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 editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 05:03, 19 November 2011 view sourceLadyofShalott (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators57,118 edits →Did your talk page enjoy the trip to namespace?: WOW?← Previous edit Revision as of 07:42, 19 November 2011 view source Doc9871 (talk | contribs)23,298 edits →Sanctimonious, was it?: new sectionNext edit →
Line 241: Line 241:
**Oh, I'm sure they're all stale, yes. But I think the duck test identifies Ravens1985 as a sock of Willie/LCV convincingly enough, and that makes it more difficult for the next one. CU can see what else is under Ravens. ] (]) 04:44, 19 November 2011 (UTC) **Oh, I'm sure they're all stale, yes. But I think the duck test identifies Ravens1985 as a sock of Willie/LCV convincingly enough, and that makes it more difficult for the next one. CU can see what else is under Ravens. ] (]) 04:44, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
***Is that the same as Willy on Wheels? (I might be completely off base there. The WilburWheels name just sounds similar to me.) <font face="Lucida Calligraphy">]<font color="#0095c6">of</font>]</font> 05:03, 19 November 2011 (UTC) ***Is that the same as Willy on Wheels? (I might be completely off base there. The WilburWheels name just sounds similar to me.) <font face="Lucida Calligraphy">]<font color="#0095c6">of</font>]</font> 05:03, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

== Sanctimonious, was it? ==

Baiting, was I? *growl*. I'm a well-known defender of the wiki, and my nearly 10,000 edits are up for anyone to judge. Get it? Got it? Good. ] ] 07:42, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:42, 19 November 2011

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


Balwant Singh Bagwal - article review

Can't stand blank talk pages - looks like you have no mates!

I would be grateful if you or one of your stalkers could take the time to check my recent edits at Balwant Singh Sagwal and at Ajmer Singh. I am having a spot of bother with an editor whose contribution history and style seem to indicate a newbie but who was aware of WP:OWN. Rather stupidly, I did not check their history but that is precisely because their talk page stuff suggested that they did in fact know what they were doing (sort of).

NB: I moved the first article - it was originally at Ballu. - Sitush (talk) 17:40, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, no worries about the above now. I've been taken to ANI (again) & doubtless someone there will review what has gone on. - Sitush (talk) 18:38, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
Sitush, I'm just going to block you right now and then see what's going on at ANI. Your constant whining over "reliable sources" and "neutral point of view" is becoming a drag. Drmies (talk) 22:32, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
Funny how many references are made to Ballu (when they're really not necessary) in The Hindu right after his death. Drmies (talk) 00:00, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
TLDR. Perhaops you should do that block. I am fed up of it. I try to "keep things in order", in full knowledge that (a) that is a subjective statement & (b) I am pretty darn sure I have the community consensus there, right in the policies etc, so the subjectivity may still exist but in the context of WP ... well, bollocks to it. I do not deny that I could have handled this particular situation better: I saw WP:OWN& kinda thought "well, they must know their way around".
It is often the case that I cannot prove it but I remain convinced that in many instances I am dealing with socks and meats. Meanwhile, I am trying to be constructive elsewhere - you could take a look at the three or four articles I have been fettling this last week (perhaps Erasmus Smith or Kumar Suresh Singh stand out, insufficient although the former will be for the next couple of days, but there are others). I don't think that this particular instance is a sock/meat, but it is perhaps someone who has been around for a while as an IP.
How many times am I going to be dragged to ANI? It sometimes seems that I am there more often than the bloody administrators are, and it invariably ends either neutral or in my favour. The admins (you included) must be fed up of seeing my name. I enjoy the research and the by-ways that I travel along that route but as far as India-related stuff goes, well, it is just a hell-hole of POV, OR, SYNTH, poor phrasing, entrenched attitudes etc. And WMF seems to be implicitly encouraging this. I applaud anything that reduces systemic bias etc but the cost/benefit right now seems to be considerably skewed, and it is not assisted by the fact that admins generally seems to want to keep well away from the area (itself, perhaps, an indication of systemic bias - they feel that they do not know enough about the sphere & so would rather not ...) I know that they are trying but WMF need to get more oversight and base-level education in place via mentorships/projects etc before they continue their push. It is certainly not entirely the "fault" of the contributors. And, no, I do not expect you to offer a comment on that opinion.
It really, really pained me to take List of Ror to an article with no content at all. But what the heck am I supposed to do? I am convinced that some of the entries there were correct but WP insists on certain standards, and rightly so. It is like trying to square a circle. Send me a decent recipe for the carnitas MI-inducing stuff.
Rant over. I shall see if there is a bottle of beer in my fridge. I might drink it. I might knock myself over the head with it. - Sitush (talk) 01:30, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
BTW, did you see this? The sock is back, albeit there was only a sniff. Ahem. - Sitush (talk) 01:48, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Sitush, sometimes I wish I could block on sight (or on second sight) and get away with it. I don't know about the India project--with or without the WMF you're dealing with some heavily involved editors who care about their caste but couldn't give a fuck about RS, V, N, etc. And Christ, there's some poor writing going on there. I gave your IP a level-4 warning, but there is really nothing we can do. I mean, I can protect the talk page, but that's silly, and I'm not sure the frequency allows for that (I'll see).

