Revision as of 12:38, 20 May 2014 view sourceWee Curry Monster (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers25,546 edits →Abusive Chilean IP is back on Ian Gow: thanks← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:18, 20 May 2014 view source TParis (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators30,347 edits →Religion: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 318: | Line 318: | ||
::::::The thing is, there isn't any fight over the structure of Hawaii-related cuisine articles. Candleabracadabra has been engaging in the creation of non-notable stubs and moves against consensus on multiple topics. Look at the ongoing chaos he caused over at ] with his one page move against the consensus formed in January. He creates and thrives on utter chaos and disruption all over the place. The real problem has nothing to do with Hawaii-related topics at all. Look at all of the red links on his user page. Did he create all of those deleted articles? Look at all of the non-notable articles he's created in just the last several months. He refuses to use reliable sources. He refuses to follow any aspects of the MOS. He refuses to follow basic civility. Is there a single guideline or policy he does follow? All I'm saying is that the problem at hand here is bigger than any disruption he's caused on the Hawaii-related topics. ] (]) 06:33, 20 May 2014 (UTC) | ::::::The thing is, there isn't any fight over the structure of Hawaii-related cuisine articles. Candleabracadabra has been engaging in the creation of non-notable stubs and moves against consensus on multiple topics. Look at the ongoing chaos he caused over at ] with his one page move against the consensus formed in January. He creates and thrives on utter chaos and disruption all over the place. The real problem has nothing to do with Hawaii-related topics at all. Look at all of the red links on his user page. Did he create all of those deleted articles? Look at all of the non-notable articles he's created in just the last several months. He refuses to use reliable sources. He refuses to follow any aspects of the MOS. He refuses to follow basic civility. Is there a single guideline or policy he does follow? All I'm saying is that the problem at hand here is bigger than any disruption he's caused on the Hawaii-related topics. ] (]) 06:33, 20 May 2014 (UTC) | ||
*{{U|Cullen328}}, DYK know that Candle saw fit to quote my response to your "lard is fatal to Jews" comment on their talk page, out of context, to make me look like an antisemite? (And I apologize for saying "lethal" instead of "fatal"...) ] (]) 12:01, 20 May 2014 (UTC) | *{{U|Cullen328}}, DYK know that Candle saw fit to quote my response to your "lard is fatal to Jews" comment on their talk page, out of context, to make me look like an antisemite? (And I apologize for saying "lethal" instead of "fatal"...) ] (]) 12:01, 20 May 2014 (UTC) | ||
== Religion == | |||
What barney said deserved a block. If anyone did the same thing concerning gender, sexuality, or race a block would be a knee-jerk reaction. When an editor blatantly demeans the beliefs of 2 billion people, more if you consider other Abrahamic religions, that likewise deserves a block.--v/r - ]] 17:18, 20 May 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:18, 20 May 2014
Archives |
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
Well
? Is it an invention? Is the Christmas tree an invention? An invention is a unique or novel device, method, composition or process. It may be an improvement upon a machine or product, or a new process for creating an object or a result. An invention that achieves a completely unique function or result may be a radical breakthrough. Such works are novel and not obvious to others skilled in the same field. Hafspajen (talk) 14:19, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- OK; he is blocked. Hafspajen (talk) 14:44, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- They were right, though: the Christmas tree was invented by Saint Boniface. Drmies (talk) 15:06, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- Bonifac? Hafspajen (talk) 15:17, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- I believe the editor is an adherant of the Lutheran theory. As to Boniface, that was an oak. Beyond that, I will endeavor to maintain neutrality. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:20, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- Editor, - was. Yes, Yngvadottir. Hafspajen (talk) 15:25, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- Look it up, Yngvadottir. Boniface lived for more than eighty years and I will fight all your efforts to reduce his life to the size of a tweet. DYK...that Saint Boniface wrote a grammar book? DYK...that Saint Boniface gave up a cushy job running a monastery to go slumming in Germany, before the Autobahn? DYK that Boniface served under three popes? DYK...that Saint Boniface told his companions to lay down their arms and accept martyrdom in Frisia? DYK...that Saint Boniface invented the Christmas tree? DYK...that Saint Boniface had asked to be buried next to a woman? etc. Drmies (talk) 15:40, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- And since Haffy titled this section "Well": DYK...that at the place of Saint Boniface's martyrdom a horse got a hoof stuck in the mud, which after extrication caused a well of fresh water to spring up in the brackish environment of the Frisian swamp, a well which later was claimed to be the "Brewer's Well" from which the Dokkum brewers drew their water, and which is now a basin with water from which a young child named Nefthys Brandsma was cured of the whooping cough? Well, did you know that? Drmies (talk) 15:42, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- Not approved the above hook. Too long, too sexy, too naked. Haffy (talk) 15:17, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- DYK... that Dutch restaurant De Rôtisserie was criticized so severely by a restaurant magazine that the magazine was threatened with a boycott but that the restaurant was awarded a Michelin star a few months later? (Too bad that I still have to write the article about that restaurant, but the riot is real.) The Banner talk 22:11, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- Editor, - was. Yes, Yngvadottir. Hafspajen (talk) 15:25, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- I believe the editor is an adherant of the Lutheran theory. As to Boniface, that was an oak. Beyond that, I will endeavor to maintain neutrality. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:20, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) As I say, I will endeavor to remain neutral and thus not to mention Redbad or for that matter Penda. But I note that Ælfric wrote a grammar book that so far as I know has yet to be rendered into modern English - one of those tasks I neglect for Misplaced Pages :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 15:55, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- --Ælfric of Eynsham, and I see it was done in '08, good :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 15:58, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
wells are deep subjects... (cue trombone). --kelapstick 15:50, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- The Feminine beauty ideal.... Xanty? Yngvadottir? Haffy (talk) 00:06, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- Hmmm… (gets Swann Morton number 3 out, starts first cut) Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 06:23, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- I think that if all the uncited points of view are removed from that article, all that'll be left is copyvio. Responses from fairy tales??? Consequences??? Madame Hedhurtz now. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 06:38, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- That's an exciting topic. Glad you're doing some work on it. Drmies (talk) 15:31, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Glossary of shapes with metaphorical namesHafspajen (talk) 15:51, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Legal threat in email
Could you tell me how and where do I report a legal threat that has been sent using Misplaced Pages email? The help page suggests to report at ANI, but there I can not post email.
Plus could you check this short paragraph Adhisaya_Ulagam#Release_and_reception? The film had a poor box office record, the information is sourced by one highly reliable newspaper ToI and another more or less reliable source.
