| Revision as of 20:33, 28 January 2015 view sourceEric Corbett (talk | contribs)45,616 edits →Mailing lists and conspiracies: it's a useful list of potential enemies, that's for sure← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 16:05, 16 January 2025 view source Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,311,118 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Eric Corbett/Archives/2024/September, User talk:Eric Corbett/Archives/2024/December) (botTag: Manual revert |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Notice|The Wikimedia Foundation is not a software development organisation, and ought not to be pretending to be one. Let's try and make that clear to them by a regular Monday boycott until they come to their senses.}} |
|
<!--{{Notice|The Wikimedia Foundation is not a software development organisation, and ought not to be pretending to be one. Let's try and make that clear to them by a regular Monday boycott until they come to their senses.}} |
|
{{#ifeq: {{CURRENTDAYNAME}} | Monday | {{wikibreak|message=It's Monday now, so I'll be gone until tomorrow.}} |}} |
|
{{#ifeq: {{CURRENTDAYNAME}} | Monday | {{wikibreak|message=It's Monday now, so I'll be gone until tomorrow.}} |}}--> |
|
<!--<center> |
|
<!--<center> |
|
<div style="align: center; padding: 1em; border: #591b00 solid 2px; background: #FCC200; -moz-border-radius: 8px; width:75%;"> |
|
<div style="align: center; padding: 1em; border: #591b00 solid 2px; background: #FCC200; -moz-border-radius: 8px; width:75%;"> |
| Line 10: |
Line 10: |
|
|archive = User talk:Eric Corbett/Archives/%(year)d/%(monthname)s |
|
|archive = User talk:Eric Corbett/Archives/%(year)d/%(monthname)s |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{sidebar |
|
{{sidebar with collapsible lists |
|
| outertitle = Archives |
|
| outertitle = |
|
| topimage = ] |
|
| topimage = ] |
|
| bodyclass = hlist |
|
| bodyclass = hlist |
|
| style = {{box-shadow}} {{border-radius}} background: #F8EABA; font-size: smaller; |
|
| style = box-shadow: 4px 4px 4px #CCC; border-radius: 8px; background: #F8EABA; font-size: smaller; |
|
|
| expanded = |
|
|
|
|
|
| contentstyle = text-align: left; |
|
| contentstyle = text-align: left; |
|
|
|
|
|
| heading1 = 2007 |
|
| heading1 |
|
| content1 = |
|
| list1name = 2007 |
|
|
| list1title = 2007 archive |
|
|
| list1 = |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
| Line 30: |
Line 33: |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
| heading2 = 2008 |
|
| heading2 |
|
| content2 = |
|
| list2name = 2008 |
|
|
| list2title = 2008 archive |
|
|
| list2 = |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
| Line 45: |
Line 50: |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
| heading3 = 2009 |
|
| heading3 |
|
| content3 = |
|
| list3name = 2009 |
|
|
| list3title = 2009 archive |
|
|
| list3 = |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
| Line 60: |
Line 67: |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
| heading4 = 2010 |
|
| heading4 |
|
| content4 = |
|
| list4name = 20010 |
|
|
| list4title = 2010 archive |
|
|
| list4 = |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
| Line 75: |
Line 84: |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
| heading5 = 2011 |
|
| heading5 |
|
| content5 = |
|
| list5name = 2011 |
|
|
| list5title = 2011 archive |
|
|
| list5 = |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
| Line 90: |
Line 101: |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
| heading6 = 2012 |
|
| heading6 |
|
| content6 = |
|
| list6name = 2012 |
|
|
| list6title = 2012 archive |
|
|
| list6 = |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
| Line 105: |
Line 118: |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
| heading7 = 2013 |
|
| heading7 |
|
| content7 = |
|
| list7name = 2013 |
|
|
| list7title = 2013 archive |
|
|
| list7 = |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
| Line 120: |
Line 135: |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
| heading8 = 2014 |
|
| heading8 |
|
| content8 = |
|
| list8name = 2014 |
|
|
| list8title = 2014 archive |
|
|
| list8 = |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
| Line 135: |
Line 152: |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
| heading9 = 2015 |
|
| heading9 |
|
| content9 = |
|
| list9name = 2015 |
|
|
| list9title = 2015 archive |
|
|
| list9 = |
|
* ] |
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| heading10 |
|
| content34style = text-align: center; margin-top: 1em; |
|
|
| content34 = |
|
| list10name = 2016 |
|
|
| list10title = 2016 archive |
|
<span style="display: inline;"><span style="display: table-cell; border: 5px solid rgba(64,255,64,0.9); {{box-shadow|0|0|2.0em|rgba(64,255,64,0.9)}} {{border-radius|0.5em}} background-color: #eee; opacity: 0.9; -moz-opacity: 0.9;">]</span></span> |
|
|
|
| list10 = |
|
<p> |
|
|
|
* ] |
|
]! |
|
|
|
* ] |
|
</p> |
|
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
| heading11 |
|
|
| list11name = 2017 |
|
|
| list11title = 2017 archive |
|
|
| list11 = |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
| heading12 |
|
|
| list12name = 2018 |
|
|
| list12title = 2018 archive |
|
|
| list12 = |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
| heading13 |
|
|
| list13name = 2019 |
|
|
| list13title = 2019 archive |
|
|
| list13 = |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
| content35 = |
|
| content35 = |
| Line 157: |
Line 248: |
|
| navbar = none |
|
| navbar = none |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
==Happy New Year Eric Corbett!== |
|
|
<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em;{{round corners}}" class="plainlinks">]] |
|
|
{{paragraph break}} |
|
|
{{Center|{{resize|179%|''''']!'''''}}}} |
|
|
'''Eric Corbett''',<br>Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable ], and thanks for your contributions to Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 10:56, 31 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
<br><br> |
|
|
<center><small>Send New Year cheer by adding {{tls|Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.</small></center> |
|
|
</div> |
|
|
Yes indeed {{u|Hafspajen}}, may Eric, yourself and anybody who does good for[REDACTED] watching this page have a good new year!♦ ] 11:00, 31 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Reference errors at Bolton == |
|
|
|
|
|
I noticed the reference section at Bolton, over which we laboured for a long time, and it had turned to a sea of red. I did something to get rid of the red.... but probably not the right thing. Anyhow it has made me lose the will to live. If anybody wants to know what discourages editors it is this. I give up. PS I wish you and Mrs Corbett all the very best for 2015. ] (]) 14:22, 31 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:A rather irritating bug was introduced into the {{tl|citation}} template a couple of months ago, the result of which was all those complaints about the citations having no title if only the |contribution parameter was used. But to compound the matter if you simply change the |contribution parameter to |title then it appears (incorrectly) in italics; I've started labouring through with the most satisfactory fix I'm aware of. Did we once have an etymology section in that article? If we didn't then why is the Mills book listed in the bibliography? |
|
|
|
|
|