Hey Sitush, we drank a bottle of St. Bernardus Abt tonight, and then a bottle of Brother Thelonious Monk. I hope you found something nice in the fridge as well. Take care, Drmies (talk) 04:37, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Danny Lee Wynter

Howdie Drmies :) Your duplication here has confused me, and I'm not sure what to remove or revert. Prehaps you can take another look. Thanks.  -- WikHead (talk) 17:47, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

  • Oh, I thought something went wrong there with an edit conflict. Did you fix it yet? I'll have a look. Drmies (talk) 21:23, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
    • No, I didn't fix it yet. There seems to be two slightly different versions in one, and I'm not sure which is the keeper. I'll go back to address that now, and hope I don't remove any good edits in the process.  -- WikHead (talk) 21:31, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
  • I'd call this a issue; occasionally one of my fingers slips and touches another button with drastic consequences. Thanks for pointing it out--but next time, don't give me so much credit and just cut or undo, haha. I hereby grant you the right to call me a moron in three edit summaries, but this privilege expires the next solstice. Drmies (talk) 21:29, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
    • Ahhh, you got back to it before I did. Appears to be in good order now :). Have yourself a great day Drmies. Happy editing! PS... I'd never call you a moron. Your work here is usually always right on the money. :)  -- WikHead (talk) 21:37, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Tovalu

Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at Tovalu's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Kamala Lopez/Jeanmarie Simpson articles/relationship

We could use your unbiased eye over here - http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Kamala_Lopez Webberkenny (talk) 20:30, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

  • I've looked at the article and some of the talk pages around it. I have no opinion, really, except that I think that the material about the biggest disappointment etc. probably has no place in this article. Moreover, I'm the second person you're approaching, and Mr. Stradivarius suggested you try your case at DRN, which it appears you haven't done yet. Sorry, but I am not going to get involved as some kind of arbitrator, though I am going to make a couple of edits to the article. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 21:15, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Well, I have made some edits, but I think I have left the bone of contention alone. There was far too much resume padding in here. I don't know which one of the two of you may or may not represent which party in some dispute, and frankly I don't care. The edits I just made were done on the basis of such guidelines as WP:RS and NOTRESUME. When this gets to DRV, you may find that the real issues that are bothering the two of you have very little to do with article content. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 21:28, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the review of the article and the changes that you've made. I am far more experienced with persuasive writing as I am an MBA not a news reporter. I believe you would find webberk's frantic tone and accusations on a talk page that I am Lopez to be enlightening...
"Simpson is and has been an artist on the national and international levels working in the peace movement, very notably since 9/11. You are trying to elevate Lopez (probably yourself) to Simpson's level, and the level of thousands (if not millions) of legitimate, hard working activist. Ask Cindy Sheehan or S. Brian Willson or Mimi Kennedy or Frank Dorrel or any of a host of other relevant peace activists today, and they will know and applaud Simpson's work and refute any claims you (Lopez) have of meaningful activism. Lopez (you) have a long and sordid history of alienating people including Ben Affleck, a well-respected political activist who has revealed Lopez's (your) narcissistic, phony tendencies. Webberkenny (talk) 05:16, 14 November 2011 (UTC)"