Now they want to remove the entire reception and box office sectionTito☸Dutta 18:28, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- This is from a registered account? Why don't you send it to me and I'll see. In the meantime, I'll ping Beeblebrox, Moonriddengirl, and Newyorkbrad; maybe one of them is online and has better advice to offer. Plus, I may not be on for very long. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 19:05, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, it is from a registered account you have found already. I have sent a copy of the last email to you. Tito☸Dutta 19:22, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- OK, I blocked. That was unacceptable. Keep me posted if there's further disruption of one kind or another. Beeble, MRG, NYB, see User talk:Kurtwagen18 or ping me if you have any questions or comments. Note that I removed email also (it was abuse of the email function as well), but I let them keep talk page access. Drmies (talk) 19:27, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- I'll be happy to take a look if you think it would be helpful, but beyond explaining our policy and blocking the account, I'm not sure what else we could do. Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:30, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you Newyorkbrad. Drmies (talk) 19:39, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- I'll be happy to take a look if you think it would be helpful, but beyond explaining our policy and blocking the account, I'm not sure what else we could do. Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:30, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Frederick Hollick
This article came in via AFC this evening about the man who might well have pioneered the concept of sex with a hoover, and I'm sure one of you lot can help improve it. There's some content on Google Books that can be used. I'd love to help, but I've got to break up a fight between two children upstairs. Ritchie333 19:50, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- Ritchie, sincerely, would you like to have sex with a hoover? Hafspajen (talk) 20:50, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- Firm opposition toward masturbation, homosexuality, celibacy, and interracial relations was upheld by Hollick Nature abhors a vacuum. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 21:15, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- I'm glad I wasn't drinking anything or my laptop would have been ruined. Thank you for the laugh. Now I will be trying to figure out your username for the next few hours. Bgwhite (talk) 06:48, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- Ritchie, the two girls are sleeping outside, in the tent. Nice and quiet. But last night I found them on blankets in their clothes closet. Children are idiots, don't let anyone tell you different. Drmies (talk) 01:53, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- Eh, I call that inventive. YOU would never thought of sleeping in a closet, right? Hafspajen (talk) 01:57, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) I've never intentionally fallen asleep in a closet...although woke up in one at least once the panda ₯’ 10:04, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Abusive Chilean IP is back on Ian Gow
Remember that IP editor from Chile who responds with abuse every time there is a content dispute? User talk:200.104.245.226 may jog your memory. Just a heads up, he is back . WCMemail 09:12, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I don't see any abuse--where is it? "Cruft"--well, what you all have been fighting over is the brand of the car, and it strikes me as cruft as well. It's just another stupid edit war, and I'll tell you what you can do, given that the article talk page hasn't seen discussion since 20 fucking 11. Actually, this goes for the IP as well. There needs to be an RfC here, with one or two sharply formulated questions to settle this nonsense. Because this is really nothing more than a content dispute in which neither party has some kind of automatic upperhand. In other words, as long as the IP can keep their nose clean, language-wise, you are no more right than they are and I see no need for admin intervention. In yet more other words, if you're both edit-warring you're both at fault.
Sorry, but them's the shakes. You know I like to shoot straight, and I give no advantage to either party--not to you because you're registered, not to them because I think they have a good point. Thank you, and good luck, Drmies (talk) 14:55, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- I didn't ask for admin intervention. (emphasis added) As you noted the last time, at User talk:200.104.245.226 I didn't treat the guy differently just because he was an IP. His response Cunts, Cunts Cunts You dopy little fuck, "wee curry monster". You dopy little fuck, "wee curry monster". and to make the singularly untrue claim that I reverted him solely because he was an IP.
- Were this a named account the abuse he handed out would have seen him blocked long ago. He repeatedly gets away with it as he rotates IPs regularly. I simply alerted you, as you were familiar with the previous problems not to seek advantage in the vain hope I could edit without being abuse. I disagree as to your point on the make of the car, it was a modest cheap little car which gives insight into what the man was like. You can dismiss it as cruft if you like, I disagree and the consensus on the talk page agreed with me at the time.
- Shoot straight by all means and I have no problem with that. Cooper's 4th rule is know what your target is and more importantly what is behind it. Don't shoot the messenger when all they want is a lid kept on the abuse. WCMemail 15:50, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- WCM, there is (as yet) no abuse, only a continuation of an old conflict. I'm simply telling you that the only way to solve this is to get broad consensus, and then, if that RfC goes your way, every continuation of the edit war on their part is disruptive and blockable. (I do not see any consensus on the talk page at all, by the way.) I have no opinion on the "what if it were a registered account" thing--well, I do, and I think you are not correct, but I'm not shooting anyone here, I'm just trying to get this settled. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:59, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- Really, any editor whose talk page contributions are CUNTS, CUNTS, FUCK YOU, YOU DOPEY CUNT wouldn't be blocked? As for not shooting the messenger, all I asked was for someone who knew about the past to keep a lid on abuse, whilst I tried to discuss it. As for shooting the messenger, you state above that I'm equally at fault. Really? Who remained civil, who tried to engage in talk and who simply yelled CUNT. WCMemail 20:04, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- IP 92.234.25.254 has no talk page contributions. The other IP did, and didn't I block it? There is no abuse as of yet so there is nothing to keep a lid on. And I'm not talking about you being at fault in civility, so please don't put words in my mouth: I was talking about the edit war. I still don't see how you don't see that putting the make of the car in there gives insight into the man's character: it's OR, SYNTH. Now, for the last time, I have supplied for you an avenue through which you can solve this once and for all, something that will give you carte blanche to revert, since it can easily be argued that your last revert was not kosher. I don't know why you're not listening to that, instead of harping about insults slung months or years ago. Drmies (talk) 20:48, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Would you mind reminding our IP friend not to disrupt talk pages by interleaving his comments in mine please. I would do it but on past performance he'll simply get abusive. WCMemail 07:53, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for that, btw do we have to do the "you're only reverting me as I'm IP" routine again? It is starting to bore me rigid. WCMemail 12:38, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Venomous Voice
Drmies, can I ask for you to double check my translations of the Dutch quotes at Soeara Berbisa? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:48, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yes you may. Drmies (talk) 14:28, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- Wow Crisco 1492, that's a pretty patronizing quote there. BTW, are you sure you want to call the Soerabaijasch Handelsblad a "Dutch newspaper"? Dutch-language, sure, but doesn't "Dutch" mean "published in Dutchland"? And you cite that paper pretty regularly: shall we just write up the article? Drmies (talk) 14:34, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- I know, eh? "Civilised". I'm pretty sure these papers had different reviewers, since the review of Harta Berdarah even used the word "Indonesia". — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:50, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- As for writing an article... I'll see what I can get. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:47, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- I know, eh? "Civilised". I'm pretty sure these papers had different reviewers, since the review of Harta Berdarah even used the word "Indonesia". — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:50, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
User abusing multiple accounts for making unsourced edits/inflation of numbers on articles relating to the Armed Forces of Albania
Hello Dr. The other day you blocked DHalilialbania201197 indefinitely for being a sock of Denis Halili, created and used in order to avoid scrutiny, and previous warnings. Today a new obvious sock popped up, Denis20Halili01 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), adding the exact same unsourced material to the exact same articles. So I thought you might to whack both the new sock and the until now unblocked master. I could file an SPI, but a), it would most probably take several days (not for me to file it but for someone to look at it), and b), the socking is so obvious here that it doesn't take much of an investigation to see that they're one and the same... Thomas.W 13:45, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks Thomas.W. Blocked, and now I blocked the main account as well, indefinitely. Listen, go file that SPI please, even if it's just pro forma, so we can collect some CU evidence in case this does not stop and gets more sophisticated. I can't rightly figure out if we're dealing with some teenage vandal or with someone who works or worked for that army and is genuinely interested in improving those articles (or, really, the army's reputation), and doesn't want to figure out how to edit positively. Drmies (talk) 14:26, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for the blocks. The SPI report is underway, in fact it was half completed when your notification popped up... Thomas.W 14:32, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Excellent work
I happened to read your comments on an RM for the Assault Weapons Legislation article. Very thorough, very methodical, very clear. That is some first-rate admin-ing.
