User talk:Dennis Brown/Archive 17

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18

Contents

Drake equation

Hello Dennis, Could I please ask you to look at recent additions on the Drake equation page? I have recently reverted comments from 24.90.155.20, as they appear to be POV in both content and style. However, they have been re-inserted without any explanation and it appears that this contributor is starting to edit war. I would be grateful for your view on this? With very best regards, David David J Johnson (talk) 12:08, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

  • I've left them a message on their talk page. I agree that their edits do appear to have an inappropriate POV in them, and instructed them to take it to the article talk page instead of adding it back. Hopefully, that will suffice. Ping me again if they didn't get the hint. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 12:17, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
    • Dennis, Many thanks for your help. Will ping you if there are any further probs from this "contributor". Regards, David David J Johnson (talk) 12:29, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

Thanks for your work on editor retention.

  • Thank you, and happy holidays to you! I don't celebrate any of them officially, but I enjoy celebrating with my family and friends that do. I'm looking forward to spending some quality time with them over the next several days, eating some great food and creating some new memories. Hope you do as well, friend. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 19:35, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
    • I will indeed, its lucky I have a low cholesterol level. BTW Are you thinking of heading for Hong Kong this summer? It would be interesting to have a discussion on editor retention. ϢereSpielChequers 20:00, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
      • I wish I could, but I can't. I missed the DC event as well, and it is only 5 hours by car for me. I'm still kicking myself for missing that. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 20:08, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Sadly the DR stuff I attended at DC wasn't as good as I had hoped. But yes, it would have been worth the drive. Rich Farmbrough, 04:37, 21 December 2012 (UTC).
Since I'm so involved in DR (behavior more than content) I would have really enjoyed hearing some different perspectives on it. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 15:51, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protecting Jenni Rivera

The talk page indicates that you semi-protected the page Jenni Rivera due to "Violations of the biographies of living persons policy".

As the woman is deceased, shouldn't a different rationale for protection be indicated?

Thank you.--Yammie2009 (talk) 20:52, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

  • I completely understand the confusion. BLP applies to persons who have recently died the same as it does to those that are living, as part of the protection relates to their family and friends. There isn't a specific amount of time in policy that must pass before they are no longer covered. It is covered in a subsection of the BLP policy at WP:BDP. BLP is commonly applied as a rationale for recent deaths where there is improper editing regarding the events that surrounded the death itself. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 22:07, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

SPI

Hi, wanted to let you know I sent an email re a SPI. Thanks. Logical Cowboy (talk) 22:12, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Haven't looked at it. I assume it is ok to forward to a CU if needed? Dennis Brown - © Join WER 22:14, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Yes, please. I did mess up on the whole case, I posted it to the wrong place, out of habit. The link to the case is in the email. Thanks. Logical Cowboy (talk) 22:16, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
  • OK, I sent you a better email that is hopefully clearer. Thanks. Logical Cowboy (talk) 23:28, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Hi, seems like this went quiet. Would it help if I filed a fresh report in the correct place? I did name the wrong sockmaster, so that needs to be corrected. Or is this under way, and should I just wait a while? I did send an email to the CU with more information. Thanks. Logical Cowboy (talk) 22:46, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
  • for technical reasons, I had to hand this off. Keep in mind, it is the holiday season, lots of us are tied up with family and activities, so enwp has to take a little bit of a back seat. sorry. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 22:49, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Andy the Grump admission to editing drunk on AN/I

I am going to bed. But take a look and let me know where I went wrong. I don't know that actually did....but seems I have been accused of dramamongering and yet not a mention about Andy being drunk. This all stemming from a discussion on the Sandy Hook talk page. Thanks and feel free to trout if necessary.--Amadscientist (talk) 10:43, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

At any rate, there may need to be a checker user done at the very least on the IP and another (or others) showing up. I think I stayed to long at that party. If there is a current SPI investigation that would be of relevance to my opinion on the IP, but I now feel I should not interact with Andy in any shape of form ever. Good luck with the Sandy Hook page. I feel that I cannot collaborate there further. Happy Winter Solstice--Amadscientist (talk) 11:10, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
  • I would by lying if I didn't admit I did a facepalm at "drunk and beligernet editor". It does kind of show you have a predetermined bias, and I wouldn't have recommended that phrase. Technically, there is no policy against editing drunk, and we can't do a breathalizer over the internet, so it would be unenforceable anyway. One thing I've learned is that if you see Andy at ANI, there will be a split consensus, so I tend to not jump in until all the facts are out. Invariably, Andy is completely right on the merits, and completely wrong on his conduct. There is no simple answer here, either you live with it or block him. Like some others we know, he is a polarizing figure. When he isn't telling someone to fuck off, he is actually a damn good editor and has lots of clue, and still a net positive. But he aggravates the daylights out of me that 2% of the time as well. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 14:43, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
      • Thanks for the assesment. This is one of those moments when I feel the community is taking a blind eye for the sake of someone they feel is a net gain even when they drive others away. I disagree that the term shows a bias...I agree I have one. I didn't say it because I was guessing at it. He stated it outright on the ANI but we are supposed to question whether or not he meant it? I don't think it is a good idea to allow editors with such horrible social skills to get away with a claim on AN/I of "Yeah, I'm drunk. I would rather be blocked then change my behavior of name callng" (paraphrased), But as you know I am learning the ropes on the level of acceptance some editors are giving and given. No matter how bad his behavior is....he will always be allowed to stay. This doesn't just disapoint me. This concerns me greatly. But at least it is all in the open and readers and editors alike can judge for themselves how worthy Andy is. Since I was only involved in the discussion and not the actual dispute and was making an attempt to mediate what turned into a one sided name calling fight, I am reconsidering my contributions and time spent in areas that are not worth the work. I have no idea what those areas are but will take some time away from Wiki to determine this. It may simply be best if I stop trying to assist editors for a while. Clearly Andy has issues, his behavior and comments are shocking and disgraceful and no amount of good contributions will ever convince me that he is a worthy editor at the moment. Perhaps one day...but not now. If he is allowed to get away with this, others will begin to do the same and when they are blocked or sanctioned for the same behavior, a special class of editor is created. --Amadscientist (talk) 23:42, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
        • Again, Andy frustrates the crud out of me, I just don't know a solution. I also accept the fact that he is difficult to block for a variety of reasons. And I wasn't scolding, just saying the bias did come through a little. No biggie, but it was there and that hurts you, not him. I agree that Wiki'ing drunk is not a good idea. Dumb, actually, but there isn't a policy against it. You can block someone for disruption if it rises to that level (confine them to the talk page drunk tank, so to speak) but "drunk" isn't actionable by itself. I just proposed a new project at WER that might interest you. Low drama, low stress, not too much time, won't interfere with editing, should be fun. Not sure if it is you cup of tea, but it might fit your criteria here. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 23:51, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
    • I'll check it out. Don't get me wrong. I don't feel like you scolded me. In fact, I come to you as a matter of getting a better perspective. With Andy....I have just become fed up and just can't work with him in any way, but thats about me, not about him.--Amadscientist (talk) 00:03, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
  • I do want to add, the idea of "one hour block" by someone. Very, very bad idea. Short blocks for incivility are proven to cause more incivility. If it isn't worth blocking for at least a few days, it probably isn't worth blocking for. Dennis Brown - © Join WER


I think someone posted a violence threat on Andy page.--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 15:17, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Since I can't see the diff (props to WK for responding to Shrike's report so quickly), I'll just give out my boilerplate reminder that any threats of violence, no matter how absurd, must be reported to the Foundation per WP:EMERGENCY. I only say this because it's a policy I stumbled on very early on here, and since then have found that a good many longterm contributors are unaware of how broad its scope is. — Francophonie&Androphilie(Je vous invite à me parler) 15:43, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
  • I think the threat was an idle one, but it isn't my place to make that determination, so I did email the foundation with the diff. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 15:50, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
This was Mikemikev, who is currently teaching EFL in Seoul. The posting was standard for him (cf the blocked ip sock troll who intervened in the ANI thread recently). Mathsci (talk) 23:05, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

revdel?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grosse_Pointe&curid=654237&diff=529192253&oldid=529192236 Gtwfan52 (talk) 00:30, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

  •  Done Dennis Brown - © Join WER 00:33, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
    • TY and have a great Christmas. My all the love of the season come to you and yours! Gtwfan52 (talk) 00:41, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Season's tidings!

Christmas lights - 1.jpg

To you and yours, Have a Merry ______ (fill in the blank) and Happy New Year! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:10, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Thank you, and "Decemberween" it the fill-in-the-blank holiday for my people. It is celebrated as the 55th day after Halloween, which coincidentally is the same day as Christmas. It is celebrated with food, drink, presents and by spending quality time with family and friends. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 14:15, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Brands

Fredmeyer edit 1.jpg
Hello, Dennis Brown.

You are invited to join WikiProject Brands, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of brands and brand-related topics.
To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 16:52, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Interesting. If the goal is what I hope it is, to help create a more consistent way to cover brands, reduce spam and fluff, and increase the number of articles on notable brands, then count me in. With all the controversy and problems with paid editing, a proactive approach is the right one. I've signed up and will take a look around when I have time. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 17:03, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for joining the new project! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 17:42, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Suspicious edit in WP:FFD?

Hello, Dennis. Merry Christmas. How do you do?

I run into this edit in WP:FFD. I thought I should ask someone about it because to me, it looks like vandalism. Seems to me a user, who is not an admin, has removed an entire discussion because he thinks nominator should relist it as no one cares!

However, there is something that made me ask you: The user in question has been in Wikipedia since 2005 and has over 100,000 edits plus three additional user account rights. Vandalism is uncharacteristic of such a person. Is there something I don't get?

