User talk:Bishonen/Archive 17

Archive 10

←

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Please don't leave

I'm sorry you are feeling tired. While you should do what is best for yourself, you are valued and loved here.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

miss jocund and honey-tongued --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:22, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

• Enjoy your time away from the madhouse, but come back when you're up to it, because your presence helps make the place bearable. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:32, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

... even enjoyable, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:37, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

A tiredness cure for you!

Although i never touch the stuff, i hear coffee is good for this kind of thing. Enjoy it, this one's on me! And keep up the good work for as long as you enjoy it. Thanks ツ Jenova20 (email) 13:15, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

(Reluctantly.) Sip. Thanks. Bishonen | talk 15:53, 4 March 2013 (UTC).

Recent Revert

So we can edit discussions that are closed?? LalaLAND (talk) 14:41, 4 March 2013 (UTC) Unless you reply here, I will revert again as I will assume it was a mistake on your part. LalaLAND (talk) 14:46, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I very much doubt it was a mistake, so just leave it. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:51, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

That "No further edits should be made" note isn't a rule, just a request. And even if it was a rule, Wehwalt would have every right to remove his own edit per WP:IAR, since he gave a good reason for the removal. You gave none for reverting him, and you still offer none. How did your action improve Wikipedia, pray? Bishonen | talk 14:52, 4 March 2013 (UTC).

Tea Party movement arbitration case opened

An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 20, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 23:49, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Feel like an FA

I have been tinkering about with this page one that should appeal to our Americam cousins. Would you like to take a look and see if you feel like fixing up the punctuation and reffs etc. What do you think?  Giano  18:12, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello, my friend

His Excellency with some chums

Since I have gotten myself involved in a little nonsense elsewhere on this site, I thought I would do the polite thing and express myself mordantly relieved that you can still be found upon these hallowed pages. I do hope that I have agitated your neural pathways sufficiently for you to purview (and even approve of) my sentiments. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:45, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

LHvU wandering around WP muttering, Giano and Bish possibly collaborating on an FA... it's starting to feel like 2006! --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:54, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Wonderful! I can go back to successfully raiding Ahn'Qiraj every night instead of failing to write an encyclopedia. --RexxS (talk) 01:41, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, isn't it a lovely, 2006 again: Abba, Saturday Night Fever and my flared jeans with red & green leather pockets - Oh happy days.  Giano  08:16, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

You must be thinking of your misspent youth fifty years earlier, excellency. You have mail, and Bishonen will take a look at the article you mentioned as soon as RL problems allow.

@Mr LessHeard: Bishonen should be back to her unpleasant self in a few days and will then respond to your kind yoho. Cassandra at the peak of her insanity (crazytalk) 13:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC).

I can assure you that my nephew looks extremely smart in whatever he wears. In my family, it is considered vulgar to relentlessly pursue fashion. My own hemline has not moved since 1927 and very dignified it looks too. You may choose to look like a stick insect in one Vivienne Westwood's strange creations, but people of a certain standing do not. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 14:10, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

You're right Ma'am. I was particularly struck by how smart he looked in his recent portrait. --RexxS (talk) 17:55, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

It has been several seasons (or possibly eons) since I looked anything like a stick insect - is there a reputable encyclopedia in which I might discover whether there are any classes of log insects you might recommend? Therefore I shall presume this later discourse not to be meant for my attention. LessHeard vanU (talk) 17:58, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Look out, Giano! Some guy has fallen out of the clock tower and is about to land on top of you! --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:01, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

• Mr van U, I suppose the lady was referring (enviously) to the striking portrait on my talkpage. Presumably her eyesight isn't what it was. Cassandra at the peak of her insanity (crazytalk) 18:29, 8 March 2013 (UTC).

P.S. Oh look, Giano's wearing the priceless vestments made when Lady Catherine replaced her drawing room curtains! (Mentioned in this account of her funeral.) Classy! Cassandra at the peak of her insanity (crazytalk) 18:43, 8 March 2013 (UTC).

Whats wrong with you people??? The Lady Catherine is here and no red carpet???

Note to the master

• Apology notification <attempts irresistible puppy-dog eyes> — Ched :  ?  10:47, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

User:Noodleki

Hello. You blocked Noodleki (talk · contribs) for copyvios back in February, it seems they have a sock account Noodle90 (talk · contribs) (created back in October 2012, but mainly active after the block of the master) which is now busy doing exactly the same thing they were blocked for. --Saddhiyama (talk) 21:39, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Wham, bam, thank'ee ma'am. Checkuser confirms socking. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:12, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Looks like I stupidly waded into the shark tank, thinking it was the starfish petting tank

I really have no idea what's going on there, Bish. If it looks like I'm advocating a bad idea somehow, I'm not. I know I'm not, because I'm not advocating anything. I was just commenting on the more general case of "he was blocked by one admin, now you need consensus to unblock", which drives me up a wall. But it looks like that isn't actually the case. Whatever it is, it looks like this is a typical ANI circus? And as usual Regents Park showed clue of some kind, and is getting yelled at for it? Haven't looked at ANI for (goes to check userpage) 16 days. But I'm really sorry it's got you stressed out.

Still working on Grownupedia. "Still working" in the sense of "still thinking it would be a cool idea for someone else to do". Step one: find someone who knows what they're doing to take over the task, and then play a Tom Sawyer trick on them. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:37, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Could someone please ping me when applications become available? Also, I do have a few friends I could nominate for membership if there is a lack of interest. (reference note: While whitewashing fences is a noble profession, it can get to be a tiresome task) — Ched :  ?  07:37, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much

For this. I wonder, is there a "defender of the puppy" barnstar? It is so nice to know when I am ill and having trouble staying on top of things there are kind editors like you who will step in and help run interference. You have my gratitude. KillerChihuahua 03:04, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, of course there is. --RexxS (talk) 05:29, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

OMG, that is teh awesomeness, thank you Rexx! KillerChihuahua 02:58, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

• :-D I am not worthy! Bishonen | talk 11:05, 16 March 2013 (UTC).

Very nice Rexx! Bish-glad to see you are still around and I hope you are doing well.PumpkinSky talk 22:40, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

:) BlueSapphires (talk) 10:14, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Hello Bishonen, I will be celebrating my birthday on 19 March. So, I would like to give you a treat. If you decide to "eat" the cookie, please reply by placing {{subst:munch}} on my talk page. I hope this cookie has made your day better. Cheers! Arctic Kangaroo 15:36, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

[Breathing out a light spray of {{cookie}} crumbs as she speaks :] Darwinbish has stolen your cookie! The cookie made her happy and she'd like to give you a great big hug for leaving it where she could reach it. Spread the WikiLove by giving her more {{cookie}}s, unless you want her boys to pay you a visit!

A pie for you!

you need more food, since darwinbish stole your cookies!!!! Aunva6 (talk) 02:15, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Yum! Munch munch munch! [Bishapod runs off, full of delicious nectarine pie.] bishapod talk to your inner fish 10:26, 18 March 2013 (UTC).

so hungry

Wow - this family certainly does have a healthy appetite. :) — Ched :  ?  10:55, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

since all the food keeps getting stolen, I give you a kittenses!!!!

Aunva6 (talk) 18:03, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

• OMG. So cute, but I know what'll happen to that sweet little kitten! Bishonen | talk 19:10, 18 March 2013 (UTC).

  Run kitty!! --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:12, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

  Oh. well that's ok, then. I thought DB was going to eat it. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:19, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

  Oh, no! "Kitten Education", below, is one of her standard templates. But I don't blame you, I suppose — it's a common misconception that the Evil One eats kittens.[1] But she actually likes babies, and enjoys corrupting them. Bishonen | talk 19:40, 18 March 2013 (UTC).

  Hmm, but what about Bishzilla? Does she eat kittens? If not, I guess we can only blame ArbCom; mystery solved at last! Heimstern Läufer (talk) 14:25, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

  Well… I admire your fine storming-out message there, little Heim, and the fact is I'm not sure. Bishzilla is on record as stating she won't eat anything smaller than chihuahuas ("not worth trouble!"), but what happens when she's really hungry is a bit of a grey area. I admit it. It's well known that she does eat users. (And not only from ungovernable hunger, compare this recent close shave.) Kittens wouldn't be her first choice, that's the most I can say. A more urgent question at this time is, does arbcom eat chihuahuas? Bishonen | talk 15:49, 19 March 2013 (UTC).

  We're about to find out. KillerChihuahua 00:32, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

  Well, fine little storming out messages are quite the rage, aren't they? (By the way, to anyone else who might be wondering about why I would post such a strange message, the date of the post is significant.) Heimstern Läufer (talk) 13:35, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

  This fine storming-out message is highly recommended. Works on any date. Bishonen | talk 13:43, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

I am SOOOO going to have to steal that one the next time I get in a huff. TY for pointing that one out Bish. :-D — Ched :  ?  17:04, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Come here, kitty, kitty, kitty..

(edit conflict)

Darwinbish has taught your Virtual Wikikitten to bite you shrewdly on the ass. Hopefully that has made your day better. Kittens are cute and have very sharp teeth! Spread the goodness of kittens by giving someone else a bitey kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

A beer for you!

well, what better thing to do than get a bish drunk!!!!! only good can come of that! Aunva6 (talk) 18:13, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

[Young Darwinfish has a few sips and reels off.] I left you some, Bishonen, I'm a good little user, I am! Burp! tipsy darwin^fish, 19:59, 20 March 2013 (UTC).

Not convinced. See: http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/123000.html --RexxS (talk) 00:45, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Divine Bish

[2]. Indeed. In fact, there's already even a book about you: Small Gods. NE Ent 01:26, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

but bishzilla isn't small... I mean, why would tokyo be afraid of a small bishzilla?

Aunva6 (talk) 02:37, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Protection

Hi Bishonen. I added pending-changes protection to Delwar Hossain Sayeedi while you were writing your decline comment there (I didn't see that you'd declined until I went back to RPP). I'll leave it up to you whether you remove my protection or leave it there. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 16:54, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, there wasn't anything abusive in the new user's additions, just something about the name, and I hope they'll get my point about using the talkpage. On the other hand I think there's a case to be made for using Pending Changes on all BLPs! We just simply don't want drive-by editing on them to be too easy. So I'll certainly leave your action, thanks for filling me in. Bishonen | talk 17:23, 21 March 2013 (UTC).

I like the section heading and the smell of monsters. May I take refuge here for a while? I have just done something horrible. [3] Hans Adler 21:12, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

"And if you can't justify your position, maybe you will learn something and change your opinion." Ha! [With abnormal strength of character, Bishzilla refrains from linking to a certain RFAR which does not indicate any willingness to learn or change on the part of the person Hans addressed. With another huge effort of will-power, she also doesn't link to the Wikipedia Review leaks of the highly embarrassing demeanour of the same person on the arbcom mailing list.] Worn out by all the will-power! Applying Bishonen conglomerate monster protection racket! [Bishzilla stuffs the little üser Häns in her pöcket.] No worries, little Höns! Not keeping any arbs or godkings in there these days! Safe place! bishzilla _ROARR!! 22:01, 21 March 2013 (UTC).

i'd think said person would be used to such statements/criticism. said person did collapse the comment, although as part of a chunk (bigger than the longest talk page i've seen as of yet), in an effort to reduce the length of his talk page.

Stoppit!

Don't you dare insult Mummy [4]; I won't have people being beastly to her; she's a wonderful, kind and very misunderstood person. She has known true suffering; it wasn't easy being dead for four years, and people said very cruel things when her third and fourth husbands both took their own lives. You should realise that - so stoppit or my pony will kick you. The Hon Mrs Humphrey Starborgling (talk) 20:54, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah right. [/me thoughtfully pets Mrs Starborgling's pony.] What a fine fellow! I just saw it on Darwinbish's page! Bishonen | talk 22:09, 21 March 2013 (UTC).

Thanks

Thank you for the help on the Yohio article. I was not sure I did the right thing by reporting it to Article protection but I guess it was for the best. The tone of the sentences I removed was way to negative to be unbiased. However if the sentence can be rewritten in a less negative tone then I am all for it. Again thank you.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:11, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for keeping an eye on the article and posting an alert, BabbaQ. I really hate the idea of that young guy googling for his name and finding mean stuff in his Wikipedia article. Bishonen | talk 21:23, 22 March 2013 (UTC).

Think the situation at the Yohio article has calmed down thankfully. Now I would like your opinion on Robin Stjernberg, someone has been placing a image of him making a funny/ugly face which I have had to revert several times now back to the original image. I am not sure that a image of a subject making a funny and quite honestly ugly facial expression is appropriate, I have had to revert the image back several times and I think I did the right thing but always better with other users opinions too. Just as Yohio doesnt want to read negative about him if he comes to his Wikipedia article I doubt Stjernberg wants to see an image of himself making a ugly face. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:17, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

No, WP:BLP is serious business. I've warned both the account and the IP (no doubt the same person). You edit conflicted me, shame on you! ;-) Bishonen | talk 15:42, 4 April 2013 (UTC).

Good work. Well, no one is perfect ;-) --BabbaQ (talk) 17:04, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

User Kiruning changed back to mentioning Yohios Japan status. I reverted the users edits because as we have established already any assumption of the singers "fame" in Japan is pure speculations and Yohio has never claimed to be a "huge pop star in Japan" anyway. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 20:21, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Yep. Your revert turned up on my watchlist, and so I have posted on their page Pity neither you (I suppose) nor I saw their post on Talk:Yohio a week ago. I only just noticed that one. Stupid of me, since they mentioned me (my protection) specifically and everything. But my watchlist has rather large holes (like when I sleep). Bishonen | talk 20:33, 22 April 2013 (UTC).

Thanks for PP on Spooling

Thank you so much for taking care of my request! Anti-vandal work goes so much more smoothly when one can get help from folks with powers we don't have.

I took a quick look at your work, BTW, and it's great. Please don't leave! The tiredness will pass—I've had to deal with it myself when the jerks started to get under my skin.

Have a good weekend! — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 23:56, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

[Uneasily.] My "work"? Really? I always suspect I'm the laziest admin on Wikipedia. But thank you. Bishonen | talk 00:04, 23 March 2013 (UTC).

Your content I'm sure, Bishy. Dun be silly. You writes so good, I am maze. KillerChihuahua 00:27, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, what I should've said is "your writing". Sorry for the confusion; my intent was to complement you.

I can haz thesaurus, pleez, to rite gooder?? — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 01:17, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Compliment undeserved, sadly. I wrote content in the early fourteenth century, a period which probably the elderly MurderDoggie recollects fondly, but that was then. But for riting gooder, you absolutely can! Please see helpful advice and link at the top of Bishzilla's talkpage! Use thesaurus and you, too, can write in voluble, wordy, loquacious, glib, prolix, tedious, pleonastic, verbose, garrulous style! Bishonen | talk 01:29, 23 March 2013 (UTC).

or we could make all our edits in lolcat. I suppose that could be considered garrulous.-- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 04:16, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Haha! Little Aunva6 sarcastic, we like that! darwinbish ^BITE☠ 17:04, 23 March 2013 (UTC).

well, witty mite be bettr werd, but thank u none teh les. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 17:27, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

curious

About this revered

do you folks know how revered you are? just wondering. — Ched :  ?  05:44, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I sure hope so, it's pretty obvious if you ask me. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 14:20, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

• [Bishonen and her talkpage stalkers are nonplussed, but Darwinbish takes it all to herself, and preens.] Well, this comes as no surprise! The reverend darwinbish ^BITE☠ 14:29, 24 March 2013 (UTC).

reverend darwinbish? I think you mean the Reverend Dr. Sir Darwinbish, KoW, PhD (Knights of Wikipedia). sounds more... illustrious... -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 14:32, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Not all tps non-plussed, fortunately. --RexxS (talk) 22:51, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

BISHZILLA FOR TRUSTEE!!!! -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 23:02, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

LOL. I might have known better than to encourage your insane visual imagination, Rex. The 'zilla for trustee..? I could have sworn she already was. Bishonen | talk 23:53, 24 March 2013 (UTC).

does that supersede arbcom? I could have sworn jimbo said arbcom has absolute power over teh interwebz. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 03:40, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh, don't listen to that guy, ask Rex, he knows all about it. (Are you still a trustee, Rex?) Bishonen | talk 11:43, 25 March 2013 (UTC).

For a little while longer, yes. But you soon learn that teh interwebs are actually under the control of The Ruler of the Universe. Depressing, isn't it? --RexxS (talk) 00:32, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Re:Copernican principle

Well, it is clear that Wyattmj and 91.183.53.247 are one party, which edit warred against three regulars (Drbogdan, Ushau97 and myself) and 78.50.199.189. With all their loud words, Wyattmj never provided sources for their fringe ideas, and when directly asked to stop and show the sources (by a fourth editor, 4twenty42o, on talk:Copernican principle), simply went on with reverts. You might be right though that I should report Wyattmj and have them blocked for warring instead of reverting, to stay clear of 3RR. Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 07:33, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

'This user is no longer enjoying Wikipedia, and currently has nothing more to say, especially not on this page.'

I know how you feel. That is why I don't even bother to sign in most of the time and rarely edit anymore. Alatari (talk) 01:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I understand. I'm glad the conflict has been resolved. Bishonen | talk 11:38, 25 March 2013 (UTC).

Somehow your response won't show up in my watchlist even if I turn on all things including bots and specifically search on user talk pages. This kind of watchlist error has been happening to me for years. Is it just a flaw in the system? Alatari (talk) 16:30, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

A bug, I should think. But I don't understand such things. This is the place to ask. So how about my e-mail message, did you get that? Bishonen | talk 16:38, 25 March 2013 (UTC).

my watchlist works fine. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 16:43, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Found a discussion on the bug here: [5] where they discuss a bug [6] (it's 5 years old and not resolved) when you hide any parts of the watchlist. So thanks. This sounds familiar so I probably forgot about it. The adjusted watchlist is huge. Alatari (talk) 17:34, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

It's working! [7] now to figure out how to hide Cluebot again. Supposedly there is a user script to add to your browser that will do the job. Alatari (talk) 17:47, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

WP:AN discussion

A discussion which relates to actions or comments made by you can be found at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive247#Peter Damian socks. Fram (talk) 15:55, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

IPv6

That IP was an IPv6 and just as much a vandalism-only account as they would have been using the IPs that you're already familiar with. As long as you're not considering a range block, you can treat them just like their shorter cousins. The difference with the range blocks is that you can block a few million IPv6s and probably only affect half of a street. Sounds like heaven for Sandstein. --Famously Sharp (talk) 01:04, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

But how I treat the short cousins depends on whether they're static or dynamic. My problem here is that I can't tell which this one is, it doesn't have the usual "Geolocate" link. Oh, Famously, why aren't you an admin so that you can deal with it? (Rhetorical question, I know why. Laziness.) Anyway, I'll be asleep in 30 seconds. P. S. "Considering a range block"? Me? Is that a polite pretence that I might know how to perform one, or mere sarcasm? Bishonen | talk 01:13, 27 March 2013 (UTC).

IPv6 will make your decisions much easier. The chances of different people ending up using the same IPv6 address is even smaller than my chances of passing an RfA. In fact you could block a given IPv6 for a period even longer than us dinosaurs have been around without incurring any significant chance of affecting another user. So go for it! --Famously Sharp (talk) 02:08, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Beer keg

No, I haven't: I've seen many cases where such editors are genuinely surprised to see the House of Usher fall on top of them, and remain convinced of the conspiracy. I'm not sure I could still lift a beer keg, in my advanced state of physical and moral deterioration. As a tangent, my dog is investigating the yard, digging things up and sniffing them with her soft and beautiful nose and it warms my heart. On that note, I'm going to leave our wonderful project for a little while; have a great weekend. Drmies (talk) 15:11, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

You too. We all know beer isn't even the Dutch drug of choice, hint hint, snigger. Bishonen | talk 15:18, 30 March 2013 (UTC).

aren't germans supposed to be the drinkers? Ich habe gehört, sie trinken Bier wie Wasser. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 21:23, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

aren't - looked like my name, and I was called "melliflous" again, how heart-warming! (Germans drink, so do Dutch, and Belgians ...) - the warming came in time for my first steps to the WP:Great Dismal Swamp ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:06, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I think of it as the Slough of Despond, but I'm sure other metaphors apply as well. Maybe the La Brea Tar Pits, from which have been dredged thousands of skeletons of prehistoric Wikipedians. Antandrus (talk) 21:29, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I had my history with the swamp ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:51, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

MONGO scared!

Help! This is in my userspace...it needs your support and I was hoping after I do some more modifications, you might be brave enough to shoot it to the zilla? Thanks in advance!--MONGO 19:57, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Hehe, no need for RFF. Founder flag already activated! Bishonen | talk 20:01, 2 April 2013 (UTC).

I nominated the 'zilla yesterday... see the 'zilla talk page. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 20:05, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Great! MONGO once again behind the curve...dumb MONGO...head back to forest, leave footprints, spook visiting city slickers.--MONGO 14:12, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

What a surprise - a tribute to me!

My dearest, and very dearest Mrs Bishonen, I am quite overcome by your writing an article on my most favourite BP (best poet). I had no idea you were planing such a tribute to my service to Wikipedia and years of selfless devotion to the world of culture, art, beauty and refinement. By celebrating these little known poets we open up and share a world of enlightenment to the little people - whose lives are so base and shallow. Of course; it's not quite as I (a true expert) would have written it, but for a first attempt at a page; it shows great promise. Very well done. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 20:39, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Thomas Jordan's best-known poem always makes me think of you:

Let us drink and be merry, dance, joke, and rejoice,

With claret and sherry, theorbo and voice!

The changeable world to our joy is unjust,

All treasure’s uncertain,

Then down with your dust!

In frolics dispose your pounds, shillings, and pence,

For we shall be nothing a hundred years hence.

Because it's so not true in your case! You steam right on with the claret and sherry, theorbo and voice into your second century, you're immortal! Excelsior! Bishonen | talk 21:02, 2 April 2013 (UTC).

Interesting

milquetoast? This wikt:milquetoast? ;) NE Ent 23:47, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Yerse? Don't you think the shoe fits me? Bishonen | talk 00:41, 5 April 2013 (UTC).

In my opinion, based on unscientific, sporadic observation, you're always one of the most calm, reasonable Zen admins except when ... you're not. NE Ent 02:08, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Thomas Jordan (poet)

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:05, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi

I need your help again, now an IP has merged the Allenton house fire without any discussion or consensus. Atleast not to my knowledge. Is that something that needs to be adressed at the IPs talk page? Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 15:32, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

WP:BRD says just undo it, and discuss on the article talk page. i'll give the IP a mild warning, and direct him/her to discuss it. (@bish- perhaps you should add a talk page stalker notice, you certainly have some, lol) -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 15:49, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Aunva6 for your assistance.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:30, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks, aunva6. The IP jumped the gun, without attempting to reach consensus on either of the talkpages, nor engaging with the previous discussion. In fact, I can't see that they have posted on any talkpage at all. That is unacceptable. If I were you, BabbaQ, I'd revert back to the status quo ante (not just revert the redirect, but also the addition of merged material to Mick Philpott), with a conciliatory edit summary explaining that this is only until consensus is reached, and then try to revitalize the discussion on Talk:Mick Philpott. Of course the merge discussion needs to be kept on one talkpage, so whichever one you prefer, you may want to put a note on the other page about it. But, no, I don't see any need for you to engage on the IP's talkpage. (My tps are the best, that's why I keep giving them nice compliments.) Bishonen | talk 19:35, 6 April 2013 (UTC).

I will do that. Thank you for the assistance with this. Also if you could take a look at the Emmelie de Forest article. Some POV pushing by user Vinson wese is going on since earlier today. I am not sure what to do really as the user seems combative. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 23:57, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

I decided to revert all recent edits and leave a comment on the articles talk page and hopefully the situation will die down.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:05, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Regret to have to write to you again but the user has reverted back to his version of rambling up reason after reason to why Emmelie de Forest is a liar about her nobility claims. I dont know if I am right here but I think an article about a singer should not contain 70% information about how the singer is lying about something even if it is sourced or unsourced. Cheers.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:11, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

that sounds like WP:undue to me... and his edit summaries are, for lack of a better word, odd...

("Urbandweller" has a tendency to enforce his/her viewpoint without discussion - not a good basis for collaborating on an encyclopedia. In fact, I'm the only one using the talk page. You cannot place an NPOV tag without a rationale/discussion.)

there doesn't need to be discussion to place tags, and most don't even require posting on the talk page about it, so that is just pure nonsense. it also looks like a borderline personal attack on urban to me. I will look at the source,and see what it is really saying. also suggest leaving it lie, lest you violate 3rr. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 00:23, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I have told the user I will be leaving the discussion and let someone else look at the situation. The user has done the exact same strange edits on the Danish article on this singer. Even if the sources are correct it gives undue weight to a certain situation that has been blown out of proportion by the user in question. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:28, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

*Sorry I wasn't around. I see they've been blocked for 31 hours by Bbb23 for violating WP:3RR. So far so good, but it seems they also need a talking-to about WP:BLP and WP:UNDUE, or the problems on those fronts are likely to continue. We can't have that kind of stuff in a bio. I'll go tell them so. Thanks for defending these biographies, both of you. (I've deleted the Category:False claimants of royal descent. Abusing people isn't the purpose of categories.) Bishonen | talk 11:33, 7 April 2013 (UTC).

Yes, it is really frustrating when a new user pops up and refuses to listen to reason. Even after Auven6 tried to reason with the user it still refused to compromise. In my opinion not an even smaller mention of all of this should be in the article but I accept that some people find in necessary to have this pseudo-event mentioned. The user is doing the exact same thing in the Danish Wikipedia article on the singer. Yes, Auven6 was really helpful and as I stated to her I admire her patience with that user last night. Cheers.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:49, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

I took a look at the Danish history and talkpage. Interesting. I see a mention of the user's block on en in the latest edit summary (an update in relation to your mention on talk that they're "under investigation", BabbaQ). Are you Danish? Do you guys have any policies corresponding to 3RR, BLP, and UNDUE? Bishonen | talk 13:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC).

No I am not Danish I am Swedish so I understand almost everything written in Danish too. Yes, the users edits has been reverted over there too partly. I am not sure if the 3RR rule apply on Danish Wikipedia. But if so then the user has done the same problematic edits there too. And yes I think that Danish Wikipedia has the same rules about UNDUE and BLP. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 14:17, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you with this but could you take a look at the edits of user Thomas Phuck at the article Simona Williams, I believe the user is either Simona herself or someone close to her. Seems a bit like the Emmelie de Forest article where one user is determined to have its own way no matter what. I hope I did the right thing by reverting some of the users edits and adding back only the important information. I also have a concern about the username Thomas Phuck, if you change Ph to F and then uck you get a certain word that might not be suitable for Wikipedia, and I am not sure if that was the intention of the user :) So please take a look. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 15:56, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I've no experience of these types of blocks, so I lazily stuck Thomas Fuck here for attention/assistance. An SPA, apparently — I'll take a look at the contribs later. Bishonen | talk 19:18, 28 April 2013 (UTC).

And replied here to a suggestion that it might be a real name. (Ha ha.) Username blocked by Ched, so presumably we may expect a new account to start editing Simona Williams in the same inimitable style. Don't worry, I already gave them a 3RR warning. Bishonen | talk 23:08, 28 April 2013 (UTC).

Revision deletion

Turning to you, since you always appear so helpful and wise. Could you possibly help me out by deleting my contributions to this page. They were minimal, and I rolled them all back almost immediately.

