in HS543's comment above. Also note that both CF97 and HS543 are terribly concerned with the spousal information in infoboxes. (Diffs easily available).

Just some more bricks for the wall. BMK (talk) 09:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

One more thing (I hope). This is from the SPI on Bigshowandkane64, posted by one of his socks (I'm much too tired to dig up the diff on it):

"I don't know why you guy's still keep thinking were sock puppets. were not at all. WikipediaGuy01543 (talk) 01:12, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Note the incorrect use of the apostrophe. I'm going to ping @Bbb23: for him to have a look-see, in case the above may be sufficient to run a CU. BMK (talk) 09:09, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

I seriously don't know what your talking about. This my only account, that's not my other account! HomerSimpson543 (talk) 13:14, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Almost precisely the words used by two sock in the SPI linked above. Amazing! BMK (talk) 15:47, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

I just saw the ping and was about to post that the protestations are very similar to ones made in the past but I see that BMK has already made the connection. IMO a WP:DUCK is quacking. BMK, Bbb23 is away until the 16th (or thereabouts) and may not see your ping until then. MarnetteD|Talk 16:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

• Thank you all. We don't need no stinking checkuser, as the quacking of HomerSimpson543 is deafening. I've blocked and tagged and will add a pro forma SPI. Good work, BMK.

The timing of the creation of DisneyPixarFan1995 and VideoGamesandMario2006 is certainly suggestive, but IMO they haven't really edited enough to make the call. Bishonen | talk 16:22, 8 December 2015 (UTC).

• I came across this from another angle, however CartoonFan97, Music743, VideoGamesandMario2006, DisneyPixarFan1995 and Futurama1431 are all  Technically indistinguishable from your friend HomerSimpson543 above. And I am not a stinking Checkuser. I like to think I smell quite lovely.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:11, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

• @Ponyo: Thanks for confirming that. BMK (talk) 23:25, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

No problem. Someone's gotta pick up Bbb23's slack. Just kidding! Hope you're having a great holiday if you see this! --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:30, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

I'm sure 'Shonen wasn't commenting on your scent, Ponyo. It's just an allusion to Stinking badges and perhaps subconsciously to my much-missed wikifriend, User:Gold Hat. --RexxS (talk) 00:45, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I've realized it should probably have been spelled "stinkin'". And no, Ponyo doesn't stink, I quite like Chanel no 5. (Better used in moderation, though. You needn't splash it on like it's Giano's cologne.) Anyway, I may add those socks to the SPI when I have a minute or two. Bishonen | talk 11:51, 10 December 2015 (UTC).

"steenkin'" - for reasons of verisimilitude. --RexxS (talk) 15:09, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Oh I understood the film reference, I simply chose to take offense regardless. I've taken entirely too little offense of late and thought I would step up my game.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:46, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Quite right, gotta keep 'em on their toes. I've added your handful of socks to the SPI, just to keep in practice. Bishonen | talk 16:59, 10 December 2015 (UTC).

Asheville

One of my favorite cities. If the US had an NHS I'd move there. Why's it on your watchlist? Doug Weller (talk) 07:33, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

It wasn't, I was just running my eye idly down the user creation log. (A harmless hobby which has left many traces in my contribs in the past few weeks.) And this was a new user with a name I thought might mean something I didn't quite understand — "bang" is a kind of dubious word — so I clicked on their single contribution. I'd never heard of Asheville. But it's on my watchlist now! Did you ever attend the Bele Chere? Bishonen | talk 11:36, 7 December 2015 (UTC).

Is this how watchlists get out of control? -Roxy the dog™ woof 23:31, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

No, that's more when you see vandalism to a page you watch, revert it, check the contribs, and revert the person's other "contributions" too. Hey presto, you're now watching three more pages. Bishonen | talk 00:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC).

Request for lifting ban

It's been months since ban was imposed on me. As you might have noticed, my editing has also reduced significantly. Would you please review the ban now under changrled circumstances. Thanks -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 04:33, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Capankajsmilyo, your ban is set to expire on Christmas Eve — not long now.:-) But if you can tell me how you plan to avoid the previous problems with your editing of Indian religious articles (chiefly unreliable sources), I don't mind unbanning you a little early. Bishonen | talk 20:56, 8 December 2015 (UTC).