- Thanks, I appreciate that.
Ping
I left a reply to you on the Assault weapons legislation in the United States talk page. It begins, "No problem." I am typing this on my phone's little touch pad. Will be gone one week but will check in as able... most likely this way unless son lets me take his notebook computer. Will you please help me keep an eye on that discussion while I'm gone? I'll be back May 26. Lightbreather (talk) 15:03, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- Well, maybe. I don't know. I'm getting kind of tired of the whole thing, and this latest move edit war is the icing on the cake. A little netbook, BTW, makes a nice birthday gift to yourself: my Toshiba NB505 is less than 300 bucks and has a great keyboard. Drmies (talk) 15:10, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- OK. But I want you to know, that in addition to finding Scal's comments and edits to be against policy, he personally scares me. I think one thing WP could do to bring in more women editors is enforce the civility policies a little better. When I'm here - especially on gun related pages - I feel like I've walked into a dark bar full of men - many of them cranky bastards. It should be more like a best-places-to-work conference room of civil men and women. Lightbreather (talk) 16:01, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- Also, I'm glad you've archived your discussions. That last comment Scal made at me was not only his usual mean crap, but it was creepy scary, too. I sat with my husband drinking my coffee for 10 minutes debating whether I should reply, but your archiving saved me. I live in a world where this happens - Spitting, Stalking, Rape Threats: How Gun Extremists Target Women - so when guys who edit WP gun articles game and belittle me, it truly does scare me. (I live in Arizona, and I am an acquaintance of Jennifer Longdon. Gun bullies say her story is made-up - but they also think the guvment is comin' to take they's guns. These guys are crazy scary, and nobody can convince me that there aren't some assigned - perhaps even paid - to edit Misplaced Pages. I'm not saying Scal is one of those guys, but dollars to donuts some of the guys I've worked with are. And Scal's behavior does not reflect well on Misplaced Pages or his own character or intentions.) Lightbreather (talk) 16:45, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- I don't rightly know what to say here, but I will assume that Scalhotrod is on the level and isn't trying to scare. Drmies (talk) 20:51, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks Drmies, I'm thankful for your archive as well. Lets hope that LB doesn't try to convince others that her personal fears are anything other than her creation. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 02:12, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Sure, but that's enough, Scalhotrod. We live in a violent world, and in general I may well share some of her fears. Let's bring the temperature down, not up. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 02:30, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Edit tags
The tag compared to the edit is priceless...--kelapstick 18:25, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- And now you're a dumbass? Tsk tsk. Drmies (talk) 20:55, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- I've been a dumbass for years, juts ask Mrs. Kelapstick. --kelapstick 21:02, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- Oh really?--kelapstick 15:52, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yep! Pff, what's this me throwing the f-bomb around? Drmies (talk) 17:10, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Might I present exhibit A (although I was quite fond of my response)? Did you miss all the excitement here yesterday? My comment over there was regarding this edit summary on your talk page, and then this response to it being reverted. It was a grand mix up, but I think everyone is happy and sipping their afternoon tea. --kelapstick 19:03, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yes. Well. I didn't get it--the link to that list of tags, and what that had to do with someone pretending to be you saying you're a dumbass. I guess I should look at this page's edit history more often: I didn't see that Wee Curry Monster's edit was reverted and now that I do, I have to congratulate WCM on that, since I find that tremendously humorous. And looking at the history, I see that I have a message from an old friend, so I'll go read that now. Speaking of people who aren't dumbasses, did you see what Crisco 1492 manage to do with Soerabaijasch Handelsblad overnight? Respek. Drmies (talk) 20:03, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Sigh... It makes it no longer funny when I have to explain it to you. The text was indeed and i may not know much but i am a dumbass..., but the edit filter taged it as (Tag: Possible self promotion in userspace). And yes, that comment WCM made was quite humourous, and apropos, but some people just don't have our high class wit, and we must look after them now. Be sure they are not offended and all. Anyhow, it is tea time. --kelapstick 20:21, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yes. Well. I didn't get it--the link to that list of tags, and what that had to do with someone pretending to be you saying you're a dumbass. I guess I should look at this page's edit history more often: I didn't see that Wee Curry Monster's edit was reverted and now that I do, I have to congratulate WCM on that, since I find that tremendously humorous. And looking at the history, I see that I have a message from an old friend, so I'll go read that now. Speaking of people who aren't dumbasses, did you see what Crisco 1492 manage to do with Soerabaijasch Handelsblad overnight? Respek. Drmies (talk) 20:03, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Might I present exhibit A (although I was quite fond of my response)? Did you miss all the excitement here yesterday? My comment over there was regarding this edit summary on your talk page, and then this response to it being reverted. It was a grand mix up, but I think everyone is happy and sipping their afternoon tea. --kelapstick 19:03, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yep! Pff, what's this me throwing the f-bomb around? Drmies (talk) 17:10, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Oh really?--kelapstick 15:52, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- I've been a dumbass for years, juts ask Mrs. Kelapstick. --kelapstick 21:02, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Template:Did you know nominations/I Got U
Drmies, Launchballer has suggested a new hook after you told him the original one was uninteresting. Can you please take a look at it? Many thanks.