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 11:23, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Just ask him, I know Hammer very well, he is no vandal. He will be bold at times (which is typically a good thing) or he might have just made a mistake, but I'm sure it wasn't vandalism. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 11:28, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

ΛΧΣ21 05:48, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

  • And ho ho ho to you as well. Hope you have a great holiday season. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 02:42, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Trillium Poncho cat dog.jpg And a happy new year
Have health, happiness and peace at your home all your life. Thanks for keeping some of us also in peace... :-) E4024 (talk) 11:17, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Well, the world didn't end on the 21st, so there is hope for a better 2013 for all of us. Happy holidays to you as well. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 02:42, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!!

For all you do. We need more Wikipedians like you :)

Nadolig hapus

Dennis, you are a tireless champion of fairness and reason here. Please accept my very best wishes of the season. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:06, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for the kind words. I hope you and yours have a great holiday season as well. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 02:41, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

14 hours is almost as much as I do ;) so...

TheBeachHH2.jpg Best wishes
for the holidays and 2013 from a warmer place than where you probably are ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:57, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Haha, rub it in, Kudpung! Enjoy, both of you, Drmies (talk) 22:29, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
  • I'n in all fairness, I'm still a young fellow, barely 48, I'm not as tough as my elders, Kudpung. ;) Dennis Brown - © Join WER 22:40, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
    • Ha! You're older'n me! Drmies (talk) 22:55, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
      • You have children, I don't. Wait until they hit their teens, then we can compare gray hairs. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 22:57, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
        • Haha, as my beard would have told you, I skipped gray and went STRAIGHT to white. Which reminds me, I owe you a word: I cut it. It had to go. It looked OK, but it didn't feel so good, and Mrs. Drmies apparently thought it would interfere with marital hanky-panky. If you friend me on Facebook you can see the before, during, and after (not of the hanky-panky, of course). But you'll have to find me first--I'm completely incognito. Much respect to all the bearded ones, including Uncle G and Mandarax. BTW, I saw a picture of Kelapstick--he's not a bad-looking fellow. I think we should have a "prettiest Wikipedian" competition. Drmies (talk) 23:53, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
          • I had to grow, cut, grow a few times as well. The oil in your skin has to adjust to get rid of the itchy. Haven't found you yet, but it would be easy to find me. Good luck with the "prettiest" contest, I told you, I'm only bar pretty. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 00:06, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
            • Holy crap...I'm older than Dennis? L...er ahem. =) (but only by a year!) My beard skipped grey as well and went straight to white about 5 years ago! Amadscientist (talk) 02:35, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

From the Puppy

Air Hoar Frost 2008-02-07.jpg

Happy Holidays from the Puppy!

May the coming year lead you to wherever you wish to go.

-- KillerChihuahua 17:35, 23 December 2012 (UTC)


Good news[1] Hopefully you'll be able to help him/her. KillerChihuahua 01:48, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks pup. If nothing else, hopefully the heat is reduced that some good discussion and education can take place. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 02:37, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Well, I'm not as festive (or template-gifted) as some of my fellow Wikipedians who I see have littered your page with various banners, but I still wanted to wish you a Merry Christmas (or whatever Decembertween thing you were referencing a few posts above) and a Happy New Year. Go Phightins! 02:48, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Decemberween is a special holiday that goes back a full decade. It is celebrated as the 55th day after Halloween, and is a secular holiday that just coincidentally falls on Dec. 25th ;). So Merry Christmas/Festivus/Decemberween/etc to you and yours. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 02:53, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
    • What a coincidence Face-smile.svg! Thanks. Go Phightins! 02:56, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Gerard van Honthorst 001.jpg
Dennis Brown, I hope you have a Merry Christmas and hope your day is full of the true spirit of the day.
Plus, good food, good family and good times. :) Have a Great Day! :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 07:19, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Spread the joy of Christmas by adding {{subst:User:Neutralhomer/MerryChristmas}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

  • Thank you Homer. Hoping for some peace and goodwill towards our fellow man in the New Year as well. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 16:24, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas - 2012

Christmas Greetings. Kierzek (talk) 14:47, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

  • I hate to do this, but... non-free image removed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:15, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
  • It's the thought that counts :) And happy holidays to the both of you. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 16:23, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

TBrandley 23:35, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Just got back from sharing the evening with family, expect to do more tomorrow. Hope you get to do some of the same. Happy holidays to you as well! Dennis Brown - © Join WER 01:49, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
    • Thanks, I'm probably going to, and will hence most likely be offline tomorrow.

Hope you and your family are enjoying the holidays!

Be well and be safe!--Amadscientist (talk) 23:44, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Just got home from spending time with family, about an hour away. The kids got to open their gifts, they were thrilled (they are teens, we just give cash at this point, I have no idea wtf a 17 year old wants). Going back to spend the whole day with them tomorrow, so won't be around here much. It is one of the few times I get to see everyone, so I am enjoying it. Hope you get some quality time with family and friends as well. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 01:51, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

--LlamaAl (talk) 02:27, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Till 04:50, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Thank you Till, hope you have a great holiday season and a safe New Year as well. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 20:37, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Hey Dennis! Wishing you a very Happy Merry Christmas :) TheGeneralUser (talk) 12:02, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Hope your xmas day went as well as mine, lots of good food and good company. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 20:38, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Page protection

I was reverted again today at the Union of Orthodox Hebrew Congregations. Can you semiprotect this please? The edit-warring has lasted over a month with no explanation being provided for the blanking. I have tried RFPP to no avail. 82.132.246.70 (talk) 12:13, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

  • If I semi-protect it, that means YOU won't be able to edit it as well, since you don't have a registered account. Also, we don't generally semi-protect for a content dispute, which is what this looks like. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 13:47, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

I understand that it looks suspicious; a BLP concern and an IP single purpose account. However, I assure you that the section is well sourced (8 different references) to various newspapers. There is no "content dispute" - unless you consider a section blanking tag a valid discussion - and I request that you protect the page so that only autoconfirmed accounts can edit this page. I am frustrated, I have been repeatedly reverted for over a month without explanation. 82.132.246.70 (talk) 14:20, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks ... I guess for your begrudging help. I am surprised you think the neutral version is that of a serial section blanker who has been reverted by ClueBot and other patrolling editors, while my properly sourced version has been reverted. 82.132.246.70 (talk) 14:34, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Actually, what you are adding is a BLP violation. Just because sources are talking about claims of a crime doesn't mean we can add them. I have protected the article, but because of your addition. I've reverted that out as WP:BLPCRIME clearly says we do NOT add this kind of material for simple claims of a crime. Do not add it to any other article, as that is a violation of WP:BLP. Please familiarize yourself with the policies relating to biographies of living persons. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 14:33, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
    • It isn't about the other person, it is about adding material that someone has been accused of a crime. I haven't edited the article and not familiar with the subject matter, so I only removed the material that I knew didn't belong, per WP:BLPCRIME. Not everyone accused of a crime is guilty, and in the US (where enwp's servers are located) you are presumed innocent until found guilty by a judge/jury. That is why we don't add that kind of material. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 14:38, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Try telling that to my daughter. What national papers have reported, you have objected to. Have a shitty Christmas. 82.132.246.70 (talk) 14:52, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
We aren't a newspaper. If you would just read WP:BLPCRIME you would understand. Feel free to stay away if you are just going to be rude. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 14:53, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Why don't you remove the Jimmy Savile allegations while you're on your righteous crusade? I am used to people ignoring my cries of pain but I am surprised to encounter similar callosity on wikipedia. 82.132.246.70 (talk) 15:00, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Savile has been dead for over a year and is therefore not subject to the constraints of WP:BLPCRIME. Dennis is properly enforcing Wikipedia policy, nothing more. Wikipedia is not a platform for you to air your personal grievances, no matter how deeply you feel them.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:19, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Why is my plight less important than those affected by Freddie Starr, Dave Lee Travis, Stuart Hall, Wilfred De'ath who are all alive and whose alleged misdemeanors have been reported here? 82.132.246.70 (talk) 15:25, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
I haven't looked at them to know there was a problem, and today is a bad day since I'm about to go spend the rest with family. The only reason I knew about THIS problem was that you brought it to my attention. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 15:32, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
I'll jump back in to try to help a little. First, I know this is personal for you, but Dennis's actions are not personal. Your plight is not less important or more important than any other person related to a victim of alleged child molestation; no one is trying to diminish that. Second, Wikipedia has many articles. Sometimes articles have problems that come to the attention of someone who can correct the problem. Sometimes they don't. Unfortunately, that may create inconsistencies among articles as to application of policy. Dennis made the right decision here, in my view. If another article has material that violates policy, it should be corrected, not the other way around. Third, I took the Starr article and looked at it as it was the first on your list. No one reported a problem with the article. Thus, unless someone happens to notice the addition of the child molestation accusation (I assume that's what you're referring to), it would remain until someone did and challenged it. I'm not going to express an opinion on whether the Starr material violates WP:BLPCRIME, but it would not surprise me if someone argued that it did. However, there is an important distinction between the Starr and the Union articles. One of the exceptions to BLPCRIME is WP:WELLKNOWN. It could easily be argued that Starr is much better known than the rabbi. I'm not going to look at all the other articles - honestly, I'm just too busy at the moment.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:40, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

GA collaboration for the New Year?

What do you think?--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 12:33, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

  • I've filed for my first GA on another article, so I'm not as familiar with the process as you likely are. If you think there is enough material that can be added to obtain GA status, then I would be happy to work with you on getting a GA. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 13:44, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
    • I think it would be possible, yes, though I have only one GA myself I have done a few reviews .. I'd be happy to work on it with you so I'll get started in January?--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 14:50, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
      • Sounds good. I had been planning to focus more on content and less on admin duties Jan-April anyway, and I can't think of a better use of my time than improving an article to GA status. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 14:55, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

..

