Misplaced Pages

User talk:Drmies

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by The Banner (talk | contribs) at 02:15, 1 February 2015 (→Block required). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 02:15, 1 February 2015 by The Banner (talk | contribs) (→Block required)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120
121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130
131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140
141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150


Template:NoBracketBot


Lips Are Movin

Hey, Can you go over the article once :). I have performed a copy-edit on it. If any concerns left, pleasepost on my talk page. You are awesome. Thank you. MaRAno 13:52, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

I say "What art iconoclasm!"- you say "Yes, it's sartorially challenging"

Drmies entertaining page
George William Sartorius- I just had this. − .
weird. We really don't have an article on him

+ we still don't have an article on this guy. Not very fair towards him, he tried hard. Those are nice melons! --Hafspajen (talk) 14:28, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

'* And after all this said, Drmies help now to translate that article for Xanty, so he can have some EV on it and nominate his first featured picture. After all he is the expert on the Rose Bonheur and her brothers. Hafspajen (talk) 14:36, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Come on... with a little help from our beloved great Dutch Doctor he can make it - and share those stunning cows with the rest of us... maybe it can be put as the picture of the day on Rose's birthday 16 March or something. Hafspajen (talk) 14:41, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
..' I only hope the file is big enough. After I checked I am not sure if it will satisfy Crisco.... Hafspajen (talk) 14:42, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Suddenly the 'phone rang. "Who could this be?" Hafs wondered "It's after midnight, and all the artists are tucked up in bed". It was George William Sartorius, effing and blinding as usual. Something about red ink, or a red link- Hafs couldn't make it out. "This is too much" Hafs thought "Let's put George down on the Dutch Doctor's waiting list for neutering. That'll shut him up". Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 15:25, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
George William Sartorius. Can't find nuffink more on him at the moment on the web- Hafs can hang the gallery now. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 15:42, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
At the moment he has the same birth and death years as John Nott Sartorius, so probably wrong for GW. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 15:50, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
  • I wouldn't say I particularly LOVE – in all-caps – eighteenth-century art; if anything, I would reserve that for the late nineteenth. I don't have many art books, and none that I do would include him. I tried Oxford Art Online and the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, both of which in an ideal world would cover every British artist, but there was nothing. Sorry. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:12, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Luvo page - your redirect

Hi,

When I was updating Christine M. Day I noticed you had re-directed Luvo to another page. Just curious to find out why in light of http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/01/14/outgoing-lululemon-ceo-christine-day-to-take-helm-at-healthy-fast-food-firm-luvo/. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 16:44, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

  • Is the answer in here? Sorry, it's been a while. Perhaps CorporateM has a clue--for some reason I referred to them in my edit summary. Drmies (talk) 17:01, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
    • Well at least I now know why your cryptic edit summary said this: " (hey corp, this is about a corp)" -- but with my memory I will most likely forget ;-) ,and I guesss it is now up to me to figure out why Luvo was re-directed without a ref to support it. Ottawahitech (talk) 17:14, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
      • Well, I understand neither tone nor content of your message. It is not your job at all to figure out what my motivation was--though I can tell you: some of their food was on sale at Publix, I bought it and ate it, and looked into the name, and found this article which prompted me to create a redirect to an existing article on Misplaced Pages. Cause redirects are helpful, and they don't need a ref to support them.

        You act like my creation of this redirect is somehow a Big Deal. First of all, Luvo started its life as LYFE, so that already makes it a plausible redirect. Second, if you want to know why it's not a redirect to the Day article, I can ask you, why should it? Or, why should that have been the more plausible target? Luvo and Lyfe share something else--they're brands, companies, and redirect a brand to a company CEO is odd. But if you want to write the Luvo article, or if you insist on it being a redirect to Day (and why not to Steve Sidwell (entrepreneur), who apparently founded the joint and owns most of the stock?), then why don't you just propose that somewhere, or why don't you just do it? Drmies (talk) 00:02, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

        • Well, the discussion motivated me to read about LYFE here on Misplaced Pages, then to read some of the references, and then my wife ended up on their website, and says they have a nice menu, and they have a restaurant in Palo Alto, where we work from time to time, so now I see a leisurely, pleasant lunch there with her in the next few weeks. So, thanks. Cullen Let's discuss it 04:24, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

he ploughs the fields with untold sorrow. Please ring after midnight

https://nl.wikipedia.org/Ploegen_in_de_Nivernais
Just WHERE DID THAT GO? Is this an attempt to escape translating the article? Hafspajen (talk) 18:14, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunaltelly the file is not good enough to FP. But still... it is good enough for a DYK... Hafspajen (talk) 18:34, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
External videos
video icon Bonheur's Plowing in the Nivernais
If you keep removing it you will never know. The link is attached to the picture... the one you cut .... Hafspajen (talk) 01:30, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Can I go to sleep now? I look forward to DYK and GA nominations. Drmies (talk) 04:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
THAT WAS GOOD: wonder who will nominate? Xanty maybe? Hafspajen (talk) 20:07, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Comment time for proposed merges

Hello, Drmies and anyone else watching. I proposed a bunch of merges of song articles to their albums' articles. I've read the merge guidelines, but am unclear on how long to wait after proposing a merge for comments and votes before taking action. Misplaced Pages:Merging says at least one week in one place, and at least 30 days in another. In practice, what's a good amount of time to wait for comments/votes? Thanks as always! Comments welcome from anyone. =D Shinyang-i (talk) 04:31, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