When I saw it among old AFCs, I thought "WTF? Surely he is notable by now. Another bad AFC review." But as I moved it and started working on it, I realized that this had all the potential to turn into some kind of BLP nightmare with vandalism inserted for a dozen different reasons (including, quite possibly, vandalism performed as artistic experimentation). I don't want to be the permanent guardian of the article and would prefer to keep my username out of that article history. (If you decide to move it to article space, please perform the deletion of my edits before doing that.) --Hegvald (talk) 13:25, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh, wow. I agree with you that the subject is somewhat notable, but I'm rather glad you had second thoughts about putting it in mainspace. I well remember the furore in Swedish media at the time. Have you seen Erotic cake, by the way? And this section of Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth?

Thank you for the compliments. Flattery will get you most places with me, but in this case… sorry, I can't see any policy support for disappearing those edits of yours. Do you really think they're embarrassing, or likely to cause trouble for you? Because I don't. It's obvious from your edit summaries that you had good reasons for everything you did, including changing your mind.

I won't move it to mainspace. But if it should turn up there later, it'll surely hardly be your responsibility to be its guardian, even if you do appear back in the history. Bishonen | talk 14:15, 7 April 2013 (UTC).

Oh snap, and I was so sure a bit of flattery would work... Generally, I try to stay away from BLPs, and I soon realized that it was a miscalculation to get involved with this one in particular. Either way, he is notable enough that somebody is likely to post an article in mainspace soon anyway. Doing this from scratch would require less effort than starting from the AFC version.

No, I didn't see Erotic cake before. How does the caption author know that the beheaded and half-legged cake-woman is a dancer? Is she perhaps dancing some form of the Cakewalk? Was ML's cake intended to be erotic, or is there a violation of WP:SYNTH going on there? (It was remarkably similar to that Ur-European Venus of Willendorf, who may or may not have been considered erotic by palaeolithic European men. Or palaeolithic European lesbians, I should add, just to remain completely politically correct. Or palaeolithic bisexuals of either sex. Or anyone alive at the time who may have objected to being identified as part of mainstream palaeolithic culture.)

I noticed the Adelsohn Liljeroth cake-cutter section. It should probably go, but it seems pointless trying to remove it, as someone will just put it back. It's "notable" and easy to source, while a balanced description of her political career would both take time to put together and soon be marked as a "resumé" by some drive-by tagger. --Hegvald (talk) 18:39, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Nirmal Baba

Although, you had declined page protection but please see [8] history again the sections like --Allegation of fraud--- the main reason why his controversial telecasts were stopped and cases are pending in Supreme and other courts are repeatedly removed. Further, I doubt if the page protection will suffice as I note that Single Purpose accounts like Daniel w2, Jk2689, Bj28193, Luro28 are created to keep the vandalism alive.

As you are an admin and have powers to stop such vandalism, I request you to please look in to matter again and perhaps find a solution to this. Can this all accounts be blocked for vandalism, sock puppetry?? Jethwarp (talk) 05:29, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Wow!!! User Jk2689 - even blanked the page. Jethwarp (talk) 08:55, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Wow, that's some attack. Those new accounts are probably all one individual, but I don't care whether or not — they're vandalism-only accounts, so I've blocked them. And since it's so easy for that/those determined individual/s to create new socks, I've also semiprotected the article for three months. Thanks for letting me know! Bishonen | talk 10:25, 8 April 2013 (UTC).

P.S. New accounts have to wait four days before they're able to edit through semi. If somebody has the patience to create new accounts and leave them to "age", we could see another outbreak in 4—5 days. In my experience, that usually doesn't happen, but if it does, please just let me know again, and I'll play whack-a-mole (=block them as they show up). It may come to full protection, I suppose, but we'll try to avoid that. Bishonen | talk 10:34, 8 April 2013 (UTC).

they have to do a certain amount of edits too, don't they? -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 13:48, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Ten edits. That won't inconvenience anybody much. Bishonen | talk 13:50, 8 April 2013 (UTC).

ten constructive edits... perhaps I'm being a bit pessimistic, but what are the chances that a vandal will make 10 constructive edits on each sock? -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 13:53, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

The chances are pretty close to 100%. There's not much point in going to the trouble of registering a sock account if it can't edit through semi-protection. --RexxS (talk) 01:04, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

• sigh* why do people go through so much effort to vandalize.... it defies all logic. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 01:26, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

[Maniacally:] Because it's fun! Fun! Fun! darwinbish ^BITE ☠ 09:19, 9 April 2013 (UTC).

You're a silly little sock, darwinbish. Actually, in this case it's quite logical, Aunva6. The subject is a, um, spiritual leader, and the current vandals are obviously followers (or quite likely all one follower) removing negative facts (lawsuits), or the sources for such facts. Bishonen | talk 09:27, 9 April 2013 (UTC).

that does make sense... -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 14:37, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

thanks...I will be watching the page.Jethwarp (talk) 14:48, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

>> P.S. : At least one mole has been left....free... pl. see..[9]. --Jethwarp (talk) 09:26, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, right. That may be somone else. They edited through semi to add puffery, as J.P. Gordon said when he reverted, but did make an effort to add references. Their actual vandalism was back in February, so there has been progress of a kind, and they haven't reverted JPG. I don't think I want to block them, or even warn, right now. There have been a few constructive edits to non-religious articles too. Please keep watching, and I will, too. Bishonen | talk 10:15, 17 April 2013 (UTC).

ANI, IPs, etc.

Just to let you know that I respected your comments at WP:ANI. Regards. Bbb23 (talk) 22:59, 9 April 2013 (UTC) has extended an olive branch of peace.

---

• Thank you. That's good to know. Bishonen | talk 12:21, 10 April 2013 (UTC).
  • Nooooo.... not an olive branch. See #7. MastCell ^Talk 19:05, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkpage stalkers

rrawRRR ... 'Zillas want food <looks at little twig, tastes ... pfft.> yucky. Little Bbb a good editor, Chedzilla happy to pick up and put in pocket that honorable Bishzilla give him. Bishonen .. "can I keep him"? I think he make fine addition to the cabal. — ChedZILLA 01:11, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Zilla .. see what happens when I let you have the keyboard? Yes, we all know that Bbb is a good editor and a good admin. Now could you please stop sticking your most enormous nose into other people's business? geesh ... the stuff I have to deal with here. Bish, my apologies for letting my sock loose. Best to your whole family .. although I'm still smarting over the little ankle biter chewing my arm off. :) — Ched :  ?  02:02, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

i'm sure I speak for all non-admins when I say that I find rouge admins to be the best admins! also, I thought that sticking our noses into others' business was what being an editor was all about, I mean look at all the BLP articles out there! and ched, your arm will grow back soon enough, from what I hear, this isn't the first time! -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 02:25, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Copernican principle

Can you please check the latest edits at Copernican principle? -- Kheider (talk) 19:24, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case may be relevant. — Ched :  ?  19:39, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, and this. 72-hour block by VSmith. But I'll watch the article when the user returns from their block, because the history really doesn't look promising. I hope you'll ping me again if it starts up again and I miss it, Kheider. Bishonen | talk 20:25, 10 April 2013 (UTC).

Ah, I was wondering how I got to Planck (spacecraft). That and Cosmological principle probably also bear watching; I dunno what the deal with cosmological principle is; maybe I'm not on the up and up enough to get it, but the latter part looks like kinda bad. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:31, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Roofs

I don't suppose you (or one of your fellow Nordics) would care to start a new page would you, by simply translating this [10]. It would be most useful.  Giano  19:56, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Säteritak. I'll see what else I can add. It's not a translation, as there was some dubious historical claims in the (unreferenced) Swedish article. Not sure if there is an English term. I doubt it but I'll look around for one. --Hegvald (talk) 20:44, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

That's brilliant; thank you. I have linked it already. I think it's a Scandinavian Baroque feature, which spread to northern Germany and the Low Countries but don't have a reference for it. It's often confused with mansard, but is quite different.  Giano  21:23, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:30, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

That would be a rather unusual direction of cultural influence. --Hegvald (talk) 07:49, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

To the contrary

Our paths have crossed previously, though rarely [11]

The manner in which I manage my talk page is completely unrelated to the content of comments posted there. It is no more or less embarrassing than the manner in which anyone else chooses to manage their user and talk pages.

Thank you for expressing your opinion. Fladrif (talk) 17:48, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker)Well, without patting myself on the back (since it's hardly original), the way in which I archive my talk page, for example, could not possibly be called embarrassing. You make it impossible for other editors to see what was being said when. Within guidelines, yes. Transparent, no. Irritating, absolutely. Drmies (talk) 04:28, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

• Well there's a pointless link. What am I supposed to do with it, research in depth for actual interactions? You've been here five years, I for longer than that. It would be statistically surprising if we hadn't both edited round about 67 of the same pages. Bishonen | talk 10:56, 15 April 2013 (UTC).
• P.S. No, it's simply not true that it's unrelated to the content of comments posted. You keep barnstars and delete everything else. That's embarrassing. Bishonen | talk 12:36, 15 April 2013 (UTC).
  • Bishonen, you're being totally unfair. In February 2010, they actually added words. Drmies (talk) 17:16, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

I was just about to post the same thing but you beat me to it. Yes he keeps his barnstars.--Penbat (talk) 13:05, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

asking for more, or what? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:21, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

(watching) I am weeping and wailing, permitted here, thank you, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:09, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

• I find Fladrif's talk page arrangements seriously irritating, see [12]. For somebody who throws stones it is annoying that I cant easily find out much about who I am dealing with. I am very tempted to piece all the talk page posts together either online or offline, it may take a while to do tho.--Penbat (talk) 11:13, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

You may want to do the same for Townlake, who deleted the same way, for example here, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:37, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

I echo the sentiments of Gerda and Drmies as well. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:23, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

• Oh, TY by the way Bish, much appreciated. Penbat, check your mail. — Ched :  ?  12:41, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Boing

Although all admins have autopatrolled by default, Boing had himself un-admin'd last month. DS (talk) 15:09, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

He got re-adminned, though, and I believe the crat that de-adminned him gave him autopatrolled as he did so. nevermind, no he didn't Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:11, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

...oops, I misparsed the situation. Thanks for pointing that out. DS (talk) 15:13, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh my,

LOL, literally. I tried to think of something clever this morning when I saw the "trophy" thing in his edit summary - but was too pressed for time. Now I'm glad, cause I NEVER would have close to topping that one. Well played Bish, well played. :-) — Ched :  ?  20:03, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Hehe. I just caught sight of that dangerously manic-looking image and couldn't resist. Bishonen | talk 12:16, 16 April 2013 (UTC).

I know someone who looks like that. I've always been jealous of pretty boys. Drmies (talk) 14:30, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

LessHeard, for his part, isn't that young nor that blond, but I hope the facial expression catches how he looks when he receives barnstars. Bishonen | talk 14:40, 16 April 2013 (UTC).

Age isn't the be-all-end-all determining factor of life for me. So even though Mark is a bit younger than I am, I still look up to him in all so many respects. I'm proud to consider him a role model. — Ched :  ?  13:28, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Question to talk page stalkers

I've often thought we need to say something like this, but perhaps it already exists, maybe inside something longer? Anybody know? Bishonen | talk 12:16, 16 April 2013 (UTC).

• Bishonen, for the love of money, if you'd settle down for just a moment... Sometimes it works, though. Not with my kids, mind you, at least not when it's really necessary for it to work. Drmies (talk) 14:32, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
• It's kind of a corollary to Wikipedia:With all due respect. Banned in Boston and Streisand effect come to mind. Drmies (talk) 14:53, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
• A brief search revealed nothing equal immediately, but it did give "Calm down!" (followed by a smiley) as an example of "a better way" than "positive conflict smothering" ("positive" doesn't mean good or beneficial here, and to be fair the "calm down" bit isn't the point the author is trying to make. Yet there it is ... Wikipedia:Don't_smother_conflict#Examples_of_conflict_smothering). ---Sluzzelin talk 15:18, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
  • OMG, say it isn't so. "Calm down" with a smiley is worse, in fact it's the worst. I must add that to the "essay". Thanks, Sluzzelin. Bishonen | talk 15:37, 16 April 2013 (UTC).
    • I usually link to Wikipedia:No, seriously. You need to chill the fuck out. I mean, with a smiley. MastCell ^Talk 15:50, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

I suggest block first, protect their talkpage and delete all the edits...they have ever made...no discussion is even needed.--MONGO 18:36, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

What's even more useful is that final epithet - do we have an acronym better than HAIBIN? I could imagine massive use for it on Wikipedia. --Famously Sharp (talk) 19:26, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Heheh. Pity WP:HAM is taken! Bishonen | talk 20:24, 16 April 2013 (UTC).

Delfin-bin and ...

... hamfisted and irritating, but I'm nice!

I like what Hai-bin evokes. Delfin-bin and Hai-bin. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:25, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

• Hehe, you're good, Sluzzelin, and crazier than I thought. I'll never understand how you found those images. (Hai is if possible even more evocative in the frozen north. Ah, the native tongue of Bishzilla!) Bishonen | talk 22:35, 16 April 2013 (UTC).

Mick Philpott

Hi, cheers for reply, I've replied on my talk page.--A bit iffy (talk) 14:26, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Tell the truth

I suppose I could feign interest, but regarding understanding: Do you (or Bishzilla) understand anything he's saying? I think "extra firm" patting is unfair when dealing with fringe topics like this. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:18, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

NO WAIT! I didn't mean "fringe"! Please ask your pet to show mercy. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:20, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

NO WAIT!! I didn't mean "pet"!! I meant... um... how would you describe that relationship? --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:21, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

[Ominously.] My lifeguard. Bishonen | talk 17:53, 16 April 2013 (UTC).

(*gulp*) OK, I'm interested. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:00, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

GNU C-Graph

Hello. There is currently a discussion at WP:ANI regarding GNU C-Graph. The thread is Complaint Against Summary Deletion of "GNU C-Graph".The discussion is about the topic GNU C-Graph. Thank you. -Visionat (talk) 16:50, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

If I might ask...

When I said to NE Ent "Re I'm not an admin - you should be!" over at ANI, what did you read that as meaning? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:00, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Never mind - I had misunderstood something -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:08, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

• [Intrigued. Tries to figure out some bad way she could have taken it. Comes up empty.] Sorry, I got nothing. Bishonen | talk 16:29, 21 April 2013 (UTC).
• I know! Maybe you meant to say "Re I'm not an admin - you should be proud of it!" but you accidentally pressed save before you got finished typing? (I'm the smart one here, you may as well ask me directly next time.) darwinbish ^BITE ☠ 16:31, 21 April 2013 (UTC).

@Boing .. just be sure to keep your hands inside the vehicle at all times if you should visit the little ankle-biter. things seem to disappear if one isn't careful. :) — Ched :  ?  16:45, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

I've invoked WADR

here. You or your little ankle-biter may have useful comments in this discussion. Montanabw^(talk) 19:52, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

My god, she's not allowed outside the userspace. We'd all be dead. But I'll take a look in a bit. Bishonen | talk 20:25, 21 April 2013 (UTC).

Might

He might be Belchfire. They share similar interests and have similar styles. Pass a Method talk 21:36, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

He might also be User:Frankfort05 Pass a Method talk 21:46, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

• Unless I misremember the limits, those are both too old to checkuser. And two suggested masters is no good—won't fly on WP:SPI. "Checkuser is not for fishing." Sorry to be such a wet blanket. If you have some striking diffs with similarities of style etc, you could still take our new friend to SPI. Socks can be blocked per WP:DUCK, without a checkuser. But only if it's good, and only for one proposed sockmaster!

Anyway... if Keted doesn't change their editing style, they'll soon be indeffed on their own merits. Let's hope they do change it, then all's good. Bishonen | talk 22:51, 21 April 2013 (UTC).

Frankfort is almost certainly Scientoom. Ask Alison who did the block.  little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer  02:45, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

User:Keted6 has returned to edit-warring on Abdulrahman al-Awlaki Pass a Method talk 21:49, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I know I'm in your bad books at present...

... but could you possibly have a look at "Ekorrgos"? The phonotactics for both of our modersmålor just seems completely wrong there. Pete aka --Shirt58 (talk) 11:04, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

[/me ferrets around for her bad books. Can't find 'em. Darn. If you did something fiendish, please disregard this reply, because if so I should of course ignore you!] Not a problem in Swedish phonotactically, if that means what I think it means. (Yes, I did click, but you could put my phonetics expertise on the point of a pencil.) Compare for example herrgård. No problem there. Speaking of which, what does Sighsten Herrgård (1943—1989)), a gay man with a phonotactically cromulent name but not conspicuously fancied by older or any women as far as I know, have to do with it? Anyway, it's an ephemeral neologism, we don't promote 'em. Bishonen | talk 11:44, 22 April 2013 (UTC).

Thank you

		The Civility Barnstar
		Thank you for leaving a helpful comment on my RfA in which you helped me to improve my understanding of civility. I always welcome constructive criticism like that, and here's my way of saying thank you. Cheers, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:58, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Piotrus. I'm sorry to see the current pile-on. Bishonen | talk 23:47, 26 April 2013 (UTC).

re:

"(And I'm old, too.)" ... hey, Zillas are timeless and ageless. :-) — Ched :  ?  00:20, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Ho ho ho

Smok, Giano's personal dragon

See my new, cool re-write page; I've got my owm dragon now, Smok, [13] and he's far bigger, scarier and better than any of your small reptiles.  Giano  20:43, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I see him. About the size of a sheep, isn't he? Cute little fellow. Bishonen | talk 22:29, 28 April 2013 (UTC).

He's not; he's huge and extremely fierce!  Giano  07:38, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

What precisely is....

Her Ladyship's attention has been brought to this edit of yours [14]. Lady Catherine is not familiar with the term and wishes to know precisely what is a TOC Limit? Please address all correspondence through me and nobody else; Lady Catherine is not to be bothered personally; she is currently in Amsterdam advising her Godson on his forthcoming reign. Vera Corpus (Miss) (talk) 19:40, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

How kind of you to stalk my edits, Miss Corpus. I feel validated. That template was new to me, but I had noticed with consternation that the subsections on Vanbrugh's plays and architectural works didn't appear in the Table of Contents, and managed with some difficulty to locate the template that was doing it. Apparently this template makes the TOC ignore subheadings beyond a certain depth (in this case, subheadings with more than 3 equals signs, ===). The idea apparently is that too "deep" a TOC will look "cluttered".[15] Yes, so it will, but information and ease of locating a particular play/house in that long article seems to me more important than a pretty (but misleading) TOC. In this version, you can see how the TOC looked just before my edit. Pretty and useless. Bishonen | talk 20:00, 30 April 2013 (UTC).

It sometimes finds use when the 'References' section is subdivided by lower-level headings (like 'Notes' and 'Sources') and the editor prefers not to show them in the TOC. Of course it only works when the rest of the article has no other sub-headings that we do want to see in the TOC, but that does occasionally happen. --RexxS (talk) 22:38, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the fixiedust, great T-Rex. Bishonen | talk 23:03, 30 April 2013 (UTC).

re: Thomas P.

Just noticed your post here. I'll be busy and away for a good part of today - but if you (or any other admin.) feel a change is in order, please feel free to remove or adjust my block as you see fit. I'll check back when I get home later today or this evening. I also asked LoS to have a look here. — Ched :  ?  13:24, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

It's fine, thanks. I've had some (one-sided) correspondence with the user, where he complied with my request for evidence for a statement he had made. It checked out fine. Bishonen | talk 20:03, 30 April 2013 (UTC).

I'll leave things to others then ... perhaps a 'Zilla or two can handle it? .. <Ched cackles with evil laughter> Which reminds me, I need to drop by the honorable Giano's talk and see if "Smok" would object to my using his very glorious picture on the Chedzilla page. Some sort of WP:FOP thing caused the loss of his profile pic. But I know so little of these things. My very best to the family (although I've learned my lesson about trying to pet the little ankle biter) — Ched :  ?  20:15, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Have you really? It was rather daring of you to ignore her on your talk. Still got the other arm? Want to lose it? Bishonen | talk 20:34, 30 April 2013 (UTC).

• LOLOLOLOL .. wham biff urkkk <Ched reminds self to go say hi to the little one with teeth before it's too late :)> — Ched :  ?  15:07, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Ahr. Hrrm. I guess there's occasionally leakage from the over-indulged Darwinbish personality into other members of the conglomerate, like me. Good job she doesn't have the block tool, isn't it? Imagine the biffing and the urkkking. [/me resolves to become more like Darwinfish.] Bishonen | talk 19:29, 1 May 2013 (UTC).

OBOD

Hi Ms. 'Shonen. I noticed that you and the little one with sharp teeth were testing a few things. Perhaps you are already aware of this, but if you missed it then you may be interested in (User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/orangeBar.js). I also noticed that Floq and User:Writ Keeper have been talking, so WK is putting a lot of effort into helping others implement the solution as well as tweaking the interface. I noticed a few of the kids playing with this "new notification system", which I actually did get a chuckle out of even if I pretended to be a grumpy "get off my lawn" guy in front of them. Actually there are a few things I do like about the little red dot - not only does it ping you if someone mentions you by linking to your username .. but it also just told me about the tightrope revert. (and of course I don't mind - Jimbo is big boy, so if he has an issue with my comment then I'll offer any explination or apology if I ever have to cross that bridge.) And while I'm at it .. I'm sorry, but I have to mention my guiding spirit User:Huntster just once with this new system. (I know, bad as the kids huh? ... but he always takes things in stride). Anyway - just thought I let you know about the script in case you hadn't seen it in your travels. Cheers and best to the family ... OH WAIT ... if you must give your adminy bits to one of the family, please give them to 'Zilla ... that little one with sharp teeth is sooooo unpredictable .. although she was most magnanimous about the slight on my talk page. Still - 'Zilla for admin, 'Zilla for 'Crat, 'Zilla for Arb, .. even User:Bishzilla for founder!! Cheers. — Ched :  ?  21:09, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Ched, but I don't miss the orange bar personally. I'm so used to the look of wiki pages that the little red blob strikes me immediately. What I miss is other people, who may be less habituated and addicted, getting a pushy, in-your-face, garishly colored banner all across the page whenever I 've written a tremendously valuable post on their page. Really.

I'm not sure about Bishzilla, she's getting above herself as it is. I mean, who exactly is the mighty mother account around here? And yet Zilla had the nerve a while back to issue a warning that she might topic ban me from Wikipedia space.[16] For silliness, if you please. It's true that I was trolling. Still. And admin tools might well encourage her to encroach further. Do we need that? We do not. Bishonen | talk 21:30, 2 May 2013 (UTC).

My name is invoked, and so I appear. Actually, what Floq and I were discussing wasn't the OBoD script; it's a bit of CSS I made to hide the incredibly obnoxious +1 template. With it, it just shows up as a little, text-only "+1". Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:37, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Saw the mention ping too, which has prompted me to agree that 'Zilla needs the admin bit. Wiki really could stand to have a little more utter and complete chaos amongst the admins ranks...someone really willing to get in there and eat offenders alive! — Huntster (t @ c) 23:59, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

With apologies to the Goons

		The Hitting the Nail on the Head Award
		"But I haven't got a nail on my head" --Famously Sharp (talk) 21:43, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Julian Assange page

I would like to correct an inaccuracy on Julian Assange - the source doesn't state that he is living on a diet of pizza and takeaway food. It states that he has received takeaway food, which isn't the same thing. If I receive a takeaway pizza now and then it doesn't mean that I live on a diet of takeaway pizza. the source also states that he has a microwave and a kitchenette, and that his mother says that he is eating well.. At any rate, if the article wasn't protected, I would remove this error, so I suggest that it be removed as inaccurate. Totorotroll (talk) 15:30, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Totorotroll. I've moved your request to Talk:Julian Assange and answered it there, because it's useful if others with an interest in the article can read our convo also. Bishonen | talk 17:30, 4 May 2013 (UTC).

Madagascar

Hi, can you restore Madagascar's indefinite move-protectio (sysop)? I think you removed it by mistake. Thank you. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:29, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Sure. I agree there's no call for anybody to ever move the page; at least not until such time as the spelling/the official name is changed. Bishonen | talk 20:38, 5 May 2013 (UTC).

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	You are one of the best! MONGO 02:12, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

It sucks MONGO. You beat me to the punch. All rights reserved though for the future. :) Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 02:16, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

• [Bishonen blushes a becoming pink. Darwinbish turns bright red with rage. ] Must create vicious anti-admin barnstar for useless milquetoast admins! I am missing this template in my collection! [Eaten by envy, Darwinbish withdraws to her evil template smithy. ] darwinbish ^BITE ☠ 14:57, 6 May 2013 (UTC).

Musing

Re [17] -- why is there no BishParrot (talk · contribs)? Seems likes a deficiency in the Bish-pantheon to me. NE Ent 13:01, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, my suggestions (before they spiralled out of control) were somewhat based on what was close on the keyboard. Though it turned out the real explanation was m had become p, which was a surprise — they're miles apart. A bishparrot, hmm. I must admit I like this clever chap/gal! Have you seen this upstart fish, btw? Not in the pantheon! (Portrait here.) Bishonen | talk 13:19, 8 May 2013 (UTC).

You know it makes an Ent sad to see an upstart fish stuck a tiny little bowl, right? NE Ent 02:11, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	because your awesome and, despite all the crap you've been through, you just keep going! -- Aunva6talk - contribs 14:10, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

[Darwinbish, outraged again, steals the spinning star and leaves her favorite animated gif in its place.]

How right you were about the crap, Aunva! Crap from my own socks.. but never mind, I appreciate the sentiment no matter the illustration. Bishonen | talk 17:19, 8 May 2013 (UTC).

[A robed cultist, face hooded yet radiating a subtle aura of unspeakable horror, sneaks up to the image and replaces it with the symbol of his unholy master.] Cthulhufish (ph'nag | fl'thun) 17:54, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Afphla namql to you too! [Darwinbish will not admit to being somewhat impressed.] A bit of a primitive fish, isn't it? No legs! And shut up in a bowl! Better send it to play with User:Darwinfish. [Db links Fish's name so he'll come here and be scared. Thank you devs! ] darwinbish ^BITE ☠ 20:24, 8 May 2013 (UTC).

[The robed cultist returns, maintaining a posture of awful surety and calm, but there is a definite trace of fear in his voice]. Do not taunt the Master, little one; the Great Cork is all that separates this world from what lies beyond the Divide. If it were loosed, the earth--nay, the entire universe--would be plunged into the Outer Darkness, where the daemon-sultan Azathoth reigns, blind and unsensing, from the mad throne surrounded by a hellish chorus of accursed flutes and manic drums. The Master sleeps as long as the Cork is in place, but were it removed, he would instantly awaken and whisk us all away to those doomed nether regions with but a single, alien thought. Sleeping, yet not insensate--speaking of the manner of His imprisonment may have the most dire of consequences, and He has ways of making His will known and done. Ways that-*-[The cultist's speech is suddenly cut off as his head jerks slightly to one side; his eyes, heretofore alight through the shadows of his cowl with a mad double flame, grow glassy and dark. He falls to the floor, twitching and lowly muttering a single phrase in an alien tongue, over and over--Ph'nglui mglw'phalg Cthulhufish R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn...] Cthulhufish (ph'nag | fl'thun) 20:44, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

• Allright, everybody just relax. I'm running this show now! The Great Cork (talk) 21:06, 8 May 2013 (UTC).

