Misplaced Pages

User talk:Drmies: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] 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 editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:35, 28 July 2014 view sourceDrmies (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators407,711 edits →Please reopen← Previous edit Latest revision as of 01:49, 23 January 2025 view source Wburrow (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers9,749 editsm →Hayden Miller Productions/ActuallyHayden: linking to case I opened 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{pp-semi-indef|small=yes}}
<!--New comments at the bottom, please.-->
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|maxarchivesize = 200K
|counter = 151
|minthreadsleft = 10
|minthreadstoarchive = 5
|algo = old(15d)
|archive = User talk:Drmies/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{archives|auto=yes|search=yes}} {{archives|auto=yes|search=yes}}
{{NoBracketBot}}


==Mail==
== ...---...---... ==
{{ygm}}
]
And you may want to read . Or am I being too long? ] (]) 03:17, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
*I read it. Perhaps Spartaz can shed more light on it--maybe they have a suspicion, or gave it up. ] (]) 05:08, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, everybody is giving up. Do you see that last comment? . Do you see where that was inserted? And I wondered why on eart nobody cares nore for this nomination. Put it right in the middle of the starting info - so it looked like the whole thing was of. Bloody impudent. It makes absolutely no difference if lately the picture might been considered have a different painter. One might make a note later that it might be an other artist's work - or not. There are hundreds of great paintings like that, it doesn't matter. ] (]) 07:11, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Disruptive editors sometimes attempt to evade ] by using several practices when disrupting articles:


{{-}}
* Their edits occur over a long period of time; in this case, no single edit may be clearly disruptive, but the overall pattern is disruptive.
== A barnstar for you! ==
* Their edits are largely confined to talk-pages, such disruption may not directly harm an article, but it often prevents other editors from reaching consensus on how to improve an article.
* Their edits often avoid gross breaches of ], by refraining from ], while still interfering with civil and collaborative editing meant to improve the article.
* Their edits remain limited to a small number of pages that very few people watch.
* Conversely, their edits may be distributed over a wide range of articles to make less probable that some user watches a sufficient number of affected articles.


{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
Nonetheless, such disruptive editing violates site policy. And have you heard of ]s? One of their interesting features is: #Creating disturbances on ] pages, e.g. objecting just to object. ... ] (]) 14:31, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
*{{U|Hafspajen}}, even if this person is a supreme irritator, I can't take administrative action for all the reasons I've indicated, and since I don't know this area very well I can't assess the situation in the first place. But I do have a suggestion, and I think you should take it: start an ]. That is the first step, regardless of what road we're on, for a situation like this one. I'll be glad to help, but you have to start this, and I suggest you read the guidelines and then think carefully about what to write up. ] (]) 23:00, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Original Barnstar'''
::Aha, brilliant. ] (]) 23:02, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Happy New Year, Drmies! In 2024, other editors thanked you using the ] on the English Misplaced Pages. This made you the '''#11 most thanked Wikipedian in 2024'''. Congratulations and, well, ''thank you'' for all that you do for Misplaced Pages. Here's to 2025! ] (]) 19:39, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
|}
*Haha thanks, {{U|Mz7}}--and I just hit you with a +2! ] (]) 15:28, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
*{{U|Bbb23}}, happy new year, and how is it that you are thanked more than me??? I thought I was the good cop! ] (]) 15:29, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
**It's a conspiratorial ploy by the perps to cozy up to the bad cop.--] (]) 16:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
***Shoot I just thanked ] for an edit, and she was already ahead of me. ] (]) 17:54, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
{{User QAIbox
| image = Ehrenbach icicles.jpg
| image_upright = 1.3
| bold = ] · ] · ]
}}
:::* As explained on my talk, I hope I do more real thank-you than lazy click-thanks ;) - Happy new year 2025, opened with ] that first sounded OTD in 1725 (as the Main page has). --] (]) 18:01, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:::* ], my ] 300 years after the first performance, is up for GAN. ] will be my story tomorrow. --] (]) 21:09, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
:::* My ] is about a composer who influenced music history also by writing. Did you watch Masilo talk and dance? --] (]) 09:54, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:::* ... and today, ], ], in memory of her first appearance on stage OTD in 1900, and of principal author ]. --] (]) 18:56, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
:::* Today, between many who just died, ] on his 45th birthday who was good for ] mentioning a Verdi opera in 2018, - you can see his work in the trailer of another one that I saw, and my talk page has a third (but by a different director). 2025 pics, finally. --] (]) 18:43, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
:::* Today I have ] (trumpeter, conductor) on the main page who worked closely with ] who became GA yesterday, - small world! To celebrate: mostly flowers pics from vacation ;) --] (]) 20:01, 20 January 2025 (UTC)


== Advice needed ==
*The point about the school of Raphael image that Hafs nominated was that it has a pronounced yellow colour cast as a result of the processing it had received. That's inevitable when you make these kinds of edits in RGB space equalising 10% or more of the histogram. I simply opposed it, quite vigorously it is true but then the issue had arisen before. It was Hafs' fankly aggressive response that provoked the drama and in the course of researching the history of the painting (not my period) I ascertained its true provenance and of course I commented that, in (and I'm afraid was likewise extremely aggressive, the plainest of personal attacks by any standard). I also took the trouble to upload to Commons an annotated file on the painting ] where I used a beautiful image by , the tinkering of another image by him of Manet's ''Olympia'' being the original source of all this drama.


How can I convince user:Sky258 that, per ], airport connections need independent sources? Nearly all his/her are unsourced and reverted. Warnings did not help but blocking seems over the top. Do you have any ideas? <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">]&nbsp;]</span> 17:46, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
:And now we have this issue of Renoir's ''Bal du moulin de la Galette'', where I pointed out (as a comment, not as an oppose) that the image nominated was in fact not the holding museum's image (as claimed I mean in the file description). When I nominated that as an Alt, a Google Gigaplex image if you please, following another long established editor's objection to the original that it lacked resolution, more drama culminating in a withdrawal of the nomination in what can only be described as , ensued on the grounds, if you please, that the Google Gigaplex image's colours were inauthentic. And what is droll is that in this case too there seems a real possibility that the image nominated was in fact of an earlier version famously auctioned in 1990 for a record price at the time. I can't comment because I've never seen the painting, but I have ordered the relevant catalogue (I collect them anyway and this is something of a collector's piece) and I shall likewise upload an image of painting to Commons when I receive it if there's one suitable (though unfortunately these major efforts are generally illustrated with fold outs which can't really be scanned effectively).
*Hmm I disagree: they were warned by multiple editors, and the content is unsourced. I was going to ask about talk page consensus, but there is project-wide consensus... ] (]) 22:59, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
**Okay. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">]&nbsp;]</span> 23:33, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
***Unfortunately, the learning curve after the prior block is best described as flatliner... <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">]&nbsp;]</span> 02:17, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
****Hmm Banner I jumped on that too quickly: it was not a complete flatline, and I left the editor a note, which one might call a final warning. ] (]) 16:25, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
*****I disagree: and . <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">]&nbsp;]</span> 18:52, 18 January 2025 (UTC)


== CS1 error on ] ==
:What piques me about this is that following the original drama this editor love-bombed ], the only way I can describe it, in a way that ultimately made me uncomfortable. And then finally this, .
] Hello, I'm ]. I have '''automatically detected''' that ] performed by you, on the page ], may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
* A ] error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( | )
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a ], you can .
Thanks, <!-- User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/inform -->] (]) 23:15, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
== CS1 error on ] ==
] Hello, I'm ]. I have '''automatically detected''' that ] performed by you, on the page ], may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
* A ] error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( | )
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a ], you can .
Thanks, <!-- User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/inform -->] (]) 23:16, 8 January 2025 (UTC)


== ]/] ==
:It worries me that if this drama exceeds its local boundaries, it really wouldn't be difficult to identify me. Not at all because I'm a celebrity or anything of the sort, but nevertheless if all this were seen by a number of former colleagues, one of which at least I know edits Misplaced Pages quite actively, then certainly I would be identified, and that would be a very considerable embarrassment indeed for me.


Returned to ] AGAIN, with that nonsensical ref about a BENFICA match for a SPORTING championship win (reverted it on the spot)! I guess the rest can stay (should you see that the sources are appropriate, if not remove it), will duly compose it (i.e. Style of play section) when i get home.
: I would be glad therefore if you discouraged Hafs from this kind of activity. And in any case I'm awaiting the resolution of another matter not related to this or Misplaced Pages, and after some possibly concluding edits, I shall probably cease editing Misplaced Pages, or at least rarely contributing. Editing at Commons seems to be a gentlelady's pursuit, at Misplaced Pages my experience is not. ] (]) 23:13, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
:*Hafspajen wears his heart on his sleeve. I can't tell him to wear it anyplace else. As I've said before, I simply don't know enough about this entire process, so I can't decide, for instance, if nominating an alternate picture is acceptable or disruptive. The only thing I know is that I like Hafspajen and he's clearly disturbed by your behavior--whether he's right or wrong I'm not sure but I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, though I wish he didn't care so much.<p>Now, I've known Hafspajen for a number of years, and I don't know you from Adam, so I'm not a very good candidate to tell him on your behalf what he should do. If he's the only one who's bothered by your comments in those FP discussions, then maybe he should reconsider, but if he's not, then perhaps a community discussion (which is what an RfC/U is--it's not some process that ends with a block or a ban, quite the opposite) is helpful. At the very least, I'd like to hear from some other people, privately or otherwise, whether his concerns have any validity to them or not: I have no interest in judging when I am not a judge and don't understand or know the evidence. And that's really all I have to say right now, to both of you I suppose.<p>Oh, one last thing: your "identity" should not be of interest, at least not your real-life identity, and I trust that no one here will consider outing you or anyone else. Whether you have been here before, wearing a different coat, that may be of interest, but let no one start fishing around for your name and job title, and cause embarrassment. Thank you, ] (]) 23:57, 24 July 2014 (UTC)


Attentively ] (]) 19:44, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
*Trying to be nice with somebody is not a crime. Yes, I tried to be nice, but I also told C.o.m.c. not to do this kind of things, but it went on and I couldn't stop it. If one wants to participate in the project - ANY project - first - one has to be respectful, show respect for others edits, leave place for all the editors participating, one or two lines of comment in a polite neutral way is QUITE enough. One has to make intelligent, calm, moderate comments, and not starting throwing around words like ''horrible'' and ''silly'' and such. This kind of comment is not a comment but crap, a five year old can say things like this. Also showing respect for other peoples edits, you edited MY edits, changed files, and so on. Everybody knows one should not to start editing others works, others nominations - if not asked. Also it is important not to overwhelm everything with loads of comments because it is scaring away the other editors who just see it as problems - and stop participating in the nomination. The goal is that everybody should be able to participate. And yes, the so called '''what seems to me a frank threat'' - using big words again - it was simply meant - you will lose respect and appreciation, if you go on like this. I am not interested in real life identity at all, who cares. But after all this not so constructive discussion I might be interested in that fact, as Drmies said: '' whether you have been here before, wearing a different coat, that may be of interest''. ] (]) 00:46, 25 July 2014 (UTC)


== Books & Bytes – Issue 66 ==
{{ec}}The kind of language you used in the Featured picture candidates nomination WAS NOT AS YOU SAY: '''''an entirely neutral and non-challenging way''''' , NO, it was like: ''horrible'', a ''kind of art botox'', ''just silly'', ''inauthentic'', and ''derisory'', and you're ''wilfully not going to get the point'' , ''Chto xudshee sanskrtiskee akkcentee ya kagdee-libo slishal'' and the rest of similar expressions as: '''chocolate botox kitsch of trusty old DCoetzee's restoration''' and other personal attacs like '''he tries his hand at wit and subtlety, then he must expect me to respond in kind''' - should not be alowed to be used more in any nominations, not here, not anywhere. It is framed in with red: Please remember to be civil, ... to comment on the image, not the person. Which is why we have "All objections should be accompanied by a specific rationale''. The above is not a specific rationale. ] (]) 00:55, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::* Regarding ], a requirement is that he should already have been on my page to resolve the issue. He has, , he responded with a threat and came here. That should worry you. You're welcome to love him to pieces of course. For what it's worth, my experience of life is that people who wear their hearts on their sleeves usually have some sort of agenda tucked away upfront in their pants. You're right about not knowing me (as far as I know, I mean who can tell with the anonymity thing, but then I wouldn't be editing at all without that). ] (]) 00:52, 25 July 2014 (UTC)


