| Revision as of 19:03, 25 January 2015 view sourceEric Corbett (talk | contribs)45,616 edits →January 2015: Sandstein has no supervote, he just thinks he does← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:13, 25 January 2015 view source Lightbreather (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users17,672 edits →Enforcement request notice: untrueNext edit → | ||
| Line 411: | Line 411: | ||
| ::] I do not often get to demonstrate how much I am in your corner. I add my hope to your hope. I live for the day LB would fly away on her broom. (Have I said lately I am a female editor...?) All the best, ] ] 18:02, 25 January 2015 (UTC) | ::] I do not often get to demonstrate how much I am in your corner. I add my hope to your hope. I live for the day LB would fly away on her broom. (Have I said lately I am a female editor...?) All the best, ] ] 18:02, 25 January 2015 (UTC) | ||
| :::The strange thing is that I've collaborated with loads of female editors on articles, probably more females than males, yet not a single one has ever complained about the the way I've treated them or interacted with them. The only females who've complained about me are those I've never come across and I wouldn't know from Adam. ] ] 18:10, 25 January 2015 (UTC) | :::The strange thing is that I've collaborated with loads of female editors on articles, probably more females than males, yet not a single one has ever complained about the the way I've treated them or interacted with them. The only females who've complained about me are those I've never come across and I wouldn't know from Adam. ] ] 18:10, 25 January 2015 (UTC) | ||
| ::::Eric Corbett, you and I had never interacted until July 2014 when this happened at WT:AN: | |||
| :::::Lightbreather: ... Where and how can I go about making a formal request to make a unique noticeboard area? | |||
| :::::Eric Corbett: ... the easiest way to avoid being called a cunt is not to act like one. | |||
| ::::When I complained about it, you started following me around to harass me whenever I talked about civility. So you see that although perhaps many women have had the pleasure of collaborating with you, I have not. That doesn't negate the fact that you've collaborated with women, or that I've collaborated with men, but please don't try to pass yourself off as a victim. You've done your share of being uncivil, and that's a fact. ] (]) 19:13, 25 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| What you're going through at the moment, is something I've been through. Your best course of action, is to remain ''silent'' on the events. ] (]) 17:27, 25 January 2015 (UTC) | What you're going through at the moment, is something I've been through. Your best course of action, is to remain ''silent'' on the events. ] (]) 17:27, 25 January 2015 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 19:13, 25 January 2015
 | The Wikimedia Foundation is not a software development organisation, and ought not to be pretending to be one. Let's try and make that clear to them by a regular Monday boycott until they come to their senses. |
 |
| 2007 |
|---|
| 2008 |
| 2009 |
| 2010 |
| 2011 |
| 2012 |
| 2013 |
| 2014 |
| 2015 |
|
|
Mele Kalikimaka
Have a bright Hawaiian Christmas!--Mark Miller (talk) 16:37, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
Hawaiian? Is Eric in Hawaii or something?♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:32, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- I wish! Eric Corbett 12:05, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Huck
This Huckleberry Finn article... would need some attention. From a good article editor perhaps? Hafspajen (talk) 03:44, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Happy New Year Eric Corbett!
Eric Corbett,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Misplaced Pages. Hafspajen (talk) 10:56, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Yes indeed Hafspajen, may Eric, yourself and anybody who does good for wikipedia watching this page have a good new year!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:00, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Reference errors at Bolton
I noticed the reference section at Bolton, over which we laboured for a long time, and it had turned to a sea of red. I did something to get rid of the red.... but probably not the right thing. Anyhow it has made me lose the will to live. If anybody wants to know what discourages editors it is this. I give up. PS I wish you and Mrs Corbett all the very best for 2015. J3Mrs (talk) 14:22, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- A rather irritating bug was introduced into the {{citation}} template a couple of months ago, the result of which was all those complaints about the citations having no title if only the |contribution parameter was used. But to compound the matter if you simply change the |contribution parameter to |title then it appears (incorrectly) in italics; I've started labouring through with the most satisfactory fix I'm aware of. Did we once have an etymology section in that article? If we didn't then why is the Mills book listed in the bibliography?
