User talk:The Rambling Man

ITN/DC

TRM, you and I may never get along but I want to sincerely thank you and User:Jayron32 for supporting this good faith suggestion that I genuinely think helps the project.

Cheers, IP98

No worries. And as you can see, nothing bad has happened, but we still need to convince the ignorant. Which may be an insurmountable problem, simply due to their numbers. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:53, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

FLC

Hi Rambles. Naming of the article aside, are there any other issues you're aware of that need addressing? Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 13:05, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

None as far as I can see. It would probably benefit the nom if we could get a consensus on the name, move the article (and the nom) and cap the current discussion which somewhat detracts from reviewing the list itself (although the concerns raised are certainly reasonable). The Rambling Man (talk) 13:26, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Burt Kwouk

On 25 May 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Burt Kwouk, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:34, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Defender of the Wiki

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For your continued defence against unnecessary fair use, and in particular for your efforts to source File:Sally Brampton at Woking library in 2010.jpg Thryduulf (talk) 01:10, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Funny that....

....this is probably my most favourite album of recent times, so it's nice to see it linked on your user page. Best track (not necessarily off that album) is "His Majesty King Raam". It's a shame they're not around much anymore. Cassianto^Talk 23:59, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes, definitely a shame. I saw them live a couple of times, Cambridge and Somerset House. Of course, the finest track of all time is The Rambling Man.... The Rambling Man (talk) 05:02, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

That goes without saying. You lucky sod! I'd love to have seen them live. They bowed out far too early in my opinion. They are described as being on a "hiatus", but I don't really think they'll be a reunion any time soon. A friend described them as being like an indie version of Röyksopp, but at the same time, a housie alternative to Bonobo. Either way, they are bloody brilliant and sorely missed. Cassianto^Talk 11:04, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Sir Alf

Have made a start this evening, hope to have a bit of time tomorrow when I can get stuck in on his time at Spurs. Cheers —  Cliftonian (talk)  21:20, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Spurs and England international playing sections are filled in now—just management and after football sections need doing now. I will try to find the time to do some tomorrow but it's quite rare I get a few hours to really focus on it like I did today. Among other things I've sandwiched the international career into the Tottenham bit, which I think improves the article flow a bit—rather than jumping back from the end of Alf's career in 1955 to 1949, we get a smoother chronological flow straight from Tottenham to Ipswich. Hope this helps, cheers —  Cliftonian (talk)  17:50, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Right, I think that's me lot for this weekend—I've got up to him arriving at Ipswich, so his playing career is done and we just have to go through his managing. We have two months exactly to go until 30 July 2016, the 50th anniversary of the big day. I reckon if we give it another two or three weeks before going to FAC we should be fine, so long as we make clear in the FAC statement that we are going for 30 July TFA. I'll try to find some more time if I can, hope all this helps. Cheers, —  Cliftonian (talk)  16:50, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Cool, I hope to get a bit of time tomorrow (eldest off to nursery, just me, the missus and junior at home for the day). Really good work so far. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:27, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Great. Think it'd make sense for you to go through the Ipswich part as you probably know it rather well anyway. I look forward to seeing it. Cheers and all the best to the family. —  Cliftonian (talk)  17:30, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Silly question..

...If DYK is causing layout issues due to being unable to fulfil its commitments on the main page, why are you editing the other sections to accomodate DYK? Why not remove DYK's until it fits? (It would help if you have a diff to illustrate the before/after tinkering) Only in death does duty end (talk) 08:23, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Well have a read of WT:DYK, in particular the section where I've asked them to slow down. It's illuminating and striking how defensive the regulars are over there and how little they care about anything other than rushing DYKs through to the main page, at all costs. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:17, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

No I understand that (thats what prompted my question), I mean that you stated you were altering other parts of the main page to fit DYK - why not alter DYK once it is live to fit the rest of the main page if DYK is the cause of the formatting issue? Only in death does duty end (talk) 09:37, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Because the only way to do that is to remove hooks and, as I said, in that very discussion on the talk page, I have been threatened with wheelwarring to restore hooks I may choose to remove. I am hoping the DYK clan can see common sense and stick to eight hooks, just slow the rate. That way there's no problem at all from my perspective, even if we have to trash one (which happens every three or four sets) after its sent to the main page. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:21, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Unlucky 13

It appears that the sorting treats the 13 as a 1. Do you know of any coding to get it in the right order? I was imagining, is there something that would make the "13" be treated as a "9"? Because the second-highest score was an 8–0, so that would work. '''tAD''' (talk) 11:39, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

