User talk:Beyond My Ken

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
It is The Reader that we should consider on each and every edit we make to Wikipedia.
     A HORSE
     (crowd-sourced)
(Life is too short!)
Undertow seal.png

Articles that look like shit and need to be fixed[edit]

Reminder: To work on[edit]

Xanadu (musical)[edit]

Would you kindly explain why you reverted every one of my edits to the article on "Xanadu (musical)", even including my addition of a relevant cite and the revival of a dead cite? -Tullyvallin (talk) 13:01, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Because you changed all the dates from the American form to the British form, which was incorrect. BMK (talk) 18:16, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Thirty Day Princess poster.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Thirty Day Princess poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:09, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Note to self: Someone replaced it with a supposedly free poster. I have my doubts. BMK (talk) 18:17, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Center for Security Policy[edit]

My understanding is that in American law a charity is defined by Category:501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations. Maybe it shouldn't be so classified, but according to the article, it is.Rathfelder (talk) 18:24, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Your understanding is incorrect. A 501(c)(3) organization is a not-for-profit tax-exempt organization. Most charities are 501c3's, but that doesn't mean that all 501c3's are charities. Read 501(c) organization#501(c)(3). BMK (talk) 18:37, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I cant see any other definition of a charity in US law. The article says not all charities come within 501(c). It doesn't suggest anything which is not charity can come within it, other than a grant making charitable foundation. Charitable contribution deductions in the United States makes it clear that section 501(c)(3) qualifies an organisation "to gain status as a tax-exempt non-profit charitable organization".Rathfelder (talk) 21:47, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Nope, wrong. My wife works for a 501(c)(3), and it is not a charity, it is a not-for-profit law firm. The vast majority of non-commercial theatres are 501{c){3)s. Here's what the IRS says:

Exempt Purposes - Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3)

The exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3) are charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals. The term charitable is used in its generally accepted legal sense and includes relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erecting or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the burdens of government; lessening neighborhood tensions; eliminating prejudice and discrimination; defending human and civil rights secured by law; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency.[1]
Again, most charities are 501c3s, but not all 501c3s are charities. BMK (talk) 21:53, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Don't post here about this subject again, go to the article talk page instead. BMK (talk) 22:00, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

White washing[edit]

Hey BMK, I noticed this recent edit from you on CSP’s page: [2]. I thought it was an *attempt* at a good faith edit and was a little taken aback by your accusation of “whitewashing.” I took a little time to go through a little of the edit history and noticed that there are a few instances where this has happened 12. I hope you don't take my comment negatively. I know there are socks out there, but I think you may be a bit trigger-happy with your accusations of “whitewashing” and are failing to assume good faith of other editors. I wanted to bring this to you first before I considered bringing this up to an administrator. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Armchair General (talkcontribs) 18:03, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

The article has a long history of attempts to remove material that CSP deems to be negative. That's not going to happen.Ggiven its history, I think it's quite reasonable to put aside AGF in this instance and assume that similar attempts are exactly what they appear to be. BMK (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
I saw no malicious intent with any of the edits cited above. The last edit was someone simply moving a statement from one section of the article to a different section of the article. Your belief that it is "reasonable to put aside AFG" and "assume" any edits that change some of the negative aspects of the article is "whitewashing" not only violates AFG editing guidelines, it also violates the "Assume the assumption of good faith" and the “Don't assume” editing guide. Take it easy and give people the benefit of the doubt. You're a bit trigger-happy and if this keeps happening I will bring it to the attention of the administrators.The Armchair General (talk) 14:19, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

June 2016[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Irvington, New York 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:
  • meaning "pleasant place" in [[Zulu language|Zulu]]<ref name=guilded>Higgons, Jenny (June 14, 2016) [http://www.lohud.com/story/money/real-estate/homes/2016/06/14/victorian-house-irvington-splendor/

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:03, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done BMK (talk) 20:07, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Special:Diff/725299518[edit]

I do not think that the reintroduction of the "CS1 maint: Multiple names: editors list" error is the way to go. It is clear that they are editors. Nevertheless, I you would prefer for "(eds.)" to be displayed, you should request a change to the 'cite' template to be made at Help talk:Citation Style 1 . --Dcirovic (talk) 20:34, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

