Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:18, 2 January 2013

Archives

2006 · 2007 · 2008 · 2009 · 2010 · 2011 · 2012 · 2013–2015 · 2016–2017 · 2018 · 2019 · 2020 · FA archive sorting · 2021 · 2022 · 2023 Jan–Mar (DCGAR) · 2023 Apr–Aug · 2023 Aug–Dec · 2023 Seasons greetings · 2024 · 2025

I prefer to keep conversations together and usually respond on my talk page, so watch the page for my reply.

To leave me a message, click here.

Hallmark

Thanks for helping out with Hallmark of Hall of Fame movie Front of the Classs. I couldn't get the image to work for me, but it's there now and that's what counts. Also thanks for finding more sources and filling the blanks, such as summaries and plots. That's not my kind of thing. I was surprised no other user took the time to make a movie link, when Front of the Class was first announced. Especially since there's so much information out there now for Hallmark movies.

Your help is really appriciated. GiantTiger001 (talk) 07:47, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Ack! Thanks for the reminder that I was interrupted by Wikidrahmaz just as I was intending to expand that article from the sources. And thanks for getting the ball rolling. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:49, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Reminder to self

1. Periodic table for EdChem. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:06, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
2. Circumcision to prep for GA. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:11, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

No reply

Hi SandyGeorgia,
I received no reply at either Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Medicine, Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Education, or Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Psychology about merging the ABA and Behavior mod articles.
Also User:Casliber is checking at his office.
One psychologist said he thought ABA was a form of Behavior mod.
He said he wants to ask others in order to get a more a global view on ABA.
In addition, it is quite confusing because Cognitive-Behavior Modification is the old term for, what is now known as, Cognitive behavioral therapy.
Nonetheless, a website said CBT and ABA are two different forms of behavior therapy.
CBT is a form of psychotherapy and ABA is a form of behavior analysis that utilizes the application of operant conditioning to reinforce behavior.
ATC 05:58, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

I just spoke to someone I know who has a Ph.D. in Behavior Analysis and Clinical Psychology. He is also an author and works with autistic children as well as people with sexual disorders and helps people organize themselves in business (See here: Organizational behavior management (OBM), a form of ABA), and has spoken at various press conferences. He said anyone who still uses the term "behavior modification" is using "outdated termonoligy" and that no one has called ABA "behavior modification" in years if they kept up with the literature. In addition, he said Cognitive behavior therapy commonly used ABA in the old days which is why they use to call it "Cognitive-Behavior Modification". He said some forms of CBT still incorporate ABA which is known as Functional analytic psychotherapy and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. But it is primarily two different forms of Behavior therapy. So what should I do about not receiving a reply? I can't just merge the articles on my own right? So what should I do? ATC 08:14, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Pre-GA second round

Hi Sandy, hope you're having a good holiday season. At circ, I finally got through suggestions you gave, and also a general walk-through of the article, looking for more and fixing. Fortunately (?) for your first pre-GA look-through, you happened to go through the section that I thought had the worst prose in the article. Would you mind giving it another spin? Note: One thing that is NOT done is cleaning up wikilinks, that will be the last thing I do before submitting, so don't worry about that. I'm not expecting that it is FA quality now or even will pass GA as-is, but I just need to get the GA process started. Sometimes I need some external pressure to make me get things done! I'm hoping it's now close to "good enough to start GA" and will get to GA as part of the GA process. I just don't want a quick-fail. Appreciate it! Zad68 21:14, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

It's on my list ... hope to get there soon. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:04, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks... any time urgency that there might have been is now attenuated due to an active RFC, but of course your input is always appreciated. Zad68 16:35, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh, my ... you do have your hands full there, and I'm impressed that you've been able to make so much progress. OK, so pls ping me when you think I should tackle the article again ... honestly, free time isn't something I've got a lot of, so I'd rather do this work once the "issues" subside. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:27, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, hands full... I blame you--you see what happens when you leave even for 24 hours? This whole place goes to hell. For those of you who like mixed metaphors: Actually it's par for the course for that topic area, it waxes and wanes, so I'll ping again when the "issues" activity is at ebb tide, which it will be, one way or another. Zad68 18:12, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Improving Otis Redding

Hello,

I am sorry for my harsh responses on the article's nomination page. I tend to be sometimes a poison dwarf if something does not function correctly. I would like to work with you to improve Otis Redding. Since you have much better English skills, I have difficulties in detecting errors. I and our readers would be glad if you help bring it on the main page. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 11:23, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I will try to get over there in the next week or so ... no promises, but it's on my list. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:04, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Citation question

Hi Sandy, hope your holiday season isn't too hectic.

I have a citation question. It involves sports, which may not be your forte, so if you cannot answer it, I hope you can point me in the right direction.

I cite ESPN quite often. I'm now building a "template" to help make the citation faster. Most of the parameters are quite straightforward, although I confess some weakness when it comes to "work" and "publisher". I decided to look at some FA, on the assumption that these citations have been checked thoroughly.

I have been working on the assumption that I should use {{cite news}} for newspapers, even if on the web, while I should use {{Cite web}} for other web based sources.

However, when I checked Yao Ming, I see that refs to ESPN use {{cite news}}. So question number one is if you agree with this. Again, I presume that because it has gone through FA, it is the right approach, but I'd hate to start using it and find I grabbed the wrong article. (I also glanced at Tim Duncan, but that one isn't using the cite templates). I checked Derek Jeter, which also uses {{cite news}}.