<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr">
:::* {{U|Coat of Many Colours}}, may I request that you explain in language that is not veiled what exactly you mean in your comment just above re: ''people who wear their hearts on their sleeves''... I allow this courtesy before I read it how I wish. Referring to what is ''tucked away upfront in their pants'' sounds alarmingly misguided in courteous talk page discussion. Please convince me otherwise. Thanks. ] ] 15:40, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
<div style="font-size: 1.5em; margin: 0 100px;">
:::::* It's a ''bon mot''. I often wonder where they come from myself. Do you have shares in Hafs BTW? I see you're , which really was meant as sort of peace offering. (*Sigh*) just don't seem to be able to do anything right any more these days. ] (]) 16:52, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
]</div>
::::*No, C.o.m c. what you say above is not true. You see a threat where is nothing of the kind, that's one. I came here after you edited MY NOMINATION so it looked like you were in charge and YOU had the responsability of dismissing it, NOT ME, you treated it like you had the right to insert this kind of text there. '''WHERE YOU PUT THAT TEXT - THAT is the NOMINATOR's part'''. Do you see that last comment? . After all this you just put a big remark in the middle of the information about the artwork. That was when I had enought. And when you kept reverting my edits when I decided am going to witdraw it but you and won't let me do that. It is my nomination, I can witdraw it if I decide that. If I wan't to remove it it is not up to you to revert me. AND on top of everything you go and nominate the '''very same picture again''', the one that I witdraw. Yes I think it is disturbing and disruptive and disrespectful - sorry. ] (]) 01:07, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
<div style="line-height: 1.2;">
::::* "Do you see that last comment? ." Yes I did. You deleted an edit I made indicating the proper provenance of this painting. You were very aggressive in my estimation. I shan't continue here.] (]) 01:18, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
<span style="font-size: 2em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif">'''The Misplaced Pages Library''': ''Books & Bytes''</span><br />
I didn't deleted it, I '''moved''' it, down, as a last comment, where it belongs. '''''WHERE YOU PUT THAT; THAT is the NOMINATOR's part. YOU HAVE NOTHING TO DO THERE.''''' After that you got the ansver you try to make it sound like the way you did above, you say: ''I'm afraid the response was likewise extremely aggressive, the plainest of personal attacks by any standard''. Really ? That came after all this happened FIRST:
Issue 66, November – December 2024
</div>
<div style="margin-top: 1.5em; border: 3px solid #ae8c55; border-radius: .5em; padding: 1em 1.5em; font-size: 1.2em;">
* Les Jours and East View Press join the library
* Tech tip: Newspapers.com
<big>''']'''</big>
</div>
</div>
<small>Sent by ] on behalf of The Misplaced Pages Library team --17:32, 10 January 2025 (UTC)</small>
<!-- Message sent by User:Samwalton9 (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=The_Wikipedia_Library/Newsletter/Recipients&oldid=28051347 -->


== Banned cease-and-desist photographer ==
:* After you attacked Crisco. (in the same way, for Olympia - it is all in the ])


I am really frazzled now. Someone is . I can not find any trace of that. You should expect some traces of that on ENWP, Meta or Commons, but no.
:*After you changed the picture I nominated.


Do you (or your stalkers) know anything about this? It sounds a bit fishy to me right now. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">]&nbsp;]</span> 14:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:*After you used the above language in the nomination, not a calm rationale but ''horrible'', a ''kind of art botox'', ''just silly'', ''inauthentic'', and ''derisory''.
*No clue. I'll add to your note. Thanks, ] (]) 16:10, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
**Thanks, seeing the edits of this account, the editor did this wiki-wide. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">]&nbsp;]</span> 16:50, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:*After you put a giant distracting big picture in the nomination that had nothing to do with it, bigger then the nominated picture. I remove it and you put that back, and refused to remove it, even after you were asked twice. It was an administrator had to remove it, because you won't do that.


:(stalker comment) I don't really have anything conclusive to add, but from what I see, the user who uploaded the images is not banned or even warned from either enwiki or Commons. He appears to be a professional photographer who uploads many of his images to commons, and then Misplaced Pages, replacing lower-quality existing ones if necessary (I guess there is a small chance its all a big copyright misuse but you'd have thought that would have been picked up upon, particularly as his work involves famous buildings and peopel so probably gets a lot of views). You can see on his talk page there is a message from an IP user in 2019 (who stopped editing in the same year) regarding 'excessive use of own images'. I'm unsure if any such rule actually exists, but in my opinion it was not applicable anyway as the use of the images improved the site, were not self-promotional in terms of including watermarks or anything to overtly identify the contributor, and was not excessive proliferation of photos within individual articles. The reverting user has only made 92 edits, half of which were reverting the photographer today. Not sure why they would even take this course of action, expect perhaps they noticed an image (one of their own?) replaced by the photographer editor, read their talk page, decided the 2019 message was something official and unilaterally decided it justified reverting all recent additions (in the same style as the 2019 user, which is suspicious too). ] (]) 17:45, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:* After you were editwarring with me trying to force not to withdraw a nominantion 'I wrote above: '''Withdrawn nomination''', with big letters - something you call here: ''' can only be described as a fit of screaming pique''. Oh, really? Reverting twice my witdrawal how can that be described??
:], thank you for doing some of that leg work--I had looked at various things but managed to miss that IP comment. And that IP comment: well, "excessive" use is a thing frowned upon but you laid out the (common sense) practices pretty neatly; thank you for that as well. ] (]) 18:08, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{tl|tps}} That photographer's license terms seem to take a strict position on the exact way credit must be given in off-wiki uses of their work. I'm not sure if they have pursued settlements against good-faith reusers or in other ways headed into license-trolling. I, like others, cannot find discussion about it on enwiki or commons.{{pb}}There was a previous case (long ago, different license-holder) where consensus formed that the ''effect'' of mass use of a certain creator's content on-wiki was to induce innocent/good-faith but not "strictly by the not-quite-expected license terms" use off-wiki, enabling forced legal settlements. There was thought that the creator themself was actually intentional about using wiki in this way, and that all of this exceeded the community's tolerance and good-faith. ] (]) 18:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
::], yes, thanks--I remember a case too and I think it played out on Commons, that guy who posted videos of himself ejaculating and stuff, and there was a guy who sucked his own ****. But more to the point, I also remember a case of a photographer who, it was judged, was basically here to promote their own business and I think an ANI post led to removal of some of those images. But I can't see what practical guidelines ] is supposed to have broken. ] (]) 18:10, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I have no idea if there is off-wiki evidence of actual legal actions against re-users, or claims that WP sites are inducement. But I also assume anything I'd find by googling I couldn't mention here for OUTING anyway. ] (]) 18:15, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Yep, and any kind of case should be either discussed on-wiki or submitted privately if there's some privacy concern, rather than signaled (if that's even the word) with a boilerplate and vague edit summary. ] (]) 18:18, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:], I have reverted those edits. Thanks for bringing it up. ] (]) 18:13, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
::Your welcome. I hope the editor just made a mistake. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">]&nbsp;]</span> 02:43, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
:For every one who's interested, please see ]. ] (]) 21:42, 13 January 2025 (UTC)


== Just to clarify posts on Miijumaaru talk page ==
:*After you were nominating MY nominated picture that just got withdrawn


The conversation I pinged you in at was a continuation of the post right above at . The editor broke it into two parts for some reason and I wasn't about to correct the nesting issue since the conversation turned turbulent. Since they did multiple changes to articles I thought it would be good to let them know that <nowiki>{{main}}</nowiki> is never used in the lead per the template itself. This was made aware to Tennis Project awhile back and several of us have been slowly fixing tennis articles to comply. A daunting task. I hope this helps you understand the situation I encountered. ] (]) 20:01, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:*And after I discovered that you started editing in an other nomination the very ''' nominators text area''' (my nominations ) : YES, I did said: ''Don't you make comments in the MIDDLE OF THE nomination text, got that'' because I got enough.


== On a side note to above template talk ==


While template "main" should not be used in the lead, the template "further" is less clear on placement. I just looked and the template "see also" also says not to use in the lead and is used only at the top of sections. "Further" says nothing about placement and I can't help but wonder if that should also say not to use in the lead. Where best to bring that up? On the narrow Template:Further talk page? Or is there a more general template talk page that it should be talked about? Thanks. ] (]) 20:18, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
And you are not coming here to say - ''sorry this the above was wrong'' - you come here with a preposterous idea that '' then finally this, what seems to me a frank threat''. That remark you are reffering to was the following :''I don't like what you do. You may win the war, but you may lose something else''. That remark was not a threat. I meant exactly what I said - you will lose goodwill. It was '''''':''''. Is that a threat? I don't think so. A warning - yes, threat - no.
*That's a good question, and I don't have an answer for that--but I think ] is the first place I would go to. I don't know that that page gets a lot of traffic, though... But if, as you say, there is a consensus for the other one, you might could ping some of the editors who discussed that. ] (]) 21:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
*:I posted at Manual of Style/Layout first to see if anyone knows the answer. Thanks. ] (]) 22:06, 13 January 2025 (UTC)


== AfD sock ==
:And the way you go on like this it shows very well what kind of new atmosphere we have at the nominations. I don't like the way the words are used, I don't like the uncivil comments. I don't like the way Crisco has been attacked, I don't like the way I have been treated. When I make some remark or criticism, I try not to interfere with the votings, at least, unless it is some real big mistake going on. There was one picture, I didn't liked Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/Skull with cigarette by Vincent van Gogh, but I waited until it got its votes with my comments. You maybe don't bother much but you destroyed at least two nominations like this. ] (]) 01:20, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::You may not bothered much, but you were showing quite an attitude towards {{U|Crisco 1492‎}} - one of the best editors on the project too. That did disturbed me - to start with. But I tried to be nice, anyway. ] (]) 02:29, 25 July 2014 (UTC)


There's something seriously wrong with {{noping|OhNoKaren}}. The account is about a week old, and she's already created many AfDs. That's pretty much all she's done. I vaguely remember some deletion socks, although I don't recall that they had problems with the procedure as she does. Even if she's not a sock, I'm thinking her editing is disruptive enough to block, but I have to go eat dinner. Can you check if you're still around?--] (]) 01:59, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
*Well, we did just block an AfD troll, a few weeks ago, but this one has a clean record, from my perspective. I need coffee, BTW. ] (]) 13:04, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
**Thanks. Later, after logging out, it occurred to me that the new user's name is similar to {{U|Ohnoitsjamie}}, not similar enough to block for impersonation, but I wondered if the user's conduct rings any bells, Jamie?--] (]) 15:05, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
***Sounds like a "sour grapes" account, someone upset that their vanity bio/company page was deleted? Not sure what the specific case would be. I suspect a sock check would turn up multiple accounts. <b>] ]</b> 15:07, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
****Sorry to disappoint you. ;) ] (]) 16:17, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
****See analysis on ] - she did nominate multiple vanity bio/company pages, and I think those will actually get deleted. --] (]) 16:17, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
*****If many of the nominations have merit, it makes her less disruptive, but not less suspicious.--] (]) 16:34, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
**** CU would probably be stale, but ] comes to mind; after I deleted a page they created, they became very active in AfD; some of the noms were good, but many were not and they were eventually blocked, unblocked, then reblocked for violating terms of their unblock. <b>] ]</b> 17:01, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
*****HOW IN THE WORLD DO YOU REMEMBER STUFF LIKE THAT ] (]) 17:03, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
****** That's a great question; there's plenty of more useful stuff I wish that I remembered. <b>] ]</b> 17:07, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
*******The two users don't write at all the same. Light2021 doesn't sound like a native English speaker. Drmies, was a check ever run against Light2021? Looks like they were accused of socking (their block log is, um, busy)?--] (]) 17:13, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
********Yep--by ] and, to stay on the topic of memory, by you. ;) ] (]) 17:34, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
********It's documented here, ], and Jpgordon checked after an unblock request in 2018. ] (]) 17:39, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
*********Ha! If you remember, my memory is almost non-existent, and as far as CU-related stuff, I repress all of it as bad memories. That said, I suspect that if you were to check the CU log of Light2021 vs. the data on Karen, you might find that they edit from different continents, pretty much ruling out that she's a sock of Light2021.--] (]) 18:05, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
**********Hmm no I don't remember that. ;) ] (]) 18:11, 16 January 2025 (UTC)