  • It depends, Shinyang. Sometimes these things linger for a long time; a few weeks ago I closed one such thing that had been open for more than half a year. I'd say wait a week, or two at the most, and then just go ahead and cite WP:BOLD. I hope that kind folk like Xanty and Cullen and others can help you out in the next few days--I am taking a short break to visit a friend in Manchester. Good luck, and thanks for your continued dedication. Drmies (talk) 05:14, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ploughing in the Nivernais, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Third Republic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:33, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

New article

Dedicated to Great Mies - Not grey-but colorful - Gustav III. Hafspajen (talk) 23:24, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Kim Prisu

I declined an A7 on this article. I linked the French Misplaced Pages article to it. I started trying to do copy edits, but it's a massive mess. Might be better to start from scratch using the French article as a basis. Someone more interested in painters might want to tackle it?--Bbb23 (talk) 02:13, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

@Bbb23: Not atypical for artist articles I'm afraid. I have wrangled most of it into English but may have to leave the mid-section, the narrative of his career, for tomorrow: I have another task I must do now off-wiki. I will put the external links there from the French to stave off BLP-PROD, but I am not sure he's notable. Yngvadottir (talk) 06:33, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
The decline of the A7 was easier than the issue of whether he's notable. The French article looked more like a resume than anything else. My knowledge of painters is a limiting factor. I would think that our "timeline" section could be pared down to only those events that are noteworthy. Thanks for helping out.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:34, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
What's a "Acadêmico Correspondente"? He's been appointed as one by the Brazilian Federation of Academics of Science, Literature and Art. Probably notable, but doesn't appear to be any English results on him (unlike Os Gêmeos). Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:55, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

A mess at Curious (Fiestar song) - can anyone help?

Hello. There's a bit of a mess at Curious (Fiestar song), which I have partially compounded. It's not an edit war, so don't worry! Basically, the article is in several song categories and the infobox indicates the article is about a song. However, it was located at Curious (Fiestar album), which apparently was a move from Curious (EP). I moved it to what I thought was correct (Curious (Fiestar song)), but infobox and categories nonwithstanding, the article really is apparently about an EP called Curious after all. I can't move it back to the EP title, and I have no idea what to do. Can anyone help me get this article to the proper title and get all the incorrect titles (song and album) deleted or redirected or whatever they should be? No big hurry. Thank you so much! Sorry for the mess! Shinyang-i (talk) 08:45, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

After more research, I think I've finally figured it out. Sort of. Whoever did this used two different translations and somehow called it an album. The article is about a song and its B-side after all...I think. Shinyang-i (talk) 21:09, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

DYK ...that he ploughs the fields with untold sorrow...(pictured) ... ?

Vine

Template:Did you know nominations/Ploughing in the Nivernais Hafspajen (talk) 16:16, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Robert Lovelace Preparing to Abduct Clarissa Harlowe.JPG
  • Hastermind, next time you'll say that something wasn't a joke and that I deleted the "real" reference. Your untold sorrow sounded like it could have come from Gerda Arendt's diary (or latest research paper). Drmies (talk) 16:28, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Not that you are likely to be in Wales…

But I came across this, and thought you might be interested to know about it: Medieval Women Editathon. LadyofShalott 17:37, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Whistlaw at Swansea University, Wales

Yes, it's today; thanks for keeping an eye on the Project page - which will list all edits. Add your username onto the Project page, as a virtual guest! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 09:09, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to our WomenHistLaw project! I know it's 8am there now, but we'd love to have you involved at any time during the day. We have three hours to go, but even after that, you can get in touch with me or on Twitter @WomenHistLaw. If you'd like to sign up on the 'Remote' section of our event page, please do! Srbswansea (talk) 13:49, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

  • I wish I'd known before--please next time drop me a line if you think you can do with administrative or other assistance. I hope y'all had a great day. I did sign up in the "remote" section, but I'll leave Twitter for the young folk. Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 16:20, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Lady, Ealdgyth, did you see this? (And look at the size of that grant!) I wish I had some students I could send to Wales, but our Medieval Program is fledgling, to put it mildly. I will pass the link on to a few colleagues here and there if, Srbswansea, Facebook is not too old-fashioned and wordy for a Twitter user... :) Drmies (talk) 16:23, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Sadly, I would probably not qualify - I'm an "independent scholar" ... as is so euphemistically known. No M.A. even. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:52, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for signing up on the page Dmries - I'd love for you to pass the link on to any colleagues, and I'll get in touch when we do another editathon (and give you more warning this time). I'm actually not on facebook either for the project or personally, but we are considering setting up a page. Will let you know if so! Srbswansea (talk) 09:49, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Racial attack

Hi. This was just brought to my attention. Is that ever acceptable on WP? Lugnuts 14:57, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) That's really something, he tells you to learn English, but he can't spell "don't" or "you" correctly... --AmaryllisGardener 15:01, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
No, "gook" and words like that are never OK, though "inbred" is only slightly less never OK, if at all (though I appreciate the plane/plain thing). If I had seen it last week I would have blocked. BTW, I think "mandarchod" means "motherfucker", but I'm no expert. Sitush, how are you on your Hindi insults? Drmies (talk) 16:17, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Yup. --NeilN 16:19, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Drmies, I am about as (in)competent with Hindi insults as with Dutch ones. I tend to look the words up when suspicion arises, as NeilN has done. There can be an element of cultural differences involved, though: what may seem like a grossly offensive term to, say, a Californian might equally be nothing more than joshing or mild disparagement to someone from, say, Maharashtra or even Manchester. You need to look at the usage in context. Which seems pretty clear-cut in this instance. - Sitush (talk) 17:36, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
So it's OK to say someone is of a particular ethnic background in a negative sense and/or a motherfucker, just as long as no-one spots it within 5 days?! Lugnuts 19:14, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
No it's not. But if you came here expecting Drmies to block him, as long as he isn't currently attacking you, he should be warned and everyone should carry on. Because blocks aren't punitive. I guess you should have came here earlier. Just my 2¢. P.S. I added a lvl 3 warning on his talk for personal attacks, since Drmies removed the attack earlier today. --AmaryllisGardener 19:24, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Lugnuts, I can't really block after the fact--five days after the fact. For better or for worse that would make a block punitive and I'm not supposed to do that, as revolting as that particular insult was. I thought that the change I made would be clear enough to the user. Drmies (talk) 20:19, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Russian Armed Forses in Ukraine.