The second question relates to the ideal parameters for Work and Publisher.

The Yao Ming article uses "publisher=ESPN" and no entry for work

Derek Jeter uses "work=ESPN New York" or "work=ESPN Classic" but nothing for publisher.

I do recognize, (I think) that citations styles do not have to be uniform across all of Misplaced Pages, but it is desired to use a consistent style within an article, so that may explain why I'm seeing differences between articles, even if there is consistency within an article, but I would like to set up the canonical style for my future use.

My tentative conclusions:

• Use of {{cite news}} for ESPN is acceptable
• Use of "publisher=ESPN" and no entry for work is acceptable--SPhilbrick(Talk) 14:41, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Hea there! Hectic would be an understatement :) :) I hope yours was grand!

On the first, I disagree that cite news should be used; ESPN is not a hard print source to my knowledge. I distinguish between what is in hard print and what is web-based when it comes to work and publisher (journals, newspapers, etc are italicized).

I also disagree on the second; since ESPN is not a hard print source, I would use publisher, not work. It should not be italicized. I would say Jeter is wrong. On the other hand, it's less important which template you use as it is to get italics correct. We do not italicize websites; we do italicize books, journals, and newspapers. Perhaps folks are using cite news for ESPN because it is media news-- as long as the italics are correct, that's probably OK>

It would be good to hear from others, but that's my take. For example, I use cite web and publisher for the BBC, but using cite news would probably be OK as long as BBC isn't italicized with "work".

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:12, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I have been using {{Cite web}} for ESPN, so I can continue doing so - I was surprised to see {{cite news}} instead on some FAs, so I decided to ask.

I'm discombobulated by your disagreement with the second point - I suggested using the Publisher parameter, and I think you are saying the same.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 16:32, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

OK :) Reading too fast :) Maybe someone can remind me of the name of that Australian editor who was the citation guru ... I was absent for most of 2012 and memory fails me. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:34, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I think you're referring to User:Fifelfoo. Ucucha (talk) 16:41, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thx Ucucha ... Sphilbrick, you might ping Fifelfoo to this discussion-- he's the best at citation. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:02, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks to both, I've posted there.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 17:20, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

As long as you use the publisher= parameter for ESPN, it doesn't really matter which template you use because the output to the readers is usually the same. The only difference I can think of is when an article is by the Associated Press or another news agency; there is an agency= parameter for cite news, but not for cite web. From that standpoint, there is an advantage to using the cite news template, even though I'd prefer to use cite web for a non-print publication myself. Also, bear in mind that ESPN does publish a magazine, and sometimes runs the articles online. In those cases, cite journal is probably your best bet, in the absence of a cite magazine template. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:24, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Good luck

All the best in your retirement, take care, and have a good 2013 onwards. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:47, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

• Indeed. Good luck Sandy. I hope you find peace and happyness. — ΛΧΣ 19:08, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

  Dipstick administrators and familiars going hog wild, indeed. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:18, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Not sure what spurred this, probably not hard to imagine, but best wishes for the future and maybe someday you'll see something more positive in the project to make you want to return. Someday the site may improve!!... Saludos.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:20, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

You will be sorely missed. I don't think FAC will be the same without you. ceranthor 19:22, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you for your hard work on FAC and just making Misplaced Pages better. Good luck with what the future brings. User:Zscout370 19:26, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
• Hey Sandy, we're going to miss you around FAC. You were an excellent delegate for FAC and really the vocal point. Going to miss having someone strong at reviewing and capable of the best. Like I say to everyone in real life who has left an important place (courtesy of G.B. Shaw): "I want to be thoroughly used up when I die, for the harder I work the more I live. I rejoice in life for its own sake. Life is no "brief candle" for me. It is a sort of splendid torch which I have got hold of for the moment, and I want to make it burn as brightly as possible before handing it on to future generations." - Hopefully it burns brightly after you've left. ;) Thanks for the memories! Mitch32 19:37, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
• :( Parrot of Doom 19:53, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

• Sandy, we've had our fair share of differences. Hell, we've had more than our fair share. That doesn't mean I'm not sorry to see you go. Best of luck to you in the future. Ed  20:01, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
• Hope you come back. There's been a lot of experienced folks getting run off here lately. Its a shame for you to be one of them too over this. Kumioko (talk) 20:04, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
• Bah. Come back immediately! Rich Farmbrough, 21:06, 31 December 2012 (UTC).
  
• I hope you come back after a break, Sandy. Without you around, much of the project will be empty and lifeless. Gimmetoo (talk) 21:14, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
• Best wishes. Firsfron of Ronchester 23:14, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
• :( indeed WLU (t) (c) Misplaced Pages's rules:/_complex 23:20, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
• Hope your desire for good content will eventually overwhelm your frustration with the current state of things. Happy new year and all the very best, Jacob. JFW | T@lk 23:20, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, damn :( What bought this on??? You hurry up now and get yo'self back on here when you is well rested :) You're gonna be missed till you do. Fish 23:28, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