:Anyway, a Happy New Year to you and yours and to everyone else who watches this talk page! ] ] 15:45, 31 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::We did, it was removed by the editor who decided it needed a review and who "fixed" the History section. I didn't mean for you to fix it, I just thought it looked better minus the red, but thank you, I now know where to look if I come across it again. (I doubt I'll remember why.) The trouble with not looking in much recently is that everything I've looked at has been "improved". ] (]) 16:01, 31 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::Hmmm. I can't understand why that Toponymy section was removed, so I've put it back. ] ] 17:08, 31 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::I shuffled it in after you removed it again. It looked lost in the history. Thank you for sorting out the refs. :) ] (]) 19:35, 31 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::That's fine by me, as I didn't notice it where it had been moved to. I see you're having the usual fun on your talk page. Have a drop of plonk and forget about it until tomorrow. I've just opened a bottle of port, and as Ruth doesn't like port I'm going to have to drink it all by myself – I don't believe it keeps once the cork has been removed from the bottle. At least it doesn't in our house! ] ] 19:41, 31 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::::You're right, except the bottle is already open. Port, like sherry, puts me to sleep. ] (]) 19:48, 31 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Happy 2015 == |
|
|
|
|
|
Best wishes for a productive and dramah-free year's editing in 2015, and health and happiness beyond the encyclopedia. ]] 15:54, 1 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Thanks Pam. We'll see what this year brings on WP, another ArbCom case for something or other I expect. ] ] 17:33, 2 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Article on ]== |
|
|
|
|
|
Hello Eric Corbett; Yngvadottir did a really top re-write on ], and suggested you might be able to help the article toward peer review status. Yngvad has put his finger on the main issue which is that there is only one biography about him even thirty years after his death. Luria's research is, however, quoted repeatedly and repeatedly even in current research. Is the current article any closer to inching towards peer review quality? Cheers. ] (]) 17:22, 2 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:There's really no such thing as "peer review quality", just submit it for a peer review. Having quickly read through the article two things jump out at me though. The first is that some of the prose makes no sense at all to me. For instance, {{tq|"The 1930s were significant to Luria because his prescient studies of indigenous people opened the field of multiculturalism to his general interests."}} I have absolutely no idea what that means. |
|
|
|
|
|
:The second thing is that the ''Scientific influence of Vygotsky'' section is way off topic, and whatever is specifically relevant to Luria ought to be distributed in the appropriate places in the article. ] ] 17:58, 2 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::It was nice of you to visit the article. I have revised/rewritten the sense of the problem sentence you just pointed out. Also, I strongly cut back the text in the Vygotsky section. Having only the one published biography about ] seems to be a possible red herring for nominating the article for, I assume, a GA review. If there are any oversights remaining in the article then let me know and I'll try to take care of them before the next steps of nomination. Cheers. ] (]) 19:34, 2 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::That there's only one published biography ought not to be a problem for GA. ] ] 19:37, 2 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Where? == |
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe you should just add where Undine caught her husband in the act of adultery, if it's so important. Was it in the bridal bed? The backseat of her jeep? On top of the washing machine? Maybe it does matter. ] (]) 07:54, 5 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:*In the castle Written by ]. On a very brief scan, it seems that Undine's husband thought she was dead. As for the complainant- if I had blood coming out of my colon, I'd get it checked out. ] (]) 09:15, 5 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:*:But where in the castle? ] ] 13:49, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::*Sorry, got it wrong- it appears that Huldbrand and Bertalda had "a confidential conversation" in a "waggon" filled with cotton; Hulbrand dies just before he is to be married to Bertalda, when Undine appears to him. H and B are rescued from the wagon by Undine when it turns into foam, courtesy of her father Kuhleborn, who's the driver. So, Undine doesn't actually catch her husband in adultery. ] (]) 14:11, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::*:The adultery bit does appear to be incorrect. Huldbrand's unfaithfulness appears to be his marriage to Bertalda. ] ] 14:26, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::*:... actually I'm uncertain which Ondine story is being referred to here, but it certainly isn't Fouqué's. ] ] 16:06, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*As a side note, we went to the woods for Rosie's birthday and played Pooh Sticks. She won. ] (]) 17:05, 5 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:*That's ], thank you very much. ] ] 08:32, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*Looking through Misplaced Pages for the White Lady of Avenel I came across ] (text , including image of naiad), an article that seems to have escaped the attention of the Shakespeare fascists--by which I mean those who claim erroneously that Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare, a ridiculous proposition of course. And that article identifies the titular "Count of the Cabala" as Roger Bacon (who is Shakespeare) and then as ]. If you've read '']'', raise your hand. ] (]) 16:13, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*:I've read that, but many years ago now. There's something not right about the way we're telling the story of Ondin's curse that needs to be fixed; Ondine killed her husband with a kiss, not by cursing him, but it may require a consultation with the text of Giradoux's play to figure out where the loss of autonomic functions actually fits in. ] ] 16:23, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::*I have nothing to offer on that topic yet; I've just been finding tidbits of intertextuality (OK, a lot of them). What I see is a lead that needs expanding. As we've seen before, there is kind of a fundamental problem--do you take term X in a definitional sense, forcing yourself to pin it down to (in this case) one particular author and era, or do you take it (as I typically do) broadly, as an idea, or maybe a trope? In the latter case one runs the risk of slight anachronism, but I think that's partly the result of fetishizing a name. The former runs the risk of undue limitation and a fragmentation of what in history, literature, and myth appears to be a pretty continues state of affairs--of a belief ("belief") in a certain kind of creature with certain kinds of qualities. ] (]) 16:57, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::*:The description section needs some expansion yet before worrying about the lead. ] ] 17:24, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
