Misplaced Pages

User talk:Bishonen: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:39, 28 June 2008 editBishonen (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators80,275 editsm →Blonde bison: this is an obsessively tiny edit← Previous edit Revision as of 16:07, 29 June 2008 edit undoBishonen (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators80,275 edits short breakNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
{{NoAutosign}} {{wikibreak}}
{{nobots}}

<div class="boilerplate metadata" id="I used to be an administrator at Misplaced Pages" style="{{divstyleblue}}"> <center>'''I used to be an administrator at Misplaced Pages'''</center>

I used to be an administrator at Misplaced Pages, and an enthusiastic content contributor, but after a head-on encounter with the Arbitration Committee around Christmas 2007, I'm neither (although I keep ]). If you like, see links by , , , and ; but I can't say I recommend anybody to dive into the sour and incurable old business. Thanks to all friends and sympathisers for the lovely messages of encouragement which they posted throughout those troubles, with special thanks to my pretty ]. There are a lot of great people here. Peace. ] | ] 22:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC).

</div>
{|class="greytable" style="background-color:#F8FCFF"
| width="29%"|]
| width="5%"|
| width="32%"|]
| width="5%"|
| ]
|-
! align="center"|Bishonen is semi-retired.
|
! align="center"|The ] ''Ursus americanus''.
|
! align="center"|The ] flutterer.
|-
| width="29%"|]
| width="5%"|
| width="32%"|]
| width="5%"|
| ]
|-
! align="center"|The ] ].
|
! align="center"|The ] flower.
|
! align="center"|The ] arctic balloon.
|}
<br style="clear:both" />

{| cellpadding=3 cellspacing=0 style="float:left;text-align:center; border:solid 1px blue; background:rgb(235,250,244);margin=5"
| align=center|Bookmarks'''<br>]
|-
|
]
<br>
]
]
]
<br>
]
]
]
<br>
<br>
<br>
]
|}
<br>
<br>

{| cellpadding=3 cellspacing=0 style="float:right;text-align:center; border:solid 1px blue; background:rgb(255,240,253);margin=5"
| align=center|Talk archives'''<br>]
|-
|
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
|}
] goldenchip.''']]
<br style="clear:both" />

<!--Any messages below, please-->

==Semi==

It's good to see you (semi) back. I've read and reread ] with great pleasure and am always on the lookout for material of a similar calibre.

Well, join the ranks of unenthusiastic contributors. I've always thought that enthusiastic contribution (or anyway sustained enthusiastic contribution) was a ticket to some sort of breakdown or insanity, so I've been doubtful from the start. It's served me fairly well. (Though I can't claim to have served en:WP all that well. Still, people haven't complained much.)

Another good strategy is to avoid editing on any subject that might appear on the telly in an anglophone country: such subjects attract energetic nitwits.

Please edit as sporadically as you wish, and enjoy yourself. -- ] (]) 16:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

== RFAR comment ==

I've moved (not ''re''moved, obviously) your comment on the request for clarification on the IRC case to the "statements" section, but did not merge it with your previous one for clarity. You don't need to worry that it'll get less attention because it's not sitting in the Arb's section, I'm pretty sure FT2 at the very least was expecting/waiting for it and will read it regardless of where it lies. &mdash;&nbsp;]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> for the Arbitration Committee, 17:20, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
:The way it's phrased doesn't make any sense in the place you moved it to. You could at least have left a note stating that you moved it. As for FT2 reading it, it's not a letter to him! It's explicitly aimed at all the ''other'' arbs. A good day's work, Coren (not). :-( ] | ] 17:56, 27 March 2008 (UTC).
::You are, of course, welcome to edit your own comment to edit the reference to its location&mdash; I moved it because where you had posted it was not appropriate, but I also would not take it upon myself to modify something you wrote. &mdash;&nbsp;]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 18:08, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
:::FGS just link to it before we are all banned for God know what crime telling the truth is. ] (]) 18:11, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

== Justanother ==

I was under the impression that community consensus is always in favor of a ban whenever a disruptive user here escalates to cross-wiki disruption. I could be wrong, though ... ]] 19:09, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
:I regret how this turned out, but Justanother threw themself overboard with the antics at WikiNews and the socking here. Sorry. ] <sup>]</sup> 19:14, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
::The fat lady ain't been heard from yet. Keep an eye on AN, Jehochman. ] | ] 19:18, 30 March 2008 (UTC).
:::I've always pictured you as trim. ] <sup>]</sup> 19:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Are you aware that Justanother has posted a total of eight formal block review requests for his last two blocks, all of which were denied? Good luck with him, although I'm very disappointed with parts of your statement. <font face="Verdana">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 20:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

==Chinchilla party!==
]
<center>Let's dance! ] 01:06, 31 March 2008 (UTC)</center>

Hello little chinchillazillas, come party in 'Zilla pocket! Is El Commandante birthday? ] '']'' 13:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC).<br>
:A very merry ] to me!
::''To who?''
:::To me!
::::''Oh you!''
:::::A very merry ] to you.
::::''Who me?''
:::Yes, you!
::''Oh, me!''
:] 21:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


== The good old days! ==

You might be interested to read this: a damnation of our spiteful and malevolent Arbcom, with which I completely concur. It puts things rather as they are - a rarity on Misplaced Pages these days. ] (]) 19:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