• I understand your frustration, but you will be sorely missed by many, including me. I hope you will change your mind. Jayjg 00:25, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• Nobody has earned a break more than you, Sandy, but I hope it will only be temporary and that we see you back after you rest and regroup. Happy New Year to you and yours (he says, somewhat bleary eyed -- it's the morning after the party in this neck of the woods...!) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:26, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• I hope you're well and 2013 is happy and fulfilling for you. I'll miss your comforting presence. This project will be significantly diminished by your departure. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 01:01, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• This is terrible news for the project as we enter 2013. If you're still watching here, know that you influenced me more than any other editor, and that I hope you return some day when things become calmer here (if that ever happens). Enjoy yourself in whatever you do in the future. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:14, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• So disappointing, losing such a valuable, knowledgable contributor! Best wishes, Hordaland (talk) 01:38, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• This is a big loss for wikipedia and I am very sorry to see you go Sandy. I wish you all the very best in life and I thank you for all of the hard work you have done for the encyclopaedia. You did a good job. Maybe you will come back. That would be nice. All the best. Bye. Take care.--MrADHD | T@1k? 02:24, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• Thank you for all you've done at FAC. And then some... Buggie111 (talk) 02:59, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• You were one of the very first people I ever found on Misplaced Pages when I was reading and editing autism articles. I'm very sorry to see you go but I know we all have to make choices like this eventually. ☮Soap☮ 03:03, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• Your excellent contributions will be missed. Best wishes, hope to see you back in the future. Yobol (talk) 03:05, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• I do hope you will reconsider, Sandy; but I will certainly understand if you do not. Incompetent or otherwise wayward admin actions are a serious threat to good order on Misplaced Pages. Something needs to be done, but in the nature of the case it is hard to get any coordinated effort at reform. Best wishes to you, anyway. Noetica 03:32, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• Hope a bit of rest returns your spirits. Much of Misplaced Pages is free of drama. It is in fact free of nearly any one editing. All the best and you will be missed. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 05:59, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• :( per Doc James. Soon the only people editing here will be students and admins, neither of whom have any passion for or understanding of their subject or for article writing. You had both in spades and damn those fools who put that passion out. -- Colin° 08:52, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• Weak. You are one of the strongest voices here. You leave us who respect that voice to carry on your legacy. But you abandon that legacy. Thanks for giving up on us. Doc talk 08:58, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• Sorry to see you go, and hope you return. You've done great work here. Hchc2009 (talk) 09:50, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• While I tend to hang around the female hogs ears area of this website, that doesn't mean I'm not aware of its Silk Purses contributors. I can only echo your content-writing peers' sincere regret on your retirement.--Shirt58 (talk) 10:25, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• Thanks for keeping us all honest - take care. Sad if you are gone for good, but make sure you prioritise your own wellbeing before getting worn out here. I'll keep my fingers crossed that you come back envigorated sometime. Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:16, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• I'll believe it when I see it - will check back, around June or so. I hope you and yours are well, best wishes, Postpostmod (talk) 15:59, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• Oh dear! I hope you will be back after a break. We need you. All the best. Johnbod (talk) 16:12, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• The project is diminished by your absence, but I hope that it will draw attention to the reasons for your departure. I have blanked my userpage as JFW suggested. -- Scray (talk) 17:46, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• This really bites. I've also blanked my user page in protest, not that it will do any good. That does it for me; I was reconsidering putting myself through another RFA, but I refuse to be part of any group that will do this kind of thing to content editors like Sandy. Please come back, we need you! In the meantime, good luck and the best to you and your family, and thanks for all that you've done here. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:02, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• You are a great loss Sandy; hope you will be back soon. --John (talk) 18:10, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• This sucks. I understand it, but I don't have to like it. Thanks for all of your work over the years. Dbrodbeck (talk) 18:32, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• Will miss you, until you return.--Dwaipayan (talk) 20:55, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
• I had only ever gotten to interact with you once, and only briefly, on one article. I add my voice to the general wailing in asking for your Wikibreak to be brief and for you to come back refreshed after realizing the good here outweighs the bad. I ask this for purely selfish reasons: 1) because I found your assistance really helpful, and 2) I need a chance to redeem myself after that penis joke misfired horribly. Besides, getting your attention focused on something I was working made me feel like I was breaking into the "big time," and yes that is a naked appeal to your ego. In sum, I hope you just scan down this big list of "me too" bullet points and this comment takes up enough vertical space that it tips the balance in your mind so that you conclude, "Yeah OK I'll come back." Zad68 21:46, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

All the best in the coming year. Happy New Year and thank you for all you have done here, You will always be welcomed to return....Modernist (talk) 01:22, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for your service to the project, and best wishes in 2013 where ever you go and what ever you do! Jusdafax 02:39, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

What should be said about admins chasing away good contributors?

The issue has been raised in two threads related to Sandy's departure at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Editor Retention. Please comment there. Biosthmors (talk) 02:55, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Back

So, the sock is blocked now, and Mark Arsten has a years' worth of enabling to answer for. In answer to Bio above, here's what can be said about admins like Mark Arsten (talk · contribs), who blocked a valued content editor with no warning, who made false statements during Kiefer's last block, and who enabled a prolific sock for almost a year: User:MathewTownsend (Mattisse). While he was running around blocking content editors for minor infractions, he was supporting a prolific sock who was once again going after FAC, TFAR, the FA process, Malleus, and anyone on her plague list. WTF do we have admins for if all they do is make work here impossible?? Risker, you were wrong here. WRONG. You set up a situation where all of the rest of us had to deal with her again. I have brought back the page so others will recognize her next reincarnation (since we know the arbs don't care about watching for same, and we know there will be another one, and we know the usual cast of characters will defend and enable). WHY oh why have the arbs made this year all about socks, sockmasters, and those who enable them? We all know who enabled and continues to enable both of them, and you, Mark Arsten, are among those. So you just block me all you want, because you have made it a badge of honor to be blocked for speaking the truth and for defending content contributors against the socks, vandals, disrupters and other unsavory types that so many of our admins now find it convenient to enable. Will we content contributors ever be able to take back the Wiki, or will the arbs and the admin corp continue to defend sockmasters as if their big egos depended on it? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:49, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