**OK, my sworn duty as a Misplaced Pages editor overrides my desire for comedy. For the full crazy effect, look at , longer but essentially the same as the one I just undid. The real shits and giggles lie in the fact that more than a few Misplaced Pages editors have looked at those versions without, apparently, raising an eyebrow. This includes {{U|Sadads}}--but he is, I believe, a Rosicrucian. ] (]) 16:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
***What an article! Can't believe I didn't think it was a start (That was an AWB edit, when I got a little overeager with stub tagging). But Bacon's Shakespearean investigations must have created his greatest legacy I am sure? As a true universalist, you cannot deny the importance of complex esoteric beliefs to true knowledge of the world.... ] (]) 16:36, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
****I'm working on it now, and I have become convinced that Ovid was also Bacon. I mean Shakespeare. ] (]) 16:45, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*****Bacon and ovid? All-day breakfast at the ''Swan of Snitterfield''? ] (]) 16:58, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*Can you read ? I've ordered the book--it has a 42-page appendix on Undine, where she came from and where she goes. ] (]) 17:45, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*:Yes I can read that review. Looks as if the book could be very useful in helping to stitch the various threads together. ] ] 17:54, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== V == |
|
|
|
|
|
Eric, what do you think about these edits? . What I think it was odd that this user removed a referenced entry, with an . Now I noticed he is edtiting her article too, removing big amounts of info. Also . Looks like NPOV edits too me. ] (]) 13:10, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Well, to take things in order, I've never thought much of categories, so I wouldn't be concerned about altering them. Vanna Bonta is probably famous enough to be included in that list, although I don't think that section should be written as a list anyway. The last edit I don't see as being problematic, just removing some clutter. ] ] 13:48, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::*Yes, agree about the last one. What worries me the editors edit summary: (removed non-famous owner of a chow-chow) and that he -she goes editing the article removing quite large bits - souced too. ] (]) 16:00, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::What I meant ...was '''not''' the dog article ( might not made myself clear enough) but it was the actual ] article edits, that worries me. , that was what I wanted to ask you about what do you think about those edits. rather a lot of them. It was only trough the dog article noticed the editor. <sup>And actually he was back again to the dod article tagging the entry as better source needed. a good enough source?</sup> ] (]) 18:32, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Hmmm. The material that was removed is a bit overly gushing for me, so I probably agree with its removal. As for IMdb, you can't use that as a reliable source for anything. ] ] 20:21, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:OK then. ] (]) 21:07, 7 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
==Eddybox== |
|
|
Stefan2 has "commented out" the image you suggested because of ]. Any suggestions as to how to get around this? ]<small>]</small> 13:56, 8 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:You could try ] ] ] 14:58, 8 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::{{done}}. If I get the bio, this Sunday. If not, Sunday following. ]<small>]</small> 15:05, 8 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*Thank You. ]<small>]</small> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Books and Bytes - Issue 9 == |
|
|
|
|
|
<div style = "color: #936c29; font-size: 4em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif"> |
|
|
] '''The Misplaced Pages Library''' |
|
|
</div> |
|
|
<div style = "font-size: 1.5em; margin: 0 100px"> |
|
|
]</div> |
|
|
<div style = "line-height: 1.2"> |
|
|
<span style="font-size: 2em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif">'''''Books & Bytes'''''</span><br /> |
|
|
Issue 9, November-December 2014<br> |
|
|
by {{user|The Interior}}, {{user|Ocaasi}}, {{user|Sadads}} |
|
|
</div> |
|
|
|
|
|
<div style = "margin-top: 1.5em; border: 3px solid #ae8c55; border-radius: .5em; padding: 1em 1.5em; font-size: .9em"> |
|
|
*New donations, including real-paper-and-everything books, e-books, science journal databases, and more |
|
|
*New TWL coordinators, conference news, a new open-access journal database, summary of library-related WMF grants, and more |
|
|
*Spotlight: "Global Impact: The Misplaced Pages Library and Persian Misplaced Pages" - a Persian Misplaced Pages editor talks about their experiences with database access in Iran, writing on the Persian project and the JSTOR partnership |
|
|
<p><big>]</big><br><br> |
|
|
</div> ] (]) 23:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
<!-- Message sent by User:The Interior@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:The_Wikipedia_Library/Newsletter/Recipients&oldid=641474928 --> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Thanks == |
|
|
|
|
|
I understand from a mutual friend that you seconded my nomination for "Editor of the Week", that was very kind of you. I feel rather guilty as I have wound back contributing quite a lot recently. I do like the Bongs' miners. ] (]) 16:02, 13 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I hoped you might. ] ] 20:15, 13 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:You, me, and your nominator Sagaciousphil are little more than occasional visitors here now. so no need for you feel guilty. We are after all only easily replaceable units of work. ] ] 00:49, 15 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Capitalisation of Scheduled monument, Ancient monument etc - are they proper nouns? == |
|
|
|
|
|
A comment at ] has asked about capitalisation of "]" (and by implication ]). They are defined by the law ] does this make them "proper nouns" or not? Any advice or contributions to the discussion appreciated.— ] <sup>]</sup> 17:57, 13 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I don't think it does, and in fact the text of the Act refers to "scheduled monument" and "ancient monument", which I think is the clincher. ] ] 18:20, 13 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
<references /> |
|
|
{{-}} |
|
{{-}} |
|
==Happy Birthday Eric!== |
|
|
|
|
|
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#3D2B1F; background-color:pink; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">]] |
|
|
{{Center|'''''{{resize|160%|Some Chocolate Cake and a pink ] for 2015 . . .}}'''''}} |
|
|
---- |
|
|
<br>''...with much pink feelings.....''<br><br><small>Best wishes from Haffy for a happy and healthy 2015</small><br>] (]) 12:41, 16 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
</div> |
|
|
{{-}} |
|
|
|
|
|
:Thanks, that's very kind of you. ] ] 13:01, 16 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:: Happy birthday, ]! (I know, not exactly your topic, but written/expanded on my mom's birthday thinking of that, - my poodle) --] (]) 13:17, 16 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::Thanks Gerda. I used to think of poodles as toys, girl's dogs, but I've come to realise that they can be really big bruisers as well. ] ] 13:24, 16 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::Especially the Pink Vegetarian Male ones... {{smiley}} ] (]) 15:21, 16 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::Many happy returns :) ] (]) 15:33, 16 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::Thanks. As I've got older I've usually tried to avoid birthdays, but the Internet has made that virtually impossible today. ] ] 15:46, 16 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::::So do I but I'd be mortified if I wasn't taken out for a meal. I'm about, but busy, dogsitting today, not sure who's in charge but a long walk has worn him out and he's chewing a huge marrowbone. Otherwise I'm plodding on with little enthusiasm. ] (]) 16:13, 16 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::::The meal has been organised, no worries on that score. ] ] 16:19, 16 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
