Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:05, 11 August 2012

"It was reading the ultimate paragraph of this post: that finally convinced me it was time to go, yes, Hans is quite right, I am stuck in a vicious circle and there was no likelihood of things improving."

— Extract from Giano's retirement statement

Archives

2007 April May June July August September October November December 2008 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2009 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2010 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2011 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2012 January February March April May June July August

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Just a note

I understand that you are mad, but could you please try not to use the word "fuck". Sorry for your current troubles, just saw this. TBrandley 06:19, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Also, letting you know that you are at WP:ANEW. TBrandley 06:22, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I responded at the ANEW—injecting a little reality check and context into the issue.

In the meantime Malleus, if you want to have a laugh in the face of all this silliness, take a moment to think about us poor Aussies with only one gold medal! :-(

GFHandel ♬  06:57, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

That's really incredible. I just watched the Aussie's lose again in the women's 3km pursuit. Something's obviously not right. Malleus Fatuorum 17:20, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I think the host nation is too good this time (and is relegating Australia to silver in many events). GFHandel ♬  20:46, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

TBrandley there's nothing wrong with the word fuck. Perhaps if Malleus demonstrated the same lack of understanding of regional language differences, he might take offence at your suggestion that he is insane. Parrot of Doom 09:59, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I will use the word "fuck" wherever and whenever I consider it to be appropriate, whether you or anyone else likes it or not TBrandley. Malleus Fatuorum 17:20, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Have you ever considered Misplaced Pages:Do not say "With all due respect"? With link, there is no ambiguity. One could also simply make a recommendation to go commit the infamous anatomically impossible act. Really, sometimes using ten words instead of one is a lot of fun! Montanabw 22:51, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I wrote the Wikispeak version: "Most frequently seen in the postings of editors with aspirations to become an administrator, or those who do not have the courage to say I think you're talking bollocks." Malleus Fatuorum 23:01, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

If you're interested

I'm sure you are not looking for more trouble in your life, but I would be interested in your opinion as an experienced FA person on Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/Barack Obama/archive10. --John (talk) 10:20, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I've replied there. My opinion is that this FAR is quite improper. Malleus Fatuorum 21:01, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I take it you reviewed the talk page before commenting? --John (talk) 20:28, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Of course. Malleus Fatuorum 21:02, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

I was interested in your comment "The issues so far identified seem to me to be relatively easily fixed and in some cases arguably in areas where reasonable people may reasonably disagree". My issue with the article is its completeness and I found the editing community utterly unreceptive to the inclusion of any non-positive material regarding the targeted killing of Osama bin Laden, or indeed any other matter. When you say "relatively easily fixed", do you mean that the article is actually OK as a Featured Article without such balancing material, or do you have some other mechanism in mind for addressing the completeness of the article? Other concerns I have are related to the dodgy employment graph and to the lack of inclusion of any mention of drone attacks, something that will likely be seen in future as a key feature of his first presidential term. If it was possible to negotiate with the regular editors in talk I would certainly have done so. There is a tremendous resistance to change there; while I certainly appreciate the political reasons for this, I really do not think the article meets FAC at present. Whether a time will ever come when regular editors there will agree that "the time is right" for a review remains to be seen. Meantime, the article's status has not been reviewed since 2008. I understand, as I said when I messaged you, that there may be very compelling reasons for you to wish to avoid getting into controversy. The sad thing (for me) would be if the Obama article (an extremely important one) was to remain in almost as bad a condition long-term as the 9/11 one, and for similar reasons, and yet continue to show the little star. Thanks in advance for any further thoughts you may have. Are we still due to take the Melford Stevenson article to FA? I have some ideas for this. --John (talk) 12:46, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

If it proves to be impossible to negotiate with the regular editors then that's the time for an FAR. Yes, I think we ought to be thinking about Melford for FAC in the near future; what ideas do you have? Malleus Fatuorum 20:20, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I know you don't use userboxes, but ...

... some of your stalkers might like my latest creation ;P (Polynerdism is the function of being able to be significantly nerdy in a number of apparently-unrelated areas.) Pesky (talk) 10:48, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

This user is a Polynerd

That "polynerd" idea is interesting, as in truth I've pretty much avoided most articles on a subject I actually know anything about other than what I've read. Malleus Fatuorum 22:44, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't you find, though, that once you've read all the stuff necessary for the creation / significant improvement on an article, that you've absorbed (and remember) enough of it to qualify as nerdiness in the subject? ;P Pesky (talk) 07:42, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

I hate the word "nerd", a derogatory term used by people who think knowledge and intellect is worthy of derision. Parrot of Doom 07:55, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Ahhh, but haven't we adopted it along the lines of Proud To Be a Nerd, Nerd Pride, Nerds are Needed, and all that ;P Also see this. The guy is a genius. Pesky (talk) 08:47, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Become an antique dealer- that's where "polynerdism" really pays off. Ning-ning (talk) 08:56, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Hehe! My parents did that! Their polynerdism resulted in an item bought for £5 being sold for enough to buy them a new car ... Pesky (talk) 08:58, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