:Yes. Did you notice it's by Geogre, quoted from his talkpage? Geogre has just finished up the indictment that he has been writing there, by request, over the past few days. Seems Kosebamse is collecting the definitive anthology on his own talk. Not a bad idea. ] | ] 21:27, 6 April 2008 (UTC).
::::Yes, isn't it clever of Geogre to be so analytical. What a pity are the Arbs are so hell bent on acheiving their own agendas that they are prepared to stoop to such low levels to acheive their aims. If they had one fraction of Geogre's brain they would not be held in such contempt.] (]) 22:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
::::: Did Geogre or you yourself try running for arbcom? (I can't recall). Heya folks, btw. :-) --] (]) 14:09, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
::Yes, we did, and very well we did too, as you well know; and it's a great pity for the project we are not on it, as there would be less chatting and a great deal more dedication. ] (]) 14:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
::: I was less crazy and didn't run. :) No chance of that happening again anytime soon? --] (]) 15:12, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

What might be useful is a discussion of what the best attributes of an arbcom would be. I will presume that we don't want everyone to be clones of each other - independent thought is always best. But is having factions and different 'types' on arbcom good in the long run or not? Arbcom has been running for several years now. Have some Arbcoms been better then others, or not? If so or if not, why so or why not? (Horrible sentence, but you know what I mean). We could also discuss whether "short and sweet" (decisive) or "long and discursive" (trying to please everyone), is good or bad for an arbitrator. The answer is, of course, a mixture of both, applied in the right circumstances. Does the current arbcom get the balance right? ] (]) 11:41, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

You know what would be a good idea? A discussion of the selected/elected nonsense. When I ran, I was not picked. In fact, for the empty seats, two or three people with higher votes had to be overlooked. ("Oh, but the formula of oppose/support*log(Namespace edits/articles written) did not favor you" may go where all casuistry ends up, so far as I'm concerned.) When members are selected by one person, that one person becomes all-important to those selected and to the shape of the project in general. Indeed, the ''reason they are selected'' remains private and a question of "judgment," and yet the basis of this judgment is obscure. What becomes vital is that the one person know what's going on in every corner of the project, needs to be very well informed, and needs to be informed by ''his own eyes'' and with no interference. (Needless to say, I believe that such awareness would lead to selections that look very like the votes, and the more we have seen selections at variance with the votes, the more we have seen "bad" arbs.) ] (]) 12:51, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
::What might be of more use, is if the arbs bothered to evaluate a case first rather than dismiss it in a hurry before considering fully. ] (]) 12:54, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

== oh .... ==

I had no idea you'd had these issues, Bishonen. I was about to ask your advice about changes I've made to the FAC-instructions, so if you're still around, I'd be pleased to discuss them.

I do hope you come out of semi-retirement, because you're one of the editors I've most admired. ] ] 12:31, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

== Giano ==

Giano is frighteningly insightful, which is why he's been targeted so much. --I offered as well because anything that helps to deflect trolling from Giano helps Misplaced Pages. <span style="font-variant:small-caps"><font color="#800080">] § ]/]</font></span> 16:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
:::Thanks for the concerns, but there will always be trolling at me, because my opinions touch too many nerves and threaten too many people's cosy wiki-lives. I am quite happy to take the flak for that myself. ] (]) 16:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

==Barnstar==

{{barnstar}}. You were nice to me when I was new and unconfident. Very sorry to hear that you have had difficulties. ] (]) 13:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
<br style="clear:both" />
::Thanks, Judith. :-) ] | ] 13:52, 23 April 2008 (UTC).

== Hi there ==

Nice to see you back, and thanks for your note. I'm still weak-opposing the ''est'' FAC. I find it very hard to engage with the writing and the topic. It has improved, but I've just had another quick look and see yet more mediocre prose. I think it should have been withdrawn and overhauled some time ago. That goes for quite a modest proportion of FACs—it's a pity that there's such opprobrium connected with the notion of withdrawing and resubmitting after renovation. I think the directors have a hard time keeping the list down to a manageable size. ] ] 13:40, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

==Orthodox Easter==
], "Easter morning prayer in ]", 1891, Oil on canvas, 133x193 cm, , ], ].]]
Hi Bish, as you probably know, this Sunday the Easter also arrived to the ] world. To mark this event and make a small present for you, here is the great piece of one of my favorite Ukrainian painters depicting this event in my homeland as he saw it a little over 100 years ago. Enjoy! --] 07:59, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

:It might be just as interesting that ] (sorry for the horrible spelling) is not far away either, as heathen festivities are so very much en vogue... ] (]) 14:20, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

::Thanks, Irpy, very fine. I note that our ] article completely ignores the ''main'' Valborg tradition—claiming it's lighting bonfires and/or "singing songs of spring" or something like that—well, la di da. I expect you know the main tradition as well as I do, my dear IP. I'm just listening as we speak to the traditional radio interview with a ] specialist in its honour. ] | ] 16:14, 30 April 2008 (UTC).

== Request for recusal ==
As you stated in the March community ban discussion regarding Justanother, you are not an uninvolved party. Your role right now is his mentor and I hope that mentorship is successful. It is incompatible with that role for you to also stand in judgment of him--or, for that matter, of me. When the Tango RFAR opened your conduct struck me as mockery the worst terrorist attack in my country's history--an disaster that my nearest relative barely survived, and over which I went to war. When I expressed my shock at what I hoped was an uncharaceristic lapse of judgement, your reaction had the effect of a direct insult. I hope it was not your intention to give offense, but you did give offense: very much so. With things standing this way, I really don't think it was appropriate for you to act as you did at AE today.

