Revision as of 13:30, 10 February 2011 editArcticocean (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Extended confirmed users46,227 edits →SAQ: Green monster← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:02, 10 February 2011 edit undoBishonen (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators80,259 edits To unmask you!Next edit → | ||
Line 109: | Line 109: | ||
* Bish: Why have you written your latest evidence section in green? It provides a lot of discomfort to the pedantic clerk in me, but, really, I'm just curious as to why you did it :P. ]<small> <nowiki>]<nowiki>]</nowiki></small> 13:30, 10 February 2011 (UTC) | * Bish: Why have you written your latest evidence section in green? It provides a lot of discomfort to the pedantic clerk in me, but, really, I'm just curious as to why you did it :P. ]<small> <nowiki>]<nowiki>]</nowiki></small> 13:30, 10 February 2011 (UTC) | ||
**To unmask the people who don't read my evidence, because there's an explanation in there, AGK! :-P Did you happen to notice that there are a couple of green bits in my "real", original evidence section also—the one that's not about Smatprt? All my green text has the same function: to look different from the rest. To look new and green. See, I disapprove strongly of people adding to their original text ''without'' indicating that "this was written later, and refers to stuff that has happened ''after'' my original evidence." That is information I want, when I read other people's evidence. It makes things much clearer. But I usually don't get it: people chop and change, remove and add, and mostly don't even date the changes! The more I read such ] evidence, the more discomfort it causes the pedantic editor in ''me''. So much so that I wanted to make my own additions ''really'' different, as different as possible. Proper dates! Green dye! | |||
**Lots of reasons! Still uncomfortable? If you are, I suggest a non-green way of doing it, which you're very welcome to implement: wash out the green dye and give those bits a different font instead. That's beyond my skill, or I'd do it myself. ] | ] 14:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC). |
Revision as of 14:02, 10 February 2011
Talk:Shakespeare authorship question
Shakespeare authorship question RFAR
User:Bishonen/Evidence section for Shakespeare authorship question. Do not touch. Beware of the Darwinbish.
Post messages below, please.
RfAR
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests#Shakespeare authorship question and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks, If you are aware of any other parties who might be usefully added, please list them etc. LessHeard vanU (talk) 23:43, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Care for a glass of water?
With your alter ego's habit of biting, I am most concerned... LessHeard vanU (talk) 11:31, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
- The state of being rabid does indeed come from having rabies, so you'd best keep out of Darwinbish's way. The person I myself bit is now blocked, which, considered per WP:ROPE, is surely a pity. For what could be more economically illustrative of our (or Shakespeare's) problems than her own words? The statement she has already posted on the RfAR page, for instance, provides a kind of shortcut to the heart of the matter. I plan to argue this with the little Futzilla as soon as I have time to spare, i.e. WP:NOTNOW. Bishonen | talk 12:22, 15 January 2011 (UTC).
- Of course, hydrophobia is indicative of and an alternate name for rabies - what erudite jesters we are...!
The hopefully soon to be opened SAQ Arbitration case should not, I feel, become the NinaGreen Arbitration case - the issue is far too long standing for the focus to be on the most recent focus of advocacy/pov issues; I am hoping that you as an established custodian of that article can provide some historical oversight (pre or contemporary with Smatprt?) of the concerns. (Do I now end this with some reference to Bishzilla? Your removal of others examples has somewhat restricted my understanding of your talkpage protocols...) LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:38, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
- Don't worry, she'll refer to you! Bishonen | talk 22:15, 15 January 2011 (UTC).
- Little user come back! Need big hug! Remember hugging protocols! bishzilla ROARR!! 22:13, 15 January 2011 (UTC).
Happy 10th
Thank you, Bzuk. No offence, but I just don't like templates on my page. Bishonen | talk 19:53, 16 January 2011 (UTC).