My issue is simple - webberkenney has revealed his/her frame of mind which is that Lopez and Simpson should be compared and that one be chosen as MORE important than the other. My frame of mind - I don't give a CRAP about Simpson and the webberkenney avatar. However, the issue of inserting irrelevant information for the sole purpose of making one person less than another seems...stupid.
As for addressing "the bone of contention" the only contention I currently have is the importance she has places on inserting the criticism of the movie when Mr. Strad already addressed this issue by stating:
"...it is ok to have some criticism of the film in her biography, but only from mainstream film critics, and there should not be too much weight on the criticism compared to the other coverage of the film. Criticism from Simpson should probably be limited to the article on the film itself..."
That content has already been placed on several pages as recommended by Mr. Strad. I hope this can be finally resolved and we can get on to addressing other issues. I have interest in Lopez's activism but I'm not a "FAN" as weeberkenney describes herself with regards to Simpson. I just want to improve the Lopez site and, if I believe there is additional information to add to the site, I will seek out advice before posting it if that will mitigate further dispute. I believe webberkenney should do the same. Is there a process for doing this or will the conflict continue?

JHScribe (talk) 05:04, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Agreed

JHScribe (talk) 13:49, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Nope - no dispute resolution necessary. I believe the proof is in the pudding. The articles and their clearly sourced references are what is important. I will continue to ensure that Simpson's work is duly honored and that Lopez and her hysterical attempts to hide the truth are fruitless.Webberkenny (talk) 05:21, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Format problem

The sentence beginning "By the late nineteenth century" at Caste_system_in_Kerala#Origin_of_the_caste_system is intended to be the first sentence of a new paragraph. Any idea why it is not splitting from the prior paragraph? It seems to be correct in the edit window but not in the article view. Very odd. - Sitush (talk) 02:39, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Butting in: It had something to do with the quote template being inside the paragraph, instead of being seperated from it. I've fixed it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:51, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Interesting. Thanks for helping out, BMK, while I was out protecting pages. Drmies (talk) 02:53, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Wow, and thanks. I use that template a lot, and in the exact manner used on that article. I have never come across that behaviour before. I might just go in there & see if the colon immediately prior to it was a part of the issue. - Sitush (talk) 02:56, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Sitush, I'm blown away by what you've done for that article. Amazing. Drmies (talk) 02:58, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. t has got a long way to go yet. And, yes, it was the colon that caused the problem. That's a bug, surely? - Sitush (talk) 02:59, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
The peculiar behaviour is not new - see Template_talk:Quote#Paragraphs. - Sitush (talk) 03:18, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
What is that, the ANI for geeks? Please tell Mandarax I said hi. Drmies (talk) 03:21, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Since you asked for one at WP:AN. Enjoy! Jasper Deng (talk) 03:04, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Go the F to Sleep

I disagreed with your edit. I reverted you and added a little. Just so ya know... LadyofShalott 04:05, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

  • Well now, isn't that interesting. The words you added actually help. But a. this is some awful poetry; b. please don't make me put a linkrot tag on that article; and c. what about secondary sourcing? Drmies (talk) 04:10, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
    • a. No argument there! b. Point taken - I'll deal with that in a moment. c. Hmm... yeah... I don't if there is any. I doubt it. I kind of worried that what I added might be a bit too OR-ish. (Ewww, did I just say that?) LadyofShalott 04:20, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
I never heard of this book until this very morning when I heard it reviewed here on KGO (AM), Northern California's most popular radio station, where they delicately called it "Go the Bleep to Sleep".
On another matter of great importance, Drmies, that bacon butty you sent me the other day cannot accurately be called a "bribe". It would have had to have been offered in advance. Instead, I think we ought to call it a "service award". Thanks, anyway. Also, I look forward to seeing your photography in the world's great publications, after your career change. Cullen Let's discuss it 05:23, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Staying The F Awake