I have a feeling it's sorting as just text, not numerically, hence the 13 is out of sorts. I have used the {{ntsh}} template in the past, that may work for you. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:53, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

The {{sort}} template ended up doing the job '''tAD''' (talk) 12:08, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Carla Lane, RD

I see from RD that her story may be of interest on the front page. Please check my work on her article. I decided to add some material about her birth name, and activities with animals. Hopefully I was able to correctly reference the information about her that I thought was interesting. Gabs Blue Labs (talk) 04:05, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Another barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		The reason for awarding this Barnstar is two-fold. First, for the innovative trial you have helped to design, manage, and evaluate for ITN recent deaths. Second, for helping to bring RD articles up to posting snuff even with interventions from real life (them nappies). May you continue to improve ITN! WaltCip (talk) 13:32, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations

It seems that congratulations are in order. I hope mother and baby are both doing well. 92.26.162.36 (talk) 16:58, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, and yes, they are. Best. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:30, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Checking ITN Admin Instructions

I've been busy and missed the discussion where the 4 RD max was decided, so thanks for catching my blunder. Wikipedia:In_the_news/Administrator_instructions said 3, and this page hasn't been updated in a while (the RD portion came into play back in 2013), so I've changed the instructions to 4 RD max on the template (found the discussion in WT:ITN archives). Could you double check to make sure everything else there for RD is updated/correct (for example, when should RD be removed)? You've been able to stay better abreast of the discussions than me, and I want to make sure I'm following the agreed upon procedures. Thanks, Spencer^T♦C 05:49, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Sure, no worries. The Rambling Man (talk) 05:50, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I think the rest of it looks up to date. There was a previous issue with some link between blurbs and RDs but I think that's gone now. All good. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:06, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Carla Lane

On 2 June 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Carla Lane, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:09, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

This very nice gentleman...

...needs his talk page access yanked ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:40, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Ramsey

Great to have you back! --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 08:24, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Sca|talk

I put your ITN note back. I'll gladly unban you if you agree not to post negative stuff on my talk. Sca (talk) 21:49, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Michael Schumacher has been nominated for Did You Know

Hello, The Rambling Man. List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Michael Schumacher, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 12:01, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

2016 Epsom Derby

Thank you for various edits to sort out formatting and so on, to help get the 2016 Epsom Derby article up to scratch for ITN. Last year's version had bad referencing problems which I hopefully learnt from to improve things this year. Can I ask some advice please? I always have issues with dashes and I've seen you fix these on the article. What should I be using as the correct dash? I am not sure what item on the keyboard to use, any help you can give me will be gratefully received. Cheers. --Bcp67 (talk) 12:06, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

I get my dash advice from the MOS, WP:DASH. You can get an en- or an em-dash from the toolbar below the editing window, beside the "Insert" dropdown. Alternatively you can type – or even use the {{spaced en dash}} or {{em dash}} templates. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:28, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply - much appreciated and I'll put it to use. --Bcp67 (talk) 13:12, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

No worries. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:12, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Did you know/Public Security Directirate

Which sources exactly? Makeandtoss (talk) 05:45, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

See yesterday's WP:ERRORS. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:08, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	I don't know you that well but I've been following the "scandalous" nonsense in ANI and you're hilarious. Know that not everyone around here has a stick up their arse. Crumpled Fire (talk) 21:19, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

I appreciate that, CF (if I may abbreviate your name, as oft is mine). Stay tuned, I'm sure this isn't the last time I get dragged into drama by the dick brigade.... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:21, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm sure one of the devs around here could cobble together a bot that yanks you to ANI once a week. It wouldn't need any more complex grammar than this, and just pre-load with phrases "civility", "personal attacks", "ITN", any other suggestions? Would save a bit of time I'd have thought. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:28, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Bloody Rambling Men, coming over here, stealing our barnstars, lowering the prices of our Talk Pages... *splutter* _Muffled ^Pocketed 18:32, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Why thank you. I had hoped my pomposity combined with uncivil outbursts would have prevented the awarding of such trinkets, but you guys proved me wrong... Shucks! I'd like to thank my mum, my cats, oh, G and B (of course!) and all those who voted for me!! Love you! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:44, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't venture into ITN very often but it does confirm my suspicions that being able to write an encyclopedia article and being able to whine like a drama whore are mutually exclusive qualities. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:39, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK for List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Michael Schumacher

On 13 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Michael Schumacher, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Formula One driver Michael Schumacher was on the podium in every race of the 2002 season, including eleven race victories, breaking the record for most in a season? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Michael Schumacher. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Michael Schumacher), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:12, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

For all the help you give to several editors and articles. And for a good sense of humor! --BabbaQ (talk) 20:18, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you...