== A barnstar for you! ==
:* <nowiki></nowiki>. ] was promoted. I supported it. The only point of the few edits I made there was to smooth over ruffled feathers. I took the trouble first to stitch the VGM tiles and secondly to supply a file description at ]. We have been here before Hafs . The difference is that when I hurt I kick my tormentor in the bollocks. Really last from me. Let me know if you find a new matron's apron to weep into. ] (]) 02:07, 25 July 2014 (UTC)


{| style="background-color: var(--background-color-success-subtle, #fdffe7); border: 1px solid var(--border-color-success, #fceb92); color: var(--color-base, #202122);"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Editor's Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thank you for helping reduce the use of "served as", "serves as" and such like for what are not public service roles. In those two examples, "was" and "is" would be preferable (this last sentence is obviously not for your benefit, but might help someone else who reads this). ] (]) 12:21, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
|}
*I appreciate that--but I'm even stricter than you are: I think it's almost always a euphemism for "work"... ] (]) 13:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
**Thanks. I would like to be stricter, but encounter too much pushback from other editors. I think at most it should only be for unpaid, genuinely altruistic activity. As an example, and without wishing too be too cynical, far too many politicians are self-serving. And of course, we need to take into account that some reliable sources often still use the term for state sector jobs, military and politicians. Perhaps once it is removed from more business bios, we can start an RfC. ] (]) 14:20, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
***], thanks--I thought I'd be careful, since I didn't want to butt heads with you after you sent me this nice message, but I agree with you completely. If you get paid, it's not service. If you get underpaid, it might approach service--but if you are underpaid and still make a fair amount of money (like, for instance, as president of the US), "service" is a bit of a euphemism. As far as reliable sources go--yeah, but in "serve as president" the operational part is "president", not "serve". I teach at a state university: is this service? I like to think so, for various reasons, but it's ludicrous to pretty much equate that with philanthropy (another item we see in ALL those articles), as if it didn't come with a paycheck and possibly health insurance. No Christmas bonuses, of course. ] (]) 16:16, 16 January 2025 (UTC)


== ] ==
::Yes the title '''''has been factored''''' as you express it - because it was an other one just exactly the same that confused the bot. What's wrong with it? Is it a crime or an offense for real - or you just try to make it sound like it, like the remarks above? And yes the ''Skull with cigarette'' - it was promoted because I did not interfered with it - not before it had five votes, as much as needed to be promoted. If I was not waiting patiently with expressing my comments it would have gone down the drain, for sure, 100%. BUT YOU have succeded to destroy several nominations by '' opposing it vigurously'' - as you say yourself: '''''I simply opposed it, quite vigorously it is true''''' - well, you did, and not only that but all the rest above. Nobody has to belive me, it is all in the ] project pages. ] (]) 02:35, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::And a last thing. The picture mentioned above did ''not'' had ''a pronounced yellow colour cast as a result of the processing it had received'' - it looks like that - just as yellow in the original. ] (]) 03:45, 25 July 2014 (UTC)


Thanks for your edits at ]. I had prepared this for a COI report, but was waiting for that editor's response:
::*And yes, I am very much interested to start an ]. ] (]) 12:11, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
*On November 30, 2023, that editor stated : "this account is not a business account, anyone using this account will be doing so with direct supervision of the account owner, ie. I will be standing behind them any time the login is used".
:::* You were on my Talk page rather a lot these past few weeks. I would come down in the morning to check my email and find another dozen messages from you. I trust you agree I responded courteously enough, and of course I was flattered. Now I see you are engaged in the process of reverting your kisses on that page and that's OK. But I've already told you I think you have overstayed your welcome there and I don't want to see any further interaction other than, what would be courteous, giving me a heads up about your complaints you make about me in various forums, this by no means being the only such. ] (]) 17:55, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
*That editor then made a number of edits at ] that removed content sourced by secondary sources, and added content of a promotional tone, sourced by primary sources.
::I won't. But I have to tell you two things. 1) You said, you felt it was too much. 2) I did not reverted it as you say above, I '''changed''' it to a smiley. It was entirely because you said you were not confortable with it. And you said you won't reply. ] (]) 17:59, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
*That editor wrote a lengthy declaration of their purpose , stating, "I kindly request that any changes avoid undermining the hard work and dedication of many business owners and community members who have strived tirelessly to erase the stigma and stereotypes associated with the region."
===Additional question on behavioural problem===
*A Google search of "invise" and "Mike L." adds depth.
::Thank you for this edit. . ] (]) 20:41, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
::Also Drmies, please remove those pictures, with the unpolite ''"Hafs' trusty old DC"'' comment on it. If anyone is interested in the discussion, there is a much more complete version here - ]. Also it would be appropiate to remove them from here: ] - it has nothing to do with the Munch Scream. ] (]) 20:48, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
{{tb|Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/File:Portrait de Jeanne d'Aragon, by Raffaello Sanzio, from C2RMF retouched.jpg}}


Certainly seems like a single-purpose editor trying to cleanse the article of well-sourced negative content. Cheers. ] (]) 12:05, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
== Fascist government of Ukrain finally dismantled: Jatsenjoek resigned ==
*Oh, I feel the same way. Did you see what they tried to post on your talk page? See the filter log. But the problem with the article (I'm sure you saw my pruning) is, in my opinion, much bigger than just that. The negative information isn't about that organization, as far as I could tell from that confusing article. But they're p-blocked from the article now; who knows, maybe they'll figure out how to gain consensus for anything on the talk page. I will reiterate that the argument "it's negative stuff and it shows up in a search" is completely inappropriate here. ] (]) 17:30, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
For your information, and since you made a post on my 'talk' page about my usage of the phrase "fascist Kiev government", let me share you some good news. The fascist government of Jatsenjoek finally resigned! Enough of the bloodshed and financial crisis and attacks on the standard of living of the people of the Ukrain! They will elect a new government in october this year. It will be released now soon enough what hands the Ukrain fascists had in this airplane crash (they have not released their data - e.g. radio communication with the airplane - about the crash, all they come with is false allegations without proof), which killed more then 280 people, of which 193 of the Netherlands. We know they have blood on their hands! ] (]) 19:42, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
*I'm sorry--you must have wanted to post this on my VKontakte page. <joke>But Mother Russia and Father Stalin will be happy with your message, no doubt.</joke> ] (]) 20:20, 24 July 2014 (UTC) ::I'll try to add some well-sourced content back to the article. Cheers. ] (]) 17:38, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
*Ha. After I saw what you posted on ], now removed as chit-chat, perhaps someone will block you for that. I won't, cause I am done for now, but you clearly violated a guideline that you were well aware of. If it happens again I will certainly block you. Thank you, ] (]) 20:25, 24 July 2014 (UTC) :::Sure. You think, ], the subject is notable, that organization? Cause all I see in a quick search is some promotional BS. It may be better to consider . ] (]) 17:44, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Wait. I'm wrong: I should have figured that there was more in the history, including a lot of you. The article ''was'' about a region and for now I'm going to go back to ; hope that's okay with you. Then we can take it from there. ] (]) 17:48, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
::Had to come by and say hi simply after seeing that section title on my watchlist. Everybody's a nazi in Ukraine, that's been my conclusion from twitter.--''']''' • <small><sup style="position:relative">]<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-3.2ex;*left:-5.5ex;">]</span></sup></small> 20:31, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
:::Yeah, tis an attention getter. "Twitter"--I know what it is, I just don't believe it has an independent existence outside of TV programs reporting on what someone Twittered. ] (]) 22:51, 24 July 2014 (UTC) ::: is where it got messed up. ] (]) 17:54, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
{{quote frame|quote=Utah's tech community has been nicknamed Silicon Slopes, a reference to California's world famous Silicon Valley high tech commnity.|source={{cite book|title=Utah: Third Edition|series=It's My State!|edition=3rd|author1-first=Doug|author1-last=Sanders|author2-first=Lisa M.|author2-last=Herrington|author3-first=Kerry Jones|author3-last=Waring|publisher=Cavendish Square Publishing|year=2015|isbn=9781627131780|chapter=Making a Living|page=73}}|width=100%}}
:::Oh, well, you know--{{U|Yngvadottir}} took the bull by the horns. Thank you Yngvadottir. ] (]) 22:55, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
{{quote frame|quote=Increasingly a growing technology sector&mdash;the so-called Silicon Slopes&mdash;has developed around the Salt Lake&ndash;Utah County line.|source={{cite book|title=Utah Politics and Government: American Democracy Among a Unique Electorate|series=Politics and Governments of the American States|author1-first=Adam R.|author1-last=Brown|publisher=University of Nebraska Press|year=2018|isbn=9781496207852|page=48}}|width=100%}}
{{quote frame|quote=In Utah Valley, the coinage "Silicon Slopes," invented by Google in 2013 upon announcing that Provo would be the third city in the nation to receive a Google Fiber network, has been picked up eagerly by business leaders |source={{cite journal|journal=Utah Historical Quarterly|volume=82|issue=3|editor1-first=J. Cecil|editor1-last=Alter|publisher=Utah State Historical Society|year=2014|page=188|title=THIS WAS THE PLACE: The Making and Unmaking of Utah|author1-first=Jared|author1-last=Farmer|doi=10.2307/45063063|url=https://jaredfarmer.net/s/Farmer-This-Was-the-Place-Making-Unmaking-Utah.pdf}}|width=100%}}
The non-advertorial independent sources strongly disagree with that first paragraph, Doktoro.
Personally, I am inclined to take the word of the {{plainlink|1=https://www.history.upenn.edu/people/faculty/jared-farmer|2=Walter H. Annenberg Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania}} published in a state historical society journal over what is said in a self-published corporate blurb.
] (]) 07:42, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
*], I don't know what I did wrong: that is NOT the version I wanted to restore. Thank you. And it's nice to see you again. Keep your distance: I got something from my boy and I don't want to pass it on to you. ] (]) 17:24, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
**Take out your mask and pass {{harvnb|Gustin|2013}} along to ], Doktoro. That, in addition to the history professor, will get you the ] connection. ] (]) 09:06, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
***{{cite magazine|title=‘Silicon Slopes’: Google Fiber Planned For Provo, Utah|author1-first=Sam|author1-last=Gustin|date=2013-04-18|url=https://business.time.com/2013/04/18/silicon-slopes-google-fiber-planned-for-provo-utah/|magazine=]}}


== AN == == Email ==


{{ygm}} ] (]) 15:17, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi,
*{{U|Yamla}}, yes--go for it. Thank you. ] (]) 17:14, 20 January 2025 (UTC)


== Just got back from a weekend trip ==
I posted an appeal of topic ban you issued to me at AN (). All the best.--] (]) 16:00, 25 July 2014 (UTC)


Is there something pressing I should be looking at this eve? ] (]) 01:39, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
== Even though you will be notified because i highlighted your username... ==
*Haha I don't know. Can you make OSU ''and'' ND lose? I saw MidAtlanticBaby was at it again, yawn. ] (]) 01:40, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
**I saw the AN was protected from move. So somebody's active. I imagined today's DC stuff might create a bunch of new pages. I've been traveling all day and wanted to look around before I hit the sack. ] (]) 01:45, 21 January 2025 (UTC)


== Ye Guofu ==
...please read and/or participate in here (http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Dennis_Brown#PANHEAD2014_block). Vaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaasco!