I will continue to follow up on the COFS arbitration case (where I named myself as a party) as I deem appropriate. Adequate follow-up is feasible only for persons who have long experience in the case because the individual you are mentoring has used so many different accounts and IP addresses and has followed another editor across projects. I hold no malice toward your mentoree and hope his contributions improve as much as another party's have; a successful mentorship would be best for everyone. <font face="Verdana">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 16:16, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

:I'm not aware of being JA's mentor. Where does that come from? From Jehochman's suggestion that I might want to mentor JA? Becoming somebody's mentor does take some input from the actual involved parties, I believe. Unblocking an editor does not make me their mentor. I've unblocked quite a few users during my four-year wiki sojourn. Am I the mentor of all of them?

:As for your disgusting attack on me as a terrorist supporter, I was actually thinking that by now you probably had the grace to be ashamed of it. I was prepared to forgive and forget, since you were obviously upset when you made remarks like . But I see that that's not required. Instead, you come to my page to ask me to "recuse" from criticizing whatever you may do? Like that absurd forum-shopping of yours at AE? Pfui! ] | ] 16:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC).
::I have never accused you of being a terrorist supporter; several people had already approached you regarding your unbecoming conduct, and your aggressive response to feedback has been very discouraging. Please review the history and adjust your statement accordingly. <font face="Verdana">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 17:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC


:::Oh, do you think so? For my part I'm careful about what I state. ''You'' might care to read the history and adjust your own wildly inaccurate claims:
:::For your "'''several people had already approached you regarding your unbecoming conduct'''", read:

::::''WaltonOne had approached me'' regarding my manner of requesting arbitration. ''By no means about the WTC tragedy. You'', Durova, were the only person to read a defence of MONGO (the defender of the WTC articles) as "mockery" of what happened on 9/11. You owe me an apology for that heinous and farfetched interpretation, but I don't expect to get one. I'll settle for you keeping your bluster off my page.

:::For your "'''Walton One pointed out the inappropriate ''mockery of a tragedy.'' After ''several days' restraint,'' hoping that Bishonen would reconsider, I thanked him''' , read:

::::Walton One criticized my use of Bishzilla-speak for the purpose of requesting ''a de-sysopping.'' He gave ''no hint of 9/11''. ''After an hour'' (! there's your "several days restraint"), you thanked him.
:::Please adjust your own random claims somewhere, preferably not here. I'm really tired of you and the way you spray accusations around a 360° circle. ] | ] 18:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC).

I find it inconceivable, in view of history, that Durova even utters the words like "unbecoming conduct". This is the utter attack on the commonsense and human intelligence. On top of that, there is this invocation of the terrorism and other stuff which cannot be meant as anything but character assassination. I hear lots of semi-legible riffle that it may be "time" for Durova to apply for her adminship back, that she "suffered" enough, "paid the heavy price" and all that other stuff of this kind. What I find especially startling that stuff along those lines was said even by one sitting arbitrator. "Punished"? How is the desysopping a "punishment"? How is it a bigger deal than a single 24-hr '''block'''.

Yes, people may differ on the propriety of some jokes (Zilla-speak was certainly a joke obvious to anyone) but there is nothing Bishonen ever did that would warrant any words that starts from "unbeco..." It is also clear that Durova did not learn any lessons and remains all involved in sooperseekret activity still failing to realize what was '''really''' wrong with her last debacle. And what was wrong was not a mere judgment error. --] 19:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

==Hmm==
I believe that you may be right. :) But surprising, some date his life at 1693, and there was a publication attributed to a "Benjamin Motte" from 1691. But wait, theres more... he had a father with the same name. Dun dun duuunnnn. :) ] (]) 15:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
:Well, I still don't see him publishing from beyond the grave, father or no father. ] | ] 18:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC).
::One would hope! ] (]) 21:10, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

== Snowed under + thinking about it ==

I've got it in the back of my head, but I'm snowed under in real world work. :-)

--Signing for Sekrit Kim: ], 22:50, 10 May 2008 (UTC).

: Sorry about that ^^;; --] (]) 23:24, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

== RFA Thanks ==

Thanks for your support at my recent Request for adminship. I’ll strive to be the “calm voice” in the future when commenting on challenging issues. I hope you find I live up to your expectations. Best, ] (]) 13:53, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

== Sad that you're gone ==

You were so kind to my alter-ego Murno Gladst when it was detected that his article page was not from the realm of reality. He has since died, and I see that the user page you so kindly set up for him (instead of tagging him for deletion) has also gone away. Bishonen, it is evident that you are a diligent and kind person, and I'm sad that you are no longer with us. , ]
: Er, thanks... but who are you, Ravaged? The Knight Who Fears the Seafood? ] | ] 17:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC).

== Your recommendation ==

Hello Bishonen,

Looking for positive suggestions. What do you recommend? I'm confused because I thought I was doing what is right. Coaching is welcome...Cheers, ] (]) 00:12, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
:You will have gathered that the v-word is wrong for content disputes and/or good faith edits. It's actually a personal attack. I feel so strongly about it that I created that "vandalism warning warning" template (admittedly a bit of a joke), even though it's not in my nature to write templates. Also, you kind of mark yourself by making inappropriate vandalism accusations (and by ]), because newbies typically do that.