Not anymore you're not! ^{(also just realized that I swapped the bracket keybcaps while cleaning my keyboard)}-- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 05:37, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

• Darwinbish, what have I told you about creating socks? ... That you're not allowed to, that's right. You'd better keep that fellow in order or I'll block him/it. I suppose all you creatures of the night had forgotten that I'm the admin around here? Eh? Eh? Bishonen | talk 21:11, 8 May 2013 (UTC).

• I'm just thinking that perhaps Talk:American_Godzilla#Requested_move_2 may be of interest to you. ;-) -- Ohconfucius ^{ping / poke} 05:37, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

On a more serious (and vague) note...

Did anything ever come of that last email? This edit reminded me) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:56, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Nothing useful. You have mail expressing my sense of the lack of usefulness more fully. Incidentally, why do you suppose your linking of my name on User:Drmies' page didn't ping me? It surely can't be simply because it was in the caption? Or because it was merely "Bish" visible on the page? You're the expert, and the keeper of the writs. Bishonen | talk 20:35, 9 May 2013 (UTC).

My linking? Pretty sure that was the good Doc's linking, as seen in this diff, not mine. The Master is preparing to devour the Doctor's sanity as we speak. (Pop quiz: am I talking about Wikipedia or Dr. Who???) I don't even *like* Dr. Who, and I still found this reference impossible to evade. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

My mistake, sorry. The perpetrator wasn't the focus of my question, though. Can you figure why it didn't ping me? Bishonen | talk 00:10, 10 May 2013 (UTC).

Ah, I see. I think it's because he didn't sign it; it only pings someone when the post is signed. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 01:07, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Diamondadnrs seems to be an unusual user

Could you check up on User:Diamondadnrs. Is it just me, or is this person entangled in a dispute that has not ended over at Copernican principle? I don't want to jump to any conclusions, but... I like to saw logs! (talk) 08:50, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

(Note that Diamondadnrs started editing on 14 April as Diamondandrs and then lost that account (presumably meaning lost the password?), as stated here. A little confusing wrt contributions.) I'm keeping my eyes open, but I don't really have any tools, or special craftiness, that would enable me to "check up", more than any other user. That means the best I can do is ask a polite question on the user's page, and I will, after dinner. (Weird un-American timezone here. :-)) Incidentally Diamondadnrs has just stated they're taking a ten-day break from Copernican principle, and will "focus on other pages". Bishonen | talk 16:09, 11 May 2013 (UTC).

I was wondering if this person is in any way related to <redacted>, who was recently a part of the same, ahem, discussion over at Copernican principle. I figured that as an admin you did have the tools to check out this situation. I seem to remember something about puppetry alleged, and well, this might be relevant. Regardless of whether there is a direct relationship, I was thinking there was some indirect relationship based on the edit history. I like to saw logs! (talk) 17:19, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Sure, I knew what you meant. That's what I've asked about here. I don't have access to the CheckUser tool, no. Only a handful of people have that. Those people can be asked to help, here, or by e-mail or on IRC, and I'm thinking that should be the next step, depending on the reply I get. For myself, I'm going to wait for a response from Diamondadnrs before I go further. Nothing to stop you requesting a checkuser right now if you want, but you should be aware that checkuser (the tool, not the people) is only a technical tool. It can't really find out about recruitment. Anyway, these are real people we're talking about. I don't want to necessarily be governed by appearances, but assume as much good faith as possible. Bishonen | talk 17:56, 11 May 2013 (UTC).

A barnstar for you!

	The Citation Barnstar
	super page Adamantios 171101 (talk) 11:24, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

(Nonplussed again.) Citation? Me? Well, thank you very much. Bishonen | talk 16:10, 11 May 2013 (UTC).

Please restore this page.

Greetings, Bishonen! I hope that since you're an administrator, you may be willing to restore the article Bouleia for me. The fact is it should never have been deleted in the first place; the deletion log summary states that the article bore no indication that it met the guidelines for inclusion, but fossil taxa generally are considered automatically notable. In any case, there is a source here, which can be used to help assert the article. I thank you in advance. So a print encyclopedia, a strawberry shortcake, and a sycamore walk into a bar - wait, have you heard this one? (talk) 08:36, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Automatically notable? I'm not sure. I think there ought to be more information, even in a stub. The only content was "Bouleia is an trilobite" plus this link. I agree with you that there was no speedy delete criterion for deleting it, but I suspect it might well have been deleted per one of the PROD or articles for deletion processes anyway. I'd rather not create it, but you can easily do it yourself. Or, tell you what, I'll put it in your userspace, where you can work on fattening it up a bit before releasing it into mainspace, to lessen the risk of it getting deleted again. Here it is in your userspace. You might look at a few of the blue links on the List of trilobites, for instance Bornholmaspis, to see what's expected of a trilobite stub. Happy editing! Bishonen | talk 09:37, 12 May 2013 (UTC).

Thank you, very much! :) So a print encyclopedia, a strawberry shortcake, and a sycamore walk into a bar - wait, have you heard this one? (talk) 04:28, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I just looked at the example you provided; it happens to be one I did, myself! Cheers! :) So a print encyclopedia, a strawberry shortcake, and a sycamore walk into a bar - wait, have you heard this one? (talk) 04:31, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Looking good now! I wasn't aware that you'd done Bornholmaspis, but there's a pleasing symmetry in having one you did yourself suggested as a model, don't you think? :-) Would you like me to delete the redirect that the process left? Bishonen | talk 09:42, 14 May 2013 (UTC).

Dear talkpage stalkers! A request for an image!

Goodlooking? Not exactly an attractive gentleman!

Is the world turn'd upside down because of ridiculous fashions, or is there something Bishzilla needs to tell us?

Once upon a time I had access to Early English Books Online through my uni library, and used to download cool facsimile covers and titlepages for 17th-century articles. No more. :-( Anybody out there who has, and who would like to download some goodlooking image of one or two of Thomas Jordan's (c. 1612—1685) many, many publications and then upload them to Commons, for the purpose of illustrating the article Thomas Jordan (poet)? If you're unsure of how to license such images and so on, see for example this example. Much appreciation will ensue! I'll get that sucker featured before I know where I am! Bishonen | talk 21:06, 12 May 2013 (UTC).

I will inquire at the New York Public Library this week and see what they have to offer. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:11, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Fancy hearing from you, Brad, at the very moment when I was about to post a note on your page. OK, why don't I post it here instead:

Ha, how about that. On 20 April, I started larding and re-referencing the article in a sandbox, complementing my old DNB source with material from the more up-to-date ODNB. Only after I returned to mainspace today and pasted the new over the old version did I notice that you had copyedited it on 21 April. Bad luck.. sorry about that. I can't face merging your improvements with mine, not right now — I can do it next week — but perhaps you'd like to, well, copyedit it again, now that it's a bit different? Bishonen | talk 21:21, 12 May 2013 (UTC).

No problem. I'll be glad to read through it again and make any tweaks that seem tweakable. Should I do it now, or wait until you let me know you are ready? Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:34, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Please fall to. I'm ready all right, I've been fiddling with it for hours. Bishonen | talk 21:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC).

• • Haha! Wonderful, Nikki! Brad, it would be very cool if you could complement these fine covers with one or two of the Lord Mayor's shows, that were so splendid and successful? I quote from the pageant part of Seccombe's list of "Jordan's chief works": 30. ‘The Triumphs of London,’ 1675 (Sir Joseph Sheldon). 31. ‘London's Triumphs, express'd in sundry Representations, Pageants, and Shows,’ 1676, 4to (Sir Thomas Davies). 32. ‘London's Triumphs,’ 1677, 4to (Sir Francis Chaplin). 33. ‘The Triumph of London, for the Entertainment of Sir James Edwards,’ 1678, 4to. 34. ‘London in Luster; projecting many bright beams of Triumph,’ &c., 1679, 4to (Sir Robert Clayton [q. v.]). 35. ‘London's Glory, or the Lord Mayor's Show,’ 1680, 4to (Sir Patience Warde). 36. ‘London's Joy, or the Lord Mayor's Show,’ 1681, 4to (Sir John Moore). 37. ‘The Lord Mayor's Show, being a description of the Solemnity at the Inauguration of Sir William Pritchard, Kt.,’ 1682, 4to … 38. ‘The Triumphs of London performed … for the entertainment of Sir Henry Tulse,’ 1683, 4to. 39. ‘London's Royal Triumph for the City's Loyal Magistrate … at the Instalment of Sir James Smith, Kt.,’ 1684, 4to. Bishonen | talk 23:36, 12 May 2013 (UTC).

From an ancient of days, no longer present

ON NANSEN.

"I see," said Mr. Dooley, "that Doc Nansen has come back."

"Yes," said Mr. McKenna. "It's a wonder he wouldn't stay till winter. If I was setting on an iceberg in latitude umpty-ump north of Evanston these days, they couldn't pry me off it with a crowbar. Not they."

"He had to come back," explained Mr. Hennessy. "He got as far as he cud, an' thin he was foorced be th' inclimincy iv th' weather to return to his home in Feechoold, Norway."

"To where?" Mr. Dooley asked contemptuously.

"To Foocheeld, Norway," said Mr. Hennessy, with some misgivings.

"Ye don't know what ye're talkin' about," retorted the philosopher. "Ye ought to go back to school an' study gee-ography. Th' place he come back to was Oostoc, Norway, between Coopenhaagen an'--an' Rogers Park."

"Maybe ye're right," said Mr. Hennessy. "Annyhow, he come back, chased be a polar bear. It must iv been a thrillin' experience, leppin' fr'm iceberg to iceberg, with a polar bear grabbin' at th' seat iv his pants, an' now an' thin a walrus swoopin' down fr'm a three an' munchin' his hat."

"What ta-alk have ye?" Mr. Dooley demanded. "A walrus don't fly, foolish man!"

"What does he do, thin?" asked Mr. Hennessy. "Go 'round on crutches?"

"A walrus," said Mr. Dooley, "is an animal something like a hor-rse, but more like a balloon. It doesn't walk, swim, or fly. It rowls whin pur-suin' its prey. It whirls 'round an' 'round at a speed akel to a railroad injine, meltin' th' ice in a groove behind it. Tame walruses are used be th' Eskeemyoos, th' old settlers iv thim parts, as lawnmowers an' to press their clothes. Th' wild walrus is a mos' vicious animal, which feeds on snowballs through th' day, an' thin goes out iv nights afther artic explorers, which for-rms its principal diet. Theyse a gr-reat demand among walruses f'r artic explorers, Swedes preferred; an' on account iv th' scarcity iv this food it isn't more than wanst in twinty years that th' walrus gets a square meal. Thin he devours his victim, clothes, collar-buttons, an' all."

"Well, well," said Mr. Hennessy. "I had no idee they was that ferocious. I thought they were like bur-rds. Don't they lay eggs?"

"Don't they lay eggs?" Mr. Dooley replied. "Don't they lay eggs? Did ye iver hear th' like iv that, Jawn? Why, ye gaby, ye might as well ask me does a pianny lay eggs. Iv coorse not."

"I'd like to know what the objict of these here arctic explorations is," interposed Mr. McKenna, in the interests of peace.

"Th' principal objict is to get rid iv an over-supply iv foolish people," said Mr. Dooley. "In this counthry, whin a man begins f'r to see sthrange things, an' hitch up cockroaches, an' think he's Vanderbilt dhrivin' a four-in-hand, we sind him to what me ol' frind Sleepy Burk calls th' brain college. But in Norway an' Sweden they sind him to th' North Pole, an' feed him to th' polar bears an' th' walruses. A man that scorches on a bicycle or wears a pink shirt or is caught thryin' to fry out a stick iv dinnymite in a kitchen stove is given a boat an' sint off to play with Flora an' Fauna in th' frozen North."

"That's what I'd like to know," said Mr. Hennessy. "Who ar-re these Flora an' Fauna? I see be th' pa-aper that Doc Nansen stopped at Nootchinchoot Islands, an' saw Flora an' Fauna; an' thin, comin' back on th' ice, he encountherd thim again."

"I suppose," said Mr. Dooley, "ye think Flora an' Fauna is two little Eskeemy girls at skip-rope an' 'London bridge is fallin' down' on th' icebergs an' glaziers. It's a pretty idee ye have iv th' life in thim parts. Little Flora an' little Fauna playin' stoop-tag aroun' a whale or rushin' th' can f'r their poor tired father just home fr'm th' rollin'-mills, where he's been makin' snowballs f'r th' export thrade, or engagin' in some other spoort iv childhood! Go wan with ye!"

"But who are they, annyhow?"

"I make it a rule in me life not to discuss anny woman's charac-ter," replied Mr. Dooley, sternly. "If Doc Nansen was off there skylarkin' with Flora an' Fauna, it's his own business, an' I make no inquiries. A lady's a lady, be she iver so humble; an', as Shakespeare says, cursed be th' man that'd raise an ax to her, save in th' way iv a joke. We'll talk no scandal in this house, Hinnissy."

But, after his friend had gone, Mr. Dooley leaned over confidentially, and whispered to Mr. McKenna, "But who are Flora an' Fauna, Jawn?"

"I don't know," said Mr. McKenna.

"It sounds mighty suspicious, annyhow," said the philosopher. "I hope th' doc'll be able to square it with his wife."

-- Peter Finley Dunne, Mr Dooley at Peace and War copyright 1899, Boston. (His explanation of the Dreyfus Affair is even better.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.86.151.242 (talk) 16:14, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello honey! I remember you, and Nansen! Bishonen | talk 19:21, 13 May 2013 (UTC).

Mail

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

De728631 (talk) 11:43, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

That's strange, I don't see it. You'd better try again. Bishonen | talk 14:35, 16 May 2013 (UTC).

Have a look at your spam folder? Anyhow, it's not that important. I just found an old mail of yours in my folder where you sent me a comment on some admin action back in February this year. De728631 (talk) 20:17, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Oops, yes there it was. My bad, I never know where to look for where gmail stashes them. Anyway, you're right, it wasn't important, but thanks for getting back to me. Guess what G-mail said about it, though? "Why is this message in Spam? We've found that lots of messages from gmx.com are spam." So if you're having lots of messages ignored, that might be the explanation! Bishonen | talk 20:33, 16 May 2013 (UTC).

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Side dish may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:58, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, BracketBot! [/Me pats the good bot.] Bishonen | talk 20:08, 16 May 2013 (UTC).

ooh, a new bot! *munch* i like this new automaton. tastes good! it's a great idea, considering how easy ti is to forget a bracket or two... -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 20:43, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Caspar Milquetoast Award

Thank you! This makes my finger-in-the-dike efforts seem worthwhile after all. Textorus (talk) 22:44, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Hehe. We all feel like little Dutch boys sometimes in this place. Bishonen | talk 11:12, 18 May 2013 (UTC).

Hi

Hope everything is OK with you and your life? I would like to ask of you to review the sources on the Emmelie de Forest article concerning the royal ancestry claims and the "controversy" surrounding it. In the Media attention about claim of royal ancestors section and also accusations made against her dead father at the Personal life section. I am personally doubtful that it needs to be mentioned in an almost accusive tone towards this young singer, and also being mentioned in the same tone against the singers dead father. I am asking you this as I think this is the last opportunity to do anything about it if needed before she very possbily wins the Eurovision final tomorrow night. I might be completely wrong and everything about the claims about royal ancestry is a complete fake and a scam like it seems the article wants to give the impression, but if not I rather have it removed or down-sized further for Wikipedia crediblity reasons. In my opinion the entire section reads like a scandal article in The Sun newspaper. Anyhow, if you find the time please review it as I have seen your earlier good decision making concerning similar situations such as the Yohio article. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 23:11, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Gosh. With that number of media references, all quoting each other, it almost looks like the person adding them is trying to tire out anybody who wants to check the story. (It's working with me. :-() Or scaring them away with that amount of repetitious Danish. I'm afraid I'd lost sight of the article, so I'm glad you alerted me. Did I ever tell you that Vw was on the same crusade on the no and nn Wikipedias? I managed to interest an admin on nnwiki, but the nowiki stub remains a disgrace. Well, I can't watch the whole galaxy of Wikipedias, I'll try to take appropriate responsibility for this one, where I'm an admin. I've removed the whole paragraph, put a note on the talkpage, and given the user a strong warning. Thanks, BabbaQ. Bishonen | talk 11:09, 18 May 2013 (UTC).

Thank you very much Bishonen. Yes I am aware of the users crusade on those Wikipedias and also Emmelies danish article which I find to be a total disgrace too. Sad to see that Danish Wikipedia is allowing this trash to remain. The user will probably Wiki-lawyer his way to the re-adding of the content so look out. Thank you once again!--BabbaQ (talk) 15:05, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh no they won't. I may be a milquetoast admin for normal purposes, but not on BLPs. Especially not in a case like this, with an unfolding current event. Bishonen | talk 15:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC).

As I suspected, the user has undone your edit and called your edits vandalism and you personally he labels a "troll" at his talk page summary. I am totally fed up with this single-purpose accounts attitude towards this Wikipedia right now. --BabbaQ (talk) 17:02, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

I think you can close the ANI discussion as the matter is solved and no further admin involvement is needed for now. Good work Bishonen.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:34, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, somebody uninvolved should preferably close it—not me. Plus, I've posted an addendum now about a possible indefblock. Anyway, I was amused by VW's ANI attempt to co-opt Dr Kiernan for his own team. Good luck with that. :-) Bishonen | talk 18:11, 18 May 2013 (UTC).

Take a look at Emmelie de Forest's talk page. A similar discussion yet again what is wrong with people?. Also possible sockpuppeting.BabbaQ (talk) 01:05, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

That user has been contributing since 2009, so I don't think they're a sock. Thanks for reverting their edit at Impostor. It was certainly inappropriate, and I've just warned them. Bishonen | talk 12:20, 19 May 2013 (UTC).

"What is wrong with people"? What would be "right" with people? СЛУЖБА (talk) 21:43, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Bishonen, someone has added the "controversy" section back, once again it reads like a The Sun scandal section.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:14, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

They hadn't exactly added it back, so I presume they were unaware of previous events and discussions at the article. But I actually thought this new text was rather worse than the old. I've removed it and posted on the talkpage as well as on the user's page. Sigh. I'm going to bed... maybe I'd better put up some kind of edit-mode-only banner about this issue at the top of the article, with dire threats of instant blocks. Either that, or fullprotect it. Bishonen | talk 23:58, 20 May 2013 (UTC).

Would a "pending changes" protection not work instead of fullprotect? I have got reviewer rights, so can keep an even closer eye on the article and reject any changes that are attempts to re-add the controversial details. Wesley♦Mouse 10:35, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Good idea, especially if you're willing to keep an eye on it, Mouse. Done, and I'll complement it with an editspace banner, once I figure out how to do that. That will hopefully minimise the risk that other reviewers, who mainly look for straightforward vandalism, will approve such additions before you get there. Bishonen | talk 14:02, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

Sure, I don't mind keeping an eye - keeps me occupied around these parts LOL. Wesley♦Mouse 17:02, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Troll!

Who sez you're a bad troll? Maybe you're a cute one, like File:Wizard troll doll-low res.jpg Not CCA-SA licensed, you have to follow the link, sorry.. They're as least as cute as some of those darn socks running rampant around here. Anyway, any objection to me closing it? Maybe they'll come around after a week (okay, probably not, but if AGF was easy anyone could do it). NE Ent 19:10, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

No objection. Nor do I object to being called a troll. Depends who does it, of course, but most of the time it's a badge of honour, something akin to being blocked by Jimbo. And nobody's cuter than Darwinbish, are you crazy? Especially not some Norwegian plastic doll with pink hair. You want one of her templates? Bishonen | talk 19:25, 18 May 2013 (UTC).

Userpage protection decline

I'm a bit confused about how own userpage protection works. You say you cannot protect my userpage because it has never been edited by anyone other than myself, which is of course true. I have read the policy regarding protecting pages within own userspace and it demands evidence of vandalism by anon. users or other good reasons for protection (none of what, I admit, is present in my userpage's case). However, this user page was protected by User:Mike V when the page had been edited only by two other users (one of them was bot) except the author, and none of their edits were unconstructive in any manner (all before the page was recently moved as a result of a rename from User:Pratyya Ghosh to User:Pratyya). No specific reason was provided by the protecting administrator. Is it true that the page got protected merely because someone other than the author himself had ever edited the page? Did it not violate the policy regarding protection of own userpages? smtchahal^talk 13:42, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Strange. I see that Mike referred to WP:UPROT, which as you say only supports protection at the user's request "if there is evidence of vandalism/disruption or other good reason to do so", so I don't know what that was about. I'm afraid you'll have to ask Mike; it's possible that he simply made a mistake, admins being human and all. What I told you on the WP:RFPP page is standard, in fact I noticed after I'd replied that I could even have used a template for saying that pages are not protected pre-emptively: {{RFPP|np}}. As for your question if it makes a difference that somebody other than the author had edited the page: no, it wouldn't. Semiprotection only (basically) works against IPs, anyway. Are you worried about your userpage? Is there anything I can do to help? I'll add it to my watchlist if you like. Bishonen | talk 14:10, 19 May 2013 (UTC).

Since I have linked his username on this talk page, Mike should get a notification and hopefully will reply, too. But are you sure that he made a mistake? Because in a more recent case, User:WorldTraveller101's user sandbox was protected by another administrator, User:Materialscientist, who provided the very same WP:UPROT link in his reason, when in fact the sandbox page literally had never been edited by anyone other than the user it belongs to; let alone vandalism and/or disruption by anon. users. And no, I'm not really worried about my user page. As you have already noticed, my user page was only ever edited by myself. But I thought it a good idea to get it protected pre-emptively after I saw (or rather presumed) any registered user could get their userspace pages protected; something one of the Wikipedia policies is against and yet something a few administrators allow anyway. smtchahal^talk 17:25, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I hate to disappoint you, but I'm far from sure that people notified about being mentioned on this page will actually notice, or be curious enough to go look. They're hardly obliged to, and may be busy doing other stuff. If you really want to pursue this, you'd better post on their pages, or else post a more generalized query on the administrators' noticeboard. Bishonen | talk 17:37, 19 May 2013 (UTC).

User page advice

Hi Bishonen,

Just a quick question if I may, regarding user pages and what is suppose to be on them. I contacted Karlwhen (talk · contribs) 1 month ago, after I noticed he is using his user page to host Eurovision Song Contest-based score sheets. Are these allowed on user pages, or is it classified as using the page for blog-like activities? I sincerely appreciated your advice on this matter. Regards, Wesley♦^Mouse 17:51, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm. Well, that's not what's supposed to be on a userpage, no. But I don't see that it does much harm, and culturally, there's the traditional leeway for managing one's own pages. Speaking for myself, I wouldn't edit a userpage, or go adminny on the user's ass, unless it was something offensive like racism or personal attacks. One wonders, though, why he keeps all that on his userpage. I mean, clearly he's hugely interested in the ESC, but why on the userpage? My guess would be that it's because he doesn't know about sandboxes. You can see here that he doesn't have any. It would be more pleasing to you and me and surely also more convenient for the user if he had a normal userpage with a little personal information (like he started out with here) and also had a sandbox, as it might be User:Karlwhen/Eurovision, for the ESC tables.

It might be seen as rather uncollegial of him not to reply to your post (while continuing to add material to his userpage). But perhaps he feels, well, ignorant and defensive about Wikipedia's many complicated rules. He might have been a bit overwhelmed by all the attention back in July — you know, felt criticised, even though I do see that you spoke very nicely to him — because he hasn't edited his talkpage since. Hmm. Not sure about this. If I'm able to think of some really non-threatening way of explaining to him how to create a sandbox, maybe I will post on his talk later and suggest it. Or you do it, of course. I'm absolutely not famous for my tact. ;-) Bishonen | talk 19:48, 19 May 2013 (UTC).

?

• Giano and Bishonen rolled into one? [Proudly:] I took and uploaded the photo of the genuine Swedish salmiak "salt sill" fish in Swedish fish. And then I ate the sucker. Aaahh, saltlakrits. Bishonen | talk 17:30, 17 April 2013 (UTC).

Now tell me about this, because I was wondering about it a while. Warrington (talk) 15:40, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

• • I think Drmies was saying you were an expert in the fields of architecture (like the great user:Giano) and Swedish candy (like me, though only in the sense that I introduced the delicious salt sill to the article Swedish fish). I was more trying to amuse Drmies, who is probably aware how fast friends Giano and I are. You know, implying that you are really our combined sock. Not so funny when you spell it out, I suppose. :-) Well, so do you have a proper deep Swedish understanding of salmiak? Only then will I acknowledge your candy expertise. (Furthermore, how long does it take to make a hafspaj? What's hafs about it?) Bishonen | talk 16:09, 20 May 2013 (UTC).

This is the liquorice blackfish.

This lutefisk in a Norwegian market is no relation!

Norwegian fish, 17 May dinner in the United States of lutefisk, rutabaga, meatballs, cranberries, and lefse.

• Never mind items of clothing worn on the feet. I am in the dark on this... Dark. Yes I do have a proper deep Swedish understanding of salmiak. Do you have a proper deep understanding of lets say poppy seeds or polkagris? Hafs is a sort of Swedish mess. Hafsig, och paj. Hafspajen (talk) 11:43, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I know what hafs means, I'm Swedish (how else would I have the true deep appreciation of salmiak). I think I've even heard terms like hafspaj and hafskaka before. What I meant to ask was: how quick and hafsig does the baking process have to be for the result to qualify as a hafspaj? And in what sense are you a hafspaj? The mind boggles. I mean, I'm admittedly not a bishounen, but still. (Poppy seeds? There's an unusual criterion for Swedishness. Do you mean on a loaf of bergis? I appreciate them.) Bishonen | talk 14:16, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

Probably very quick, somewhat like Mary Poppins. Actually this Hafspaj word was an accidental alfapet word, meaning nothing, when placing words besides each other, and strange words may emerge. Me, Hafspaj, just for fun. Alfapet is the Swedish name for the game Scrabble. Never tasted a hafspaj. Bergis looks good, thought I newer taster any.Where can you buy them? Any place in Lund? Now wait a minute, you can speak Swedish?? Hafspajen (talk) 15:15, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

[Thinks about it. Reluctantly.] I suppose I can. On a good day. On the rare occasions I visit the Swedish Wikipedia, I even do. But I'm not crazy about getting translation requests (have done too much translating for a living), so don't tell anybody! Bishonen | talk 16:01, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

Why am I 'The Great User Giano' getting tacky little anonymous messages saying that my name has been mentioned here; it's like having Big Brother listening at the keyhole. I don't know how you Nordics can eat that disgusting fish; I should think the cold has played havoc with your taste buds and digestive systems.  Giano  18:08, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

It's better than that, Excellency; if you tick the appropriate box in 'Preferences', you can also get email notifications from Big Brother whenever somebody mentions you. (Winston Smith had it easy.)