Thanks for catching that. It was a misclick. Things happen. ] (]) 20:38, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
== ] ==
*I caught something? Yeah, some awful bug--been coughing and wheezing and sweating for days now. {{U|Kudpung}}, how are you doing these days? I would love to see where you live. Time is running out, isn't it, for all of use. ] (]) 15:47, 22 January 2025 (UTC)


== Article assistance ==
Was looking at some ZZ Top and curious as to some redirect (steak and snake) and found that we are redirecting Tube Steak -> hot dog. Now, I'm pretty sure that if a burly man walks up and says he wants to give you a tube steak, he isn't going to hand you a ]. Not sure if this needs an RFC, but topics of this nature are your specialty, so I wanted to throw it on your lap to fix. I'm busy, about to make some crab cakes, broiled shrimp over saffron rice and garlic cheese bread. ]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;] 20:14, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
*How should I know anything about tube steak? I mean, it means "dick", but do you really want to redirect it to "penis"? And go easy on the garlic bread: you ''know'' all those refined carbs aren't good for you. I'm ] tonight. ] (]) 20:48, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::Now my planned dinner for tonight of roast chicken with white rice sounds really boring.--] (]) 22:01, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:::Guess that's gonna be for tomorrow night. A bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken just came through the front door.--] (]) 22:20, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:*Tube steak is also a slang word for "hot dog" though I don't think its in much current use for that meaning anymore. It is attested on p. 1013 of ''The Routledge Dictionary of Modern American Slang and Unconventional English'' (2008 ed.), which also lists "penis" as a second meaning.. However, this confusion can make old articles like these amusing.--''']''' • <small><sup style="position:relative">]<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-3.2ex;*left:-5.5ex;">]</span></sup></small> 21:08, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::*Milowent, answer honestly: were you User:Tubesteak? ] (]) 21:11, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::*Well, I don't know if this should go elsewhere. Maybe penis is the best place to go. And Milowent, that tremendous tube steak of yours, I mean the one you referenced of course, was it ? ] (]) 21:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::*This talk page never fails to make me giggle and still see the relevance in the discussion.--] (]) 21:18, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:::*] could do with a photo. Anyone fancy cooking one? ] (]) 21:19, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::::*Oh, man. That puts the Bacon whatchamacallit to shame. {{U|Kelapstick}}, are you aware of this? ] (]) 21:55, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::*Shawarmtastic! My left arm went numb thinking about it. ]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;] 22:14, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::*I'm not clicking on that link! And I hereby disclaim being ]. My earliest edits were indeed in 2007, but that was when I feared editing. I think redirecting it to hot dog is fine, it was a legitimate use in the 1960s-80s at least. And in the internet age, every word will eventually also be a sexual euphemism, so we can't just redirect 4.5 million articles to penis and such. BTW, I just googled images of ] (with my eyes half-shaded just in case), but boy that looks tasty.--''']''' • <small><sup style="position:relative">]<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-3.2ex;*left:-5.5ex;">]</span></sup></small> 21:26, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:::*That is why I drop stuff like this here, for people may giggle, but they still see the serious question behind it. I'm still not sure where it should redirect, but a discussion here ''might'' eventually come up with a good argument. ]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;] 21:45, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::{{like}}--] (]) 21:58, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
* Hmmm...the most common use of "tube steak" is indeed for a hotdog. I used to be involved in some pretty cheap pRon, and "tube steak" was never ever in the dialogue - although I've heard it occasionally used in a puerile manner <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 22:54, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
**Ok, I will ask: wtf do you mean by "I used to be involved in some pretty cheap pRon"? Are you really Ron Jeremy? You can't just say that without providing enough details so that we can judge you. ]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;] 00:18, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
::: Well, I'm better-looking and darker-skinned than the porcupine, but you're pointing in the right direction. Hey, I grew up in a small, poor country ... education isn't cheap <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 00:26, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
::::See, now I'm just jealous. I never had the muscular body for that. But then, neither did Jeremy. Anyway, getting back to the point, I've never heard a hot dog being called tube steak. I accept it was, and we have a couple of rather hilarious citations above proving it was, that is just new to me. I didn't hear it much regardless, but when I did only as a dick joke. For instance, in Cheech and Chong's Next Movie, I'm wanting to say it was Red (Cheech as his own cousin) that said "I got you a tube steak smothered in underwear", which spawned a small smutculture around that phrase, which I tried to link but it appears both are blacklisted. Probably a good thing. ]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;] 00:43, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::: Yeah, Cheech and Chong also did "you ordered a pepperoni pizza? Well here's your pizza, *unzip* and here's your pepperoni!" (which is sadly very similar to a line I once performed). They did a lot of turn-food-into-drug-or-sex jokes <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 10:05, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::::"Ain't that a peach" is another example from Next Movie. Drmies needs to start ] with all this gold. ]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;] 12:50, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::::: I heard pizza? Good news from ], for a change, I call it peace music, --] (]) 14:28, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
::::::::Dennis, write it yourself. It's in the same realm of culture and importance as that muscle car of yours. Gerda, I have yet to hear good news from the Ukraine: I read the list of victims, with brief bios, in ''de Volkskrant''--and I was selfish enough to feel relief that I knew no one on that list. ] (]) 14:46, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
::::::::: You are right, Drmies. I know, however, victims of a war here, and appreciate ]. The heart-warming hook was not taken but appears on my user page, --] (]) 15:16, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::::::*And a lot more civilized than Dennis's tube steak. ] (]) 16:10, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
::::::::::* Nichts gegen ], - see the ]. Also admire his civilized AN close, - same players as in the article history. --] (]) 22:44, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::::::::*Gerda is entirely too kind to me. And thanks for the talk page space Drmies. I was serious about whether or not those redirects were proper, and now I know. I ''won't'' be using that slang term to describe my Ball Park dawgs, however. ]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;] 00:56, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::: Cheech and Chong have nothing on the finest lines from any movie, anywhere: ]
::::::: '''Frank''': "Nice beaver"
::::::: '''Jane''': "Thanks, I just had it stuffed"
:::::: Now that's some funny shit <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 20:50, 26 July 2014 (UTC)


Well, given what you said above about being ill (sorry), I'm not sure you'll want to do this, but perhaps it would be a distraction. A new editor added unsourced material to ]. I left the editor a warning, and they re-added the material, this time with sources. The sources are unverifiable (by me at least), and there are various other issues, copy editing if nothing else, and I think you'd be much better than I at reviewing the material. My knowledge of long-deceased foreign epidemiologists is nil. Besides, articles about disease are not ideal for a hypochondriac. If not up to it or uninterested, I understand. Regardless, I hope you get better soon.--] (]) 18:57, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
== 18th-century Dutch Patriot -red link ==
*I'm not a hypochondriac--in fact I'm an inveterate optimist, unfortunately. Yes, I'm ill, and I think I have some infection that's also making an infected tooth unbearably painful: I need this root canal done quickly, but everything here has ground down to a halt because of two inches of snow. ] (]) 21:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
**Pretty normal in the South. I remember once being at work, a few flakes of snow fell from the sky, and there was a mad dash for the exit.--] (]) 21:20, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
***Yup. But this cold/flu/whatever I have delayed me: by the time I got to Blockbuster there were no copies of any of the ''Die Hard''s left. ] (]) 21:34, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
****Even when you're sick, you're funny.--] (]) 21:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
*****I do what I can on a budget, Bbb. So this guy was indeed a badass--I got a bunch more from the source that was already cited, but there should be English sources as well for someone like this, and I'll have a look--and polish up my Ukrainian. ] (]) 21:56, 22 January 2025 (UTC)


OK "badass" is not enough credit. He worked with ] during the ] which killed maybe 15 million people. Have a look at --I was confused because I didn't see a thumbnail, but this lengthy description accompanies a photo of him and Strong in full moon suits. Amazing. Can we use it? I'm about to plow through , and there's . These are just the first couple of hits; we need to do better. Talk page followers, get to work! Papa is actually sick! You shouldn't let him do all the work! ] (]) 22:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
]
''The Keeshond was named after the 18th-century Dutch ], ] (spelled 'Gijzelaar' in Modern Dutch), leader of the rebellion against the ]. The dog became the rebels' symbol; and, when the House of Orange returned to power, this breed almost disappeared. The word 'keeshond' is a compound word: 'Kees' is a nickname for Cornelius (de Gyselaer), and 'hond' is the Dutch word for dog''.


== Your AN request ==
::Nothing on the patriot? ] (]) 20:24, 25 July 2014 (UTC)


{{U|Voorts}} and I , ], and fell to the floor.-- ]<sup>]</sup> 23:54, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
:::{{tps}} ]. Not much, but there are two sources. And so much for modern spelling. (awwwww, doggie!) ] (]) 20:34, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
*So who got the ten bucks? It's $10 for legal threats, right? ] (]) 23:58, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
**My standard retainer is $50K and your first born child. ] (]/]) 00:07, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
***Her retainer was only $5000. Are we talking about the same thing? ] (]) 00:13, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
****You get what you pay for. ] (]/]) 01:03, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
*****{{smalldiv|1=I'm not sure what we're talking about anymore. ] (]/]) 01:03, 23 January 2025 (UTC)}}
******I was talking about teeth... When I became admin we had a list of what kind of block was worth how much, with money transferred from the Foundation's San Francisco office via PayPal. I believe that well has dried up. ] (]) 01:16, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
*I just want to see what kind of letter these guys wrote and who they sent it to. ] (]/]) 23:58, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
**As a member of Drmies' legal team, I'll try to remember to send you a copy.-- ]<sup>]</sup> 00:02, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
***Shoot I got it all wrong: it's ]'s team who should be getting the letter. Seriously, I don't get it. I'm dealing with something similar at ]--first there's the edits made in complete ignorance of what we are and what we do. Then there's the combative responses and the complete lack of the editor reading what was actually said and linked. Then there's one or two or three more editors saying the same thing, and the persistence on the disruptor's part, and then it's over, and no one feels good about it. ] (]) 00:07, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
****As I understand the threats, it is clearly a case of ] ] &#124; <sup> ]</sup> 00:27, 23 January 2025 (UTC)


== Hayden Miller Productions/ActuallyHayden ==
::You are so smart, Yngvadottir. Correct link. ] (]) 20:38, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
*Not a redlink anymore, but not much of an article yet. ] (]) 21:27, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
*{{U|Xanthomelanoussprog}}, I don't agree, ''pal'', with those edits in . At the very least, you should ask for someone to oversight the edit summary: those are not copy edits (in the first paragraph), they are just yo personal opinion, man. Booyakasha. Now, howz about fixing some categories for me there, hey? I mean, eh? ] (]) 21:53, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
http://www.petwave.com/Dogs/Breeds/Keeshond/Overview.aspx - dog ref. ] (]) 22:06, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
::What categories? Citrus fruits? (you can tell he's an opponent of Oranges, as he is sucking a Lemon) ] (]) 06:55, 26 July 2014 (UTC)