I can't sleep, again. Can you get hold of this from JSTOR, please? It might be at archive.org but their search system is dreadful. It's for Herbert Hope Risley, another of my ongoing revamps. An "interesting" guy, for whom I have a juicy quotation awaiting: "his career ... marked the apotheosis of pseudo-scientific racism". Anthropometry & all that sort of bull. - Sitush (talk) 04:51, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

RPP getting backlogged again

I'll give you another beer (if you know you won't get drunk) if you help take down this follow-up backlog at RPP :) .Jasper Deng (talk) 05:27, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Please remove such misleading information

Drmies, I thank you for sending me a kind message and pointing out my ungrammatical sentence, but I really hope you would remove such Offensive and misleading information on this wiki page ---> Negrito, what's written in the bottom part is 100% MISLEADING and OFFENSIVE.. and contradicting against what the other wiki page have stated. Unlest you prove to me that I'm wrong than I'm going to have to believe you're an Afro-centrist who deliberately edited this false information to mislead everyone. I'M NOT THREATENING YOU, I have no power to but I'm so annoyed by this edit I have long wanted to report to the admins. Someone showed me this edit, and I was shocked to found how false it was. I'm completely offended by this false edit.

On the Negrito wiki page it is stated " Haplogroup D (Y-DNA) are found frequently among some peoples living in the same area. In China, stone coffins were used by these peoples " Nowhere on the chinese article (the reference for it) did it mention about dna.

IT COMPLETELY contradicts to what this[REDACTED] says http://en.wikipedia.org/Andamanese " Within this lineage, the Andamanese (Onges and Jarawas) belong almost exclusively to the subtype designated Haplotype D, which is also common in Tibet and Japan, but rare on the Indian mainland. However, this is a subclade of the D haplogroup which has not been seen outside of the Andamans, marking the insularity of these tribes."

Drmies, Do you know what's haplogroup? Y-dna is the paternal lineage and Mtdna for maternal lineage. China has Y-dna D1-M15 and D3a y-dna which is related with Tibetan and Tibeto-Burmese this is genetically proven. BUT ON THIS Negrito wiki it states that the dna is related with negrito which is garbage and completely misleading. And Since adamanese negrito are the only negrito with their own type dna D* which is isolated only on the Adaman island, how the hell is China D dna related with them?. PLEASE... I really urge you to change it. Also about the accusation that I removed the word "fan" . I believe someone edited that for me, Why would I remove the word "fan" for? makes no sense. BTW, I just checked on this[REDACTED] http://en.wikipedia.org/Rainie_Yang, I added she was of "Cantonese origin" but it was removed. I have evidence to back it up, here is her interview she clearly said she was of Cantonese origin. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIfhxJzTOYs

ONE MORE THING: How could you allow to cite these sources ( reference 17 and 18 ) when none of you understand Chinese? one of them says nothing about negrito, in fact the page is not even availabe, and other is just an random chinese forum with chinese people discussing about ghost and negrito. These 2 reference is complete nonsense. http://www.11xs.com/html/9344/1541085.htm www.sr0768.com/bbs/simple/index.php?t16103.html To cite these two as sources? such freaking comedy, since when did forums became reliable sources. WarriorsPride6565 (talk) 5:03, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

  • I don't have a clue as to what a haplogroup is. My guess is that it's an element in a modern, updated version of Malebolge? The Lady has already pointed out that you are incorrect about that removal remark, and I will leave it at that. Whatever you want to say about freaking comedy is not for here but for the talk page of the associated article, where you are free to make your case in a clear, concise manner, and without bold print and all-caps. Oh, if forums aren't reliable sources (and they aren't, you are correct), why would a YouTube video of an interview be? At best, it may verify what she has said--and by the same token I can claim to be a direct descendant of Mordred. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 15:13, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

IP you blocked

24.248.154.2, who you blocked, is misusing their talk page access; since the bot at AIV keeps reverting my report, can you revoke the tp access of this IP? Thanks. HurricaneFan25 21:34, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the blocking of User:Applianceelectrician