...for blocking 50.253.212.229 (talk · contribs). It might not stop him, but at least now he's on some admin's radars. :)

(talk page watcher) @The Rambling Man: purely idle curiousity, but why that length of block? It seems curiosly 'random,' if you know what I mean- 2' 57" if I read it right? _Muffled ^Pocketed 12:30, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Bugs, no problem. FIM, I'm not sure why that's the case, I just selected the 3-hour option from the drop-down... The Rambling Man (talk) 12:32, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

No worries TRM. Bit bizarre; maybe they changed something on the Matrix _Muffled ^Pocketed 12:42, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Tempted

Very tempted to start a full-blown edit war over that hat, just because I'm bored and want to see how far out of hand it would get. But perhaps another day... GoldenRing (talk) 13:55, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Just remember what Rocky said to Ivan Drago, just after Drago says "I must break you"... The Rambling Man (talk) 14:01, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

I didn't think he said anything, just got the shit kicked out of him? Anyway, we all know Drago threw the fight. What? You don't like my source? GoldenRing (talk) 14:28, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Nah, when Drago says "I must break you", Rocky replies "Go for it!". Slightly bonkers. And then went on to win the hearts and minds of the Russian people. What a bloke. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:31, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Jack Verge - FAC

Hello there, I've put Jack Verge (Australian rugby player KIA 1915) up as a FAC. I'd very much welcome your comments, if you happen to have a moment. FunkyCanute (talk) 09:09, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Jo Cox

I'd ask that you revert your edit to the ITN template. Problematic enough to try to ensure BLP is adhered to on one, semi-protected article. On two, parallel ones, one of which unprotected? Madness. Besides which, there is quite enough flag waving and namechecking on the death article as it is, without any additional substance worth mentioning. StillWaitingForConnection (talk) 09:38, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Brexit and ITN

Hi. I'm pretty new to this ITN malarky, but I'm right in thinking a nomination has got be both newsworthy and showcase improved articles, which to be brutally honest, United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016 really isn't just yet. Just wondering if I'm giving a right reason to oppose (and it is purely on article state, of course it's a major news story) as nobody else has done so yet. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:58, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Your comment at Wikipedia talk:In the news/2016 RD proposal

Frankly, I am offended at the way you phrased your comment, which makes me uncomfortable engaging with you personally. I get the feeling that your intention was to discourage me from contributing to the project, rather than simply to rebut my arguments. Mamyles (talk) 17:41, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

I stand by my comments. I'm not discouraging you from anything, just completely and utterly refuting your position and argument. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:15, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Theoretical discussion

Hi TRM, noticed that you seem rather displeased with DYK these days and was kind of wondering if you are concerned more about immediate problems or the overall structure in general. If the latter, do you have any sort of theoretical "magic wand" solutions to put out there and if the former, do we need something like a RfC to gather discussion on certain problems that cannot be fixed with temporary solutions? Thought I'd start the discussion here so we keep trial balloons that go over like lead ones from creating unneeded drama elsewhere. Montanabw^(talk) 19:38, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Montana, thanks for your note. There are many issues with DYK. The biggest is the lack of quality and attention to detail. Too often hooks are promoted then pushed onto the main page without sufficient quality control, and that's with regard to the veracity of the hooks, the quality of the articles as a whole and the interest of the hooks as written. Other peripheral issues include the arcane template methods used, the way in which it's virtually impossible to track your own nomination through to the main page, the susceptibility of the system to big game competitions like WikiCup which causes surges in nominations for easy points at reduced quality (thanks QPQ!) and finally the blind-leading-the-blind approach of maintaining this fictional deadline that DYK has to change twice a day. An RfC is essential in due course. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:15, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Hmm. Much true, though also the same basic complaints that existed almost a decade ago...But the question is how to not make the process so intimidating that no one will review articles-- I find it a bit daunting as it is, and I generally won't touch an article review where the discussion has erupted in controversy-- too much of a minefield. On one hand, I remember when qpq was implemented, and frankly, I would never have gotten involved with reviewing at all had I not been initially "forced" to do so, in part due to the template style-- it's a steep learning curve. I do think that it's important that people not game the system, but I don't think that is the biggest problem; IMHO qpq isn't all bad (frankly, I think qpq for GAN would be appropriate also) because without it, I doubt I'd ever review a DYK, I'd just write articles (honest confession). I would agree that the difficulty of a user tracking their own article is a problem, and I'm open to DYK going to once a day (wonder why it was more often, perhaps so many articles in the early years?). I think one real concern is that the DYK criteria is scattered across a half-dozen different pages, and the section that appears in the editing template is really the only thing anyone reads, except that some of the links don't work very well (no direct link to earwig tool, last I saw, nor to a character counter). I guess the question is this: What is actually solvable, and what is just the eternal round of kvetching about how DYK is not FAC? Montanabw^(talk) 03:39, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Crafoord Prize