Hello - when I noticed , I opened an ] for these users, but I see now that you've already blocked both, so there might not be much point to the case. Is it helpful to keep the case open? And if not, is there a way for me to withdraw it? (I couldn't find a way to do that.) Thanks! ] (]) 01:46, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
== Lack of response? ==
*Yeah, it's all too obvious, isn't it. Let me have a look and see what's best. Thanks, ] (]) 01:48, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi, Drmies! I just saw your comment about me on ], and I have to admit I'm puzzled and confused... What lack of response are you talking about? Was I supposed to respond to someone and I failed to do so?
I saw your comment on my talk page, I realized where I have failed and, as you saw, I took no further action on your edits at ]. Did I have to do anything more than that? You didn't mention anything. Please, assist me on this, 'cause I'm really at a loss here. Respectfully, ] (]) 13:53, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
*Thanks for your note here, CostaDax: all I was looking for was a kind of "OK", but all I saw was that you deleted the message. In wikispeak that means "I read it", of course, but I thought it was a somewhat serious matter that warranted a comment. (I see now that that's how you "archive" your talk page...?) Anyway, I understand now that you understand, and that's all I'm looking for ({{U|Bgwhite}}, disregard my comment). Thanks, ] (]) 14:19, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
::Thanks for your response. I take for granted that you are more experienced than me, and I'm always willing to listen to more experienced editors. And just so I can explain a little more why I included that passage on ]:
::*the passage came from a ] from BBC America which can be found here:
::*I read on ] that "while press releases are by nature intended to be reproduced widely, there is no inherent permission to alter them or create derivative works based on them, or to use them for commercial purposes". That's the reason why I did not alter it.
::*the reason I did write it in the first place, was because it has been so widely reproduced (even released as such by BBC America on facebook: ), that I assumed that it is considered part of the ]; according to ], the copyrights do no longer hold for works "that were released into the public domain by the copyright holder".
::Maybe I misunderstood the instructions and maybe I made the wrong assumptions. But I did not intend to violate any principles and guidelines. I just did what I thought was compliant with Misplaced Pages's policy.
::I'm glad that you contacted me, I just couldn't realize why you did what I thought was an attempt by you to chastize me. In any case, I know now that you did not have any intention to do so, and I'm glad. I hope this offers a bit more insight on my actions (and general philosophy), and that it clears the air. Take care! ] (]) 14:56, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
::*Ha, yes--you may not alter them, etc. and are to be treated like other copyrighted content, "and may not be freely reproduced". That they print it all over the place does not mean it's released into the public domain, though; if it is released as such, it's usually accompanied by a notice of some sort. Well, this is my understanding, anyway: if I'm wrong one of the many helpful talk page stalkers will set me straight quickly, I suspect. Thanks again, ] (]) 15:08, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
::**<small>(standard disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.)</small> You're more or less right, Drmies. This is a thing that many many people don't realize, but "]" is a very specific term in copyright jargon, and it does ''not'' just mean "the domain of things that are available to the public". One can release things to the public while retaining copyright all the time--which is why music/movie/etc. piracy is illegal, even though the works in question are being distributed widely; the copyright holders own and maintain their copyrights over the work even as they're distributing it. "Releasing something into the public domain" means that one relinquishes ''all'' rights to it permanently, and it takes more than simply making something available to the public to do that. One has to ''explicitly'' state that they're releasing all their rights to a work; disseminating one's work widely isn't the same thing. It's simply just a case of unfortunate linguistic coincidence that causes the confusion, I think. ]&nbsp;]] 21:23, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
::::*I think I made a mistake like that early in my career, thinking that since something (an image, or a photograph, can't remember) was on the internet, it was OK to use. It wasn't. Funny, though: we seem to be the only ones on the entire internet to take this seriously. ] (]) 22:37, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

== ] Deletion ==

You deleted such informative article it is a part of history it was the first digital anime magazine ever built, plus its free and no business occurs. Without the information from Misplaced Pages everybody could just claim that they are the first to launch a free digital anime magazine. Please participate in regaining the article its serious. Don't accuse an article to be an advertisement if its free and a non-business society do you even read the sources? You also deleted it without any warnings, please state your side. --] (]) 17:44, 26 July 2014 (UTC)-- ]
12:39, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
*It was a Facebook page; calling it a magazine is a bit of an exaggeration. You have no proof, by the way, that this was the first digital anime magazine, but more importantly, the article met all the qualifications for speedy deletion (see ]); administrator {{U|Randykitty}} deleted ] as advertising, a decision I agree with since it is written as a promotional piece, not a neutral, well-verified encyclopedic article (there were no sources). That the advertised product is free is irrelevant. Now, I didn't "warn" you because I didn't nominate it for speedy deletion; that was {{U|Largoplazo}}, whose notification is on your talk page, surrounded by similar notifications. Thank you, ] (]) 18:30, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

== Request advice ==

Hi, Drmies. I have a question regarding Dan56. As you know, we clashed at a couple of articles last month, and I subsequently took some time off and tried to edit pages that he doesn't. The problem is, no matter how little I interact with him, every time we cross paths he accuses me of following him, . I feel that he is inappropriately crying wolfhound every time I edit a page that he edits. What should I do, because as much as I try to avoid him, I am getting really frustrated by his repeated accusation that I "follow him" for some reason. I think that his continued actions in this regard constitute personal attacks that harm my reputation. What should I do? I also welcome input from {{u|Malik Shabazz}}. ] (]) 18:49, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
*], I find this whole thing odd. Why would someone go around and canvass (OK, "invite") a hundred people for an FAC and and RfC? Some clicking around is insightful. The was not supported by two "outsiders" ({{U|Maunus}} and {{U|Simon Burchell}}), the latter of which says "it's not a problem if an FAC has stagnated". But while it may be true that some were sent while there was little activity at the FAC, there were others that were sent out on the 28th, right after Froglich's comments. See ]. (BTW, if {{U|Dan56}} is looking at this, that was a lousy, lousy way to handle an oppose. Not just lousy in the sense of bad tactics--it's not an FA--but also just shitty, in that you seem to accuse a valid oppose of judging on the base of personal blah blah, and I don't see that there: awful wikilawyering.)<p>I find this habit of sending out these invitations to be odd and bothersome. A note on the project page, that should be enough. And look at who those invites went to--who on earth would send a note about an FA review to Werieth (hey, {{U|Betacommand}}, how you doing?), who doesn't know FA from FU and may never have made a content edit in their life under any of their accounts? Strange. ] (]) 21:19, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
**I'm not sure what to suggest. As I mentioned last time, some editors who have had problems with Dan in the past have discussed starting an ], but I don't think it ever got off the ground. —&nbsp;]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub> 22:53, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
***Thanks Malik. That really is the way to go. ] (]) 04:39, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

* Okay, thanks for your input. I guess at this point I am willing to try an RfC/U for Dan56, but per ]:

::"Before requesting community comment, at least two editors must have contacted the user on their talk page, or the talk pages involved in the dispute, and tried but failed to resolve the problem. Any RfC not accompanied by evidence showing that two users tried and failed to resolve the same dispute may be deleted after 48 hours as "uncertified". The evidence, preferably in the form of diffs, should not simply show the dispute itself, but should show attempts to find a resolution or compromise. The users certifying the dispute must be the same users who were involved in the attempt to resolve it."

: Can I assume that either or both of you guys are willing to certify? Are the contacts that you two made with Dan56 at his talk page and at article talk pages sufficient to satisfy the minimum requirements? Please advise. ] (]) 17:47, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
::Well, that's tricky. Unlike Malik (I think) I'm somewhat involved in the content of some of those articles, so I suppose I should check my admin bit at the door if those provide prime evidence--but I wasn't going to close this RfC/U anyway. Then again, participating in an RfC about Dan will probably mean I can't take ''any'' administrative action--not that I foresee having or wanting to do that. Anyways, yes, I will probably be willing and able to certify, though I will not likely go in great detail, and I'd love to have Malik's input as well. I think that those discussions on that one Black Sabbath page are probably enough to legitimize an RfC/U. The real question is whether it will serve much of a purpose. Dan56 seems a bit intransigent to me, and the end result of an RfC/U is typically a "word to the wise"--but then, it's frequently the first step, if more steps are ever necessary. Drop me a line when you're working on it. I will have to look at some diffs again. Tomorrow is not a good day for, but I'll have 48 hours. Make sure you define quite clearly a. what the problems are, accompanied by our alphabet soup (WP:EW, WP:NLT, WP:OWN, whatever) and b. what you think the wished-for conclusion of this RfC/U should be. Good luck. ] (]) 18:56, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
::: Thanks, Drmies. I too will be busy at work today and most of tomorrow, but I should have something for you to look at by Wednesday. ] (]) 17:22, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
::: I started a draft ]. Please feel free to add or alter anything as you see fit. ] (]) 18:55, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

== Concerning an editor you mentor ==

Regarding the editor you mentor who has taken such an aversion to me, I wonder whether it would be worth mentioning to him that sometimes when you have an insufficient command of a language (clearly English is a second language for this editor) misunderstandings can arise. The edit in full to which he took such violent exception is as follows:

:* '''Oppose''' - No way. I don't have enough computer memory to process these enormous images, but I did manage to get the retouching editor's last effort at FPC into Nikon X2 long enough to see that basically what's he's doing is "equalizing" the histogram (essentially pushing the "auto-level" button). That may be appropriate for a digital image, but it won't do for an art image. These images have simply aged, and they darken for a variety of complex reasons. Only expert restoration can bring them back to an approximation of their original appearance. This kind of processing is just silly, inauthentic, and derisory. still beautiful: " ... thy eternal summer shall not fade / Nor lose possession of that fair thou ow'st": but this is just horrible, a kind of art botox. Not on my account, sorry. ] (]) 05:18, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

That's quite forthright of course, but it's not an 'attack' and it didn't merit his vehement response. ] (]) 22:43, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

: erm ... what's that about W above by the way :}? ] (]) 22:46, 26 July 2014 (UTC)


::I have to seriously ask you stop editing this nomination, stop ( I removed some new ones added here again) and stop adding comments like '''''this image sucks''''' and now I am asking for administrators intervention agains ] on this nomination, {{U|Drmies}}.
::And also ask for stop telling Fylbecatulous not to vote here, above in the nomination ]. I care because it is my nomination, because it is a beautiful picture, it has character, grace and it is lovely. If it is attributed to several painters - this kind of doubt happens in the world of art history. Why do '''you''' C.o.m.c. care som much, that is on the other hand a mystery, that nobody seems to want to deal with. ] (]) 22:55, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

And what a shame that nobody dares to raise their voices to tell you that you are a clearly ], that nobody say stop - while you are sprinkeling the whole ] with agressive remarks and behaving absolutely disruptively and no matter how many times you are told to stop you just go on like this and will NEVER stop, whatever happens. It is YOU, C.o.m.c. the person that you try to make poor Fylbecatulous into telling him:'' In this case we have a newbie wrong about everything and apparently unwilling to cooperate. It would likewise be kind, tolerant and generous of him simply to admit his mistakes, embarrassing and possibly unpleasant though that might be, and move on.'' That's you, C.o.m.c., not him.

:'You started editing Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates for a month ago and succeded to turn it upside down completely. You can always pick up one or two webbsites here and there aboutsome ongoing nomination or one certain painting but you don't have the training and ability to judge art or pictures. You are filling that project with a lot of weird nominations, and both your nominations and your comments show that you don't understand art, art history, have no deep understanding of most things that this project is about. ] (]) 00:41, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
::And I sincerely belive that you should be banned from editing ]. ] (]) 00:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
*Coat, I don't know who's being pointed at as the "retouching editor". Maybe not a personal attack, but not difficult to see how someone could take it that way. ] (]) 01:28, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
:*Luckily I don't have to get involved into looking through everything that's gone on in detail. In fact some of the passionate writing above makes me less than 100% sure even as to who is being alleged to have said which part. But it's worth noting a significant difference in emphasis between the phrase "This kind of processing is just silly, inauthentic, and derisory" (pretty much the strongest phrase from the first paragraph), and "you don't have the training and ability to judge art or pictures ... you don't understand art, art history, have no deep understanding of most things that this project is about" (the key phrases from the last paragraph). I suggest to the participants (or some of them) that thinking over that difference may be useful in finding ways to de-escalate this dispute. (If that is the aim...) --] (]) 04:08, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

::* Well, the retouching editor would be DCoetzee I suppose (an editor I admire and god knows I have spent significant time doing the same sort of thing he accomplished by bots - my position on copyright is a practical and realistic one, but off-topic here), but that's not quite what I meant. The point about DC's edits (I mean his 'retouched' edits) is that they serve a limited function as thumbnails. The fact is that these gigapixel images often simply don't thumbnail well. Nor even necessarily display well within the resolution of ordinary screen monitors. Why should they? I agree absolutely with JohnBod about the limited applicability of these images. But to take an image that has been digitally processed so severely and use it as Misplaced Pages's "best" strikes me as perverse in the extreme when a casual glance at it is sufficient to show it has suffered an egregious colour cast as a result.