{{od}} |
|
|
Did you got any Chocolate cake to your meal in real life? ] (]) 22:24, 16 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:No chocolate cake, but I did get my favourite ice cream, Neapolitan. Tomorrow I may push the boat out and go for a banana split, but I'll have to starve myself first. ] ] 21:27, 17 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:*Ha, if that is your favorite ice cream, and you like beer, perhaps you can try --it actually tastes and feels sort of like all three at once. ] (]) 02:54, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:*:I might give that a go. As a kid I loved ice cream in lemonade. ] ] 02:56, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*Happy birthday! --] (]) 21:47, 17 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*:Thanks John. ] ] 21:57, 17 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Stop responding to provocations== |
|
|
|
|
|
Don't let JW play you, Eric. You know what he's up to — just back off and let other people take care of it. Don't be a moth to his open flame... ] (]) 22:41, 19 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
: Simpler: don't edit on Monday ;) --] (]) 22:46, 19 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Gerda, just because it's Monday doesn't make it open season on me. ] ] 22:48, 19 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::: I had successfully not looked at that page for weeks, but Floq's statement made me curious. ] pending again, did you know? --] (]) 22:58, 19 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::I don't take much interest in what happens in arbitration cases, even in my own. ] ] 23:37, 19 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::: I don't mind for myself, thanks to your ] and later talk about dignity. --] (]) 07:09, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Jimmy Wales is no flame and I'm no moth, but he does have serious questions to answer nevertheless. ] ] 22:48, 19 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:*Since Sebald's '']'' I have started thinking about moths quite differently. ] (]) 16:25, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== This comment from Mr Wales ought not to be allowed to be buried == |
|
|
'']] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
He knows very well the regard, or more accurately the lack of it, that I hold him in, but the difference between us that I don't keep trying to provoke him into some kind of sanctionable offence. What would be the point anyway, as he's unsanctionable? ] ] 00:37, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:Not quite. Notice will be served. ] (] '''·''' ]) 01:19, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:: Let it go, Eric. There is no good outcome for you, politically speaking, going toe to toe with The Co-Founder. He chips at you, he looks petty, you look like a good guy for staying away, and slowly the dynamic changes... ] (]) 01:58, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::There is no good outcome for him in going toe to toe with me, so why does he persist in doing it? ] ] 02:25, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I think we've gone from a block of Jimbo being an embarrassing error by an admin ha ha (akin to deleting the main page), to something that is almost a matter of time. How the mighty are fallen, and by their own fingers, too.--] (]) 02:33, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Time will tell I suppose. ] ] 02:38, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:There's a pattern of closing down discussion on Mr Wales's talk page whenever an issue inconvenient to his disciples is raised. It's really difficult to see how that can be interpreted as being healthy. ] ] 02:49, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
This is priceless, coming as it does from the crowned emperor of personal attacks. Who true to form is now making himself scarce until the obnoxious comment on his talk page is archived and, he hopes, forgotten. ] ] 12:56, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: Your encouragement and talk about dignity (a word that not everybody can use) is not forgotten, see just above, and I found it interesting to follow a link to 2013, - not much changed, but ] is more active again ;) --] (]) 13:12, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::I've completely dialled out from Jimbo and what he says now. This is 2015 now, nothing good is going to come of it. Given that he knows that what he says about you is going to provoke a reaction I'd ignore him, but that's me.♦ ] 13:25, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::As they say, DFTT. ]<sup>]</sup> 22:44, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::If I was going to FTT, I would slap {{tl|uw-npa2}} on his talk. ] ] ] 18:26, 21 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::{{like}} DO IT Ritchie333! ]<sup>]</sup> 00:21, 22 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Jimbo it seems will always hold a grudge. It's common on here though. Sandy Georgia for whatever reason has always been that way towards me, in fact I don't think I've ever encountered a single situation on here in 8 years with her which has been a positive one. ♦ ] 16:04, 22 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Help== |
|
|
Eric and company, I could do with some help. I've been looking at ] and couldn't leave this GA alone. I have come to believe that this should not be a GA but I don't wish to go any further without some solid advice from some legitimate GA writers and reviewers. Thanks. ] (]) 03:02, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
: That song is neither "bubblegum pop" nor "doo wop." It is saccharine-sweet hip hop. ] (]) 06:14, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::Stop the genre warring! ] ] 06:17, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:"Trainor stated that the clip did not only comprise of a story and theme " and "the lyrics tell off a cheating, lying, boyfriend" tell you all you need to know about whether or not this is a legitimate GA. ] ] 10:09, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:*That last one is mine: an obviously failed attempt to make something out of nothing. "Lyrically, the singer tells of a cheating, lying boyfriend while asserting Trainor's physical assets." That actually suggests the singer is singing about Meghan Trainor. BTW, the "physical assets", that's some cute phrase from I think a Billboard review (cited here in our voice)--the reviewer means "the singer says she has a great ass". Anyone remember the famous "I Like Big Butts" paraphrase wars? ] (]) 16:24, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:*:It was the "tell off" I was complaining about. ] ] 18:28, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::*Haha, I didn't even notice that! Sorry. I made thirty copy edits to that article yesterday and only scratched the surface. In the meantime I wrote up ], and found that the article lacked #4, neutrality, as well. ] (]) 18:49, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::* Actually, both "tells of" and "" are correct in context, although the latter is a bit informal. I would suggest going Joycean with "tell of(f)". ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 19:14, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::*But "tells off" means to scold or reprimand, which I don't think is what was meant. ] ] 19:21, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::* I guess I'll have to go listen to the song a few dozen more times to settle this... :P ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 20:26, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::*I'll try at some point, given my younger daughter is an avid top-40 music lover and commandeers the car radio regularly....] (] '''·''' ]) 19:35, 21 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Quick Question == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, Eric. I'm recently looking at improving some of the Chinese Food articles that are relevant to my interests. I know that one of the B-class requirements is for an article to have "coverage"; this is easy for foods with extensive history, but relevant information can be harder to find for some traditional "folk" dishes that has nothing to note other than perhaps that millions of Chinese people ate them for some centuries. |
|
|
|
|
|
I just want to know: in your experience, how much - and what kinds of - information would be required before a food article would pass B-class, GA, or FA status? Especially for folk food without lots of history or notability in western culture? |
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, and apologies for the trouble. |
|
|
|
|
|
<font style="font-family:script;font-size:16px;vertical-align:top;position:relative;top:-13px;">↢ ]] ↣</font> 20:16, 23 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:{{tps}} Have you tried looking at other B rated food articles to compare with? That is usually pretty helpful. '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px Black;">]<sup>]</sup></span>''' 20:36, 23 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I'm afraid you'll have to forgive me, but given the way I've been treated here over the years, and am still being treated, I'm in no frame of mind to help anyone with anything. Perhaps {{u|Jimbo Wales}} might care to help? ] ] 23:28, 23 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::@Cassianto: I've tried, though the number of food GAs are pretty scarce and most often are people, types of ingredients, or general categories. I guess my difficulty is that content for specific dishes are relatively difficult to find (as opposed to general things like rice or maize). |
|
|
|
|
|
::@Eric: I definitely don't blame you after what had just happened. Though it is unfortunate, since even though I'm new and most of my edits are minor, you were one of the reasons I decided to signed up and try to contribute in the first place. Thanks regardless, and best of luck with everything. <font style="font-family:script;font-size:16px;vertical-align:top;position:relative;top:-13px;">↢ ]] ↣</font> 16:27, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
I thought some of the people here might be interested in this one, should it be deleted? The AFD needs some wider input. I reckon it should be deleted asap, words like "амбас " might reduce the 13% female to just one. :-).♦ ] 16:25, 24 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*Also, Eric, at the risk of sounding like a grandfather, please don't comment in that WER thread anymore--the point was valid and has served its purpose, but ''someone'' is going to read it all wrong and throw you in front of the bus. And poking Jimbo is poking the bear; y'all should just stop poking each other altogether. He may be an oxen and you may be a gadfly, but if his big ole tail swats you we're all worse off. Thanks. ] (]) 19:08, 24 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*:"Someone" may do as they please. ] ] 19:31, 24 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::*I'm sorry. ] (]) 22:15, 24 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::*:I'm fundamentally opposed with every fibre of my being to these prohibitions on discussing certain issues that ArbCom has become all too ready to hand out for the sake of a quiet life. So "Someone" will just have to live with that. ] ] 22:24, 24 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== WikiProject Editor Retention == |
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't see your name on the members list. Believe me when I say that one of the individuals who offers the most help for newer reviewers would be a very welcome addition. ] (]) 23:24, 24 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I'm not much of a joiner John, and given recent events I'll not be doing very much more helping. Every day it's just more and and more provocative BS, even from our God king himself. ] ] 23:29, 24 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::Remember you're talking to a guy who retired from the project a year ago here as a result of dealing with someone who even the arbs in the relevant case called a serious SPA issue (having edited a total of 3 closely related articles in 8 years) and indicated was a serious POV pusher, whom I have basically been stalked by since then. And I obviously agree that the comments made by others there were themselves more than a bit out of line - Buster seemed to say the same thing in his comments. But, as a former Biography project A-Class reviewer, I know that there ain't that many good reviewers, and good reviewers are one of the things which probably help keep editors who get their articles reviewed around. We could definitely use some knowledgeable input in that regard. ] (]) 23:34, 24 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I'd go so far as to say that the lack of good reviewers at all levels is a significant factor in editor retention. We all know how it feels to work your butt off on an article, submit it at GA, and then see it ignored for months. ] ] 23:40, 24 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I'm not usually a fan of cups and contests on here, but the GA Cup has been reasonably well behaved and helped reduce the backlog down a bit, so hopefully it's got better. The worst thing about working on an article then submitting it to GA is keeping it ''at'' GA level in the queue while a horde of rampaging IPs come along and try and bugger it up - for music articles this usually involves "in popular culture" or musical genre warring. ] ] ] 17:19, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::That's a widespread problem, not unique to music articles. Consider that flytrap ''Notable persons'' section in pretty much every township article for instance. ] ] 17:52, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::Stuff like drives me up the wall, bad source, wrongly formatted, trivia, wild speculation, off topic, largely irrelevant ... but by the time I get to it other editors have "helpfully" done really important things like make sure a web link starts with http, repair disambiguation links, and other stuff that ignores totally whether the edit was useful or not, and making a straight "undo" impossible, requiring me to pick apart the original edit or resign myself to having a "GA" that doesn't meet the GA criteria anymore. Sorry, I need a lie down now. ] ] ] 09:35, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Enforcement request notice == |