What was the item? LadyofShalott 00:30, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Checking in

If you already saw my previous message and just haven't had time to respond, then I apologize. Anyways, a bunch of people posted to your talkpage at the same time that I had, so just checking to make sure it wasn't lost in the crowd. Thanks. Ωphois 22:30, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I've just been a little distracted by a few other things. Malleus Fatuorum 22:41, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Gregorian mission

This is a note to let the main editors of Gregorian mission know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on August 10, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Misplaced Pages:Today's featured article/August 10, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

The Gregorian mission was the missionary endeavour sent by Pope Gregory the Great to the Anglo-Saxons in 596 AD. Headed by Augustine of Canterbury, its goal was to convert the Anglo-Saxons to Christianity. Along with Irish and Frankish missionaries, they converted Britain and helped influence the Hiberno-Scottish missionaries on the Continent. In the late 6th century Pope Gregory sent a group of missionaries to Kent, to convert Æthelberht, King of Kent, whose wife, Bertha of Kent, was a Frankish princess and practising Christian. Augustine was the prior of Gregory's own monastery in Rome and Gregory prepared the way for the mission by soliciting aid from the Frankish rulers along Augustine's route. In 597 the forty missionaries arrived in Kent and were permitted by Æthelberht to preach freely in his capital of Canterbury. Soon the missionaries were able to write to Gregory telling him of their success and that conversions were taking place. A second group of monks and clergy was dispatched in 601 bearing books and other items for the new foundation. The exact date of Æthelberht's conversion is unknown but it occurred before 601. Before Æthelberht's death in 616 a number of other bishoprics had been established. Although the missionaries were unable to remain in all of the places they had evangelised, by the time the last of them died in 653, they had established Christianity in Kent and the surrounding countryside and contributed a Roman tradition to the practice of Christianity in Britain. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Poor Ealdgyth. Malleus Fatuorum 23:16, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

I have already whined to friends. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:35, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

The daily offering of an article to the puling masses? And on such sort notice (not Ucucha's fault, either)

tip: Advisor.js will readily hose Image/File usages with names containing " - ". I always check each one. I've fixed this and added "_" as protection (although "helpful" drones will often undo this). I'll watch the article for idiots, today. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 00:35, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Fuck "good faith"

This is a good example of the kind of thing that so depresses me about Misplaced Pages. You bust a gut to produce an FA, but then it needs to be obsessively "improved" by those too ignorant and lazy to have done the work themselves, or to improve any of the supporting articles. Malleus Fatuorum 23:59, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

For the record, Malleus, I like your tits. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 07:54, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

"But if you know it's definitely wrong, you should be getting the Witchcraft Acts article in shape yourself" - obviously you're not a true believer Malleus. How dare you not bother improving an article, who do you think you are? ;) Parrot of Doom 20:37, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I found that to be quite astonishing. Malleus Fatuorum 23:43, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

A request for assistance

Hello, and good wishes,

Though you have a reputation as a fierce fellow, I come to you (as recommended by Drmies) to ask most humbly if you might be willing to look at some of my work, and possibly give me some advice on whether some of the articles I've worked on might qualify for Good Article status. I list many articles I've started or expanded on my user page. Though it is difficult for me to pick favorites, I will mention a few that I feel a bit proud of and would like some help improving if other editors such as you feel that's needed: Harry Yount, Sierra No. 3, They Call the Wind Maria, Chris Brown (dancer), 1970 Memorial Park riot, Ford Hunger March, Norman Livermore, Leon Jordan, Ethan Russell and Al Qöyawayma. I will also mention the major expansion I did on George Meany, a major U.S. historical figure which was an inaccurate and pitiful stub when I started on it. These articles all have shortcomings, I know, and I tend to be very self-critical, but I believe them to be useful contributions to this encyclopedia. Your comments on even one or two of them would be appreciated. Thank you. Cullen Let's discuss it 03:57, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Stalker butting in, as usual ... Malleus isn't really "fierce".. Not per se. Neither is my eight-foot boa ;P (who is called Cuddles) Pesky (talk) 08:57, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

But the very mention of They Call the Wind Maria, which is the most maudlin, overwrought, piece of crap show tune in all of human history is giving me twitches if not PTSD! Malleus, at least slap an NPOV tag on that piece of fluff! Better yet, give it your own special treatment, full-roar! I've got your back! Montanabw 19:08, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

The funny thing is, Montanabw, the song itself isn't a big favorite of mine. My tastes run to hard rock. But I had this DVD laying around for years of Paint Your Wagon and I like both Clint Eastwood and Lee Marvin, so I finally watched it. Not the greatest movie ever made. That caused an ear worm of They Call the Wind Maria, which I got rid of by writing this article. If you think my article doesn't reflect what the reliable sources say about the song, feel free to add any other you can find. The song is notable, I think we can all agree, even if it isn't quite A Day in the Life, which is one of my favorites. I was surprised there was no article about it here, so I wrote one. Cheers! Cullen Let's discuss it 22:39, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