:It's easy to say "don't"; I can understand that you want suggestions about what to ''do''. I'm afraid I don't have the time to review DreamGuy's recent editing, so I'll focus on the redirect of ] that you refer to on his talkpage. (I'm kind of busy, but please let me know if there's some other managable/small-size spat that you'd particularly like me to look at.) Checking the History, I'm bound to say that I see you edit warring just as much as DG is (which casts a bit of a strange light on Arcayne's current edit summary about how many times DG has been reverted—those reverts were ''all done by you'', and you're skirting the 3RR just as much as DG is..!) Nobody's discussing on the talkpage: not DG, not you, not Arcayne. Nobody at all since March. My first suggestion would be that you write "see talk" and not "vandalism" in your edit summaries, and then write an argument on the talkpage against redirecting the page. Then you'd have the moral high ground, and some basis for criticizing DG, if he doesn't reply (though in my experience he usually does). Best wishes, ] | ] 10:41, 18 May 2008 (UTC). P.S. Se also my post on Arcayne's page.
::Bishonen - is it permissable for a single editor to constantly redirect an article against the concensus of several editors concerned with the page without mentioning anything about his or her reasons on appropriate sub-section on the Talk page? Is it permissible for the editor to do so to this day after day, week after week, month after month without putting his or her reasons there? There is a subsection in the Talk page of the article entitled "Regarding the claim that this is a content fork" in which 100% of the editors answer in the negative. DG has never put his opposing case there but has serially re-directed the article against the conscensus. Is he justified in doing so for as long as he likes, day after day, without putting his case in the subsection entitled "Regarding the claim that this is a content fork"? ] (]) 11:31, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
:::Thanks for the advice, Bishonen. I guess I did kinda screw the pooch there by not creating a discussion topic and instead expecting others to react to the revert and create the topic themselves. As for tag-teaming, I know it may not count for much, but I would have undone the redirect even if I had not received the message from BH, as I don't think the two are the same topic. If anything ] is a ''subset'' of the ], and not the other way around, but both are distinct enough topics to stand on their own. This has been pointed out before, in both articles' discussion pages, but I think DG has consistently disagreed with this consensus. I don't mind a change in consensus, but it has to be built, and not enforced by reverts. I've learned that lesson the hard way myself. The reason that I didn't direct BH to the same quote from 3RR was because he seemed to be enforcing the consensus as it currently stands, whereas DG wasn't, and wasn't being very courteous in doing so. Also, he seemed to be at ease with dispensing with BRD; he offered the edit, but didn't choose to defend it through discussion.
:::Thanks a lot for your comments, though. Your point is made - I should have brought the topic to the discussion page myself. :) - ] ] 12:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
::Thank you for responding Bishonen. I have been reading several of the essays and policies to try to gain better insight. I am confused where you say that all those reverts were me..I reverted twice only on the Whitechapel Murders Article. I did reverts on ] but not more than twice for any particular incident. I do understand that you don't have to commit all 3 reverts..sometimes, continued use of 2 could qualify. I can see that you believe that there hasn't been communication between the editors...awkwardly, there has. The long-standing continued discussion of the Whitechapel Murders article occurs on the talk page for Jack the Ripper as well as the article talk page for Whitechapel Murders. It exists in several threads on the current ] page as well as in the page archives. In particular the current thread on New edits which is where we were hoping for open communication. His redirect essentially destroys a whole article, somewhat akin to page blanking, and as yet, he is the ONLY editor to have decided that this needs to happen. Others, myself included, believe that it should exist. He moves against consensus. Asking for help on Arcayne's page was something that I did because I knew that many other editors simply must not be aware of the situation..I knew what consensus was and to me DG was page blanking. I wanted to ask an Admin who was aware of this ongoing problem...it takes susbstantial reading following the archives of JTR and other pages such as the one in question. I didn't mean to implicate Arcayne or anybody else.
::The actual words of my reverts are those of Twinkle although I do select "Vandal" when making that choice. I found it odd when I first came onto Misplaced Pages and saw the use of the word "vandal". Having received one of those, I know it can hurt..still on my talk page. I will try to remember what you have told me. Please let me know what you think after seeing the current discussion. Thank you. ] (]) 13:07, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
:::Sorry, Berean Hunter, I should have checked the number of your reverts, instead of hastily going by your words about having reached your "revert limit". However... please note (Colin, too) that my comment above was a reply in good faith to your request for "coaching" about your own conduct. My assumption has been that that's genuinely what you want from me, rather than an opportunity for complaining about DreamGuy. I guess maybe it's a bit of both. As I said above, I'm chary of reviewing DG's behaviour as a whole, because I don't have time to take a good overview of it at this time. Generally speaking, though, I don't doubt that he has been a rude bugger... he usually is. Anyway. Since you mention the thread "New edits" especially, what's your problem with it? As far as I can see, it ''has'' opened communication. In fact it was DG that opened communication with it. One last piece of "coaching," if you want it: you're not the first user I've seen blaming Twinkle, or templates, etc, for his/her own wording, But you are fully responsible for every word you post. (Please see the pink box at the top of ].) If the standard Twinkle edit summary, or, say, the wording of a template, don't fit exactly what you want to convey, just don't use them.
:::Arcayne, I appreciate your frankness in taking stock of your own actions. That's sometimes no fun, but probably the best learning process available to us as editors. Regards, all. ] | ] 20:04, 18 May 2008 (UTC).
::Yes, sorry, the ambiguity error is mine. My self-imposed personal revert limit is 2; hopefully a built-in safety mechanism to keep me out of trouble..but it doesn't seem to have worked (insert smile here). I didn't have a problem with the thread on "New edits", you had stated that we weren't communicating..I was just showing you for your benefit that we had been. He never responded that day but just came back trying to force the edits...but no I'm not wanting to complain about DG...respectfully speaking, I don't believe that you, I, or any of the other contributors involved will be able to remedy the editing environment at JTR. I believe that solution involves getting more eyes reading through what has been happening there..new wikipedians, existing editors, and yes some Admins, too. The current group appear heavily browbeaten and wearied and have gained my sympathy for it. The article needs more contributors...or observers even. After all, if any of us speak up..we get accused of something...so it would have to be outsiders looking in. I hope for better things there but it has been unhealthy for months.
::I'm not blaming Twinkle..quite the contrary. I think the term vandal is spot-on & still applies to him through his edits...his actions & words speak for themselves and in time others will see for themselves if they study & analyze his editing behavior. I have. ].
::I watched him do it again today but did nothing.
::I know you are pressed for time but the invitation is there if you would like to comment/coach on my general editing etc. I am trying to learn from those who afford the opportunity. Cheers, ] (]) 00:05, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