Of even greater concern though, Chère, is that Fastily's rampant bot has tagged your blackfish as suitable for moving to Commons (after which it gets an Ncd template and soon after is CSD F8 deleted from here). Did you want to drop a {{Keep local}} template on there? --RexxS (talk) 18:26, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

If so, you better hurry, because the keep local template is up for deletion. Not that it has a chance of actually getting deleted, but why let the facts get in teh way of tasty drama? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:34, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

[After conflict]::::::::Well it's a bloody nuisance if we can't have a chat about another editor without him being automatically notified. We shall have to start being like those irritating, church-going women who say: "if you can't say anything nice about a person, it's better to say nothing at all" which is probably very true, but does make life exceedingly dull - even in a place like Wikipedia where some irksome little tit is always earwigging and anxious to run off to ANI saying Giano (or whoever) has been uncivil. Now, I had better go and plead to save keep local template - those morons on Commons can't be trusted with an image.  Giano  18:40, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

It's actually not so bad, Giano: you only get notified if someone makes a Wikilink to your user page, so it's going to be pretty uncommon unless someone is actually trying to get your attention. Simply typing out the user name won't alert you. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:47, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

What good news that is; I shall remember not to link. Now, I only have irksome little tits to worry about.  Giano  18:51, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

• I've tagged the File:Salt.sill.jpeg with {{keep local}}. It's a very valuable addition the Swedish fish article, and precious to me because it's the only one (?) of my uploads that I actually, and effortfully, photographed myself. Giano, I suspect you're falling into Automatic Mediterranean Prejudice Mode here without even clicking on my links. This isn't rotted Baltic herring or marinated matjessill or indeed lutfisk, it's delicious liquorice candy. Mmmmm… [/me falls into a reverie, then runs out to buy some.] Bishonen | talk 19:46, 20 May 2013 (UTC).
  • Effortfully, eh? That's two words today that I've tripped across that had me reaching for a dictionary (the other being the verb "inactivate," which I was sure was a typo for "deactivate"). Nice. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 20:04, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

What can I say, my English vocabulary is a Lesefrucht, strongly nourished by Victorian novels. Oh, a redlink? It's German for fruit of reading. Good word! "Effortfully" (along with Lesefrucht) may well be one of my ten most frequently used words. Bishonen | talk 20:15, 20 May 2013 (UTC).

Swedish fish? BlueSapphires (talk) 15:22, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Swedish fish. Bishonen | talk 15:32, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

Yum. BlueSapphires (talk) 22:32, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Hemerocallis 'Kwanzo'

Wow, I go away for a few months and everything has changed! No more orange bar? Just a little red blob? Does it work if I mention myself with the little bracket things? User:Tex I guess I'll find out soon! _{BTW, Bish, there's a new Baby Tex on the earth. Mama and baby are fine. Just thought you'd want to know.} See ya around! Tex (talk) 21:02, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I did want to know, congratulations, that's great, Tex! Mentioning yourself is no good, I think! Does the new Baby Tex have a Baby Tex II account yet? Don't look like it! Bishonen | talk 21:21, 22 May 2013 (UTC).

Hee hee! Last time I had an addition to the family, I created a sock (Baby Tex) and he got indef-blocked! I see my new little one caused a kerfuffle without me even creating a sock for him. It's another boy, by the way. The wife is freaking out about having to live in the country in Texas with 3 boys (me being the 3rd boy)! Heh. Thanks for all the well wishes from the Bishpack! Tex (talk) 15:17, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, poor unfortunate Recent Changes patroller (or so I suppose), stumbling unawares into organized wikicrime territory! Quite a relief to see they got away with a mere fish-hitting. Lots of boys, great… I hope db's latest babygang recruit gets creates an account soon, because Pod is dying to shower him with fishapod plushies. Getting any sleep at night? Bishonen | talk 15:36, 23 May 2013 (UTC).

A Bishapod plushie really would be adorable. — Huntster (t @ c) 00:19, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Big strong admins need plushies too! bishapod talk to your inner fish 10:51, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

Your suggestion above for the new baby's account is now blue. Send Pod over with the plushies!!! Not much sleep, no. Little booger likes to cry! Tex (talk) 14:27, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh noes, you created it? And now we wait for him to be blocked in a cloud of plushies! Shall I alert User:HJ Mitchell? Bishonen | talk 19:16, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

My favorite legal-decision of the week, cited in the New York Times Sunday Magazine:

Some might look at the silky wording of IP Nav's letter to Renaissance and see a close question; this court, however, sees an unmistakable and intentional warning shot across the bow. The actual message is pellucid to any patent litigator, so that IP Nav's use of apophasis is disingenuous and unavailing. Remember Mark Antony's funeral oration in Julius Caesar? That's how an experienced business executive or lawyer would view IP Nav's assertions that "we are focused on addressing these issues without the need for costly and protracted litigation" and "our client's preferred approach is to conclude licensing discussions without resorting to litigation. We hope you share this objective." The implied "or else!" oozes from this letter like lye from lutefisk. To paraphrase an observation attributed to Anton Chekhov, you don't hang a gun over the mantle in Act I unless someone is going to fire it in Act III.

— [18]

Editnotice...

...is up; you can see it if you try to edit the page, and you can preview/change it if you like at Template:Editnotices/Page/Emmelie de Forest. Cheers! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:14, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, it's beautiful. 1st of July sounds just right. Bishonen | talk 17:42, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	thank you for all your work with Emmelie de Forest. couldn't have solved the problem without you! -- Aunva6talk - contribs 01:17, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I also would like to thank you Bishonen for the help with the de Forest article. I seems to be in a more stable condition right now. Hopefully people will not add the material until further information is known. If ever, in my opinion the entire thing sounds weird to add. Amyway, Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:54, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much, guys, and thanks for your help. The article is currently protectively swaddled by PC2 + the rather tight-lipped edit notice, so there's not much strolling idjits can do. By the time we remove those protections, the genealogical interest (oh, gee... how can people even care?) will hopefully have died down. Mind you, I'm sorry to have to have the pending changes, because I'm sure there are many good sensible users out there who would like to be able to update relevant details without the hassle. But I realised it had to be when <ahem, never mind who> popped right back up with more reverting and fatuous comments about "harmless fun facts". Anybody who is now inconvenienced by PC can thank that user for it, because it was the last straw for me. Bishonen | talk 16:39, 22 May 2013 (UTC).

You could have just easily participated in finding consensual phrasing instead of spending much more of your and our time & energy "Streisanding" this trifle. --Trofobi (talk) 15:04, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but unfortunately I was just too hysterical.[19] You're the one who's been wasting everybody's time by asking the same questions over and over again after they have been amply clarified.[20] Frankly, Trofobi, I'd stop going on about it if I were you, and give people a chance to forget the role you played. You don't seem to realise how lucky you were not to be blocked. Bishonen | talk 16:06, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

You're massively exaggerating. --Trofobi (talk) 17:04, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

• On behalf of Project Eurovision, I would also like to extend the thanks and appreciation to Bishonen for the hard work and dedication in protecting the article. It is acts like this that are a shining example of a true Wikipedian at their best. Wesley♦Mouse 16:20, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks Wes, you're massively exaggerating.:-)

@Trofobi: please stop editwarring on my page to alter my post, or you may get blocked. Not by me in this instance, but many admins watch this page. And talk about Streisanding… sheesh. I tactfully refrained from mentioning your name above, but you had to come here and publicise your fatuousness where 476 talkpage stalkers can see it. Fame. Bishonen | talk 19:09, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

Bishonen, your patience with this user is to be admired. But at some point enough is enough, and that goes for both users that is rude towards you. --BabbaQ (talk) 22:02, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

All admins are used to rudeness, it comes with the territory, and isn't really to be wondered at when users find themselves unexpectedly stymied by the use or threat of admin tools. It's human. I find it harder to have patience with an admin who sabotages me. :-( Bishonen | talk 22:58, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

Just wanted to send you this cute kitty here. Happy towel day. --Trofobi (talk) 09:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I have never witnessed a user who begs to be blocked like you Trofobi. Do you really want Bishonen to grant you your wish? Or are you just simply rude.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:22, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

It is intended as de-escalation effort - if you, Bishonen, conceive this as rude then please accept my apology and remove or reword it. --Trofobi (talk) 18:55, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

No, no. Thanks for the cute cat, I took it in a friendly way. I was just about to answer BabbaQ myself — I think he must have misunderstood. If the cat is some sort of trolling or sarcasm, it's too deeply buried for me. :-) Bishonen | talk 19:15, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

Emmelie de Forest

Then fully protect it. Your choices are unprotected, semi-protection, PC/1, PC/1 with semi-protection, and full protection. Not PC/2. I would expect you to know that, and I assumed that you had simply mismoused instead of consciously defying consensus and using PC/2 on an article.—Kww(talk) 21:19, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

What consensus would that be? I used my admin discretion and used a protection alternative that's available to admins via a drop-down menu. I wonder why it is? Could it be because of the way the RFC is going? What's the consensus at the moment, or hadn't you noticed? You wade into a difficult situation at a sensitive BLP without even bothering with a note on the talkpage, or a note to me, and apparently without any research. If you have any sense you'll revert yourself. Bishonen | talk 21:29, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

I soon think it is time to do something radical concerning the protection of this article. The way users are treating you Bishonen and the article is simply not OK.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:58, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

There's been no discussion ever on the use of PC/2 that ended in a consensus to use it. Hell, I don't dislike it: I think it actually stands a chance of being useful, while PC/1 is little more than a petty annoyance. If you think the article needs more protection, I'll upgrade the protection to full. I'm not pulling your chain when I said that I thought this was a simple mistake on your part: the log comment of "The contest is currently ongoing. I think we won't have any more drive-by IP edits today." seemed compatible with semi-protection or PC/1. —Kww(talk) 22:00, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Huh, what? I said that when I semiprotected the article for three hours on 18 May, just time enough for the ongoing contest to end, you know?[21] Click here to see my comment when I actually configured Pending Changes on 21 May: "Violations of the biographies of living persons policy" was what I wrote as the reason that time. Did you really look that carelessly before you pushed the button? You didn't look at the talkpage at all, I'm sure, or you could hardly have missed that my PC2 was a deliberate action. I discussed it with WesleyMouse there, as I did on this page of mine, above. I won't bother to dig out the diffs of any of that for you, because you've made it clear that you're too busy to read any of this stuff, including the protection history.

I can't make head or tail of your suggestion of Pending Changes 1 combined with semiprotection, by the way. Semi prevents IPs and new users from editing. PC1 means that when they edit anyway, they have to be reviewed…? Really… ?

Anybody who reverts your revert of my protection will of course be "wheel-warring". That's one of the reasons it's worth taking a few minutes to think (and to fucking read) before you put yourself at the "second mover advantage." Fullprotect if you like, but please don't suppose or state that you're doing it to accommodate me. It's a very drastic move, and I'm against it. Bishonen | talk 22:50, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

Anyone can feel free to change the protection state to unprotected, semi-protection, PC/1, PC/1 with semi-protection, or full protection. I won't raise a peep. I noticed the article in the list of PC/2 articles and looked at the protection log. Want me to say I fucked up? Fine, I fucked up. But the path out of here is not to reinstate PC/2. It isn't one of the choices available to either of us.—Kww(talk) 22:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you fucked up and you're fucking up again. You simply repeat your "PC/1 with semi-protection" with no concern for my comment on that combination? OK, apparently you're also too busy to read my posts. I guess I'm done. Do return to your more important tasks. Bishonen | talk 23:04, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

Didn't notice that I had included it when I cut/paste from my earlier task. You're right that PC/2 with semi-protection is a meaningful combination, but PC/1 is not. Doesn't get us out of this position, though. Like I said, I won't object to you changing the protection level to anything that doesn't include PC/2.—Kww(talk) 23:09, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I've got it, feel free to stop saying it. Having slept on it, I guess I have a little more. I'm sorry it's so dreadfully long, you'd better just read every third line.

Have you ever thought of taking an admin break? I did last year, and it was useful to be reminded of how the other half live. You might find it refreshing too. When you applied for adminship, you probably weren't thinking "I want to be an admin because I want to rush around enforcing "rules" I don't even believe in and speedread other people's uninteresting yapping", did you? Or "I want to steamroll other admins and get them thinking about handing in their tools"? There's nothing like that in any of your RFAs.

I performed an admin action after thinking about it for half a day, and you set your judgment above mine, after about 30 seconds of consideration, by the look of it. When I asked, above, what consensus you were talking about, you prevaricated like some politician by saying "There's been no discussion ever on the use of PC/2 that ended in a consensus to use it." That's hardly the point, if you're going to enforce anti-PC2 as a "rule" and to accuse me of "consciously defying consensus" in using it. The point is instead, has there ever been a discussion on the use of PC/2 that ended in a consensus to not use it? Not that I know of. It's enabled, it's usable. As you're aware, there's an ongoing RFC about it, which currently stands at 92 Support and 50 Oppose. You fucked up, on your own admission and partly because you misread the log, and now you're seemingly too stiff-necked to un-fuck up. Is that because you're too good to instate the dread PC/2 (because of a non-existent "rule" against it)? You should have been too good to remove it, certainly in the high-handed way you did. Not too late to do the right thing, you know. Bishonen | talk 12:52, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

Princess Marcella Borghese

Hi Bishonen! The page you edited was modified again by ExcuseMeNYC. Can you do something about it please?? Thank you!! Juliet55 (talk) 00:39, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

I keep editing this page and will continue to edit it as long as incorrect and irrelevant information is posted. This is a page for a person, not a company. Who owns Borghese cosmetics is not relevant to Marcella's history as she is no longer living or affiliated with the company. It is a separate entity and is owned by Georgette Mosbacher. Several attempts were made to post this information with references cited to prove Georgette is the owner and they were removed. But since this page is NOT for the Borghese cosmetics company, it is not relevant anyway. Please stop referencing the current management and ownership if Borghese cosmetics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ExcuseMeNYC (talk • contribs) 09:37, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

(Crossposting my reply to User talk:ExcuseMeNYC to increase the chance that the new user sees it.)

Hi, ExcuseMeNYC, and welcome to Wikipedia! You make reasonable points about the text, but please do look up the help page Help:Edit summary that I linked to in my message. Edit summaries are used to inform other editors of the reason for an edit, and it's confusing to repeatedly remove material without an edit summary to say why you're removing it. Edit summaries for each edit will appear in the history of a page. I do understand that these Wikipedia terms and technicalities are difficult for new users, but if you take a look at the history of Princess Marcella Borghese here, you will see how that works, with the edit summaries of my edits and (mostly) also of Juliet's edits. Your edits only have the automatically generated section name and nothing about any reason. That's why I reverted you.

If the explanation for a removal is too complicated for the limited space of an edit summary, you can simply write "See Talk" there, and post an explanation on the article's talkpage, which will have the advantage of starting a discussion about it.

May I ask if you're related to the IPs 24.215.249.118 and 24.215.248.86, who edited the article to add the Georgette Mosbacher-related material? Bishonen | talk 13:10, 26 May 2013 (UTC).

Addendum: I've been digging around in the article history, but it's extremely difficult to find the references you speak of that purportedly show Mosbacher owns Borghese Cosmetics, since the person who added them (you?) didn't use any edit summaries either. :-( Please post those references right here so I can take stock of them. Bishonen | talk 15:22, 26 May 2013 (UTC).

Again, this is NOT a company page. It is for a person. The only reason Revson and Revlon are relevant is because it is how she created her line and it was when she was alive, therefore its relevant to her history. Who owns the company now does not need to be mentioned on her page as she is deceased and no longer involved with this separate entity. All that needs to be known is that she started a line and was involved with it until her death. If anything, you can even remove that the line is now known as simply Borghese and based in NYC and simply keep that she was involved with the line "named after her" until her death. I will not be adding the Georgette Mosbacher references as they are not relevant to Marcella's history and you people keep removing them EVEN with numerous references cited, which is rather childish and not consistent with this websites protocols. ExcuseMeNYC (talk) 22:41, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for getting in touch. From now on, please let's simply keep the discussion on Talk:Princess Marcella Borghese. I will reply to you there. Bishonen | talk 23:00, 26 May 2013 (UTC).

<post moved to section "Cosmetics" below. Bishonen | talk 08:35, 30 May 2013 (UTC).>

Mens Parking

Hallo Bishonen, retrospective is about TV shows giving overviews about the year passed by in late december. OK? Thanks for your help. Serten (talk) 21:42, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

A Norwegian cookie for you!

To the deffender of the Swedish cuisine! Don't let the Swedish cuisine be too weird. Hafspajen, alias Warrington (talk) 13:09, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Wow, big! [Hastily gobbles the entire kransekake before Darwinbish can parachute in and steal it. Takes some extra insulin.] Thank you, very nice! Bishonen | talk 14:58, 28 May 2013 (UTC).

This is a cookie? If they have cookies that big, what are their cakes like? More to the point, where do I get one?!! Heimstern Läufer (talk) 13:33, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Apparently in Rochester, Minnesota.[22] :-) Everything's big in America! Bishonen | talk 14:32, 29 May 2013 (UTC).

The cakes are this big![23] & [24]!! Hafspajen (talk) 09:33, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Cosmetics

Have you worked out what is going on on that page? I haven’t, except that the recent SPA edits must be driven by the litigation that’s going on between the current owner of the brand and the reality TV person who is a scion of the storied family. But I have no idea why one of them is trying to include things (which fail to interest me) in the article or why the other is trying to exclude them. Tedious business. Ian Spackman (talk) 03:09, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, I sort of know what's going on, but it's strange that the small differences between one sentence and another on the page can be important to anybody. As you say, tedious. I'm hoping the SPA has vented and shouted enough and will be happy to have the last word, so I'm refraining from arguing with them further. The state of the article doesn't seem horrible now. Bishonen | talk 05:25, 29 May 2013 (UTC).

Oops, I didn't see the latest developments. That does it, I'm blocking them. Bishonen | talk 05:43, 29 May 2013 (UTC).

I can see you love to ban people who disagree with your personal opinion. How is that being a good administrator or editor? I have NO agenda regarding the Marcella Borghese page other than to not have it contain information that cannot be proven or that is inaccurate. Every point I have made as been valid and you are obviously trying to bully me into submission. You need to stop making this about your own point of view and follow the guidelines of your own website. ExcuseMeNYC (talk) 07:49, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

If there are two subjects I'm utterly uninterested in, they're cosmetics companies and noble houses. I have no personal opinion about either of them. I have blocked you indefinitely for disrupting the article and importing battles from the outside world into Wikipedia. Take them to the appropriate venues. That's not here. Bishonen | talk 08:20, 30 May 2013 (UTC).

Find-a-grave = spam?

Re: [25]. I was wondering - is it really spam? I have not dealt much with this site, but I found it useful once or twice for burial refs. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:17, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

That site has generated an enormous amount of "discussion". One example (not fit for the faint-of-heart) is here. Searching that page for "Links to previous discussions" shows several other links. There has been massive spamming of the site, with many of the targets being pretty useless as far as WP:EL goes. There's always an opportunity to argue for a particular link being an exception, but it would need to be a pretty good argument IMHO. Johnuniq (talk) 10:11, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

I may have been a little seduced by the opportunity for a shit hot edit summary. :-) Anyway I agree with John; I tend to remove it pretty much on sight, though I suppose it can be useful on some (rare) occasions. Copernicus is a good illustration of how uncritically it's spammed, I presume by a bot looking for bios and the bare fact of the subject being dead. There are four paragraphs already in the article about Copernicus's funerary adventures, as of course you're aware, Piotrus. I've seen a documentary about them. Don't need no fucking crappy find-a-grave. P.S. C-class, really? Well, I only engaged with the external links. You got plans for it? Bishonen | talk 10:26, 31 May 2013 (UTC).

Thanks for the grave story, pun perhaps intended :) C-class, yes. For years I've been to scared to tackling this mess - it has been ground zero for a number of trolls and the surrounding circus. But I have finally begun tackling this; for now I've started on cleaning up the references, which hopefully will not attract too much flame. Any help appreciated, it is very much a core encyclopedic topic, with a high number of views per day. I'd like to get it to GA, through I am not sure if I'll be able to deal with the near constant revert warring between some editors, sigh. Perhaps you could chip in to their page discussions, and help to wrangle some form of consensus? I think the latest phase of the talk bickering is concerning the (grossly too short, IMHO) lead. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:56, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, because I'm famous for my tact and finesse. <sarcasm> I might be more useful staying aloof from editing so I can sweep in as an uninvolved admin if one's needed. (Amongst my many and varied excuses for avoiding work, that's my favourite.) Guess how much crap the article would be accumulating if I hadn't semiprotected it? Nobody quarrels like a patriotic IP, and I noticed that in Copernicus you had also had the astrologers visiting. :-( Bishonen | talk 10:33, 1 June 2013 (UTC).

I know nothing about Find a Grave, but its bio of Copernicus is amateurish and contains several errors. Thanks for removing the citation to this drivel, which is clearly not a reliable source.—Finell 09:24, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Pictures

Look at the pictures on this wiki: http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_Mir%C3%B3?uselang=cs. Something like this would be needed on Miró. Eh?. Would you , will you.. Hafspajen (talk) 14:05, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The photo on the left in the "cariera" (career) section of the above article is of the monumental tapestry that hangs in the Miro Museum in Barcelona, which he created specifically for display in that museum. I just uploaded my own photo of that piece to Commons -- here [26] -- so feel free to use it if so inclined. I also have some sculpture photos (same museum) if interested. DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 14:33, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Going by those image pages, the Romanian Wikipedia doesn't seem to insist on any license or source whatever for locally uploaded images. But en.wiki does, so, sorry, I don't rightly see as how I can. It sounds like Doc Joe's your man. Bishonen | talk 15:09, 31 May 2013 (UTC).

So that!'s the problem. . But then you cannot trust those guys, Rumanian art galleries. If we were fake , where would we hang, in a Rumanian art gallery… (P. G. Wodehouse). So I guess the Doctor is the man...

Hafspajen (talk) 16:43, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Does this interest you at all?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/English_Wikipedia_readership_survey_2013 --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 02:53, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah.. I suppose. I've already typed out two different comments, and scrapped them both because I found some cogent post on the page which made me change my mind. Too much to read... ! :-( But I'll try in a day or two to read through the whole and finally finish a comment. God.. it's easier to contribute to these things while they're still young! Bishonen | talk 17:03, 2 June 2013 (UTC).

Don't feel obliged. I'm just wondering if you think it's a good idea in principle. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 17:44, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

How

The Cockalier is a mix between a Cocker spaniel and Cavalier King Charles Spaniel

• 

  Beware of the skvader

How do I do an article on Cockalier, a Dog crossbreeds when there is a redirect of the word Cockalier to Mongrel article? see here redirect page [27]. Shall I do an article of the redirect or make an aticle and redirect the redirect (which is kind of silly). Or? ... If you got me. Hafspajen (talk) 09:35, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Cockalier is a fully protected redirect. If you take a look at the history, you'll see it was an article (a stub) in 2007, which stated that the breed is recognised by the American Canine Hybrid Club.[28] User:DragonflySixtyseven turned it into a redirect and protected it, because "ACHC is a pay-for-inclusion registry and there is thus no notability." So you can't turn it into an article. If you can convince Dragonfly that there is something better than ACHC that does establish notability, I'm sure s/he'll remove the protection and you'll be free to turn it into an article. Or you can convince me, but that's not as good, since dog notability isn't within my expertise. (If it goes woof and wags its tail it's notable, isn't it? Pettable, at least.) Bishonen | talk 14:54, 2 June 2013 (UTC).

Oh, well there are quite a few articles on crossbreeds on Wiki, see List of dog crossbreeds. This might be convicing... http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/cockalier.htm and also this. http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/americancaninehybridclub.htm. It seems to me they do recogognise Cockalier. And remember Blue Lacy. Hafspajen (talk) 15:38, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

• (Cockalier doesn't appear on List of dog crossbreeds.) Sorry, no, those aren't that convincing to me. If a crossbreed is "recognised" by a pay-for-inclusion registry, that sounds to me a bit like saying a diploma mill recognises me as a PhD because I bought a PhD diploma from them. But then as I said I don't know a lot about it. You'd better take this to either Dragonfly, or Requests for unprotection. Bishonen | talk 16:14, 2 June 2013 (UTC).

• Exactly, as you say, the Cockalier doesn't appear on the List of dog crossbreeds. But many other crossbreeds in the same situation do. That was the idea. But the whole things doesn't sounds like it is worth the effort if it has to be so complicated. One crossbreed more or less... might have better things to do than chase cockaliers. Hafspajen (talk) 20:41, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

• Right, why not edit Cockatrice instead! Cool crossbreed. Bishonen | talk 23:06, 2 June 2013 (UTC). Or Skvader. Bishonen | talk 23:15, 2 June 2013 (UTC).
  • Shall I start turning people into stone? :) Hafspajen (talk) 08:27, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Assistance appreciated

As you've noticed, this editor's contributions have required a lot of cleaning up [29]. I encountered them at Ayurveda, and added suggestions and warnings to their talk page, which are, as is the user's prerogative, deleted without acknowledgment or discussion. There's a tendency to steamroll ahead without listening to more experienced editors. I have already begun to discuss this with Acroterian, and perhaps a word from another administrator will help. Thank you, 99.149.85.229 (talk) 11:43, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah. When I saw their "move" of Nirmal Baba I assumed they were a very inexperienced editor, but I now see they've been here for a while. Refusal to listen to advice will often have the same effect as newness, of course. :-( I have sort of had a word already, at Talk:Nirmal Baba and Talk:Baba Amte, so I won't go to their usertalk yet awhile. Posting on article talk also has the advantage that the addressee doesn't get to delete it. Bishonen | talk 12:21, 4 June 2013 (UTC).

All valid observations, Bishonen. Thank you, 99.149.85.229 (talk) 19:57, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

I do respect more experienced editors. And would like to learn form them. I would like to here-itself apologize if some of my edits / reverts have been found inappropriate. I have started following the advice given at Ayurveda article and will discuss on talk page before making edits at important sections or when the material might have differences of opinions. Thanks. --Abhijeet Safai (talk) 07:34, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello Abhijeet Safai, and thanks. Perhaps you noticed my note here about "moving" articles (=changing their names) by copy-pasting, which creates problems. Please use the "move" tab at the top of the article, per instructions at Wikipedia:Moving an article. But it may not in any case be the best idea to move an article without discussion, when the history and the existing redirect show that it has already travelled back and forth between the different titles a few times. You're very welcome to ask me here if you have any questions. Bishonen | talk 09:24, 6 June 2013 (UTC).

Thanks Bishonen. I do not remember where but I remember that I had read somewhere that the articles are named by the real name of the person and not with devi, baba etc. I had seen the article of Shri_Mataji_Nirmala_Devi which redirects to Nirmala Srivastava.

I am aware that this cannot be the rationalization of my edits and I agree that I should have read talk pages in detail before cut pasting the content. Thanks. --Abhijeet Safai (talk) 10:58, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Cool, but please note that you should never do it by copypasting, no matter if it's an excellent move that everybody agrees with. Always do it by using the "move" tab. If the move tab doesn't work, that's a sign you need to ask an admin to do the move, and this you do on the page Wikipedia:Requested moves. Feel free to take the Nirmal Baba/Nirmaljeet Singh Narula issue there. (The move tab won't in fact work for non-admin editors now, since the redirect has been edited.) Bishonen | talk 11:08, 6 June 2013 (UTC).

It is really great to see your response. I shall do that as time permits. Thanks. --Abhijeet Safai (talk) 11:35, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

.ANI

Well said. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:53, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, and useful to have that link here. Please click on it, dear talkpage stalkers! Go vote! Bishonen | talk 11:00, 6 June 2013 (UTC).