Drmies, I don't understand what's wrong? There must be freedom of speech. Internet is really no pictures of the Russian army in Ukraine. Роберт Рэй (talk) 18:51, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

  • There is no freedom of speech here; this is a website, not a constitutionally protected zone. (Which constitution anyway?) You can't place important but unverified statements in articles, and this particular one isn't neutral at all, for reasons that I think are pretty clear. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 20:18, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Chinese boy band M.I.C. (band)

All five members of this band has a page on English wiki but not Chinese wiki. Methinks that at least some lack independent notability and could be deleted/merged. Timmyshin (talk) 01:30, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

I just looked at that article and holy schnikes! Most fanning-est fan page I've read in a while. It's crying for a heavy copyediting! I don't think there is any group overseeing Chinese pop music articles. Shinyang-i (talk) 06:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Point taken, @Drmies:! ha ha~ But did you read the part that gushes about how talented each member is? It was heartwarming. By the way, speaking of article overkill, I got a comment on one of my proposed merges of a song article to its album that I must be "jealous" of the song article. I've been many things in my life, but never jealous of a Misplaced Pages article before. This is new experience for me! =D Anyway, if all goes well hopefully there will be fewer bare-bones song articles and the EP/album articles will thus be improved...at least a little bit. I'm going to attempt my first merge later. Will you be around to look at it afterwards, to make sure I didn't screw something up? Shinyang-i (talk) 23:37, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

FLY, bird fly

Melero - Freestyle GP Camión de España 2013 -
I CAN fly
I can FLY anyway
We TRY to fly
Twas brilig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
Cornelis Cornelisz. van Haarlem - The Fall of Ixion
"A New Sandow Pose (VII)", Eugen Sandow
File:Ballasyrkellypic.jpg
I believe I can fly, actually.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ritchie333 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes a featured pic. Hafspajen (talk) 02:09, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Oh, boy! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:51, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
you make me nerrvous
Goethe und Fritz Von Stein
  • O boy o deon. Went and saw that "Ex Machina" yesterday, in a cinema that was as weird and creepy as the film (no-one around so we sat on a bench outside the screen room, only to have the manager running up to "borrow" the bench to put a dead customer on). Two male geeks and a harem of naked female robots acting sexy and coy; should've had had a harem of naked male robots (knob-bots?). Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 18:52, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
But did he die before or after seeing the film? Yngvadottir (talk) 19:39, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Don't know which film- there are 12 screens. Might have been "American Sniper 3D" Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 20:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
How exiting... Tell me about the plot Hafspajen (talk) 22:40, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
YAY! - they rock... Hafspajen (talk) 23:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Drmies I suggest you chose two-three pics you like. It is a kind of emotional test, you know.... have fun.... Hafspajen (talk) 23:36, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Ah more to chose from. I feel this one is really, really - tricky. Hafspajen (talk) 00:21, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

FA = green light to be abusive

Exactly how many FAs does it take before I can start telling people they are filthy and repulsive? I assume just 20, but I want to be certain. Rationalobserver (talk) 16:52, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

(watching) I don't speak English well enough to know exactly what abusive means, but I was surprised what you had to say on the talk of a user, to that user, who just left hurt. Emotionalobserver --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:57, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't know, Rationalobserver. But I will tell you that for your case, I think WP:NOTHERE is starting to sound very appropriate. Your way of stirring the shit pot is repulsive to me. Drmies (talk) 17:05, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict) You embarrass yourself with these transparent attempts to label and discredit people, and I think your position that as long as editor A has enough FAs they can call editor B repulsive, or whatever they want, is parochial and simple-minded. Rationalobserver (talk) 17:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I think you should reconsider what NOTHERE means--one of the things it means is that the good can outweigh the bad. Really, it's not that difficult. Drmies (talk) 17:35, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Rationalobserver, If Cassianto comes out of retirement and if he continues to make personal attacks, it seems reasonable to bring it back up then, but at this point, I think it would be best for the wiki-community if we all drop the stick. (also, "simple-minded" might not be the best way to express yourself if you are advocating for civility. Just sayin')--BoboMeowCat (talk) 17:20, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I didn't know he was retired, as I unwatched his page, as soon as I realized I backed off, so I agree with you. It looked to me that he was still attacking people, and I thought AN/I was a good place to report attacks. I stand by my simple-minded comment. To assert that getting FAs earns you the right to abuse people is asinine in the extreme. Drmies' position is that ORY deserves the insults in retaliation for their gross misunderstanding. That's some of the worst logic I have ever seen online. Rationalobserver (talk) 17:23, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
If you really think that what I said means what you say it said, you may not be versed enough in English to contribute. Or you're suffering from ressentiment. Because that is not what I said. Drmies (talk) 17:37, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I'll second that, Drmies. Perhaps we should just wait for our ANI notices. We hope (talk) 17:07, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
A pox on thee, thou art a pribbling earth-vexing lout!