Thanks, the issue was huge no. of edits, I was asked to go slow, that's what I'll do. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 03:46, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

I had to mull over this, but I've responded positively on Pankaj's page now. Sorry it took a while. Bishonen | talk 20:11, 10 December 2015 (UTC).

Another DegenFarang sockpuppet

There are so many it makes my head spin, but you blocked DegenFarang and one or more of his socks. Another duck to block has appeared Popcorntastesgood. In less than 50 edits total (none in articles I've ever edited), he managed to vandalize my talk page and use the tell-tale phrase "peacock" in one of his edit summaries. I don't know if posting this info to you here is okay process, but it is such an obvious sock that I thought I'd try here first. (Also, this User first registered 3 days after the last Degen IP sock was blocked.) Thanks. 2005 (talk) 07:12, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Posting here is fine. I see they've been harassing you (I've warned them), but I don't see any poker editing — isn't that the major characteristic of Degen Farang and his socks? (Isn't there anybody else who might be angry with you?)

I took a quick look at the contribs in general. The edits to Anders Behring Breivik are fine. The latest edits defending a troll on ANI less so IMO. (I've given the troll in question a discretionary sanctions alert.) Back later, I've got to run. Bishonen | talk 11:38, 8 December 2015 (UTC).

However... you were right, 2005, it's DegenFarang. Checkuser blocked. Bishonen | talk 20:51, 8 December 2015 (UTC).

Thanks. 2005 (talk) 22:23, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

We are returned!

Buona sera and Buon Natale e felicitous anno nuovo whatever...

Bishonen gallops off in her elegant riding habit.

Good News Mrs Bishonen! We are returned to you from our adventures in Vienna. Some dear little girl, connected distantly with my nephew, was marrying some frightfully important Austrian (not as important as me of course) so we all went across for the 'free beano' (as one of Giano's sons called it). I don't normally like new money, but the groom paid for all our hotels and flights, which I think is very generous, and one shouldn't be too quick to judge. Dearest Giano was taken ill on arrival at Heathrow, I said to him, just because the champagne was free on the flight doesn't mean one has to take it to excess. Watching him and his sons being stretchered across the tarmac was not attractive. I don't normally like his wife, but the poor woman does have a cross to bear. I shall be staying with them until the New Year - so felicitous greetings to you all. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 18:46, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

[Bishonen gallops off on a white steed from the Spanish Riding School.] Thank you, dear lady, and the best wishes of the season to you! I can't believe I ever thought your sot of a nephew dashing! Bishonen | talk 21:24, 8 December 2015 (UTC).

Chronological order

I think I was writing my RfAr comment at the same time you were writing yours. I'm not sure what happened with the order, but I'm glad for yours to appear ahead of mine, as yours is more succinct and therefore better. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 18:25, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

I just e-mailed you, to tell you what Bishzilla does with top-posters. We really said the same thing at the RfAR, didn't we? Only one of us said it nicely, while mine was nasty, brutish and short. Bishonen | talk 18:31, 9 December 2015 (UTC).

• Brad, Kevin has removed that bit. Perhaps it would be humane for you and me to remove our comments on it? I'm just disappearing outside, but if you agree and remove yours, please take mine with it. Bishonen | talk 18:44, 9 December 2015 (UTC).

I've struck the portion of my statement that has become moot. I haven't stricken or removed mine altogether, because I think my last paragraph is still important. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:44, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

(Crossing out makes stuff more noticeable, not less, IMO.) Well, our comments have already been commented on, with our names. I guess I'll just leave my words, so as not to force the commenter to cross out theirs… jeez. Bishonen | talk 21:32, 9 December 2015 (UTC).

• I always love the crossings out; they're always the best bits. Giano (talk) 22:05, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Apologies

Truly sorry for my faux paus.
Kautilya3

• No problem. With handheld devices, many of us have fat fingers. Bishonen | talk 21:09, 11 December 2015 (UTC).

• Well, I wouldn't say many. A woman who doesn't have a manicure and practice her arpeggios once a week, to keep her fingers slim, has lost her self respect. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 22:27, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kevin Gorman

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kevin Gorman. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kevin Gorman/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 28, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kevin Gorman/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:19, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I won't contribute, Lankiveil, in fact I'm rather sorry it's come to this. Tell Bishzilla about it instead. She'll be glad to help by superclerking. Bishonen | talk 11:43, 11 December 2015 (UTC).