Serious Question
If I wanted to blow a raspberry at someone on the internet, how would I go about communicating that in writing? How would you spell it? PHTTHPTH? Someone needs to come up with a spelling and create a meme so that everyone on the internet knows what you are doing when you type that. Tex (talk) 21:25, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Serious, or even doom-laden, reply
Only User:KillerChihuahua knows. Ask the puppy. Bishonen | talk 01:12, 21 January 2011 (UTC).
I tend to prefer THIIBBBIT! :P myself. SirFozzie (talk) 01:43, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
- I am not sure that this is legal, and even if it were it should not be mentioned in polite company (therefore, this page is fine...) LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:49, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
- THIIBBBIT would work. However, in my experience, the more time-honored "pppppppppppppppbbbbbbbllllht!" is just as effective; this form may have the bs between the p section and the l section omitted. Remember that the raspberry, or Bronx cheer, is an unvoiced linguolabial trill. As such, while specific spelling is open to interpretation, repeated consonants are a must. In this day of modern technology, there is always the linking or sending of a sound file, as well, which will leave no doubt as to the nature of your communique, even for the more obtuse. I trust I have been of some minor assistance. KillerChihuahuaAdvice 14:39, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
- I have to say, I have never seen a raspberry with an L in it before. The customary spelling over here is phthaarpElen of the Roads (talk) 22:42, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
- (e/c with the Elephant Man) My own feeling is also that I like to see an R somewhere in there. But this is an encyclopedia, not a record of editors' feelings. This sound file, Pups? How about sending the whole article? Oh, look, it's rhyming slang, ha! Raspberry tart / fart! Bishonen | talk 23:07, 22 January 2011 (UTC).
- The Elephant Man? The Elephant Man!!!!! You're getting as bad as that young fishersnapper friend of yours. Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:55, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
- Bishonen is regrettable compound of all worst features of all her socks, little Elen. Tetchy, difficult personality! Naughty 'shonen always embarrass easy-going popular Zilla! Whole family hopeless! bishzilla ROARR!! 00:44, 24 January 2011 (UTC).
- As for 'shonen bias, need seen to be believed! Look how many ways is biased! bishzilla ROARR!! 00:44, 24 January 2011 (UTC). Bishonen | talk 00:56, 24 January 2011 (UTC).
- Bishonen is regrettable compound of all worst features of all her socks, little Elen. Tetchy, difficult personality! Naughty 'shonen always embarrass easy-going popular Zilla! Whole family hopeless! bishzilla ROARR!! 00:44, 24 January 2011 (UTC).
- The Elephant Man? The Elephant Man!!!!! You're getting as bad as that young fishersnapper friend of yours. Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:55, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
- (e/c with the Elephant Man) My own feeling is also that I like to see an R somewhere in there. But this is an encyclopedia, not a record of editors' feelings. This sound file, Pups? How about sending the whole article? Oh, look, it's rhyming slang, ha! Raspberry tart / fart! Bishonen | talk 23:07, 22 January 2011 (UTC).
- I have to say, I have never seen a raspberry with an L in it before. The customary spelling over here is phthaarpElen of the Roads (talk) 22:42, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
- THIIBBBIT would work. However, in my experience, the more time-honored "pppppppppppppppbbbbbbbllllht!" is just as effective; this form may have the bs between the p section and the l section omitted. Remember that the raspberry, or Bronx cheer, is an unvoiced linguolabial trill. As such, while specific spelling is open to interpretation, repeated consonants are a must. In this day of modern technology, there is always the linking or sending of a sound file, as well, which will leave no doubt as to the nature of your communique, even for the more obtuse. I trust I have been of some minor assistance. KillerChihuahuaAdvice 14:39, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
regarding phonetics
My grandfather, who served in the Indian Army under Auchinlek, once witnessed a discussion between two aged gentlemen at the Officers Club who were insisting upon their interpretation of the of the subject matter. One insisted that, phonetically, it should be represented as "Baaa-room" while the other remained adamant that "Bar-ooom" was the better approximation. This discourse was eventually interrupted by a young officer who, in attempting to draw the situation to a conclusion, noted that each vowel in the word had equal prominence and the correct pronunciation was "barroom". Silence ensured, while each of the ancients contemplated this new opinion. Finally, one stirred and said, "Bright young fellah, no doubt, but I rather fancy he has never heard an elephant fart..." LessHeard vanU (talk) 23:01, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Ha!