I've been walking home at night when chavs have shouted "got a light", and when I explain I don't smoke and hence don't have one have been referred to as a "fucking gay bastard". Now, with that in mind, I just can not get excited about name-calling on here. Please, all of you, although FAC is a minefield and requires extreme devotion, all experienced editors are capable of writing a GA, especially if it's one that nobody cares about watches or edits. You can probably improve a London Underground tube station article (especially if it's a Zone 6 one, though I think they might have been done already) to GA status with the right books from your local library. Or, if you're feeling daft, you can do a news search for "pink cat" and discover there's enough to spin an actual pink cat article out of it, and get it on the Main Page. Some food for thought. Ritchie333 17:16, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

(ec)Saying behavior is repulsive is not a personal attack. I agree that the way Rationalobserver intentionally stirs up trouble is repulsive in that it has the effect of driving people away. Chillum 17:17, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
But hostility and aggression doesn't drive anyone away? Cassianto's edit said "I find you repulsive", so he meant the person, not the edit. Never mind, I really don't care that you prefer such an obnoxious culture, but it says loads about you as a person. Rationalobserver (talk) 17:19, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
@Rationalobserver: You have a nerve bringing this here, so I have a question back atcha. What does an editor have to have done for the project to get away with making a gross, hurtful insult based on a stupid misreading, and not to express regret for it unless the insulted party "compromises"? There. Feel free to take me to AN/I or complain that admins haven't done enough to rein in personal attacks. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:28, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
If I was an admin that saw ORY's comment relatively soon after it was made I would have blocked them until they agreed to retract it. That would have prevented 90% of the resulting drama that admins allowed to unfold. If teachers allowed their brightest pupils to abuse the less bright ones based on their relative accomplishments our education system would fail. I think that applies here as well. Rationalobserver (talk) 17:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Rationalobserver, you seem to be as tendentious and vexatious a complainant as Lightbreather has been of late. Please, just drop it and get back to doing something that is more obviously beneficial to the core purpose of this project. - Sitush (talk) 17:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Drmies. Is there any way to protect Cassianto's Talk page from all of this baiting and abuse? Why are these "editors" continuing to crap on him after they already drove him off the project? I think there should be some topic bans here, but not on Cassianto. -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:21, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Well, that's not a bad suggestion, but I see that the latest notice has been removed, so I don't see a need for it right now. If disruptive behavior there continues, protection is certainly an option, as are blocks for baiting, taunting, whatever you want to call it; please let me know if that happens again. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
According to Rationalobserver Eric and myself should be embarrassed with promoting the Enid Blyton article to FA and hang our heads in shame because of a few "Oxford commas". I wonder what the decent and actual rationally minded female editors on here think of her behaviour. This sort of thing really represents the worst of wikipedia.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:14, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
What this female editor thinks of it is unprintable. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:26, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

User:Cassianto

"Retirements" and "Wikibreaks" are this user's way of avoiding scrutiny:

--v/r - TP 20:16, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

  • #70. We're volunteers. The community should be glad of what a person does to help build the encyclopedia, not expect them to stick at it like a day job. (Also, the GA and FA processes are stressful and ye gods, I will have no truck with them. Those who do, feel justified pride.) Yngvadottir (talk) 20:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Cassianto is an extraordinarily productive Wikipedian, creating or expanding numerous high-quality articles. He is an excellent collaborator and willing to go the extra mile to get sources. He is the kind of editor who is improving this encyclopedia. It is no wonder that he needs a break from time to time and gets frustrated by editors who are unreasonable or uncivil to him. I have not found that those picking fights with him are similarly productive; in fact, they are wasting everyone's time. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:12, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Why are we still discussing this? It seems like if people can't get Eric Corbett sanctioned, then they have to get someone else sanctioned instead. Enough already! Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 21:17, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
    • Ahh, I see, so what you are all saying is that there was a memo that went out that someone new was promoted to untouchable status and I somehow lost my copy. I didn't see the untouchable user group was applied to Cassianto, someone should get on that quick so the rest of us that actually have to own up to our shit know to steer clear.--v/r - TP 21:59, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
TParis - there has been MORE than enough time and text expended on this topic. It's outlived its due date. Time to move on IMO. — Ched :  ?  22:05, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I disagree, Ched. Issues outlive their due date when they are dealt with in an appropriate and justifiable way. Shoving dirt under the carpet doesn't make the floor clean.--v/r - TP 22:25, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
  • What good exactly does it do anyone to keep dragging this saga out, TParis? Answer: none. Go and find something else to do, rather than trying to get this user blocked when it clearly isn't going to happen. This has already been debated to death. Deliberately throwing more dirt on the carpet for no good reason doesn't make the floor clean either. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:27, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Tell me, Lukeno94, what good it has done in ~8 years of shoveling this crap under the rug? We're a more divisive community than ever. Until attitudes like yours are stopped, no good will ever be done. You haven't solved anything, you've just kicked the can down to the next time Cassianto loses his shit. Which, by recent patterns can be estimated to be between now and May 2015. So, watch out future selves, we're going to have to talk about this again because we didn't talk about it now. And we'll kick the can again because some people lack the conviction to judge their friends.--v/r - TP 22:40, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
  • What, attitudes like mine where I'd rather let an editor cool down by themselves (even if it means a bit more ranting on their own talk page) rather than throw a bunch of warnings/ANI threads/blocks/other sanctions at them, when they're an experienced editor who occasionally blows their top? You don't like Cassianto. We get it. I barely know Cassianto from Adam; I don't think I'd ever come across him prior to the latest Eric Corbett saga. And let's face it TParis, you're hardly a saint yourself (and nor am I), so I really don't see how you have the right to passive-aggressively try and get Cassianto sanctioned (which is what this comes across as.) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:44, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
  • There is that same old tactic again. If someone expects people to be treated fairly, they must have a grudge. Sorry, I haven't ever interacted with Cassianto before so you're shit out of luck there. This editor isn't cooling down, he's using a 'wikibreak' to avoid scrutiny. And you're right there to take his claim at face value. Sorry, but the evidence is there that this user is using Wikibreak as threat to get his way. And you'll give him every opportunity to do so because you're an enabler. You get good feelings inside when you can latch onto your Wiki-hero and defend them and perhaps then they might bestow their grace upon thee. I'm surprised we don't have a WP: page for that behavior. Someone should create it.--v/r - TP 22:55, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
  • There wouldn't be any real case to answer even without a Wikibreak/retired template. Stop with the bollocks about "Wiki-hero", and the irony of expecting people to be treated fairly whilst acting like this is pretty strong. It doesn't matter one jot what Cassianto thinks about me. I'm sick to fucking death right now of people demanding that long-term editors who actually appear to be half decent be kicked to the kerb just because they aren't angels. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 23:15, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Scrutiny about what TParis? I find it hard to retire for a few months when non-involved people, such as yourself, mud fling at me. Why should I not defend myself? And more to the point, why are you trying to keep this alive? This dead horse has already been flogged. Don't you have a stone to crawl back under? Cassianto 22:57, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
    (talk page stalker) Correct me if I'm wrong, but maybe they're talking about this, when you're the topic of an AN/I discussion and half of the people are like "Don't bother him, he's retired!". P.S. "don't you have a stone to crawl back under?", um, says the person that's "retired"? --AmaryllisGardener 23:00, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
  • See my post above, or perhaps you'd like me to draw you a picture if you're a little hard of understanding? You linked to a closed thread at ANI, so your point is? Cassianto 23:04, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Good grief, is this dross still continuing? Do people really have nothing better to do than this? Feck me - get a grip and move on to do something constructive, rather than this balls. - SchroCat (talk) 23:10, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree editors are getting tired of it already, I just got done trying to defuse things on orange's page, time to move on and edit the encyclopedia. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:12, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
If only we could. But unfortunately, improving the encyclopedia requires discussion, then BOOM! And that's assuming people can stay away from other people. --AmaryllisGardener 23:15, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Well as I said to another editor either two things can happen 1. Continue to argue despite the fact that little has changed in over a day, or 2. Take it to WP:ARBCOM which I am sure nobody wants. This all has already been to ANI twice what more blood are people looking for here? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:18, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
  • TParis, I do not believe that "retirement" avoids scrutiny; clearly, in this case, it doesn't. I am not aware (and I can't go through your list of diffs right now) that Cassianto is somehow a longterm abusive disruptor or something like that. Amaryllis, "he's retired" is not an excuse for abuse, of course, nor do I believe that that's the argument proposed by "half of the people". If Cassianto had really made some kind of clearly unacceptable remark, I would have told them so. But what they were supposedly guilty of in this case is at best minor. Do you really want blocks to be thrown about for every single angry comment? And have you thought about what would happen if we did? Some things are unacceptable, sure, and I will gladly block for racist, sexist, etc. kinds of remarks. But this, no, and bringing that to ANI serves only one purpose--and, in this case, successfully. Sorry TParis, I don't like disagreeing with you but that thread was not going to be helpful. If you want to catch Cassianto on their way somewhere and have tea or a beer with them and chat them up, that would be more useful. And now it's dinner time. Even abusive admins and their families need to eat! Drmies (talk) 23:19, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict) ENOUGH ALL OF YOU. This is sounding like a 2nd grade "he called me a poop-head" argument. I don't give a good flying furry rat's ass who stated what. Go back to editing or I WILL start handing out blocks. Period. — Ched :  ?  23:23, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

sorry

Sorry for sticking my nose into your talk, but I hadn't seen you around. In general though - my post stands as far as other areas of wiki where this is going on. — Ched :  ?  00:07, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

I have a dumb car — Ched :  ?  19:05, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, that's my poor grammar. It was a proper car that nearly hit me yesterday... someone who didn't realize I had right of way, and someone who didn't even try and stop. Had I not taken avoiding action, my bike would probably be a wreck right now (as would I). Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:12, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I thought you were in a regular car and a little car almost hit your's. Well then, nevermind! --AmaryllisGardener 22:14, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Landmark Worldwide

Yes, again. I imagine that you've been quite happy to be quit of the Landmark article, but I'm asking that you and/or your some of your stalkers take a look at the state of things.

There are an alarming number of unfounded accusations flying about on the talk page (and a minor one or two at WP:RSN as well). There have been bulk reverts and inserts, including what looks to some like an end-run on the RfM you closed. I won't bore you with the rest, but given that the article is now under sanctions it would be useful to get some admin eyes over there. As always, thank you! --Tgeairn (talk) 00:54, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

  • Holy shit. That's an exciting recent history. Who came up with that ridiculously cumbersome system of documentation? That person must think, for instance, that newspaper articles are as important as monographs. And this edit--what's that, guilt by accretion? But we (i.e., Misplaced Pages) can't really claim that "A number of critical newspaper articles have called the Forum 'cult-like'". I do not see how this entire edit is warranted by an appeal to BLP--I do see that the editor is, apparently, yet another longterm editor of this subject matter. That edit is not OK since it is too drastic, but then again, that section needed trimming in the first place.