- Anyway, a Happy New Year to you and yours and to everyone else who watches this talk page! Eric Corbett 15:45, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- We did, it was removed by the editor who decided it needed a review and who "fixed" the History section. I didn't mean for you to fix it, I just thought it looked better minus the red, but thank you, I now know where to look if I come across it again. (I doubt I'll remember why.) The trouble with not looking in much recently is that everything I've looked at has been "improved". J3Mrs (talk) 16:01, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Hmmm. I can't understand why that Toponymy section was removed, so I've put it back. Eric Corbett 17:08, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- I shuffled it in after you removed it again. It looked lost in the history. Thank you for sorting out the refs. :) J3Mrs (talk) 19:35, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- That's fine by me, as I didn't notice it where it had been moved to. I see you're having the usual fun on your talk page. Have a drop of plonk and forget about it until tomorrow. I've just opened a bottle of port, and as Ruth doesn't like port I'm going to have to drink it all by myself – I don't believe it keeps once the cork has been removed from the bottle. At least it doesn't in our house! Eric Corbett 19:41, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- You're right, except the bottle is already open. Port, like sherry, puts me to sleep. J3Mrs (talk) 19:48, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Happy 2015
Best wishes for a productive and dramah-free year's editing in 2015, and health and happiness beyond the encyclopedia. PamD 15:54, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks Pam. We'll see what this year brings on WP, another ArbCom case for something or other I expect. Eric Corbett 17:33, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Article on Alexander Luria
Hello Eric Corbett; Yngvadottir did a really top re-write on Alexander Luria, and suggested you might be able to help the article toward peer review status. Yngvad has put his finger on the main issue which is that there is only one biography about him even thirty years after his death. Luria's research is, however, quoted repeatedly and repeatedly even in current research. Is the current article any closer to inching towards peer review quality? Cheers. FelixRosch (TALK) 17:22, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
- There's really no such thing as "peer review quality", just submit it for a peer review. Having quickly read through the article two things jump out at me though. The first is that some of the prose makes no sense at all to me. For instance,
"The 1930s were significant to Luria because his prescient studies of indigenous people opened the field of multiculturalism to his general interests."
I have absolutely no idea what that means.
- The second thing is that the Scientific influence of Vygotsky section is way off topic, and whatever is specifically relevant to Luria ought to be distributed in the appropriate places in the article. Eric Corbett 17:58, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
- It was nice of you to visit the article. I have revised/rewritten the sense of the problem sentence you just pointed out. Also, I strongly cut back the text in the Vygotsky section. Having only the one published biography about Alexander Luria seems to be a possible red herring for nominating the article for, I assume, a GA review. If there are any oversights remaining in the article then let me know and I'll try to take care of them before the next steps of nomination. Cheers. FelixRosch (TALK) 19:34, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
- That there's only one published biography ought not to be a problem for GA. Eric Corbett 19:37, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Where?