I would, but I don't fancy a quick and stompy death at Bishzilla's claws ;-). Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:49, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

• Oh my dear Mrs Bishonen what a funny world we inhabit; I am stuck in a dreary wet London with no hope of escape. Scrotum IV is in dry dock having a new propellers fitted, the Queen has left town and the city is deserted. My nephew is insisting we all remain here for Christmas; I went to Harrods to do some Christmas shopping, but it was full of Americans, why do they all come here in December - I suppose they are trying to escape that Trump man, I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't let half of them back in, then I will never be able to get the perfumery counter. Then there's the all these Chinese and the Russians, it's a wonder the earth hasn't fallen off its axis with all this uneven distribution. Anyway, I am here for some information - I need a Wikipedia project to divert me, and my perceptive antenna have been tweaking at something called GLAM - what exactly is it and where do I join? Obviously as one of Wikipedia's more glamorous lady editors I have a great deal to offer. It's such a pity it's not something we could do together, but I am more than happy to give you some beauty tips and advice, should you ever decide to alter your image. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 14:17, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

With your love of culture, a project for Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Museums should suit you to a T, especially now that it also includes botanic and zoological gardens. Those might even be able to provide a home for your superannuated Pekes. Join here to contribute content and expertise. Bishonen | talk 15:06, 11 December 2015 (UTC).

Need longer block on 81.183.217.1

Hi. Regarding User talk:81.183.217.1, after their one week block expired, the IP went right back to the same personal attacks against Anna Frodesiak and disruptive editing. Can we get a longer or indefinite block now? Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 08:27, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

No indef on IPs. But it's good and static and clearly used by the same... hmm... some words occur to me, but I suppose I'll just call it the same "user". Kudpung has placed a one-month block; I'd have made it three if I'd seen it first. Never mind. They'll be back I'm sure, they're quite incorrigible, and then perhaps we can make it six months. Bishonen | talk 09:54, 12 December 2015 (UTC).

Shvrs

Shvrs is back, 15 months on. You topic banned them in April 2014 and then blocked for repeated breaches. They've just tagged Raju as disputed but didn't even explain their rationale on the article talk page & indeed can't because of the ban. I doubt that rationale is any different from their previous disruptive original research etc but what do we do here? Obviously, even tagging is a technical breach because the ban appears to be indefinite. - Sitush (talk) 14:24, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Technical? Certainly it's a breach of the topic ban. I'll just remind them. Bishonen | talk 14:39, 12 December 2015 (UTC).

A good block there

That was a very good block if I may so myself. 81.158.98.220 (talk) 16:36, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

I've made three blocks in the past 15 minutes... but a little research of your contributions shows me which one you mean. Yes, I'm pleased with it. (I softblocked, where I could have hardblocked.) Bishonen | talk 16:41, 12 December 2015 (UTC).

Ban broken

CrazyAces broke his article creation ban by bringing the Mitchell Santa Maria into mainspace. I would have brought this to the blocking admin, but he has not been active for awhile. The article is of similar "quality" to the past ones and I don't want to have to go through attempting to fix the bulk of articles he has reserved in his sandboxes for mainspace. At the very least, I ask for a warning so this doesn't get out of hand, again. Thanks as always.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 01:30, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

? TheGracefulSlick, I'm not sure if you mean the blocking admin (User:Vanjagenije) or the banning admin (User:JzG), but they're both as active as ferrets. Well.. OK, I'll warn CA. Bishonen | talk 10:42, 13 December 2015 (UTC).

• Guy has blocked for a week. Spartaz ^Humbug! 11:00, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Yup. This saddens me. Crazyaces seems like someone who is trying to help, but just doesn't get it (for multiple values of it). Guy (Help!) 11:08, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

I tend to agree with that. I have seen him lots at DRV and he simply hasn't grasped how it works round here. When you reach

out, he is always positive but never follows through and returns to his old ways. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:14, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, Bishonen you are correct. I based my statement on what CA said at an appeal he made, but looking back I see I misunderstood what he said. I wish there was something that could be done to help CA, I would mentor him if he'd let me. However, with Guy, I'm not sure he quite understands "it".TheGracefulSlick (talk) 21:35, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

User sub page deletion

Hi. I noticed you recently deleted this page. Could you please point me to where the creator explicitly requested deletion per U!? Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:30, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

You haven't quite got the right name; I think this is the one you want. The request for deletion was made privately, by e-mail. Bishonen | talk 11:43, 14 December 2015 (UTC).