Hi, The Rambling Man, those files have no fair use rationale for inclusion in this article: does this mean, the files have to be removed from the articles Edward Norton Lorenz, Eugene Odum, Allan Sandage, W. D. Hamilton, Timothy A. Springer too? Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 05:53, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Each fair use file needs justification on the file page for use in each article that it is intended to be included within. If a rationale exists for each of those files for each article then there should be no problem. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:03, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

In this case that means I can revert your revert I guess? Lotje (talk) 07:49, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

No, not at all. The images cannot be used on other pages without a fair use rationale specific to those pages, and there is no good reason to include such fair use images anywhere other than the biography pages. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:54, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

ITN/RD trial criteria RFC

Have you notified an admin to close the RFC on the ITN/RD trial criteria yet? If not, I will.--WaltCip (talk) 12:57, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I posted a note at AN last night thus but it's a pretty overwhelmed place, so I'm not holding my breath. Perhaps you can ping someone directly? The Rambling Man (talk) 13:13, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I can try and get in touch with an admin that's not directly involved with ITN. I think it's best to get the opinion of an outsider that is not familiar with the usual maelstrom that goes on during the nomination process.--WaltCip (talk) 14:20, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Wise move. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:21, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Taking your name in vain... lol

Mentioned you and The Boat Race series here: Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Largest_DYK_ever.3F. You would have some valuable input to this discussion Montanabw^(talk) 02:09, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 July 2016

• News and notes: Board unanimously appoints Katherine Maher as new WMF executive director; Wikimedia lawsuits in France and Germany

• Op-ed: Two policies in conflict?

• In the media: Terrorism database cites Wikipedia as a source

• Featured content: Triple fun of featured content

• Traffic report: Goalposts; Oy vexit

• Blog: Jimmy Wales names Emily Temple-Wood and Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight as Wikipedians of the Year

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:47, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Michael Cimino

On 5 July 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Michael Cimino, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 04:50, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

There is no such thing as bad publicity

I notice that you seem to have speedily deleted this redirect as WP:R3 – an implausible typo. This action seems inappropriate as the phrase is neither implausible nor a typo. The action is also improper as it did not follow discussion and you seem to be involved. Please revert. Andrew D. (talk) 16:10, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

It's an orphan and something you vanity-created. Move on and quit the erroneous obsession with involved actions. Take it elsewhere, and start being productive for a moment. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:52, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

I have taken the matter to WP:DRV. Andrew D. (talk) 17:13, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Well done! So proud. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:14, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Wambach

Hi Rambling Man, can you take a look at what's going on here? Thank you. Hmlarson (talk) 12:28, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

July 2016

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to David Thompson (explorer) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• of the maps issued by the Canadian government. It now resides in the [[Archives of Ontario]].<ref>[http://www.archives.gov.on.ca/english/exhibits/thompson/records.htm David Thompson Records Held by

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:36, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Closing the ITN/DC RFC

I don't want to pile on any more in there, but the quality gate helps prevent "just anyone" since a single local news paper article wouldn't be enough WP:RS to create a WP:N article anyway. --107.77.232.167 (talk) 21:37, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

I know that, you know that, and I've given an answer based on the fact that the proposal makes no changes to the existing approach in that regard. That should be enough, and the opposers who trod that path are either ignorant or stupid. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:39, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, however it turns out, it's been a riot being on your side for a change. Remember to make time for your family, the clowns on here are never going to love you like your family will. I'm going back to lurking ITN/C. Cheers, IP98 --107.77.232.167 (talk) 02:43, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Indeed, I'm glad to have tried hard on our behalf. Take it easy, and when you dislike everything I ever do in the future, just remember, there was one moment when ........... The Rambling Man (talk) 15:52, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Andria train collision