• Speaking of big egos and lack of apologies: There's a class act in that head. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:39, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I had a feeling you would be back. :-) Welcome back!--MrADHD | T@1k? 23:50, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

In all fairness, Sandy, did you know that MatthewTownsend was a sock? --Rschen7754 23:54, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Kiss my ass, Rschen, with your false statements everywhere I look. I was gone almost all year; where were you when you weren't spreading stories about me and FAC? You see that link above to Laser's sandbox? You see that conversation after her last dozen or so socks were found, where Risker told us all to shut up, then the sandbox was blanked? Was Risker watching out for socks? We weren't supposed to. This is no different than the way we were shut down when Merridew was running amok through FAC. It seems that between the arbs and the admin corp, and the socks and the socks enablers, FAC is fair game. And you've been part of that, so bug off. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:02, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Sandy, I can see why you're upset; I would be too. But in some instances, I think you're lashing out at the wrong people. I was one of the editors trying to hold TFA together while Raul was gone, and who repeatedly told a certain editor to stop scheduling TFAs inappropriately, and who emailed Dabomb87 repeatedly as the end of the TFA queue grew closer and closer. I can't say that I've always been perfect or gotten it right, but I've tried to be fair. I think ArbCom screwed up the Jack Merridew thing horribly, but there wasn't much I could do about that. I don't think it's fair to assume that Mark knew about the Mattisse socking; it was only within the last week or two that people started making the connection and contacting CheckUsers. I thought his position on the Brer Rabbit community ban was particularly bad, and I called him on it, but still I don't think the Mattisse issue is a fair assumption. Again, I have a lot of respect for you even though we've had our differences, but I don't think that attacking everyone in sight is going to be helpful. --Rschen7754 00:20, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Yea, I know you did some of that, but that's not all I've seen you doing and saying. In the interest of putting the past behind, I'm not calling you on it, but you don't know the history, you haven't got the storyline right, and sometimes you make wrong statements because you just don't know. But you do it again, I will call you on it-- I have NO INTENTION to ever put up with this admin bullshit again, and I no longer care if you all block me a gazillion times, because one thing that is proven over and over from the last year and a half is that FAC and the FA process cannot count on either the arbs or the admin corp to stop the disruption. If you can block Drmies and Nikkimaria, you can sure as hell block me, too. The Mattisse thing is by NO MEANS the only thing Mark Arsten has to explain for; he's up to his eyeballs in denial or something, but the Mattisse footprints are clear as sunlight. Just because I was absent most of the year-- no reason for plenty of others to have turned their backs and let it happen again. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:25, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

It's been open discussion since October - see here. Particularly interesting thread re Malleus, the thread re MT, and the hatted section - "some thoughts" - at the bottom of the page. I've not been around much because of all of this, and I've been grieving which is really hard to do when being attacked - without an admin lifting a finger!. (btw - Sandy meant to get by to say hi months ago, but stuff kept happening. Nice to see you back and nice to see you not retired). Truthkeeper (talk) 00:56, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, TK. What is Rschen's role in this? I wasn't around at all in October; by the time I came around, the Moppet thing was over. Specifically, what does this mean?

SilkTork, I would take a look at Iridescent's talk page before mentioning Matthew Townsend - there's some context you may not be aware of. --Rschen7754 19:52, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

What was on Iri's talk? And since/if Iri knew, why was nothing done? And since SilkTork was a former mentor of Mattisse, he would have most surely recognized the clear footprint; what did he do, or why did he do nothing? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:01, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Catching up more, I see SilkTork seems to have known, although he was being circumspect. So, there we have it; again, the arbs knew the FA process was under assault by socks, again, and nothing was done. That is classic Mattisse victimization; why did no one submit an SPI then? What did the arbs know and when? WTF are we content contributors, chopped liver ???? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

User_talk:Iridescent/Archive_16#Thank_you and User_talk:PumpkinSky#MathewTownsend are the threads. --Rschen7754 01:03, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I can't make anything of that gibberish, except that all the usual folks are in there, yet no one seems to have recognized the clear footprint. I don't see any relationship with the first thread. Specific question is: What was your role, Rschen? I don't recall you being around when Mattisse was ripping up FAC, so I wouldn't expect you to recognize her. I would expect you to stop making statements about FAC which I find generally wrong and insulting. That several users have consistently and for years been allowed to rip through FAC should not be an indictment against FAC, rather against all the admin enablers. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:13, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

My role? I got annoyed by MatthewTownsend's comments, and told him it was a bad idea to keep making them. That's it. And I'll bite: what statements about FAC have I made that are "generally wrong and insulting"? --Rschen7754 01:16, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