Christmas Lights house display.JPG


Seasons greetings to you and yours
Dougweller (talk) 13:36, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

  • You too Doug. I'm trying to tie up some loose ends, then going to spend the day with family. Hope you get to as well. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 13:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

BN thread

I posted to User_talk:Ligulem#BN before seeing your "we need to be as welcoming as we are inquisitive and have a better tone in the questions", but I'm happy to see we are on the same page.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 15:20, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

  • It is a bit of a Catch 22. We DO want to be more inviting to users coming back. I would imagine most are coming back only long enough to keep the bit, prompted by the email, not just coincidentally coming back. But yes, we should welcome them back as we would any editor. Asking question (properly worded) is appropriate, however. In my mind, when we remove the bit from the user, they are still technically an admin. The bit is removed only as a security measure, not for cause. As such, when they return to claim the bit, they should be treated like any other admin. Part of being an admin is being willing to answer questions about their actions or lack of, and in part, this helps verify who they are. Obviously, we need to be more polite in asking them and not make it feel like they are being interrogated, and TRM's methods did cross over into that, but I think that wasn't really his intention, he was just overreacting to the previous problems a bit. Part of the battle seems to be two lines of thought, MBisanz (and surely others) is on the side that the Crats must act on policy in a very rigid and strict way: resysop unless there is a policy reason why you can't. Others tend to subscribe to the idea that the Crats can exercise some discretion in making the call, based on the best interests of Wikipedia. There is logic to each argument, and at this point I can't claim to know which is "best" or "correct". This division seems to be the underlying issue on several discussions there. This is a very unusual set of circumstances that is not likely to be repeated, so I'm looking forward to things returning to normal in a week. Until then, I think we should try to meet in the middle, and be extra cautious in our questioning, but still ask the questions. Of course, that is a Crat board and I'm not a Crat, so I don't want to push the point too hard. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 15:59, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

Evergreens covered in snow in Nebraska.jpg Happy Holidays!
From the frozen wasteland of Nebraska, USA! MONGO 12:15, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Wastelands? I've lived in Wichita and Grand Forks, Nebraska isn't a wasteland, just good farm land. Now, frozen, it certainly is at this time of year. :) Happy Holidays to you as well MONGO. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 20:36, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2012

N. R. Narayana Murthy

Just in case you wish to comment, I filed a report at WP:ANEW, and I mentioned your name in passing.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:37, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Thank you for the notification. I've recommended it be moved to WP:AN for a topic ban for both editors. That would seem to be the least aggressive way to deal with the problem, and the most likely to achieve the goals. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 15:59, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
  •  Done--Bbb23 (talk) 16:18, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

WADC (radio station)‎ and other points

Hey Dennis, hope your Christmas was a good one. When you have a moment, could you move WADC (radio station)‎ back to WADC. The page was moved from its proper place (at WADC) against MOS and naming convensions. Thanks. - NeutralhomerTalk • 16:15, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

  • I'm a little short on time today, but I think you need to address the move with the editor, so I'm not stepping on someone's toes. I think you are right on your assessment, but he is a long time editor and there may be issues I'm not aware of. You can point him here if you want. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 16:24, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Hollisz

Just noticed, on the Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zimmermanh1997 front, User:Hollisz has, once again, posted more "poor edits" here and here. These are the first two edits after coming off a 31 hour block by User:Drmies. I will post this information to the SPI page. - NeutralhomerTalk • 16:20, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Brought Hollisz to AIV per Drmies instructions after the 31 hour block. - NeutralhomerTalk • 16:27, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
But it isn't sockpuppeting. There is no overlap. I've closed that case. If he is being disruptive, then Drmies knows how to handle that aspect. It isn't socking to stop using one account and start using another. He could have forgotten a password, for example. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 16:48, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
True, he could have, it just felt DUCKy to be since he switched from the Zimmermanh1997 account, then to the IP, then to Hollisz. AIV will, hopefully, handle the Hollisz account. - NeutralhomerTalk • 16:51, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
No question it is him, I'm just saying there are legitimate reasons and allowed uses for multiple accounts as well. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 16:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
True, I just don't think he is doing this for those good reasons. I know, AGF. Do you think it would easier to protect the pages he frequents or maybe setup an edit filter to prevent him from making these edits? It has worked in the past with other users. - NeutralhomerTalk • 17:05, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
If he is doing something disruptive or against policy, an admin can take action on it. I just can't for sockpuppeting. I don't think an edit filter will work. Like all disruptive behaviors, you have to start by talking to him on his talk page (in a calm manner that assumes good faith) and try to fix the problem at the lowest level. For an admin to take any action, it has to be shown that the least aggressive methods have been attempted and failed. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 18:51, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
After I took him to AIV (per Drmies instructions), Diannaa posted a personal, calm, non-templated warning, but to no avail. Edit-warring continues. :S I updated the AIV post as I am unsure what else I can do. - NeutralhomerTalk • 20:40, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Looks like Diannaa blocked him. We have to give everyone a chance for someone to conform, she did. I just haven't been on much lately, it is getting to that time of year when I will be scarce for a few months, and I actually have to "work" at work, so it is often hard for me to research deep enough to take action. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 22:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Pine cone on pine tree.jpg Happy holidays.
Best wishes for joy and happiness. Also, best of luck to the new year! Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:04, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Just wanted to get my two cents in as well :) Happy Holidays, Happy New Year, Et ceterA, Et ceterA! -- JoannaSerah (talk) 22:23, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Thank you :) Looks like we are going to work on getting one of the NC articles up to GA if we can (above). Hopefully we will. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 22:37, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Andrew Powers

Hello Dennis, First of all thank you for your reviewing of the SPI case and quick decision. However I noticed that User:Andrew Powers is not blocked indefinitely as you might have assumed here [2] as in the block log they have only been blocked by Kuru for 2 weeks (see [3]). As the main account User:Andrew J Powers which was renamed to User:Andrew Powers back in april 2012, is the actual main account now, so they might need to be indefinitely blocked as you said. Regards. TheGeneralUser (talk) 17:22, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hank Harrison

I just want to let you know that I do understand you, I am also reluctant to repeat a clearly defamatory claim about a 72 old man originally made in the context of a apparently bitter divorce custody hearing and then repeated by Love who obviously doesn't remember anything from then. But I don't see how we can have the biography and not include both the accusations and Harrison's response to it since both have been widely published by secondary sources. That is why I think we should delete the article, it is too much of a mess for wikipedia to get involved in a dispute between Courtney Love and her father.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 17:42, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Without question, I know your argument is in good faith and I understand your reasoning, even if I disagree with you. It is a Catch 22, which makes me want to default to excluding it. Like you, I'm hoping it will simply get deleted and make the point moot. Until then, it is at a standstill, we both have differing opinions and can just wait for others to pipe in to see if a consensus can develop. I'm a fan of WP:BRD and letting the system work, even when I don't agree with the outcome. I never take stuff like this personal, and glad to see you don't either. Neither of us have a dog in this hunt, we both are just doing what we think is the proper interpretation of policy. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 18:41, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I've requested additional comments at tyhe BLPN and at the talkpage of the biography of Courtney Love where the same claims are currently included.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 18:47, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Great minds think alike :) I was thinking that this would be a good idea, glad to see you already started. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 18:50, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Socks

Dennis, please look at User talk:186.212.143.98. I'm comfortable with the block, but I'm not sure that the user isn't correct about the Dalai lama ding dong part. If you look at the Dalai lama SPI report, you'll note that User:Marokwitz tied the IPs to BilalSaleh and Guinsberg, which the IP admits to. Marokwitz also tied them to the Dalai lama, but now I'm not so sure. If you scroll up the report, you'll notice that other IPs have been tied to Dalai lama, but none geolocate to Brazil - they all edit from the UK. Now the IP admits to abusing multiple accounts, but I want to be accurate about who is the master when I block. If I don't hear from you because of your schedule, I'll try to enlist the support of another SPI person. Of course, if any of you talk page stalkers want to pitch in ...--Bbb23 (talk) 19:58, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Guinsberg is BilalSaleh, confirmed by CU and behaviorial similarities, and geolocates to Brazil as noted before at ANI. Dalai Lama Ding Dong generally geolocates to Northern England/Scotland. I filed an SPI thinking that Bilal Saleh was a sock of Dalai lama ding dong. The CU admin, on discovering that the BilalSaleh and the Guinsberg account were connected, labeled them as socks of DLDD. Marokwitz then relied on this in his subsequent SPI. In hindsight, Guinsberg is probably an independent sockmaster. Ankh.Morpork 20:21, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
I haven't looked at the history of how the SPI reports were filed and aggregated, but assuming you are correct, then the reports and the tags on the user pages need to be fixed. I don't suppose you want to connect the dots (links/diffs) on how the reports themselves went awry? I really need to be doing my real life work.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:51, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
I've noted in archive, but not sure what else to do. Some socks will geolocate differenty for a variety of reasons, proxys (both open and closed) being one reason. I don't have the time to sort it all out right now, which is why I just noted it in the archive. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 21:03, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, Dennis. I'm not going to do anything further on the clean-up issue. However, if I have to block more puppets (I did one subsequent to opening this conversation), I will not specify that they are a puppet of Dalai lama.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:09, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Sounds good. With IPs, it doesn't matter as long as we can track it back to someone. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 21:13, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
I agree. Marokwitz (talk) 12:03, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

A couple of sockpuppet archives that may need merging

At Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Historylover4/Archive you mention that Turmerick is the Master. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Turmerick/Archive. Dougweller (talk) 10:04, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Hollisz/Zimmermannh1997, Part 2

Well, looks like there is officially some crossover between the two named accounts and 98.204.145.138. What should I do? - NeutralhomerTalk • 15:08, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