    Tgeairn, that whole thing is such a mess that I can't, on the fly, figure out what's what, and I haven't yet looked at the talk page, but thanks for alerting me. This is just what we need: more drama! Drmies (talk) 01:54, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

    • Must have drama, even better than must-see-tv... I guess that's why I'm still on the topic.
I see your point on the drastic cut - although to be fair, that content was all added in a single edit (okay, two) as well.
When you (have a strong drink in hand and) are ready for the talk page, I'm sure you won't be disappointed. --Tgeairn (talk) 02:14, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

I thought you would enjoy this edit, wherein the completely competent editor uses 1993 and 2003 sources for a statement that something happened in 2013. I'm guessing that maybe he hasn't read those sources. Cheers! Tgeairn (talk) 22:36, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

  • You are just totally determined to get me back into this, aren't you. But you have to understand, and I think some of your opponents are reading this too (though, honestly, I forgot who is in which camp, except for Dave and Cirt, haha), that I can only wear one hat at a time: editor or admin. Now, I did see a note on that talk page that made the BLP claim more acceptable, and I'll get to it, yes.

    Also, Tgeairn, drop .50c in the sarcasm jar, and Cathar66, come on: that's not good. BTW, I'm still wondering who came up with that GODAWFUL referencing system, which has advantages ONLY for an article where individual sources are cited more than once, and where different pages are cited. No one in their right mind (I hope whoever is responsible is reading this) would do this for the single-cite newspaper and other articles that are found in this article. Drmies (talk) 23:23, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Guilty as charged. Yes, I'm sure there's a whole following (as I can't make an edit without it being reverted or "corrected", it seems). I probably owe the sarcasm jar more than that. The citation tangle (which was supposed to be an un-tangle) was decided here. Anyway, whichever hat you wear I'm sure you'll be dashing. As always, Tgeairn (talk) 23:35, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

First merge - can anyone help?

I just finished merging three tiny song articles into one tiny album article, and I'd like to make sure I did everything correctly. I think I am okay except for possibly some redirect pages. The singles have Japanese titles, so redirect pages were created back when the song articles were created, to redirect the titles in Japanese script to the articles in romanized Japanese. To avoid double redirects, I changed those redirect pages to go from the titles in Japanese script to the new article title. But the redirect reason on the redirect page is now incorrect, and I'm not sure if I'm supposed to change it or what. See here:

The actual text produced by the template seems to be correct (since it doesn't say that the target is the same name in another language), but perhaps it would be appropriate to (additionally) use template {{R from subtopic}}.--Boson (talk) 18:09, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, @Boson:, I will do that! Shinyang-i (talk) 01:53, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

K-pop

Andrew6799 is still at it. The article popped up on the Special:PendingChanges and I reverted the "chit chat" once, but its back again. Regards, --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 05:46, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Question

I understand about trying to uncover real peoples Id's but what if that person uses their real name as a username and it's connected to marketing material. How would a person go about disclosing that without being afoul of outing stuff? Hell in a Bucket (talk) 15:07, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

  • Well, in the case of a "real" name, there's the opening lines of WP:OUTING--if they give their legal name ("voluntarily posted his or her own information"), then their name is fair game, so to speak. I mean, I suppose you have to indicate some evidence that their user name is their real name, but I suspect that in most cases this is easy enough to establish, without having to uncover much. And depending on what we're dealing with, there's also Template:Uw-ublock-famous, which is a kind of license to kill. Feel free to tell me or, if you prefer, email me the name and I'll look at it in confidence. Drmies (talk) 18:30, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Right. Well, JamesBWatson has skinned this cat already--thank you JBW. They blocked them for "advertising only" and I agree: the edits are, as you spotted, promotional enough. This particular user name is in itself not blockable, since it's an individual's name, and the company name is different, and they're not plugging something that has the same name as they do--sorry if that sounds too much like colloquialized Bradspeak. And yes, it is so blatantly obvious that as far as I'm concerned there is no outing here of any kind. Thanks for keeping the place clean. Drmies (talk) 23:17, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Help, Swedish Navy Clothing

Swedish Navy Clothing. Hafspajen (talk) 17:09, 30 January 2015 (UTC) What is that. Hafspajen (talk) 17:15, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

A range of clothing introduced by a British-American photographer after he photographed some recruits for the Royal Swedish Navy. To use a naval term it was not just ‘the cut of their jib’ that struck him. But also the combination of the navy and the clean, healthy, sexy outdoor image of the Swedes themselves that made for a great line in clothes. And then there's Irish clothing. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 18:26, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
AH, oh. by the way nobody EVEE calles sausage for bologna in Swedish. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Swedish_cuisine&curid=28490&diff=644876022&oldid=644874526 Hafspajen (talk) 18:29, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Looks like it is an American thing. Hafspajen (talk) 18:33, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

"Is there anything better than to be longing for something when you know it is within reach?" ...Greta Garbo. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:37, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
??: The light is not downing down on me - yet. Maybe next moment. Hafspajen (talk) 18:41, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Enjoy! ... before User:Yngvadottir gets those sharp tailors' scissors out! Martinevans123 (talk) 18:45, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict)All blue and white. My favourite colours. Why do WE have to shop at nasty places like Hennes and Mauritz ....Hafspajen (talk) 18:55, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
A whole 28 people like this. Sad, really. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:52, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
That is totally pornographic. Drmies (talk) 18:56, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
File:Grey and navy suit on mannequin.jpg
Scalopus Aquaticus
Well, yes ... Yngvadottir (talk) 19:05, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
28 people? — Ched :  ?  19:10, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
MIES!! Have you ever tried Bacon soda??? Hafspajen (talk) 19:20, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Now what, is it deleted already? Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Swedish Navy Clothing. Hard days. Hafspajen (talk) 21:52, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
No, I have just nominated it for deletion. Maybe someone can find sources I was unable to. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:01, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Me, Haf, and the other BGS kids, back when the wall was still standing.
How useful! "We're going where the air free." Martinevans123 (talk) 23:23, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
OH. Oh, Dante! Oh, Laure!! Hafspajen (talk) 23:45, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Wow. NepHop. New for me. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:49, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
SSSgghhdsssssss. The sinners who burn. - PumpkinAwardedHafspajen (talk) 00:32, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Gabrielle Vincent -- thanks