Hey Drmies, I was looking through WP:UAA a few minutes ago, and I came across the above user. I noticed that you put a block template on their page; however, looking at the block log of the editor (here), it doesn't look like they're blocked. Do you think you could take a look at it? Regards, The Utahraptor/Contribs 01:38, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Pete the Cat book series

Remember the kerfluffle a while back? Anyway... I went tonight to the new independent book shop in town and found out that there's a new Pete the Cat book out, Rocking in my school shoes. Then I got on WorldCat and found out that another, Pete the cat and his four groovy buttons is due out next year. So apparently, Litwin and Dean are still working together. LadyofShalott 02:53, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

  • Yes, didn't I tell you we got the school shoes book? I'm sorry, I thought I had--unfortunately, it isn't half as good as the first one. I think I did tell you that Litwin showed up alone at the book festival. But, more importantly, congratulations on having a new independent book shop! Drmies (talk) 02:56, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
    • I don't think you did, or if you did, I somehow failed to register that you were telling me about a new one. (Was this recently?) Anyway, yes, I'm really glad to have the new book shop, and I hope they do well! I made a couple purchases tonight (not PtC), and will probably place a special order in the next few days. LadyofShalott 03:00, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

User 70.82.76.77

Despite two final warnings given to this user (including one by you), this user had disrupted the One Life to Live page by delibaretely adding content not discussed in the provided sources and then going as far as leaving a note telling other editors to not change this bogus edit.

At this point, I don't know if disciplinary actions should be taken towards this user or if he/she should be given yet another chance.Farine (talk) 07:19, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

  • Frankly, this edit dispute is a bit on the stupid side (it's a soap opera), but indeed, the reference does not contain the closing date. You've warned them; next time you can report them to WP:AIV. Their uncommunicative character might be taken into account. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 15:22, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
  • I think all of y'all's time would be better spent turning articles like Ashley Abbott McCall into actual articles (with references and stuff) or scrapping them. That whole conglomerate of soap articles is quite embarrassing. Drmies (talk) 15:24, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Well I wouldn't called it a "dispute" since it happened only once in the case of this article and may never happen again (though the user has had many disruptive behaviors in other articles).
I also wouldn't call it "stupid" because adding delibarate errors on articles or adding content not supported by the provided sources is vandalism. Plain and simple. And all vandalism is bad. There is no vandalism that is less worst than the other, and all acts of vandalism should be treated equally whether it's open vandalism or subtle vandalism. It's totally ridiculous that Misplaced Pages would write that One Life to Live is ending on January 20, 2012 when all the other websites are restricting it to January 2012. And such situation should not be taken lightly under the excuse that "it's just a date".
As for Ashley Abbott McCall, I don't have enough knowledge of the article to be able to contribute to it.
Thank you for having taken the time to respond and I wish you a nice day! Farine (talk) 21:21, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Well, obviously you rank articles differently when it comes to importance. It always saddens me when time is spent on relatively trivial matters (in my opinion, of course). In this case, what's even worse is that the other party is uncommunicative, which means even more time has to be wasted because we have to assume good faith, check the sources (which I did, and you as well), give warnings, etc. You'll have to agree that in the grand scheme of things this is a trivial matter. That you want to get it right is not trivial at all, I'm not saying that.

But here is the thing: the editor is now warned. You are an expert on these matters, I am not: so look through their recent edits and see if they're doing the same to other articles since your final warning. (I just looked, but I can't judge whether in all that unsourced stuff anything in those recent edits crosses a line--it's not my field.) Given that they've been warned plenty I will block if they persist with this behavior. Sound fair? Drmies (talk) 22:36, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I'll notify you if something happens again. But I hope we won't have to go there because I really hate having to do this. Especially that the majority of unregistered users are good people who wants to contribute positively to this encyclopedia and it's only a minority of unregistered users (a strong minority, unfortunately) that gives the rest of them a bad name. Nevertheless, in the case of User 70.82.76.77, he/she has received plenty of warnings and it's time to bring this to a disciplinary level should something happen again.
Regards Farine (talk) 23:01, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
There's a couple of areas that don't seem to work without IP work and that simultaneously suffer from it, and this is one of them. Soccer (and other sports, I imagine) is another. Again, it's the uncommunicative nature that is causing the problems--yes, on the one hand, you don't want to block someone who is contributing positively, but on the other hand you have to decide whether the positive outweighs the negative. I asked them earlier to explain more, which would automatically tip the scale, so to speak. They didn't take me up on that, unfortunately. Thanks for keeping an eye out, Drmies (talk) 23:13, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
That's the thing. Many unregistered users are not even aware that they have a talk page and the only to get a hold them is by actually blocking them. That's when they realize that we've been trying to communicate with them all this time.Farine (talk) 22:16, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