|
|
|
|
|
I have made an enforcement request against you at AE - ]. ] (]) 00:00, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:What a surprise. Hopefully it will result in you being banned. ] ] 00:34, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::] I do not often get to demonstrate how much I am in your corner. I add my hope to your hope. I live for the day LB would fly away on her broom. (Have I said lately I am a female editor...?) All the best, ] ] 18:02, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::The strange thing is that I've collaborated with loads of female editors on articles, probably more females than males, yet not a single one has ever complained about the the way I've treated them or interacted with them. The only females who've complained about me are those I've never come across and I wouldn't know from Adam. ] ] 18:10, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
What you're going through at the moment, is something I've been through. Your best course of action, is to remain ''silent'' on the events. ] (]) 17:27, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I think I guessed that Fylbecatalous was a female editor who loves cats ... but there's another prominent editor I have worked with who could either be female or gay male, and whose topics of interest and style fits both profiles pretty equally. And frankly I don't care which as long as they can write articles. ] ] ] 21:15, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
] on the ] for toffee though.]] |
|
|
:::::I love cats myself, I have two of them, and I'd kick the shit out of anyone who tried to give them a hard time, male or female. ] ] 21:39, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:That's certainly ''a'' course of action, but is it the best? What happens if we're all silent? Silence is often considered to be a tacit admission of guilt. ] ] 17:33, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::When you're under an Arb restriction, you're generally viewed as guilty until proven innocent. Best to let others defend you at times like this. ] (]) 17:41, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I think you're generally viewed as being guilty, full stop. ] ] 17:48, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Editor Retention discussion == |
|
|
|
|
|
{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;" |
|
|
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:top;" | ] |
|
|
|rowspan="2" | |
|
|
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: bottom; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Purple Star''' |
|
|
|- |
|
|
|style="vertical-align: top; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | I am appalled at the recent developments since I logged off yesterday, and honestly think the profound overreactions of someone who, apparently, has a history of such overreactions have led to your deciding, not unreasonably, that that person seems to have come to the conclusion that they are able to request the equivalent of the death penalty for jaywalking. I can understand wanting to put as much space between yourself and such profoundly overemotional and self-righteous individuals, and, honestly, should have done the same thing myself a bit over a year ago, before the arbitration that led to my very temporary retirement. I hope that you don't let the idiots get you down too much as a result of these most recent developments. ] (]) 17:22, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Thanks John. What's happened though is pretty much what I thought would happen with that "broadly construed" nonsense that ArbCom is so fond of, which is why I've been declining invitations to get involved with articles on female subjects. It's just manna from heaven for the Sandsteins of this project. ] ] 17:29, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== January 2015 == |
|
|
<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px">]To enforce an ] decision and for violating your GGTF topic ban, as discussed in the related , you have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''48 hours'''. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions. <p>If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the ] (specifically ]) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. --><span style="font-size:97%;">{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE{{!}}arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN{{!}}administrators' noticeboard]]. ''Your reason here OR place the reason below this template.'' ~~~~}}</span>. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the ] on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (]), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 18:19, 25 January 2015 (UTC) <hr/><p style="line-height: 90%;"><small>'''Reminder to administrators:''' In May 2014, ArbCom adopted a ]: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" ). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."</small></p></div><!-- Template:uw-aeblock --> |
|
|
|
|
|
:I think you ought to extend your block to 72 hours, as I don't edit on Mondays. ] ] 18:24, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::That doesn't strike me as a reason that would justify extending a block. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 18:38, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Does anything ever strike you? ] ] 18:41, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*I would consider the block to be inappropriate, given that far more admins voiced dissent against the block than supported it. Obvious supervote is obvious. ] ] 18:48, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*:Sandstein has no "supervote", he just thinks that he does. His next step of course will be to restrict access to my talk page. That might be a mistake on his part though, because there's always the possibility that I might launch into a profane and vitriolic attack on him and anyone who believes that he is anything other than what I believe him to be. ] ] 19:02, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*It appears to me that there is an agenda . '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px Black;">]<sup>]</sup></span>''' 19:51, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*:I'm not permitted to say what I think about Sandstein, although he's permitted to propagate whatever lies about me that pop into his head. I think that tells us all we need to know about WP's chaotic model of governance. The reason that Jimmy Wales wants the WMF to ban me as soon as humanly possible is because he knows that I'm right, and he's afraid that too many others might realise that as well. ] ] 19:59, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*I can see Sandstein's logic on this one, and had the comment clearly been meant in bad faith I might have supported a block, but this seems completely out of proportion to the alleged offence. That said, I think it's grossly unfair to accuse Sandstein of having an agenda. I have criticised Sandstein in the past for his overly literal interpretation of remedies and the lack of proportion in subsequent sanctions (as indeed have plenty of arbitrators over the years), but he takes this approach across the board. I've seen nothing at all that suggest he has an axe to grind—against any editor—and would appreciate it if people would refrain from making such suggestions unless they have evidence. It is important to remember that it is