No, it is not clear that they are editors, so whatever form it takes, the citation must clearly state that they are editors. Please stop making changes whichremove important information from citations. The information is much more important than that the cite follows some arcane Wiki-rule. BMK (talk) 20:56, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
The purpose of separation of authors and editors is to enable proper integration with COinS metadata. In order for that to work, the names cannot have free-formatted additions. It is possible to bypass metadata integration by using 'authors' and 'editors' parameters. However, that is not the preferred solution.
If you think that having "(eds.)" is important, than it should be equally important to have it present in all references. The best way to accomplish that is by altering the template. --Dcirovic (talk) 21:15, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
You know what, I don't give two shits about metadata, I'm here to write an encyclopedia, and if metadata gets in the way of that, then the metadata needs to be fixed. The tail should not wag the dog. BMK (talk) 21:18, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Mail[edit]

Check it. Can't remember template! Muffled Pocketed 20:26, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

I did, was just going to answer. Template is template:ygm as in "You've got mail". BMK (talk) 20:28, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Right, I see- cheers! Muffled Pocketed 09:42, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
I didn't get that either! Something's a bit bizarre. No worries Muffled Pocketed 15:53, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Did you check your spam folder? BMK (talk) 15:58, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Outlook; no spam folder. Receiving others from WP recently- you didn't happen to send with some fat attachment maybe? Muffled Pocketed 17:46, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Nah, this last one was barely 2 lines. BMK (talk) 18:02, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 16[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

John Randel Jr. (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Surveyor and American Institute
No, No, Nanette (1930 film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Ed Ward and Michael Cleary
Commissioners' Plan of 1811 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Superblock

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done BMK (talk) 15:32, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Stark Mad[edit]

Ok, where should I begin. In the case of Stark Mad, the original paragraph was made by a poster/editor who used an IP address instead of having a Wikipedia account, thus his IP addresses vary. These postings concerning Warner Brothers and or First National Pictures, usually silent, but some sound, usually have a citation heading "1957 MOVIES FROM AAP Warner Brothers Features and Cartoons..". They link to Internet Archive, Media Digital History Library, a collection of the various catalogs of available for home prints. So you're correct when you say "This Material has been added to a fairly large number of film articles in the past." Assuming it's the same editor from IP to IP the citing in some of the articles using the "1957 MOVIES FROM AAP" doesn't always represent what the line or text the article is describing. It's just a stray citation, though I know what he's generally inferring and that he may even be well meaning. You can go through any number of films with this citation at List of early Warner Bros. talking features. The poster misconstrues, that Jack L. Warner ordered destroyed the pre-1948 negatives but still maintained prints of those films that were intact and good for rerelease, show-at-home, television, whatever. His paragraph did not say that and I tried giving some of it a rewrite so that it was literate, accurate, and coherent and not coming off as jibberish. As fleeting as the IP poster was, the Jack Warner sale of his survivingng prints (rather than negatives) was more complicated than what the IP poster citated. (*See Saving Cinema: The Politics of Preservation) Koplimek (talk) 22:37, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

I am aware of the IP-hopper from Khazakstan who posted this stuff. The rewrite was appreciated, but it's still essentially unsourced. Have toy posted on Talk:Stark Mad#Unsourced material? BMK (talk) 00:14, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Hiya[edit]

Just wanted to let you know that there in fact is an ANI discussion regarding you. It is about your having told an individual to stay off this page. Just FYI. John Carter (talk) 23:13, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

And it's been closed as non-actionable. John Carter (talk) 23:40, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. In defense of the OP, he did notify me, but I deleted it. BMK (talk) 00:15, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

File:David T. Abercrombie.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:David T. Abercrombie.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. 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. Magog the Ogre (t c) 16:42, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Chuckletime[edit]

"'... who indulge in all sorts of irrelevant activity " Face-smile.svg Muffled Pocketed 15:12, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

William A. Boring[edit]

Old trick - I changed the external links to references because I was going to run Reflinks on the article to clean up bare URLs - all of them were bare, references and external links alike. Soon as I finished I un-changed them. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 20:05, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

OK, got it, thanks. Sorry to interrupt you mid-action. BMK (talk) 20:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
No worries - if you ever catch me at it, that's what I'm doing when I convert external links. Makes my life so much easier.
Keep up the good work, and happy editing! --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 20:08, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Metropolitan Life North Building[edit]

For the past few days I've been working on articles that link to dab pages, and this one came up. Apparently the lede misstates that Metropolitan Life replaced Stanford White's 1906 church. However, since neither structure is mentioned in the History section, I'll go back and clarify that. With both linked in the article, would it then be acceptable to delete the link to the dab page? (Happy summer.) Mannanan51 (talk) 04:32, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