==]==
Hi there, I've written this article as an attempt to introduce the articles on ], ] and ] in a completely non-technical and approachable way. I was looking for some good editors with no background in science to look this over and advise me on how it could be improved. Would you have time to help with this? All the best ] (]) 16:38, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

:Mmm... no, I wouldn't really. But such an appealing little task... and what a handsome animation you've got there... I'll send ], who has no background in ''anything'', to make some suggestions in the introduction. Please just revert if his edits are ''too'' stupid. He never takes offense. ] | ] 18:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC).
::P. S. I'll try to send him back for more later, but he's grading exams. An appropriate task! ] | ] 19:03, 20 May 2008 (UTC).

== nomination for deletion of WP:ZN ==

Hum, I was reading at ] how ] was not amused that no one thought of warning him, and I thought "''surely Bishonen is aware of this MfD, right?''". Right? --] (]) 18:01, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
:Wrong. Thank you. ] | ] 18:58, 26 May 2008 (UTC).

== Come off it ==

<small>From ]</small>

Thatcher, how do you mean "dispute it elsewhere"? Where would that be? As Ryan points out, it's a closed case. Seriously, ''where'' are you advising Giano to dispute it? Mmm? ] | ] 19:05, 26 May 2008 (UTC).

:If the argument is that the AC should be ignored, then anywhere that isn't an AC page would be more appropriate. If a statement that a remedy is to be ignored must be made, I would suggest a user page as the appropriate location. ] <sup>]</sup> 19:47, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

::Like ? Giano removed that with . Should he really have to put it back? Maybe I should go and catch up with what has been happening, or is this just more of the same? ] (]) 19:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
:::::::Oh please Carcharoth just ignore them - they are not worth it. There is little to choose between the lot of them. We shall have ], her ] and that ] here soon, all full of wronged righteousness. The Arbcom is now surplus to requirements, ignore them - I do. ] (]) 20:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

:::He doesn't ''have'' to do anything. I'm merely suggesting that that would probably be the place to put it, if you really do have to make this kind of protest. I personally would not put it in that big box because I think coloured boxes of this sort are ugly, but that's beside the point.
:::I was attempting (seriously) to answer Bishonen's (serious) question. ] <sup>]</sup> 19:57, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
::::Thank you. No, Giano doesn't ''have'' to do anything, and nothing he does is of interest to the AC; hence presumably his frustration. If, against appearances (with your colored boxes), you're interested (seriously) in any (serious) discussion I might offer, is my shot at it. It's in fact on a userpage (this one). I bet ''that'' was widely read ! <sarcasm>. Only ''one'' arbitrator (Paul) has even spoken to me (in private e-mail) after the case. After Kirill called me a "problem user" during it. I'd be ashamed if that indifference was mine. I expect it's such selective deafness that is provoking Giano into editing arbitration pages the way he is. It seems to be the only way to stop our top brass in the middle of a yawn. It does not become you to take the attitude you do, Smoddy. ] | ] 23:02, 26 May 2008 (UTC).
:::::Hey, I'm not quite sure why I deserved this. I'm not exactly sure what the behaviour that is unbecoming is. If it is suggesting that making edits that one knows full well will not stand should not be made, then I stand by that behaviour. Beyond that, I really don't know. As it happens, I had actually read your comments before, and to a certain extent agree with them; some of the comments from members of the committee during that case were not remotely acceptable.
:::::I stand by my (serious) advice not to engage in wholly futile edit-warring and by my long-standing belief that you, Bishonen, are one of the best. I struggle to reconcile this with your strident criticism of me. ] <sup>]</sup> 08:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
::::::::And I'm trying to reconcile your professions of esteem with your indifference to my plight during the arbitration, and your unconcern with the "not remotely acceptable" comments made by arbitrators. An unconcern admittedly widespread in the community and in the committee itself. What I expect of people varies, though. ] | ] 10:39, 27 May 2008 (UTC).
:::::::::I don't believe I was aware of the "problem user" comment until just now... I limited my involvement in that case to discussion of general principles, rather than specific users and issues, on the grounds that, having been on a lengthy break from Misplaced Pages, I didn't know enough about recent history. If I did not comment, it was due to fear of making a boob of myself, not to indifference. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
:::::::In response to "''I'm not quite sure why I deserved this''" - you don't, but I'm afraid Sam, you are seen now as part of an Arebcom which is a living disgrace to the project. It's actually not your fault, especially as you are not really one of them, but sadly mud sticks. Perhaps it's time for those connected with this so called Arbcom to come clean, walk away and/or publicly denounce them - that way some atom of respect may be restored. ] (]) 09:39, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
::::::::I'm not in the habit of denouncing people. Even if I did think the committee was as corrupted as you make out (and I don't, even though I do think there are non-trivial issues that need to be addressed), my method of going about effecting change would be more subtle than such dramatic statements. I'm far too English for that! If people really associate me closely with the committee, they really should look more closely at my opinions. There are many fundamental matters where I disagree with both the committee corporately and its members individually, even while I think they are good people trying to do good things. I don't tend to see conflict in black-and-white, on Misplaced Pages or in meatspace. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
:::I'm afraid that is why nothing will change. I see a "Gang of 7" who have behaved in a thouroughly disgraceful fashion, they are a complete waste of space and should be removed before they harm the project further - they passed resolutions they had no intention of even pretending to implement, they are liars! Your subtle methods of acheiving change have merely kept them where they are - if that is the "English" way - then the English have certainly taken a turn for the worse. You want to keep liars in power then continue as you are doing. ] (]) 13:28, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
]

==G'day Bish....==

I took this photo the other day, and ended up swinging by here earlier for no particular reason, and noticed that you've got a similar one - so I thought I'd make a gift of it!