::: As for our editor's latest intervention (if I call it "hysterical" I can be certain that another unpleasant posting will ensue), I think Demiurge is quite right. I shall just try and distance myself from him. I shall be sorry if I'm not able to contribute at that forum, but if it really is just a shoe-in service for a matey clique of friends, then I'm sure I'm best out. Happy to leave him to you to cherish all to yourself :). I notice by the way that - that will indeed please my ex-boss if he happens to alight upon it ... I await the blast any moment, he will go absolutely critical in several higher dimensions and beyond, and I really *will* have to close my account then. Oh well. Just a hobby. Thank god for booze.

:::Thank you for your time. ] (]) 05:45, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

::::And all that stuff that about ChildOfMidnight explains the weird allusions to 2009 he suddenly introduced into my Talk page. I spent most of 2009 in and out of hospital being replumbed and rewired and god knows what else - socking Misplaced Pages wouldn't have been a priority. ] (]) 06:19, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::''I did manage to get the retouching editor's last effort at FPC into Nikon X2 long enough to see that basically what's he's doing is "equalizing" the histogram (essentially pushing the "auto-level" button).'' You appear here to be confusing two separate processing functions (and somehow using a lens or something to carry them out). You're making all this stuff up, aren't you? ] (]) 07:27, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
::::::Well I'm not going to start another long series of responses. I do a bit of photography at entry level. I have Nikon Capture X2 as imaging process software. The most basic edit you can make there is to ''equalise'' the histogram, i.e. to map the lightest pixel to pure white and the darkest pixel to pure black, linearly interpolating the tones in between. You can accomplish this with sliders on the histogram or by pushing AutoLevel. It's usually quite a pleasing edit since it naturally gives a full range of tones, but its defect of course is that in RGB space it necessarily introduces colour imbalances. Now I don't have enough memory on my computer to input the very large files involved,but by dint of waiting long enough I was able finally, after several crashes, to get the source file DC was editing into the program and again, by waiting, able to perform the AutoLevel edit and confirm that basically that was what had been done (the image lacked the 10% lightest tones) and that that was the source of the yellow colour cast. DC himself has commented that he used the Curves function in Photoshop. I assume that's the same thing. I hope that satisfies your concerns about my integrity.
:::::: This is the last from me here. My intention was merely to make a constructive suggest to Drmies about this editor. ] (]) 07:50, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::::That's a weird effect- use of levels in that manner produces gaps in the histogram, but doesn't tend to introduce colour casts. The yellow cast could be produced in curves by ramping up the R and G curves individually; if curves was used to increase the contrast, more than likely the RGB curve was put into an S shape. Introduction of casts could be avoided by using an adjustment layer in luminance blend. I did look at the two files cursorily and my impression was that (saving what you described as the "piss colour") the yellow one was superior in detail. I used to whop out the casts by picking, making a new layer, filling with foreground and inverting, then increase the transparency. In this case, a yellow layer inverts to blue, drop the opacity down to about 10%. ] (]) 08:07, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::::: The original ] has a cast as well I notice. The nicest image is, or so at least I think, the museum image I uploaded to my file upload ] by a very noted art photographer and which I think you will agree is absolutely stunning. I mean truly beautiful as all his images are. Unfortunately it's not high resolution so can't be offered as a Featured image. When I put the two images side by side in a multiple I'm afraid our editor just deletes it. Don't misunderstand me about digital processing. While not really a very keen photographer, I do know that it's always been the case that there's no "correct" print for a photograph, and that is truer than ever in today's digital age. But that is not so for a painting, and beyond that I don't want to spend the time. I don't mean to be in any way off hand, but I've reached saturation point with this drama. I can't understand how an editor who professes to love this painting can champion such a piss (yes indeed, literally) poor image of it, but I can see right now it's going to be shoed in for Featured by (so it seems) a bunch of Welsh jihadists waiting in the wings, and there's nothing I can do about it. Thank you for your time. ] (]) 08:37, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

== User:Munich001 ==

] has added unsourced material to which was subsequently reverted . Not sure if you want to deal with him. ] (]) 05:35, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
*Kingjeff, any time you see that kind of writing, which looks not-so neutral but is well phrased and organized, Google it. In this case it was copied from http://m.fifa.com/worldcup/players/player=196752/profile-detail.html. Thanks for alerting me, ] (]) 15:59, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

== Archived?? ==

Why did you removed materials from someone else's talk page?? ] (]) 09:55, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
*Who's asking? ] (]) 14:31, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
::What did you mean by {{tq|Who's asking}}? Are you suspecting me a sock?? No no I'm not a sock friend. I'm just a wandering IP moving here and there, reading comments by experienced editors. I have a habit of checking history to see if the page has been vandalised or not. While doing that I came across to that IPs talk page. When I checked the history, I'm surprised to see that an admin removed most of the stuffs with an edit summary "archived". Why did you do that on someone else's talk page?? ] (]) 19:57, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
:::I'm asking who's asking so I can guesstimate how much I will say. The IP is used by a friend of mine who announced his retirement. That's all. ] (]) 19:22, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

== Edit war ==
Editor ] returned to make the same edits before being blocked by edit war. See:https://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/Panhead2014 ] (]) 27 July 2014 (UTC)
*Maybe so, but I don't understand . I mean, there's a reference (that you removed) which clearly has him play 15 years in the Spanish league (and score eight, not seven goals). You removed an archived link, some information from templates... ] (]) 15:13, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
*That link--it's always better to have something as a reference than as an external link. Now, edit warring, I don't know: their last three edits seem fine to me, and they are explained. Whether they're really reverts, well, probably they are in the broad sense of the term, but they improve the article. Sorry, but your English can do with some maintenance sometimes. I'm about to look into the ANI report. ] (]) 15:16, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
*{{U|Randykitty}} has kindly done the honors. I'm just baffled at the complete lack of consideration shown by that editor: when you're in a hole, stop digging, and if someone does ''not'' want to block you, don't beg them to. Now, Gringo, you should be wary of committing the same mistake again (edit warring); however, as Panhead pointed out in the ANI thread that boomeranged so quickly, I am an "involved" editor and so cannot take action against you, in the same way that I did not take action against them--I'm sure he appreciates that. Thanks, ] (]) 18:24, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

== YGM ==

Not good having to teach in the summer. I used to have to do this when I taught at the University of Birmingham. ] (]) 16:30, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

== ] ==

werde ich demnächst unter Händen nehmen ... :-) --] (]) 20:16, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
*I made ], since I had those references handy, properly formatted. ] (]) 20:50, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

== Katowice Film School ==

This article was written before the web page which is suspicious to be copied. English description at http://www.writv.us.edu.pl/strona/english was based on[REDACTED] article!
I didn't change it, I've just only redirect it to the correct name of the faculty. ] (]) 02:31, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
*You're saying that the university copied the Misplaced Pages article? Sorry, but I find that very, very unlikely. (Link .)] (]) 02:35, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Probably you are right, I am sorry. Isn't better to leave only basic informations from this article? ] (]) 02:44, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
*Well, here's the thing--it's only rarely that individual departments are notable by our standards. It's possible that a valid addition can be made to ], which is not a great article, but only if ] prove, one way or another, that the department is worth mentioning. What you need to beware of is that such articles frequently turn into directories, and those are typically removed. So think of notable people, important projects that have been written up in magazines or the paper, etc. Thanks, ] (]) 02:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
I think this faculty is worth mentioning, even in short article, because of it's rare specialization. There are not so many filmschools in Europe and each one is quite known. This school produce short films and documentary which are presented at the most important film festivals, like San Sebastian FF, Palm Springs, etc. That's why I think it's untypical faculty. It's also untypical for any university to produce films. ] (]) 03:20, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
*If you're right, reliable sources will prove it. (Not Facebook...) ] (]) 03:37, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Could you undelete article and delete those paragraph which are beaking rules please? I will add reliable sources to provide my argument. It doesn't have to be deleted from cover to cover. ] (]) 12:24, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
*{{U|Krzyztopor}}, it's in a sandbox: ]. I have removed all the copyvio stuff (which was, basically, all the content), and have attributed the remaining text to you in an edit summary (this is the easy way, chosen for logistical purposes). Good luck with it, ] (]) 17:30, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

== Drmies admin help line ==

] is a page up for deletion at AfD. Editor now wants it deleted. Why they want it deleted depends on what talk page the editor has left ] ] ]. ], same person, was deleted at AfD in 2008. After finding out about the 2008 article, reading it and other talk page messages, my instinct says to delete, but salt. But, I'm not sure. ] (]) 06:14, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
*It's a different article, as I'm sure you saw, so G4 certainly doesn't apply. That user changed their mind very quickly, didn't they. Why not just let the AfD run its course? The editor suggests BLP concerns, but I don't see that there is a clear and present BLP violation happening. ] (]) 15:00, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
**Same person and about 75% the same article. The latest keeps getting additions and deletions by the creating editor, so they share a majority of the same content depending on what version is read. Thanks, I'll let it run its course. ] (]) 20:27, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
*<small>Thank you for calling the Drmies admin help line, Neutralhomer speaking, how may I help you? :) - <small style="white-space:nowrap;border:1px solid #900;padding:1px;">] • ] • 15:12, 28 July 2014 (UTC)</small><small/>

== YGM ==

…take two aspirin immediately. ] (]) 08:07, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
*Oops, should have taken one this morning. Forgot my fiber tablets too! ] (]) 14:53, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:I tried to find a sexy asprin costume for the "take two and call me in the morning (to tell me about it) joke, but this was the best I could find ] has failed me!!!!19:39, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:*Whoa. "Got a Bayer aspirin caught between my knees"--that one is news to me! ] (]) 19:43, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:::I didn't even bother to read the page first, granted that it is about sex, with a famous-ish and highly parody-able quote, I am very suprised about the Rule 34 violation. I may have to report this to Reddit! ] (]) 19:47, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

== ERR you lost me?? ==

Did I say something wrong? I thought it was actually thoughtful advice. ] (]) 19:35, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
*Well, the "walk away" part probably was if it was intended generally, though I think that "Peoples edits are discussed regularly here" sounds like you think it's perfectly alright what Scal did, the invitation to the coterie, and I strongly disagree with that. The law probably does not forbid it, but it's a very unfriendly thing to do, very uncollaborative. I haven't been keeping up with the latest installment of their drama, but these talk page/archive edits by Scal--I would ''never'' do something like that to the talk page of someone I disagree with so strongly, unless it was a certified administrative action. It's unwise and provocative. So in this case, I side with LB, who finds it a kind of stalking, and to tell ''her'' to walk away from ''that'', well, that's not fair. Scal needs to walk away from LB's edits and pages, in my opinion. Thanks, ] (]) 19:39, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
] was a message to them both, I understand what you mean about it being unfriendly and I haven't read through that entire thread to see if it was entirely offbase but the failure of both to drop the stick and multiple ANI filings lead to blocks and most times not blocks based on accuracy but blocks to just stop the madness. Sometimes they need a reminder hey go take a break come back, my last comments were aimed at LB because they had replied back and was continuing the dispute more, Scal at that point had basically stated hey the break sounds like a good deal ] but the overall message was take a break, too much drama. I pointed out my own sanctions because to this day I think that the Arbcom findings were based on precisely what I mentioned above. On that note I just ran across this on AN so was researching and commenting but I'm not invested. Didn't mean to be misunderstood. ] (]) 19:48, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
*Thanks. Oh, there's more on AN? That means it's time for me to log off. ] (]) 19:50, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
::Here's a brand new one ] ] (]) 19:54, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

== Please reopen ==

Please reconsider and reopen my request. My concerns are real, and they are NOT being properly addressed. ] (]) 20:19, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I might add, today, he joined the Gender Gap project. WTF! Do you think he would have done that if I hadn't asked about a civility board and that whole, simple request devolved into a discussion about what "c*nt" means in different countries? Please. As a mature woman, I know what harassment is, and this behavior is harassment. ] (]) 20:27, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

:How do you know he joined the GenderGap, also can you explain the significance as I am unfamiliar with what it is? ] (]) 20:36, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
::Because I only joined it a few days ago myself. ] (]) 20:38, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:::I joined it by invitation from another editor. Scal joined it today, less than 48 hours after I joined. ] (]) 20:42, 28 July 2014 (UTC)


Drmies, only six days ago, Scalhotrod speculated that I'm going to edit as an IP or create a second account. Callanecc warned him. During the civility board discussion, another editor called me a c*nt (others disagree that it was personal), and Scal called the comment that included that gem, "Brilliant!" One of the guys in that discussion who insisted that I acknowledge that c*nt is a friendly greeting among men in Australia, started a discussion on my page headed "Poor manners." I humored him. When it started to circle back in on itself, I asked him to leave me alone. He and others commented further. I deleted what was added after I asked to be left alone. In swoops Scal to revert my deletion and to tattle on me. The same guy who started the poor-manners discussion? Scal goes to his talk page, gives him at atta boy, and once again starts gossiping about bad old LB.
:''You have to understand that regardless of what WP policy says or how its interpreted and/or enforced, LB believes that anything said to her, about her, or simply perceived in reference to her that she does not like, IS a personal attack in her mind. Its how her mind works and no one will change it unless she wants to. She won't listen to (or be convinced by) any reason or logic that diverts her from her particular goal or objective when editing an article regardless of how sound or commonsense it is. Once I realized this, I gave up and just tried to keep doing what I always do, expand and cleanup articles and try to maintain article neutrality where ever it makes sense. She didn't like that on one article and took me to Arbitration Enforcement which resulted in both of us being Topic Banned for 6 months. Personally I consider it a very small price to pay now that others are becoming aware of her tactics and attitudes.'' (Scalhotrod)
Then, as a cherry on top, he joins the Gender Gap.