@Mannan51: What you've done seems fine. I made a couple of tweaks to the lede for sense, but otherwise all seems well. Thanks very much, BMK (talk) 10:30, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Fixing ping @Mannanan51: BMK (talk) 10:31, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Incendiary Blonde (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Howard Johnson
John Randel Jr. (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to James A. Bayard

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:11, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done BMK (talk) 15:08, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Previous Review request[edit]

I've put a lot of time and energy into helping you, and this is what I get? Fuck that, it's over, done, finished, get someone else to review your edits. If I see you adding anything to the Lane Powell article directly, I will revert it and bring it to the attention of admins as COI editing. Don't post to my page again, you ungrateful "intern". BMK (talk) 18:50, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

My apologizes[edit]

BMK, I want to apologize. Although my intentions were to just present a counter argument and not offend you, it did come across as unappreciative. So I do want to apologize and thank you for all your hard work and time that you have put in to help me. I sincerely mean it. Frustration got the better of me. (LPWik97203 (talk) 19:11, 23 June 2016 (UTC))

Your apology is accepted, pro forma. It changes nothing, I will not assist you on vetting your edits on Lane Powell, and I warn you again about deleting other people's comments from talk pages. BMK (talk)
BMK the comments that you made on the article talk page, and that you blanked, were useful. May I restore them? Jytdog (talk) 22:31, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
@Jytdog: Yes, of course, you may. Format them as you see fit, but I would prefer that it be clear that you're restoring them with my permission, not that I did so myself. Best, BMK (talk) 22:35, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Great thanks. Thanks for being willing to help and I understand why you don't want to anymore. Jytdog (talk) 00:18, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Koruikivka reference[edit]

I have provided the source for the "largest atrocity" at the Koriukivka page - http://sivertimes.com/book-and-information-exhibition-to-the-days-of-koriukivka-massacre/846

Could you please restore the text, if its OK now?

And thanks for paying attention to the articles and suggestions to improve!

Портовик (talk) 12:33, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I've reverted my edit and added your citation. Thanks. BMK (talk) 21:33, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Regarding to Edward321[edit]

Juandavid ph (talk) 23:22, 24 June 2016 (UTC)I´m kinda new on policies, so i´m lost here.

Ok. i'll take in count your suggestions. Thank you :)

Reply[edit]

Thanks for informing me of Juandavid ph jumping straight to arbitration enforcement without even bothering to inform me. His sole previous interaction was posting to my talk page where he assumed bad faith on my part, referred to it as his article, accused me of vandalism, demanded I "stay away from his article", and came across as demanding I post to his talk page to get permission for any edits to "his article".[3] Could you please explain the Wikipedia guidelines in reliable sources, notability, fringe theories, and neutral point of view to Juandavid ph? He listened to you enough to revert his post to the arbitration noticeboard. His version of "his article" treats any report of ghosts as true, regardless of the quality of the source. [4] Edward321 (talk) 00:11, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Good idea, I've done so. BMK (talk) 00:40, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 26 June[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:28, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done BMK (talk) 00:46, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

History of Abercrombie & Fitch[edit]

The relevant policy the image violated was cite by Stefan2, which you failed to properly refute. Consensus is determined by strengths of the arguments, not by the numbers of participants arguing one way or another. Again, if you disagree with my closure, feel free to take it to WP:DRV. Making any further reverts will be viewed as disruptive behavior, which you should only continue to do if you're interested in getting blocked for it, in addition to violating consensus and violating the WP:NFCC policy. — ξxplicit 11:34, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Nope, simply citing an opinion that a policy was violated is not the same thing as the policy actually being violated, that has to be determined by a consensus of the editors in the discussion, which did not exist. By closing the discussion without providing your a summary of consensus you have, in effect, made a supervote, and you know that that is not allowable. I have filed at DRV, and you need to leave the image in place until the review is complete. I do not recommend that you block me, as you are inherently involved, and in any case, a threat of a block does not scare me away from pursuing what is correct. BMK (talk) 11:39, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

ANI Closed[edit]