PS: Apologies for not doing anything with the Poklonskaya nom, but I think it's sufficiently controversial that it should be closed by an admin who's familiar with DYK, and I am not an admin (nor do I want to be). BlueMoonset (talk) 03:38, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Sure thing. Is it closed yet? My computer slows down to a crawl when I look at that 130k monster. Drmies (talk) 14:53, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- BlueMoonset, maybe you can ask some of the admins I pinged, or find another one, to close it. While that beast is hogging up space I really don't want to go anywhere near it, and as long as this keeps dragging on the article's proponents have no reason to believe that a qualified majority and editorial/administrative experience counts for anything at all. I mean, the folks opposing it didn't just fall of a turnip truck, and their comments need to be taken seriously, if only to put the lie to this "it meets the requirements so it should run" stuff. For the sake of DYK, and a few other sakes, please get someone to close it. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:28, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Remember not, Lord, our offences! My fault, I supplied another hook, and instead of taking that they argue about still a better one and if it the article may have one or two images. - I won't mind a translation to nl of the useful phrase, moving to "and be not angry with us for ever" ;) - The discussion in German was amusing, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:39, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Oh, that's hilarious, and I'm not even halfway through. Ha, even I have an inkling of who Henry Purcell is, so yeah, that's Axel's problem. And of course we all know who "wir" is in "Du hast Recht und wir unseren Frieden" (BTW, I know it with "Ruhe")--it's men. Yes, we're obviously dealing with someone whose penis got caught between two intelligent women who argued a point correctly, and he had to dick his way out of it. Oh boy. Drmies (talk) 01:12, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- "Du hast recht, und ich hab meine Ruh." is the version I also know. - Below, apologizing: this article title is perfect to do so. Now I have it ready, for use on de-WP. - Axel: he takes great pics, see? He went out to take two of the Musikhochschule on my request. - There's another discussion below the hilarious one, I translated again, this time not for a banned editor but on request ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:10, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- I know it as "Sie hat recht, und ich hab meine Ruh"--men talking about their wives. Drmies (talk) 15:19, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- I use it also;) - How do you like the top of my talk now? (I keep my edit notice the same, for years, but change there.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:30, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Oh, it's very pretty, and I appreciate how much work you put into it, and the work you do before you can put that work into it. I'm not with you on Colonel Henry: that's too much honor, given the socking and the plugging... Drmies (talk) 15:42, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Too much honor, it wasn't much work, unfortunately it grew over time, from just the two who died, - the final missing, and the others are nothing in comparison. Did you read my thoughts about disruptive editing? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:35, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- ps: you like good discussions? I think this (first meeting) was one, I asked "Are you against an infobox? Just asking, reading "sudden new inspiration" and like(d) the one-of-a-kind response, - my offence. (I don't talk about those of others.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:04, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Do horses have hands?
Picture description. A miraculous intervention (1182) by the Virgin Mary in saving the life of the 12th century Portuguese knight Dom Fuas Roupinho, possibly a templar, while he was hunting deer one foggy early morning. Beside the chapel, on a protuberant rock 110 meters above the Atlantic, one can still see the mark made in the rock by one of the hands of Dom Fuas horse.
In memory of the miracle he had a chapel (Capela da Memória) built over the small grotto, where the miraculous statue had been left (c.715) by king Roderic after the monk's death. The first church in O Sítio, was built over the grotto Hafspajen (talk) 14:04, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Tweaked it. At least Nazaré, Portugal had it correct already. Drmies (talk) 20:28, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- I tweaked the Nazaré page- a "protuberant rock" is a rock shaped like a stiffy. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 21:35, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
OK Hafspajen, we have work to do, all of us, including Always Learning, and of course Yngvadottir. AL, can you have a look at the Portuguese article pt:Pederneira (Nazaré), to see if it has any quality at all and if it's worth translating--I think, after some Googling, that it has notability. In that case, part of the history needs to split off from Nazaré, Portugal, because the church, for instance, properly belongs to Pederneira. In addition, AL, I'd like for you to look at this here to see if it appears accurate and somewhat in line with the pt-wiki Pederneira article. For instance, I need to know if the Alcoa river in that source is indeed the Alcoa River. It would be nice to get a map, too--I have a hunch that the Pederneira Bay, if indeed it is still called that way, is an important geographical feature and it might be nice to look at. (The Portuguese articles don't have anything.) And I wonder if Sítio needs an article, but maybe that's of later concern (see pt:Sítio da Nazaré). Besides there are associated articles: I know that Candleabracadabra could have a field day with something like pt:Elevador da Nazaré.
Alright. AL, we could really use your help here. Let's see if we can put this town and area on the map properly. Bishonen, do you know a mapmaker on the English wiki, or should I try the Graphics Workshop again? Drmies (talk) 21:36, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Bunchofgrapes left… :-( But I'm delighted to see that Johan Elisson, official mapmaker for the Andrée expedition, is again editing a little; I thought he left too. Bishonen | talk 22:25, 18 May 2014 (UTC).
- Naah, I've always been here! Just haven't had the time to edit very much in the past few years (I got a job much thanks to my Misplaced Pages involvement!). But now I'm finding a little more time to edit; my long term goal is to bring Boden Fortress to FA status. I'm not a very good mapmaker though (despite the Andrée map turning out pretty good). – Elisson • T • C • 07:19, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Bunchofgrapes left… :-( But I'm delighted to see that Johan Elisson, official mapmaker for the Andrée expedition, is again editing a little; I thought he left too. Bishonen | talk 22:25, 18 May 2014 (UTC).
- Xanthomelanoussprog, I pruned your stiffy and created Pederneira. Now how about the bay? Drmies (talk) 22:02, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- I think geography needs to be made clear here. Church of Nossa Senhora da Nazaré, the church, is on O Sitio, a hilltop. It does not seem to belong to Nazare properly (it's not part of the Portuguese article the way it is part of the English article), and that makes sense since it's on a hilltop and Nazare is on the seaside. Always Learning, what say you? Drmies (talk) 22:11, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
1 - PT:WIKI entry of the Pederneira neigbourhood seems tidied up and written in neutral language, has no refs though; 2 - Yes it is the same river, 100% positive. I profit from the opportunity to say i'll be leaving WP for good after the 2014 FIFA World Cup, this time no turning back, i'm not having fun (no way, quite the contrary) anymore, for quite some time. Wish i could have been of more help, happy week to Mies and everyone that participated in this exchange. --AL (talk) 00:55, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- I added a small bit to Pederneira (woke up after 3 hours sleep to find that I need to write something about a bay- right I see it's Pederneira Bay, I'll check it out in a few hours time). Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 01:07, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Complains, complains
List of Toy Story characters ...eh. Hafspajen (talk) 16:34, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Draft:Native Hawaiian cuisine and Native Hawaiian cuisine
I was unable to move the draft back to the article title so a history merge or admin intervention is needed. I have taken the article to a deletion discussion so the community can weigh in on how best to handle the subject. Given your interest in the dispute over Hawaiian foods I am letting you know so that you can provide whatever assistance is needed. Thanks. Candleabracadabra (talk) 17:09, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, but K-stick has already taken care of it. I accept your apology, Drmies (talk) 20:07, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Drmies. I had previously moved this cut and paste pastiche from Hawaii-related articles into draft space with this rationale. Please notice, Candleabracadabra did not reply to that discussion, but instead copypasted the draft space article into the redirect and nominated it for deletion to clean up the page history. Once again, Candleabracadabra refuses to engage in a discussion about problems with his edits. I think the article should be moved back to draft space or his personal sandbox, as it is not ready for mainspace. It is simply a duplicate fork of the cuisine of Hawaii article, most of which has nothing to do with Native Hawaiian cuisine. I have temporarily remedied that problem by removing it, but Candleabracadabra is continuing to add too many images and surround the text, even after this problem has been pointed out to him several times in multiple discussions on article talk pages and his user talk page. There appears to be a serious competency issue at work here that goes beyond any simple content dispute. Viriditas (talk) 21:44, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Viriditas, I am going to leave this up to K-stick, who is thoroughly read up on the matter, though I will be glad to monitor the situation. Thanks, and do keep me posted wherever it is by pinging me, if necessary. Drmies (talk) 22:00, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Once the battling has ended, I am prepared to improve our content on the cuisine of the Native Hawaiian people before 1778. I will even buy some scholarly books. Just ping me once the hand to hand combat is over. Cullen Let's discuss it 05:50, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
For you
The Silent Award | |
Sadie the black Labrador Retriever... Hafspajen (talk) 17:09, 18 May 2014 (UTC) |