I was surprised she didn't have a page here -- thanks for fixing that! —Steve Summit (talk) 21:39, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

  • Sure thing, scs--tell you what, it came about because I'm trying to remove them from Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women writers/Missing articles as fast as Rosiestep can add them, just to get her upset. But it's in piss-poor condition, as are the others I did (see Lulu Wang), since they're straight-up translations of the Dutch/French versions. In other words, your help is appreciated. Drmies (talk) 22:56, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
    • Well you'd better keep up, amigo, as I'll be adding more redlinks before you kow it! Lol! Seriously, Drmies, thanks for all your work on those women writer biographies, including Lulu Wang. I can't believe the nominator didn't notice in a google search (assuming they did a google search) that Wang was a best-selling Dutch-language writer. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:47, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
      • Ha, what made you think they looked? Also, please don't essentialize me, Rosiestep: amiga will do just as nicely--that I'm rumored to have a penis, that's just rumors. Hey, I wish the Dutch sources were more easily available: I am sure that Trouw, NRC Handelsblad, de Volkskrant have written on her. Do you think there is a DYK in it? Drmies (talk) 13:44, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
        • I am so sorry for that, Drmies; truly. Trouting myself. Yup, I see a hook so I'll nom it. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:20, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
          • I'm kidding, Rosiestep. Thanks for the DYK, by the way: I am proud to be on the same nom as you. BTW, the article history of Essentialism is interesting; I was very disappointed, and it shows you that the real postmodern geeks haven't really gotten active on Misplaced Pages. Also, "essentialize" (as well as "essentialism") are underlined by my computer's spellcheck--that tells you something, something bad. Drmies (talk) 00:06, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

You said I should ping

Miss Gladis M. Holman Hunt (The School of Nature).

Hafspajen (talk) 20:08, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

do you want to be a soldier?
Ahem, huh. I don't know...
Make up your mind!

-Hm, large? Medium? Maybe from the American Alps .... Hafspajen (talk) 20:11, 28 January 2015 (UTC)


Here he is again. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Labrador_Retriever&diff=644897433&oldid=644897144 Hafspajen (talk) 22:07, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Insight, if you will

Would you be willing or able (or both) to explain why this is still alive 23 days later? -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:13, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

  • I don't know, Winkelvi. I just closed one thread that keeps being reopened (by a wabbit, no less), and another that wouldn't die. I HAVEN'T EVEN HAD BREAKFAST YET, and even my zebra is still asleep. Why am I up?

    Hey! Admins! Please close the Winkelvi thread. (It's a good idea for someone else to do that anyway, since you and I have recently agreed on a matter of content, and so we're invoooolved. Maybe.) Kelapstick? LadyofShalott? TParis? Northamerica1000? DGG? Drmies (talk) 13:41, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Oh, Gawd..."invoooolved". Sinister. Evil. Very un-something! And please have breakfast, but not without the zebra (are you and the zebra involved? don't answer, that would be too much information). Happy Saturday to you, Drmies. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 15:27, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Thoughts on A Pink

An editor recently created a "list of A Pink members" article and worked hard to get it sourced properly. After some discussion, he's merged it into the main A Pink article, but I'm not sure about the formatting in the member section. What do you think? I've just never seen it done in the little boxes like that and don't know if that's allowed or what. Do you have any idea? Also, it occurs to me there are far too many photos on the article though, so I thought I'd post on the talk page about that. The editor who's been working on it is very amenable to discussion. Shinyang-i (talk) 07:16, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