What does "OP" stand for

Article semi'd for a year, OP given advice, seems like that's it, folks. 61.3.42.217 (talk) 11:54, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) See Internet forum#Thread- Internet slang for 'original poster' in a thread. so, you were the OP here! Muffled Pocketed 11:57, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) It stands for "original poster" :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 11:55, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) It could stand for "Outgoing President" -Roxy the dog™ woof 12:14, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Or Optimus Prime...! Muffled Pocketed 12:19, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Reply from Davidng913[edit]

To BMK. I already removed the differences sections. Thanks for telling me. Davidng913 (talk) 21:52, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

No, I restored it. BMK (talk) 21:53, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Epicgenius does agree that we should remove the sections of differences, due to them being unsourced. Please leave it that way.Davidng913 (talk) 16:08, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

30th Street Station[edit]

What was the reason for this no-comment revert? The standard station infobox width is perfectly adequate for standard horizontal images like the one used there. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:02, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

I disagree, the standard size was not sufficient for the reader to glean the availabe information from the image. It's been like that for quite a while, and no one seems to have had a problem with it except you. BMK (talk) 03:15, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
No, you are disagreeing with established precedent in both cases where you have reverted me. The documentation for the reflist template uses 30em as the default. Using 30em versus 40em here not only is the best support for all varieties of browsers (any smartphone browser will have a width of 30em, but many are not 40em wide), but vastly reduces the amount of whitespace. That will especially be true as the article is expanded and the number of properly formatted sources increases. Meanwhile, lengthy discussions on Template talk:Infobox station have established the default upright=1.35 parameter as the proper width for horizontal images for station articles. That is based on MOS:IMGSIZE which specifically says that "Lead images should usually use upright=1.35 at most". Given that this is a fairly typical station image in a fairly typical aspect ratio, there is no reason to violate this.
This seems to be part of a rather longer-term pattern where you act as though you have ownership of the article. On a number of occasions you have reverted positive or needs-to-be-discussed-but-possibly-worthwhile changes, often with either no comment or a dismissive summary like "Restore better version". This includes reverting a widely-implemented set of parameter standardization changes by an extremely experienced user, removing Street View links (again, widely used) (the purpose of Street View links is not to replace Commons images, but to provide an interactive view of the areas around the station. This is extremely useful to actual users of the station looking for entrances, dropoff areas, etc in their physical context), treating a factually correct IP edit as though it was vandalism, and more. Meanwhile, almost none of your edits to this article have any edit summary. I find it distasteful that you are acting as though your personal preferences on this article outweigh the needs and opinions of the community. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 07:54, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
You're welcome to your opinion, but although you're wrong on many counts, I have little interest in discussing them with you, considering your accusatory attitude. BMK (talk) 15:24, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
You are correct; I conflated technical edits with behavior which was unfair to you. I am sorry for being an accusatory grouch.
I would like a discussion on the technical merits of some of our edits. If you now prefer not to engage directly with me, then I can post on the article talk page. If you're willing to discuss here - either from my previous comment, or I can rewrite a less accusatory summary of my thoughts - then that works for me. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:03, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
In a couple of hours I'm going to be on a cruise ship, and I'm not shelling out the exorbitant price their asking for WiFi access, so could this be a discussion we have after I return home on the 10th? BMK (talk) 13:16, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Harlem River (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Circle Line
Inwood Marble (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Ossining, New York
Merrily We Go to Hell (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Charles Coleman
The Grifters (film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Charles Napier

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:37, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done BMK (talk) 16:27, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Edit warring re: furry fandom[edit]

Hi, I believe your recent behavior in editing furry fandom has nothing to do with improving the article. I've reported it as edit warring, particularly since you now accuse me of POV-pushing. Furry-friend (talk) 11:30, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

LAs mentioned, you don't seem to know exactly what edit warring is. BMK (talk) 13:14, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Notice[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Beyond My Ken resorting to personal attacks and refusing discussion in order to prevent editing an article. Thank you. Mdann52 (talk) 16:12, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Just passing the above along for someone you've asked not to talk to you (apparently, I don't know the history here...) Mdann52 (talk) 16:17, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Apologies for using your talk page, but I have been informed that Wikipedia policy states I must post this on your talk page: Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Furry-friend (talk) 09:27, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:David T. Abercrombie.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:David T. Abercrombie.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 08:15, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

WP:SIGFORGE[edit]

I saw that you often use my signature. You should not do this. It's easy to use the signature placeholder to sign your posts correctly. I dont‘t want to be mentioned if you do comments, corrections or something like this. Please respect that BMK is my registered signature! --BMK (talk) 16:01, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