  • I'm really backlogged today and tomorrow, you might need to ask another admin. The real world is keeping me busy. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 15:21, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
  • No worries, Drmies blocked for 1 month on the IP and increased Hollisz's block to one month as well. Hope the real world doesn't keep you busy long. :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 15:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

72.228.190.243

Hi Dennis, Could I ask you to look at recent contributions from this IP address. The contributor is inserting POV into articles, but is also using bad language against those who disagree with him/her (See Talk Page). Would be glad of your opinion. Will be away for a few days from tomorrow. Best regards, David J Johnson (talk) 22:25, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

  • I gave a final warning. Their other contributions seem in good faith, although not impressive. If they continue, I would recommend a block. I think I've been exceedingly generous, but I hate to block for one inappropriate outburst. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 22:35, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Dennis, Unfortunately he has now had a "go" at you. Frankly, I don't think he will listen to reason. Regards,David J Johnson (talk) 22:54, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

  • I've directed him to a couple of essays. I'm not worried what he says about me, he doesn't know me, appears to not understand Wikipedia in the least, so I will allow him a little more rope. Granted, it is probably for naught, but if he gets blocked, I will know I at least tried. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 23:05, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
    • Many thanks, Dennis. I'm off for a few days break. Best regrds,David J Johnson (talk) 23:08, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Michel Petrucciani

Check out this. If you spot the Chopin influences you'd be right, and he's buried very close to him in Paris. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 15:03, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Wow, I wasn't familiar with him, but I love his style. You can tell he has his own beat inside, and it comes through very clear. Not just technical skill, but soul. Interesting article as well. Found this jewels as well. [4] Dennis Brown - © Join WER 15:44, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Early greetings for the new year

Giulio Romano - Victory, Janus, Chronos, and Gaea - WGA09625.jpg Best Wishes for a Happy New Year!
May 2013 bring you rewarding experiences and an abundance of everything you most treasure.
Cynwolfe (talk) 16:59, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


Victory, Janus, Chronos, and Gaea (1532–34) by Giulio Romano

Although our interactions have been limited, I appreciate your calm, reasonable approach. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:59, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Thank you! Hoping this new year brings good things for us all. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 11:42, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

new editor barnstar

Dennis, do you know of a barnstar that would be fitting for a brand new editor whose work, altho not very extensive, has been spot on? There is a guy that has been editing Idaho articles that is doing a bang up job, and I wanted him to know it has been noticed. Unfortunately, there is no Idaho barnstar. Thanks in advance! Gtwfan52 (talk) 19:12, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

  • I just create my own. Take a look in my sandbox, I created a basic on at the bottom there, you can just copy and paste, add your own text, modify the header, etc. [5] Dennis Brown - © Join WER 11:33, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BStudent0

Point is moot as the account has been blocked anyway. Mtking 22:02, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Ah, I see. At SPI, the CUs are funny about providing diffs. Often, we will just investigate anyway, but they really want us "clerking" more and digging around from scratch less. I jumped on that case because I'm familiar with the master, but it wasn't obvious enough at first glance that I could just block, which is why I needed diffs. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 11:43, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Kiefer

Hi Dennis. I see you have commented on Kiefer's talk page, so I thought you should be made aware that he has banished me from his page and has removed a number of my comments (including where I pointed out that Sven has been in email contact with the RfA candidate, has concluded that he no longer has any concerns, and has switched his !vote to Support). I think those comments are pertinent to the discussion and should be seen by any reviewing admin. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:39, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

  • I just walked in, it looks like someone took his talk page access. I was hoping to bring a little calm into that discussion by just providing a perspective that didn't take either side, but since it failed, I just smiled and backed away. Most of the time, Kiefer has an interesting perspective on things, but once he goes off the deep end, there is no saving him. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 01:54, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
    Yeah, it's a shame he switches into attack mode so readily - apart from that unfortunate tendency, I think quite highly of him. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 02:05, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
    I do too, even if we got a rough start at my RfA, and I generally get along with him just fine. That is why I tried to start a process of walking him away from the edge of cliff. Once I saw he took my comment out of context, I just struck it per his request and backed away, not wanting to make the situation worse, concluding that I couldn't help him. I was really trying to help him but I don't think he understood that. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 02:19, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Personal attacks Rude comments hatted. Is that better?
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Striking something you've written, and at the same time justifying what you originally wrote, is a definition of disingenuousness (besides detroying any meaning whatever that the act of striking might have). Apparently you admit you only struck to placate his request, and defended what you originally wrote. (I doubt that would satisfy a logical guy like Kiefer!) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 03:08, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Striking the header was to placate, which was pretty obvious. Seriously, take it to WP:AN if you find me abusive, then Arb to get my bit stripped. I've tried to engage you time after time but you are only interested in criticizing and I'm bored with it and don't want it on my talk page anymore. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 13:10, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
I don't want any words with you anymore, Dennis, you give me a headache. But I won't sit here without saying anything (if I can help it), when you once again push words into my mouth and make me responsible for them, that I never said ("abusive [admin]"), and offering me to go somewhere I've already indicated I'd never go under any circumstances (AN/ANI) for anything, ever. It's good however that you admit to placating, in case you didn't know, I'm not the kind of person who apprediates that kind of thing (which is the same as insincerity/disingenuousness in this case, is it not?). You favored Townsend by allowing his stream of PAs to go uncommented by you, calling them "opinions"/"errors". Yet for me, you have no issue whatever making accusation of personal attacks. Your favoritism and bias shows, I'm done with you, please leave me alone with any more of your comments, please. Goodbye. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 13:32, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
It's clear from your comment, Dennis, you consider yourself a "savior". (And on December 25th, too! How appropriate.) p.s. The "savior" stuff has gotten a bit old. (False self-credit.) Why not give it a rest in 2013? Ihardlythinkso (talk) 02:52, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
If you are looking for an apology for my trying to help Kiefer, I wouldn't hold your breath. It is no secret I think highly of him. For that matter, if I think I can help any blocked editor understand and get unblocked and return to editing, I will try. My use of the word "save" was a "pool" analogy, and surely this was obvious, even to you. I'm not a Christian, so I don't use that word in the same way that you might, so that comment seems steeped in bias. Kiefer politely asked for one of two scenarios "Please strike that statement or revise it if your intention is different.", and I quickly complied giving him both, explaining my intention AND striking it so no one would misinterpret it. I even provided him a link to the best admin to take concerns regarding sexual harassment, as I took his concern seriously. If he found anything inappropriate in my (failed) attempt to find some middle ground, he would have said so, or emailed me. You are assuming a lot of bad faith, and honestly, turning it into a personal attack against me. Seriously, why would I go out of my way to say "Without comment on this current disagreement..." unless my goal was to stay completely uninvolved in the debate so I could possibly unblock him?
One of our first interactions was when I went to ANI to get his talk page access restored over a different block, against the wishes of the blocking admin. Our last interaction was when I congratulated him for the birth of his baby girl, and to tell him I had put his uploaded image of him and his daughter as the lead photo in the article Father. Kiefer knows I wish nothing but good things for him. Think whatever you want, but you are so off in your interpretation of my intentions that it boggles the mind. Please just go away and come back some other day. Frankly, I'm disgusted by this display. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 04:01, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
That's a nice photo :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:44, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Dance around it if you will Dennis, but the sentence you struck, you also justified in the same post. That makes no sense to a logical person (sorry if logic or consistency offends you). And I'm not the one using the word "save" -- you did, and do. (And for what's "disgusting", let me remind you, when Elen said you "saved" me at a spurious & baseless ANI initiated out of frustration of a noob, well, that was pretty disgusting, and made me wanna puke! And I'm quite sure she said that, just as a dig to me, since she knows how to get under my skin, and enjoyed doing so.) If you wanna insult me, be braced for insults back. You are constantly telling everyone how you are "the last to block". (We hear this so much, kinda makes one wonder why you are so obsessed over having the bit and power to block, that you need to remind us over and over and over again that you have that power. It seems as though you use this as an implicit threat: "If I, Dennis the angelic one, am 'last to block', and even I think block is appropriate in this case, then you can betcha by golly your nickers that block is completely warranted in this case, no questions asked.") The pristine, angle-like Dennis Brown. As I've said before, you drink your own Koolaid, and that's not healthy. Merry Xmas. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 12:03, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Ihardlythinkso, you have judged this one astonishingly badly - Dennis has not come remotely close to insulting either Kiefer or you. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:14, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Fucking shit. (He said what I said was "disgusting" to him.) Give me a fucking break. (If that isn't insulting ...) And I never said he insulted Kiefer -- maybe you should quit stuffing words in my mouth and making me accountable for them, that I didn't say, huh!? I said by striking his comment, and then justifying the same comment in the very same post ... that it was disingenuous. And probably would not be accepted by a logical guy like Kiefer. And that is all. (But what the H am I doing talkin' to you?? Why don't you people show some common courtesy and leave a two-party conversation as two-party instead of butting in all the time?? I guess that is the rudeness of the WP?!? Do your part to clean it up and stay the fuck out of my conversations with someone else, okay?) Merry Xmas. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 12:26, 25 December 2012 (UTC) p.s. The WP shit is active -- you can see it here, folks!!!
Er, I beg your pardon? This was a two-way conversation between Dennis and I before *you* butted in! Anyway, this is not your talk page, it is Dennis's - which means he has the right to tell me to shut up and go away, but you do not. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:33, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Ihardlythinkso, for the second time: go away. I've done all the explaining I need to do. I have no idea what comment of Elen's you are talking about, and I don't really care since I'm not responsible for her words. You are just soapboxing and making personal attacks, and doing so with an astonishing lack of clue. I really don't want to repeat myself, go away, come back in 2013, but you are not welcome here until then. This starting to look like Suicide by cop, and I want no part of it. Any further posts by you this year will be reverted by me or any talk page stalker. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 13:38, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
  • You've asked me a Q, Dennis, so I'll answer it: No. (You struck something, you clearly didn't take back, but just to placate a request. That's a clear pattern, with Kiefer, and now with me.) Your bias against me, versus Townsend whom you let a litany of personal attacks slide without comment, naming them "opinions" and "[user] errors", but labelling of personal attack here against me, is noted. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 06:25, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────:This was a rather long discussion with strange meanderings.