- Thanks Hafspajen. I was just thinking today about Sadie getting old. Our neighbors had to put their dog to sleep the other day, and I can't help but wonder. I should be stocking up on bourbon already, cause I'll be a basket case. Drmies (talk) 20:15, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Oh, but she is not that old... Hafspajen (talk) 20:21, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Almost as old as my marriage, and we're all limping along, haha. Seriously, she'll be 11 this fall, and her old football injury (meniscus? our vet in Knoxville was a former football player, and that's what he called it) is getting worse and worse. Drmies (talk) 20:23, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- This helps always for football injury elderly dogs.Hafspajen (talk) 20:26, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Oh, but she is not that old... Hafspajen (talk) 20:21, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Impersonator needing a block
Hello Dr. Since you seem to be online I thought I'd post here too, in addition to the report I filed at WP:UAA. Could you please block BilCat litter (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)? They're impersonating/targetting user BilCat (see contributions). Thomas.W 20:27, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
And if you have time to spare Dave de Silk Air 11-85 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is another imeprsonation account, that is directly linked to "BilCat litter" (see contributions). Thomas.W 20:32, 18 May 2014 (UTC)Both users have been whacked now, so nothing here to do... Thomas.W20:48, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Please help
Can nothing be done about Scalhotrod's and his ownership issue with the Assault weapons ban page? In addition to moving it unilaterally without discussion, he is now removing as many instances of the word ban as he can get away with. Aren't these articles under discretionary sanction? Isn't what he's doing completely contrary to those. Please, please help. I'm on vacation for a week and losing weeks and weeks of work. All I have to work from is my phone. Please help. This can't possibly be acceptable behavior. He's also scrubbed all but one instance of the word ban from the Roberti-Rooms article. Please help. Lightbreather (talk) 22:36, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- The article falls under discretionary sanctions. I'm a bit busy right now with dinner prep (need to make rice and beans the easy way) and can only do little things, and intermittently. But we have ArbCom on call, in the shape of Beeblebrox, who owes me a beer (maybe). And isn't Writ Keeper an admin, a bureaucrat, and an ArbCom clerk? And isn't GorillaWarfare on that team as well? Y'all, we can use your help here: I'm just a lowly admin who's been involved in way too many gun-related discussions. In fact, all those articles could do with a bit more oversight. Thanks girls. (I'm appropriating "girls" to mean the old-fashioned "guys".) Sorry Lightbreather, but the three people I pinged are good people and they also know people. Drmies (talk) 23:06, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Arbcom clerk? Ew, no. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 23:28, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Doesn't mean you can't help, Writ Keeper. Don't make me go to AN. Drmies (talk) 23:54, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- I'm neck deep in examining piles and piles of diffs from our current case so I am somewhat lacking in spare wiki-time at the moment. If there is anything to this I suggest taking it to WP:AE for action. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:39, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Well, maybe it's because I'm totally unfamiliar with the history here, but I don't really see a problem, nor what discretionary sanctions have to do with it. Making edits that another editor disagrees with isn't a blockable offense. There hasn't been any edit-warring over the changes Lightbreather is talking about, and at least on the surface, they appear to be good-faith, so I'm not sure what you really expect me to do about it; as everyone knows, admins don't rule on content decisions. Is there any particular reason why discussion on the talk page or escalation to venues like DRN can't be tried here? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 01:21, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Arbcom clerk? Ew, no. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 23:28, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
also
In addition to being on a mission to wipe out as many uses of "assault weapons ban" as possible, he also is unilaterally removing "high-capacity magazine" wherever he can. No discussion. No matter how well sourced or how long they've been part of the lexicon... these terms must not be used on WP (according to Scal's and a half-dozen other editors. They have battled editors over this (not just me) for years. Here's the latest: Lightbreather (talk) 23:40, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Lightbreather, I looked at a few edits and I can't say that they are prima facie disruptive, which means that I simply can't do much as an admin. As usual, the case is to be made on the talk page. You are, of course, free to revert (as the second step in the BRD cycle), as long as you make sure that you yourself don't fall into Discretionary Sanction territory. I saw that Scalhotrod had been notified, and I am sure you have too. Drmies (talk) 23:54, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Kelapstick, remember how you told me that the only way grilling is successful is with beer and undivided attention? Please have a look at these matters, since I'm out for a while. Drmies (talk) 00:01, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Here's your help, Drmies, when you need rice and beans FAST as we did tonight. Knorr has this item called Fiesta Sides in a pouch. We got the Spanish rice, which can be microwaved in 12 minutes. The beans were canned O Organics Fat Free Refried Black Beans, though the cheese grated on top added a bit of fat, I guess. No lard, though, which is fatal for Jews. Just 3 minutes in the microwave. It was delicious with some enchiladas, and I made the tossed salad. By the way, I don't think Oprah Winfrey has anything to do with the beans. Bon appetit! Cullen Let's discuss it 05:31, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- "Lethal to Jews" is lethally funny. And I always thought you were Irish! Anyway, I sauteed onions and bell peppers, with tomatoes, cumin, coriander, etc., and boiled the rice and two cans of black beans. It's substantial and very tasty. But I'll keep your shortcut in mind--and please give my regards to Mrs. Cullen: I hope she is well, and you too. Drmies (talk) 13:58, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- You did it the right way and we did it the quick way. Yes, I am both 3/8 Irish and also Jewish. It is kind of a mongrel identity that motivates me to search for kosher corned beef each Saint Patrick's Day. Both my dear wife and I are doing well for our advanced ages (at least in comparison to Randy in Boise, and the legions of editors contributing from Mom's basement). We hope you, your wife and your girls are thriving and staying cool. Things are getting warm in your neck of the piney woods, aren't they? Cullen Let's discuss it 05:41, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Yuca
Should this page be a disambiguation? It seems to me that cassava is the main subject. The only other yuca subject is a redlink. And a hatnote link can be kept to Yuca (disambiguation) for the yucca subjects. Clearly my process and procedure knowledge is insufficient to know how to process this kind of housekeeping and I've already disappointed Kelapstick once today. If it's too much to handle or involves lots of acronyms we can just let it go. There is only so much Wiki knowledge I can acquire in one day. Candleabracadabra (talk) 00:27, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Today is a new day, Candle. I'd be on it if I didn't have to bring my Ferrari to the dealer today. Drmies (talk) 13:56, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- First things first: that redlink can go. Nothing links there, and the deleted article is nothing, nothing at all--it does mention the term "Yuqueros" but that has no significance per Google, at least not for "disparaging term used for Venezuelan metalheads". Drmies (talk) 14:56, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- OK, there is little Wiki knowledge necessary for this: you'll be pleased to know common sense suffices. Now, please check me: I placed a hatnote on Cassava, the best one I could come up with, and redirected Yuca there. What do you say? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:10, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Additional question on behavioural problem
Moving along. Drmies (talk) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
If you want to discuss this it probably deserves it's own section. Please assume good faith. I am also not sure Drmies will appreciate this discussion taking place on his talk page. But be that as it may, creating an article on the associate professor whose writing's have been the subject of some controversy seemed to me a reasonable outcome given that the AfD close did not work out and the merge was reverted (per what I read on the revdel or whatever the wp:refund Wikispeak is for that subject. I guess I would simply close by saying that I have no objection to moving this discussion to the article talk page or to anyone initiating a deletion discussion for the new article or to any other action that is carried out with respect and consideration and without any attacks or assumptions of bad faith. Discussion is probably the best first step and I always think it strange that it isn't more common as a first step on Misplaced Pages. That said, as I've noted, this may not be the best place. We have to be respectful of the various sensitivities of our editing community and to whatever disabilities, challenges, or obstacles they may or may not face. Candleabracadabra (talk) 02:16, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
HERE is the Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Involuntary celibacy (2nd nomination), and here redirect , and article created. Hafspajen (talk) 02:49, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
There was a community process, and what you do is against broader community consensus. This is disrespecting the consensus. Hafspajen (talk) 03:00, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
(od)Thanks!- seems okay to me (apart from the term "incel" (used in the Guardian piece), which sounds like it comes from the same lexicon as "susper" and "misper". Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 10:07, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
a favorite of Theodore Roosevelt:
Yabba dabba doo - Scooby Candleabracadabra (talk) 18:16, 19 May 2014 (UTC) |
Aknowledgement
Thanks for the cuddly moment!