I hope you're aware that I think your treatment at the hands of the arbcom is absolutely deplorable, and offer you both sympathy, and sincere gratitude for the kind words you sent my way the few time we crossed each other's paths... of the 4 people who issued me with indefinite blocks, you're definitely my favourite!!

Hope you like the pic, and hope you're well! cheers, ] (]) 11:40, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

:Thankee, very pretty. The ones at the top of the page are Bleeding Hearts—or as it might be bleedin' hearts—from an Anonymous Friend. (Hello there, L.) What are yours, PM? Bleedin' trumpets? ] | ] 13:55, 27 May 2008 (UTC).

== YES!! You're back! ==

Bish, this has been a damned lonely place without you here. I too gave back the mop and bucket, changed my username and, well, here I am. Back for more.

It is beyond good to have you back. Welcome, welcome, welcome. The former "Lucky 6.9" in his new guise of --] (]) 16:16, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
:Lucky! Hugs! ] | ] 17:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC).

Back at ya. For some reason, my e-mail keeps kicking back the verification, so my e-mail isn't on file here nor has it been. Doggone, I wish I could send you a PM with my info, but alas, this is a wiki and not a bulletin board. Hugs, squeezes, everything good. --] (]) 18:10, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
:Ha, you need a copy of '']'' to know who's who anymore. I'm glad you're back, Lucky, and hoping you are luckier. ] (]) 17:14, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

LOL! Bish, you are the best. I don't think I'll need renomination (I got it back once before), but I don't want it at this time...but if I ever change my mind, there ain't no better friend on one's corner than Bishzilla! Crunch poor old Tokyo beneath your tootsies and we'll talk soon. Yours, --] (]) 22:33, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


::Bish dear, are you truly ''back''? (holding breath, crossing little doggy toes) ]<sup>]</sup> 00:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
::: Arf arf, little yap-yap, nice to see ''you'' back. Well, I comment on stuff in project space from time to time. Didn't actually intend to... but if I see as it might be a lynching in progress... I guess that's the "semi" part of being semi-retired. But as far as writing content, the wikipedia juice has run out of me. :-( ] | ] 12:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC).
::::Well, Bishonen, I hope that the wiki-juice for content writing comes back too, because you were always a mighty fine content writer. But maybe you're out there writing a book, or something else worthy of your abilities, instead. If you're not, you should be. -- ] 17:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
::::: Too, too kind! ] | ] 20:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC).
::::::Nonsense! It is very accurate. WikiPedant seems to have an excellent grasp of your skills and the ability to communicate same. I strongly second the sentiment! ]<sup>]</sup> 23:27, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

== Thank you ==

The only thing that would have meant more would be a support from zilla. :) '']'' <small>(])</small> 00:54, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

:Ha, I thought so! The only reason you've become such a good editor is you're dead scared of the dino! ] | ] 06:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC).

::].'' ] ] '']'' 06:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC).

:::Little Stupid Support ! ] '']'' 06:47, 30 May 2008 (UTC).

::::What happened to "Little Stupid go splat!"? :-) ] (]) 07:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
::::::: Better Little Stupid go <b><font color="lime">''splash!''</font></b> ! ] (]) 23:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC).
::::::] too sentimental to leave well enough alone... ] '']'' 08:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC).

:::::Teeheehee... thanks zilla (I'm scared to say that, I think...). :) '']'' <small>(])</small> 08:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== Glad to see you are back ==

<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">]

]] has smiled at you! Smiles promote ] and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing! <br /> <small>''Smile at others by adding {{tls|Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.''</small>
</div><!-- Template:smile -->

== Re:You lookin at me? ==

Gah, sorry, one too many "they're"s without paying attention to what they would be referring to. I need to pay more attention to that. I meant the redirects, not the users. All users are useful, even the semi-retired ones.--] ] 19:32, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
: :-) ] | ] 20:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC).

== Email ==

Hi, Bish, I've emailed you. :-) ] ] 01:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

== Civ 4 ==

My ] is done. It's pretty ] and windy. My plan is to write a very short, declarative page, but this is the analysis -- meant to be analysis -- that serves as the rationale for that. I blame no one for skipping this essay (it is long) and waiting for the new one. ] (]) 15:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

:Hmm, well it was an interesting read, but that last paragraph sounded a bit vindictive ''':''') ] (]) 16:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
::No, of course not! That last paragraph is ''purely'' hypothetical. It's no more true than the psycho-dramas. I can't believe that anyone would think that it's anything but light hearted exaggeration or that anyone would ''ever'' say such a thing about ''any'' of the people who serve Misplaced Pages in such a ''noble'' and ''important'' way. None of them even ''could'' be held in reproach, given the utterly ''sober'' and ''intelligent'' manner in which they are (s)elected. ] (]) 20:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
:::Well said Geogre, I agree with pretty much everything in that essay. '']'' <small>(])</small> 08:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

== Resolve ==
I apologize for my rudeness to you and have already tried to make amends with WBardwin. Best --] (]) 03:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
:Thank you very much, I'm glad to hear it. ] | ] 07:16, 3 June 2008 (UTC).