If I bring them up again, I'll be accused of continuing old disputes. So let's leave it at, next time you make a statement about me or FAC, there had better be a diff attached. And pardon my bad manners (i'm in a wee bit of a foul mood after more than a year of this BS) ... thank you for the explanation of your role-- I appreciate it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:20, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm still not really thinking very clearly to be honest. I posted to show that at least I'd noticed as early as October that it was being discussed. Didn't know Silktork was a Mattisse mentor, never interacted with Mattisse as Mattisse (before my time) but she has been around the Hemingway suite of articles as other socks. Haven't a clue why nothing was done. I don't want to go into detail, but truly have been through hell in RL since September and wiki wasn't a priority so I didn't bother to follow up. Just wanted to make the case that this shouldn't be a surprise. I always thought the "Miss Moppet situation" was way beyond the pale. But whatever. Truthkeeper (talk) 01:10, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear things have been very rough on you, TK, and I appreciate you weighing in to the extent you could. Yes, it is not at all unexpected that Mattisse would turn to SilkTork, and SilkTork was in a position to recognize the footprint, even if I wasn't on Misplaced Pages. Do the folks in positions of authoritah anywhere on Misplaced Pages even care about the disruption that they have allowed to be visited upon so many pages and so many editors at the hands of sockmasters? I say it's time to stop the enablers. Oh, and by the way, why the hell didn't someone ping me way back in October? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:16, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

At the moment, Sandy, it seems that people are more concerned with civility than sockpuppetry. I have returned to a Misplaced Pages that I no longer recognize, and the worst part is that I thought it was bad before I took a break. Glad to see that you're back, by the way. ceranthor 01:18, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

No f'ing shit, Ceranthor. This place is horrificly unrecognizable, where enabling and supporting socks has become the norm, while admins wanting to flex their muscles run around blocking editors like Nikkimaria or Drmies. That's why I put up my first ever retirement tag yesterday ... I have given up hoping that either the arbs or the admin corp gives a flying f about content contributors trying to build articles. I don't know this place anymore, but if I'm going to go, it's going to be with a long block log, because I'm not taking this any more. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

To be fair - some of us are just dense and wouldn't recognize any sockpuppets if they bit us. I totally missed Pumpkin Sky, Alarbus, Matthew Townsend... all of them, and I should have been in a perfect position to recognize most of them. Mea culpa. It's possible that some folks just are oblivious like I am. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:20, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

NB: For next time, I moved Laser Brain's page to Misplaced Pages:Long-term abuse/Mattisse. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:27, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Ealdgyth, "we" aren't high enough on the pay scale. Let's look at some facts about the arbs. Casliber was an old mentor of Merridew, he told us he didn't know Alarbus was Merridew, he could have seen the repeat pattern of hounding and taunting; Kirill told us something different (I'd have to look that up, got it bookmarked somewhere, but neither Cas nor Kirill are known to shade the truth), EotR stalled and never answered or gave incomprehensible answers while she was coming on strong to make me shut up, but many times several arbs told us that Merridew declared all of his accounts, so they knew it was him. Well, which is it? They've still never told us, but he taunted and hounded openly and often. So, no answers, but does that mean the arbs saw the taunting, hounding and disruption every bit as much as we did and did nothing? Or what does it mean? Why did Cas not know Alarbus was Merridew, and why did Cas not do something? So, now we have a repeat here. Risker told us years ago to stop focusing on Mattisse, laser's page was blanked, everyone went complacent, and now we find that SilkTork, an arb, should have known. What the heck is going on in here? Do they not care that FAC has been under permenant assault since Mattisse started in 2009? Cas, glad you're here ... since I was mentioning you before ec. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:32, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I had no idea about Alarbus, and had limited interaction with MathewTownsend, who had seemed level-headed in what I'd seen. But I've clicked on links above which I hadn't been aware of. I've had a pretty busy few months IRL so have just focussed on content-work and reviewing to wind down/relax. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:47, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

• Cas, then how do you explain some of the arbs claiming that all of Merridew's accounts were disclosed? I have that stuff bookmarked somewhere, but gave up on the idea we would ever get an answer. But now we have another (repeat) situation. Were his accounts disclosed or not? Did SilkTork look into Mattisse or not? Was Risker watching or not (since the rest of us were pretty much told to stand down)? More importantly, what the heck do we have to do to get FA disruption to stop? There *will* be a next time, with these committed sockmasters. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:53, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Hehe, you clearly did not spend enough time around MathewTownsend then. :-) Ed  01:49, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Ed, I can't tell if that's directed at Cas or me? My main interaction with MT was on Stephen Hawking, where she was right (and I recall she had a family interest in physics), but where another party was behaving worse than even Matisse at her highpoint (the other person was engaging in outrageous personal attacks and personalization), so I tried to take the high road and get the two of them separated. Other than that, I wasn't paying attention because I was sick already of a year of disruption. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:56, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

That was 100% a reply to Casliber; my apologies. Mathew was a pain and a half. Ed  02:00, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

You got that right ... but don't even think of telling that to the supporters and enablers, who *will* come around in due time. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Bit hard for me to speak about the committee mailing list without permission. I certainly would have known if the identity of Alarbus was disclosed on the list as obviously I was on the mailing list. I think maybe the best thing for the community as a whole is to update various pages on WP:LTA as now more than ever we are developing a portfolio of work worth defending. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:42, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

yea, I know you can't say much, but you really don't have to ... you see, I know that neither you nor Kirill are inclined towards shading the truth, so when you say you didn't know Alarbus was Merridew, I have to conclude that some other arbs were lying when they said his accounts were all disclosed. Point now is, how can we get the arbs on the side of content, to stop preventing us from speaking up (as EotR did in the Alarbus situation), and to help content contributors rather than enable socks? We've had consistent disruption visited on FAC since 2009, and going all the way back to the Mattisse mentorship, we've had little help, and nothing but sustained persistent disruption from returning users and socks. How hard is it to recognize that there are less than a handful of people with complaints about FAC, so when a new user shows up with issues, how hard is it to tell? Why is FAC left hanging out to dry every time? Cas, why did some arbs insist that Merridew's accounts were disclosed? If you had known Alarbus was Merridew, you would have put a finger on the issues at FAC, which were hounding and taunting of Raul. Why can't the arbs be honest, or at least do something to help stop the disruption? Did SilkTork look into whether MathewTownsend was mattisse? If not, why not? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:48, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I can't speak for Silktork (so will let him answer for that) and only now just saw the GA reviews linked to on TK88's talkpage, hence to a casual observer it may have seemed that there was nothing amiss. WRT the Alarbus afair, I guess it was true to say that all his known socks at the time were disclosed. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:58, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