On 13 July 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Andria train collision, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. The Rambling Man (talk) 04:42, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

ITN/C and Boris

I'll leave the ITN/C for Boris alone for now (assuming it will be closed as not posted at some point), but I did find it telling that when did a quick look round the papers, the broadsheets have all got Teresa while the tabloids (except The Sun) have all got Boris. That just seems odd. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:36, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Apology

I didn't know I was pinging you and I can't figure out why that's been happening. I removed a couple things from the notes at the top of my talk to see if that makes any difference. Sorry for the unintended nuisance. Let me know if you have an idea of how to fix it. Sca (talk) 13:17, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Start my removing my linked user name. That way, no matter why it's happening, it won't happen again. I get that you want to desperately display this juvenile banner of shame about me, but the least you can do is stop telling me about it. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:19, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Will do – but TRM, really, do you always have to get in a dig or insult every time you communicate with me? I didn't start this exchange that way – I sought to be conciliatory. WP:EQ. – Sca (talk) 13:40, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Bollocks, conciliatory would be to remove the playground banner and to stop pinging us both about it. Pot and kettle. If you feel that you can just ping me and drop messages here whenever you like, you should start acting like a grown-up and remove the pathetic banner. You dig and insult every time you leave that shit at the top of your talk page. Now do me a favour and go away. It's either equal or it isn't, but I won't resort to pathetic school kid banners every five minutes. You are old enough to know better. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:13, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

This sort of venomous invective is the reason you are banned from my talk page. I give up on ever establishing any sort of working relationship with a person who constantly spews vituperation and disparagement at me in a continuing and totally unprovoked vendetta.

This is you.

Sca (talk) 14:42, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

You're the one with the pathetic warning that you keep pinging us about so why not just disappear and stop pretending that you are somehow superior. You are absolutely not. Now go back to your futile banners and stop bothering those of us who make a real difference here. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:08, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Oh and as for totally unprovoked vendetta, try STOP PINGING ME WITH YOUR JUVENILE NOTICE. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:10, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Removed the link to your user name from my talk page, and your message there. If you're still getting pinged, I have no explanation and don't know how to stop it. Sca (talk)

Wonderful, how very generous of you. Now, disappear off somewhere and continue with your futile little notices and emoticons and leave improving Wikipedia to those of us who can and do. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:36, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Happier times ahead

Do you still do GA reviews or know someone who does? Secretariat (horse) is up; it's a "big" article, and an old one that required a lot of reworking and re-sourcing; as you know, those are sometimes the toughest ones to work on. We need a good reviewer. Montanabw^(talk) 09:10, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

If you don't find a good reviewer, then I could give it a go. Might take me a couple of days to get to it and a couple of days to complete it? The Rambling Man (talk) 14:03, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

That would be fine, my personal deadline is the WikiCup round, but I'll be getting antsy if the review isn't underway by August 1. If someone else gets there first, that is fine, but go ahead and put it in your queue if you'd like. Montanabw^(talk) 02:34, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Looks like I was beaten to it. Hope you manage to sort out that lengthy lead and the table sorting... ! The Rambling Man (talk) 11:33, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Feel free to pop by for wikignoming. In the meantime, another languishing GA, not mine, but I've edited it some and so can't review is 1973 Preakness Stakes. Montanabw^(talk) 22:11, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

ITN/RD trial criteria RFC

It looks like the ITN/RD trial criteria passed muster. Congratulations on getting it through (and extra congrats for trudging through the treacle of the opposition filibuster).--WaltCip (talk) 15:09, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Indeed, I got the feeling that particular editor suddenly realised how wrong he was and hasn't edited since... Hopefully it'll be a good and positive change for RD! The Rambling Man (talk) 15:14, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Pokemon

Has since the 10th July been the subject of, or been featured in, over 30 BBC news or media articles. Probably irrelevant. Only in death does duty end (talk) 22:33, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2016 Open Championship

On 19 July 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2016 Open Championship, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Yellow Dingo (talk) 08:40, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Bad edit conflict

Do with this as you wish!

The Chicago Marathon, one of the six World Marathon Majors, has been contested by men and women annually since 1977. Since 1983, it has been held annually in October.