== :O ==

<nowiki>*huggles*</nowiki> -- ] (]) 00:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
:'Ello little Gurchzilla, what smiley trying to say? So clever is finally now ! Feel free post congratulations below. Ignore little 'shonen, was useless admin always. ] '']'' 22:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC).
::All bow to Admin /zilla. Hail Hail Her Adminship. We are not worthy!! --] (]) 22:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
::: Right. 'Zilla keep ''telling'' little users ! ] '']'' 23:35, 6 June 2008 (UTC).
::::Oh, give it a rest, dino. Get off my page! Shoo! ] | ] 23:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC).

==RE:talk page==
I got your note and responded on my talk page. Good to keep an eye on edits. I looked at the page history and a bit of your profile on here and see that you developed that page. Good! Talk about one of the most ignored subjects in the humanities. I also saw that you edit a number of other pages relevant to late seventeenth century drama and theatre history. Keep fighting the good fight. Anyway, please take a look at my rationale for the changes I made and see which you can keep. Some of those points are picky, to be sure, but not all. I'm new to editing wikipedia pages. In the future, what should I do? Citation needed tag? Note on the discussion page? Any advice is welcome. ] (]) 11:11, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

:Thanks for the helpful response. I put a very short response on my talk page. I'll definitely check out your other articles. Sorry to hear you don't think the page is very good anymore. Balancing the repertory and theatrical context with the need for brevity is a serious challenge, but I think you have done a good job. ] (]) 22:51, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

==Potentially Interesting==
I've been looking at discussion pages a lot to see how editors work out what a page should look like. Some are obviously more orderly than others. I went to the ] page expecting a blood bath, but the editors were pretty civil. Check out , though. Wow. Who knew people could get that bent out of shape over a literary critic? <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

==New section==
I did successfully post a request for it being archived, probably what led to edit conflict when you tried to archive! --] (]) 22:45, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
:What I'm saying here. Well, you posted twice. ] | ] 22:47, 17 June 2008 (UTC).

== The other side of the coin ==

Bishonen, would you have time to look at ]? ] (]) 10:54, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
:Well... briefly. The two cases aren't exactly the same, though I can understand that both users are upset. :-( I've replied on ANI, and passed the issue on to MBisanz. ] | ] 19:29, 18 June 2008 (UTC).
::This case is no different if you look at it, See my comments. ] (]) 21:45, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

== For your consideration ==

My lady, have you ever encountered a prehistoric monster in a meek and humble mood? If you ever run into trouble with one of these creatures, perhaps you should just try to befuddle it with courteous phrases? Respectfully, ] (]) 11:44, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
:Haha! Look at her scratching her head and trying to look wise. Useful trick! Well done, Bamse. ] | ] 13:44, 19 June 2008 (UTC).

== Re-Blueboy's block ==
]
That guy blocked himself a fair few times, trying to up hold wikipedia of course. I noticed that he blocked himself on the 20th of March, quite recent. Accidents? Or is he just a smart alec. Why did you used to be an admin, what happened?

] (]) 01:52, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
:No, those were all bona fide accidents. El C is a good friend of mine. (Compare the piped link for "secretary" in the "I used to be an administrator" box at the top of the page.) As for the admin business, well, the ] pissed me off and ] stole my tools. If you care to read about the events, you'll have to click on the other links in the top box (, , , ). But I think they're depressing rather than interesting events. Anyway... El C is a lovely guy, and a hard-working and highly skilled admin. There's just something... weird, about him and his block button. Regards, ] | ] 08:48, 22 June 2008 (UTC).

Here, have a goldenchip, it's on me! ] 13:44, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
:It's on you sitting, I see! ] | ] 14:48, 25 June 2008 (UTC).
::It took forever, but I found the long, long, l-o-n-g and complete analysis Geogre did. It's in his talk page archives instead of at a subpage -- most recent , I think. Given the '']'' going on now, I thought it worth the effort. ] (]) 15:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
:::I took it a couple of days ago, yes! What, no top feature? ] 07:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
== word usages ==

Hey ''ya''; that's my style, giggle giggle. ] (]) 21:38, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
: Ya talking to me? ] | ] 21:43, 26 June 2008 (UTC).


== Rockpocket ==

Bishonen, I need some advice , as for the first time ever I want to start dispute resolution. The reason for this is a particularly nasty email from Rockpocket, which I reproduce here with his permission:

::"''So you keep saying, but you are not convincing anyone this time. You should see the emails I received gloating over your cock up. Its amazing how many people detest you but are too scared to say anything publicly. I guess that is testament to your power on Misplaced Pages (or their cowardice). But still, twice in one day you got it wrong in a horribly public way. That must be a record.''
::''I have nothing to lose, Giano. I already fucked up big time. Thats the difference now. Even your loyal harpies can't manage to cook up a reason for my tools to be removed without getting it all wrong. Don't you worry though, you will get your wish. I will relinquish them before too long, but when I choose, not when you demand.''
::''In the meantime, you missed the boat with Kb by turning your attentions to me. He is going to continue to edit pseudo-anonymously and there is nothing you can do it stop it. He has already started. Which is a shame, because I expect he finds this whole thing hilarious and is laughing at both of us while we club lumps out of each other.''"

Obviously such a situation cannot be allowed to continue, people are allowing their dislike of me, as Rockpocket says) to cloud their judgement of what is best for the project. What does one do in such a situation? go for RFC or straight to Arbcom, and if so how? Obviously my faith in the Arbcom is at rockbottom - any advice welcome. ] (]) 07:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Can I butt in? First, and foremost, I want to reinstate my advise to avoid corresponding off-line on any Misplaced Pages matters with individuals in whose ethics you cannot be certain. Otherwise, there is a good chance of this who said what game that took place yesterday at Rockpocket's talk. With diffs on-wiki that kind of bullshit does not cut.