We've talked about this before, some years ago. You do not edit on en.wiki, and I use "Beyond My Ken" on every other WikiMedia Project where we might both edit. There is not real conflict, and extremely little chance that we will be confused. I am not "forging" your sig, because there is no intent to deceive. My personality and behavior are well known here, and yours is not. I do not believe the matter needs any additional discussion, but if you are unhappy with the situation, I suggest you do what 7.83% of English Wikipedians do and bitch about me on AN/I. 19:54, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Our BMK; Well, of course he has been encouraged to do so... Muffled Pocketed 19:58, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Ah, I see that someone I have been in conflict with is stirring the pot. It brings to mind that part of WP:HARASSMENT which reads: :

Harassment is a pattern of repeated offensive behavior that appears to a reasonable observer to intentionally target a specific person or persons. Usually (but not always) the purpose is to make the target feel threatened or intimidated, and the outcome may be to make editing Wikipedia unpleasant for the target, to undermine, frighten, or discourage them from editing.

Harassment can include actions calculated to be noticed by the target and clearly suggestive of targeting them, where no direct communication takes place.
So I'm wondering if any of the talk page stalkers here who happen to be admins would consider Editor A who has been in conflict with Editor B going to Editor C to stir things up a little by informing Editor C of how they can hassle Editor B might not fall under this rule? If so, a look at Fortuna's link above and a word to the wise to Editor A to cut it out might be appropriate. I myself have no plans to say anything further to Editor A, and I have responded to Editor C above. BMK (talk)

(tpw) With the rollout of cross wiki notifications, in the off chance someone uses User:BMK| when referring to you on en.wiki [5] [6] they get a notification on de.wiki. - NQ (talk) 11:16, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

This is about the most preposterous complaint I've seen yet. SIGFORGE is intended for deliberate forgeries, rather than innocent signature collisions. Sure, Beyond my Ken could choose a different sig, but I see no indication he's mandated to. The "registered signature" comment is particularly weird. There isn't a registered trademark-like protection available for sigs on WP. If we even wanted to use an IP-like analysis we'd look to common law trademark law, and discover that Beyond my Ken's use would be excused because BMK doesn't participate here normally, and vice versa. If anything, this sort of analysis might lead to a conclusion that BMK should change his sig when on enwiki. But I don't see that happening. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 14:30, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Mendaliv, a year ago I'd have agreed with you, but with the new systems in place I think the complaint is reasonable. Now that cross-wiki notifications are in place, it means User:BMK will get a notification on de-wiki every time someone on en-wiki accidentally refers to Beyond My Ken as [[User:BMK]], which must get fairly irritating fairly quickly. Assuming Beyond My Ken wants to abbreviate his signature, changing it to something like User:B.M.K. which won't cause the same problem would seem a reasonable request—deliberately continuing to do something which gives no benefit to yourself and causes a nuisance to someone else, just because you "do not believe the matter needs any additional discussion", is at the very least poor manners, regardless of whether it actually violates any policy. ‑ Iridescent 14:50, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Irisdescent, thanks for that (the information, not the slap on the hand), I hadn't thought about the change that cross-Wiki notifications brought about, making the formerly existing Chinese wall between User:BMK and myself much more permeable than it once was. It's certainly easy for editors, especially newbies, to confuse the sig with the account name and send a ping or post a comment to the wrong place. I'll make a change, although I'm not sure what exactly it will be. BMK (talk) 17:16, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
@NQ: My thanks to you as well, and to @Mendaliv:. BMK (talk) 17:18, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
(talk page watcher)I still don't understand why User:BMK came here and pointed that out, but didn't go to User:Bmk's page and make a similiar request to that he made here. Muffled Pocketed 17:22, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Considering this, I have, at least for the time being, restored my sig to my account name. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:10, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

It's a shame to see a regular lose his moniker. The WMF really should have considered that before pushing this change through. How about using BTK? It's similar and available. Larsilopolus (talk) 19:11, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm considering other choices and will probably make a change at some point when I get over being disheartened from the idiocy on AN/I. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:56, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Maybe "BMK with mayo on white toast". Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:04, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

David T. Abercrombie[edit]

Please stop re-adding non-free images in violation of WP:NFCC#1. A non-free image being preferred or higher-resolution does not exempt it from policy. If you re-add this image again you are liable to be blocked to prevent you from committing violations. Stifle (talk) 09:35, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