Thanks for the just words, Dennis. Let's forget about the unjust words .
For the record, Boing has acknowledged misreading what I repeatedly wrote, and he has struck many of comments. I have acknowledged his good faith, and stated my wish that I had not written "little man", etc.
Perhaps the heat of the discussion arose because we both take due process and good names seriously and we also share a serious commitment to protecting persons with concerns about alleged sexual harassment?
TParis's excision of the discussion prevented me from striking more of my comments from AN/I, but I did strike several on my page. Boing has been welcomed to post whenever he wants on my talk page, of course.
For comparison, I had quoted Boing's discussion of Sven, which had three variations on "lie" in one edit, without calling Sven a liar. I also quoted or gave diffs of various personal attacks on myself, which resulted in no blocks or administrative warnings. Scott MacDonald's rabid attack has still not resulted in a retraction or a warning, but has received endorsements from blocking heads at ANI, who never miss an opportunity for viciousness. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:13, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
    • I was trying to keep an arm's length away so I could consider an unblock, but I chose my words poorly, so that it could be taken more than one way. I really did mean it in a very general way, but completely understand how it could be taken as specific. That was just a failure of communication on my part, so I bowed out as to not make the situation worse. I really am sorry about that. I hope you know that I have a good opinion of you, I just failed miserably in my verbiage that day. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 22:11, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

..

Interesting copy/paste issue encountered

I've been doing a lot of work on a handful of articles (particularly Fort Dobbs (North Carolina), which relates to the Anglo-Cherokee War article substantially. In the process of creating the Dobbs article, I made a few edits to the pre-existing (and somewhat poorly cited) Anglo-Cherokee article. Whilst doing that, I encountered the following website: [6]. On this site, someone named Gilles C. H. Nullens of Belgium purports to have written a series of books on everything from Native Americans to the Masons. In his book on the native americans, he has what appears to be near-verbatim copies of Wikipedia articles, noticeably the following: Anglo-Cherokee War -- Nullens link 1; Battle of Blue Licks -- Nullens link 2; Battle of Oriskany -- Nullens link 3.

I looked at the revisions, and each seemed to take their current form in short-term, large-scale re-writes. Blue licks was rewritten by Kevin Myers on August 21, 2006 See differences; for Oriskany, it appears to have been set in its current form (and that copied on the Nullens site) on May 7, 2009 by user Magicpiano See differences; and as for the Anglo-Cherokee War, it appears that the article reached a crystalised version of its current state as of May 25, 2009, based on the edits of Natty4bumpo See that article.

My first thought is that this Mr. Nullens is just copying wikipedia articles and presenting them as his own, which I suppose can't be stopped. The variety of editors involved in editing these three articles alone -- especially given the involvement of Kevin Myers, whose edits I think are top-grade -- makes me certain that this is the case, rather than the idea that some cabal is attempting to copyvio the works of an unknown amateur historian from Belgium. Just thought I'd bring it up, though, in case anything can be done to rectify the situation. Thanks! Cdtew (talk) 05:24, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

    • Since you may be very busy right now, I've also posed this problem to another admin -- discussion is at User talk:Dank#Issue related to Fort Dobbs (North Carolina). Cdtew (talk) 16:44, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
      • Thanks for understanding. I try to be as responsive as I can, but my job is very seasonal, so I actually have to work for a few months out of the year, but get to goof off most of the year. A pretty good trade off in my eyes, but I just so happen to be at the start of the "real work" part. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 14:03, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Earth100/101

Dennis, couldn't a CU be done to check whether the two accounts are related? Not saying whether it should or shouldn't be done, just asking whether it's feasible.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:01, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

  • I've already tried to ping a CU twice to see if they were interested. The argument about 1600 hours is incorrect, they edit roughly around that time on the weekends some. Someone could file at SPI and request CU if they wanted. That CU can't prove disprove, particularly if one is on a proxy, open or otherwise. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 23:05, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Dennis, I also saw your comments on the user's talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:51, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

My Hogmanay message

I've been rather astonished by the events of the last few days, but they've made it very clear to me that Malleus carries too much baggage to be anything other than a drama magnet. I don't think that's right, but I'm only one person, I can't change anything. Perhaps I'll edit from one of my alleged admin accounts if I decide to contribute here again.

I actually think that I'm very easy to work with, unless you go out of your way to piss me off of course, and if you do you'll get both barrels, admittedly. Anyway, I'm sorry I won't be able to offer any more help with your 1950s American automoble culture article, but I'm sure you understand. Just one final piece of advice; try to remember that the article is about culture, not the 1950s automobile industry, and good luck at GA/FA. Malleus Fatuorum

  • It is unfortunate but I understand, as we both knew this day was coming. I wish I knew a solution that would satisfy both "sides". While I've tried, it is well beyond my capability to resolve. Thank you for taking the time to help me with the article, it truly made a difference for both the reader and me personally. I learned a tremendous number of things; more in two months than the previous two years combined. And yes, I had to look up "Hogmanay", so even on your way out, you taught me something. Whatever you do next, I hope you find peace and purpose, friend. You deserve that. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 03:11, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Recommended reading in the context: User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 122#Continued: civility and team spirit, bottom line: civility is not spoken but lived. You two do that, keep it up, the best for 2013! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:21, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Your words of support truly mean a lot. ```Buster Seven Talk 00:07, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

  • And your enthusiastic support of editor retention, the project and new users means a lot to me as well. You have more than earned my support for a free t-shirt. If they gave you a leather jacket, Nike's and a cool hat, we would still owe you :) Dennis Brown - © Join WER 00:10, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

(EC) Added thought: I NEVER support administrative action because of incivility. I support peer pressure; editors on the scene taking care of the act of incivility. Its one of the basic reasons we are civil in real life. It keeps us collaborators working toward a common goal: a social structure that works. No matter how loud those that don't agree scream, here, on the web, we are citizens of WikiPediaWorld. ```Buster Seven Talk 00:18, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

  • It's the same reason cops don't enforce civility, only harassment or physical attacks. Civility is too much "in the eye of the beholder", and too easy to abuse when enforced selectively. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 00:27, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
  • That is, except in Michigan, where the police will still arrest you for uttering the f-word in front of a child. [7] Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:12, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
  • "Although we rank the expletives Boomer shouted among our language's top five most offensive words, they're also among the top five most frequently used, according to Timothy Jay, the author of "Cursing in America" and a professor at the Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts." That quote alone is very telling. Oftentimes, making something taboo or illegal only makes it happen more frequently. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 16:15, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
A Peace Officers peace can not be disturbed. A citizen needs to make a complaint. At least that's how it is in my neck of the woods. Also consider that, sometimes, the simple harmless swear word carries alot of venom and anger behind it making it neither simple nor harmless. ```Buster Seven Talk 20:32, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

wondering

WP:DENY Dennis Brown - © Join WER 0:00, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I think everyone has had ample opportunity to express their opinion on my talk page at this point. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 22:00, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

You wonder about biting newbies? See [8] and [9] But the newbie is the more mature (nicer) than the entrenched editor. See [10] and [11] Seems worse than "incivility" to me but rather just plain mean.