I find it humorous that Rockpocket claims lots of private support. I rechecked one IRC log and I find 1=2 boasting "private support" too at IRC when he came there to whine about you and me. Another striking similarity that, perhaps, makes my honest error of confusing 1=2 IRC's rants as Rockpocket's. Their onwiki reactions to Giano-matters are so similar that I could not remember one from the other. I suggest you simply ignore this "private support" claim. It does not matter even whether it is true or false. Anything that happened off-wiki is simply invalid as far as the Misplaced Pages matters are concerned.

My beef with Rockpocket's act is not even his bad judgment in "permitting" and abusive editor to sock. My beef lies primarily in his handling of this incident. Arrogant posts to an editor's talk with escalating annoyance that evolves to block threats. As if this is not enough, the fellow actually unilaterally blocks an established editor '''indefinitely''' seeing no need to raise the matter at ANI to get some feedback ''first''. Worse, he does not post his block for a review after performing it either and as the ANI thread (started by me) develops to the wide community bemusement, he remains absent from it. This is an outrageously bad way of dealing with a problem and this is why he should not have tools in the opinion of this "loyal harpy". (Sorry again that I was "all wrong" by confusing 1=2 with Rockpocket. I never said that this is a reason good enough for desysop. But indefinite block of an established editor done this way certainly is.)

I would not bother with ArbCom or even less so with an RfC. The latter is always a waste of time. Rockpocket speaks about things remaining in the "record that must be". I fully agree. The record of this kerfuffle will remain in the form of diffs and histories. You can be sure that he will not be blocking people indefinitely for a while. As for the usual bunch of those eager for Giano's head, this will change nothing. But nothing can change them anyway. So, I think it's time to draw some conclusions and a line. --] 08:24, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

== User:Blechnic ==

Hi Bishonen. I see above that you may have other things to occupy you, but would you be able to swing by ]? What seems to have happened is that Blechnic had a run-in with some DYK admins and while not being very civil, was berated for the civility, took offence, and left. I'm trying to point out that what Blechnic was pointing out was more important than the civility issues, but Gatoclass, for one, disagreed. I'm not sure I'm getting my point across. Would you be able to help? ] (]) 11:21, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
:Not sure. Maybe when I get out of the ] six months from now. ] | ] 16:35, 27 June 2008 (UTC).
::In my defence, it's not entirely correct that I felt "that what Blechnic was pointing out was important than the civility issues" - I just felt that the civility issues needed to be ''addressed''. Which is not quite the same thing. ] (]) 16:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

== Plus ca Cheech ==

Ok, if you want to point at my explanation (and rant) about "what happened" at the IRC RfAr, I've now put it at a proper subpage. It's at ]. The Civility essay is too long to be wielded. It's a ''summa civilitas''. We need the movie treatment, and I haven't written that, yet. ] (]) 12:41, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

:Excellent! I don't agree, though, that "In the loss of original old timers and the passionate authors, you are seeing a new paradigm." Misplaced Pages's paradigm has always been to bleed oldtimers. Look at some—any—discussion from six months or a year ago—see the energetic participation there of people you used to know well at one time? And who have dropped out, silently or noisily, since then? Where are the users of yesteryear? Or go back in history to when one of the classic articles starts. Probably that's a version by somebody who dropped out even ''before'' you started editing. I saw one written by Larry Sanger a while ago. There's been something wrong with the paradigm—the project, the structure—since yonks. ] | ] 09:41, 28 June 2008 (UTC).

I agree with you about that, but the question is how many people are ''healed'' of Misplaced Pages and how many are ''sick'' of it when they leave. I remember when people used to get better and leave, but I think there is at least an acceleration, if not a new paradigm, of people getting sicker of the place faster and leaving more. The small beer that used to be the reward for an article has been replaced by a cup of ashes, and a Project to come label, a group on IRC to dismiss, and a group whose power comes from the laying on of hands to decide that the author ''had been'' bad at some past point. ] (]) 11:40, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

==Controversial disappearances==

And what's with the practice of doing something really controversial, then ''seemingly'', almost making it a point not to be around to deal with the immediate fallout? ] 07:36, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
:Oh, people are always mouthing that that's not to be done, and always doing it. Not just "seemingly", either. The time David Gerard blocked Dreamguy and went straight to bed comes to mind. (And was offended when I did his job and took it to ANI.) As for what's with the latest disappearance, just ask the user on his page, if you fancy having a query briskly blanked. ] | ] 09:41, 28 June 2008 (UTC).
::Heh. This section showed up right about the time of FT2's disappearance...I love this place! ] (]) 16:05, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
:::I'm surprised anybody who's been ... exposed to FT2 is surprised. Read down from , for instance. ] | ] 17:37, 28 June 2008 (UTC).

==Blonde bison==
]...I just had myself bleached to be cool...it's the new trend here in bisonland...--] 15:13, 28 June 2008 (UTC)]]
]
Hello there, White Buffalo, this is ] speaking (snoring) ! That "]" is the sickest ] I ever did hear ! ] 16:01, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

== Re: Scream ==

* Noted, thanks. I'm sort of glad I disengaged - there's a lot of drama on wiki today. I'm still looking into a lot of things, before commenting further, but this incident definitely has lower priority now. ] (]) 17:25, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:07, 29 June 2008

Bishonen is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Misplaced Pages soon.