Ima trock you for blolling. Drmies (talk) 10:49, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

was gonna vote, but it got locked... -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 01:54, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Kåldolmar

Hi! Is this a possible reference for citation needed to Swedish cuisine's kåldolmar +...http://sverigesradio.se/sida/avsnitt/123552?programid=3052  ??? Hafspajen (talk) 12:50, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I think you want to reference the Charles XII history behind the dish, right? Your link is OK, I suppose, but here's a better one from Svenska Dagbladet 2012. Newer and with fuller historical background. Bishonen | talk 13:34, 6 June 2013 (UTC).

• • Looks fun! Warrington (talk) 13:06, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

[/me is combobulated by the timestamps.] Time travel? Bishonen | talk 17:10, 6 June 2013 (UTC).

Stolen wholescale from this edit, but forgot to cut off the timestamp and replace with ~~~~~. Famously Technical 01:16, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Murder of Travis Alexander

Hi, I am not really involved in the dispute but I have noticed that an article that I have contributed alot too has been the subject of a dispute for a few days. It is a user named Geebee that runs a pro-Jodi website of somekind that has heavily edited the article, and it seems that alot of Pro-Jodi Arias stuff has been inserted. The user is showing the telling characteristics of someone who wants to "win the discussions" as evident on the users extensive use of the talk page. Similar to the user who wanted to edit Emmelie de Forests article. I am also wondering if Geebee has broken the 3RR, anywhow If you could take a look at it when you find time it would be appreciated. regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 14:38, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I've noticed the problem whereof you speak, but sorry, I can't face diving in there. The world is too much with me, and the way the user in question bloats up the history with myriad tiny edits is the last straw. You'll have to ask a younger and stronger admin. (hint hint hint try User:Drmies hint hint hint) Or take it to… arghhh… WP:dispute resolution. I'm sorry to have to give you that counsel of desperation, BabbaQ, I know dispute resolution with POV-pushers is a waste of time. But then POV-pushers are altogether favoured by the way Wikipedia works, as eloquently expressed by User:MastCell here: "our current system gives filibuster power to anyone with an Internet connection and an obsessive pet belief". Bishonen | talk 15:38, 7 June 2013 (UTC).

I totally understand you my friend. I am also tired of the Jodi Arias situation, and wouldnt have bothered you with it if not another user had sent me a PM last night and asked me for advice. I have created an article about a more happy event that might give you some "happy energy" ;), Wedding of Princess Madeleine of Sweden and Christopher O'Neill.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:20, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Very nice, looks really good. Did you see that we have an admittedly not very good piccy of the pair together here? It's already been mined for this, and could suitably be chopped in half, removing Victoria and Unknown Gentleman, for use on your new article, if you like (and if you know how, because I don't). Bishonen | talk 18:28, 7 June 2013 (UTC).

Thanks a lot, Bishzilla. Let's see who brings me up next for admin abuse. A day's worth of protection for Trayvon Martin almost got me desysopped. For some real fireworks of the completely unencyclopedic kind, see 2013 protests in Turkey, one of whose editors kindly inquired if I was "the Gestapo of Wikipedia". Drmies (talk) 16:49, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Well... Aren't you? :p J/K Technical 13 (talk) 17:12, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

• Bish, seriously for a minute (RAWR!), what are we going to do with Trial by media? At best, it's a poorly verified List of trials by media. Drmies (talk) 17:33, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

[Bishonen is too busy trying to understand the "are you the Wikipedia Gestapo" edit. Mutters:] Ik gebruik alle bronnen door elkaar, als ze elkaar tegenspreken behandel ik beide… ok… "I use all brown door elks"… aha… "when the elks use sign language"… yeah, this is tricky. Terrible article, I suggest AfD. [Misströstar.] AfD is overrun by defenders of terrible articles. Is anything actually really deleted, ever? I created a joke list in 2005 or whenever it was, to make a point. It's been AfD'd at least twice but there's no getting rid of the sucker. In the latest AfD, I voted "speedy delete" and explained that I'd created it as an irresponsible joke. No soap, it remains an ornament to the project. Bishonen | talk 18:13, 7 June 2013 (UTC).

When they contradict each other, he uses both. Apparently. Those two "rewarded" articles are wonderful. Drmies (talk) 19:05, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

The elks contradict each other? Worse and worse. Yeah, the second AfD is certainly a reminder of the light, carefree days. You see even NYB kidding around in there? In other news, I'm helping you stub that school article. :-) Very hardworking admin, me! Bishonen | talk 19:47, 7 June 2013 (UTC).

Many thanks

Thank you very much Bish. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 23:32, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

A pleasure. When I arrived at the page in question with every intention of blocking, you had already posted a warning there. Everybody works faster than me. Man, edit warring on Requests for page protection has to be pretty unusual. I just sent you an e-mail. (P.S. Do you really hate Korea? :-)) Bishonen | talk 23:37, 7 June 2013 (UTC).

Thanks for the email. I replied. As far as posting the warning faster than you, I think you were so fast at stopping this disruption that you traveled back in time and caught me giving the warning. At least that's how I see it. :) As far as the claim by the sock, I guess to love Korea you must dump as much unsourced crap as you can in any K-pop article you visit. Somehow i don't see this as such a great idea. Take care Bish. :) Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 00:14, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

IPV6 addresses

The IPv6 user has moved over to Blacklight power: [30] since your page protection of Energy catalyzer, IRWolfie- (talk) 23:57, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I'm really tired of playing block-a-mole with them, so I'll just semi that one as well. Though I don't doubt that there are other related articles... sigh. I'm going to bed now, so you'd better alert some other admin if you see the IP hopper soon again somewhere else. Incidentally, RexxS told me it's easy to block the whole range for the IPV6 addresses — but no, I go sleeeeeeep. Bishonen | talk 00:09, 8 June 2013 (UTC).

In this case, the rangeblock would be a rather wide range (/40), so this would not be an easy block to make without possible collateral damage.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:33, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Jasper. This stuff is really a morass to me. Hello, User:RexxS? Ping ping? Got any comment? Bishonen | talk 12:47, 8 June 2013 (UTC).

I was going to ask about an IP6 range block, but I don't understand IP6 that well. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:37, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the club. I don't understand range blocks, period. Bishonen | talk 19:43, 8 June 2013 (UTC).

I have a guide at User:Jasper Deng/IPv6 and mw:Help:Range blocks/IPv6.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:56, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Bish, reading up on CIDR might help you understand how ranges and range-blocks work. Technical 13 (talk) 19:58, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry I wasn't around, Chère; I was in Lincoln this weekend, retiring from trusteeship of WMUK. And now I'm going to take a break - do look after the place while I'm away. --RexxS (talk) 12:47, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

[Darwinbish proudly expands her tiny chest, files her gleaming teeth to needlepoints, is prepared for anything.] Don't worry, Famously! darwinbish ^BITE ☠ 17:09, 9 June 2013 (UTC).

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Föreningen Vetenskap och Folkbildning may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:25, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

[Bishonen pets the good bot. Darwinbish bites it shrewdly on the ass.] Thank you, BracketBot. Bishonen | talk 19:42, 9 June 2013 (UTC).

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of whistleblowers may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• {| class="wikitable sortable"
• UMDNJ Human Resources Department, UMDNJ Department of Informations Systems and Technology] Six months after the University "resolved the issue with Mr. Nappe", several of Nappe's

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:25, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

I already fixed the template I broke, you slow old bot. Bishonen | talk 20:29, 10 June 2013 (UTC).

LMAO! You get that bot told straight Bishonen. It is rather slow lately and annoying. Anyone thought of booting the bot up the cyber-ass to speed it up? While I'm here, I was wondering if I may run something past you, as I've had a bit of a brainwave idea what I'm not 100% sure if it would be good for a particular article that I am working avidly to improve. TB me when you have a spare moment. Thanks, Wesley♦Mouse 20:38, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Mouse, I would, but I notice that it's OGAE Video Contest 2008 you're working on, and, well the only subject I'm worse equipped to deal with than the Eurovision Song Contest and its fan club would be anything to do with sports. Sorry. Bishonen | talk 21:11, 10 June 2013 (UTC).

Oh its the main OGAE article that I was on about, not the Video Contest ones (I have those kinda sorted out). On the main OGAE one I have listed the members but only by bulletpoints. I was thinking of changing them into prose format to describe each of the respective branches (now that I've found the websites for all 39 of them, and would be able to write something based off their "about us" sections). Would that be better than having them listed in their current status? Wesley♦Mouse 21:18, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Putting lists into prose is always an attractive idea in general; lists are boring. Mind you, prosifying a bullet list of 39 sounds very ambitious. But I'd say go for it. Bishonen | talk 21:32, 10 June 2013 (UTC).

'Tis a sad day when interacting with BracketBot is actually more fulfilling and productive than interacting with 95% of the active Wikipedia community. MastCell ^Talk 20:41, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

That's as may be, MastCell, but do you know what's the most fulfilling and… uh… [stumbles at "productive"] well, exhilarating, thing you can do on Wikipedia? Removing content. There's nothing like it. Check it out: Tempur-Pedic was 14,000 characters a few hours ago, and is now 3,500, and I feel full of endorphins. Btw I can imagine removing stuff from medical articles feels even better. Bishonen | talk 21:11, 10 June 2013 (UTC).

help

Hi my dear friend.

Could you please make me understood of this text. would you mind to paraphrase that. thanks a million. please use positive verb in the last sentence. << The study indicated that greater boredom in year seven predicted significantly less satisfaction at year 16. In addition, greater satisfaction in year seven did not significantly predict less boredom in year 16. >> Alborzagros (talk) 12:45, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Could you please give me a link to where the text is to be found, whether it's on Wikipedia or elsewhere? I'll probably understand it better if I have context for it. Bishonen | talk 14:28, 11 June 2013 (UTC).

hi, here you can see this. [31] Alborzagros (talk) 05:37, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

OK, cool, that helps. I'd put it like this: "The study showed that the participants who were bored in year seven were significantly less likely than the other participants to be satisfied with their marriage in year 16. It also showed that if participants were satisfied in year seven, it didn't make any difference to how bored they felt in year 16." Does that make sense? I don't blame you for having trouble with it. They've put two sentences about two different results together in one paragraph, and the second result is even a bit of a surprise in relation to the first. But the key, I suppose, is that the researchers have treated dissatisfaction and boredom as completely different things. Bishonen | talk 16:24, 12 June 2013 (UTC).

Thank dear friend. you are really a great man. you kindly put into enough time to answer me. You made me freshened up by your reply. I got at new information about this psychological issue and you pointed new keys out to sort out my misunderstanding. I have never pulled back to consult with you because of your informative knowledge and I am impatiently holding on for coming across new problem in English Translation in order to come back to your wisdom. This answer was a good opportunity for me to practice my new learnt phrasal verbs. thanks good wishes. Alborzagros (talk) 07:51, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

That's great, feel free to come back with new problems. (Note: you couldn't know, but I'm a great lady, not a great man. ) Bishonen | talk 09:56, 13 June 2013 (UTC).

Hi again. sorry lady. In Persian Wikipedia (my first and mother language) 99% are male and you seldom find a lady!!! that is a reality not kidding. so i thought you were a boy! Alborzagros (talk) 10:19, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Temporary Full protection

Hi! Please take a look into the article Stranded Pakistanis. Some editors are continuously removing the contents just to win over this AfD. The reason of the AfD is that the contents of the article Persecution of Biharis in Bangladesh largely overlaps with Stranded Pakistanis and is also a POV fork. The revision prior to the Afd should be restored and should remain fully protected till the AfD closes.--Zayeem ^(talk) 14:16, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't think so, really. I understand your frustration, but moving on to an individual admin's talkpage while you still have a live request at Requests for page protection smacks of Forum shopping. Also it's not the kind of subject I have any expertise in, so I wouldn't take action in any case. Sorry. (If an admin declines the request at RFPP, you can then try to discuss with that admin on their user talk, if you like.) Bishonen | talk 14:26, 11 June 2013 (UTC).

Hi1

I think you missunderstood my intention. The comment on Rich Farmbrough was mine, I just added a change to my own comment. Under Wikipedia rules and guidelines I am allowed to change my own comment. Next time look at history, my user name pops up there, unless you track it by IP... I thank you in advance for understanding, if not, we will talk somewhere else...--Mishae (talk) 17:56, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh, good. Not sure what you mean by "track it by IP"; I tracked it by the page history. That particular comment was added by an IP here, and here you edited it 12 hours later, logged in as Mishae. An explanation in the edit summary is helpful under those circumstances. Well, edit summaries altogether are helpful, and signatures. If you sign with four tildes, you will get both a signature and a datestamp, as here on my page; it you sign with five, as I think you may have done on Rich's page, you just get the date. Bishonen | talk 18:37, 11 June 2013 (UTC).

Yep, thats exactly what I did, I signed with 5 yesterday, and then wanted to add something in a rush. I'm sorry for any missunderstanding...--Mishae (talk) 19:41, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Croton Aqueduct

What do you make of the Talk:Croton Aqueduct situation? Curb Chain and the Deutsche Telecom IP(s) were adamant about being two different persons in the discussion there; one of IPs even notified Curb Chain on his talk page [32]. WP:SPI will probably refuse to connect them because the disruption wasn't extraordinary. But the coincidences in their other editing interests: at BRIC [33] (a recurring editing interest of Curb Chain, who edited it around that time too [34]) and also flags in general [35] [36] (a more minor interest of Curb Chain) are weird. There are a bunch of other people who agree with Curb Chain on the spacing issue, so maybe it is someone else despite these other coincidences... What do you think? (This is also an ongoing issue: the IPs keep doing that, the most recent edit of that kind from the that Deutsche Telecom range was yesterday [37]. It has also been going on for a long time [38] [39] [40] [41]. An ideal use of a dynamic IP, especially one from a huge range, is apparently enforcing one's aesthetic standards on random articles, without contributing anything more substantial to them... I wonder if this is one of those editors banned for using unapproved bots. It's hard to imagine how they find so many articles containing HTML comments in such a short time span by regular editing...) 86.121.18.17 (talk) 07:09, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Nobody asked me to comment here, but I will anyways, since I feel at the very least that I've said more than enuff at AN/I (a 1st time forum for me that I'm still no where near comfortable being at BTW). As our Romanian IP address editor has said already noted there at AN/I recently "Curb Chain has probably been editing for a substantial amount of time before his current account. His invocation of 'wp:nsr' and 'flagcruft' in the first few edits points in that direction", there's really never has been any doubt in my mind that the Curb Chain (CC) account wasn't this editor's first Wikipedia account. Is it an attempt at making a "clean start", a sockpuppet, a meatpuppet, a "band hand" account, etc.? I really have no idea. I do have (a very limited but) enuff experience in with dealing with sockpuppets to know that the Checkuser's (for some reason that I don't understand fully) really can't connect IP address users to full Wikipedia accounts. It's also not unusual for sockpuppets to make talk page posts on each other's talk pages to try & throw people off. Is CC really from Germany, is CC using a dynamic IP address, is CC trying to hide his identity somehow, etc.? Again, I really have no idea. Those two German IP addresses from the above-mentioned aquedeuct talk page have made only a few dozen edits at best on Wikipedia and CC has made over 18,000 edits. What is also apparent to me at this late date though is that CC has basically been editing Wikipedia for quite some time without really a clue of how to do so constructively. Guy1890 (talk) 10:04, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

I really think this needs to go on WP:SPI. I haven't heard that they can't connect IPs to name accounts — surely they can. The Checkusers may not be very interested in the evidence that Curb Chain wasn't a new account, though; it's persuasive, but they simply don't much care if it wasn't new when it started. (They can't check that far back, anyway.) What they care about is abusive use of socks, such as pretending to be more than one person in a discussion to give the impression of more support for a position than actually exists. 86.121.18.17, if that's what happened on the talkpage you mention, I'd definitely take it to WP:SPI. That is precisely abusive sockpuppeting, and you have a lot of points and diffs showing same unusual interests, etc. I see you provide some more on ANI. (Don't talk to me about Bishzilla, she'm about to explode with conceit.)[42]

@Guy: you did fine on ANI. If it hadn't been for you, nothing would have happened. Now maybe something will. But I totally agree that you don't need to comment further there. Admins are both busy and lazy; the longer a thread is, the less likely they are to read it. Bishonen | talk 11:51, 16 June 2013 (UTC).

Well, as an IP editor it turns out that I can't start a SPI page. My time is limited, but the DT IPs must know that what they are doing is at least a little controversial, because in some cases they have been reverted, and the IPs reverted back; Special:Contributions/91.10.19.237 has done a lot of those. Good luck. 86.121.18.17 (talk) 11:58, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh crap. You know a lot more about it — I've never edited any of those pages. But I'll try to fashion an SPI report, if I get the time for it a little later. (UNLESS A NICE TALKPAGE STALKER WOULD LIKE TO TAKE CARE OF IT HINT HINT, or Guy.) Bishonen | talk 13:26, 16 June 2013 (UTC).

Maybe it's that the Checkuser's can't connect different individual IP addresses together...I forget exactly. My "experience" at SPI really includes only assisting at SPI in the identification of a small group of sockpuppets after a rather lengthy (month plus unfortnately) set of discussions at AfD, MfD & DRV. What we really appear to have documented above & currently at AN/I appears to be mostly a bunch of (closely-related?) IP addresses (that only have maybe a few hundred edits under their belts collectively) oddly focusing on spacing issues (some involving flags) & empty subheadings in various Wikipedia articles. I've yet to see enuff evidence of Curb Chain's editing patterns to connect CC with these various IP addresses. I'm not saying that those diffs don't exist...I just haven't seen them yet. What appears to be more likely is that maybe someone (CC?) is doing a lot of these odd edits while logged out (maybe while using a dynamic IP address?), which is something that I think that I've seen dealt with more at AN/I than at SPI (I might be mistaken about that though). In any event, the Checkusers have a job that I don't envy at all. The standard at SPI appears to be pretty high, and, unless you can connect an account with a known group of already-identified sockpuppets, you basically need to spoon feed (for lack of a better term) the Checkusers a whole set of diffs that specifically show a consistent pattern of very, very similar edits over time. Guy1890 (talk) 18:42, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

If it is of any help, Curb Chain has also been removing HTML comments, and more generally spaces of all kinds. Those between the last line of text (external links, references, etc.) and the navboxes are a sizable percentage of the vertical whitespaces he pruned; around 300-400 such edits by edit summary alone. He doesn't seem to care by what technical means the space was added. A small sample: [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49]. 86.121.18.17 (talk) 20:58, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi2

I want to make you aware of that IP 87.232.1.48 and I had a dispute before the IP was blocked three months ago. The first thing the IP now is doing is following my edits around apparently. I will assume good faith but I have no interest in engaging with the IP further as he brings up my bad sides. I dont know how to handle this without being "the bad user that attacks the IP". In the last few hours the IP has edited Miss World Sweden, the Jodi Arias: Dirty Little Secret article and the film articles AfD and Yohios talk page. Especially the edit/revert on Miss World Sweden seems to have been made only to try to get some sort of reaction from me. And I know that all IPs and users are entitled to edit any article they like, but I feel that doing edits to simply possibly provoke a reaction is unecessary and on verge of Wikihounding. I could be wrong but I have this distinct feeling as the user has except for one edit only edited articles that I have edited within a short period of time before the user returned, and it was exactly unfortunatly what I expected would happen. All I want now is for the IP and myself to move on and try to be productive only, right now I feel the IP is heading towards wanting a new edit-war for some reason. Regards, --BabbaQ (talk) 21:25, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Another admin has taken the time to look at it. But if you feel that anymore actions needs to be taken then do that but otherwise I consider this case closed unless the IP tries anymore tactics. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 02:53, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't around, Babba. But that was a very nice forceful warning from Blade! It should work, and if it doesn't, more can be done. Bishonen | talk 12:14, 17 June 2013 (UTC).

Bad unblock?

Per WP:3RR, administrators can block for less than 3 reverts in a 24 hour period, and that seems reasonable given that the user in question had previously been blocked twice for edit warring. Also, per WP:TOOLMISUSE, there's not an obvious reason why consultation was not sought before the unblock. I think you owe User:Bbb23 an apology for that unblock without consultation, even though it does seem you were looking for a strict 3RR violation, which needn't have existed in the first place to prompt a block. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 07:34, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

It was certainly a bad block in the first place, and I note that the admin involved has failed to comply with the policy requirement "to respond promptly and civilly to queries about their Wikipedia-related conduct and administrator actions and to justify them when needed." Which speaks for itself. Tony (talk) 09:44, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

• It seems JC believes I deserved the block. But then he and I have never been great friends. ;-) -- Ohc ^¡digame!_{¿que pasa?} 09:50, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Nor have he and I, but thanks for telling me your opinion, JClemens. I explained to Bbb23 why I didn't have time to consult, and he still isn't around, so if I'd waited for a response I'd still be waiting. Or rather Ohconfucius would, which I don't see as a good thing, considering all the circumstances. Asking people to apologize to other people is a foolish pursuit in my opinion, however popular on Wikipedia, and so is informing experienced users of the content of well-known policies such as WP:3RR and Wikipedia:Administrators. I've been an admin here since before you made your first edit. Don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs. I suppose I'd better link that phrase, since I nearly got blocked for personal attacks by an eager young admin last time I used it. Bishonen | talk 13:10, 17 June 2013 (UTC).

• And about User:Bbb23, am I supposed to assume good faith? I'm more inclined to say it looks like they intended for me to stew. Blocked me and didn't respond to my unblock request for NINE HOURS (and still hasn't, BTW), and then disappears for the next TWELVE. -- Ohc ^¡digame!_{¿que pasa?} 13:33, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

admins are people too. he may have real life stuff going on, unless he is editing elsewhere, in which case, not responding is not OK. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 13:45, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

• Now let's see... the block was placed at 15:58, 16 June 2013 (UTC); unblock request was posted at 16:07, 16 June 2013 (UTC). Bbb23 was online until 00:59, 17 June 2013 (UTC), and made 35 edits in the intervening time. No time to review my block request? Makes you wonder... -- Ohc ^¡digame!_{¿que pasa?} 14:06, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

No, you've got it wrong, Oh. It's not the blocking admin that's supposed to review the block, it's somebody uninvolved. I'm sorry that took so long; I should have thought it was usually quicker. But I don't work Category:Requests for unblock in a general way, so I don't know much about it. Bishonen | talk 15:06, 17 June 2013 (UTC).

• Ah, I take it back. I didn't know the system had broken down. But it was a long wait, and the furore plus impatience got the better of me. -- Ohc ^¡digame!_{¿que pasa?} 16:46, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks, Bish. And Aunva is right: we shouldn't assume to know why Bbb isn't around: it might be disappointing at the moment, but s/he should be given the benefit of the doubt. In any case, we should all resume our profiles of getting on with each other for a larger benefit. Cheers all. Tony (talk) 15:10, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

  Our profiles of getting on with each other..? [Darwinbish is nonplussed. Her profile don't look nothing like that.] darwinbish ^BITE ☠ 15:58, 17 June 2013 (UTC).

  Darwinbish...you've evolved!--MONGO 17:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Bishonen, I left a detailed reply on my talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:13, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Hum...your comment "Notice: If another admin wants to comment on this topic, they may. Any non-admin comments will be reverted regardless of their merit" is troubling. You're a better admin than that I know...you should expect to get grilled from time to time on admin actions and that isn't just for other admins to do. While I respect your right to manage your talkpage as you see fit and also don't think a flame war is helpful, declaring that non-admin comments will be reverted...regardless of their merit...is troubling.--MONGO 02:04, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Least you stick to your guns and enforce the rule on that topic.[50].--MONGO 02:11, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

• Indeed. Of course BB can manage their talk page as they see fit, but I also find it astonishing that they would make such a proclamation. Let's see, they used it as justification for removal of my comment. Like "this is a purely admin matter and is none of the fucking business of you mere mortals". I have every confidence Bishzilla will know how to handle it. -- Ohc ^¡digame!_{¿que pasa?} 02:17, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

• Well..If Bbb23 just wants to have the dialogue between themself and Bish then all he had to do was say that's what he wanted. I also think the block was improper/unnecessary.--MONGO 02:24, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

• I've been forbidden to post on Bbb's talk page. Yet my problem was that Bbb doesn't comply with the admin policy concerning communicating with editors about his admin actions. Just doesn't want to know. OK. Tony (talk) 02:51, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

• Tony1, Ohconfucius and MONGO are unworthy! Maybe he's just trying to keep it a one on one dialogue...maybe.--MONGO 02:58, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Shameless canvasing

Hey Bishonen, I saw your funny but actually serious thread in the AN archives, "Civility blocks are sexy, articles are boring." In that spirit, do you think you could look, as an uninvolved admin, at the Johnvr4 situation recently archived here. Discussion has petered out on ANI, but the content troubles have been going on for a year... I have also pinged User:Mark Arsten. 86.121.18.17 (talk) 21:28, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

The thing about civility blocks, I guess, is that everybody has an opinion about them. About content, only some people have an opinion; namely, people interested in and/or knowledgeable about the specific kind of content. Nobody's interested in all kinds of content. So… take me. While I'm generally interested in American politics, as so many people are around the world, many aspects of it are as a closed book to me, from ignorance and from, well, disinterest. I suppose that's partly personal, but in good measure from my not being an American. You can probably guess where I'm going? Yeah… amongst the many, many things I'm ignorant about, the subjects and especially the conspiracy theories covered in Operation Red Hat rank quite highly. I went look, but I just couldn't get my head round it.

(Later.) After reading the deletion discussion, I understand that my incomprehension of the article comes only partly from my own stupidity. I admit I'm relieved. (And I found a cool essay there, WP:TNT.:-)) Well, Operation Red Hat's been deleted, never mind about that. I understand you're worried about the user's continued editing, maybe especially Project 112. (Good tags! They reminded me of the useful coatrack essay, that I'd forgotten about.)

No… sorry. I really am sorry, because I can see how hard you're working with this. But I don't have the energy, or the will, to handle an obsessive SPA who first talks all the hind legs off of all the donkeys and then fucking copypastes the goings-on all over the place. I dealt with such a user once, in early 2011, and I'm still in fucking recovery, even though other people did most of the heavy lifting. And that was in a field I like and understand!

If the topic ban question comes up on a board again, I have now read enough background to post a brief supporting opinion. But beyond that, I got nothing. :-( I wish you luck.

Crying is OK here.

P.S. Oh god. [/me sees Balph Eubank in there. Starts to tear out her hair in clumps.] Bishonen | talk 23:18, 19 June 2013 (UTC).

LOL, don't go into PTSD over this. I suppose these guys fall in MastCell's 85%, although somewhere toward the tail. 86.121.18.17 (talk) 01:24, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

In the meantime, I'm starting to get feelings of déjà vu whenever I edit anything about CBW. Latest [51]. 86.121.18.17 (talk) 21:29, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Okinawa...? arghh... then comes my fit again: I had else been perfect, whole as the marble, founded as the rock. [Shivers.] Bishonen | talk 22:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC).

Part 2

There's now an arbcom case request about the contamination of Earth with Mars bacteria (as if ...) pitting someone who might fit your definition of "obsessive SPA", not surprisingly supported by another editor endorsing a sandsteinean approach to dispute resolution (meaning based on superficial civility). Someone not using his real name (talk) 19:04, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Kiefer.Wolfowitz' block

(I've copied this post of mine from Geni's page, since he replied here, and it must be hard to follow for others.) You're wheel-warring with me, Geni. And why did you even bother to block the e-mail? As far as I can see, he doesn't have e-mail enabled in the first place. I wasn't aware of that, but discovered it when I tried to e-mail him to say that I'd restored it. (See, I preferred to do that by e-mail since posting "openly" on KW's bedlam of a page means being moved around, recombined, re-headlined, deleted, collapsed, or any combination of them, and I don't fancy it.) You know you're not supposed to wheel-war, right? Bishonen | talk 12:34, 20 June 2013 (UTC).