And only a little over 1,600 edits.[12] Is he being encouraged to stay? MathewTownsend (talk) 00:47, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Well, yes and no. I read over the discussion, which ended with the newer editor saying "I apologize. I didn’t know featured article maintenance as well as my actions were such a pain in the ass. Dually noted," (sic). They were blunt, to the point, but stayed on topic. It isn't how I would have said it, but I'm not the poster child for civility. Sometimes blunt is effective, as it appears to be here. Actually, the editor has rollback and has been here 6 months, as was noted in that discussion. It appears he was bordering on 3RR without summaries as well. Some might argue that the more established editors could have been more gentle, and I understand that. Other might argue that there is no use pussyfooting around with someone who might be kind of new, but should know better. They caused some of the their own problems, in other words, and FAs can be rough and tumble with ANY of our established editors. In the end, the editor accepts the criticism and seems to have learned from it. I've added a word of encouragement as well. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 01:21, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
    • I also added a note on their talk page. Looks like someone else already has been helping them. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 01:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
  • yeah, well Wikipedia:ANI#Malleus_Fatuorum_and_Cornellier this ANI thread and this AN thread - so much for a respectful atmosphere. It's disgusting and only getting worse, making a mockery of wikipedia's editing policies. I can't believe that this foul behavior is not only condoned but actually enabled, by the community. Gratuitous nastiness is rewarded. The established bullies win and are entitled to be unblocked in seconds. This is an incestuous group. The same editors and the same enabling admins. Its ugly and frightening. MathewTownsend (talk) 03:11, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
    • It is frustrating and I don't prefer the harsh methods, but there is the reality that the entire FA process is that way and I can't go in and unilaterally change it. The editor was incorrect in what he was doing. I agree that a more gentle approach is better, that is the method I use, but I can't just go and block for this. Malleus knows that I, and everyone else, wishes he would find less abrasive ways to tell someone they are messing up, but there is only so much I can do, particularly well after the fact. Civility is the big issue that has Wikipedia torn in two in every forum, and there isn't a consensus on how to even define it, no less deal with it. I don't like a lot of things here, but what I can do about it is very limited. The environment around FAs is always going to be a bit rough and tumble. If you have a solution that will cause less drama and problems, I'm all ears. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 11:41, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
      • I know you can't do anything about it. Apparently it's hopeless and not even Arbcom can deal with it. It fatally infects wikipedia, not just FA. The latest was over GA but it happens anywhere he engages. I can't understand why a grown man can't refrain from viciously attacking vulnerable others over petty issues, the excuse being protecting "his" work or that of one of his band of followers. Are you saying that he has no self control? Is it a macho thing? That's what it seems like. Will he feel "lesser" if he backs down? How can one person so fatally divide the community? And over his insistence on being allowed to express a foul temper and humiliate others (which his followers think is admirable!) This has been escalating for years, and nothing has been able to prevent it. It is heading toward some kind of ugly showdown. The train is heading down the tracks right at us where we sit spinning our wheels. MathewTownsend (talk) 13:46, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
        • I agree that a showdown is on the horizon. I took the day off, spent it with some friends, came back and saw several people blocked then unblocked, including Malleus. I have thought about the whole civility issue a great deal, and have to admit, I have no clue how to solve the problem here. It isn't just Malleus, although a lot of people do hold him up as the poster child. I've actually worked on one article intensely with Malleus and found him very easy to get along with and extremely helpful. Most people actually get along with him fine, and the majority of the time his edits are extremely worthwhile. I've also seen times where I think he got the shaft and things were taken out of proportion. And yes, I've seen several times when I just facepalm and wish he had not said what said, and told him so. As for spinning wheels, I wish I could argue against that, but I can't. I tend to be pretty tolerant of occasional rudeness from everyone, I expect a degree of it and think we have to be careful to not try to overpolice civility, which is as bad as what we have now. I think we sometimes do block other editors too quickly over simple spats that would solve themselves if you just mediate a little, and that also costs us editors. Adults bump heads sometimes, you have to allow for some of that, I think, as long as it doesn't drag into the isles. As an admin, it is a very hard line to draw because of the diversity of opinions and culture here, so I tend to default to the more tolerant side. But like I said, I just don't have the answers and the community as a whole certainly doesn't either, so try to patch things up where I can with people that get the dirty end of the civility stick. I'm sure it sounds a bit lame, but I just honestly don't know what else to do in the current environment. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 14:00, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
          • Malleus is the major problem because of his viciousness, the quickness with which he strikes his victims, his gratuitousness bullying, especially of those he perceives as "lower" in standing, the obvious pleasure he takes in victimizing others, his vested posse of protectors, etc. Yes, these are other rude editors, but he is their role model and sets the tone, and they don't have the manipulative skills, the maliciousness, the number of protectors and sycophants he has. He's a macho bully. This has been escalating for years. I've never seen him get the shaft. If it seems that way, it's usually built up frustration from those that have long observed (or randomly been the victim of) his meanness and bullying, his gross insensitivity to others. His behavior is far worse than "incivility". And new editors notice, are disgusted and frustrated, and leave. Like AutomaticStrikeout, the kind of new editor that could mean a positive future for wikipedia:[13][14]

            Yes, Malleus is wonderful if he perceives you as "on his side", and then is smoothly charming and agreeable, but make a stupid error (if you're not one of the "in group") and you'll be sliced, diced and maliciously attacked (especially if you're a nobody) all out of proportion to your unintended error, and no one there at the time, witnessing it, will reproach him. I think this behavior stems from a bizarre form of mafia "ownership" of certain areas of wikipedia. (My knees are going to get broken for this.) MathewTownsend (talk) 20:57, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

            I'll be interested to see how you try to justify that as being anything other than one of these personal attack thingies Matthew, as it's a complete pack of lies. Malleus Fatuorum 21:19, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
            I don't know about Dennis, but I for one can see absolutely nothing good coming if this conversation continues. Let's give it a rest, shall we? The end of the year has seen enough stupid drama, let's let it die in relative peace. Writ Keeper 21:24, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
            I agree, nothing good is coming from this conservation, it is users just "biting" each other at this point with personal attacks. Let's enjoy the holiday season and relax. TBrandley (what's up) 21:35, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Malleus is half Sicilian didn't you know?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 21:43, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Agreement has been reached. Admins are not all-powerful and cannot solve the world's problems, especially not by committee. Opinions on civility and what constitutes a PA will continue to differ. Dennis Brown is admonished to not refer to Mrs. Brown as "a sack" ("hit the sack before midnight"), everyone else is admonished to load up on carbs tonight. Tomorrow is another day. Happy new year. Drmies (talk)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Dennis, you're an Administrator, right? And in dialogue with MathewTownsend above, he unleashes a string of personal attacks on Malleus, and, you don't even issue so much as a caution, let alone admonishment or warning about it, instead characterizing the series of PAs as "opinions". Amazing! (How do you find consistency in that, just curious? "Because he's Malleus, PAs against him can be overlooked?" And the hypocrisy of someone complaining about incivility of a user, via a series of PAs! Again, amazing.) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 03:55, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

  • If I thought saying or doing something would have helped, I would have, but sometimes the best solution is to archive and just stop the discussion, which stops the incivility. This is based not on my experience as an admin, but from years of being a mediator. I use this method regularly. It did stop the arguing, after all, which was my goal. As for it being inconsistent with other admin, I am not responsible for their actions, only my own. If anything, I believe this method needs to be used more often, not less, in these isolated discussions. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 04:24, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
    • Dennis, I believe you had a duty as an Admin, to confront the PAs that were being spouted, at a minimum to name them PAs, and caution Townsend from continuing in that vein. You chose not to. Regardless what you did as a mediator in RL, your obligation as Admin on Wikipedia calls you to at least caution a user streaming a series of PAs against another user, right in front of you. If you "use that method" of ignoring PAs on WP, then I'd say that is shirking your role as Admin here, or, playing favorites (admonishing and warning others, except those you don't feel like). I can't believe what you are saying above, perhaps I'm not understanding. (You're advocating, that instead of calling a stop to PAs on another user you're direct witness to, that Admins are best to ignore them?) Wow I dunno ... I still think you failed your obligation as WP Admin, by that. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 04:55, 31 December 2012 (UTC) p.s. At least you didn't deny they were PAs. (But, neither did you acknowledge, that they were. And you wonder why I often ask for you to pin down on which side of fence you are!?)
IHTS, Wikipedia is a voluntary project; no one here has an obligation to do anything. Give Dennis a break, he can chat with who he pleases on his talk page without acting like the thought police if that's what he wants. If being an admin means I'm not allowed to talk with anyone without pointing out their deficiencies then I'll resign tomorrow, and I imagine I'll take most of the admin corps with me. If you're so concerned take it to a noticeboard (note, that was a joke. Please don't take it to a noticeboard, for God's sake...). And also, why does anyone have to be on a particular "side of the fence" in this fiasco? Honestly there's a whole world out there, this issue is so minor I literally can't believe how involved everyone has gotten, and talking about the issue like it's a major international conflict doesn't help anything. Basalisk inspect damageberate 06:13, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Amazing reply. You remind me it's a volunteer project. I happened to know that already. You instruct me that Dennis can chat with "who he pleases". I never suggested he limit who he chats with, thanks for implying I did when I didn't. I didn't ask Dennis to "point out deficiencies" of the editor, rather to caution him about the PSs he was spewing. "Thought police" isn't involved here at all, since the PAs were black & white text in Dennis's face. You're also amiss thinking I'd ever go to a noticeboard about anything ever here ... I do not have any faith in the DR noticeboards, IMO they are cesspools of irresponsibility. I disagree that no responsibility expectations exist for Admins, when they witness point-blank in dialogue with a user, a stream of PAs being made of another user. Do you have any additional twisted arguments to waste my time with, Basalisk? Ihardlythinkso (talk) 06:30, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Re your complaint re "side of the fence". That was limited to Dennis's lack of either denial or acknowledgement in his response to my question why he didn't caution Townsend for making the litany of PAs, whether they were even PAs in Dennis's opinion, or not. (It was not about any generalized "fiasco", or whatever you are referring to.) Do you have any other manipulative, muddying comments for my attention? Ihardlythinkso (talk) 06:35, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
BTW, that's very impressive: one Administrator in conversation with a user who's making a litany of PAs against another user, says nothing, and later characterizes the PAs as "opinions", and explains that he felt it best to just ignore the PAs (without explicitly acknowleging they were PAs). Then another Administrator comes in to back him up on choosing to ignore the PAs without comment, on the basis that WP editors are volunteers, and Administrators have no expectation or responsibility to comment in such a situation. Then chastising a user for calling question to why the litany of PAs were allowed to escape even a word of caution from the Admin. Very impressive indeed. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 06:57, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Oh God. The fact you stepped in here, Basalisk, couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that you have been an Admin only since November 23, 2012, and that User:Dennis Brown nominated you at your RfA, could it now?? Ihardlythinkso (talk) 07:14, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
I fail to see the relevance of that to this discussion.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 07:44, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Let's end this pointless discussion now. Basalisk (talk · contribs) makes a great administrator and both Dennis Brown (talk · contribs) and Basalisk deserve a break, this is just "biting" each other with uncivil-like comments at this point and nothing appears to be in process of being addressed. Let's enjoy the new year and relax. TBrandley (what's up) 07:49, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
@TBrandley, I don't know how "pointless" it is, when it deals with intentional oversight of presumably what is Admin responsibility. I don't judge others and try to stick to the facts (written record). If Basalisk decided to make comments, that was his choice, no one forced him and he only is responsible for their quality. "Nothing appears to be in process of being addressed" I agree, but didn't come here to get anything "addressed" (I had a Q and then some replies and comments).
I see by your User you've been here ~1 yr. and: "This user is not a Wikipedia administrator, but would like to be one someday." (Not not surprising then, you would be careful not to make any comment even remotely unsupportive of another Admin, since Admins seldom "break rank", do they?) This thread would have been 10 times shorter had Dennis responded "Yeah, I probably shoulda said somethin' about that", but that didn't happen, instead I've been wading thru followup comments by his protege, and then reprimanded by an Admin wannabe. (No insult, just fact.) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 09:29, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
@Ihardlythinkso: Glad to see that you're scrupulous about your spelling and punctuation as you malign other editors and slap them down. Being pedantic mixed with being entirely clueless - with a soupçon of righteousness and just a touch of arrogance - is always an interesting combination. My advice is, stick to chess, that's pretty much your speed, you don't really seem to have a good handle on this thing called human behavior (one of the more complex subjects we know of). Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:37, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Oh gosh, thanks for your viscious personal attacks. And over-the-top accusations. It's so pleasant here, returning any criticism, with that kind of nasty viciousness. (Have balance, much? And you think your demonstration here shows you to be a superior example of civility? Really?) Hostile. Nasty! Wonderful. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 11:30, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Is this December 27 edit summary of yours to an IP user an example of your superiority in the "human behavior" department?: you are a simple-minded and ignorant person Ihardlythinkso (talk) 11:45, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Ken, didn't you write this (found it on one of your subpages): "[...] the people who hang out at AN/I are, by and large, admins or their friends and hangers-on, and it's almost inevitable that, either consciously or without being at all aware of it, they are going to be biased in favor of other admins. When a civilian brings a complaint about an admin, there is a distinct tendency to reject it out of hand as sour grapes or a deliberate attack, and, to a large extent, the wagons get circled." Ihardlythinkso (talk) 12:03, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Ya know Ken, ya got a lot of opinions, and some of it is down-right scary reading (I must say). But I agree with a *lot* of it. Just a casual observation: you're aware, right?, that most of what you write there is seeped in overwhelming superior attitude? (It's true. That would make it difficult to read for some, but know what? Not me. Because I'm genuinely interested in ideas. You do have some inconsistencies/contradictions going on there too, but, that is expected, given just how many ideas you have going there, which is considerable. I can see you put a lot of thought and emotion into the WP. I want to compliment you on that! [Cause I like to give credit where credit is due. Not only critique.]) I've bookmarked your page for further reading -- it is interesting. Again, thanks for your work there ... I think WP needs more thinkers/change. But I see also you have given up on change there, concluding WP is happy w/ itself despite its dysfunctionality. That's depressing, but might very well be true. The fact you put so much into expressing ideas for a better way, shows u to be an idealist. (I think that's good.) Good New Year's to you. Sincerely, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 12:31, 31 December 2012 (UTC) p.s. I see you got the beginnings of an extensive blocklog, including an indef block in your history. (That's good. 'Cause I don't think I trust anyone w/ a clean blocklog, any longer! [It shows they're not really trying, or something.])