File:David T. Abercrombie.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:David T. Abercrombie.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. 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. Stifle (talk) 09:37, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:David T. Abercrombie.jpg[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

Thanks for uploading File:David T. Abercrombie.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 09:49, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

File source problem with File:David T. Abercrombie.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:David T. Abercrombie.jpg. 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. Stefan2 (talk) 09:50, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Gah! I remember you and the other image brute from my days attempting to upload images here without arguing the NFCC loopholes you exploit. He's under enough pressure right now, you big meanies! It's an image from the early '30's at the latest. It's probably PD - not something to bust his balls over. Boo. Doc talk 10:04, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

I've tracked the image back to a PNG uploaded by Nenyedi (talk · contribs) in 2007; full details are at Wikipedia:Files_for_discussion/2016_July_11#File:David_T._Abercrombie.jpg. Unfortunately there's not much to go on; he gave no hint whether he did the scan himself. There's nothing helpful in the metadata for either image. I've pinged him on his talk page but he's inactive three years now. I'll keep looking. Mackensen (talk) 13:01, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Returned[edit]

As promised, it's after the 10th and I've returned home. However I've also managed to pick up a very bad cold or something, and I feel like shit. "How very convenient", some might say - well, maybe so, but it's still the truth. I've just bombed myself with about every relevant OTC drug in the house and expect to be asleep soon. When I wake up is anybody's guess, when I return to full-time editing even more so. In the meantime, don't hesitate to keep slagging me off in various fora - get your jollies in while ye may. To those who have been defending me, my sincere thanks, I owe you all a beer or other beverage of your choice.

"Somewhere over the rainbow, bluebirds fly / There's an 'pedia where idiots, assholes, and SPAs have no alibi." (My apologies to Howard Arlen and E. Y. "Yip" Harburg.)

B.M.K. (aka "Beyond My Ken"; not the German editor User:BMK or the en.wiki editor User:Bmk or the Ugandian businessman Bulaimu Muwanga Kibirige) (talk) 12:18, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Tuesday - Still feel like crud but marginally less so. Just a cold (I hope) moving down from my head to my sinuses, to my throat, to my chest, with the added bonus of cramping in the calves and shins. Taking mondo meds to force me to sleep, meaning my brain is muzzy (I just tried to call my wife at her office on the TV remove control. Didn't get her, but saw some pretty awful ladies' sneakers on QVC.
Unless things clear up a bit by this evening, probably no editing from me until tomorrow at the earliest. I recommend that everyone who's ever has a conflict with me (after 11 years and 192K edits to 35K+ pages, that's a lot of opportunities for disputes!) head over to AN/I to put the knife in while they can, before some poor sane admin realizes that there's no "there" there, just a conflict dispute and a lot of hot air, and closes it down. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:04, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Hang in the Bulaimu Muwanga Kibirige - that is my favorite one in the long signature above :-) I hope that you get to feeling better soon. MarnetteD|Talk 19:10, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
I'd buy you a beer myself in exchange for an honest conversation. Mackensen (talk) 21:57, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
You might start by reading User:Beyond My Ken/thoughts#Lying, while keeping WP:AGF in mind. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:24, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
You've fixated on the idea that people thought you were lying. That's not what this was about. Mackensen (talk) 02:37, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
No, it was about many things: it was about vindictiveness, retribution, trolling, SPA POV editing, and long-held grudges. It was also about getting back at someone who has contributed more to the encyclopedia that most of the other participants in the discussion, the implicit denial that Wikipedia is in reality a meritocracy (as it should be) and not the libertarian heaven-on-earth some editors thought they were signing up for. It was also about my tendency to be sarcastic at times, to have an extremely low-tolerance for stupidity, idiocy, bullshit, lack of judgment, and those who cannot tell the difference between suggested activity and absolutely policy (who are among the hard core of the MOS-hardliners). In a very minor way it was about my being snarky to a SPA bent on skewing an article to their POV. It was also about rudeness when rudeness is justified and the inability of a 5-year editor to understand how Wikipedia works.
If what you're interested in doing is "curing" me, I suggest you save your energy and put it elsewhere: for instance into the myriad systemic problems that are the root cause of many of the problems mentioned above, such as cutting off IP editing, beefing up our security system so editors can actually spend more time editing and less removing vandalism, integrating automated editing programs which will eliminate grammar-school writing -- you know, stuff that will actually improve the encyclopedia and free up editors' time.
What I am not interested in, here or in real life, is a "Let's sit around a fireplace and get down to brass tacks" session, because – as opposed to neurology, social psychology, psychiatric pharmacology and other related fields – current "psychology" is a joke, more hand-waving then it is science, and has been for many, many decades.
Otherwise, if you have comments that fall outside those parameters, I'd be very interested in hearing them. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:34, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm going to walk away. As a long-tenured editor myself, I cannot agree with the position that tenure justifies disrespectful behavior. Mackensen (talk) 10:58, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
If that's what you got from what I wrote, then, yes, you had better walk away, because you're not getting it st all. If I were enclined to synopsize it in the manner you have, I'd say it was almost precisely the opposite: long tenure and massively productive contributions require respect for the editor and a certain amount of forgiveness for idiosyncrasies. That's what is meant by a meritocracy. Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:28, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:David T. Abercrombie.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:David T. Abercrombie.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:34, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Flyer (pamphlet)[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. – voidxor 19:01, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