possible for somebody to take an action you disagree with in only the best of faith, and that it is possible to disagree with that action without suggesting that the person who made it had an ulterior motive. ] | ] 20:47, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::His "approach" has been to punish one party whilst letting off the other. That, to me, points to an agenda. That's my opinion and I'm sticking with it. '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px Black;">]<sup>]</sup></span>''' 20:57, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Assuming for the sake of argument that there is a basis for sanctions against the other party, there isn't an applicable arbitration remedy. We can and often do scrutinise those who come to AE with unclean hands to request discretionary sanctions, but we don't have the same latitude with specific remedies like topic bans, and Sandstein has only evaluated things from the perspective of arbitration enforcement (which is also something for which he has a reputation). ] | ] 22:13, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::So what's going to be next Harry? Am I even allowed to mention the existence of the GGTF? This very much reminds of one of those five-steps-removed from shows. Can anyone point to any female editor that I've abused in the way that I'm being continually accused of? ] ] 21:19, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::*Based on this block, I would say no, you won't be able to. ] ] 21:50, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::*:So basically I'm forbidden to edit any article to do with females? Why didn't ArbCom just say that? ] ] 22:00, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::* So Eric can't edit ] <small>(well obviously ''right now'' he can't but you get my drift)</small> to give it a good copyedit and beef up the sourcing so it can be a GA? Who else will do the work? ] ] ] 22:04, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::*I wouldn't go that far. It just looks to me like ArbCom wants you, Eric, to simply avoid even ''seeing'' the acronym GGTF, let alone mentioning it or responding to someone else who has the audacity to bring it up in a discussion that hadn't involved them previously. ] ] 22:27, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
This block was against a clearly forming consensus and contrary to the best interests of the encyclopedia. I am far too involved to entertain any unblock request but as on outside observer I would probably grant it(oh, I just noticed it is a special kind of block where I could not anyways). Just because someone technically violated the rules does not mean the community cannot have a consensus to not act, there was such a consensus and it was ignored. ] 22:06, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I have never understood the "broadly construed" ArbCom mantra, but ''c'est la vie''. It now seems to me to being stretched to the point of ridicule, but I doubt Sandstein will care about that, as it gives him the opportunity to wreak his vengeance. ] ] 22:20, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::It's just Sandstein doing what Sandstein does; probably nothing against you specifically. A while back someone wrote something like "if there was a group of people running from a burning building, Sandstein would be the policeman calmly standing at the curb writing them tickets for jaywalking." But I've never seen any evidence that he's partial in his actions. ] (]) 22:44, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Are you suggesting that Sandstein is an equal opportunity abuser? ] ] 22:54, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::As I said on his talk page, yes, I'm afraid that's the case. It's not that you're blocked because you're Eric Corbett(TM), but because you broke The Rule #418 §13, fine print. ] (]) 23:14, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::I broke no rules. ] ] 23:53, 25 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::Now that I have the time (a self-imposed 3 day holiday to honor a friend), I was strolling around one of the old pastures behind the GGTF Building and found this ]. Careful! It stinks! ]<small>]</small> 00:30, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
] |
|
|
*Well, thanks a lot, Sandstein. Great job adminning; you've clearly allowed Lightbreather to breathe more freely and make even more quality contributions. Eric, I came by to ask you if you could have a look at ] for me, which I just wrote up, on request. Turns out it was quite a bit of fun, and I was reminded of why I joined Misplaced Pages in the first place: to learn stuff. Anyway, I got plenty of real-life work to do, so I think I'll join you. ] (]) 05:12, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*Count me in. (Had one only, brief interaction w/ LB, in good-faith and also at WT:WER, ending in her artificially blaming me as "part of the reason" for her resignation from the Misplaced Pages. So zero faith she wouldn't & doesn't attempt to scapegoat others for whatever her hostile GGTF agenda is.) ] (]) 06:24, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
] |
|
|
* Me too. One exchange with LB, ], not really an interaction. There seems to be some difficulty in grasping my idea that the flowers of kindness, generosity, forgiveness and compassion do not grow well on a soil of people thinking of other people as toxic personalities. - Watch AE for more entertainment, we have the approach that suggesting to generally replace a template by a better one leads to "removing and adding" an infobox and thus is a violation (which prohobits "removing" and "adding". I would not be surprised if it ended the same way. - Thank you, ], for giving me the term "best interest of the encyclopedia", - the interests of arbitration enforcement may be different. - I was cited there because I restored ] after an edit war. --] (]) 10:38, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:: some flowers also for {{diff|User talk:Cassianto|644267917|644265511|Cassianto}} --] (]) 18:18, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
* + 1. Just because an Arbcom gag order ''can'' be enforced on an utterly trivial and extremely tenuous technicality it doesn't mean it ''has'' to be, and any admin who gets their jollies by enforcing it that way is clearly an abusive one whose action deserves nothing but the contempt of "teh communiteh." And in this instance the contemptible action was performed at whose bidding? ''Lightbreather's'', for fuck's sake. An insult so pointed that it's hard to believe it wasn't deliberate and malign. ] (]) 17:55, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
*:Lightbreather isn't what she appears to be, and no doubt she'll be exposed in time. As for Sandstein, he's a one-off hopefully. ] ] 18:02, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::*Sorry to but in here in the middle of this, but whatever conflicts that occurred it isn't fair that {{U|Cassianto}} should leave and should be chased of. I know how that feels, I was there myself a couple of times myself. It is not exactly editor retention... if now we are discussing that one so much. Now if any of you (Ä, except Eric of course ) would go over and revert him, that would be nice. I bet he doesn't have a Phil who could do this for her/him. Or I will do that. ] (]) 19:05, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::* Never mind, I did it myself. Kinda ironic that all this went out of a discussion about wikiproject editor retention... ] (]) 19:19, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::*:Do you really believe that editor retention is a priority for the likes of Sandstein? ] ] 20:22, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*I'm not sure what this latest block was meant to achieve, but "Ours not to reason why" I guess. ] ] 18:58, 27 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::Look at it this way. Think of the sheer joy felt by those who dislike you. The block may have been pointless, but at least something good came from it. ]<span style="font-style:italic"><sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></span> 19:37, 27 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==ANI== |