You know you aren't meant to undo another admin's blocks without first contacting them right?Geni (talk) 12:37, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

How predictable of you to say that, Geni. I'm disappointed. Anyway, I'm sure you're aware that you're the one that crossed a bright line, not me. Bishonen | talk 12:40, 20 June 2013 (UTC).

Also, could you please respond to my other question? Did he have e-mail at all, when you blocked it? I don't think so, but there may be something technical here that I'm missing. I'm asking because I'd really like to know; it would allow to me to draw a conclusion. (About his actions, not yours.) Now that you've posted here, I'd prefer if you kept anything further here, too. Bishonen | talk 12:51, 20 June 2013 (UTC).

• Just a quick note that although KW does not accept emails, he is able to send them. The way to check this is to look at the note on the email user function "This user has chosen not to receive email from other users." - means a user has an email address accepted by the software, but chooses not to receive email. They can still send it. Worm^TT(talk) 13:03, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

• Oh, that explains it. Thanks, Wyrm. Bishonen | talk 13:11, 20 June 2013 (UTC).

Post from new user moved from the top of the page

TO BISHONEN FROM MEDIA PIONEER: The living person referenced in Joshua DuBois fluff biased posting has clearly implied that he has a degree in theology or divinity from a reputable university (such as Princeton). R U disagreeing that Princeton is not "reputable"? So a statement about what this person has "Not" done by failing to having any education or degree in theology, divinity Bible History, Bible Archaeology, Hebrew or Koinea Greek (which are all basic minimum studies required to be a reputable minister or rabbi)is paramount to demonstrating to the readers of Wiki that this living person has educational qualifications commensurate with a politician but not of a minister. If you are an atheist that may demonstrate why you give so little credence to a proper degree in ones occupation. Finally, the exact QUOTE which was fully and properly reference about this persons "Tweet" had been published for quiet a while and demonstrates the tone and motives of the living person and his politically correct agenda, which if you would study the subject is NOT a part of his African Methodist-Episcopal background. Nor is it of his late father. Your block was intentionally malicious and most likely you are a biased friend, associate or Democrat trying to re-write history more favorable to your political interests. Shame on you! Mediapioneer (talk) 13:01, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Curb Chain

Beware of the skvader, it may be a sex symbol.

This edit suggests he's not getting the scope of the topic ban. Perhaps because the article doesn't have the word "List" in the title? postdlf (talk) 16:33, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

That article's type is a chimera, in the original sense of the word. (Romanians have a funny portmanteau for that made out of combining ostrich and camel; and there was even a debate as to whether it should be in the dictionary given how widespread it is: www.romlit.ro/struocmila) Anyway, the suggestion made on talk to chop out the giant list is a good one. 86.121.18.17 (talk) 17:50, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

A lion, a snake, and a goat. OK… got it. I shall think of it as a skvader (hare + grouse). Thanks for keeping an eye out, Postdlf. I've written to Curb Chain. I can see this topic ban coming back to bite me on the ass again and again, what fun... [Imagines a combination of an oyster and a camel. No, that wasn't it.] Bishonen | talk 18:28, 20 June 2013 (UTC).

A Jackalope perhaps? — Ched :  ?  18:42, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the trip through the Looking Glass you take when dealing with this editor. Email me if you start developing nervous tics or heart palpitations... Montanabw^(talk) 19:34, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Happy birthday

... and amen to whatever Scandanavian gibberish has replaced my words of wisdom (temporarily, one would assume) atop your talk page. MastCell ^Talk 00:17, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Ethereal gossamer words about the magic June night. Intoxicating spells, I assure you. Just don't run them through Google translate if you don't want the magic to turn into a series of bishzilla-grunts and comic pratfalls. No, they won't be here for long, but, uh, your...mmm...words of wisdom, haven't they had their week in the sun? Bishonen | talk 01:03, 21 June 2013 (UTC).

"Gibberish"? A quality distinct from the phonological plainness of English. But don't the Danes say that Swedish sounds like Danish spoken with porridge in yer mouth? How rude. Tony (talk) 01:37, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Hah. Thanks for gratifying my unreasonable egotism. Take that, Harry Martinson! MastCell ^Talk 20:30, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Just in case ...

... there's a connection between your "motto" and your real life ...

HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU!!! .. and I figure with the you, the twins, 'Zilla, Bish and chips, and the plushie maker .. there's a 6:365 chance one of you is close to such a joyful day. — Ched :  ?  01:58, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for the attention, guys. If you track the socks through their logs, Ched, for instance [52], you'll see that the twins were born 19 October, Pod 5 July, and so on. And if you count all the plushies so diligently sewn by Yomangani and Pod, we were probably born on every day of the year! But my birthday is on the magic, dappled, sleepless, longest day of the year: 20 June. There's not technically "midnight sun" here, but it sure as hell doesn't get dark. Juni natt blir aldrig av: the June night never comes, it looks more like a dewy day. Bishonen | talk 05:31, 21 June 2013 (UTC).
  • 祝你生日快乐！ You'll have to tell me your fun IKEA-related interpretations of those. :-) Heimstern Läufer (talk) 06:30, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

• Hey, you've sent me the seasonal dance around the maypole performed on my birthday, how thoughtful! In kanji form! (That's as far as Bishzilla's understanding of the matter goes, but I suppose the characters are actually Chinese and called something else?) [/me reads the rather fun Maypole dance article. Could it be that I'm being "an exceptionally poor researcher" like Alexander Hislop?] Just look at the feet of the person near the left edge (second from the left? the crowd's a bit of a blur just there): that's dancing! I don't know that there's traditionally a herald with a staff involved, like your guy second from the right, but there almost ought to be; he looks very fine. The maypole itself in the middle is perfect, there's even a wreath on one of the arms (compare the photo). If I might be critical of just one thing, it's the slightly intrusive furniture. Make fun of my IKEA interpretations all you want, but the chest of drawers just doesn't make sense to me. I suppose it's "symbolism", that catch-all? Are the drawers to be thought of as containing the brännvin and hotdogs? Anyway, most kind, little Heim! Bishonen | talk 11:00, 21 June 2013 (UTC).

• They're called "hanzi" in Chinese, but that word is a cognate of "kanji" and are in fact writtent the same way (much as "light" and the German "Licht" are cognates, and if those words were written using ideograms rather than phonetically, they might might be written the same way but pronounced differently). And no, not making fun of the IKEA interpretations, I just think they're fun! I'm not sure they ever completely make sense, even when you can read them, but they are the way the language is written, like it or not! If you ever really want to know how Chinese characters are formed, I could tell you, but probably better to use email, as it'd be really long. Or you could just read Chinese character! Heimstern Läufer (talk) 15:03, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

• Having some hazy notion of maybe two or three kanji, from Bishzilla and my son, I have an idea that the chest of drawers may in actuality mean the sun. Does it? Then it would fit just excellently with the other dancers in the summer solstice celebrations. ^_^ Bishonen | talk 16:57, 21 June 2013 (UTC).

• Yup, that's the original meaning, but in modern Chinese, it's come to mean "day" instead. Hence it being related to birthdays. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 04:05, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Check it out, talkpage stalkers!

Hey, folks, you remember Bishonen's rather bland compliment switch at the top of this page, that she used for saying something ingratiating to her visitors? Boring. Check out the new improved switch on my page! :D darwinbish ^BITE ☠ 19:44, 21 June 2013 (UTC).

List of blues rock musicians

The article The Reformation has been deleted. Do you think you could remove that entry (and its annotations) on that list page? It occurs twice.Curb Chain (talk) 02:04, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Can you remove The Blue (rapper) and "Phoenix Orion" on List of alternative hip hop artists?Curb Chain (talk) 02:47, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, no. You're banned from the topic of lists broadly construed. Apparently now I have to tell you that the ban also applies to user talkpages. Please don't try to make an end run round your ban by asking others to edit for you. Lists are off limits for you on all pages. Bishonen | talk 22:14, 22 June 2013 (UTC).

More on a certain user already mentioned on this page

As it is apt to be deleted on Curb's page, as the blocking admin (I think you're the blocking admin, I want to copy my comment at Curb Chain's talk here as well:

Puh-leese, Curb, don't play innocent, it doesn't become you. YOU are under restrictions for YOUr behavior and WP:OTHERSTUFF is irrelevant. You are an experienced user (especially factoring in your probable sock accounts) with a known record at AN, so don't claim you don't know how it works. Really, I actually can't decide which of your little ANI drahmahz is my favorite; the one from 2011, the famous one, this lame one, another lame onethe lamest one Montanabw^(talk) 21:33, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

• Curb Chain isn't blocked, they're topic banned (compare the section above). But I'm the one that closed the latest ANI discussion, formulated the topic ban, and registered it at Wikipedia:Editing restrictions, so in that sense I'm "it". Extensive link collection there! You're welcome to back up your post here. Perhaps a more informative header? Wikipedia is full of rabbit holes like a Swiss cheese. Bishonen | talk 22:19, 22 June 2013 (UTC).

• I stand corrected, at any rate, this isn't the first time that an admin who took action against CC has been accused of being involved precisely BECAUSE they took action against CC. Just letting you know. I could change the header to "through the [{Lewis Carroll|Looking Glass]]," ?? ;-) Montanabw^(talk) 17:28, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

• Just make it simple, horsey person. There, I fixed it for you. :-) Bishonen | talk 18:05, 24 June 2013 (UTC).

• LOL< that was precisely what I was trying to avoid... Montanabw^(talk) 21:33, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

• Oh crap, stupid me! There's already a section called Curb Chain higher up on this page! Such doubling can cause schizophrenia and dehydration of browsers. Changing again: how's this? More tactful, huh? (What can I tell you, people don't often come to teh bishonen looking for tact.) Bishonen | talk 22:00, 24 June 2013 (UTC).

• Just making a note here that the 91.x.x.x DT guy is almost certainly the same editor as Special:Contributions/79.223.4.134, who started one of those ANIs noted by Montanabw above; compare [53] with [54], [55] with [56], and [57] with [58]. DT apparently has more than one IP range, all of them huge (/10). 86.121.18.17 (talk) 06:39, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Heads-up

The 91 IP has come back to ANI: [59]. Someone not using his real name (talk) 19:00, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

OK, thank you. Not going to do anything about that, sorry. Bishonen | talk 21:17, 26 June 2013 (UTC).

Attack political party

With regard to your revision of Attack (political party) you have unsufficient grounds to prove this party far-right. I wonder where do you come from and what expertise do you have in political sciences and Bulgarian political life? I recommend that you better assess Attack´s political behavior rather than what is said and declared by them. A party calling for nationalization and entering under-table coalition with a minority party cannot be called far-right and there is not such an example in the political life of Europe nor in the world. If "Attack itself claims not to fit on the left-right scale" you should at least remove the "far right" behind ultra-nationalist and leave it as a point of discussion. I understand that there is a number of violations against the page but you cannot put reasonable comments and ammendments on side because of this. Many serios observeres in Bulgaria strongly disagree with what is Wikipedia saying about this article. BR, silversvile — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silversvile (talk • contribs) 12:07, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

The article talkpage is for discussing improvements to the article. I posted on talk when I edited, and invited you in my edit summary to come there also; perhaps you didn't notice. Please respond to me there, not here. By the way, you can sign your posts on talkpages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~. That'll turn automatically into your signature and a timestamp. Bishonen | talk 12:30, 24 June 2013 (UTC).

Barnstar magnifique

User: Penyulap created this magnificent barnstar specially for me, constructed the machinery, trained the hamsters. (I had to swing by his page and pick it up, for reasons known to those who know Penyulap.) Amazing work and great kindness! Thank you very much, Pen. [/me tries to pet the hamsters.] Gosh they're going fast, it might be better not to bother them. Bishonen | talk 20:54, 24 June 2013 (UTC).

Coolest barnstar ever. Looking at it put me back to kidhood. Most fitting choice of recipient. Poor 'Zilla and 'Pod, green with envy. ---Sluzzelin talk 03:24, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hehehe. It is, isn't it? And a shame about Pen's block. User:MONGO just referred to a barnstar he got (Hairy Shakespeare of the Woods Award) as the coolest ever. Guess what, Penyulap was involved there, too! I think it may be a draw, though the fairybread and hamsters absolutely take it away for childhood associations and for little legs blurry with speed. (As for the family, Zilla and Pod will get over it, but I fear for User:Darwinbish with her natural propensity for resentment and black bile. Emerald with envy!) Bishonen | talk 05:22, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

• Like — Ched :  ?  21:41, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Very nice. Let me watch … is it evening already?--Wehwalt (talk) 22:24, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Sock to block

[60] Staszek Lem (talk) 19:42, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

• Done. Thank you. Bishonen | talk 21:15, 25 June 2013 (UTC).

Will respond soon

I did see your very thought provoking post on PS's talk page. It's produced a great many ideas in my head, and I will respond ASAP. Best to the whole family as always. — Ched :  ?  18:54, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Provoking thought? Oh my...this could be interesting. And yeah, from my chair this has been interesting. Intothatdarkness 20:19, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, guys. If you think that's interesting, you should see this little lot. (In the admin talkpage history, it's today's edits that are of interest.) It's all done and dusted, I think, I'm not asking for input or anything. But what a disgraceful business. Bishonen | talk 20:30, 27 June 2013 (UTC).

Yeah. A touch too much of that kind of thing, IMO. But it does seem to be the accepted cost/way of doing business here. Doesn't make it right, mind, but closed societies tend to have their own mores and standards. Intothatdarkness 21:54, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Popping in real quick so this isn't archived. I'll resist the urge to stir any "adminy" drama stuff (there's certainly been no shortage of it). BUT ... the whole "Ched tries to be nice" thing: "moar, MOAR .. Feed me MOAR"!!! While I at times I may have the urge to attempt a go at "humble" ... I think I have the intestinal fortitude to resist that urge. I greatly appreciate the right honorable Ms. 'Shonen's view here. Especially as she has such a wide range of experience with her family. Little ankle biter can be rather blunt, while the twin brother and the plushie maker are the sweetest of souls. IMO Bishzilla is also very nice and kind, although she is not to be trifled with least her wrath be unleashed. (a good second choice for Admin. tools I think). Now Ms. 'Shonen herself tends to be on the kind and understanding side. VERY often a defender of the disadvantaged. Also, as an administrator she much check her emotions at the door and deal with things in a dispassionate and objective manner - so while I trust the "nice and kindness" is there, we don't always get a solid view of it. </me waves at Into on the way through - how ya doin buddy?> — Ched :  ?  15:27, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

[Bishzilla repeats her mantra: ] 'Shonen tetchy, difficult personality! Typical of her to criticise nice people! Easygoing 'Zilla obviously better admin! No worries archiving, little Ched. No busybody archive bots allowed on the Family's pages! [My god, she's started to spell Family with a capital F. This is worrying.] bishzilla _ROARR!! 17:44, 28 June 2013 (UTC).

</me sees the beautiful 'Zilla #1 on wiki, massive tail thumps and shakes the very earth> Oh Ms. 'Zilla .. you like little flower snack? Not filling meal, but good intentions. YES YES .. You be admin ... you be "founder" please. Like What you think about all the silly children running around? I see master begging for kudos ... lmao. He silly huh? My master very perplexed ... not sure what that mean ... but he really hard to understand. He seem sad, mad, discouraged, frustrated ... he silly. Hey .. what music you like? What movies you like? What color..... — ChedZILLA 19:00, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Zilla. Stop. And I mean stop NOW. Everyone is well aware of your infatuation with the honorable 'Zilla. I'm sorry to tell you this, but you are not the only one who finds the 'Zilla attractive. Floq's monster may be a bit upset with your overtures, as would be others. I allow you the space to post to Bishzilla's talk .. but if you're going to be a regular here - then work on articles. Do NOT clog up Ms. 'Shonen's talk page with your prattle. She has administrative duties to attend to, and I suspect that your foolish (yet honorable) interjections are not helpful. Got it? .... Sorry about my pet Bish. I'll try to do better at controlling him. — Ched :  ?  21:55, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

I know all about unmanageable pets. But the trouble is Bishzilla prefers dishonorable intentions. Even in the old days when she pined for Muzzy from a distance, she had a roving eye, and now she's impossible. Bishonen | talk 08:16, 29 June 2013 (UTC).

Dishonorable intentions? OH GOODIE .. me :-X — ChedZILLA 19:00, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

< /me places giant muzzle on Dino mouth before he makes an even bigger fool of himself> Sorry Ms. 'Shonen. I left the gate open again - and he got loose again. I think I'll have to buy a heavier chain. — Ched :  ?  19:02, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Crisco = Sock?

Bish, I sincerely hope you were joking with this edit summary. The removal was because of an edit conflict. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:11, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

I was. You're surely neither minion nor sock. But our wires must have got crossed a little; when I noted it on your page, I kind of expected you to fix it. No big deal, of course — it gave me the opportunity for one of my many untimely jests. Bishonen | talk 06:19, 28 June 2013 (UTC).

• Oh, sorry. I did poorly in pragmatics in school (thought you were just giving me a heads up) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Trust me Crisco - when Ms. 'Shonen feels the need to give anyone a "heads up" .. there's no ambiguity to it. :) — Ched :  ?  15:30, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Technical tps help please!

Help, help, Famously Technical seems to be on holiday! I tried to move the article about the book Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me) to the correct book title. Only the first part was italicized, and the parenthtesis not, as if it had been an article name of the type Amsterdam (novel). But I only made it worse; I guess plain old wikicode such as '' doesn't work for article names. (I think it does when I create articles, but not in moves, apparently.) Somebody fix, please?? Bishonen | talk 18:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC).

Unusual case, but easily fixed: the template needed to go after the Infobox, and a parameter was missing.[61] Happy editing, AGK [•] 18:35, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

A mistake was made :)

If you look at the articles about other famous books, you'll see that the italics effect is achieved with DISPLAYTITLE, e.g. {{DISPLAYTITLE:''Principia Mathematica''}}. Could you move Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me) back to its original location please? Thanks in advance, MartinPoulter (talk) 18:32, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Ah, just noticed your request above. Sounds like you need to put the request on Wikipedia:Requested moves. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 18:34, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Martin, I moved the article back just a moment before you left this message. Regards, AGK [•] 18:36, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Template..? OK. Thank you very much. A mistake was made by me; or, to weasel out of ever admitting such a thing (which is what the book is about): I took a shot in the dark. Compare my rather pessimistic log summary. Now please both go read the book, it's most enlightening. I have it here on my desk. :-) Bishonen | talk 18:46, 28 June 2013 (UTC).

• Checking AGK's edit here. Aha, I understand what went wrong to begin with, before I even got there. Stupid template saw the brackets and thought it was a title such as "Amsterdam (novel)". I learned something. Bishonen | talk 19:18, 28 June 2013 (UTC).

Got the book and love it: that's why I created a Wikipedia stub article about it. ;) Great work AGK for fixing this so quickly, and Bishonen for appropriately tentative edit summaries. Best wishes, MartinPoulter (talk) 13:21, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I see you did, nice job. And I note you also added the review from which I've picked my new admin motto (a quote from the book, of course) at the top of this page. :-) Bishonen | talk 14:27, 29 June 2013 (UTC).

Handsworth Wood

Thanks for protecting the article. I just sat on it on my watchlist rather than going to RFP because I thought it would be rejected for lack of frequency, so I'm glad that's one fewer thing to worry about. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:00, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, you're welcome. It wasn't that frequent, but it was pretty nasty vandalism, BLP-wise. We don't want it up for even a short while. Bishonen | talk 19:20, 29 June 2013 (UTC).

After more vandalism, protection was again declined at RFPP. Would you consider protecting again? (And if I've done wrong in coming to you after the request was declined, just ignore this message.) –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:06, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Bad timing part dieu

Hiya Bish....I gotta stop editing an article (which is essentially done anyway) and if you read what I already wrote here you might understand why...but its a somber issue for me right now...if you feel like fixing my usual sentence structure issues, feel free.--MONGO 00:49, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, what a dreadful thing. Sombre indeed. I was appalled when I saw it on the news here, but also surprised: how can such a thing happen today, in America? If it can, why doesn't it happen all the time, every year? I couldn't fathom it.

The irony of your fine new article is indeed the impression one takes away, from the section "Early 20th-century firefighting", that "Oh, that was then, it couldn't possibly happen today!" :-( I don't know what could be done about that impression, though, as the section is perfectly NPOV and factual. I'll ask the eagle-eyed Fr… oh no, he's been indeffed. :-[ I'll just take a little copy-editing look myself a bit later, I'm just going out. Bishonen | talk 13:15, 2 July 2013 (UTC).

Thanking and such

Hiya, Bishpack. Just swinging by on a rare down moment. Two questions...who is this Fr... you are referring to and why was he/she indeffed? And while looking through your logs to see if you were the one who did the indeffing, I noticed this: "10:53, June 29, 2013 Bishonen (talk | contribs) thanked Demiurge1000 (talk | contribs)". Wha, what? What is "thanking" someone all about? I don't think I have ever thanked anyone nor have I ever been thanked. How does one do that and what does the thanked person see when you do it? Inquiring minds want to know... Tex (talk) 18:34, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I indeffed Frutti di Mare, to MONGO's distress; they were pals. It's all User:Cassandra at the peak of her insanity's fault… long story. Indeffing him was a kind of compromise, because the CheckUsers wanted me to out him as a sock — which I didn't like to do, poor fellow — but I'd already retired him, for some good reasons that would take too long to enumerate, so blocking him hardly mattered.

Thanking is part of the new Notifications system. If you look closely at any page history, you'll see a new link at the end of each edit, labelled "thank". By clicking it, you thank the person for that particular edit. Wait, I'll thank you for your edit here right now; can you find it? :-) Bishonen | talk 19:38, 2 July 2013 (UTC).

(moving this to its own section so as to take the frivolousness away from MONGO's somber section.) Well, I'll be! I'll have to read up on poor Frutti. And thanks for the the thanks! It took a while, but I found it. Cool beans! Tex (talk) 19:44, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

See the Flesheating Bish eating pens!

Well, I see there's nothing to read up on. Poor Frutti...he will be missed. Anyway, enough playing around, I have work to do. Bye! Tex (talk) 19:53, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

My love to the ever-growing posse of babies. P.S., the simple way to find who indeffed a user, and to find the user's block log altogether, is to go to their contribs, like Frutti's here. Being an admin and also inquisitive, I probably do that ten times a day. Bishonen | talk 21:03, 2 July 2013 (UTC).

Since you've consigned FdM to the outer darkness, it's high time you addressed other phyla in your family tree: your socks are disturbingly biased in favor of vertebrates, or, depending on Darwinbish's species, chordates. At some risk of extreme obviousness, Bishobite hasn't been claimed yet. Acroterion (talk) 03:16, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

(The cladistics of the twins is a little intricate.) Bishobite, mm… pretty name. Bitey! The cute little twins Bishobite and Trilobish, perhaps. Though note that Little Stupid isn't allowed to create any more socks ever after the Darwinbish debacle. What about the whole neglected Plantae kingdom? [/me absentmindedly creates User:Flesheating Bish.] Bishonen | talk 10:12, 3 July 2013 (UTC).

A barnstar 2.0 for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Good job with copy editing the Blackwater fire of 1937. Odd to see something so major missing from Wikipedia, but nice to see an editor produce it, and another editor spit shine. AfadsBad (talk) 20:59, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

• And a third editor create a spin-off for an important concept in the article! That meshed very neatly. Bishonen | talk 21:06, 2 July 2013 (UTC).

• • That was rather fun. --AfadsBad (talk) 21:12, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

• Nice work all around! Many thanks Bish for the superb copyediting as usual.--MONGO 23:00, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Your comments

Bishonen, I saw your comment at the AN and didn't want to respond there. TP has convinced me that I've said far too much already. Boy, is that an understatement! Haha. Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that I was very hurt by your comments because before I read them I thought you were an absolute sweetheart and a wonderful admin. I can't remember exactly where I came across you, but I clearly remembered you as soon as I saw your name. I even saved your talk page and have a note that says, "Wondeful admin, so nice, very helpful!" Anyway, if you support sanctions against me that's fine, I would understand that. But the mocking tone of your comment and the fact that it alluded to my wife and kids was hard to read coming from someone as nice as you. Honestly, it shocked me when I saw it was you who wrote it. (I expect it from some of the others.) And just so you know, my wife didn't tell me to continue editing, she and my kids urged me to respond to the allegations. But regardless of what happens, I will not be editing once it's over, which I'm sure will be better for everyone involved. Anyway, your comments probably hurt me more than anyone else's because of the great amount of respect I always had for you. Have a good week. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 03:30, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

• "I always had for you"...hum...you mean since April? Did you know of Bishonen before under a different IP or maybe a username? Quick, show my comment to the wife and kids and see what they think you should say now.--MONGO 05:09, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

  Some of these are not this editor, but some are. 76, half your troubles here would disappear if you just created an account. Success (in any endeavour here) depends a lot on reputation. You can be a bit annoying. When someone without a reputation annoys others here, others will just assume the worst. With a name, you will build a reputation - for better or worse - and others will judge you on your history, not their fears. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 10:47, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

  Wow, Anthony, what a collection. So this is someone who had a pre-existing grudge against Andy? Funny how I kind of thought that might be the case. :-[ It's time this project started requiring its editors to create an account. Hasn't the theoretically very beautiful ideal of IPs being able to edit Wikipedia (most of them dynamic, usually through no fault of their own) been abused enough yet, and wasted good-faith editors time enough? Yet? Bishonen | talk 17:23, 4 July 2013 (UTC).

  Create an account? Look who's talking! 'Ark at 'er! darwinbish ^BITE ☠ 17:41, 4 July 2013 (UTC).

  I have no problem with IP's editing without creating an account...what I do have a problem with is someone too lazy to create an account showing up at noticeboards, getting into long debates and looking for reasons to taunt (as above), bait, harass and wikilawyer and seek reasons to get others sanctioned. I call that trolling...least that is what it has always been...and the passive aggressive nature of this IP is sickeningly transparent for what it is...its not even Civil POV pushing...its all just a little game, surely inspired by the wife and kids. Grrrrrrr!--MONGO 17:33, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

• No, I'm not sweet, and I'm afraid I stand by my tart remarks on AN. Reviling AndyTheGrump and pointing to his block log had what to do with the ongoing poll? All he did was give his opinion in a civil manner. No, he didn't spout a bunch of rhetorical insults, that only happened in your head. And when you brought up your wife and kids (you brought them up, I just quoted you), it was a bit of a 1974 Nixon farewell speech moment — 'I have a mother/I have kids, how can you do this to them? You've hurt them!' Bishonen | talk 09:19, 4 July 2013 (UTC).

Just to be sure

Ok, just to make sure I have it right: User:Darwinfish, User:Darwinbish, User:Bishapod and User:Bishzilla are all humorous alternate accounts of yours? Howicus (talk) 00:33, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, if you put it like that, I suppose so. Basically. Though it's technically more complicated: Bishzilla is my sock, Bishapod is Bishzilla's sock, and in an unguarded moment, Bishapod created the twins: good Darwinfish, evil Darwinbish. So they're not mine in a very direct way; but there is admittedly an Actual Secret Individual Who runs Us All, so… yeah, I suppose we're her alternative accounts. See also family portrait here: that's up on my userpage, to help myself and others when we get confused. [Reluctantly.] And then there's User:Cassandra at the peak of her insanity. May I ask why you're concerned to have it right? They mill about in a confusing way anyway, and the fact that they're my socks doesn't necessarily mean that they do what I say. I don't recommend creating this kind of family, you know! I spend half my time traipsing after Darwinbish apologizing, and reassuring people that Bishzilla really has a heart of gold and doesn't eat little users hardly ever any more. Bishonen | talk 00:54, 5 July 2013 (UTC).