• link — Ched :  ?  00:38, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Are you trying to give me that ear worm again, Ched? Cullen Let's discuss it 00:51, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I would never do such a thing. :=) — Ched :  ?  01:00, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Ricardo Montalban's mullet is as frightening as that horrid creature. Cullen Let's discuss it 01:20, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

After tremendous rain, even bad fog always goes. Ning-ning (talk) 06:36, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm not fierce, I'm simply uncompromising. Malleus Fatuorum 03:00, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Jimbo Wales#Morale and good editor retention

Hi Malleus - I guess it's courteous to let you know about this thread, if nothing else, because I've linked to a post citing an off-hand remark you made which struck me. I hope I've made it clear in my disclaimer that I've no interest in aggravating any personal issues or disputes but rather discuss a very real issue: the question of how to prevent driving away highly capable editors who've put they're backs into bringing pages to a level which can showcase the best work of Misplaced Pages . Best, —MistyMORN 20:09, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages's contempt for those who write its best articles will ultimately be its downfall. Malleus Fatuorum 03:03, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearances

Hello, Malleus. There's a discussion about main page appearances on Wehwalt's talk; I mentioned your name, and a recent event you were involved in, so I thought I should let you know. User talk:Wehwalt#Main page blurb.... Regards, -- Dianna (talk) 15:30, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

FA lockdown?

In the context of Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Pigsonthewing/Andy Mabbett and featured article of the day. -- do you think it would be a good idea to lock down the FA while it's on the front page? Or is that one of those perennial proposals which gets shot down every time it's brought up. Nobody Ent 18:47, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Page stalker here - the point is to bring in new editors. The point is not for established editors to impose their biases on TFA - that can be done on another day. New editors only have the single chance, so no articles shouldn't be locked down. Established editors should behave better. Period. Truthkeeper (talk) 18:56, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

never gonna happen. fact is TFA get edited a lot, and by regulars, too. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 19:04, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

As Truthkeeper and Br'er Rabbit said, it just ain't gonna happen, although I do think some changes seriously need to be considered. As a minimum I'd like to see all TFAs semi-protected (in fact all FAs and GAs semi-protected as well); I really fundamentally don't agree with the "anyone can edit anything" ethos. Malleus Fatuorum 19:38, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

My preference would be pending edits/flagged revisions.--Peter cohen (talk) 19:45, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I predict that will prove to be a disaster, just as it was last time. Malleus Fatuorum 19:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

My preference would be no more of the articles I've done the major share of the work on on the main page ... but I know that's just the TFA talking. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I feel pretty much the same after every TFA; it's really no kind of a reward. Malleus Fatuorum 19:55, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, there should be some way to opt-out. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:15, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I guess the option out is not to put it up for FA. (Raise it to FA-quality, but don't nominate it.) I know that isn't what you meant, Mark. LadyofShalott 22:47, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

That's one option. In reality there are certain types of article that I would never consider submitting to FAC anyway, even if I was utterly convinced they met the FA criteria. Malleus Fatuorum 00:06, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

What sorts? LadyofShalott 12:38, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Articles on controversial politicians such as Margaret Thatcher for instance. Malleus Fatuorum 12:40, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Good point, but I'm too much of a "star chaser" to ever do that. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:38, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I thought the point of posting FA on the main page was primarily to "showcase" Misplaced Pages's best work, rather than as a trivial token reward for the work put in. At the same time, aggressively targeting the FA while on the main page is, imo, a particularly insensitive form of negative reward – especially considering that the primary reward for serious Misplaced Pages work is surely the intrinsic job satisfaction. —MistyMORN 11:31, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

See WP:PEREN for this and many other proposals that never get implemented. The flip side of not locking is new users also see massive vandalism--not wiki's best side.PumpkinSky talk 03:19, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

The days of routine "massive vandalism" to the front page article are long behind us. Mr Stephen (talk) 10:41, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

It might be less than before, but it's hardly gone. PumpkinSky talk 10:53, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

My rule of thumb used to be that if it was impossible to make a useful change to the front page because vandalism-revert edits made it impossible to get a word in edgeways, then the article should be protected. I can't remember the last time I saw or heard of any article being hit that hard (but I don't do vandalism patrol these days). Mr Stephen (talk) 11:35, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

"you must be new" ORLY? I've been around longer than you and have about 110K edits. How is that new?PumpkinSky talk 11:45, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

You missed the smile on my face when I typed that ... Mr Stephen (talk) 13:46, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• I kinda noted that in my edit summary too. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:47, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• Actually if you don't count that break of 9 months or so, it's coming up on 7 years. PumpkinSky talk 11:51, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• Well, there we go. You were smiting vandals when I was learning to Wikilink. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:59, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• No, they're more sophisticated now. They put penises in obscure templates. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:44, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

got a job for you...

• Misplaced Pages talk:Today's featured article/requests#Timing

Just do it. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 14:45, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• "If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve." Malleus Fatuorum 15:05, 11 August 2012 (UTC)