You know, I can't help but think that when you ask "how can we get the arbs on the side of content ... and to help content contributors rather than enable socks", I think the problem is that both 'sides' (if you prefer to think of them that way; I wouldn't, because I don't see them as two distinct, coherent schools of thought) think that they are acting in the best interest of the 'pedia. You might find that logically framing your arguments to rebut that mindset could help you more than, well, the current status quo. Just my two cents Ed  04:10, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Yea, starting here, I was just reading over a piece of the baiting history that happened while I was away (noticed Mark Arsten in there again, too), and I fail to see how anyone can think this is helping anything. Put it together with Mattisse's entire history, and it is as intentional as disruption can be. You do know she knew darn well the whole ILT history, and what she was putting TK through, no? Maybe the next time we get one of these innocent, "I don't know nothin' bout birthin' babies" newbies claiming problems at FA, we should apply some sanctions, because so far, they bat about 1.000 for being returning socks. Maybe I could frame my mind differently, but curiously, while I was gone for almost a year, things got worse, not better. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:18, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Side show

Take this how you will (hopefully as the friends we ... used to be, I suppose), but you are part of the problem too. The level of discourse from everyone has declined since I started editing. You used to be a pillar of everything that was Right® about Misplaced Pages. Now you have peppered many of your interactions with personal, vitriolic comments—i.e. not content. This is why you found me commenting on your comments over the last several months (not well, I'll grant). While I fully appreciate some of the personal comments are necessary, like this and all the other Mattisse debacles, I would beg you to tone down the rhetoric wherever you can. Misplaced Pages will be the better for it, I promise you. Ed  05:19, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I take it the way it's delivered ... as always, without diffs. Usually or probably because that would show what you overlook in others while you claim I am "vitriolific". Same thing I said to Rschen ... next time you want to make a claim about me, diff it ... then others can see what you DIDN'T object to that was said to me or about me or about FAC. I would suggest that as soon as you apply the same standard to me that you apply to others, you'll have either nothing left to say on my talk, or plenty to say on others' talk. Deal? 'Cuz I can diff PLENTY of conversations where you decided to take difference with my tsk tsk while overlooking rather egregious attacks from others. Double standard-- sorry Ed, I'm not taking that any more, and I never base my decisions in here on whether we are, will be, or used to be friends ... I forget the past, and I base every conversation on diffable facts. So, got diffs? Let's see those conversations where you took me on for a tsk, tsk while you ignored something truly offensive that was said to me or about me or about others or about FAC. What have you done about that decline in the level of discourse besides consistently a) add to it, or b) overlook the source(s) of same? I think the diffs answer that. And if you somehow think saying "tsk, tsk" is part of a problem when Misplaced Pages is faced with massive disruptive socks, well, Ceranthor is right ... people in here have gone bonkers over some alleged civility issues, while overlooking the true and massive sources of disruption-- almost always users hiding behind socks, returning users with grudges, or editors enabling those two groups. Sure, I expended my one vulgarity on you ... maybe a year ago ... and you know as well as I do how hard you worked to provoke that out of me ... nevertheless, I shouldn't have let you provoke me so. That's history ... but I suspect your issue is that you are still smarting from that. You should let it go; life's too short, and I don't think you really want to revisit the facts there, no? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Jeez Sandy, it's not meant as a submission to an Arbcom case, replete with diffs, a chronological summary, and an ordered list of quotes. You know how you've changed over the last three years better than me. You didn't take this post in the spirit it was intended; you instead took it suspiciously, as I was afraid you would. Such is life. Vulgarity? Ed  07:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