No, no job at the present time, neither good nor bad. Just feeling soooooooooo tired, wiki-tired and overall-tired...
Cheers mate, happy week --AL (talk) 16:04, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Remember Denis Halili?
He's back: Denis20halili04 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), with the same totally unsourced fantasy edits. Thomas.W 16:32, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- One of his claims today is that the Albanian Air Force is buying the Saab JAS-39 Gripen, which suprised me a bit since I live in Sweden and haven't heard of any such sale; and a search on Google of course returned nothing. So he is obviously making it all up, in his own fantasy world. Thomas.W 16:47, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- And now also as 86.166.54.181 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), making a variation of the same hoax edit as Denis20halili04 just made, and I reverted. Thomas.W 17:07, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. Blocked, with comment at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Denis Halili. Drmies (talk) 17:25, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. I have requested semi-protection of Albanian Air Force at WP:RFPP to keep him away from that article for a while... Thomas.W 17:28, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- I have added the sock template to the user page of both the named account and the IP. Thomas.W 17:33, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Lost history
Dearest Drmies, per your interest in the Native Hawaiian cuisine saga, I wonder if you can help sort out what happened to the history of the Native Hawaiian cuisine article? After Kelapstick closed the previous AfD discussion as speedy keep the article was moved into my userspace (something along the lines of user:User:Candleabracadabra/Native Hawaiian cuisine) then moved again. I think those pages have now been deleted as implausible redirects. Anyway, the history has been lost. It shows the first edit as one where I added some content from the parent article (you'll notice that the new article indicator doesn't show up). This is very strange indeed and I'm not sure quite how it happened? Perhaps you can get Viriditas to help you sort out where it went? I really have no idea. I thought that redirecting an article after a deletion discussion was closed as "Speedy Keep" was considered disruptive, but Misplaced Pages is a wonder of neverending surprises, not all of them pleasant. Candleabracadabra (talk) 17:39, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- You're right on the last point, but I'm not sure about the next-to-last point. I'll see what I can do with my magic admin skills, given to me by a fairly large subsection of editors, who of course knew nothing about my abuse and shitholeness. It's kind of interfering with my lunch, which was to be neither Hawaiian or BBQ-ish anyway, but hey, we aim to serve to please. Your servus servorum Jimmi, Drmies (talk) 18:24, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Any ideas? Is it under one of these? Have you had a chance to ask Viriditas? It's disrupting the ongoing AfD discussion that the history can't be viewed. Candleabracadabra (talk) 18:22, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Can you look under the Native Hawaiian cuisine page? I recall that Kelapstick deleted that page to make way for the move of the article from my userspace. Perhaps it is under the redirect that was there? Candleabracadabra (talk) 18:24, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- I don't really understand how it got separated from the more recent work. Some sort of gamesmanship? I distinctly remember restoring the article from beneath the redirect. Unless it was all a dream.. Thanks for your help. They say breakfast is the most important meal of the day. Candleabracadabra (talk) 18:27, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Interestingly I found a discussion from 2012 where the discussion was closed as a consensus to have two distinct articles. I wasn't involved in that discussion or your admin nom, so I'm definitely not to blame for those outcomes if they were incorrect. Candleabracadabra (talk) 18:30, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Well, before I even look at your question, let me type this up before my brain conks out. "Native Hawaiian cuisine" was accidentally moved to User:User:Candleabracadabra/Native Hawaiian cuisine, then they corrected that and moved it to "User:Candleabracadabra/Native Hawaiian cuisine", and then good old Kelapstick deleted that incorrect redirect. You moved User:Candleabracadabra/Native Hawaiian cuisine to Native cuisine of Hawaii. There are no deleted edits in Native cuisine of Hawaii, which you started with that split on 17 May. Does that answer your question? Drmies (talk) 18:31, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- The oldest version I have been able to find in any page related to native cuisine of Hawaii, or variations there of is on 17 May, the edit Drmies mentions above. --kelapstick 18:34, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- OK, Draft:Native Hawaiian cuisine is now a redirect. There are some deleted edits in the history of Native Hawaiian cuisine, which you blanked for deletion and then redirected to Draft:Native Hawaiian cuisine. You had added content up to 29,364 bytes on May 18, 17:01, which I assume is the content copied from...somewhere? Kelapstick deleted that at 17:44 (G6), to make way for a move. Does that help? Drmies (talk) 18:37, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- What were the deleted edits? They should go back a ways ie. not be recent and not be mine. Can you restore them please? Candleabracadabra (talk) 19:12, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- They are in the history of Native cuisine of Hawaii. Drmies (talk) 19:36, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- What were the deleted edits? They should go back a ways ie. not be recent and not be mine. Can you restore them please? Candleabracadabra (talk) 19:12, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- And please strike the "gamesmanship" comment. Drmies (talk) 18:38, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm looking for the edits prior to my work on the article. My recollection is that Native Hawaiian cuisine was a redirect to Cuisine of Hawaii. But underneath that redirect there were edits. It had, apparently been a disputed issue in the past (archive 2 on the Cuisine of Hawaii talk page). Consensus was closed to create two article. But anyway, back to the point, I was just trying to trace what the heck happened, I can't figure out what happened to the edits underneath what was a redirect? Redirecting an article after a deletion discussion closed as speedy keep and when there was already consensus on the article talk page 2-1 is gamesmanship. Where this mysterious lost history has gone I don't know, but it's a big time waster. That's what gamesmanship attempts to achieve after all, disruption. That's why intervention was needed. Sadly, there was mostly bullshit. Candleabracadabra (talk) 19:09, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Maybe I'm completely wrong. I guess I must be confusing Hawaii regional cuisine with Native Hawaiia cuisine. This whole thing has been so freaking exhausting and neverending I don't know what's what any more. Apologies. I can only keep track of so many moves and redirect and other disruptions and speedy keeps and afds. It's a freaking exhausting game. Candleabracadabra (talk) 19:16, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- All of the histories can be merged, and restored if that would help, but here is what happened (only moves, redirects, creations, and AfD nominations are included):
- 16:17, 17 May 2014 Candleabracadabra - Creates Native Hawaiian cuisine