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────To make it perfectly clear: As an admin, I am not obligated to act on ANYTHING. Any other admin could have come in and said something if they wished. I'm pretty sure plenty of other admin watch this page, and none felt compelled. Admin aren't police, and it isn't our job to point out every error of every person. Like Basalisk, I would hand in my bit if that were the requirement. You could have asked any admin to review it, or taken it to the boards (yes, bad idea), but I'm not obligated to deal with problems the way that you or anyone else wants me to, as I'm bound only by policy. I overlook a great many things in the interest of keeping the peace, including my asking you twice to stay off my talk page until 2013. I make no apology for bending in the wind when it comes to minor things. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 13:18, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

OK Dennis, I'll believe you (without researching it). (But please don't water-down Townsend's series of personal attacks against Malleus by calling them an editor's "error". What caused me to Q you on why you didn't say anything, is that it did not seem right at all, not fair to Malleus or any user for that matter, to not advise someone spewing such a litany, that it isn't acceptable. You chose not to say anything in the dialogue w/ Townsend, it was your discretion to make that choice, ok, I stand corrected, I didn't know that. And you already explained why you didn't choose to say anything, but again I didn't agree with the watering-down, naming the PAs "opinions". But that is your discretion too. The whole deal is, I don't think any editor s/ have to face that kind of litany, it's abusive, and it was sad to see the only one who spoke up about it was Malleus, for I don't think he or any user in that position s/ have to, with an Admin right there. [It isn't the choice I would have made if I were Admin, obviously. I would have at least said something. I'm a little confused to understand the benefit of allowing such a litany without comment. It's pure abusivenss. But that's me I guess.])
Have a Happy New Years, thank you for answering, and thank you for letting me borrow your Userspace in unplanned fashion in meeting User:Beyond My Ken, surely an interesting and provocative character and thinker. (WP needs more ass-kicking content builders, like him, in order to improve & evolve more quickly, or at all.) Sincere, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 13:47, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Happy New Year to you as well. I have big plans: Stay at home with Mrs. Brown, drink some cocoa, and hit the sack before midnight. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 14:02, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hollisz Update

Hey Dennis, hope all is well. With User:Drmies‎ on a Wikibreak, I may have to lean on you for blocks or whatever when it comes to the Zimmermanh1997/Hollisz/98.204.145.138 situation. I kinda hate to do so, since you are insanely busy, but you are the only one (besides Drmies) that knows this whole case. Just wanted to keep you in the loop. Hope you have a good day and a Happy 2013! :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 14:47, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

  • He is around some, he closed a discussion above. If you aren't sure, just drop a note on his talk page and a pointer here. One of us or a stalker will likely pick it up. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 22:00, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Murthy

Dennis, just a heads up that I restored the topic ban thread from the archive at WP:AN. Another editor nudged me about this on my talk page. I've been much less active since the unfortunate events of a couple of days ago. It feels like slogging through mud, and I have to force myself to do anything at all. Regards.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:19, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

2013

Happy New Year 2013.jpg Have an enjoyable New Year!
Hello Dennis Brown: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 15:24, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Brains Work Better barnstar

Nicolas P. Rougier's rendering of the human brain.png The 'Brains Work Better in A Community' Award
Thank you for all your efforts to befriend and assist your fellow Wikipedian Editors (WE). WE are a community and the more WE allow attack tactics, the more WE become imprisoned by the result. Sometimes WE need a reminder that WE are all human and entitled to respect. What's so bad about Peace, Love and Understanding? ```Buster Seven Talk 18:29, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
👍 Like Go Phightins! 18:54, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Kudos

Eggnog2.jpg The eggnog of good citizenship award
For being unfailingly kind and consistently helpful, for taking WP:AGF to heart in all you do, and because barnstars are just so 2012, you are hereby awarded this partially-filled glass of eggnog. (Hurry and drink it before it spoils.) Hope your busy new year is a happy one for you, on and off the wiki. Rivertorch (talk) 21:51, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Thank you! Being human, I sometimes come up short of my own expectations, but kind words like this remind me to always try to assume good faith, be patient and listen. Have a fun and safe New Years. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 21:57, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

YellowPegasus

Hello,

I was wondering, shouldn't YellowPegasus (talk · contribs) be sporting a

{{sockpuppet|1=PIPony22|2=confirmed}}

as AnnaHendren (talk · contribs) does? (Not urgent, since YellowPegasus is already indefblocked)

-- 70.24.248.246 (talk) 23:06, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BigzMMA

Happy New Year !!!
Who should I nudge to get this resolved ? Mtking 23:58, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Lots of people are missing due to the holidays. You could ping one of the active CUs or Clerks, just look at the SPI page to see who is actively working cases. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 05:45, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Wonder Woman and WonderBoy

If you think it appropriate, would you mind mentioning the circumstances around your checkuser block of WeirdWoman123 as a sock of WonderBoy98? I'm not questioning your decision — rather, I'm confused why you'd indef-block a user as a sock without blocking the sockmaster. Please see the "Wonder Woman/GA2" section of my talk page and the "Wonder Woman" section of User talk:Aircorn if you care about why I'm asking: someone wants to G4 speedy a page that WonderBoy created, and I'm very much unsure how to handle the situation. Nyttend (talk) 14:38, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Feel free to revert any edits by WeirdWoman or delete any page, CU (DoRD) was very clear on the connection. I've emailed WonderBoy and trying to offer them an opportunity to not get blocked and instead get a little mentoring, but I haven't received a reply. If I don't get a reply soon, I will file a SPI report to hang the CU results and they will be blocked for a short period as the sockmaster. It is unusual to do this, but I'm hoping it might be more effective at preventing future socks in this one circumstance. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 14:47, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the input; page is deleted. Didn't realise that you were a CU clerk. Nyttend (talk) 15:35, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
  • SPI clerk, but not a CU. Someone dropped me this case via email, I pinged the CU DoRD on IRC and got the result. It isn't typical but the emailer thinks the editor is very young, so I just wanted to try the more gentle approach. Most cases do hit the SPI pages, but a few like this get handled off venue. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 15:41, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Dennis Brown. You have new messages at Talk:1950s American automobile culture/GA1.
Message added 18:15, 1 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TBrandley (what's up) 18:15, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick action

On the Pete K IP use issue. hgilbert (talk) 18:41, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Apology

I had a brain fart, and apologized here: [15] Dennis Brown - © Join WER 23:44, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 December 2012

Up for a challenge, Mr. Editor Retention?