More winners of the Chicago Marathon have come from the United States of America than any other country, with eight men and twelve women victorious in the 38 races run to date. In the men's competition, Kenya leads the way: Kenyans achieved a seventh consecutive victory in 2009, have ten wins in total and the country lies second in the standings for both sexes. The United Kingdom is in third place for total victories (eight), victories by men (five) and victories by women (three). All four of Brazil's victors have been men, and all three of Portugal's winners have been women.

--Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 15:06, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

References

Your stalker

I remember at one point a user was harassing you by constantly socking and post either on your page or report you to ANI. Is it still happening? What is the story anyways? Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 21:19, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Could be one of many idiots. Not sure who you mean precisely I'm afraid. I've never felt "harassed' here, just mildly vexed by dickheads and incompetent admins, former Arbcom members and WMF employees who have forgotten how this place works...! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:21, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

I could have sworn there was this IP that kept posting about you. It was countless. Maybe I am mistaken. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 21:35, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm sure you're right, if you discover it let me know. Any reason why you're asking about it? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:38, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

No reason specifically. I saw your username on my watchlist through ANI and the thought just came to me. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 21:43, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 July 2016

• News and notes: Board faces diversity and skill-base issues in new FDC appointments

• Discussion report: Busy month for discussions

• In the media: Women in science editathon gets national press; Wikipedia "shockingly biased"

• Featured content: A wide variety from the best

• Traffic report: Sports and esports

• Arbitration report: Script writers appointed for clerks

• Recent research: Using deep learning to predict article quality

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:19, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

FLC review

Hai, I have a FLC review open here. It's an award list. If you are interested, leave some comments. Thanks. --Charles Turing (talk) 11:16, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:53, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I have rectified the issues you addressed.--Charles Turing (talk) 19:27, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

possible review

Hello The Rambling Man. I have happened to notice you have been a prolific contributor of cricket FLs. I currently have a cricket FLC open here and if you have the time I would very much appreciate it if you could give the list a look. - Yellow Dingo (talk) 11:09, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:53, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Hey TRM; I replied to your comments on this FLC a couple of days back and this is just a gentle reminder. I'm guessing you didn't get the ping. Thanks for the review BTW- Yellow Dingo (talk) 08:45, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

FLC request

Hi, I know this may not be your area of interest, but wonder if you could review this candidate. I'm sure you can help fine tune the prose and table. —Vensatry _(talk) 14:20, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:14, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

ITN

Your closings and deletions are an admission that you're wrong and I'm right. How can you justify promoting a fake "psychic" who is of no importance to anyone, and suppressing a story about a terrorist attack? ITN has gone severely off the rails. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:40, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Nope, but nice try. Next up: why we should all have guns, why Trump is going to save the universe, and why contributing nothing to Wikipedia other than using it as a social media platform is a good thing. I can barely wait. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:41, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

@Baseball Bugs: closing the discussion was my doing, not TRM. The submissions on ITN/C are for discussing the articles themselves, not any issues regarding ITN itself or the approved changes from the RFC. If this is just a case of WP:IDON'TLIKEIT, then you're just wasting your time. If you actually want to go against the results of the RFC, start up discussion on the ITN talk page and provide your reasoning. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 21:48, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

(e/c) But Baseball Bugs, in all seriousness, you seem to be having significant problems understanding how certain aspects of Wikipedia functions. If you'd like me to help you, perhaps discuss what "consensus" means, or show you a well-advertised and well-commented on RFC, or maybe just a picture of Jesus riding a dinosaur (I'm led to believe that's something that creationists are into, not saying you are, but hey, this crazy world is full of messed up people, just take a look at the Republican candidate for POTUS!). In any case, I'm more than happy to guide you through how Wikipedia works, how we get a consensus on things, how to determine if a person is notable, how to nominate them for deletion rather than just losing the plot over them being featured at RD, the list is (virtually, literally, metaphorically.....) endless!!! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:50, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Delete your account

24 minutes and one support is consensus these days? Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 06:51, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Delete my account? You really are pathetic (not to mention you should know by know that it's actually technically not possible)... Honestly Ed, we're all so pleased to see you. It was an RD and I had checked the quality. Unlike your cowboy antics. Now disappear and understand that we're watching. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:22, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

We have an article on this. It's not meant literally.