I must have inadvertently deleted the "parties" template on the workshop page. I don't really think anybody would mistake me for an arbitrator. Tom Reedy (talk) 03:53, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- You don't fool me. You fancy those golden arb robes, don't you? Bishonen | talk 05:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC).
- "If nominated I will not run; if elected I will not serve!" I think WP policies guarantees I will keep those promises! Tom Reedy (talk) 06:25, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- "You all did see that on the Lupercal Bishonen thrice presented him with kingly robes, which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?" Two more to go... :P MastCell 17:39, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- Genuwine ermine robes! Get yer robes at Bishonen's Discount House! Bishonen | talk 18:27, 2 February 2011 (UTC).
- There were robes? I could have used one. I spent most of my time huddled shivering in a corner. Paul August ☎ 01:59, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- I think you might find this vested contributors sealskin vest warmer, Paul. Here, wrap up. Bishonen | talk 02:17, 3 February 2011 (UTC).
- "Genuine ermine" - there's a scene in Dish and Dishonesty that explains how they really make those robes (not suitable for cats of a nervous disposition). --RexxS (talk) 02:56, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- That's "genuwine", Big Rex. But don't feel bad, I missed it in the caption, too. Fixing. Oh, I hope you enjoyed this, before Shell Kinney removed it. You're in there too, somewhat. The author seemed upset to lose such a masterpiece of raillery, but I think Shell did him a BIG favour. In fact I had some thoughts of reverting her, but I guess I'll stay nice for these last few days of arbitration. Nice-ish. Bishonen | talk 04:45, 3 February 2011 (UTC).
- I thought it was spelled Ginuwine, in honor of the spokesman for Adult Chocolate Milk (a 40-proof vodka-based version of chocolate milk, presumably marketed to people who don't want to be bothered pouring vodka into chocolate milk themselves). MastCell 06:12, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- That's "genuwine", Big Rex. But don't feel bad, I missed it in the caption, too. Fixing. Oh, I hope you enjoyed this, before Shell Kinney removed it. You're in there too, somewhat. The author seemed upset to lose such a masterpiece of raillery, but I think Shell did him a BIG favour. In fact I had some thoughts of reverting her, but I guess I'll stay nice for these last few days of arbitration. Nice-ish. Bishonen | talk 04:45, 3 February 2011 (UTC).
- "Genuine ermine" - there's a scene in Dish and Dishonesty that explains how they really make those robes (not suitable for cats of a nervous disposition). --RexxS (talk) 02:56, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the vest. I'l save it for dress up though, as I've abandoned that cold corner for warmer climes. Paul August ☎ 14:50, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- I copied the caption, honest guv (my excuse and I'm sticking to it). Thanks for reminding me, I did spot that invective before Shell expunged it, although I was clearly treated far too leniently for the heinous crime of adopting you and your supplementary proposal. Never mind, I'm roundly battered somewhere else on that page for having the temerity to suggest a bunch of principles that almost everybody seemed to agree with. And while I remember, your point at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Shakespeare authorship question/Workshop#Upon editors compliance with the standard model of interactions is well made, and the argument so compelling that I gladly concede (being threatened with the Darwinbish always does the trick). Hmmmm, now there's an idea for a Remedy. --RexxS (talk) 05:10, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
- You adopted me? Daddy, daddy!!!! Er, you do realise the socks go wherever I go? (With the fortunate exception of Bishzilla, who always prefers moving in with her faithful manager, or taking a nap in the cosy Great Pacific Garbage Patch). Still, I hope you have a big house. I bet young darwinbish is looking forward to helping out with the remedies in that bitey case. Bishonen | talk 15:42, 4 February 2011 (UTC).