Maybe you should just add where Undine caught her husband in the act of adultery, if it's so important. Was it in the bridal bed? The backseat of her jeep? On top of the washing machine? Maybe it does matter. Drmies (talk) 07:54, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- In the castle according to this. Written by Fred of
the FuckingMount Why Mad?. On a very brief scan, it seems that Undine's husband thought she was dead. As for the complainant- if I had blood coming out of my colon, I'd get it checked out. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 09:15, 5 January 2015 (UTC)- But where in the castle? Eric Corbett 13:49, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry, got it wrong- it appears that Huldbrand and Bertalda had "a confidential conversation" in a "waggon" filled with cotton; Hulbrand dies just before he is to be married to Bertalda, when Undine appears to him. H and B are rescued from the wagon by Undine when it turns into foam, courtesy of her father Kuhleborn, who's the driver. So, Undine doesn't actually catch her husband in adultery. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 14:11, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- The adultery bit does appear to be incorrect. Huldbrand's unfaithfulness appears to be his marriage to Bertalda. Eric Corbett 14:26, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- ... actually I'm uncertain which Ondine story is being referred to here, but it certainly isn't Fouqué's. Eric Corbett 16:06, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry, got it wrong- it appears that Huldbrand and Bertalda had "a confidential conversation" in a "waggon" filled with cotton; Hulbrand dies just before he is to be married to Bertalda, when Undine appears to him. H and B are rescued from the wagon by Undine when it turns into foam, courtesy of her father Kuhleborn, who's the driver. So, Undine doesn't actually catch her husband in adultery. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 14:11, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- In the castle according to this. Written by Fred of
- As a side note, we went to the woods for Rosie's birthday and played Pooh Sticks. She won. Drmies (talk) 17:05, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- That's Poohsticks, thank you very much. Cullen Let's discuss it 08:32, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Looking through Misplaced Pages for the White Lady of Avenel I came across Comte de Gabalis (text here, including image of naiad), an article that seems to have escaped the attention of the Shakespeare fascists--by which I mean those who claim erroneously that Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare, a ridiculous proposition of course. And that article identifies the titular "Count of the Cabala" as Roger Bacon (who is Shakespeare) and then as Saint Germain. If you've read Foucault's Pendulum, raise your hand. Drmies (talk) 16:13, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- I've read that, but many years ago now. There's something not right about the way we're telling the story of Ondin's curse that needs to be fixed; Ondine killed her husband with a kiss, not by cursing him, but it may require a consultation with the text of Giradoux's play to figure out where the loss of autonomic functions actually fits in. Eric Corbett 16:23, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- I have nothing to offer on that topic yet; I've just been finding tidbits of intertextuality (OK, a lot of them). What I see is a lead that needs expanding. As we've seen before, there is kind of a fundamental problem--do you take term X in a definitional sense, forcing yourself to pin it down to (in this case) one particular author and era, or do you take it (as I typically do) broadly, as an idea, or maybe a trope? In the latter case one runs the risk of slight anachronism, but I think that's partly the result of fetishizing a name. The former runs the risk of undue limitation and a fragmentation of what in history, literature, and myth appears to be a pretty continues state of affairs--of a belief ("belief") in a certain kind of creature with certain kinds of qualities. Drmies (talk) 16:57, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- The description section needs some expansion yet before worrying about the lead. Eric Corbett 17:24, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- I have nothing to offer on that topic yet; I've just been finding tidbits of intertextuality (OK, a lot of them). What I see is a lead that needs expanding. As we've seen before, there is kind of a fundamental problem--do you take term X in a definitional sense, forcing yourself to pin it down to (in this case) one particular author and era, or do you take it (as I typically do) broadly, as an idea, or maybe a trope? In the latter case one runs the risk of slight anachronism, but I think that's partly the result of fetishizing a name. The former runs the risk of undue limitation and a fragmentation of what in history, literature, and myth appears to be a pretty continues state of affairs--of a belief ("belief") in a certain kind of creature with certain kinds of qualities. Drmies (talk) 16:57, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- OK, my sworn duty as a Misplaced Pages editor overrides my desire for comedy. For the full crazy effect, look at this version, longer but essentially the same as the one I just undid. The real shits and giggles lie in the fact that more than a few Misplaced Pages editors have looked at those versions without, apparently, raising an eyebrow. This includes Sadads--but he is, I believe, a Rosicrucian. Drmies (talk) 16:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- What an article! Can't believe I didn't think it was a start (That was an AWB edit, when I got a little overeager with stub tagging). But Bacon's Shakespearean investigations must have created his greatest legacy I am sure? As a true universalist, you cannot deny the importance of complex esoteric beliefs to true knowledge of the world.... Sadads (talk) 16:36, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- I'm working on it now, and I have become convinced that Ovid was also Bacon. I mean Shakespeare. Drmies (talk) 16:45, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Bacon and ovid? All-day breakfast at the Swan of Snitterfield? Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 16:58, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- I'm working on it now, and I have become convinced that Ovid was also Bacon. I mean Shakespeare. Drmies (talk) 16:45, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- What an article! Can't believe I didn't think it was a start (That was an AWB edit, when I got a little overeager with stub tagging). But Bacon's Shakespearean investigations must have created his greatest legacy I am sure? As a true universalist, you cannot deny the importance of complex esoteric beliefs to true knowledge of the world.... Sadads (talk) 16:36, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- OK, my sworn duty as a Misplaced Pages editor overrides my desire for comedy. For the full crazy effect, look at this version, longer but essentially the same as the one I just undid. The real shits and giggles lie in the fact that more than a few Misplaced Pages editors have looked at those versions without, apparently, raising an eyebrow. This includes Sadads--but he is, I believe, a Rosicrucian. Drmies (talk) 16:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Can you read this? I've ordered the book--it has a 42-page appendix on Undine, where she came from and where she goes. Drmies (talk) 17:45, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Yes I can read that review. Looks as if the book could be very useful in helping to stitch the various threads together. Eric Corbett 17:54, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
V
Eric, what do you think about these edits? - article before. What I think it was odd that this user removed a referenced entry, with an odd comment. Now I noticed he is edtiting her article too, removing big amounts of info. Also this. Looks like NPOV edits too me. Hafspajen (talk) 13:10, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Well, to take things in order, I've never thought much of categories, so I wouldn't be concerned about altering them. Vanna Bonta is probably famous enough to be included in that list, although I don't think that section should be written as a list anyway. The last edit I don't see as being problematic, just removing some clutter. Eric Corbett 13:48, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, agree about the last one. What worries me the editors edit summary: (removed non-famous owner of a chow-chow) and that he -she goes editing the article removing quite large bits - souced too. Hafspajen (talk) 16:00, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- What I meant ...was not the dog article ( might not made myself clear enough) but it was the actual Vanna Bonta article edits, that worries me. LIKE THIS, that was what I wanted to ask you about what do you think about those edits. rather a lot of them. It was only trough the dog article noticed the editor. Hafspajen (talk) 18:32, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hmmm. The material that was removed is a bit overly gushing for me, so I probably agree with its removal. As for IMdb, you can't use that as a reliable source for anything. Eric Corbett 20:21, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- OK then. Hafspajen (talk) 21:07, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Eddybox
Stefan2 has "commented out" the image you suggested because of WP:NFCC#9. Any suggestions as to how to get around this? Buster Seven Talk 13:56, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
- You could try this one Eric Corbett 14:58, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Done. If I get the bio, this Sunday. If not, Sunday following. Buster Seven Talk 15:05, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thank You. Buster Seven Talk
Books and Bytes - Issue 9
The Misplaced Pages Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 9, November-December 2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)
- New donations, including real-paper-and-everything books, e-books, science journal databases, and more
- New TWL coordinators, conference news, a new open-access journal database, summary of library-related WMF grants, and more
- Spotlight: "Global Impact: The Misplaced Pages Library and Persian Misplaced Pages" - a Persian Misplaced Pages editor talks about their experiences with database access in Iran, writing on the Persian project and the JSTOR partnership
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks
I understand from a mutual friend that you seconded my nomination for "Editor of the Week", that was very kind of you. I feel rather guilty as I have wound back contributing quite a lot recently. I do like the Bongs' miners. J3Mrs (talk) 16:02, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
- I hoped you might. Eric Corbett 20:15, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
- You, me, and your nominator Sagaciousphil are little more than occasional visitors here now. so no need for you feel guilty. We are after all only easily replaceable units of work. Eric Corbett 00:49, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Capitalisation of Scheduled monument, Ancient monument etc - are they proper nouns?
A comment at Misplaced Pages:Featured list candidates/List of Scheduled Monuments in North Somerset/archive1 has asked about capitalisation of "scheduled monument" (and by implication Ancient monument). They are defined by the law Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 does this make them "proper nouns" or not? Any advice or contributions to the discussion appreciated.— Rod 17:57, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
- I don't think it does, and in fact the text of the Act refers to "scheduled monument" and "ancient monument", which I think is the clincher. Eric Corbett 18:20, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Happy Birthday Eric!
...with much pink feelings.....