It's interesting to hear you use the word "cowboy" there, given that that you yourself "checked the quality" and decided to post Marni Nixon without waiting for others to chime in. It appears that you're not following ITN's recent deaths criteria, which as I'm sure you know say that RDs have to be "Of sufficient quality to be posted on the main page, as determined by a consensus of commenters" (emphasis mine). According to you, we don't assume consensus can be achieved in (mere) minutes, but of course as you have also stated, unfortunately there's a level of WP:COMPETENCE to which a number of those who regularly contribute at ITN fail to meet. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 16:19, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Ed, do us all a favour and find something else to do. I'm not interested in you or your methods here. You'll note, of course, that the article i posted was re-posted without further adjustment. The difference is that I can judge quality articles and minimum standards, and you are just an embarrassment waiting to be finally caught. It's not just me saying it, but you should know, your edits are now subject to significantly more scrutiny and it's just a matter of time before your old habits return, and then we breathe a sigh of relief as your sandboxing with the main page will finally be terminated. Purple? You're a running joke. Now bugger off and let the rest of us improve Wikipedia while you sit on your itchy-main-page-joke-and-play-thing-trigger-finger. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:23, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

I welcome any and all scrutiny of my edits! When I'm wrong, I'm wrong (although—and this is my major complaint against you, hence the deliberate echoing above—I do expect that a level of collegial decorum be upheld when calling me out, so please expect that the same attention will be given to your invective habits. And that's just not me saying that!). :-) Cheers and goodbye, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 17:48, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

You were told several times that your misunderstanding of "invective" and bad interpretation of "NPA" has sunk to a new level. Get a grip and remember that plenty of us are here to ensure you no longer use the main page as your playspace. Now go away forever and leave the maintenance of Wikipedia to the grown-ups. Smiley face. Sad face. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:36, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

• In the context of editor retention... I am left wondering what impression this conversation gives noobs of the site. Just a thought. Carry on  :) _Muffled ^Pocketed 17:55, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it's sad, but the sooner Ed realises that he can't just "pop by" here and expect a free ride, the better. The sooner people like him are no longer able to piss about with the main page, the better. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:36, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Like-Minded Person

"Dreaming the same Impossible Dream"		The Like-Minded Persons' Club
		For displaying here common sense and uncommon good taste by agreeing with me or saying something I would have said if only I'd had the presence of mind, I hereby bestow upon you Provisional Membership of the Like-Minded Persons' Club. To qualify for Full Membership, simply continue to agree with me in all matters for at least the next 12 months. (Disagreements are so vulgar, don't you think?)

Jolly good. Carry on. Tally ho. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 10:13, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

What is it with some of these Americans who insist on trying to answer every question, regardless of whether they know anything about the answer? And I was sorry to see that particular false assertion came from a Kiwi.... Thanks for the provisional membership though! The Rambling Man (talk) 10:22, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

But Rambling Maaaan, cricket is just LIKE baseball. Just like Aussie rules is just like football, or tennis is just like bocce.--WaltCip (talk) 13:58, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Baseball is just like cricket in the same way as the USA is just like Blighty. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 14:19, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Temper tantrum alert

Here...--WaltCip (talk) 20:35, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

I've seen it, thanks. What these goons don't realise (or maybe, in some childish sense, they do realise) is that amongst the 8,000 pages I have on watchlist, I include these kind of individuals' talk pages. I'm not interested in the slightest, they're bitching about things that don't even relate to adminship, just editorial discourse, and they tend to seek any excuse to drag me and others through ANI or to Arbcom or whatever. It's terrifyingly sad, especially when you consider that they generally offer little-to-nothing when it comes to improving the Wikipedia. Why are they here? Monitors? Police? Social media rejects? I don't know. But I don't care. I've added more to the quality of our readers' experience of Wikpiedia today than they will do in a year. As my mum would say, "if you're not part of the solution, you're a wanker". The Rambling Man (talk) 20:48, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

I never have temper tantrums. I merely raise questions that some editors don't feel comfortable hearing. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:17, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

You're not here to improve Wikipedia. You attempt to respond to everything at the Ref desks despite knowing very little about most of it. Often you actually answer incorrectly and disruptively. You are not a net positive here. You don't understand the difference between a RD and a blurb. You don't understand how consensus works. You are probably the least competent long-term editor on Wikipedia I have ever had the misfortune to bump into. I sincerely hope you retract from ITN where you make precisely zero positive contribution and head back to the ref desks, where you make the odd "quirky" suggestion, and stay there. The encyclopedic part of this encyclopedia really isn't somewhere you should venture. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:21, 28 July 2016 (UTC)