I see, And will that e-mail stand up to Arbcom scrutiny? --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:48, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

What..? I should think so. What's the problem, exactly? Why would arbcom "scrutinize" it? Are you suggesting I might have just deleted the page because I took a notion to delete it? Bishonen | talk 11:54, 14 December 2015 (UTC).

Arbcom probably have enough to do without investigating speedy deletions. pablo 12:13, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Unless our good Lady Catherine posts here objecting strenuously to the speedy deletion, I think policy has been correctly followed. Technically, one could argue that G10 ("disparage, threaten, intimidate, or harass their subject") could be an additional reason for speedy deletion, but I think that could be a contentious opinion, so U1 is better. I do wonder if m'lady's long forgotten adopted son has had a word. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:22, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Bishonen, I am not accusing you of anything. I'm doing some research that may well be of interest to Arbcom and I'm just asking you some questions that might help me. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:37, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I see. Well, I won't mind sharing the e-mail with ArbCom if they should ask. Bishonen | talk 12:43, 14 December 2015 (UTC).

That's good to know. You may wish to consider keeping it intact with its code and raw headers. Thank you very much. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:11, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I hate to break it to you, but you have to be a fool to not know who HRH is. --In actu (Guerillero) | My Talk 18:53, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

• Is it really necessary for me to be here and make public my wishes? My beloved nephew informs me that this entire site is run "off-wiki" by some Irish Republican Conglomerate (IRC?) or somesuch illicit organisation, so while it's in order for others (Admins such as Mr Kubpong) to use secretive methods of communication, it is not permissible for me! I find that quite extraordinary - I worked with my dearest friend, Baroness Trumpington, at Bletchley Park during the war you know - and that was very hush, hush indeed! I wished my page deleted because there is nothing so tawdry as an amusanti after the party is over - rather like Christmas decorations at the end of January when the working classes have returned to doing what they supposedly do best. If Mr Kupbong wishes the page to be re-instated, then of course it must be. As always, my thoughts were purely charitable and of "les Autres" and that of course was not just Mr Kudping. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 19:21, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

• Anyway now Mrs Bishonen, enough of poor Mr Kiddleping, you must come and have luncheon with me at my new club. My rather good looking nephew says he wouldn't be seen dead there, which I think makes it quite appealing, rather like one of those rather thrilling underground dens one went to during Prohibition. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 21:32, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I just arrived here to investigate that deletion myself! I found it a lot of fun and was saddened to see it get memory holed. (I snagged a copy as a souvenir from a site mirroring Wikipedia, so not to worry.) Blythwood (talk) 07:16, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

• I'm here to investigate this investigation. @Kudpung:, has anybody emailed you about this so called user sub-page deletion incident? If so, please save any and all such emails, with full headers, timestamps and hashes, naturally, in case there is a case related to this case. Thank you so very much. Lastly, are you, or have you even been, a communist. Jehochman ^Talk 14:06, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Edit Quest!

	Edit Quest!
	Titusfox has requested that you join them for an afternoon of questing, slaying and looting at Edit Quest, the Wikipedia Based RPG! I Hope to see you there! TF { Contribs } { Edit Quest! } 20:32, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

• Thank you, Titusfox, but I think I'll pass. In my world, role-playing games are for boys and the boyish, not for little old ladies. [/me resumes her knitting.] Bishonen | talk 20:42, 15 December 2015 (UTC).

• Well, I like slaying and looting! darwinbish ^BITE ☠ 20:44, 15 December 2015 (UTC).

Trust me Darwinbish, you're part of the Legion of... Well, you'll just have to find out! ;) TF ^{{ Contribs } { Edit Quest! }} 15:52, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi

Could you please take a look at user Legacypac edits. He is removing candidate lists for different Miss Earth pageant years. He has nominated plenty of AfDs without much explainations. Just being kind of disruptive. Atleast take a look. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 15:22, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Could you please ask somebody else or take it to ANI, Babba? I really don't want to go near, let alone immerse myself in, beauty pageant articles right as the festive season is kicking off. Sorry, but my heart wouldn't be in it. Bishonen | talk 19:18, 19 December 2015 (UTC).