Best wishes from Haffy for a happy and healthy 2015
Hafspajen (talk) 12:41, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks, that's very kind of you. Eric Corbett 13:01, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Happy birthday, seek delight! (I know, not exactly your topic, but written/expanded on my mom's birthday thinking of that, - my poodle) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:17, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks Gerda. I used to think of poodles as toys, girl's dogs, but I've come to realise that they can be really big bruisers as well. Eric Corbett 13:24, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Especially the Pink Vegetarian Male ones...
Hafspajen (talk) 15:21, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Many happy returns :) J3Mrs (talk) 15:33, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks. As I've got older I've usually tried to avoid birthdays, but the Internet has made that virtually impossible today. Eric Corbett 15:46, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- So do I but I'd be mortified if I wasn't taken out for a meal. I'm about, but busy, dogsitting today, not sure who's in charge but a long walk has worn him out and he's chewing a huge marrowbone. Otherwise I'm plodding on with little enthusiasm. J3Mrs (talk) 16:13, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- The meal has been organised, no worries on that score. Eric Corbett 16:19, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Did you got any Chocolate cake to your meal in real life? Hafspajen (talk) 22:24, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- No chocolate cake, but I did get my favourite ice cream, Neapolitan. Tomorrow I may push the boat out and go for a banana split, but I'll have to starve myself first. Eric Corbett 21:27, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Ha, if that is your favorite ice cream, and you like beer, perhaps you can try this one--it actually tastes and feels sort of like all three at once. Drmies (talk) 02:54, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- I might give that a go. As a kid I loved ice cream in lemonade. Eric Corbett 02:56, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Ha, if that is your favorite ice cream, and you like beer, perhaps you can try this one--it actually tastes and feels sort of like all three at once. Drmies (talk) 02:54, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Happy birthday! --John (talk) 21:47, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks John. Eric Corbett 21:57, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Stop responding to provocations
Don't let JW play you, Eric. You know what he's up to — just back off and let other people take care of it. Don't be a moth to his open flame... Carrite (talk) 22:41, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- Simpler: don't edit on Monday ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:46, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- Gerda, just because it's Monday doesn't make it open season on me. Eric Corbett 22:48, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- I had successfully not looked at that page for weeks, but Floq's statement made me curious. Arb sorrows pending again, did you know? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:58, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- I don't take much interest in what happens in arbitration cases, even in my own. Eric Corbett 23:37, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- I don't mind for myself, thanks to your unforgotten encouragement and later talk about dignity. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:09, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Jimmy Wales is no flame and I'm no moth, but he does have serious questions to answer nevertheless. Eric Corbett 22:48, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- Since Sebald's Austerlitz I have started thinking about moths quite differently. Drmies (talk) 16:25, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
This comment from Mr Wales ought not to be allowed to be buried
No, Mr Wales, I expect you to die!
He knows very well the regard, or more accurately the lack of it, that I hold him in, but the difference between us that I don't keep trying to provoke him into some kind of sanctionable offence. What would be the point anyway, as he's unsanctionable? Eric Corbett 00:37, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not quite. Notice will be served. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:19, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Let it go, Eric. There is no good outcome for you, politically speaking, going toe to toe with The Co-Founder. He chips at you, he looks petty, you look like a good guy for staying away, and slowly the dynamic changes... Carrite (talk) 01:58, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- There is no good outcome for him in going toe to toe with me, so why does he persist in doing it? Eric Corbett 02:25, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- I think we've gone from a block of Jimbo being an embarrassing error by an admin ha ha (akin to deleting the main page), to something that is almost a matter of time. How the mighty are fallen, and by their own fingers, too.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:33, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Time will tell I suppose. Eric Corbett 02:38, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- I think we've gone from a block of Jimbo being an embarrassing error by an admin ha ha (akin to deleting the main page), to something that is almost a matter of time. How the mighty are fallen, and by their own fingers, too.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:33, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- There is no good outcome for him in going toe to toe with me, so why does he persist in doing it? Eric Corbett 02:25, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Let it go, Eric. There is no good outcome for you, politically speaking, going toe to toe with The Co-Founder. He chips at you, he looks petty, you look like a good guy for staying away, and slowly the dynamic changes... Carrite (talk) 01:58, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- There's a pattern of closing down discussion on Mr Wales's talk page whenever an issue inconvenient to his disciples is raised. It's really difficult to see how that can be interpreted as being healthy. Eric Corbett 02:49, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