|
|
|
|
|
] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. ] (]) 19:43, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:That's rather a revealing report, but why are you telling me? I can't take part in it even if I wanted to. Which I don't. ] ] 20:18, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Point taken, I understand you are upset but rather than just moving on the comments here continued to stack up. I agree you are improving but the comments here aren't helping. - ] (]) 20:24, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::Your watching this talk page and then reporting transgressions you perceive as such isn't really helping either. I was about to give you the same advice . ---] ] 20:28, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== I am reporting your recent violation of ArbCom sanctions == |
|
|
|
|
|
Please consider this a formal notice that I have reported your recent violation of your ArbCom sanctions at ]. ] (]) 22:39, 27 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Good luck with that, I suggest that you canvass Sandstein ... Oh I see you've already done that. ] ] 22:43, 27 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:Just when you hope this place can't get any more ridiculous...it does. ]] 22:48, 27 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:Not terribly recent. Only after not gaining any sort of consensus at ] for their POV. <small>]</small> 22:55, 27 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:: In what world is a few hours ago "not recent"? ] (]) 23:02, 27 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::: This one, in which Rationalobserver made numerous edits before filing the AE request -- as has been noted by the responding admin at AE. <small>]</small> 23:15, 27 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::: FTR, to Sandstein's page, and I brought it to AE ''only'' after . You are helping them turn this on me, which is why this place is so dysfunctional. If calling an editor "filth" isn't an insult, then I don't know what is. ] (]) 23:22, 27 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::*Rationalobserver, since you clearly despise Eric so much that you will run to dramaboards at the drop of a hat with evidence that is at best flawed, why are you still keeping this page on your watchlist? Oh, yeah; so you can bait him into being blocked. That doesn't help you, Eric, or anyone else. How, exactly, is Eric supposed to improve with people like you biting at his ankles every step of the way? ] ] 23:28, 27 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::* Okay, I shouldn't have underestimated the amount of support that EC has for his ''style''. I'll take your advice and unwatch this page, and hopefully I won't have to interact with him again any time soon. ] (]) 23:31, 27 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*Owing to their filthy analogy towards me, they have been described as the noun alternative. It's not difficult to understand, but then perhaps for you, it is. '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px Black;">]<sup>]</sup></span>''' 23:30, 27 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:* I don't know what your talking about, but you win. I'll try to avoid to guys from now on. ] (]) 23:31, 27 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:*:I don't want to see you here ever again Rationalobserver. Is that clear enough? ] ] 23:33, 27 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::And if RO continues this vendetta, I'll be asking for sanctions against <s>him<s> her at ANI. I really don't care if they don't actually pass now, but at some point the number of incidents will be too much for anyone to ignore. The moral of the story for the RO,KK,LB of the world; The fact is a lot of us ''like'' him writing stuff and he can't do that blocked. And he is less likely to be blocked if you stop counting the ways to be offended and/or poking at him. Just ignore him.]<span style="font-style:italic"><sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></span> 02:01, 28 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Harassing me is allowed, I'm surprised you haven't noticed. What's not allowed is for me to object to that harassment. ] ] 02:43, 28 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::I've noticed. Let other's object on your behalf, though you could do everyone a favor and try not to take their bait.]<span style="font-style:italic"><sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></span> 04:05, 28 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
{{od}}Ping me any time, I'm just looking for excuses to avoid my dramas and take on someone else's. I'm also more than willing to tell trolls they are trolls and to suggest that particularly annoying people go commit the infamous anatomically impossible act. (I also am always on the lookout for colorful euphemisms that provoke a SCOMN response from the reader!) ]<sup>]</sup> 04:25, 28 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Mailing lists and conspiracies== |
|
|
|
|
|
You may possibly not have noticed, but there's been a lot of talk of mailing lists, and secret plots to drive you off lately. I have a problem believing in the conspiracy theories because conspiracies require clever Machiavellian people, and I have seen precious few of those sallying against you, and while ] has his faults (as we've seen over the last few days, he's not Machiavellian and I think he's basically honest, if easily led, frequently obsessive and mistaken. However, there is no doubt that some mailing lists have been rallying against you, and as they are offshoots of Misplaced Pages, we all have a right to know, which are these lists and which users subscribe to them - so lets have some names for these lists, details of what exactly are they saying and their membership. For the benefit of the shy, my user-email is working and discretion is assured. So let's get this cloak, dagger and stiletto stuff out in the open before the next poor wretch is set upon. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">]</span> ] 18:19, 28 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:The only relevant WMF mailing list I'm aware of is . ] ] 19:00, 28 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
* I'm subscribed to that one but don't participate. The periodic squirts of venom and eruptions of bile seem to be useful indicators of the intentions behind some of the shenanigans here. The list provides valuable context. I recommend joining it. ] (]) 20:23, 28 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*:I certainly won't be joining it, not even if I was paid. I think it's a shame that so many female editors have recently decided to tarnish the reputations of all female editors, but that's obviously not a battle I can fight. ] ] 20:32, 28 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