Just wanted to make sure that none of them were "people" at least not in the legal sense. My confusion arose because Bishzilla's page mentions you, but none of the others do. And don't worry, my socks stay firmly on my feet. Howicus (talk) 01:26, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

You rang?

I assume you linked my username on purpose. Don't ask for a desysop; instead, use your bit to do something Righteous. Nevermind, did it myself, not sure why I'm asking others to do adminny things.

Hope your summer is going swimmingly. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:00, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Good stuff, evocation-by-linking. Now that you've been evoked from beyond the grave, I suppose you'll have to be exorcised again? I admit that when I idly follow some of the zealot-fighters and tendentious-editing resisters (none of the ones I stalk are admins) around and see what they have to put up with, I get a real warm rush from the sense that haha, I can do something about that little lot, because I'm an admin, hoho! Bishonen | talk 21:11, 5 July 2013 (UTC).

I know you and I have not always agreed and I know you asked for people not to do this, but you shouldn't resign. I even have good, positive reasons for saying so, but I'm not sure you want to hear from me, so I'll stop.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:24, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Considering our recent disagreement about blocks and unblocks (the very subject at issue on WP:BN), I take that very kindly. Thank you. Bishonen | talk 23:41, 5 July 2013 (UTC).

Naples metro IP

He's always changing his IP-number, now he's here.--FS Italia (talk) 16:50, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, there doesn't seem to be much point in warning or blocking this person. I've semi'd the redirect also. Only 24 hours — please let me know if you see problems continuing after that (I'm going away on the 8th, though). Do you know of any other pages that he's interested in? And thank you for dealing with this! Bishonen | talk 17:39, 6 July 2013 (UTC).

if it really becomes a problem, go to WP:RPP, and have them semi-protect the pages as needed. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 17:41, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

You have a bit of email ma'am.

— Ched :  ?  13:27, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, sir. Replied. Bishonen | talk 16:13, 7 July 2013 (UTC).

How?

you know these sort of things; how do you make secure or locked (or whatever they are called) links so that when people look back on a page in ten years they can see what you are talking about - even if the page has since been lost or changed?  Giano  09:54, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

In "view history" you can click on the date to get a link like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bishonen&oldid=563790327 — but that isn't going to work if the revision has been deleted (e.g. because the page was deleted) so maybe that isn't what you are asking for. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 23:35, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Min ting

De kastade sig framstupa för hans fötter och gräto och bekände sitt fel; och Almansur gav dem därpå, såsom hans vana var när han var mild till sinnes, tid att framsäga sina böner och binda upp sina skägg, innan deras huvuden höggos av.

Hej Bishonen!

ArbCom wrote new rules of evidence for my arbitration case.

The history of the evidence page contains a small selection of remarks by the other "party" at IRC. All of the quotations concerning gender-related violence have been removed by Risker.

It would be useful to list other examples of mistreatment of women on Wikipedia, even using these rules of evidence. I thought that I had once removed something nasty Rod had written about you, but I could not find it in his talk-page history.

Best regards, Kiefer.Wolfowitz 07:07, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm really on break; I only dropped by to say "fiddle faddle" to Floquenbeam, who is on an even more unconvincing break, though even that is nothing compared to the least breaky break in the world, which is the one announced at the top of your page. Anyway, Risker gave a reason for removing those log quotes. Also, I'm afraid I'd rather kill myself than get involved in that RFAR. Bishonen | talk 09:36, 16 July 2013 (UTC).

[62] , [63].  :) Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:05, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the disgustingly sentimental songs, but I'd been following Floquenbeam's gestes, so thought I should comment, if only to offer to kill myself by eating Bishzilla's beanie. And then, for symmetry, thought I should comment on Worm's proposal; I've been following him also. I wouldn't want anybody on either side of the divide to mistake me for a nice kind good-faith-assuming sort of person. Bishonen | talk 12:23, 30 July 2013 (UTC).

That's a big bunch of baseless baloney, Bish. My break is much more convincing than yours. You stayed away only 1 week, whereas I've been staying away for 1 week for several months. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:25, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Frukta inte---ät frukt! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiefer.Wolfowitz (talk • contribs) 20:06, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh, hey, KW, did you notice Kurtis alluding to Alf Henrikson on the evidence talkpage? "I just hope that the amount of flak you're getting here will tell you something about the impact your words have on people."

Ja, det påverkar livet på jorden.

Så slarva inte med orden!

Very erudite of him, and coincidental, in that I'd already quoted it to you, isn't it? When I did, I was actually somewhat thinking of your original persecution of myself, back in the early middle ages. I'm not proud of retaining that in memory, but the very fact kind of makes Henrikson's, and Kurtis's, point, doesn't it? Bishonen | talk 20:57, 21 July 2013 (UTC).

Honestly, in that old saga ("persecution"), somebody wrote and explained that I should look at your good sides, and I've tried to follow that advice.

(I had thought that I'd removed some nasty but dull suggestion Rod had made to you, but I couldn't find the diff.)

Kurtis's opinion of my RfA comments differs from the judgments of many in the community. It's a pity he doesn't quote the people thanking me for my comments in the same RfAs (e.g. at my talk page). Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:42, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Why don't you add them? Make your case, it's not like the community would block you for that. Kurtis ^(talk) 21:45, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Woah, that was totally unintended! I've never even heard of Alf Henrikson before! Damn. =/ Kurtis ^(talk) 21:44, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

The Christian Science Monitor breaks story on Ironholds and Sue Gardner

• Murphy, Dan (2013). "In UK, rising chorus of outrage over online misogyny: Recent events in Britain draw more attention to endemic hostility towards women online". Retrieved 1 August 2013. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  • That's interesting. Thanks. I note you're no longer on break, but retired. None of it seems to slow you down much. Bishonen | talk 20:21, 1 August 2013 (UTC).

    We try not to leave trash, which can attract rats, which can bite little kids.

    Something more to your liking than Peter Gabriel?

    Neighborly, Kiefer.Wolfowitz 20:34, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Yay

This place is very drab without you. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 00:33, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

"Fiddle faddle"? That's like the 50's schoolmarm version of "you're a cowardly idiot, Floq", right? Yes, I probably am. It's Murry's block log, I wanted to give him the final say, but I'm confident he'll appreciate your annotation. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:16, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

No, it's not, it's alliteration! Pay attention! Hi Anthony! Bishonen | talk 09:36, 16 July 2013 (UTC).

Oh, powerful Bishonen...

...I am just a random Wikipedia user/supporter, but can you help me? The Mirko Filipovic article is constantly vandalized and I lack the time and know-how to do much about it. Others have complained on that article's talk page and it frustrates me that no one is locking the page. Is there anything you can do to help me? Possibly teach me to revert the edits correctly or anything else? I can only do simple things on Wikipedia, as it's confusing to me, but it really irks me when I see such blatant vandalism. Sincerely... LogicalCreator (talk) 05:47, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Good header there! Well, break or not, I'll semiprotect this. The article history is a deplorable sight. When I click through some of the editing, it's apparent that most of it is vandalism, perhaps all; contradictory results and records keep being inserted, then reverted, and nobody ever gives any source for their edits. Practically all the editors are IPs, one or two of them probably reverting vandalism in good faith; but how can I tell which is which? I can't. I've semi'd the article for a month. I'm afraid it looks like no admins are watching the talkpage, so your pleas for protection there have fallen on stony ground. This is a very common situation, in fact it hardly ever helps to ask for protection on an article talkpage. For your future convenience, Wikipedia:Requests for page protection is the place to go. As for reverting recent vandalism yourself, this is how: look at the history. Click on the date of the last good version; that will take you to that version. Edit it in a slight way, for instance, insert an extra space between two words. That won't show on the page, but it'll qualify as a "change" and make the version possible to save. Click save. The vandalism is now gone. Bishonen | talk 09:36, 16 July 2013 (UTC).

Bishonen may be a little tired from exerting that power, so let me expand on how to revert edits. Go to Mirko Filipović. Hold down the Ctrl key (assuming Windows) and click "history". On many browsers, that will open the history page in a new tab. Each row shows two radio buttons (empty circles that can be selected). On the oldest date believed to be good, click the first radio button. On the most-recent date (the one at the top of the list), click the second radio button (it's already selected by default). Click the "Compare selected revisions" button above the list. If the diff shows that all the edits are bad, click "undo" at the top right. Enter an edit summary and click Save (or "Save page"). If more wanted, the folks at WP:HELPDESK are good at providing help. Johnuniq (talk) 10:49, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

welcome back

... it's been an interesting week from my perspective. — Ched :  ?  12:49, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw you stepped out of your comfort zone there. Brave! But I shall not comment on the case. You don't like bickering, fighting and bitching — I don't either — and what's the case gonna be except a bickerfest, if it's accepted? There's one or two bruisers centrally and intransigently involved in the infobox wars that make me tired just seeing their name, you know. :-( Ti-red. Not that I can't enjoy a good fight if the conditions are right. [/me dwells for a moment on "the stupid BS with Bish and Jimbo". Smirks reminiscently.] But they so rarely are. Bishonen | talk 14:24, 16 July 2013 (UTC).

Yea, I knew I was stepping into a big pile of "ka-ka" when I posted the request. And I'm sure I won't win any friends with this. But I'm out here all by myself anyway, so I figured I may as well turn the lights on and let some of the dustballs in the corners be seen. I admit, I'm one of the really lucky ones on wiki, .. I've always had a ton of good people stand up for me. There's a lot of good folks that get thrown under the bus on a daily basis here - and I hate it when I see that. I've seen it said that much of the discord on wiki is due to old grudges .. and I know that's true. Still .. my memory isn't good enough to remember who to be mad at .. lol. I saw a while back that Eric and Giano worked on a good (IMO) compromise with some collapsible infobox stuff .. and I was hoping that would be a good way forward. I did see that Giano was watching, and willing to contribute - I was glad to see that. I hate that he doesn't care for Andy, but that's just the nature of the world. I'll be honest here too, I've talked to Iridescent a few times - and I've always found great insight there. He told me that anyone could get smacked in an Arbcom case, regardless of which side they were on. So I did know going in that this could go many ways. But I figure life is short - move things forward. At this point I'm just rambling, so I close with the hopes that your week away was a good one for you and all the other little bishes. (and one big Bish) Hugs always, Ched — Ched :  ?  20:46, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

• Oh my very dearest little Mrs Bishonen, how nice to see you returned from your travels - I do hope you haven't over taxed yourself, at your age one must be so careful. I really don't know what all this fuss about info-boxes is about; I just love them - one only has to look at my own modest Wikipedia article to see just how very useful they can be - I constantly receive letters of congratulations on my achievements as a direct result of it. Now Ched dear, what is all this rubbish about "Giano doesn't care for Andy"? Let me tell you that dearest Giano just adores sweet little Mr Mabbitt; why only earlier today - he was saying how much he would love to meet him in some secluded spot for an interesting chat - darlingest Giano does not have a mean bone in his very athletic and virile body, so please don't malign him. I thinks its very brave of you to launch such a case; naturally, no good will come of it, but it will highlight the problem. Now I must go, the poor dear Duchess of Cambridge is on the telephone, no doubt begging me to be a God parent yet again. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 21:01, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• Thank you, dear lady. I hope you noticed my flattering reference to Giano's athletic and sunkissed body here. Just like you, I'm always working to raise the dear boy's self-esteem! Bishonen | talk 21:10, 19 July 2013 (UTC).

• I did indeed notice your rather lustful comments concerning my nephew's body. It's not his fault that he is so wildly attractive, tanned and toned, and I did not think it seemly of you to mention it. Have you considered a spray tan yourself? A genuine tan must be so difficult in such a hostile climate, and it would make you look considerably younger. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 21:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

31

I saw your recent post at ANI where you blocked that guy for 31 hours. Just wondering, how'd you come up with 31 hours? A random number or is there some precedent with that? Just wondering, ★★RetroLord★★ 09:29, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

There's a drop-down menu for block duration, Your Admiralship. It starts "Indefinite, 3 hours, 12 hours, 24 hours, 31 hours…" down to "3 months, 6 months, a year". There's nothing to stop an admin from handcrafting any desired duration either, but it's quite common to use the drop-down to give 24 hours for a first offence of an edit-warring or 3RR nature, with 31 hours as an option for an aggravated case (which this was, in view of the many warnings and continued refusal to discuss). So, in short, yes, there's precedent, even convention. BTW, I notice the gentle User:Worm That Turned once blocked for a mere 3 hours for edit warring (cough) — no doubt the circumstances warranted it on that occasion. Bishonen | talk 11:15, 18 July 2013 (UTC).

In that situation I felt that what was needed was a break in the flow of conversation, three hours was a good choice. The other benefit of 31 hours is that it's a lump over 24 hours. It's particularly useful for blocking public or school IPs - where the person is likely to return 24 hours later and not feel any repercussions of the block. School lunch breaks being a prime example. Worm^TT(talk) 11:22, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I do feel sorry for today’s kids. My school lunch breaks were spent—if not developing rather absurd theories in the school library—down the pub. In neither case were there digital distractions. Ian Spackman (talk) 14:24, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, and spare some pity for today's company shills, too. The Princess page is on my watchlist, as indeed is the other page. I don't always watch my watchlist, though, so a tip is always welcome if you should notice yet more block evasion. Bishonen | talk 12:38, 20 July 2013 (UTC).

Requesting help

You recently commented on my talk page. Me and aprock haven't gotten anywhere, and without a 3rd party we wont. He's now refusing to communicate so I'm turning to you for help in the situation. Pluvia (talk) 19:23, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

I commented on your page in my admin quality, more precisely as being the admin who first blocked you and then warned you you're cruising for another block. That's what I commented on. I'm afraid that means I'm not in the market for mediation between you and Aprock, just as I'm not in the market for editing the article; all these functions are best kept separate. You'll have to ask somebody else, sorry. The obvious way of "taking" something to mediation is via Wikipedia:Requests for mediation, and that may be the only way to go in this case. If this were merely a matter between you and Aprock, I'd recommend a more lightweight procedure, like asking an experienced neutral user that you can both trust (maybe an admin, but it doesn't have to be) to mediate. But that would leave the other editors discussing on the talkpage, and editing the article, out in the cold, so it's not really an option. The trouble here may be that the other editors have little incentive to make a detour via Requests for mediation; and if they don't want to respond there, a request from you would most likely be rejected. (Mediation can't be forced.) Anyway, how do you mean Aprock's refusing to communicate? He posted on the talkpage 15 minutes ago.

On the other hand, you can't force Aprock or anybody else to keep talking by repeating yourself. Aprock seems to be getting frustrated that you keep playing the same "censorship" card, which is simply not relevant to Wikipedia, a private website. WP:BLP, on the other hand, is central to the disagreement you're having with other editors. I've asked you before if you've read it, but you're really not into answering questions or replying to other people's points, are you? Such a manner of debate often does frustrate others. Bishonen | talk 20:35, 19 July 2013 (UTC).

I did answer everything that was presented perfectly. But thanks for the response and link, I'll take it there. Pluvia (talk) 02:37, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Also, Aprock took the issues to the Biographies of living persons noticeboard a few days ago, as he noted on talk at the time.[64] It's the obvious place for you to discuss the issue that interests you, and to make your case. IMO more likely to get useful uninvolved input than a mediation request which, as I suggested above, is very likely to be rejected. Bishonen | talk 16:32, 20 July 2013 (UTC).

I viewed that a while back and it seems his request is largely being ignored. I was waiting for it to be addressed before I interjected, mearly because we were already having a discussion in the talk page. Now it seems we've come to a roadblock. So I'll add my sources there on that page and wait a few more days. Pluvia (talk) 19:45, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello

Hello, Bish. It's been a long time since you put me in my place. Today I was looking at the article on Edward I of England, and misread Malleus Scotorum as Malleus Scrotum, which made me think of your friend Lady Catherine de Burgh (of blessed memory). Since she's no longer with us, I decided to drop you a line instead. Jehochman ^Talk 00:58, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Lady C no longer with us? <s>I</s> You wish. See her putting everybody in their place above? But I'm sure you could do with an individual dressing-down, I acknowledge I've been remiss. Even though User:Cassandra at the peak of her insanity has been throwing her weight around re a matter that touches on you somewhat.[65] OK, I'll check what infractions you've been committing recently and [with quiet menace] try to gauge who you may need a visit from. Bishonen | talk 11:54, 20 July 2013 (UTC).

[In jocular mood.] 'Zilla go visit little Jehochman! Miss Cassandra not got enough weight to throw around! bishzilla _ROARR!! 11:58, 20 July 2013 (UTC).

Obitauri

I just read your comment on his Talk page. The thing is Obitauri's frustration is largely the cause of the problem, not a symptom. He has a conflict of interest about Georgia, and I don't see that that is going to change.--Jeffro77 (talk) 03:18, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

It's best to avoid predicting what an editor will do—just wait and see. Editors are often unhappy when blocked, and trying to engage them in discussion shows a misundertanding of how people work. Just leave the talk page alone, let them have the last say, and wait for future developments. That's a good procedure if the editor concerned turns out to be helpful or unhelpful. In the latter case, engaging them in a pointless discussion is often viewed as poking, and would just complicate future requests for sanctions. Johnuniq (talk) 03:44, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Jeffro, it's true that the editor hasn't given any sign of changing his approach so far, but both RegentsPark (the blocking admin) and Yogesh Khandke have given him good advice; perhaps he'll digest it later. I second everything John says. Bishonen | talk 08:31, 24 July 2013 (UTC).

In case of doubt

You are quite the Good Person I remembered you as being. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:31, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Really..? I have my doubts, indeed, so it's sweet that you think so. This was sweet, too — looking at your contribs, I thought at first you must have spammed the same message to both of us. Bishonen | talk 10:08, 27 July 2013 (UTC).

Ah, but have you considered what standing of Good Person I remembered you being...? LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:27, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Nohh... the Good Pedantic Buffoon? Did you see your trophy whore trophy just got downgraded? A pity in a way, but the Grim Reaper was absolutely right. Indeed he only just got there before I did (your graceful resurgence having reminded me of the problem). Bishonen | talk 21:36, 27 July 2013 (UTC).

I suspect that the Plowers Thaart Beee mistakedly thought that it was The Modest Trophy Whore Trophy rather than, of course, The Modest Trophy Whore Trophy as was intended, and made the Trophy considerably more modest. Nothing worse than being a misunderstood Trophy Whore, I assure you... LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:08, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Spanish Civil War

Hej, I'm back (with Wikipedia on the back burner, though, for now at least), mainly because of the kind words from you and Shirt58 on my talk page. I noticed that you've run into a notorious editor from St Petersburg, Russia, who has been edit warring on Spanish Civil War (which is on my watchlist) since some time last year, using several different IPs, including what seems to be open proxies, to reinsert a systemic bias tag against consensus (if you look at the page history of the article you'll see that I have been reverting him ever since he started his war, getting him blocked on several occasions, under a number of different IPs), so semi-protecting the article is the only thing that stops him, and was the right thing to do. So thanks for doing it. Hälsningar, Thomas.W ^{talk to me} 13:19, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I see he went after me in a more personal way with the second IP, reverting me in random places, ha ha. I've blocked that one as well. Pity IPs can't be indeffed, I suppose, but then it's not a big deal. Once they've shown their full colours as a vandal, it's simple to revert them. Glad you came back! Bishonen | talk 15:14, 28 July 2013 (UTC).

P.S. I have indeed studied the history of Spanish Civil War, and noticed the recurring disruption and your defence of the article; see my elaborate warning on User talk:84.52.101.196. Doing it by the book, assuming good faith. Bishonen | talk 15:26, 28 July 2013 (UTC).

The Russian vandal has swiftly returned as Special:Contributions/78.25.121.197, so far staying away from Spanish Civil War but revealing his identity by reverting you on Pamela, as his first edit (which I noticed in his contributions when I cautioned him for unsourced edits on other articles). Thomas.W ^{talk to me} 17:06, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

...and he has also started to stalk and revert me as Special:Contributions/78.25.123.86, an IP that belongs to the same Russian mobile 'phone operator as the other two 78.* IPs. Not that it bothers me though, but I thought you should know who it is if you're suddenly being reverted by someone using a 78.* IP belonging to OSJC MegaFon of Russia. Cheers, Thomas.W ^{talk to me} 17:19, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Right. Maybe somebody can take care of the entire range, you never know. I'm not really good with that stuff, so I've asked on ANI. Bishonen | talk 17:59, 28 July 2013 (UTC).

I'm sorry that you have become "collateral damage" in my almost one year long "war" with the Russian vandal (which started on other articles before the Spanish Civil War thing). His constant reverts don't bother me though since he's getting more exhausted by it than I am, because he has to move from one part of St Petersburg to another to get a new IP for his phone/mobile device, while all I have to do is click "undo". Thomas.W ^{talk to me} 18:14, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Hehe. That's the spirit. Blocking and protecting is also dead easy (as long as it's not rangeblocking), so no need to worry about me. Apparently the 78 range has now been blocked for a month. Bishonen | talk 19:00, 28 July 2013 (UTC).

User:Brandonworld

Suggest you have a look at deleting all the other crap in special:allpages/User:Brandonworld Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:04, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Looks like Laser brain took care of it, fortunately. Bishonen | talk 13:37, 29 July 2013 (UTC).

Curb Chain, redux

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive251#Topic ban. postdlf (talk) 02:24, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah.. thanks. Funny, isn't it? The "When you start a discussion about an editor, you must notify them on their user talk page" note is really, really in-your-face now (I modified it myself a while ago). Yet another IDHT symptom, I guess. Bishonen | talk 10:24, 1 August 2013 (UTC).

Hi3

Hey, I've seen you around often but don't think we've interacted before. I'm curious to hear more about your thoughts on The Wikipedia Adventure. The discussion seems to be bringing up some very strong reactions that I'd like to understand better. Ocaasi ^{t | c} 09:53, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Ocaasi. Yes, I've seen you around too. It must be very disappointing to read some of the negative comments (including mine) in the MfD discussion, after putting so much work into The Wikipedia Adventure. :-( And I'm sorry to have to say I don't like the game, and I'm not even crazy about the idea of a game. (Of course I note that some people on the MfD page do like it, though most indeed seem to have concerns about tone — no doubt the tone will end up changed.) I haven't attempted to play the game, which I understand from some comments is just as well, as it's not ready to be played yet. But I've clicked around a little, and I agree with the people who say it seems to target children of 7—8. You say it actually doesn't but is aimed at college-age young adults. (I think you said that someplace.) OK, I think the aim has failed, then, sorry. Badges for young adults...? I can't find the badges now, but I'm sure I saw them mentioned. I realize American culture may well differ from my own, but surely not to that extent.

However old and grumpy it makes me sound, we don't IMO want to attract children. The very young are too unlikely to make good contributions, and too likely to make poor ones, even after they've mastered the technicalities; the technicalities aren't the problem where kids are concerned, indeed the technical part is probably easier for children than for newbie middle-aged academics, at least that has been my experience. And they're too likely to make trouble for themselves and for the encyclopedia, and to suck up the time and energy of the existing cadre of content contributors. See this current ANI thread for examples of all of that. (I know the age of the editor in question, but of course I'm not going to mention it. I'll tell you in e-mail if you like.)

I don't see much point in bringing the success of the Teahouse into the MfD discussion, you know. The Teahouse isn't childish. I haven't seen anybody in the MfD discussion suggest that it's wrong to try to attract new editors by being "pleasant, fun, inclusive, visually appealing and personal". They're more saying that the game doesn't succeed in being these things, and I'm afraid I agree. (Well, visually appealing, maybe. But that's not much help by itself.) It would hardly appeal to adults of any age or education, IMO, or to teenagers (not any of the teenagers I know). And of course not to the people we'd most like to recruit, academics and specialists. (I'm sure you're aware of the last point, and weren't aiming at those specific groups.) Did many people really say in the beginning that the nice encouraging Teahouse approach "did not belong in an encyclopedia" ? I haven't read those early discussions; I'll take your word for it, but I'd also like to see how it was expressed, and how common it was; perhaps you could link me to the appropriate page.

Did you see the comment on the feedback page from new user Beaedyson? I thought that was interesting. "Might I suggest a different theme entirely? A space adventure seems less appealing to an a wider range of users as it feels too much like a game. I understand the concept of making the learning of how to use wikipedia fun but it should be more practical. Since the subject matter is to do with information, articles, authors, editors, and the like, it might make sense if the theme of the game were more like a library instead of a galaxy. One might say a library isn't fun, but people who come to wikipedia wanting to contribute are less interested in having fun and more interested in learning."[66] Second that. Bishonen | talk 16:27, 2 August 2013 (UTC).

Thanks for these considered thoughts. I'm hearing your main points: That you think the tone will appeal primarily to a younger audience (particularly badges), that the younger audience will burden our already burdened active editors, and that a different theme might have broader appeal to an audience we desire more. I've been collecting thoughts about the process but I'm still taking in this new feedback so I want to wait a bit to respond in full. I did see Beadyson's comment and have added it to my list of things to ponder. At this point, the tone for the tour is pretty much established. But just for this tour. The fantastic thing about the Guided Tours engine is we can build different tours that will appeal to different audiences. A library-themed tour might be better for academics, for example. We can test that. But that's the main point, this is an experiment, one that has not had a chance yet to collect any data. What we're doing here is creating different entry points for new editors, and not all of them will work, or work for everyone. I will return with some links to controversial Teahouse discussions. I have spoken at length with the founders of that project and they have war stories about the resistance it initially faced. New projects face resistance, especially on Wikipedia, and that's ok. But we still need to wait until we can gather data from an experiment so we can have an informed discussion about impact.

I also want to add a note about advancing on all fronts. I have worked in many different ways to target new editors. The plain and simple guide was an effort to consolidate all of our introductory material (and served as the basis of The Wikipedia Adventure's content). I'm also working with Wiki Project Med Foundation to target doctors and medical students. Just this winter we set up a program with UCSF's medical school. Next winter they're going to be the first ever medical school to have an education program elective where 4th year medical students can take on an article to improve. That's what I mean by advancing on all fronts. There are so many things we need to try and we need to try a variety of them to see what works and for whom. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts. Ocaasi ^{t | c} 14:38, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

91.155.236.125 block

Hi Bish, just saw your renewed block of 91.155.236.125 (talk · contribs · 91.155.236.125 WHOIS), but I'm not quite sure I understand the rationale. Just curious. He was last blocked for a month on 2 July, and indeed that block expired today, but I can't see him editing after that. I know there was a socking attempt through an open proxy on 19 July, but has there been renewed activity today? Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:43, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Yikes… no! I thought there had, but I was one month off when I read the IP's contribs. Thanks, Fut. (Are you sure it's August already?) Bishonen | talk 21:03, 2 August 2013 (UTC).

<Sigh> I almost hoped there had been some heavy action and fun, very fringe, reading. Thomas.W ^{talk to me} 21:10, 2 August 2013 (UTC) (the block showed up in my watchlist...)