This is priceless, coming as it does from the crowned emperor of personal attacks. Who true to form is now making himself scarce until the obnoxious comment on his talk page is archived and, he hopes, forgotten. Eric Corbett 12:56, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Your encouragement and talk about dignity (a word that not everybody can use) is not forgotten, see just above, and I found it interesting to follow a link to 2013, - not much changed, but Ched is more active again ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:12, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- I've completely dialled out from Jimbo and what he says now. This is 2015 now, nothing good is going to come of it. Given that he knows that what he says about you is going to provoke a reaction I'd ignore him, but that's me.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:25, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- As they say, DFTT. Montanabw 22:44, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- If I was going to FTT, I would slap {{uw-npa2}} on his talk. Ritchie333 18:26, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Like DO IT Ritchie333! Montanabw 00:21, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Jimbo it seems will always hold a grudge. It's common on here though. Sandy Georgia for whatever reason has always been that way towards me, in fact I don't think I've ever encountered a single situation on here in 8 years with her which has been a positive one. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:04, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Help
Eric and company, I could do with some help. I've been looking at Lips Are Movin and couldn't leave this GA alone. I have come to believe that this should not be a GA but I don't wish to go any further without some solid advice from some legitimate GA writers and reviewers. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 03:02, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- That song is neither "bubblegum pop" nor "doo wop." It is saccharine-sweet hip hop. Carrite (talk) 06:14, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Stop the genre warring! Cullen Let's discuss it 06:17, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- "Trainor stated that the clip did not only comprise of a story and theme " and "the lyrics tell off a cheating, lying, boyfriend" tell you all you need to know about whether or not this is a legitimate GA. Eric Corbett 10:09, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- That last one is mine: an obviously failed attempt to make something out of nothing. "Lyrically, the singer tells of a cheating, lying boyfriend while asserting Trainor's physical assets." That actually suggests the singer is singing about Meghan Trainor. BTW, the "physical assets", that's some cute phrase from I think a Billboard review (cited here in our voice)--the reviewer means "the singer says she has a great ass". Anyone remember the famous "I Like Big Butts" paraphrase wars? Drmies (talk) 16:24, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- It was the "tell off" I was complaining about. Eric Corbett 18:28, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Haha, I didn't even notice that! Sorry. I made thirty copy edits to that article yesterday and only scratched the surface. In the meantime I wrote up Talk:Lips Are Movin/GA2, and found confirmation that the article lacked #4, neutrality, as well. Drmies (talk) 18:49, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Actually, both "tells of" and "tells off" are correct in context, although the latter is a bit informal. I would suggest going Joycean with "tell of(f)". MastCell 19:14, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- But "tells off" means to scold or reprimand, which I don't think is what was meant. Eric Corbett 19:21, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hmmm. I guess I'll have to go listen to the song a few dozen more times to settle this... :P MastCell 20:26, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- I'll try at some point, given my younger daughter is an avid top-40 music lover and commandeers the car radio regularly....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:35, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- That last one is mine: an obviously failed attempt to make something out of nothing. "Lyrically, the singer tells of a cheating, lying boyfriend while asserting Trainor's physical assets." That actually suggests the singer is singing about Meghan Trainor. BTW, the "physical assets", that's some cute phrase from I think a Billboard review (cited here in our voice)--the reviewer means "the singer says she has a great ass". Anyone remember the famous "I Like Big Butts" paraphrase wars? Drmies (talk) 16:24, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Quick Question
Hey, Eric. I'm recently looking at improving some of the Chinese Food articles that are relevant to my interests. I know that one of the B-class requirements is for an article to have "coverage"; this is easy for foods with extensive history, but relevant information can be harder to find for some traditional "folk" dishes that has nothing to note other than perhaps that millions of Chinese people ate them for some centuries.
I just want to know: in your experience, how much - and what kinds of - information would be required before a food article would pass B-class, GA, or FA status? Especially for folk food without lots of history or notability in western culture?