- 03:57, 18 May 2014 Viriditas - moves Native Hawaiian cuisine to Draft:Native Hawaiian cuisine
- 03:58, 18 May 2014 Viriditas redirects Native Hawaiian cuisine to Cuisine of Hawaii {{R with possibilities}}
- 17:01, 18 May 2014 Candleabracadabra completes a copy/paste move from Draft:Native Hawaiian cuisine to Native Hawaiian cuisine over redirect
- 17:02, 18 May 2014 Candleabracadabra nominates Native Hawaiian cuisine for deletion at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Native Hawaiian cuisine
- 17:37, 18 May 2014 Candleabracadabra blanks Native Hawaiian cuisine
- 17:41, 18 May 2014 Candleabracadabra redirects the Native Hawaiian cuisine to Draft:Native Hawaiian cuisine
- 17:44, 18 May 2014 Kelapstick moved page Draft:Native Hawaiian cuisine to Native Hawaiian cuisine (over top of redirect, as the history of the target was originally a copy/paste of the moved article).
- 18:45, 18 May 2014 Kelapstick closes Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Native Hawaiian cuisine cuisine closed as speedy keep
- 01:27, 19 May 2014 Viriditas moves Native Hawaiian cuisine to User:User:Candleabracadabra/Native Hawaiian cuisine (wrong name)
- 01:28, 19 May 2014 Viriditas moved page User:User:Candleabracadabra/Native Hawaiian cuisine to User:Candleabracadabra/Native Hawaiian cuisine (intended name)
- 01:38 19 May 2014 Kelapstick deleted page User:User:Candleabracadabra/Native Hawaiian cuisine (G6: Housekeeping and routine (non-controversial))
- 01:27, 19 May 2014 Viriditas redirects Native Hawaiian cuisine to cuisine of Hawaii
- 03:21, 19 May 2014 Candleabracadabra nominates User:Candleabracadabra/Native Hawaiian cuisine for deletion (see Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Candleabracadabra/Native Hawaiian cuisine)
- 03:30, 19 May 2014 Candleabracadabra (talk | contribs | block) m . . (18,671 bytes) (0) . * (Candleabracadabra moved page User:Candleabracadabra/Native Hawaiian cuisine to Native cuisine of Hawaii
- 03:31, 19 May 2014 Candleabracadabra fixes the AfD tag, including timestamp, to reflect the nomination at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Native cuisine of Hawaii
- 03:35, 19 May 2014 Candleabracadabra creates Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Native cuisine of Hawaii
- 05:01, 19 May 2014 Candleabracadabra Redirected Native Hawaiian cuisine to Native cuisine of Hawaii
I hope this helps. --kelapstick 19:50, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Candleabracadabra, you don't have to apologize for asking us to do this kind of work. It's what we're paid to do. It's the other stuff that warrants an apology, and a striking through of some comments. You are always welcome here, but only if it's in a collegial manner conversant with our policies and guidelines for collaboratively editing. Thank you, and thanks K-stick for the extensive contribution. Drmies (talk) 19:54, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah well, I didn't appreciate Kelapstick's snide "you've been here for years and should know better" bullshit. As I made clear I am not an admin and can't move articles over redirects. I can't nominate an article for deletion in userspace, it tells you it has to be an article space. I can't have a redirect deleted when it's contentious. So I did my fucking best and he can take his snide comments and shove em. I had to do another AfD and it's still not right because it doesn't show the previous ones. It's a colossal waste of my fucking time and I don't appreciate it. The article has been moved all over the freaking place wily nily including into my userspace where someone who is not welcome on my talkpage shouldn't mucking about. The consensus for the article is clear as it was in 2012. So this whole escapade is an exercise in futility. And then we have your other buddy Hafspajen jumping in with his nasty innuendos and repeated accusations of bad faith. So you want to rein in the incivility? Go for it Drmies. But don't get mad at me for telling the truth. When you guys create a mess and involve yourself in it and muck it up, and you get stuck doing mopping I don't break a sweat. Cry me a river. I don't create articles in bad faith EVER and I don't edit in bad faith EVER and I try to keep a sense of humor about all the attacks I face, but I don't like it. So if I hurt your feelings, good. You deserve it. Show your fellow lowly editors a little respect in the future and don't act like such arrogant wp:dicks. Does that article still exist? I remember some fascinating debate about it. I'm sorry if you have to eat your own pudding on occasion. Next time order something else. Candleabracadabra (talk) 21:19, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Just so we are super clear, you didn't "create" anything. You copied the work that I and other editors worked long and hard over into a new title. That's called forking, and it is discouraged. The article has been moved to draft space appropriately. When you moved it back to mainsapce, it was moved to your user space appropriately. Please stop copying the work of others and creating new topics that have nothing to do with that work. That's called synthesis and it's discouraged. If you want to do the hard work, if you want to do the research, and if you want to read and write about a topic that interests you, great, do what everyone else does and do the hard work. Otherwise, you are the one disrupting Misplaced Pages and wasting everyone's time. Viriditas (talk) 21:45, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah well, I didn't appreciate Kelapstick's snide "you've been here for years and should know better" bullshit. As I made clear I am not an admin and can't move articles over redirects. I can't nominate an article for deletion in userspace, it tells you it has to be an article space. I can't have a redirect deleted when it's contentious. So I did my fucking best and he can take his snide comments and shove em. I had to do another AfD and it's still not right because it doesn't show the previous ones. It's a colossal waste of my fucking time and I don't appreciate it. The article has been moved all over the freaking place wily nily including into my userspace where someone who is not welcome on my talkpage shouldn't mucking about. The consensus for the article is clear as it was in 2012. So this whole escapade is an exercise in futility. And then we have your other buddy Hafspajen jumping in with his nasty innuendos and repeated accusations of bad faith. So you want to rein in the incivility? Go for it Drmies. But don't get mad at me for telling the truth. When you guys create a mess and involve yourself in it and muck it up, and you get stuck doing mopping I don't break a sweat. Cry me a river. I don't create articles in bad faith EVER and I don't edit in bad faith EVER and I try to keep a sense of humor about all the attacks I face, but I don't like it. So if I hurt your feelings, good. You deserve it. Show your fellow lowly editors a little respect in the future and don't act like such arrogant wp:dicks. Does that article still exist? I remember some fascinating debate about it. I'm sorry if you have to eat your own pudding on occasion. Next time order something else. Candleabracadabra (talk) 21:19, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