It looked like heavy action, and also looked eerily familiar.. unsurprisingly. ;-) It made me think "What a stubborn guy". Sorry for your disappointment, Thomas. Bishonen | talk 21:31, 2 August 2013 (UTC).

Block templates

I just do it with a twinkle in my eye. It's laziness really but why remember all the blocking templates plus it has some other admin useful features. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 21:12, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

You do? Crap. :-( I mean, "Before using Twinkle, one really should read its documentation to familiarize oneself" bla bla… much too much like work! What a discouraging way to welcome the newbie Twinkle user. Why can't they make a Twinkle Adventure game to draw us layabouts in painlessly? Different universes, I guess: you're so lazy you use Twinkle, I'm so lazy I put off learning how to use it. Bishonen | talk 21:27, 2 August 2013 (UTC).

Huh? There's documentation on how to use it? I got as far as how to install and went on from there. I think an Twinkle Adventure Game would be great, then we could all leave Twinkle messages using somebody else's name. I got caught out once or twice though. By default if an admin tries to tag a page for speedy delete, wanted a second opinion, it just deletes by default and the other things like page protection go to the admin options by default as well. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 05:14, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Hnh. Apparently you just have to enable it in Preferences. ... I have new buttons, look! I've reverted both you and me! You won't mind if I leave you a few warning messages as well, CBW? I see it is self-explanatory — why did they describe it in that "hands off, this is not for you, grandma" way? Would you like a nice welcome message? Bishonen | talk 08:18, 3 August 2013 (UTC).

Feel free to use my talk page as your guinea pig if you need one! Goodness knows I could use an indef block notice, anyway. ;-) Heimstern Läufer (talk) 09:40, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

CambridgeBayWeather, help! I went to block Heimstern using Twinkle, but, in amongst all the new buttons (rollback, delete, protect, warn, and so on) I don't see one that lets me block. WTF? Am I gonna have to read that documentation after all? :-( Bishonen | talk 12:02, 3 August 2013 (UTC).

Not sure what skin (needs a better name) you are using but with Vector I see this. You have to use the User drop down to block them and then use Twinkle (TW) to give them the block notice. It's under the Warn section. You can try it on my page as well if you like, plus any of the other features such as CSD at User:CambridgeBayWeather/Sandbox/2 (I'd forgotten about that page). CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 16:07, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Like all set-in-their-ways curmudgeons I use Monobook. But OK, I've found a "blocking" alternative under "Warn", but it's not entirely clear to me whether it'll block and/or write a block message; but probably both; it doesn't look like it'd be very happy with just a block message and no actual block. (Reasonably enough.) So, you won't mind being experimentally blocked, huh? OK, here goes. Bishonen | talk 17:26, 3 August 2013 (UTC).

Bishonen is too chicken to besmirch Heim's or CBW's block logs; she went to block meeee! Unsuccessfully. Chortle. Desysop per WP:CIR! darwinbish ^BITE ☠ 17:43, 3 August 2013 (UTC).

hey, don't be a meanie, darwinbish. twinkle has a few issues with monobook and having too many tabs for sysops. that said, I'm not sure what i'd do with out twinkle. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 17:51, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Well I see that I have, as yet, not been blocked. This just proves that she is an abusive admin, threatens to block but does not, and for no reason! Obviously this will require a report be made in a suitable drama arena and several other places to be named later. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 19:17, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

such as the central drama clearinghouse? -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 19:41, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Are you feeling playful

Camping up north. Our tents are too small to be visible.

Lady Catherine's colonial camping holiday. Dear old BB stares thoughtfully into the campfire, into which Lady C has just reeled. The punkawallahs look on disconsolately. The nursemaid with the baby doesn't care.

While I have always felt this place has an infantile side, sometime one wonders if it's not actually insane; I refer to Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure. Have you ever seen such puerile nonsense? Not to mention the wisdom of targeting children like this. I hope no donor funds are being wasted on it. Hopefully people will come to their senses and delete it.  Giano  10:16, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Compare the section above on this page. As for funds, there was a post (a "keep" post) on the MfD which suggested that deleting the project would be a waste of the donor funds that had already been spent on it. The idea being, apparently, that we have to keep throwing money at it in order not to waste money.[67] That's how gamblers argue, but I don't think they ever find it turns to account. Bishonen | talk 11:56, 3 August 2013 (UTC).

Oh dear; that's most concerning. In my limited experience, willfully wasting investors money is never a wise move and stupidly wasting a charitable donor's money is generally suicidal. However, as the very wise Moxy loves to point out, I have very limited experience of the real world and am extremely immature and stupid.  Giano  18:02, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Real life example: Last week we went on vacation to an island where we've gone 12 times before. This year we were late booking and had to take a cottage we hadn't stayed at before. It was awful. Rather than stay "because we've paid for it," we left, to avoid spending yet more money on an unpleasant vacation. We return home, repacked the kids, dog, and gear, and went camping at the Cape. It was a lot of work, but very nice and cost next to nothing. If the Wikipedia Adventure is a failed experiment, why don't they stop it and try something else? Jehochman ^Talk 18:22, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Exactly, Jonathan, very on-point example. I hope the WMF shows as much sense. Camping with a lot of kids… how horrible… yet my parents did the same thing a couple of times in the early 18th century, up north, in the mountains. It's a great memory… for me… hopefully a good one for the parents too, even though I suspect they took like six months to recover on each occasion. Bishonen | talk 19:35, 3 August 2013 (UTC).

I think camping with one's offspring is greatly to be admired and applauded. I have very fond memories of such happy holidays in the good old days in India - the children, nannies, nursery maids, coolies and punkawallahs all carrying my luggage to the marquees and then naughty, old BP (his eyes a twinkling) chasing me around the camp fire. Oh such happy days. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 21:28, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

at least the tent was properly pitched, although I would think he would be too busy Scouting to go all the way to india. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 02:06, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't think anyone has done anything to assess whether it's "failed", yet. Unlike the Visual Editor, the "Wikipedia Adventure" is not even out of alpha testing yet, never mind promoted as ready for widespread usage. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:40, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I like the general intention, but the methodology is just too immature. or, at least, that's how it appears to me. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 18:59, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Instead of the Wikipedia Adventure, we could just link people to this: [68]. In particular, the last frame about a tornado of shrieking trolls is especially relevant. I don't think it helps to tell people that it's all butterflies and unicorns, setting them up for big disappointment when they actually try to edit something that other editors are working on. (Another good link, about Wikipedia and fund raising, also relevant to this discussion: [69]) Jehochman ^Talk 22:45, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

For attempting to be humorous on Floquebeam's (I dunno how you spell it) talk. MM (Report findings) (Past espionage) 11:01, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

While I'm still quite happy with the idea of having a press secretary, I've already noticed mine doesn't appear to work on Sundays. If true, that would mean I will have to occasionally fend for myself, something I no longer desire to do. (Gently worded, as I am a kind, generous superior) Something for us to work on in the coming year. (p.s. "Attempting"? Is this a backhanded cookie?) --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:20, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

'S allright about the backhanded cookie; I'm working on my attempts. It's not so much that I don't work on Sundays, but that I don't work much at any time. If you need a 24/7 press secretary, you could try Capo Darwinbish, who has already offered her services to User:EatsShootsAndLeaves. She'd probably throw in her boys for extra services and full protection. Though hardly for the pittance you pay me. Bishonen | talk 16:03, 4 August 2013 (UTC).

Backhanded? Oh no no no no, it's just that I could sense the humour and gave credit, but I put 'attempted' because it didn't actually make me laugh. MM (Report findings) ^{(Past espionage)} 16:23, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Okay, but why?

Could you please explain to me why you don't think my comment can stand? I state that my comment is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I state that I have on-wiki diffs to prove it. Removing such comments smells like North Korea's suppressing the freedom of speech. Are you more concerned about protecting the grownup members of the arbocom, or about protecting a vulnerable kid, and all other kids who could get bullied and hurt here on Wikipedia? Thanks. 76.126.140.123 (talk) 18:24, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Protecting the grownup members of the arbcom? No, I'm concerned about removing your hints and barbs at the "bully admin". Mind you, I don't know who you're talking about, since all you provide is hints and vagueness. That doesn't fit very well with your repeated claims to have on-wiki diffs. Why the fuck don't you give those on-wiki diffs? Why don't you make the accusations specific and take them, with the evidence you say you have, to a reasonable venue? In what way does my horrible North Korean suppression of your free speech from an anonymous IP on an irrelevant user talkpage prevent you from doing that? And what's the point of whispering and hinting on Kiefer.Wolfowitz's page? What does it accomplish, other than spreading vague generalized venom? Bishonen | talk 19:23, 4 August 2013 (UTC).

The only reason I have not provided on-wiki diffs is my wish to protect the privacy of the kid.

I do not know any reasonable venue to present my evidences. There's none on Wikipedia. The arbcom was aware about that admin before the incident with the kid. It did absolutely nothing. As a result a 16-years old kid has sustained irreversible emotional and psychological damage.

What's the point of whispering and hinting? Well, members of the arbcom probably know what I am talking about, and I have a very slight hope that maybe my "whispering" could make the difference the next time bullying is reported to them.76.126.140.123 (talk) 20:08, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I am one of the arbitrators (although I have recused in this specific case). If you have evidence that what you are describing has occurred, please send it to the Arbitration Committee mailing list by e-mail at arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org. Thank you. Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:18, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Newyorkbrad, I do have evidences, but before I respond to your offer to email them to the list, could you please tell me, if you're sure we're talking about the same case? Thank you. 76.126.140.123 (talk) 20:52, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't know. I'm sincerely not sure what incident you are talking about. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:02, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Newyorkbrad, but haven't you just said "I am one of the arbitrators (although I have recused in this specific case)". If you aren't sure what incident I am talking about how do you know that you "have recused in this specific case."? What specific case you're talking about, if I may ask please? 76.126.140.123 (talk) 21:09, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I've recused in the Kiefer.Wolfowitz-Ironholds arbitration case, because of accusations made against me by Kiefer.Wolfowitz. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:21, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

would like some intervention

Wikipedia:ANI#Cryellow. it appears that other admins either DGAF, or are busy dealing with other stuff, but the linked complaint has not received any admin attention whatsoever, and deals with serious, repeated BLP vios. if you could take a look at it, that would be great! -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 21:38, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Blocked. Thanks for alerting me, Aunva. Things do indeed sometimes fall through the cracks at ANI. Bishonen | talk 22:36, 4 August 2013 (UTC).

thanks. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 23:03, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok

See knowing. — ♫♫ Leitoxx   The Police ♪♪ — 02:18, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Southern strategy

Please take a look at this article. My comments are on the talk page. I believe you've been involved in some of the edits, and I'd like some feedback in trying to clean up this article, make it more objective. My talk page comments are here --- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Southern_strategy#Weak_intro.2C_maybe_even_a_one-sided_slant 10stone5 (talk) 21:03, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Well, I'm flattered to be called on, but you've kind of come to the wrong shop. I'm not an American, and I don't have any expert knowledge of 20th-century American political history. The article has been on my watchlist for some time — I don't remember how I first lit on it, but once I had, I kept it on my list because it seemed rather obscure and little watched. It's clearly a topic with a potential for controversy, and my aim has simply been to keep an eye on it and revert vandalism[70], mistakes,[71] and obviously tendentious edits[72] when I noticed them. I haven't any interest in adding text, taking stock of the article as a whole, or, well, researching the subject in depth. In other words, getting involved on the talkpage isn't for me, sorry. Bishonen | talk 17:51, 7 August 2013 (UTC).

Request for comment

Hello Bishonen. This is the first time I contact you, and hopefully not the last. I once read "But if you're just trying to beat someone over the head with the rules, then you picked the wrong person in Bishonen" and that stuff came to my mind today in the middle of a discussion at Talk:Jomo Kenyatta International Airport, where a user is invoking a policy, but just partly the way I see the whole thing. Can you please join that discussion? Thanks in advance.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 23:24, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, Jetstreamer. I didn't mean to ignore you, but I've been a bit busy. I'm delighted to see that User:Beeblebrox has now weighed in; he's not to be trifled with either. :-) Bishonen | talk 23:18, 9 August 2013 (UTC).

Thanks for your response Bishonen, no problem for the delay. Although it's true that Beeblebrox got into the discussion, s(he) did not commented at the thread I initially pointed at. That's actually one thread above the one you mention. Regards.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 00:01, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Response from SA's page

Since SA has blanked his talk page, I will respond to you here. At least one of the people who supported an unblock said he should avoid fringe science topics. Others talked about him returning with restrictions, but did not specify what kind of restrictions. Many others left little to no indication as to whether they supported him returning to the fringe science topic area. We can't say for certain how a vote on the topic ban would break down as a result. It could be that a sufficient number of editors support the topic ban to prevent a consensus from forming on it, which would mean it stays.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 16:39, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Since this is now yet again on AN, I will not respond to you here. Except to ask just incidentally if you really think you were the best person to close the original discussion. Bishonen | talk 20:00, 10 August 2013 (UTC).

Does it honestly matter who closed it after SA was unblocked? I also closed the newer one when Tim lifted the topic ban. After the discussion has reached its logical endpoint, the thread becomes little more than a potential drama magnet if left open.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 04:19, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Naughty naughty. Bad little devil...bad, bad. No pudding for you!--MONGO 04:38, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Your activities on my talk page

I had already left a link to the disputed section in my talk page at the page of the Admin (Kim) who had given me a topic ban. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kim_Dent-Brown#Request_2 . I clearly indicated in my message to Kim that i will follow his advice in this matter. Further, i had written on my talk page a note (which you have now removed) where i clearly said that i have left a link to the disputed section on the talk page of the Admin who had imposed a topic ban on me (i.e. Kim) and as a show of good faith will be following his advice in this matter. I do not consider you a neutral Admin in this matter since you recently voted against me in the recent ANI discussion. I would like you to stay away from me and let a more neutral Admin (like Kim) take a decision about me. Lastly, i was not the one who reverted your edits on my talk page through an IP after which you seem to have placed some kind of restrictions on my talk page. In my opinion your actions on my talk page are an abuse of your Admin powers. I would like to know what recourse i have to have your Admin action reviewed by a higher authority since i want your activities on my talk page to be scrutinized to see if you have been abusing your Admin powers and unnecessarily bullying me. Soham321 (talk) 16:23, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Asking for review of admin actions is something you can do on WP:ANI. Mind you, I think it would be against your own interests to do so in this case, but don't take my word for it, ask somebody you trust. I'm afraid you don't get to choose which admins you'll pay regard to, and so I will not stay away from you; on the contrary, if you re-insert any of the objectionable material I removed, or other similar material, I will block you as promised. The restrictions I placed on your talkpage (semiprotection) don't prevent you from editing it, as long as you use your account; they only prevent you from editing it as an IP. You won't mind that, will you? Since you say the IP wasn't you. Bishonen | talk 16:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC).

Sorry, i missed seeing the very last part of your message to me. Yes, i do mind you placing restrictions on my talk page for two reasons. First, the reason you give for placing restrictions on my talk page is false and serves to undermine my credibility. I am not, repeat not, posting on my talk page using any IP address as you are falsely claiming. Second, it does not allow users who post using an IP address to communicate with me. Soham321 (talk) 17:18, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Is there any other recourse i have to have your admin behavior scrutinized besides taking you to ANI? Isn't there some other forum where i can complain about your (in my opinion) abuse of Admin powers? Further, i re-emphasize that your claim that i have been editing on my talk page using an IP is completely false and hence the restrictions you have placed on my talk page are an abuse of your Admin powers. Soham321 (talk) 16:59, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Just to re-emphasize: I was not the one who reverted your edits on my talk page using an IP address and so your speculation on the edit history of my talk page that i was the person who did this is completely untrue and reveals your inherent bias against me. Soham321 (talk) 16:54, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

• Bishonen,as a follow up to my previous posts to you, i refer the following to you for your consideration: "if an administrator finds that he or she cannot adhere to site policies and remain civil (even toward users exhibiting problematic behavior) while addressing a given issue, then the administrator should bring the issue to a noticeboard or refer it to another administrator to address, rather than potentially compound the problem by poor conduct" taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators .Soham321 (talk) 17:28, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I can't think of anything besides ANI, sorry. Complaining about admin actions is one of the things that board is for. Unless you were to start an WP:RFC/U, but I guess I recommend that even less. Not sure whether you'd want this or this. Kind talk page stalkers, if you have any other forum to recommend to Soham, please say so below. And Soham, again, better ask someone you trust. It's getting a little absurd to expect further advice from me when you're clearly not going to trust what I say anyway. Bishonen | talk 17:49, 11 August 2013 (UTC).

Bishonen, you are not responding to an earlier post of mine so i am copying it again. You had said to me: The restrictions I placed on your talkpage (semiprotection) don't prevent you from editing it, as long as you use your account; they only prevent you from editing it as an IP. You won't mind that, will you? Since you say the IP wasn't you. Bishonen | talk 16:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC). To which i had responded: Sorry, i missed seeing the very last part of your message to me. Yes, i do mind you placing restrictions on my talk page for two reasons. First, the reason you give for placing restrictions on my talk page is false and serves to undermine my credibility. I am not, repeat not, posting on my talk page using any IP address as you are falsely claiming. Second, it does not allow users who post using an IP address to communicate with me. Soham321 (talk) 17:18, 11 August 2013 (UTC)Soham321 (talk) 17:54, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

The IP edited disruptively, re-posting the inappropriate material that I had removed. I wonder why a stranger would do that. Do you have any theory about it? It's a dynamic IP, so I don't set much store by blocking it. That's why your page needs to be semiprotected at present. I'm afraid I don't understand your concern about "users who post using an IP address" not being able to edit your page. What IP users? No IP user except for 59.177.10.35 today has ever posted on your talk. Your insistence that IP users need to be able to edit your page would make sense if the IP were you editing logged out, but since according to you that's not the case, I'm quite mystified by it. Bishonen | talk 19:21, 11 August 2013 (UTC).

My theory is that it is someone who is pissed off with you and/or Mark Miller for what one or both of you may have said to him/her in the past. With respect to the restrictions you have placed, my protest is based on the fact that in future no IP user will be able to communicate with me on my talk page. It is a fact that there are regulars who use an IP address to communicate. At any rate, it should easy to determine that i am not the person who posted as an IP user on my talk page. Should you determine that i am not the IP user i am asking you to remove the restrictions you have placed on my talk page. Soham321 (talk) 19:36, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm quite prepared to believe you're not the IP, and I apologize for suggesting it. But why should I unprotect your page? It's really, really far-fetched that one of the few regular user IPs would take a sudden notion to post on your page. You do realize the only IP who ever did is 59.177.10.35, a disruptive user? I want him/her off of that page, because I don't want the stuff I removed re-inserted yet again, by that IP or another. (As I said, it's dynamic.) I don't know why that's so hard to grasp. Look, I'm really tired of this. Post further here or not, just as you please, but I'm done responding, unless you've got a new, non-repetitive, question to ask me. Bishonen | talk 19:48, 11 August 2013 (UTC).

One more point: With respect to your insinuation that i am somehow indirectly responsible for the edit of the IP user (i refer to your words 'really really far fetched...') i will point out that so far two regular editors (Johnuniq, and Darkness Shines) had earlier suddenly appeared on my talk page slamming me and claiming when asked how they ended up on my talk page they said it was through one of the two ANI discussions involving me. Soham321 (talk) 03:00, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

My claim is that you are wrongly penalizing me for something i have not done. There are a regulars who post using an IP address and these regulars would not be able to communicate with me. You are free to ban or block the IP address in question, but why penalize me for something someone else has done? Soham321 (talk) 19:51, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Usually when someone semi-protects your talkpage its to protect you from trolling...aka a favor.--MONGO 20:16, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

This is quite reasonable. However, i wish the false accusations against me were not being made since they serve to unnecessarily undermine my credibility.Soham321 (talk) 02:57, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, all right. I've removed the edit summaries from the history and I'm sorry I wrote them in the first place. Bishonen | talk 07:44, 12 August 2013 (UTC).

Thank you for your note

I am not upset exactly, I am just a little put off by something that I feel has become to huge distraction for me. But your help and input is greatly appreciated. Thank you.--Mark 17:49, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I think we may need to do a check user on this.[73]--Mark 18:06, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

IP look up shows the country of origin as India, if that has any bearing on the above and below, but I would hope someone is not trying to make the editor look bad or confuse the situation.--Mark 18:10, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

It's not a big deal in any case. Don't worry about it. Bishonen | talk 19:38, 11 August 2013 (UTC).

Not a big deal, because you found i was not that IP user? Soham321 (talk) 19:40, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Get out of this thread. You will not address Mark Miller on my page or his. Get it? Leave him alone. Mark, you will please also not post on Soham's page or talk to him on mine. Bishonen | talk 19:51, 11 August 2013 (UTC).

Can an Admin really unilaterally tell two users not to interact with each other? What if i want to make up with Mark after a few days for which purpose i write on his user talk page. Secondly, i did not address Mark in my previous response. I was addressing you. Soham321 (talk) 20:00, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes.--MONGO 20:18, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for helping that user

I just wanted to take the time to say thanks for helping that user on Jimbo's talk page. Kumioko (talk) 17:37, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

:-) I always feel bad when they lose their text. Bishonen | talk 17:39, 12 August 2013 (UTC).

Me too and this seemed such a reasonable and sincere request. Unfortunately I don't have the magic powers of resurrection so I couldn't help. Cheers. Kumioko (talk) 17:41, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Avanhard (Vorokhta)

Wait a minute. Personal attacks??? Unregistered contributor deletes information without discussion, accusing me of commercial promotion and posing threats. What do you call that? Is that a normal behavior? Please, take a look at the correspondence. The article was never written in a way to promote commercial activities nor had intentions for it. The purpose of the links was temporary until more solid and resourceful sources of information would be provided. Some of the links that did not even had any pricing listed were deleted away. The article is intended to provided information on a local sports and tourism infrastructure and explain disambiguation between town municipality and sports administration in the area, due to the fact that Vorokhta is being categorized as a resort which is technically erroneous. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 13:14, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

ip's are human too, and calling an edit vandalism, that is obviously made in good faith, can be considered a personal attack. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 13:45, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

As Aunva says, IPs are not lesser creatures than registered editors. This particular IP certainly didn't vandalize anything. The only thing I can see the IP did wrong was failing to alert you to the WP:ANI discussion they started. I'm glad to see you noticed it anyway. I'm afraid you don't get to insert commercial external links such as those. Please read the policies and guidelines I linked to in my message on your page. Also, your phrase "The article is intended to provided information on a local sports and tourism infrastructure" sounds a little alarming to me. The subject may not be notable at all if you created the article for such a purpose. I'll take a look at the article later, when I have time, to see if it might violate Wikipedia's policies against advertising and promotion. Bishonen | talk 16:29, 14 August 2013 (UTC).

Update: having looked at the article more closely, I now consider the whole of it falls foul of WP:NOTADVERTISING, and have nominated it for deletion here. Bishonen | talk 18:14, 14 August 2013 (UTC).

Blocked IP 178.66.210.168

Hello Bishonen. The IP is repeatedly adding an external link to his/her own talk page (diffs [74], [75]), and shows every sign of wanting to continue to promote his/her fringe theories there. So maybe a removal of the right to edit his/her own talk page would be in order? Cheers, Thomas.W ^{talk to me} 14:12, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh.. do you think so? I don't see how it matters much what they put on their own page. Removing talkpage access is something I'm always reluctant to do. I have now provided a block message, so they can read about 3RR and stuff, because I agree they sound sort of determined. Bishonen | talk 16:36, 14 August 2013 (UTC).

It was the repeated addition of external links that got me going, apart from that I don't care much about what they write there. Thomas.W ^{talk to me} 18:02, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

• The editor is now back as Special:Contributions/178.66.225.219, pushing fringe theories on Varangians. Thomas.W ^{talk to me} 10:16, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
  • OK, thanks. Both articles semi'd for a month. Bishonen | talk 11:23, 15 August 2013 (UTC).
    • This user's IP address is dynamic, meaning blocking the individual IP address is not very effective, so I've blocked 178.66.0.0/16 for a few days. That should keep the user away until they decide to go do something else, and the collateral damage will be minimal. AGK [•] 12:19, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
      • Good, thank you Anthony. Yes, I noticed that IP was dynamic, in contrast to 178.66.210.168. I only blocked it to relieve my feelings, and that's why I protected as well. The better option, rangeblocking, is beyond my compass, but I suppose I'll have to learn it some day. (People keep telling me it's "easy" and I should try. Maybe. That's what they said about Twinkle, and look what happened when I tried that.[76]) Bishonen | talk 12:32, 15 August 2013 (UTC).

Tremendous applause!

Congratulations, you have earned the prize for Boldest Edit of the Week, in your AFD'ing of WP:ANI!! I support! Zad68 17:55, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

See below. Some of the credit goes to Twinkle, but most of it is all mine. I think it's actually been done before.. didn't User:Ed Poor actually speedy it once? Bishonen | talk 18:08, 14 August 2013 (UTC).

Don't try and sweet-talk your way out of it. Honour thy error as a hidden intention! It was one of the greatest Freudian slips Wikipedia has ever seen. Zad68 18:25, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

		The Eraser Barnstar
		Wikipedia without ANI. Wow. NeilN talk to me 18:07, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

• Like — Ched :  ?  18:35, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't think you meant to do that...

...you seem to have nominated WP:ANI for deletion.[77] AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:56, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, she nominated both pages at the same time. I think it was a mistake, hilarious one, to be honest. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 17:57, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

User:Mark Arsten's revert edit summary was rather good.[78] :-) Bishonen | talk 18:02, 14 August 2013 (UTC).

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 18:50, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

I think you could fully protect WP:ANI with the reason "to prevent drama". Jehochman ^Talk 18:53, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

• Should we add Bishonen to the village stocks for this moment of genius? Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 18:59, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Anyway. Whatever the merits of the actual AfD, can you take a look at this account (this one [79]) too). This is strange. Some chicanery afoot here.Volunteer Marek 23:46, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)whatdaya mean 'chicanery'. the first one does seem fairly odd, but mine, I just screwed up on an AWB run, and was self-reverting. I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 23:56, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Smash!

You've been squished by a whale!
Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something really silly.

anyhow, this is probably more approprate. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 00:10, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Well, I really have to go to bed now. Sorry, Aunva, if you need to be indeffed, you'll have to wait till tomorrow. Bishonen | talk 00:13, 15 August 2013 (UTC).

awwwwwwwww... I was looking forward to it, and I get impatient, especially when UPS or FedEx is shipping me stuff. think they ship templates? -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 00:17, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Joefromrandb

I suggest you examine these diffs before criticizing me for warning Joe against user attacks. Joe has repeatedly engaged in personal attacks and edit wars pbp 23:27, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

I had already taken a quick look at your draft RfC/U, Purplebackpack. I really don't think you'd get any joy from filing it, but of course that's up to you. I find the diffs unimpressive, especially your own "Evidence of trying and failing to resolve disputes", where to my amazement I find the warnings on Joe's page that I just criticized, plus one very rude and confrontational edit by you from 7 August. If that's your idea of trying to "resolve disputes"… well, I don't even know how to finish that sentence. All such edits do is inflame disputes. Bishonen | talk 00:02, 16 August 2013 (UTC).

What's the community supposed to do about an editor who continually edit wars and personally attacks other editors? I'm not one to throw around the T-word, but his behavior would appear to qualify... pbp 00:38, 16 August 2013 (UTC)