Thanks, and apologies for the trouble.
↢ RemorA ↣ 20:16, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Have you tried looking at other B rated food articles to compare with? That is usually pretty helpful. Cassianto 20:36, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
- I'm afraid you'll have to forgive me, but given the way I've been treated here over the years, and am still being treated, I'm in no frame of mind to help anyone with anything. Perhaps Jimbo Wales might care to help? Eric Corbett 23:28, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Kazakh profanity
I thought some of the people here might be interested in this one, should it be deleted? The AFD needs some wider input. I reckon it should be deleted asap, words like "амбас " might reduce the 13% female to just one. :-).♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:25, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- Also, Eric, at the risk of sounding like a grandfather, please don't comment in that WER thread anymore--the point was valid and has served its purpose, but someone is going to read it all wrong and throw you in front of the bus. And poking Jimbo is poking the bear; y'all should just stop poking each other altogether. He may be an oxen and you may be a gadfly, but if his big ole tail swats you we're all worse off. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 19:08, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- "Someone" may do as they please. Eric Corbett 19:31, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- I'm sorry. Drmies (talk) 22:15, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- I'm fundamentally opposed with every fibre of my being to these prohibitions on discussing certain issues that ArbCom has become all too ready to hand out for the sake of a quiet life. So "Someone" will just have to live with that. Eric Corbett 22:24, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- I'm sorry. Drmies (talk) 22:15, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
WikiProject Editor Retention
I didn't see your name on the members list. Believe me when I say that one of the individuals who offers the most help for newer reviewers would be a very welcome addition. John Carter (talk) 23:24, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not much of a joiner John, and given recent events I'll not be doing very much more helping. Every day it's just more and and more provocative BS, even from our God king himself. Eric Corbett 23:29, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- Remember you're talking to a guy who retired from the project a year ago here as a result of dealing with someone who even the arbs in the relevant case called a serious SPA issue (having edited a total of 3 closely related articles in 8 years) and indicated was a serious POV pusher, whom I have basically been stalked by since then. And I obviously agree that the comments made by others there were themselves more than a bit out of line - Buster seemed to say the same thing in his comments. But, as a former Biography project A-Class reviewer, I know that there ain't that many good reviewers, and good reviewers are one of the things which probably help keep editors who get their articles reviewed around. We could definitely use some knowledgeable input in that regard. John Carter (talk) 23:34, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- I'd go so far as to say that the lack of good reviewers at all levels is a significant factor in editor retention. We all know how it feels to work your butt off on an article, submit it at GA, and then see it ignored for months. Eric Corbett 23:40, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not usually a fan of cups and contests on here, but the GA Cup has been reasonably well behaved and helped reduce the backlog down a bit, so hopefully it's got better. The worst thing about working on an article then submitting it to GA is keeping it at GA level in the queue while a horde of rampaging IPs come along and try and bugger it up - for music articles this usually involves "in popular culture" or musical genre warring. Ritchie333 17:19, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- That's a widespread problem, not unique to music articles. Consider that flytrap Notable persons section in pretty much every township article for instance. Eric Corbett 17:52, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not usually a fan of cups and contests on here, but the GA Cup has been reasonably well behaved and helped reduce the backlog down a bit, so hopefully it's got better. The worst thing about working on an article then submitting it to GA is keeping it at GA level in the queue while a horde of rampaging IPs come along and try and bugger it up - for music articles this usually involves "in popular culture" or musical genre warring. Ritchie333 17:19, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- I'd go so far as to say that the lack of good reviewers at all levels is a significant factor in editor retention. We all know how it feels to work your butt off on an article, submit it at GA, and then see it ignored for months. Eric Corbett 23:40, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
- Remember you're talking to a guy who retired from the project a year ago here as a result of dealing with someone who even the arbs in the relevant case called a serious SPA issue (having edited a total of 3 closely related articles in 8 years) and indicated was a serious POV pusher, whom I have basically been stalked by since then. And I obviously agree that the comments made by others there were themselves more than a bit out of line - Buster seemed to say the same thing in his comments. But, as a former Biography project A-Class reviewer, I know that there ain't that many good reviewers, and good reviewers are one of the things which probably help keep editors who get their articles reviewed around. We could definitely use some knowledgeable input in that regard. John Carter (talk) 23:34, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Enforcement request notice