The yuca page over the previous disambig looks good to me. Candleabracadabra (talk) 21:28, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Note that I blocked you before I saw the above message. Either way I'm not crying a river. Drmies (talk) 00:50, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi Drmies. I have not at all followed what this is all about. But you have blocked Candleabracadabra with a statement that it is a "temporary" block, while in fact it seems to be an indefinite block. It seems to me that your providing a duration--presumably short--for the block is necessary, else it is not temporary. I'll say also that I have found Candleabracadabra to be helpful and cooperative and a good collaborator on topics that we've both edited on, so I am a bit concerned about what's gone on (really i have no idea of fault or anything), and hope it is not really endangering of C's ability to continue contributing. --doncram 01:12, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- I just looked at the block, seems to be a rather short 12 hour block to me. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 01:15, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)Then you are the lucky minority. Just read the collapsed section above. Or read here, Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Denise Donnelly. Problematic. Hafspajen (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- No doncram, temporarily. I have no desire to prevent them from contributing for more than a little while, but clearly they were not in the best of spirits--I cannot otherwise understand a mea culpa, with some apologies here and on the current Hawaii AfD, followed by yet more abuse hurled at Kelapstick. I warned them that they would receive a short block if they continued, and that's exactly what happened. They are prolific, certainly, but if they want to claim to be communicative and conducive to a happy editing atmosphere they should act like it. The history of Viriditas's talk page is already bad enough, and I jumped in there in part to prevent worse, since they were clearly out of control (what, six times in a row?), but to no avail. Anyway, thanks for your question/comment. Perhaps you can give it a try by engaging in conversation; maybe you have better luck with him. Drmies (talk) 01:29, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Ok thanks Dennis Brown and Drmies, I misunderstood about the block, which was set as a 12-hour block in fact i guess, as I thought the duration would be part of what was shown in Drmies' "you are blocked" posting at Candeleabracadabra's Talk page if it was temporary.
- About what's gone on, from the above summary of page moves and so on, what leaps out to me is that editor Viriditas twice "userfied" a mainspace article, and that Candleabracadabra objected (e.g., moved it back) and that Candleabracadabra at least twice tried to open a proper AFD discussion involving multiple editors, while V's actions were unilateral. I don't know about past interaction between V and C, but if there was past negative stuff, then IMHO editor V ought not to be taking strong action that way. IMHO, if there is past negative stuff, an editor/administrator should seek to avoid the appearance of bullying. In my past experience with a following/contending editor/administrator, I know that I could not get past the fact of that editor (not V) continuing to harass willfully with stunts like "userfying", with that editor fully knowing that I fully thought they were being awful, and rubbing it in with some power trip. IMHO a compromised/involved administrator oughta simply back off; anyone but that person could discuss article notability or content or whatever. It should be Misplaced Pages policy that we do not condone bullying, and an editor's view that another editor is bullying ought hold a lot of weight, and that following-type administrators should be required to avoid the appearance of bullying once any such issue has been discerned. I don't see the same language here, and i don't know if V's status compared at all to what I saw in my past, but I do see confusion and stress contributed by the unnecessarily strong administrator-only action taken of userfying, without a community discussion. Again I haven't followed and don't understand the whole picture here at all, but I do identify with some of C's apparent frustration. --doncram 02:02, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Well, the block was for harassment of specifically Kelapstick. Whether that move/draft/article/AfD stuff was due to Viriditas's or Candle's action, I'll leave that in the middle--though I will state for the record that I can't figure out what those two AfDs were for. But even if Viriditas had been wrong in userfying, it did not warrant the abuse they received: again, look at the history of their talk page. That's old news of course, but all this "abusive admin" stuff directed at Kelapstick, with the poop-colored glasses and the disruption and the gamesmanship: there is no way anyone can argue that K-stick deserved that abuse. So no, I do not condone bullying, and I believe I acted accordingly. Drmies (talk) 02:11, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- As for me, I am looking forward to the future date when fighting about how to structure our coverage of Hawaiian cuisine comes to an end, so that actual work on improving our encyclopedic coverage of this delectable subject can resume. I find it fascinating, and will pitch in once the corpses of the casualties have been cleared from the battlefield. Cullen Let's discuss it 06:01, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- The thing is, there isn't any fight over the structure of Hawaii-related cuisine articles. Candleabracadabra has been engaging in the creation of non-notable stubs and moves against consensus on multiple topics. Look at the ongoing chaos he caused over at Denise Donnelly with his one page move against the consensus formed in January. He creates and thrives on utter chaos and disruption all over the place. The real problem has nothing to do with Hawaii-related topics at all. Look at all of the red links on his user page. Did he create all of those deleted articles? Look at all of the non-notable articles he's created in just the last several months. He refuses to use reliable sources. He refuses to follow any aspects of the MOS. He refuses to follow basic civility. Is there a single guideline or policy he does follow? All I'm saying is that the problem at hand here is bigger than any disruption he's caused on the Hawaii-related topics. Viriditas (talk) 06:33, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- As for me, I am looking forward to the future date when fighting about how to structure our coverage of Hawaiian cuisine comes to an end, so that actual work on improving our encyclopedic coverage of this delectable subject can resume. I find it fascinating, and will pitch in once the corpses of the casualties have been cleared from the battlefield. Cullen Let's discuss it 06:01, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Well, the block was for harassment of specifically Kelapstick. Whether that move/draft/article/AfD stuff was due to Viriditas's or Candle's action, I'll leave that in the middle--though I will state for the record that I can't figure out what those two AfDs were for. But even if Viriditas had been wrong in userfying, it did not warrant the abuse they received: again, look at the history of their talk page. That's old news of course, but all this "abusive admin" stuff directed at Kelapstick, with the poop-colored glasses and the disruption and the gamesmanship: there is no way anyone can argue that K-stick deserved that abuse. So no, I do not condone bullying, and I believe I acted accordingly. Drmies (talk) 02:11, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Cullen328, DYK know that Candle saw fit to quote my response to your "lard is fatal to Jews" comment on their talk page, out of context, to make me look like an antisemite? (And I apologize for saying "lethal" instead of "fatal"...) Drmies (talk) 12:01, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Religion
What barney said deserved a block. If anyone did the same thing concerning gender, sexuality, or race a block would be a knee-jerk reaction. When an editor blatantly demeans the beliefs of 2 billion people, more if you consider other Abrahamic religions, that likewise deserves a block.--v/r - TP 17:18, 20 May 2014 (UTC)