Please Drmies, HiaB. Please re-open that request. This kind of behavior persists despite the assertion by many that the way it's currently handled now works just fine. Bullshit. Civility is a problem here. It needs to be fixed. The status quo is NOT working and it's driving away good editors. ] (]) 20:38, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

:Drmies is an Admin, DP is an Admin. There are two already involved. I would again suggest that you let this go, if they continue with inappropriate behaviors there is plenty of eyes in the both of you right now and it will be a quick stop. I really don't have a dog in this fight over you or him but honestly what you are doing in appealing to everyone and their brother won't help you, it will hurt you. I've been in your shoes. ] (]) 21:02, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
::At the very least, it leaves a much more visible audit trail. If this were the real world, first, I ask Scal to stop. I've done that repeatedly. Then I report it to his manager and mine. I did that (Callanecc). Now, I want to take it to the top. Should I go to Jimbo or WMF? Honestly. I am fed up with it. My only crime here is insisting that I be treated with the kind of respect people who work together deserve. ] (]) 21:07, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

::What the response I'm receiving now equates to is the middle manager saying, I'll talk with him; don't rock the boat. And then word gets out that I ratted on one of the guys, who's just being a guy, and then whamo! Not only is he a problem, now all his buddies are watching me. Please. This is not something to sweep under the rug. It is a rug to take out into the sunshine and beat the shit out of it. ] (]) 21:10, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:::It doesn't equate to that, because Misplaced Pages doesn't have a corporate structure, and admins are neither one's superior nor one's manager. That's not a good analogy to make, because it makes it look like admins have more power over editors than they actually do. ]&nbsp;]] 21:13, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
::::I understand it's not the perfect analogy, but admins do have some power and authority that regular editors do not have. ] (]) 21:28, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

::::Thanks to {{u|Ryulong}} for restoring Writ Keeper's comment of 21:10, but could you AGF and watch it with the edit summaries? I didn't delete it on purpose - it was probably an edit conflict that I failed to catch. ] (]) 21:20, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::Yeah but .—] (]) 21:21, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
::::::Well, I was in the middle of writing. I don't know what I did, but it wasn't on purpose. Couldn't you have just restored it and brought it to my attention here or on my talk page? That seems more AGF to me. ] (]) 21:23, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::::That's something I'm trying to impress on you, your good faith is on low reserves when you continue like this. That's why I explained reality or not the perception of people change how they view it the more you go on. I don't think you are familiar with ANI or AN it creates more drama most times. ] (]) 21:26, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
::::::::So we AGF for an editor who, as of February 2012, had been blocked 13 times for incivility and disruption, when he used the word "c*nt" in response to a request about a civility board, but we don't for an editor who has no history of vandalism - because she's been (I gather from other comments here and elsewhere) "dramatic"? That seems to be the consensus among the editors here? That asking to be treated civilly, and complaining when you're not, is "dramatic" behavior? ] (]) 22:13, 28 July 2014 (UTC)


:::Jimbo has almost zero power here anymore, you are welcome to do so but the first thing any number of editors on that page will link you to is ], WMF will refer you to the community boards or admin which has reviewed and declined actions. I'll let you pursue it and not interfere anymore because at this point I think you are too upset to ] what I and many others are telling you. I know it's not your intention to be disruptive but it is one and raising more appeals only makes it more so. Writ Keeper is also admin btw ] (]) 21:17, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
::::It's almost like some sort of self-fulfilling prophecy of getting blocked for the subsequent flogging of the equine corpse stemming from her initial goal of trying to raise issues of the gender gap and then being able to cry sexism to her peers for daring to go on about it.—] (]) 21:20, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
*Dear Lightbreather, don't go to the Hotrod's talk page please. Hot rod, don't go to Lightbreater's talk page please. Y'all leave each other alone. Ryulong, please no sexist jokes here--any hint of antifeminism will be met with involuntary castration. As for the rest of all the commentary here, it's hot, my battery is almost empty, I have a pool and it's in great shape, and I have a big bottle of an American-made tripel. So I'll comment on all of it some other time, or I'll let the rest of the world handle it. Much of this drama could have been avoided by, well, avoiding drama. I'm pretty sure the Panda and I can agree on at least ''that''. ] (]) 21:37, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:*Have you looked at the diffs in the paragraph I gave above? Have you anything to say to them? If you haven't yet, could you tell Scal, on his talk page, to stay off mine? I cannot promise to stay off his, because I check it once a week or so to see if he's talking about me. (The evidence shows that he's done so twice in the past six days.) I will not tolerate being gossiped about, especially when it involves allegations (explicit or implied) w/out evidence. Also, can you ask him to leave the Gender Gap project? It's obvious that he joined it because I did, and he doesn't need to be on it to create his "The Thalians" article. Do I need to make a formal request for amendment for this at AR?

:*@Drmies, so for formality sake, I'm proposing a self imposed Interaction Ban between Lightbreather and myself for the rest of the duration of the Topic Ban we are both currently under. For the record, I've already removed LB from my Watch list and stated it on my Talk page. --] - Just your ] banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... ] 21:48, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

<small>(edit conflict)</small> ]. ]. Where is an editor supposed to go if they feel they're being attacked or harassed? I started the ANI per ] on the ''Harassment '''policy''''' page. It says, "For simple, on-wiki matters, such as a user with whom you have arguments, see dispute resolution as the usual first step." "Dispute resolution" in that sentence directs to ]. That gives two options, one of which is, "Ask an administrator to evaluate the conduct of the user. You can ask for an administrator's attention at a noticeboard such as the administrators' noticeboard for incidents (ANI)." ''People... I am following policy.'' ] (]) 21:42, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
*It isn't a matter of "where to go". You've gone to ANI a few times, WT:AN once in a giant discussion, you came here, you went to my talk page. You probably went other places, I haven't been keeping score. Believe me, everyone knows what you think about the matter. The problem is, there is a shortage of people who agree with your particular take on the issue, and you don't seem to accept this. Drmies is pretty outspoken about women's equality. So are lots of us, so it isn't like we are letting anything slide, you just disagree with everyone's take on policy. Until there is something actionable, you have to give it a rest, let Drmies swim, and the rest of us go edit articles. If not, people are going to just start ignoring you completely due to sheer exhaustion. ]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;] 22:10, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:*That 15,000+ word donnybrook... and not even 2,000 were mine. I asked a simple and civil question, got a lot of opinions about how civility can't be enforced, I learned that I did !not get called a "cunt" (so reassuring for so many to help me figure out that the person who introduced that word into the conversation meant no harm by it, so it wasn't "actionable"). I accept that there was a shortage of people in those conversations who agree with my take on WP civility. I'm already ignored by some, or at least when I bring up a specific charge with specific diffs - those get ignored. If I say something offhand, that gets commented on like nobody's business. ] (]) 22:51, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:::People do care about gender equality around here. Drmies will slap a banhammer on someone in a New York minute for it, I've seen it. Many of us feel the same way and will use the full force of policy to rid the place of someone who is a sexist pig. There is an established culture here, and it is a multiculture, however, and we have to deal with that. We have to be able to read tea leaves and tell the intent of the comment when there is a chance it is a cultural misunderstanding. That isn't easy. In this case, we know Eric. I also know that half the people that he works with are women, which is unusual, and I know that in his culture, the "c" word is used differently than how I use in the USA. Eric is an enigma: he can be so course, yet he writes amazing prose, one of our finest by anyone's standards. It took getting used to for me. If your concerns are gender ''equality'', then Eric ''is'' a huge fan, as am I and the majority of men around here. Misplaced Pages is much more enlightened than most "places". Around here, I never know if I'm talking to a woman or man, and it doesn't matter anyway. Our goal isn't to right the wrongs of society, it is to make a gender blind atmosphere. It isn't perfect, but it really is the best I've ever seen. But to be blind, we have to treat everyone equal, without gender. We don't make special accommodations or exceptions. THAT is equality. What you are complaining and how you are complaining, it is coming across as something ''different'' than this. Maybe it is a misunderstanding, but it looks like you are asking for special treatment for women, and that is counter to equality. We will never block for treating a ''woman'' in a certain way, but we will block for treating ''anyone'' in a certain way. When complaining about an editor's actions, gender shouldn't even be discussed unless they are the ones that made gender the issue. If YOU are the one making gender the issue, then you might be part of the problem. ]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;] 23:03, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
::::If you need me, Dennis, I'm to the left of you.<p>I like to think we're trying to be gender-blind but I think we are not, and that's fine, but we should not be fooling ourselves. You know I'm a guy, Dennis, and I know you're one--we're having conversations that are coded in all kinds of ways. And I think "cunt" shouldn't be used here, in a multi-national atmosphere. Has nothing to do with "US political correctness". In addition, I think that someone who says "I'm being singled out for my gender" should be given a fair hearing--there was an enlightening story on NPR today, with someone called Michelle, and her program is getting cancelled (I'm adding this detail so someone can find and link it), about how gender affects one in the working world. So I wouldn't discredit Lightbreather's complaint on that basis: it sounds too much like "Oh a black guy says black guys is disenfranchised, he must be playing the race card"--as if "the race card" is some sort of trump a black guy can pull out of his sleeve and it makes him win even though he's cheating. That's FOX news, and AM talk radio, and that's not how we should operate.<p>We had a fun little afternoon at the pool and it involved beer, friends, and tequila. I'm cooking dinner, so Mrs. Drmies can hang with her ladyfriend and talk about ladythings. And long after that and some instant coffee I'll be willing to look at some diffs. Cheers, ] (]) 23:35, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
*Yes, I went and had lunch on the ]. Very beautiful today. I suggest taking a break Lightbreather even if just for a bit and be with friends and family. Feeling the real love of those around you in real life is far better than a talk page discussion any day! I promise!--] (]) 22:27, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 01:49, 23 January 2025

Archiving icon
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
151


This page has archives. Sections older than 15 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present.

Mail

Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Happy New Year, Drmies! In 2024, other editors thanked you 1093 times using the thanks tool on the English Misplaced Pages. This made you the #11 most thanked Wikipedian in 2024. Congratulations and, well, thank you for all that you do for Misplaced Pages. Here's to 2025! Mz7 (talk) 19:39, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
story · music · places

Advice needed

How can I convince user:Sky258 that, per WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT, airport connections need independent sources? Nearly all his/her additions are unsourced and reverted. Warnings did not help but blocking seems over the top. Do you have any ideas? The Banner talk 17:46, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

CS1 error on B. J. Hollars

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page B. J. Hollars, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 23:15, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

CS1 error on B. J. Hollars

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page B. J. Hollars, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 23:16, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

User:Pinzunski/User:SukunaZenin

Returned to Francisco Trincão AGAIN, with that nonsensical ref about a BENFICA match for a SPORTING championship win (reverted it on the spot)! I guess the rest can stay (should you see that the sources are appropriate, if not remove it), will duly compose it (i.e. Style of play section) when i get home.