I have made an enforcement request against you at AE - Eric Corbett. Lightbreather (talk) 00:00, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- What a surprise. Hopefully it will result in you being banned. Eric Corbett 00:34, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
I do not often get to demonstrate how much I am in your corner. I add my hope to your hope. I live for the day LB would fly away on her broom. (Have I said lately I am a female editor...?) All the best, Fylbecatulous talk 18:02, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- The strange thing is that I've collaborated with loads of female editors on articles, probably more females than males, yet not a single one has ever complained about the the way I've treated them or interacted with them. The only females who've complained about me are those I've never come across and I wouldn't know from Adam. Eric Corbett 18:10, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- Eric Corbett, you and I had never interacted until July 2014 when this happened at WT:AN:
- When I complained about it, you started following me around to harass me whenever I talked about civility. So you see that although perhaps many women have had the pleasure of collaborating with you, I have not. That doesn't negate the fact that you've collaborated with women, or that I've collaborated with men, but please don't try to pass yourself off as a victim. You've done your share of being uncivil, and that's a fact. Lightbreather (talk) 19:13, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- The strange thing is that I've collaborated with loads of female editors on articles, probably more females than males, yet not a single one has ever complained about the the way I've treated them or interacted with them. The only females who've complained about me are those I've never come across and I wouldn't know from Adam. Eric Corbett 18:10, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
What you're going through at the moment, is something I've been through. Your best course of action, is to remain silent on the events. GoodDay (talk) 17:27, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- That's certainly a course of action, but is it the best? What happens if we're all silent? Silence is often considered to be a tacit admission of guilt. Eric Corbett 17:33, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- When you're under an Arb restriction, you're generally viewed as guilty until proven innocent. Best to let others defend you at times like this. GoodDay (talk) 17:41, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- I think you're generally viewed as being guilty, full stop. Eric Corbett 17:48, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- When you're under an Arb restriction, you're generally viewed as guilty until proven innocent. Best to let others defend you at times like this. GoodDay (talk) 17:41, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Editor Retention discussion
|
The Purple Star | |
| I am appalled at the recent developments since I logged off yesterday, and honestly think the profound overreactions of someone who, apparently, has a history of such overreactions have led to your deciding, not unreasonably, that that person seems to have come to the conclusion that they are able to request the equivalent of the death penalty for jaywalking. I can understand wanting to put as much space between yourself and such profoundly overemotional and self-righteous individuals, and, honestly, should have done the same thing myself a bit over a year ago, before the arbitration that led to my very temporary retirement. I hope that you don't let the idiots get you down too much as a result of these most recent developments. John Carter (talk) 17:22, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
- Thanks John. What's happened though is pretty much what I thought would happen with that "broadly construed" nonsense that ArbCom is so fond of, which is why I've been declining invitations to get involved with articles on female subjects. It's just manna from heaven for the Sandsteins of this project. Eric Corbett 17:29, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
January 2015
If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the ] or ]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. Sandstein 18:19, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted a procedure instructing administrators as follows: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" ). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."
- I think you ought to extend your block to 72 hours, as I don't edit on Mondays. Eric Corbett 18:24, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- That doesn't strike me as a reason that would justify extending a block. Sandstein 18:38, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- Does anything ever strike you? Eric Corbett 18:41, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- That doesn't strike me as a reason that would justify extending a block. Sandstein 18:38, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- I would consider the block to be inappropriate, given that far more admins voiced dissent against the block than supported it. Obvious supervote is obvious. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 18:48, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
- Sandstein has no "supervote", he just thinks that he does. His next step of course will be to restrict access to my talk page. That might be a mistake on his part though, because there's always the possibility that I might launch into a profane and vitriolic attack on him and anyone who believes that he is anything other than what I believe him to be. Eric Corbett 19:02, 25 January 2015 (UTC)