AfD

Well so much for early closure of the Scratch My Arse Rock AfD... there's now a delete vote. LadyofShalott 15:26, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

AN/I case

I left a comment on this case - it has sparked my curiousity. Calabe1992 22:14, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

  • Ah yes. Olaf the Shakinglord. Who came to ANI to denounce himself. His indefinite block is a serious loss to the project, of course. Hey, good work Calabe, thanks! Drmies (talk) 03:17, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Well, I wasn't around for that one. What did I miss? Something tells me he'll be back again... Calabe1992 03:19, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
You didn't miss a thing. Some dumb thing on ANI where someone came to complain about someone else, and then it turned out they were themselves, and it was all just a waste of time. That was him. As for socks, I just stumbled upon an IP for one of our masters, which revealed a half dozen more. Great fun! Drmies (talk) 03:28, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Oh fun. Calabe1992 03:42, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

A gem

I quote: "I usually do not enjoy reading books that involve strong religious views because they sometimes attempt to make the reader believe in a certain religion...they also seem to be narrow-minded and do not fully grasp my interest. At the cost of sounding arrogant, I do not enjoy these books because I already have my beliefs." Drmies (talk) 22:14, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

ANI case closures

While you're at that, close this ban proposal.Jasper Deng (talk) 05:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

A "please" is always nice to hear in such requests. 28bytes (talk) 06:27, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Well, I'm not really going to do that anyway: it's above my pay grade and I have no experience with it. A ban is not a good subject to practice on. 28, will you please look into it? Nicest 28 in the world? ;) Drmies (talk) 15:11, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
The sweetness of your words is simply irresistible, Drmies. Looks like a pretty clear consensus over there, so I'll do the honors. 28bytes (talk) 15:25, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
I once taught a class full of freshman comp students that proper MLA style meant starting every question with "Drmies , you look smashing today." They knew it was a lie, as did I, and yet it made me feel good and it made them laugh every time someone said it. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 16:54, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
I met you in Boston, and I can attest that you do look smashing. Seems I recall a stylish shirt as well. Cullen Let's discuss it 01:09, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Cullen, few people were as stylish as you and Mrs Cullen out on the dance floor. Drmies (talk) 02:39, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Ho v. Taflove

Hi Drmies. Would you take another look at Template:Did you know nominations/Ho v. Taflove? I proofread the article yesterday, but when I did a spotcheck of the sources for close paraphrasing today, I found that I was not thorough enough. (I missed an extra period.) Would you review the article to see if you can catch any more errors? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:38, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

  • Sure, Cunard. I'm making some coffee and then I'm on it. Pity--seems like a hit and run editor, and it rubs me the wrong way, that we are made to be someone else's copy editor. I hope you have a real job and don't have to grade papers. Drmies (talk) 01:14, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Judging by the talk page, it seems to be a student project with little guidance from the professor. I've had to reject two nominations from Piotrus (talk · contribs)'s students for close paraphrasing and failed verification. I gave a lengthy review at the second link but it seems the students have completely ignored it. The close paraphrasing example I pointed out remains in the article and my suggestion to break the citations down into manageable sizes of two or fewer pages for easier verification has been ignored. I haven't checked but I'd guess that my other suggestions were ignored. SandyGeorgia (talk · contribs) has had trouble recently with student projects too.