Grrr...it is quite annoying that I, being a hairy woodland beast, has yet to even be nominated for the Mr. Earth pageant....or some gender neutral such contest. Its hard being but a pawn in the game of life.--MONGO 19:45, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

MONGO at the head of the Mr. Earth pageant

• I love it Mighty Bishonen! Indeed, it is my cousin Bigsquat, though some ghastly beast put that horrid Sonics tunic on him, likely using some new fangled machine that alters otherwise such fine photographic artwork. Amazed one captured an image of Bigsquat, perhaps he was in one of those rare moods in which he was less seclusive, as we are rarely seen excepting at night when we descend upon unwitting and pesky campers and other annoying infiltrators to our woodland realms.--MONGO 20:16, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 01:56, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

MarnetteD|Talk is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec15b}} to your friends' talk pages.

Make sure to click on both pictures to see them full size Bishonen as they will give you a chuckle. May your 2016 be full of joy and special times. MarnetteD|Talk 03:11, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Felicitations of the Season

Dearest Mrs Bishone, just to let you know, I could bear horrid, empty London no more, so dearest Giano has taken me to Sicily for the duration. I arrived quietly and without fuss yesterday (pictured above). I wish I'd stayed in London now, that women Giano is married to is drinking heavily and giving me menacing looks, the children and dogs are out of control and staff undisciplined. When I mention these things, the woman becomes even more menacing. You need to come and rescue me before I'm murdered in my bed or kidnapped by the Mafia. I think I'd like to spend Christmas in Scandabrod or whatever it s your delightful little home is called. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 14:33, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to pocket ice hotel! More commodious than looks! Full facilities, lingonberry vodka!

• [Eager to oblige, Bishzilla throws open gates to special refrigerated pocket winter sports branch, also known as "Scandabrod"."] Welcome to ice hotel with full facilities, little Lady C! bishzilla _ROARR!! 15:56, 20 December 2015 (UTC).

Preparing to book a room at Scandabrod too, we just can't resist pointing out how much we adore the phrase "a vutti china e a mugghieri 'mmriaca" or "la botte piena e la moglie ubriaca". ---Sluzzelin talk 04:46, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Timeline of Ancient Greece.

Please see the history of Timeline of Ancient Greece. The page has been vandalized (or edited unconstructively) recently. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 20:22, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) IP blocked for a week, page restored to former glory. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:27, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you both. Merry Christmas! Bishonen | talk 21:04, 20 December 2015 (UTC).

Wishing you …

Happy Holidays and a Prosperous 2016!!!

Hello Bishonen, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this holiday season. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user happy holidays and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for New Year 2016. Happy editing, - Cwobeel (talk) 23:48, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

IBAN request

You told me about IBAN requests months ago. Right now I am requesting an IBAN request between myself and TheGracefulSlick. [46]. I am asking that you approve this. If I can't get this approved, I will retire immediately after having a checkuser done on my OWN account to prove that I wasn't doing any sockpuppet behavior [47]. Additionally, Niteshift36 has referred to me as "Crazy Aces" a number of times after you warned him about him calling me CrazyAces in WP:AN/I [48] Bishonen | talk 14:44, 10 April 2015 (UTC) where you stated "Don't do it again. However frustrated you are, it's seriously inappropriate, and, yes, I'd call it bullying." This isn't his first rude attack on me and I had previously made a notice on AN/I about it. [49] CrazyAces489 He deliberately put the space in between Crazy and Aces to subtly annoy me not once, but twice. (talk) 17:41, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

• In the instance, months ago, that you refer to, I bolded the word "crazy". THAT is the difference. Calling you Crazy Aces is normal because that is your name. You'll see people refer to me as Niteshift, without the 36. Not much different that having someone named John Doe III and not adding III to the end of everything. Move on. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:46, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Again you said "Crazy Aces" not "CrazyAces" nor "CrazyAces489". You are much smarter than that and were already warned by Bishonen, lets see what Bishonen has to say. CrazyAces489 (talk) 18:51, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

It's that season again...

		Happy Saturnalia
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:20, 21 December 2015 (UTC)