WP:ANI#Moving forward. — Francophonie&Androphilie(Je vous invite à me parler) 17:59, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

  • I'm flattered, but as my page notice indicates, I just started that time of year when I'm going to be working 14 hours a day. I have one of those odd jobs where I only really work half the time, but lots of hours when I do. I have a couple under observation as it is, and this would stretch me a bit thin, thus not be fair to them. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 18:05, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Mail

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, Dennis Brown. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

```Buster Seven Talk 21:20, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

  • I'm pinging back and forth between stuff, and want to look at it closer when I can focus on it. But I will. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 23:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. take yer time...weeks if necessary. Its been on the shelf for years. No rush. ```Buster Seven Talk 03:08, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Not that I keep track, but...

I won. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Congratulations. What exactly am I congratulating you for? I just walked in. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 21:51, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
    • I was just being silly; didn't mean to take up your time, I thought you'd have noticed and known what I was talking about. It appears I beat you to the McGlork (or whatever it was) reblock by mere seconds. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:58, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
      • Oh! I blocked him before I left work, made the hour commute, and was in the middle of looking at all my contribs over the last hour and I completely missed the fact that you beat me to the punch. He's been uberblocked by the Pedro Cabal, it seems. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 22:02, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
        • Chuck Norris was once blocked by the Pedro Cabal; his unblock request was declined. Cheers. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:07, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
          • Dammit, no one laughed. I hate you all. :( --Floquenbeam (talk) 03:24, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
            • (edit conflict) I had a cognitive chuckle, but didn't want to interrupt such a deep conversation that involves deals on socks (Dennis, do you do all colors of socks, btw?) Face-smile.svg Go Phightins! 03:30, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Ha! ```Buster Seven Talk 03:29, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm thick headed, and besides, I went and snuggled with the Mrs. ENWP keeps me up at night too much, I needed sleep. And snuggling. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 14:21, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
  • If I may turn serious for a moment, however... Is it worth opening another SPI for Hackneyhound and User:Make mine a tripe? I've blocked indef, since if he isn't Hackneyhound he's some other trolling sock, but is it worth the SPI? --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:53, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
    • Let me look. I may ping DQ and see if he wants to look. If so, I will file and shuffle the papers for you. You already did the heavy lifting. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 22:59, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
      • Thanks much. Dennis. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:05, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
        •  Confirmed and I just added to the archive. Your socks washed in 5 minutes or less, or the next sock is free! Dennis Brown - © Join WER 23:07, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
          • Does it have to be the same sock master, or does this free sock offer apply to any future sock? Thanks again. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:10, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
            • We accept competitors coupons, so any sock will do :) Anytime. I appreciate the heads up, helps us connect the dots. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 23:15, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

E-mail

I accidentally disabled e-mail when updating gender. Sorry. It as been enabled again.--Amadscientist (talk) 02:51, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Updating Gender???? ```Buster Seven Talk 03:09, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Yep. Its possible. LOL! ( I decided on male. Works for me)--Amadscientist (talk) 03:42, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Haven't gotten anything Dennis. If you sent something it may have been unable to get through due to the overload on my email. I cleaned out a ton of stuff so it should work OK now.--Amadscientist (talk) 22:32, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

McGurk Johnny

Thanks. That, as (ironically enough) the user speculated, was exactly why I put this on hold. As one of the regular unblock-request reviewers, I think I speak for most of us when I say that I do prefer that when someone is blocked for sockpuppetry without an SPI or even sockmaster identified, that it is difficult to properly review the block in the event of an unblock request. Which, as we see, does happen. (Vent mode off; hope you don't feel implicated since this is just a general complaint of mine). Daniel Case (talk) 04:14, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

  • I completely understand. I strongly prefer linkage. Not necessarily SPI when it is very obvious, but in cases like this. In this case, I had announced he was a sock of "unknown" at IRC, NW looked and agreed and did the block, so there was already two sets of eyes before you got there. I quickly tracked down a CU on IRC and provided enough convincing to justify the CU check (that is kind of strict since it is a privacy concern). Then I put the info in the SPI archives for him. NW was just a little quicker on the trigger than I thought. My first impression was that it might have been Mathewtownsend, who was just blocked and known for anti-malleus rants. If I'm around and you have an issue with blocked sock of "unknown", feel free to ping me, I don't mind looking and filing the paperwork at SPI, etc. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 14:14, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Recommendation for good medical article to use as a model

Dennis, stalkers:

Due to some unfortunate family circumstances I found myself reading everything I could find on percutaneous vertebroplasty a few nights ago. I added the best reference I found to the article and tucked it away on my watchlist to come back to later. A new editor came through shortly afterwards and, although the formatting was a wreck, he appeared to know what he was talking about. I engaged him, and he turns out to be an expert in this area (although definitely not in wikipedia editing). We're talking by email.

Rather than hand him a stack of policy pages to read I think it would be much more efficient to show him an exemplary medical article and say "Do it this way" (filling in policy as needed). What would you suggest for a unusually good article on a medical procedure that has a fair bit of actual controversy surrounding it? (By actual controversy I mean that there are very solid – and conflicting – secondary sources.)

Also, if you know of someone who works on medical articles and doesn't have enough to do already I could probably use another set of eyes on this.

Thanks much,

GaramondLethe 06:10, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

  • User:Basalisk is an admin and a physician, he might be a good contact for a little mentoring. I'm a marketing guy, so I don't hang at med articles. You might also go look at WikiProject:Medicine, where they have articles that became Featured Articles listed, such as Acute myeloid leukemia, DNA, Hippocampus and Immune system. Looking down at that page, you might find one that is tangentially related to the topic you need an example for. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 14:19, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
  • User:MastCell is a great help. And his talk is much-watched by Doctors. Good luck. ```Buster Seven Talk 14:35, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
  • You could post a note like this to the Wikiproject Medicine talk page (WT:MED). --Anthonyhcole (talk) 15:52, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Ketogenic diet recently went FA and was developed by the highly-respected User:Colin. I asked a similar question and that was the response I got. Adding: Sadly at this time there are no FA-quality or even GA-quality articles on surgical procedures, although I am trying to fix that!  :) Zad68 16:32, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
  • I don't care what anyone says, I have the best and most helpful talk page stalkers on the whole wiki :) Dennis Brown - © Join WER 21:50, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
  • MastCell is sporadically involved, and Colin is quite busy ... really, the best thing to do is AnthonyCole's advice ... post a request to WT:MED. And show the new editor two pages: WP:MEDRS (on sourcing requirements for medical articles, particularly since non-wikipedians have a tendency to do original research and use primary studies and case reports rather than secondary reviews) and WP:MEDMOS (particularly the sections on what sort of encyclopedic language we use and how medical articles are organized). Also, this Dispatch will help, and should be required reading for anyone editing medical articles: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-30/Dispatches. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks for all the great advice and recommendations—that's exactly what I was looking for. And yes, Dennis, you do have the most helpful stalkers in all of wikipedia. GaramondLethe 01:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Legitimate claim to an account

Hi. You wrote "... there is no way the former account holder has a legitimate claim to the name." As I sit here and read this, I wonder how your claim to the account "Dennis Brown" is any different than this (former) user's claim to the account "Griot". There is most certainly a legitimate claim to the name, isn't there? The user is presumably able to authenticate it using his or her password, which is all we require around here, for me or for you or for anyone. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:21, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

  • In this case, socking was the issue. The account was blocked as an illegitimate use of a name for abusing multiple accounts. I have never seen an instance where a sockpuppet of a master was allowed to come back as a legitimate alternate account. This isn't speaking to the puppetmaster (whos contribs would still be linked via the new name after the old was usurped). In my eyes, it is ONLY because it is a sockpuppet that we allow this. The account will never be allowed to be used by the original creator anyway. If it was an account in good standing with 5k edits, I wouldn't even have considered it, even if it was abandoned years ago. The "sock" is what makes the claim invalid and removes any previous or future use that is fully in good faith. But, that is just my perspective, my idea of when it is ok to make an exception and use discretion: when there is no way for the original owner to use the account due to it being blocked as a sock many years ago. I'm no expert here, and always open to being persuaded. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 17:28, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
    • Perhaps I'm misreading the checkuser thingy, but it looks like Griot was the master account, not a sockpuppet. Writ Keeper 17:40, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
      • Damn, you are right. That was my error. That is a different thing. If he was the sock, then to me there is clear discretion. If he is the master, that is a different thing. Thank you for correcting me, Writ. Have to ponder that. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 17:42, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
      • See my comment there. I just had a conference with some tech and crat types, the foundation is going to force SUL unification anyway, so eventually the account would be usurped if not today. Thus, I'm supporting the change as an inevitable outcome. Jeez, confusing stuff. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 19:47, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
        • You're coming dangerously close to fearmongering. Do you have a reliable source for the claims you're making? (Hint: a random unmaintained page at mediawiki.org does not count.) --MZMcBride (talk) 20:52, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
          • Fear mongering?? There is no "fear", only facts based on actual discussions that this will be coming anyway. I'm not shocked it is coming, SUL needs unification across all wikis. No one is "threatened" by it, so I have no clue what you are referring to. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 21:36, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
            • Discussions where? --MZMcBride (talk) 21:49, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
              • Real time discussion on IRC, admin channel, links and all. I was aware that SUL unification had been discussed before, but that discussion convinced me that it was an ongoing plan. Like you, I started here before unified logins. Of course, it makes sense that they eventually want to completely unify everything. I suggest moving this to the Crat page if you want to discuss it further, so anyone can participate. But again, there is no "fear" or anything TO fear. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 21:54, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
                • I imagine some users might fear losing their preferred account name with many thousands of edits. That's what completely unified login entails, you realize?
                  With respect, in my discussions with Oliver and others at BN, it's become increasingly clear that nearly everyone involved in these tech chats is completely clueless. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:07, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
                  • At this stage, they are only talking about notifying and giving them a change to oppose. Eventually, it will all have to go that way. In this case, it is a prolific sock master that hasn't edited in a few years, so it is a fairly safe bet. I DID raise all those issues in that discussion, you might note, and did a lot of background on policy before concluding what I concluded. Doesn't mean I'm right, but there is some logic to all this. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 23:30, 3 January 2013 (UTC)