BMK for convenience sake the thread is here Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Beyond My Ken still reverting maintenance edits without explanation. MarnetteD|Talk 19:50, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, MarnetteD, aI founf it, and thanks for being a good Wiki-friend. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:00, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Best wishes[edit]

I saw your request on Bbb23's talk page. I want to send best wishes and regards to you in the real world. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 20:28, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Oops I see that the block has been applied so you can't reply. No worries about that. Take care. MarnetteD|Talk 20:30, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Great respect for your contributions[edit]

I do not know you very well, but I am very sad that you are leaving. And I wanted to thank you for all that you have done for Wikipedia. MPS1992 (talk) 20:57, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

  • same. You will be remembered for "It's the reader ..." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:38, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for all your work[edit]

Your efforts have been appreciated. I hope your health is good, and that someday you will return to once again advance the encyclopedia. Regards! Jacona (talk) 21:00, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Agreed, we had our run-ins, but your article work was decent, sorry to see you leaving forever. Good luck. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:03, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Boing! is sad :-([edit]

I did the same myself once, so I understand. But I came back after a while, and I hope you do too. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:49, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Sorry you're leaving[edit]

Hello BMK. I don't believe we have ever interacted, but I am very sorry to hear you are leaving. You are an excellent editor and the community will has definitely lost a piece of itself... I know you have made your mind up but I do hope you return. Regards, --Zerotalk 22:11, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Ditto. Please don't take my vote of you receiving a warning as personal. It's just how I viewed the issue at hand. If you really do intend on making this permanent, we will miss you. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} 11:40, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Special Barnstar Hires.png The Special Barnstar
Thanks for all your hard work on this place and although we've never really worked together I've obviously seen you about and I will genuinely miss you,

Anyway take care and I wish you all the best for the future. –Davey2010Talk 22:13, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

I hope you reconsider[edit]

I have always interacted with you well BMK, and will genuinely miss you. Maybe take a break and return when you don't feel so worn down. You are a serious + mate. Get back ASAP. You're needed ;) Simon Irondome (talk) 23:05, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

I second the above sentiment. Doc talk 05:38, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
I just saw this. I hope you change your mind after taking a break. If not, thanks for all your contributions. Kierzek (talk) 03:53, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Hey BMK[edit]

I feel like you're kind of in the same place Malik was a while ago — the shit is grinding you down. Time to read, rest, and refresh and to come back strong. I can definitely relate to the "piles of unread books," but what I think you'll find is that you will need to write as you read for it to be a meaningful experience. I know it has turned out that way for me. Seriously though, take a break and clear your head and forget all the bullshit and the MOS monkeys and see if you can renew your faith in THE PROJECT, which is bigger than all the bureaucrats and all the automated editing twerps can comprehend.

What I said in the last ANI I hope you don't take the wrong way, but I really do mean — the aggressive editing needs to become a thing of the past. For one thing, because we all know how it ends if and when it escalates to ArbCom. For another, because stress is not fun and drama and edit-warfare get in the way of the fun of research and writing. You'll be happier for it. Seriously, there are MILLIONS (literally MILLIONS) of unwritten pages on WP. Get into some arcane area and dig and keep digging and keep digging. Let the stupid people congregate among the widely read, News of the Day, general interest type pages and fight amongst themselves. Find something unwritten and write it and improve the encyclopedia on the edges. That's the secret to life at WP.