Attentively RevampedEditor (talk) 19:44, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 66

The Misplaced Pages Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 66, November – December 2024

  • Les Jours and East View Press join the library
  • Tech tip: Newspapers.com

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Misplaced Pages Library team --17:32, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Banned cease-and-desist photographer

I am really frazzled now. Someone is reverting edits by a user claimed to be a "Banned cease-and-desist photographer". I can not find any trace of that. You should expect some traces of that on ENWP, Meta or Commons, but no.

Do you (or your stalkers) know anything about this? It sounds a bit fishy to me right now. The Banner talk 14:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

(stalker comment) I don't really have anything conclusive to add, but from what I see, the user who uploaded the images is not banned or even warned from either enwiki or Commons. He appears to be a professional photographer who uploads many of his images to commons, and then Misplaced Pages, replacing lower-quality existing ones if necessary (I guess there is a small chance its all a big copyright misuse but you'd have thought that would have been picked up upon, particularly as his work involves famous buildings and peopel so probably gets a lot of views). You can see on his talk page there is a message from an IP user in 2019 (who stopped editing in the same year) regarding 'excessive use of own images'. I'm unsure if any such rule actually exists, but in my opinion it was not applicable anyway as the use of the images improved the site, were not self-promotional in terms of including watermarks or anything to overtly identify the contributor, and was not excessive proliferation of photos within individual articles. The reverting user has only made 92 edits, half of which were reverting the photographer today. Not sure why they would even take this course of action, expect perhaps they noticed an image (one of their own?) replaced by the photographer editor, read their talk page, decided the 2019 message was something official and unilaterally decided it justified reverting all recent additions (in the same style as the 2019 user, which is suspicious too). Crowsus (talk) 17:45, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Crowsus, thank you for doing some of that leg work--I had looked at various things but managed to miss that IP comment. And that IP comment: well, "excessive" use is a thing frowned upon but you laid out the (common sense) practices pretty neatly; thank you for that as well. Drmies (talk) 18:08, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
{{tps}} That photographer's license terms seem to take a strict position on the exact way credit must be given in off-wiki uses of their work. I'm not sure if they have pursued settlements against good-faith reusers or in other ways headed into license-trolling. I, like others, cannot find discussion about it on enwiki or commons.There was a previous case (long ago, different license-holder) where consensus formed that the effect of mass use of a certain creator's content on-wiki was to induce innocent/good-faith but not "strictly by the not-quite-expected license terms" use off-wiki, enabling forced legal settlements. There was thought that the creator themself was actually intentional about using wiki in this way, and that all of this exceeded the community's tolerance and good-faith. DMacks (talk) 18:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
DMacks, yes, thanks--I remember a case too and I think it played out on Commons, that guy who posted videos of himself ejaculating and stuff, and there was a guy who sucked his own ****. But more to the point, I also remember a case of a photographer who, it was judged, was basically here to promote their own business and I think an ANI post led to removal of some of those images. But I can't see what practical guidelines User:Arne Müseler is supposed to have broken. Drmies (talk) 18:10, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
I have no idea if there is off-wiki evidence of actual legal actions against re-users, or claims that WP sites are inducement. But I also assume anything I'd find by googling I couldn't mention here for OUTING anyway. DMacks (talk) 18:15, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Yep, and any kind of case should be either discussed on-wiki or submitted privately if there's some privacy concern, rather than signaled (if that's even the word) with a boilerplate and vague edit summary. Drmies (talk) 18:18, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
User:The Banner, I have reverted those edits. Thanks for bringing it up. Drmies (talk) 18:13, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Your welcome. I hope the editor just made a mistake. The Banner talk 02:43, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
For every one who's interested, please see User talk:RAL1028. Drmies (talk) 21:42, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Just to clarify posts on Miijumaaru talk page

The conversation I pinged you in at Annoyed at rule changes was a continuation of the post right above at Please do not use template main in the lead. The editor broke it into two parts for some reason and I wasn't about to correct the nesting issue since the conversation turned turbulent. Since they did multiple changes to articles I thought it would be good to let them know that {{main}} is never used in the lead per the template itself. This was made aware to Tennis Project awhile back and several of us have been slowly fixing tennis articles to comply. A daunting task. I hope this helps you understand the situation I encountered. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:01, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

On a side note to above template talk

While template "main" should not be used in the lead, the template "further" is less clear on placement. I just looked and the template "see also" also says not to use in the lead and is used only at the top of sections. "Further" says nothing about placement and I can't help but wonder if that should also say not to use in the lead. Where best to bring that up? On the narrow Template:Further talk page? Or is there a more general template talk page that it should be talked about? Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:18, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

AfD sock

There's something seriously wrong with OhNoKaren. The account is about a week old, and she's already created many AfDs. That's pretty much all she's done. I vaguely remember some deletion socks, although I don't recall that they had problems with the procedure as she does. Even if she's not a sock, I'm thinking her editing is disruptive enough to block, but I have to go eat dinner. Can you check if you're still around?--Bbb23 (talk) 01:59, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Editor's Barnstar
Thank you for helping reduce the use of "served as", "serves as" and such like for what are not public service roles. In those two examples, "was" and "is" would be preferable (this last sentence is obviously not for your benefit, but might help someone else who reads this). Edwardx (talk) 12:21, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
  • I appreciate that--but I'm even stricter than you are: I think it's almost always a euphemism for "work"... Drmies (talk) 13:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
    • Thanks. I would like to be stricter, but encounter too much pushback from other editors. I think at most it should only be for unpaid, genuinely altruistic activity. As an example, and without wishing too be too cynical, far too many politicians are self-serving. And of course, we need to take into account that some reliable sources often still use the term for state sector jobs, military and politicians. Perhaps once it is removed from more business bios, we can start an RfC. Edwardx (talk) 14:20, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
      • Edwardx, thanks--I thought I'd be careful, since I didn't want to butt heads with you after you sent me this nice message, but I agree with you completely. If you get paid, it's not service. If you get underpaid, it might approach service--but if you are underpaid and still make a fair amount of money (like, for instance, as president of the US), "service" is a bit of a euphemism. As far as reliable sources go--yeah, but in "serve as president" the operational part is "president", not "serve". I teach at a state university: is this service? I like to think so, for various reasons, but it's ludicrous to pretty much equate that with philanthropy (another item we see in ALL those articles), as if it didn't come with a paycheck and possibly health insurance. No Christmas bonuses, of course. Drmies (talk) 16:16, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Silicon Slopes

Thanks for your edits at Silicon Slopes. I had prepared this for a COI report, but was waiting for that editor's response:

  • On November 30, 2023, that editor stated here: "this account is not a business account, anyone using this account will be doing so with direct supervision of the account owner, ie. I will be standing behind them any time the login is used".
  • That editor then made a number of edits at Silicon Slopes that removed content sourced by secondary sources, and added content of a promotional tone, sourced by primary sources.
  • That editor wrote a lengthy declaration of their purpose on the article talk page, stating, "I kindly request that any changes avoid undermining the hard work and dedication of many business owners and community members who have strived tirelessly to erase the stigma and stereotypes associated with the region."
  • A Google search of "invise" and "Mike L." adds depth.

Certainly seems like a single-purpose editor trying to cleanse the article of well-sourced negative content. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:05, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

  • Oh, I feel the same way. Did you see what they tried to post on your talk page? See the filter log. But the problem with the article (I'm sure you saw my pruning) is, in my opinion, much bigger than just that. The negative information isn't about that organization, as far as I could tell from that confusing article. But they're p-blocked from the article now; who knows, maybe they'll figure out how to gain consensus for anything on the talk page. I will reiterate that the argument "it's negative stuff and it shows up in a search" is completely inappropriate here. Drmies (talk) 17:30, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
I'll try to add some well-sourced content back to the article. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:38, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Sure. You think, Magnolia677, the subject is notable, that organization? Cause all I see in a quick search is some promotional BS. It may be better to consider treating it as an economical "ecosystem". Drmies (talk) 17:44, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Wait. I'm wrong: I should have figured that there was more in the history, including a lot of you. The article was about a region and for now I'm going to go back to this version; hope that's okay with you. Then we can take it from there. Drmies (talk) 17:48, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
This is where it got messed up. Drmies (talk) 17:54, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Utah's tech community has been nicknamed Silicon Slopes, a reference to California's world famous Silicon Valley high tech commnity.
— Sanders, Doug; Herrington, Lisa M.; Waring, Kerry Jones (2015). "Making a Living". Utah: Third Edition. It's My State! (3rd ed.). Cavendish Square Publishing. p. 73. ISBN 9781627131780.
Increasingly a growing technology sector—the so-called Silicon Slopes—has developed around the Salt Lake–Utah County line.
— Brown, Adam R. (2018). Utah Politics and Government: American Democracy Among a Unique Electorate. Politics and Governments of the American States. University of Nebraska Press. p. 48. ISBN 9781496207852.
In Utah Valley, the coinage "Silicon Slopes," invented by Google in 2013 upon announcing that Provo would be the third city in the nation to receive a Google Fiber network, has been picked up eagerly by business leaders
— Farmer, Jared (2014). Alter, J. Cecil (ed.). "THIS WAS THE PLACE: The Making and Unmaking of Utah" (PDF). Utah Historical Quarterly. 82 (3). Utah State Historical Society: 188. doi:10.2307/45063063.

The non-advertorial independent sources strongly disagree with that first paragraph, Doktoro. Personally, I am inclined to take the word of the Walter H. Annenberg Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania published in a state historical society journal over what is said in a self-published corporate blurb. Uncle G (talk) 07:42, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Email

Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Yamla (talk) 15:17, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Just got back from a weekend trip

Is there something pressing I should be looking at this eve? BusterD (talk) 01:39, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Ye Guofu

Thanks for catching that. It was a misclick. Things happen. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:38, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

  • I caught something? Yeah, some awful bug--been coughing and wheezing and sweating for days now. Kudpung, how are you doing these days? I would love to see where you live. Time is running out, isn't it, for all of use. Drmies (talk) 15:47, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Article assistance

Well, given what you said above about being ill (sorry), I'm not sure you'll want to do this, but perhaps it would be a distraction. A new editor added unsourced material to Danylo Zabolotny. I left the editor a warning, and they re-added the material, this time with sources. The sources are unverifiable (by me at least), and there are various other issues, copy editing if nothing else, and I think you'd be much better than I at reviewing the material. My knowledge of long-deceased foreign epidemiologists is nil. Besides, articles about disease are not ideal for a hypochondriac. If not up to it or uninterested, I understand. Regardless, I hope you get better soon.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:57, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

  • I'm not a hypochondriac--in fact I'm an inveterate optimist, unfortunately. Yes, I'm ill, and I think I have some infection that's also making an infected tooth unbearably painful: I need this root canal done quickly, but everything here has ground down to a halt because of two inches of snow. Drmies (talk) 21:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

OK "badass" is not enough credit. He worked with Richard P. Strong during the Third plague pandemic which killed maybe 15 million people. Have a look at this here--I was confused because I didn't see a thumbnail, but this lengthy description accompanies a photo of him and Strong in full moon suits. Amazing. Can we use it? I'm about to plow through the "First Report of the North Manchurian Plague Prevention Service", and there's this article. These are just the first couple of hits; we need to do better. Talk page followers, get to work! Papa is actually sick! You shouldn't let him do all the work! Drmies (talk) 22:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Your AN request

Voorts and I ran through the door at the same time, bonked heads, and fell to the floor.-- Ponyo 23:54, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Hayden Miller Productions/ActuallyHayden

Hello - when I noticed this edit, I opened an SPI case for these users, but I see now that you've already blocked both, so there might not be much point to the case. Is it helpful to keep the case open? And if not, is there a way for me to withdraw it? (I couldn't find a way to do that.) Thanks! Wburrow (talk) 01:46, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

User talk:Drmies: Difference between revisions Add topic