You may demean my suggestion that you treat me with the same standard you accord routinely to others when overlooking significant personalization on talk pages as "a submission to an Arbcom case"; all I'm asking is that any future statements that malign my integrity and character are accompanied by diffs (same thing I suggested to Rschen after seeing some of what he's spread around the 'pedia, without notifying me either by the way when he's talking about me). I can't answer your vague charges about what you claim to be my behavior when you don't provide a diff, you mislead others when you make these claims here without diffs so they can see what is really going on, and I can't take you seriously when you reprimand me for a "tsk, tsk" after the kinds of posts that are dished in my direction. Honestly, I sometimes do wonder if this place isn't just horribly misogynistic, especially after some of the discussion I observed last week ... that for some reason you folks think it's OK for men to say the most horrid things to women, but when women give it back and don't take it sitting down anymore, we get reprimanded and told "we've changed". You betcha ... this place hardens even a good ole AGFer like me. The assault on FAC has lasted at least since 2009 now, always socks, always users returning with a grudge ... what has been your part, as an admin, in stopping that? How many times did you go to an offender's talk page with the same concerns you come to my talk with? I did not take it "suspiciously"; I am asking you when you level these unfounded claims at me in the future, to include a diff and to apply the same standard to the offenders. Sure, I never woulda told someone to "kiss my ass" six months ago or a year ago or two years ago ... but then I never thought I'd put up a retirement tag over admin abuse or see the day where socks and sock enablers were valued over content contributors, where the arbs won't help us, where admins block good contributors while rushing to defend socks and their enablers, and admins would be rushing to my talk to reprimand me for a "tak, tsk", while all the FA pages are systematically assaulted by a cadre of socks and enablers. Vulgarity? You may recall that the only time I ever pointed one in anyone's direction involved you ... and not even a very good one at that ... if one is going to hurl a vulgarity, it should at least be memorable :) :) ... history now, I think and hope, but thought that was what you were referring to. By the way, please take "Jesus" out of this, thanks. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:24, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Here's where you can find some diffs to pieces of the facts, Ed ... and here's where you can find some more. Now, I can come up with about a dozen more samples, while you (most likely) have narry a diff to back the disparaging things you claim. That incident followed on you ignoring an attack on me, going off-topic on a project space talk page, dredging up old business that had nothing to do with the conversation where the attack occurred, and then you followed that up by referring to "trolling posts" from me (curious that). So, I'd appreciate that you 1) provide a diff in the future when you make such disparaging statements about me, 2) stay on topic, and 3) not fall over yourself to come here and wag your finger at me for a "tsk, tsk" while overlooking a significant attack that was launched at me that led to the "tsk, tsk". I've got a good dozen or so where you have done same, so if you want me to talk in a nice ladylike voice to you from now on, well, be nice from now on. I most assuredly agree with you that the level of discourse on wikipedia is quite horrific-- and most of the abuse is aimed at women, and I've given you the example above not to dredge up old business, but to ask you what you've done about it and why you were part of it and why you didn't stop it when you saw it happening ? You were one of the agressors in that situation, in which I did nothing to warrant the attack or you going off-topic to bring up old history or the reprimand on my talk. So start being part of the solution if you're so worried about the discourse here, and stop overlooking attacks on the women. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:57, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

This isn't about me, this is about you. And now you think I'm misogynistic? Please. The remarks are far from 'disparaging', they are collegial, calm, and constructive criticism. They're not about any specific 'tsk, tsk' you typed, they're aimed at a pattern of behavior you have exhibited over the past year. You've changed, Sandy, and not for the best. Ed  08:22, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for adjusting your prior post. I know you want it to be about me and not about you, but if you want to make it about "I've changed", then you will have to take a look at how I've been treated by admins like you, what has been done to FAC, and how admin behavior has led to the toxicity everywhere on Misplaced Pages. Yes, it is a misogynistic culture, if you (the general you, not the specific you) can sit by and let the attacks hurl my direction and then come after me for responding to same with a mild "tsk, tsk". It's time we started calling it what it is, and I'm not going to roll over and play dead anymore when my name is smeared all over Misplaced Pages, important processes are disrupted, and false things are said about me on talk pages, at ANI, and I'm not even noticed. I'm still the same Sandy to the people who treat me with the same respect they accord the men, mostly admins, and don't apply a double standard to behaviors they're willing to overlook while rushing to wag a finger at me for a "tsk, tsk". Try it ... you might like it. I'd be *thrilled* to join you and anyone else who wants to make the FA pages like they were before all the various socks tore it down and chased everyone off, and to return the collegiality and comradarie that existed there. YOU had a chance to help that along in the conversation I diffed above. YOU could have asked the offender to tone it down. YOU could have stayed on topic instead of bringing in old irrelevant business. YOU could have reprimanded the offender instead of wagging your finger at me. But you didn't. You let the toxicity continue, and you added to it by even calling me a troll. Now you want me to roll over and let you claim the change in discourse is my fault or because I've changed? OK, you got the chicken and the egg wrong, but more importantly, what are you willing to do now to help change it? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 08:36, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Apology

I owe you an apology. It wasn't intentional and was a brain spasm, but my wording came across as degrading to the FA process. I don't feel that way, and I'm saddened that I communicated so poorly. I do think that content creators are the only reason we are here. Most people know that I hold the content creators at Misplaced Pages in the highest esteem. I'm not a strong content creator, so I try to instead be supportive of those that are. In this case, the wording was just stupid on my part. I'm sorry. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:40, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Dennis Brown ... your kind apology is must humbly accepted, and I, too, apologize for any harsh or sloppy words on my part. You sound like a good man. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:45, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Good people will bump heads from time to time. It is because they actually care about the place and really want to make Misplaced Pages a better place. Thank you for your understanding. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:53, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Dennis is a good man, I believe, and you're a good man too, Sandy, though that is one scary cat on your user page. I saw a note somewhere about your retirement, and I haven't been feeling the WP spirit myself either. I'm still evaluating my own participation; there are lots of things I have no interest in right now; acting like an administrator is one of those things. (Yet I chose to do some RfC closures by way of return, but they don't actually require the use of tools.) It is hard not to get disillusioned here, especially for content creators, since (it seems to me) the deck is sometimes stacked against them. I'll leave it at that. Anyways, happy new year, and I hope Santa brought you everything you wanted. I got a North Face jacket and a new countertop for the kitchen island, so I'm pleased with him. See you around, Drmies (talk) 15:33, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Santa was very good to me ... new computer, and I've finally joined this century with iTunes, listening to the best soothing soulful music in the world right now, and Santa brought my long-lost "adoptive" daughter back in to my life from Colombia, so I am just about as happy as a clam.