  • Oh, I don't know about allowed, but it certainly is needless and would never pass muster in a GA review. Really, it's table porn, and I found a bunch of non-neutral terms in there as well. I suppose this is better than having the separate list, but it needs trimming. At the same time, we should give Sonflower0210 a barnstar or two for having picked up both policy/guideline and the intricacies of table porn syntax so quickly--they have only 50 article edits but man, it's impressive how they mastered those technical skills so quickly! Drmies (talk) 15:34, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
  • And while we're on the topic, Sonflower, please explain why you intersect with Hikari licht in such a private way, playing to your heart's delight in each others' sandboxes. Drmies (talk) 15:36, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh I've just accepted the non-neutral terms in kpop articles at this point, ha ha. I clean them up when I see them. How I see it is if the presence of something will prevent an article from reaching GA, then it's a no-no unless there's no way around it. I will make a go at trimming and de-boxing the section later today. I'm just so happy to not have a stupid useless member table there...Shinyang-i (talk) 16:15, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh this is not really relevant but I saw A Pink perform when I was in Korea. All I can say is, how do they have so many fans? They were awful. :/ Shinyang-i (talk) 16:16, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello all.
- About Hikari licht. Lol at the choice of word. Is it not allowed to edit each other sandbox? Sorry I didn't know. That user is willing to help on improving Apink articles so I thought we can work on it together. I'm still not familiar with all the wiki policies because there are so many of them. Kindly refer me to that policy so I can learn. Thank you
- About the tables. I can't think any other way to make it nicer and easy to read. Without the table, I think it's too crowded and messy. Also, May I know why you are so unhappy with the table? or Why do you think it's stupid and useless? Is it about the color difference and the border? How about if the table is there but without the color or if it's borderless? The purpose for the table is not to make it fancy or anything but to make it easier to read for each member. Also may I know what is GA review? Can I have link so I can read the policy please. Sonflower0210 (talk) 16:59, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
There you go. Hafspajen (talk) 17:45, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
@Sonflower0210:, the "stupid useless" tables I was referring to are the tables that used to be on many of the kpop group pages, which contained each member's stage name, hangul for stage name, real name, hangul for real name, birthdays, position, and whatever else. They were inflexible, blocky, and not desirable for Misplaced Pages. It wasn't a reference to what's on the A Pink article now. I was expressing happiness that you've replaced that kind of table with actual prose about each member, which is the kind of thing that does belong in these articles. The boxes that you've added now just seem unnecessary, as there's no reason the member section should flow any differently than the rest of the page. The boxes don't improve readability. I don't know if it specifically says anywhere "don't do that", but I think what Drmies meant was that if the article were being reviewed for GA, the reviewer would cite something like that as a reason to fail the article. Since all articles should strive toward GA status, that would be a reason not to include them. Shinyang-i (talk) 18:10, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Sonflower, anyone who sees your and Hikachi's edits will understand how odd it is that you all, without the benefit of proper introductions, find your way into each others' sandboxes. How did you know "That user is willing to help on improving Apink articles"? They made only two edits here: one to your (now deleted) sandbox, and one to start their own, which you subsequently took over. Materialscientist, what do you make of this? It does not pass the smell test. Drmies (talk) 23:03, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry but i'm confused here. May I know what are you implying that I did wrong here? If it's not allowed to edit other people sandbox, kindly let me know so I won't do it again or at least please refer me the policy. As you have may notice, I'm quite new to wiki and hasn't familiarize myself to all of the policies but I'm willing to improve. Sonflower0210 (talk) 23:39, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Time to say farewell.

I see you blocked this IP a few months ago; perhaps its time for a longer block? S/he seems to do little more than stalk and attempt to abuse and cause trouble, his last edit was particular uncalled for. Giano (talk) 18:46, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) That was definitely one grave dancing too many. Blocked for three months. Favonian (talk) 18:51, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you Favonian; that's exactly what I had in mind. Let's just hope nobody "famous" suddenly decides to stop editing. Giano (talk) 18:59, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Ha, that's funny: an observant fellow editor emailed me about this one. Favonian, I Fully Support Your Block, I Fully Support Your Block, I Fully Support Your Block, in triplicate obviously. Drmies (talk) 22:51, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Re:WP:CIVIL, edit warring, and user talk page violations by The Banner

This is my formal protest of your closure of this "discussion." You are an involved administrator. You should have recused yourself.

You and I have had multiple interactions regarding this problematic editor to the point that I accused you of sticking up for him, to your displeasure; that you were a tool aiding this The Banner's reign of terror. You have commented 5 times again within this ANI discussion. Your improper act, closure without a real decision, without a real penalty on this problematic editor, closes off our opportunity to get a real settlement from a real, neutral administrator. Your soft handed warning again aids continued annoyance to the rest of the wikipedia community, wherever he goes. "This has gone on long enough" is not a sufficient reason and with your previous involvement, you are not the administrator to make this decision.

We have waited and built this case for almost the entire month of January 2015, trying to solve a problem. Now we are just back to square one. The problem still exists. You have given The Banner carte blanche to bother another editor and most importantly, to further damage wikipedia. Trackinfo (talk) 19:10, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

  • Your formal protest should be filed elsewhere. My sense of decorum as an administrator prevents me from saying what I really think, though I will be glad to add that at least some of this should have boomeranged on your ass. Can I give you a hint? You build a case and no one, NO ONE, picks up on it. What do you think that means? Drmies (talk) 22:49, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Bad hair day

Possible illustration

Why don't we have that Bad hair day article? Hafspajen (talk) 19:10, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps because Eric Corbett showers daily with Wash & Go and doesn't know the meaning of the word? Giano (talk) 19:15, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
I heard he takes two bottles into the shower. What's in the other one? Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 19:20, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Ask Anroth on Wikipediocracy. I'm certain he'll be full of ideas. Eric Corbett 19:24, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Funny you should say that, Eric--on Wikipediocracy (or the other one? I mean the really trolly one, with that Barbour character) they posted a pic of me which clearly demonstrates that I'll never have another bad hair day in my life. Drmies (talk) 22:55, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
I AM HAVING A BAD HAIR DAY!!! https://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/69.249.186.91. He's back. Look at that edit ar Doberman pincher. Hafspajen (talk) 00:59, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Dutch academic

Hi: at a glance, I don't think this chap is ready for an article: Kristof Jacobs. Anyone who reads Dutch disagree? If so I'll pitch in and help translate and brush it up. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:24, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

  • I don't see anything in the article that merits our attention (or gives me cause to do some more browsing around); A7 is valid here, in my opinion. Drmies (talk) 22:44, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Block required

Hi Doc. Please see this troll. Take care. Δρ.Κ.  22:49, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

  • I blocked them for (partially) having a famous username. Perhaps Trackinfo will scold me for an involved block, haha. Thanks K! And so it goes, on and on. Drmies (talk) 22:54, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
      • LOL, mr. T. is not giving up on trying to get me blocked, banned, quartered and burned while impaled at a stake. He is annoying but also pitiful. The Banner talk 02:15, 1 February 2015 (UTC) Ow, and I will avoid another place for a while. Enough other people now active there to try to get the article neutral.