    And this article is now a GA candidate: Talk:Grounds for divorce (United States)/GA1. I feel for English professors who must deal with unresponsive students on a regular basis. Cunard (talk) 01:45, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

  • That's what I thought. Careful, or you'll be blasted on some email list. Piotrus, BTW, is doing a pretty good job maneuvering between all those parties and concerns, and he doesn't seem to allow a watering down of our guidelines in order to get students' work on the front page: see the first comment here. Well, I've finished, I think, and left two remarks on the DYK nomination page. I can't 'fix' those problems (if that is indeed what they are) since I am woefully out of my league on the technicalities. I hope you know a little bit about the law; if you do, maybe you can answer my second question. I'm going to grade some papers. ;) Thanks Cunard, and good luck, Drmies (talk) 01:48, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
  • I agree that Piotrus has been more proactive than the other professors. I love the first comment at the above video. Were you afraid that I'd bring you to WP:WQA or ANI for using naughty words? ;) I'm not good at the technicalities of both templates and copyright law, so am unable to fix those issues though I have hunch about what might be causing the first error. Have fun with those papers! ;) Cunard (talk) 02:01, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Rollback Permission

Hi, Thanks for granting the Rollback.Regarding the slip, I apologize for that and had corrected my mistake. Had a problem with Twinkle. Thanks again. Arnavchaudhary (talk) 15:18, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Campaigning for the ban of Misplaced Pages

News is filtering through that a known member of the "awkward squad", who has edited en-WP, is leading a drive to get Misplaced Pages banned in his country & has got political backing from activists. The will be picketing and the media are apparently very interested. Surely, if true, this would count as "disruptive" at pretty much the highest possible level?

You can guess the country. You may even be able to guess the individual. - Sitush (talk) 16:50, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

  • Sounds exciting! They better keep that off-wiki. Oh, I still need to look for that article: if you paste the URL below I don't have to peruse my email... Drmies (talk) 17:20, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
    • Oh no, I am sure that it will be on-wiki also. Articles involving contested maps of the country in question. Prepare for a busy weekend of short length semi-pp'ing. The article link is this. - Sitush (talk) 17:25, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
      • You got mail. Drmies (talk) 19:19, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
        • Thanks. Having skimmed the thing, I am slightly concerned that it may be classed as a primary source. I shall have a think ... and I shall ask the polymathic & Mr (or Mrs, or Ms) Google whether the title can be found in any subsequent discursive works. In any event, it gives me some personal insight into the ways of yet another nutter of the Raj period. Just off to measure the proportions of my head etc & see what category I fall into. - Sitush (talk) 21:59, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

"If you're referencing the gerbil, that was years ago."

If I had a dime for every time I've heard that... 28bytes (talk) 21:33, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

  • I'll tell you what's weird. Out of nowhere the word 'gerbil' popped up this morning (in the newspaper, I think), then Hamster came along, and then, when I picked up my youngest, it turns out that her school needs someone to take care of their gerbil for the Thanksgiving holiday. Three gerbils in one day: coincidence? BTW, I'm almost afraid to look at the ANI discussion now, after having been away for a few hours. I could guess...NPA warnings, escalating discussion, at least one section now hatted, etc... Drmies (talk) 23:14, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
    • Oh no, actually everyone worked out their differences, decided it was silly to be arguing and vowed to work together on some articles to build camaraderie. On a serious note, I have been told by reliable sources that gerbils and dead celebrities do indeed both come in threes. 28bytes (talk) 23:24, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Good Humor
For the great idea for a good article. Calabe1992 19:25, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at Calabe1992's talk page.
Message added 19:39, 18 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Calabe1992 19:39, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Did your talk page enjoy the trip to namespace?

Any idea who that person was? Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:56, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

<--No, this is the first one. Loyola is a misnomer, in a way. Note the phrasing on User:Kross and the exclamation point; note also what they edit, incl. Obesity. Then the Loyola silliness starts, here. What's next? This needs to be written up somewhere. An SPI would be useful for gathering info, and would help dealing with subsequent abuse--CU would be easy. I'm going to drop Causa sui a line as well. Think about it, BMK, cause I'm getting sleepy. Drmies (talk) 04:29, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Sanctimonious, was it?

Baiting, was I? *growl*. I'm a well-known defender of the wiki, and my nearly 10,000 edits are up for anyone to judge. Get it? Got it? Good. Doc talk 07:42, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Drmies: Difference between revisions Add topic