I let poor Dennis have it yesterday in email before someone finally blocked the sock, but I hope my apologies have been accepted and I've been forgiven. Cheer up, Drmies ... things will get better, they usually do, but sometimes when you're up to your ass in alligators, it's hard to drain the swamp, and sometimes things have to get worse before they get better.

Here's to a New Year, and hoping all those involved will finally just drop the stick and let the FA process get back to doing what it's supposed to do. Best to you, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:47, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Sandy. I wish I had the time (and the knowledge) to be more involved with the FA process; I have neither right now. I saw sporadic comments on that sock of yours and I'll read up on it soon. "Up to my ass in alligators"--well, let's get it on with the alligator haters, as the RHCPeppers say. But I'm joining the new millennium also, having just started a blog (gasp!) for a class I'm teaching this spring semester. (I'm already a bit hip since I have an iPhone.) Mrs. Drmies may be interested in your soulful singer. All the best to you and your family, with or without quotation marks. Drmies (talk) 16:58, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

You can youtube Eva Cassidy to get an idea of the voice ... and read her article here, which is quite good. Van Morrison is soothing, too. I think I've had enough conflict for the year already, and I hope to just ignore the inevitable continued provocations. Happy 2013 ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:06, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

RfAs

Hi Sandy, I noticed you've struck the votes of User:MathewTownsend, while I understand why you're doing it, I don't think it's the appropriate thing to do, the RfAs have already been closed and reflect the state of the RfA back whenever the 'crat closed; as the closing 'crat likely took into consideration that vote, I think striking it is a bit misleading :) Snowolf 00:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

So, what's the usual in similar cases? Maybe indicate it's a sock without striking? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:56, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what's the normal practice I'm afraid :D Snowolf 01:59, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh, well ... Thanks anyway! I would think that noting below, without striking, wouldn't bother anyone. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:07, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I believe normal practice would be to leave the votes alone, unless they would have affected the outcome (in which case they're handled on a case by case basis). That's typically how it's worked in the past, if I recall. (X! · talk)  · @159  ·  02:48, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, X ... now I know ... and I'm sorry for the trouble. Mattisse posted so many unhelpful things in so many places, that trying to go back and strike all of them isn't worthwhile anyway. Thanks again, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:50, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Wow

Man I am glad you are back. Welcome back - you're a straight shooter Sandy and you almost make this place worthwhile...Modernist (talk) 01:40, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Happy New Year, and Welcome back! -- Ohconfucius  01:45, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

With a great sigh...may I just say :) WLU (t) (c) Misplaced Pages's rules:/_complex 02:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

That was my first, and hopefully my last, retirement ... I am sorry for the worry, and thankful for the kind words. I won't go again with a retirement ... if something isn't done about admin abuse, sock enabling, and the sustained disruption at FAC, I'll go via block, not retirement, next time. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, welcome back and the best for the new year. It looks as though some admins have dealt with the Mattisse problem very poorly; talk about scattergun solutions, where good people get injured. Huh??? There needs to be better coordination among those with the tools to root out this sociopath, who will continue to hoodwink us and cause mayhem if we let her. Why aren't there more forensic-style analysts on the job??? Tony (talk) 02:39, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

The problem is, no matter the destruction she causes, because of the attention-craving, there are always a few who support, encourage, and enable ... so she continues. And while the other cast changes, people forget just how much harm she caused. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:43, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Frankly Sandy, you either were totally fooled and missed the Mat sock or else you are also one of the people covering for this user and are in denial. You added your mean-spirited snark while she viciously attacked and baited me, and threw fat on the fire by, essentially calling me stupid and ignorant (though worded in more neutral terms I'm sure you thought were clever). You might keep in mind that EVERY SINGLE TIME I've had trouble with another user, if there are blocks handed down, it's been the other user and never me. I do have a hard time not feeding trolls, but if someone is going after me, it's usually because they ARE a troll, and this is a case in point. So I don't appreciate your little aside about me above regarding the Hawking article, where I was simply pointing out the truth; I've seldom had to deal with a more angry and destructive user than Mat, and you do need to look real hard at how you quickly resort to being snide and nasty to people like me; this time you picked the wrong horse. You have been absolutely obsessed about the non-blocked Rlvese/PumpkinSky situation, yet you aided and abetted a notorious sock in attacking a never-blocked and highly productive editor. I hope you've learned your lesson, but I doubt you have. (I shall await your WP:LAST snarky reply, which I am certain will be vicious). Montanabw 19:39, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

First, Montana, I was absent from Misplaced Pages for most of the year, so take your accusations elsewhere. Second, do not ever post on my talk page again. You were as bad to her as she was to you, and two wrongs don't make a right. FWIW, your vicious attacks all over Misplaced Pages need to be dealt with, it wasn't only Mattisse, and I'd appreciate it if you stay off my talk-- I see no good coming from engaging your attacks anywhere. Good-bye; any further interaction from you will be removed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:45, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Fortress of Mimoyecques FA nomination

Thank you for your help with the featured article nomination of Blockhaus d'Éperlecques. I thought you might like to know that I've nominated a related article, Fortress of Mimoyecques, for consideration as a featured article. If you have any comments on the nomination, please leave them on Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Fortress of Mimoyecques/archive1. Prioryman (talk) 09:10, 1 January 2013 (UTC)