I wish you all the best in your time off and look forward to seeing you back again when your battery is recharged. You might want to pop by Wikipediocracy and vent if the urge strikes you — the door is always open there. best regards, —Tim //// Carrite (talk) 04:38, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Thoughts[edit]

I've been away for a bit and this is a travesty of a thing to come back to. I've blocked you in the past, in the interest of WP:NVC, and perhaps you have a negative impression of me because of that. However I can honestly say that had I the impression of you then, that I do now, I would have without a doubt cut you more slack. Ultimately the distant past doesn't mean much, but regarding the present: You remain one of the few users whom I would consider a Wikipedia "old god". You are an administrator without tools. Your judgment and commentary is rarely questionable, and your word is oft respected as law by many editors and administrators, including myself. You're the embodiment of a great editor, and your impact on the project is not something that can be replicated or replaced. I don't know what led to your departure, but I genuinely hope this is a temporary measure for your own sanity. Otherwise, this would be one of the greater losses this project has seen, and I don't say that lightly. Take care BMK, and thanks for all you've done for the project. Swarm 05:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Precious[edit]

It is The Reader that we should consider

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

Thank you for quality contributions and images of historic places in NYC such as Sunset Park Courthouse, for cleanup, for "It is The Reader that we should consider", for making us think about "One of our cardinal principles here is that we should, whenever possible, assume good faith", for the changing paths on your constant clear user page, - EF, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

We miss you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:59, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

ps: I thought I had said so years ago. I write an article for a dear one missed, yours will be Bells of Beyond. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:07, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Bummer[edit]

BMK, going to miss things like "long tenure and massively productive contributions require respect for the editor and a certain amount of forgiveness for idiosyncrasies. That's what is meant by a meritocracy." My thoughts exactly. Come back when you have gotten the toxins out of your system. There is no deadline...! Montanabw(talk) 07:28, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Tireless Contributor Barnstar Hires.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
We haven't talked much but I have admired your views and ideals for a long time, and your aim to always make the reader the important thing in everything we do here is the right one. Don't be a stranger. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:27, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Chiming in here. I'll miss you, too. Your priorities are in the right place. Have fun reading more books, and I hope you find it in your heart to return. Yngvadottir (talk) 12:47, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

You will be missed.[edit]

I haven't had any personal contact with you apart from "lurking" your contributions and your various appearances on ANI, but I have to say it's a real shame and a disappointment that the rabble policy wonks on Wikipedia have brought you to this point. I sincerely hope that you will be able to return at some point, but somehow I doubt this place is going to get any better...--WaltCip (talk) 13:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

You'll be missed[edit]

The 99/1 rule (I made that up!) says that 1% of active editors contribute 99% of content. The departure of even one of the 1% hurts Wikipedia and I'm sorry to see you go. But I don't blame you. If you're going to get dragged to ANI every time you revert someone, editing here is not going to be a happy thing. I hope you decide to come back but, if you don't, I hope that the knowledge that you've contributed significantly to this repository of human knowledge will give you some satisfaction. Good luck in RL. --regentspark (comment) 13:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

seconded. Get well soon. Best wishes. Kleuske (talk) 18:00, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Sad to see you go[edit]

Good editors sometimes need to walk away to clear their heads. You were one of the good ones. Hopefully you'll be back in due time. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

I entirely agree. Somehow I manage to avoid being intensely annoyed by our few industriously annoying editors. Some of my betters try to do something about them, and perhaps that's a cause of burnout. I hope for our friend's return, both to good health and to good spirits. And eventually, perhaps, to our hobby, passion, cult or whatever we are. Oh, yes. I find that the trolls in Simple English Wikipedia are much less skillful, and the ones in Wikimedia Commons are less industrious. Unless you count our sometimes overactive Commons copyright police, but that's another area in which I lose a few cases and don't let them bother me. Jim.henderson (talk) 02:24, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Seven Samurai in Space[edit]

I see you reverted my edit to Seven Samurai; no hard feelings, I just saved the text but hadn't finished it; you'll see its now more comprehensive with references! P.S. see you're taking a break, thanks for your contribs to WP. Stub Mandrel (talk) 19:22, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you[edit]

Editors Barnstar.png The Editor's Barnstar
Thank you for your many valuable editing contributions to the encyclopedia over the years. I do hope you'll come back. SteveStrummer (talk) 21:39, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you![edit]

Cup-o-coffee-simple.svg Thanks for all the edits related to New York. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:51, 19 July 2016 (UTC)