- Fortunately the house is so large that you could even fit Jimbo's ego into it. Your socks will be very useful indeed for executing the necessary remedies. 'Zilla's breath will be invaluable in clearing Tom's drive; and the darwinbish will make short work of terminating with extreme prejudice those who are foolish enough to refer to us dinosaurs as 'toys'. Did I miss anything else of importance in that case? --T-RexxS (talk) 04:47, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
List of Surrealist poets
If you have a moment, can you revert this page move? List of surrealist poets should have a capital "s" on Surrealist to indicate the connection to the movement. Thank you. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 00:08, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Done. Is there a battle about the spelling? Bishonen | talk 00:38, 3 February 2011 (UTC).
- No, I only just discovered the article today, and was cleaning it up. When I attempted to move it, I discovered it had been moved to the lower case "s" in 2004. I could find no reason for it. Thanks for moving it back. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 00:50, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Shakespeare
I was wondering what you've been up to...so I checked...just so you know...Shakespeare didn't write Shakespeare...THIS GUY DID!!!!--MONGO 02:05, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
- Was he one of the typing monkeys? Bishonen | talk 15:30, 4 February 2011 (UTC).
- In much the same vein, a previously unknown scholar weighs in... LessHeard vanU (talk) 23:34, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Sounds like
Simple wish fulfillment... LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:44, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Uh-huh. How about that cup of coffee? Bishonen | talk 22:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC).
- Your slightest wish ...
- While we're on the issue, when all this frivolous diversion is done and dusted, can I expect both of you to head over to Coffee and do some content work? Cas and I have been struggling for the past year to get that into shape for FA. --RexxS (talk) 00:46, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the pretty latte, Rex! Content work? A half-forgotten concept! I'll take a shot at it.. eventually.. I hope. I've got another diversion first: doing the footnotes for my mum on Swedish wikipedia. Trickier than you might think! Meanwhile, why don't you inquire at the darwinbish's place? Now there's a caffeine freak! Bishonen | talk 15:18, 9 February 2011 (UTC).
SAQ
Much as I can understand your urge to comment , perhaps it would be better to just not provoke her into further replies, don't you think? I mean, it's not as if further refutations like this would be likely to either teach her something, or tell anybody else something new, is it? Just a thought :-) Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:52, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, but she's so interested in policy, remember? But I know you're right (dearest)! Bishonen | talk 15:02, 9 February 2011 (UTC).
- And why are all of you guys having coffee, and I'm not getting any?! Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:53, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- For the coffee I need a link. Watch this space. Bishonen | talk 15:02, 9 February 2011 (UTC).
- Uh, two links. Bishonen | talk 15:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC).
- Bish: Why have you written your latest evidence section in green? It provides a lot of discomfort to the pedantic clerk in me, but, really, I'm just curious as to why you did it :P. AGK 13:30, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- To unmask the people who don't read my evidence, because there's an explanation in there, AGK! :-P Did you happen to notice that there are a couple of green bits in my "real", original evidence section also—the one that's not about Smatprt? All my green text has the same function: to look different from the rest. To look new and green. See, I disapprove strongly of people adding to their original text without indicating that "this was written later, and refers to stuff that has happened after my original evidence." That is information I want, when I read other people's evidence. It makes things much clearer. But I usually don't get it: people chop and change, remove and add, and mostly don't even date the changes! The more I read such palimpsest evidence, the more discomfort it causes the pedantic editor in me. So much so that I wanted to make my own additions really different, as different as possible. Proper dates! Green dye!
- Lots of reasons! Still uncomfortable? If you are, I suggest a non-green way of doing it, which you're very welcome to implement: wash out the green dye and give those bits a different font instead. That's beyond my skill, or I'd do it myself. Bishonen | talk 14:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC).