User talk:Drmies/Archive 108

Archive 105

Archive 106

Archive 107

Archive 108

Archive 109

Archive 110

→

Archive 115

Sock of account banned as vandalism-only

These three accounts were created by this editor, whom you blocked. See here. Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 14:33, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks. This is some childish racist who keeps clicking the same buttons. Boomer, if you have a moment, can you write up a (pro forma) SPI? It all starts with User:Ryanbrooke2222; if you check my contributions you'll see all the others I blocked after CU. Thanks! Oh, Oshwah, you blocked a few of these and I added a CU block to them. Drmies (talk) 14:53, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
• They geolocate to Islington in the UK. Ritchie333, you're British--do you know this person? Y'all eat kippers together and wash it down with warm beer? Drmies (talk) 14:55, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Is an pro forma SPI case necessary? I only ask as filing SPI cases isn't exactly forte. Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 15:04, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

• It's good experience for when you run for admin. :) Drmies (talk) 15:05, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Islington? That's Corbyn Country. You won't find many kippers there. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:05, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

• @Boomer Vial: Use Twinkle. It cuts down on the grunt work. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:09, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Which account is the sockmaster? Drmies? Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 15:08, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

User:Ryanbrooke2222. Look, all the admins are watching--you know why? Cause they want to see how real work gets done around here. Drmies (talk) 15:28, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Do not use Twinkle unless you know how to the manual process inside out and can perform it blindfolded while standing upside down in shark-infested custard. Otherwise, you are editing the encyclopedia without actually knowing what you're doing, which can come back and bite you. It's not so bad for AfDs, but I would never, ever, use Twinkle when blocking. It is too dangerous. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:17, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Obviously I disagree with almost everything you've written here. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:19, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

No you don't! Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:21, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Meh. It seems Cyberbot I agrees with you as I've been desysopped by them - User:NeilN. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:40, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

And so many are complaining that desysopping has been become sooo difficult; easy as pie, just use the bot. We have all been desysopped, btw, happens from time to time, remember you are mortal and such...Lectonar (talk) 16:16, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

V clever, NeilN, how'd you do that?! — O Fortuna ^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 15:52, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

I pissed off the bot overlord. [1] --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:57, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Ah, DarthBot :) well; you won't be doing that again will you... does this mean we can all throw things at you now?! :p — O Fortuna ^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 16:00, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Now? There was something stopping people before? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:16, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Ritchie333 Unfortunately for me, I've only gotten to as far as piranha-infested custard. Got any fish fingers? Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 15:22, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

No. Go fish. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:25, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Apropos of nothing in particular, I find that I perform the actual block manually, but then use Twinkle for the block notice (using the Twinkle block interface, but unchecking the "block user" box). Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:27, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Since Twinkle has them, I use them. Why not? Drmies (talk) 15:29, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

I explained my reasons here. The most common block I do is a vandalising IP, which gets no message at all per WP:RBI. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:31, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

I don't get the "Twinkle took me to..." part. Drmies (talk) 16:08, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks :-)

TL;DR - I didn't realize that his edit was only one out of a series of edits he's been making to the article. I appreciate the comment, the link, and for making sure that I understand what he was actually doing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:41, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

• Sure thing. That's one of the problems when editors don't leave edit summaries. Question is, do we need a 240k article on translations of Homer...? It's better than 240k of rasslin', but still. Drmies (talk) 03:26, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Sensebased (talk) 20:14, 20 April 2017 (UTC) : Bot Colony article - deletion of recent changes

As I don't contribute frequently, I'm not sure exactly where and how to declare COI. I am the author of the book and designer of the game, so of course there is potential for COI. This said, I believe that my recent edits to the Bot Colony article and to the Laws of robotics article to be factual, objective and informative. Therefore, I respectfully request to reinstate them OR to edit them to some acceptable form considered neutral.

Factually, the Bot Colony videogame was updated on February 21, 2017 and sold quite a few copies since ( ref http://store.steampowered.com/app/263040/ and this press release http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20170221006827/en/Bot-Colony-Videogame-Leverages-Advanced-NLU-Technology ). The older version of the Bot Colony article, which is back now, states it's been discontinued. While this is true (it was discontinued for a while), it's not discontinued any longer, so if that statements is left to stand alone, it's misleading.

About the 5th law of robotics - its consequences have been explored thoroughly in a 'serious' sci-fi work https://www.amazon.ca/Bot-Colony-Novel-Present-Future-ebook/dp/B00K7O6BSE that anticipates the verbal abilities of robots circa 2021. I believe it deserves to be mentioned in the same article that starts with Asimov's 4 laws, among other contributions. Many people are interested in machine cognition, and their ability to empathize (quasi-emotions are also mentioned there), and that's what the fifth law is about.

• Ha, that's more than "potential"! Seriously, thanks for your note--I'll respond at some length when I have the time, or maybe some of the friendly talk page stalkers can point you to the right place in our policy, where and how to declare. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 21:54, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Sensebased (talk) 12:54, 21 April 2017 (UTC) *I'm in a bind here. I can't be the source of the information because of COI, but the information itself is pertinent. Could you help edit it to make it neutral? That would be a nice resolution. Another question: I was toying with the idea to write an article about the book and link to Henry Fong's paintings here http://botcolony.com/media.php (to which I hold copyright, but I've now published). It looks like I CAN'T do that. Anyway, I'd appreciate a resolution re: Bot Colony article and laws of robotics. Thanks!

• Having a COI doesn't mean you can't supply information. It just means you have to be extra careful. As for the things you presented here--well, the Amazon link makes clear that the book is self-published; if the book is good and valuable, it's to be proven by way of secondary sources. Your other links: the one is a press release, the other an online store. None of those are good.

  This is an encyclopedia, Sensebased, not a marketing venue. Content here needs to be proven noteworthy by way of secondary sources--before we even start talking about COI, we have to have secondary sourcing. Drmies (talk) 14:37, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) @Sensebased: I know pretty much nothing about video games, but I found two independent reviews from this year and stuck 'em on the article talk page before leaving for work, partly because I have no way of evaluating the websites in question. After looking at the existing sourcing, I went ahead and added them today, and I've done some other nipping and tucking too in the bits where I understood. Perhaps you and others who know about video games can weigh in at Talk:Bot Colony on evaluation of sources and on how far I mucked up? Yngvadottir (talk) 15:44, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
• Passing through and wanted to encourage the list of vetted video game reliable sources and WPVG custom Google search as references  czar 16:32, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
• Sensebased (talk) 17:05, 21 April 2017 (UTC) Thanks for that. I've updated https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bot_Colony#Third_law_of_robotics with a mention of the fifth law of robotics in Communications of the ACM, March, 2013. Would that be sufficient to prove that the content (my deleted post under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_robotics ) is noteworthy?

Eleni Antoniadou

I !voted to keep but recognized this one was a hard call. Thank you for being willing to make a tough close and explain it fully and clearly. David in DC (talk) 14:00, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

• I appreciate that--yes, this was not an easy one, and I went over the article and the commentary a few times. Your fellow David argued his case well, and I did note your comment: that's the right spirit to have in an AfD. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:43, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Questionable action

Why are you asking me to "Lay low/lower" on Singora's talk page? If this person wasn't making foul PAs against me and others, I wouldn't be there at all. You are barking up the wrong tree by offering me advice. I trust you'll now be refusing the block based upon the diffs I've highlighted? Cassianto^Talk 13:21, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

I think all he's saying is you've just got to pick your battles. I could go all round the internet screaming about how Donald Trump is a danger to the human race, but all the Trump voters in Podunk, South Carolina wouldn't listen and I'd just get hoarse. Or, as the old saying goes, "never try and teach a pig to sing - you just waste your time and annoy the pig". Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:47, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

More succinctly, one of the best pieces of advice you'll see anywhere is at the top-right corner of User talk:Beyond My Ken. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 10:03, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

• "Shut up, suck up, survive"- Soviet labour camp saying. Best advice from there is to wear diesel-soaked underpants (to prevent lice), never take off your winter clothes in the summer, eat from the garbage, and lie down, curl up in a ball and squeal like a pig when you're being beaten. Also wear mismatched felt boots. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 12:54, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

• Ah, that explains it. I forgot the diesel oil this morning. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 14:54, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

  Yeah that's all very sound advice. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 15:45, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

• Cassianto, there are better ways to point things out to admins. If you want the editor to remain blocked, it's probably best to be more discreet about it. That you are right is, in a way, beside the point. Also, I'm not going to decide on an unblock, certainly not now.

  Update: unblock request has been denied. Cassianto, why are you yanking my chain when I (also) clearly criticized the other editor for their behavior, in pretty clear terms? How about this: if I'm barking up the wrong tree when I give you some well-intended advice, please don't involve me in any of your conflicts anymore. Drmies (talk) 15:45, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Kris Wu

I wish you would take a look on this article: Kris Wu. Seriously filled with fans' bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2404:E800:E610:1D5:5D2:8361:A218:3A09 (talk) 23:02, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Yeah Drmies I've had gnaw at it too; oversee it if you wish. But the fan seems pretty keen to reinsert the material, so action might be needed at some point. Cheers, — O Fortuna ^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 11:02, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Question about user

Drmies, what can I do for this, specifically the last sentence? AnneMorgan88 back at it again and you've warned her once or twice (even in your archives others had concerns of her being WP:CIVIL). Quite honestly, I'm sick of it. She's gone back to Softlander for this same reason. All I've been doing to the Northern Illinois Huskies articles was changing to sport-specific logos and changed the Northern Illinois Huskies men's soccer and Northern Illinois Huskies women's volleyball article names to be consistent with other Northern Illinois Huskies articles (she created them using "NIU".) She has now requested a move which as of this moment, she's the only one for the change. I've been nothing but nice, I've asked her to quit being rude, and I've done lost my patience. It is time for someone else to step in. Thanks, Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 22:16, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Would WP:ANI be a better place for this? Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 22:26, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

• Sorry I didn't get to this earlier; in the meantime, the move request is closed, and NeilN left a warning for a different insult. Let's hope that the closure of the move request puts this matter to rest. If their namecalling continues I'll be happy to block. Drmies (talk) 14:24, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

No worries! Thanks for reply, I'll definitely keep this in mind! Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 15:41, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Two days right now. I've ignored the SUBSEQUENT VENTING. Obviously a longer BLOCK will be forthcoming if the same behavior continues after the block EXPIRES. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:14, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Unblock request

Hi Doc, hope you are well. I'm having a look through some unblock requests that haven't had any attention for some time, and I came across User talk:Mchirico3489. Mchirico3489 seems genuine and is clearly not an actual sock, and I think could be trusted to not make any further similar edits until it's all been sorted out, but any unblock would require someone with CheckUser rights. Did you get any further with Prof Jones? Do you have any thoughts on what we should do now? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:44, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

• I'm fine, thanks--you too, I hope. That's the NIU folks? No, I haven't heard anything from him--tried to call, left messages... Hold on. Drmies (talk) 16:54, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
• OK, so nothing's changed. I think it's pretty clear that this was a class, and future similar disruption from one or more of the accounts is unlikely. I don't know if they're still interested in getting unblocked, but I'm not opposed. I looked at the SPI--{{U|User:Timotheus Canens}, do you have an opinion? Drmies (talk) 17:00, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

That ping to Timotheus Canens was malformed and wouldn't have worked. I'm in two minds - either decline the unblock and suggest making a new one should future course work need it (after proper organization) or (preferred) just unblock. I am not allowed to do the latter. (And yes, I'm fine too, thanks ;-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:55, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I remember this one, another student had also contacted arbcom about this. At the time I was going to just unblock them, since they're not socks, and it'd be easier to deal with the coursework issues that way. But there's a bunch of students and that's too much clicking and I never got around to looking for or writing a mass-unblock script, and then they didn't follow up so I forgot about it. I think unblocking is fine, though I'm not sure there's still any interest. Opabinia regalis (talk) 18:56, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Homechallenge55

I see you told him to stop yelling. No offense, but I don't think u should bother with him now. He has same issues and he won't take any criticism from anyone when ever we tell him to stop. He also blamed me for having issues which is not true at all. 2600:1000:B03C:C10E:D9A0:CDB:4BF9:DB4E (talk) 23:09, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Cave man$97

• Cave man$97 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Not asking you to actually do a CU or anything, this is just an observation, and that's a convenient template for it. I've got a mixture of a gut feeling and suspicion that this could be a sock of someone I've seen recently (another short-lived nonsense disruptive / vandalising user). I just can't immediately think of the other username for a SPI.

Murph9000 (talk) 01:48, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

• Yeah, I can't run CU on that suspicion, nor does it seem to be worth it. If their next edits are like the previous ones they'll be blocked, but it's likely a throwaway account. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:57, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Brandon Steven

There are three versions of the article: User:Brittany 316/sandbox is the article that was AfDed (closed as draftify after 2 days), last edited on 18 April 2016 and shows as started on 14 April 2016—it was both AfDed and PRODded, I'm not sure in what order; Brandon Steven was started on 19 April 2016; and there is also Draft:Brandon Steven, also started 14 April 2016. A fine bureaucratic mess. The name also rings a bell with me, but I have no idea why, I can't find myself in the history. Maybe there is also a deleted version, or maybe tehre's someone else of that name? Yngvadottir (talk) 16:09, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks Y. I merged all the histories and sent the thing to AfD. Drmies (talk) 16:18, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) I'll try not to completely balls it up this time!!!  ;) — O Fortuna ^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 16:22, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

I saw you in there somewhere, Fortuna, and chose not to investigate further lest I find more complications. :) Drmies (talk) 16:24, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Carried away

Sorry, I got carried away. All of the answers I got kept ringing hollow, and I kept going, expecting to get a real answer at some point. Maybe I accidentally killed one of his sacred cows, but since he wouldn't explain what was bothering him, I wasn't sure how to appease him. Not sure where I should have stopped. Guess I was hoping someone with some sense would jump in. In the end, you did. Thanks. 47.32.217.164 (talk) 03:13, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

• OK. I can't really help the two of you with that article, though. Maybe dispute resolution is best. Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 03:15, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
  • No worries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.32.217.164 (talk) 04:11, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

What it all boils down to....

The Old Coot Consolation Award

As much as I hate it, the truth I do bring, We're not young enough to know everything; So like other old coots, we keep getting screwed, Dismissing the notions we want to preclude; Like when flapping our wings for the whole world to see, We're not flying high like we once used to be. There's one exception to that which we know, About being popular where'er we go, We may not be watched as much as we think, But we're better at keeping our traffic in sync. Atsme📞📧 17:31, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk Me Down

I am reading the new biography of Martin Luther King. I am up to the spring of 1961 and the Montgomery (Alabama) Police Department is mentioned in not an altogether favorable way. So I went over to their page and noted there is no misconduct section. So I went to the talk page and see you and I were noodling on this about four years ago. Do you still hold that a misconduct section is uncalled for? I do not want to walk down the same road again if you think I am making a mistake. What do you think? Paul, in Saudi (talk) 06:55, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks. I left a note at Talk:Montgomery Police Department (Alabama) and hope other editors will pitch in. Drmies (talk) 15:03, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Simon Stagg nomination

I heard that you nominated Simon Stagg for deletion. When the articles for deletion article is started, I will contribute to it where this discussion will determine the fate of the article. --Rtkat3 (talk) 16:50, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

• Would you like to explain what it means that "you heard" this? Drmies (talk) 17:04, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

• I think Rtkat3 means that you, or a Twinkle-type script under your control, mentioned the deletion nomination on Rtkat3's talk page. MPS1992 (talk) 17:38, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Magical username

Hello Drmies, I hope you are well. I was about to leave one of my templated friendly welcomes on the talk page of new editor User_talk:*.*.*._Bnt_Sattar but I discovered that I cannot, because this editor has chosen a very unusual username.

I think as an administrator you -- or one of your administrator associates that gather here -- may be able to create the user talk page of this user and leave either a welcome or some other message. You may also have views on whether their very unusual username is a good idea or not. MPS1992 (talk) 17:44, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi Drmies. @MPS1992: I've created the page. The account creation filter and title blacklist should ideally match up. Someone should look into this. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 17:50, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

(talk page gnome) I will not spam the direct link here, but this reminds me of Xkcd's "Exploits of a mom" story (Little Bobby Tables) . — PaleoNeonate — 19:30, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, zzuuzz. I am curious with regard to the comic. Do schools in that country not have computer backups? MPS1992 (talk) 22:00, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Just want to point out...

...that this editor continues to follow me, making edits solely for the sake of annoying me. [2]. I've taken the article off of my watch list, as part of my personal policy of not confronting this editor, but I would like the background-level harassment from this guy who once called me "the worst thing to ever happen to Wikipedia" to stop. (Ironically, his disdain for me began when I commented against his behavior in a conflict with Magnolia67, the editor he is supporting now; I guess he's decided to annoy the greater of two evils. <g>) Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:59, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

• BMK, you're only a moderately-sized evil, as far as I'm concerned. You may well have a case for ANI there. Drmies (talk) 02:06, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Dethe of the Kynge of Scotis

Hello! Your submission of The Dethe of the Kynge of Scotis at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:54, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

my watchlist

hi - although you are an extremly high positioned user on this wikipedia and in my opinion you should be open to discussion here and accepting to all comments from good faith users, I have removed your talkpage from my watchlist at your request, friends only commenting for you. link Govindaharihari (talk) 04:22, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

• Yeah well sure great thanks. I do not need you to come here and comment on a request someone else has made. Yes I am open to discussion, but I am not happy if good-faith users are getting their wigs snatched. Drmies (talk) 01:20, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Is there a policy

on linking to graphic material without providing an explicit warning? EtienneDolet just did just that (and EXPLICIT WARNING that twitter link in his comment contains graphic material!), I clicked on it and saw something I really did not care to see. I'm actually fairly pissed about this and, to hell with good faith, I do have a strong suspicion he did this on purpose. He *knows* that I consider al-Masdar an atrocious junk source (they employed a neo-Nazi), we've had NUMEROUS discussions and arguments about it and he *knows* how I would feel about it. I see no reason for him to do this except to troll and fuck with me.

I really really resent being tricked into clicking on that.Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:45, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

• You have been round the block and here long enough to hover over a link to see where it will take you, quit feigning horror and grief and admin shopping linkGovindaharihari (talk) 08:32, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

• I'm not sure that hovering over that particular link would be informative - there doesn't appear to be any context in the url for the video that it shows. I've no idea whether it is a pertinent link but, well, it does seem odd that something less pointed can't be found. - Sitush (talk) 08:54, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

• Anyone that knows anything about the topic would know what to expect by clicking on the twitter feed of TheDaneChris Govindaharihari (talk) 09:14, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

• Perhaps. What about those who know nothing but read the talk page as part of, say, an exercise in dispute resolution? - Sitush (talk) 09:25, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

• I don't support the posting of the link but no one else is complaining and the user on request deleted the link. Govindaharihari (talk) 09:28, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

• Please take over, Drmies. Dealing with all the drama is exhausting. El_C 10:23, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

• Govindaharihari, no one invited you to come by here and throw shade. This is not a forum. Sitush is a friend: he is always welcome. VM, I just saw that video, though I tried to look away. No, I am sure there is no policy against that but this will haunt me for at least the rest of the day and much longer. I have gone a long time avoiding watching this kind of stuff; I knew it existed, but I never understood the desire to watch it voluntarily. EtienneDolet, what the fuck is wrong with you? Govindaharihari, I had no idea what to expect, so fuck you very much for patronizing the non-experts. Neither of you need to reply here, unless it's to apologize, and you can do that in three words or less. And in the meantime stop thinking about scoring points on Wikipedia. A human being got shot in the back of the head by some cold-blooded POS, someone thought it was OK to make a video of it, someone else thought it was OK to post that or repost that, and now someone here who we think of as a colleague drops it in the middle of a discussion about Salon as a reliable source--which it is, until the contrary is proven.

  El_C, thanks for the offer, but I've kind of enjoyed not having to deal with other people's problems all the time; I got work to do, and no appetite for getting run through the wringer again for all my efforts at diplomacy, so I'm going to lay low for a bit longer. VM, I'm sorry, sorry that you had to watch that (and I'm sorry for me too, and for my girls, whose Girl Scout troop ran a program on Syrian refugees and mercifully never had to see this, and for all the children of Syria, including Alan Kurdi, who frozen in time will always look just like my son at that age), and sorry that Wikipedia is what it is and I can't change it. Drmies (talk) 12:35, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

That entire discussion is over a similar video. Didn't think that sharing another similar video would cause much grief. Come to think of it, I should of at least warned users before they clicked on it. My bad y'all. Étienne Dolet (talk) 15:14, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

1) In the Alternet source (it's not Salon, it's Alternet) you can *choose* whether to click on the video of an execution. The twitter link you posted just pops that video right up and starts playing and it goes straight to the execution. You really can't avoid seeing it if you click it. You knew this. 2) You know that I don't consider al-Masdar reliable, that I think it's a crap source (and this actually confirms it) and there'd be no persuasive value in linking it - so why did you link it? 3) Removing the link after tricking somebody into clicking on it is fatuous. The whole point of that is to make someone see something disturbing that they can't unsee. So mission accomplished I guess. 4) Govindaharihari, go stuff yourself. There was nothing in the link or in the comment suggesting what the link would lead to. And it's really not up to readers or other editors to play detective when somebody does this.Volunteer Marek (talk) 17:09, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

• I still can't fathom why anyone would film, post, repost, or re-repost an execution. I do not remember the tweet saying what it was, and the first still seemed innocuous enough, if I remember, so I fell for it. I don't know what this was supposed to accomplish; wasn't the discussion about a reliable source? What could this possibly contribute to the discussion? Never mind, I guess. Drmies (talk) 21:53, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

My comment was in response to accusations of this being a "surprising" incident. Therefore, I merely pointed out that there's nothing surprising here and that the White Helmets has a history of similar incidents. However, as I have mentioned earlier, I should've warned users before they clicked on it even though there's no policy in that regard. Étienne Dolet (talk) 04:03, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Etienne. I hadn't thought about the video in a day and a half, so I guess it's wearing off. Not for the person's family, I imagine. Drmies (talk) 01:22, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

There is no such thing as "non binary genders." People who believe there are more than two genders are leftist lunatics trying to destroy society and should be shot.

You can shove your "inclusivity" and "empathy" up your ass. Facts trump moronic leftist opinions based on emotion. And facts state clearly that there are only TWO sexes—male and female. So stop trying to destroy society and the English language with this "gender fluid" nonsense. You may find that unlike you pathetic leftist freaks, most normal Americans support the Second Amendment. You are not even American but a far-left Eurotrash guest worker. I want you out of my country. Go back to your perverted Muslim-overrun Dutch shithole where you belong, European scum bag. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.161.142.178 (talk) 06:21, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

• Homeboy throw in the towel. Drmies (talk) 15:09, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

He forgot to say . EEng 15:12, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Wow, that special snowflake really got triggered. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 15:17, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

There's a curious irony to the fact that the IP locates to Denmark :D — O Fortuna ^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 15:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

It's mood swings from the hormone treatments. EEng 15:43, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

(talk page gnome) (edit conflict) The OP post appears to be an example of:

• Hate speech
• Death threat
• Xenophobia
• Islamophobia
• Sexism
• Far-right ideology
• Personal attack
• Uncivility
• Misunderstanding of human rights
• Contradictions (who appears to be over-emotional here)?
• Finally, probably WP:NOTHERE and failing WP:CIR?

Please, think of the kittens? —PaleoNeonate - 15:41, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

References

Request

Hi, Its a humble request. Can you provide me (04:39, 23 May 2017‎ (97,979 bytes)) deleted version of Jharkhand page? I see an edit war was on due to which you seem to have Wikipedia:Selective deletion the entire history of the page. I think you have been duped into deleting materials that were possibly original research but by no means copyright violation. The stuff that you deleted could be re-added with proper sources from internet and books. I will not restore it immediately but will help putting back the data which are correct citing proper sources. I think the article has become one of the poorest article among the Indian states and I sincerely want to improve it. Thanks JayB91 (talk) 03:35, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

• I found that content was copied from all over the place. Perhaps not all of the 40k violated copyright, but a significant enough chunk did. No duping took place. Drmies (talk) 19:54, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for River of Blood (monument)

On 29 May 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article River of Blood (monument), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that on the links at the Trump National Golf Club in Virginia, a monument commemorates a Civil War battle that never happened? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/River of Blood (monument). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, River of Blood (monument)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 00:02, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Almost 9,000. Haters gotta hate, but this is a huge monument! Yngvadottir (talk) 07:08, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

• Math(s) question: if a river has an average flow of 11,600 cubic feet a second, and the average human body has around one-eighth of a cubic foot of blood in it, what's the square root of bugger-all? Show your working. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:43, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Wow! Drmies, you've outdone yourself - that article is a masterpiece! --MelanieN (talk) 09:15, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, that's great fun. Very odd though, that most of the vandalism overenthusiatic editorialising seems to have taken place the day before it hit hyperspace! — O Fortuna ^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 09:22, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Join praise for the monumental anti-monument. I have a truly monumental thing today,- just the scoring was too long for a DYK, and the list of authors and quoted works would have filled the section. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:52, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

• You've had many such days, Gerda. Thank you for your many quality contributions. Drmies (talk) 16:24, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

I had many DYK days, but nothing that giant, Beatles responding Hitler. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:28, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

The story behind it: again I wanted to write about a group that impressed me, so worded that they sang this piece in its US premiere in Carnegie Hall. (Avoiding this time to mention what I heard: War Requiem.) The response was: not notable group singing a piece not notable enough to have an article ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:25, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

So I looked at the War Requiem again, to find that it was first performed on 30 May! And this:

"Britten said of his music, "I hope it'll make people think a bit." On the title page of the score he quoted Wilfred Owen: My subject is War, and the pity of War. / The Poetry is in the pity ... / All a poet can do today is warn. (That was written in World War I.)

I just had another GA, title translating to Wanted light of joy, written with Nikkimaria (which explains its strange ibox, mixed referencing and lack of detailed recordings, - that's the price of compromise). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:53, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Matheson, Death and Dissent

Hopefully this isn't too naughty; but if you've still got it to hand, any chance you could take a photo of p.16 for me? Much appreciated if possible. Bloody good article that TDotKoS by the way. Cheers! — O Fortuna ^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 09:00, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

• User:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, I got the first chapter for you. Email me. Drmies (talk) 17:09, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Nice one. Sent you a Gettysburg Address #1  :) — O Fortuna ^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 17:32, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

...twice. — O Fortuna ^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 18:26, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Request check(s) with the admin glasses

When I hit my redlink to create Little Portugal, San Jose, I found it had been deleted after a deletion discussion. Since the deleting admin doesn't seem to have edited since January, could I ask you or one of your admin page watchers to check that my version is sufficiently unlike the deleted one, and sufficiently better referenced? Pinging Mark Arsten in addition, in case he's within hailing range. Thanks in advance. Yngvadottir (talk) 03:34, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

It's totally different - the previous version was a brief mention of street names and landmarks, some categories, and an advertising link to a local restaurant. No references at all. -- Euryalus (talk) 03:44, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! How sad. A lot of long-time businesses have closed since then. Yngvadottir (talk) 03:59, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Updates to the Hazelwood School District Page

Hello Drmies,

The updates that were made to the district page, is the current information. Can you please change it back? Tallman91 (talk) 20:37, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello Tallman91. Are you referring to this edit that Drmies made? I am sorry to say that I must agree with Drmies that phrases like "relentless focus" are not simple statements of factual "current information", and also that lengthy lists of which elementary schools have achieved Bronze, Silver or Gold level awards in "Positive Behavior Support Intervention" do not belong in an encyclopedia.

Also, Drmies re-added some historical information about the district as listed in independent sources. If you believe that this information does not belong on the Wikipedia article about the district, you should explain why at Talk:Hazelwood School District.

Some parts of your proposed additions also seem to be copied directly from the district's website? This is not OK.

Maybe some things we can fix. Such as the district's logo. There already seems to be one on the article, is it incorrect? MPS1992 (talk) 23:05, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

MPS1992, thank you, and thank you for your offer to help. Drmies (talk) 01:26, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

FYI

I am telling you as admin who previously issued a warning to Khirurg [3] for "purposefully harassing another editor". I think he now choose another (women) participant to harass with comments like that (whole discussion), or that (whole discussion). I checked the sources and think the accusations are completely groundless. Rephrase this a little? Yes, maybe. But "introducing deliberately false information" or "lying" (2nd diff)? No, this is a groundless personal accusation. My very best wishes (talk) 19:35, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Just a note that this is the third time in 5 days that My very best wishes is going block-fishing against his ideological opponents [4] [5]. And that he seems to be stalking me (e.g. he clearly followed me to this discussion here [6]). Oh, and yeah, LylaSand did lie about consensus [7]. Khirurg (talk) 20:44, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

In the diff by Khirurg above I referred to this comment by yet another contributor in the same subject area. Was it an appropriate comment for an article talk page where users suppose to discuss only improvement of the page? I think it obviously was not. I do not care about ideology. All ideological accusations (if any) came from other users. I asked Khirurg what he means by this comment, but he did not respond [8]. My very best wishes (talk) 20:55, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for The Dethe of the Kynge of Scotis

On 2 June 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Dethe of the Kynge of Scotis, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The Dethe of the Kynge of Scotis is the only 15th-century chronicle that says that James I of Scotland was killed in the privy? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Dethe of the Kynge of Scotis. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The Dethe of the Kynge of Scotis), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 00:18, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

A little help

Hi Dr. I asked for page protection from persistent WP:BLP violations at John Ziegler (talk show host) about six hours ago. Any help would be welcome. Very best, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 00:48, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

• Thank you and cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 00:54, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
  • No problem, friend. My pleasure, and my regards to you and yours. Drmies (talk) 01:01, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
    • Regards returned. I always smile when I come across your proper eviscerations of puffed articles. And your edit summaries. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:08, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

User: 2600:387:B:9:0:0:0:B0

You may want to block User:2600:387:B:9:0:0:0:B0 again. He has made several not useful additions.JSR (talk) 19:15, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

• Feel free to leave them a warning; those two edits aren't that serious (no BLP violations, for instance). Drmies (talk) 22:19, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Question re AN, AE, EWN

Hi, Drmies. As an admin familiar with the case, can I refer you to a question I asked here? If a user is under discussion at AN, and they violate 1RR on an article that's under a 1RR restriction, should they be reported at EWN or AE as well as in the AN discussion, or should everything be kept in one place? Scolaire (talk) 18:06, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

• Oh, I don't know how familiar I am with anything. It's up to you. It's possible that AE gains more immediate attention from an admin, but it's more paperwork. Drmies (talk) 22:24, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for all the stuff you did at Talk:Iron Fist (TV series), including the CU bizness! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:09, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

• You're welcome. TV shows raise temperatures, it seems! Drmies (talk) 14:43, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Request for protecting the article on Namasudra

Hi Drmies, hope you are doing great! The article on Namasudra is a sensitive one, and was protected by you in June 2015 and then again by RegentsPark in March 2017, in order to stop consistent POV-vandalism. Now that the protection is off, it would be really difficult to revert changes on a regular basis. Would request you or any other admin to please check the Revision history, and take necessary action. Thanks & Regards, Ekdalian (talk) 06:17, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Semi'd one month. Vanamonde (talk) 06:23, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Vanamonde. Regards, Ekdalian (talk) 06:36, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Requested input

Hello, I frequently see you contribute to articles listed in Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea/Popular culture and would very much appreciate your input on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Korea/Popular culture#Eradication of variety show sections so that a conclusion towards variety show appearances can be made. Thanks. Abdotorg (talk) 19:07, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

The vest

Joakim Brodén performing at Wacken Open Air in 2013

Hey Drmies, the vest is the best. Just look at that fire next to it! Ha ha ha! Cheers, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:22, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

• Dude, you rock. Don't let anyone tell you different. Drmies (talk) 21:05, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

24.50.204.123

Hello Drmies. Since you are the one who blocked 24.50.204.51, this may be of interest: appears to be back as 24.50.204.123 and edited today with typical stupid edit summary in template space... I'm not really sure yet if that last one to Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace should stand. Thanks, —PaleoNeonate - 03:07, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Orinoco

Hello, Drmies - I've been making some edits to Orinoco, undoing some edits by an IP editor, and I wanted to provide links to WP articles for reference. I now see I erred in putting "WP" before the name of the article in the link because they are coming out as red links in my edit summaries. Other than undoing all my edits and starting over, is there any way you could fix the links in a few of my edit summaries?  – Corinne (talk) 02:45, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@Corinne: Unless Drmies has superpowers I know nothing of (which cannot be ruled out) they can only remove or suppress the entire edit summary. The technical ability to edit that edit summary does not exist, I'm afraid. Vanamonde (talk) 04:15, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, that's not one of my superpowers, I'm afraid, or anyone's--but I think it's clear enough even without being clickable, and MarnetteD found a creative way to make the improvement. BTW, Planned Parenthood at GA status? Awesome! Thanks, Drmies (talk) 05:05, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, both, and also MarnetteD. Re Planned Parenthood, I only helped to copy-edit it, but Checkingfax offered some shared recognition and gave me the template to post there.  – Corinne (talk) 15:03, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) – Hi, Corinne. I gave you credit for promoting PP to GA because you did help. A lot. I believe in sharing credit.

As for edit summaries: If you ever botch one and want to do a Mulligan, you can perform a "dummy edit". To make it work, you have to do something on the page that will not alter the appearance, then make your edit summary, then save it.

Here is an example of a dummy edit: Change a heading from ==Landscape design== to == Landscape design ==, or change == Landscape design == to ==Landscape design==

Those extra spaces, or contracted spaces will trick the system into thinking you are making an edit, but will not show to the reader. You can also use dummy edits to send messages to future editors if you want them to know something, but you do not want to make an actual edit. More about it here. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 08:09, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

38.132.120.80

• 38.132.120.80 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

Would you mind blocking this IP again? It appears to be the same person as before, so maybe a longer duration this time? Say, 2 weeks or 1 month...? Thanks. 78.84.108.148 (talk) 21:50, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Since you don't appear to be around right now, I'll try WP:AIV. Cheers. 78.84.108.148 (talk) 23:35, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

And there you have it; they're now blocked. Thanks anyway. :-) 78.84.108.148 (talk) 23:48, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

• Sorry. Me and the crew were out playing wiffle ball. Drmies (talk) 12:36, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Appropriate forums?

Is there any forums to announce the existence of an ongoing AfD I started without being accused of canvassing? I believe there needs to be more eyes from experienced editors who understand the policies surrounding the media topic.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 02:04, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

• Well, you can drop the link here. I don't know--the Village Pump? I do like the idea. Drmies (talk) 02:16, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

• Oh, I was not aware I could request an opinion from an individual editor. This was the AfD I was referring to. I will mention it at the village pump too, thanks a million!TheGracefulSlick (talk) 02:31, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

• Ha, this isn't really my talk page, and I have enough detractors to obviate the constraints of CANVASS immediately. Drmies (talk) 02:49, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

(talk page gnome) @TheGracefulSlick: Canvassing usually means to contact multiple select individuals that you think will vote the way you would like. Sending {{AfD-notice|2016 stabbing of Brussels police officers}}~~~~ to what seem appropriate public venues is not canvassing (Wikiprojects, deletion sorting lists (those are handled differently than with notices, see WP:DST), noticeboards, the relevant article's talk page, etc). The article creator should usually also be notified (available via the "page info" special link). WP:CANVASS and WP:AFDEQ have more details. There also are templates to advise participants of an AfD of these notitications ({{deletion sorting}} and {{deletion mention}}. I hope this helps, —PaleoNeonate - 02:53, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Blacklist the username Ks0stm?

Maybe it would be worthwhile to add Ks0stm the blacklist for new users?—CYBERPOWER (Message) 00:22, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

• What we need is a rangeblock and someone to contact the ISP. Drmies (talk) 00:25, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

  At least this will prevent these disruptive usernames referencing Ks0stm from being created, except by account creators and admins.—CYBERPOWER (Message) 00:26, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

• True--you're right. Ha, how do you filter someone who tries to write English but can't? And they're in college! (Sometimes.) Drmies (talk) 00:28, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

  Don't mind me, just subtly whistling. :p—CYBERPOWER (Message) 00:30, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

• You may want to have this done globally since accounts can be created anywhere. --Rschen7754 00:31, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

  The target appears to be localized to enwiki for the time being, so I added the blacklist entry to the title blacklist.—CYBERPOWER (Message) 00:35, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

• Thx. Did you throw in some variations? And Rschen, are you clever with rangeblocks? DoRD may have some numbers to play around with. Drmies (talk) 00:36, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

• I handed in my steward hat a while back, so unfortunately I can't be of help with that. --Rschen7754 00:39, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I must have done something wrong, because I could create Ks0stm is a smart guy as a test account, which I immediately blocked. Despite the entry being added, and the regex is correct.—CYBERPOWER (Message) 00:42, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Pinging @MER-C:—CYBERPOWER (Message) 00:44, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Maybe because you're an administrator? --kelapstick^(bainuu) 00:48, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

To actually override it you have to check a box that says "Override the blacklist". Otherwise, it blocks your account creation.—CYBERPOWER (Message) 00:50, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Rangeblocks won't help because he's hopping around all over the place, unfortunately. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 00:52, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I remember seeing a couple of sets of similar IPs, from the same town/area. Drmies (talk) 01:02, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

newaccountonly on the local title blacklist doesn't work because of SUL. This will need to go to meta. MER-C 03:41, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Possible legal threat or worse?

Hi Drmies. Hope you are doing well. I am wondering if either you or one of your talk page watchers who are an admin would mind taking a look at Abdulahbkhan. Not only does the userpage seem a bit questionable per WP:UP#NOT, but this edit sum and this user talk page post are a little more troubling. I thought about starting an ANI about this, but perhaps this type of thing can be resolved another way. Abdulahbkhan appears to have been editing for only a little over a month so he might not be too familiar with Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines. At the same time, this seems to be the kind of thing which can quickly get an editor into some serious trouble if they are not careful. So, I am wondering if you or anyone have any suggestions on how deal with something such as this before it gets really out of hand. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:11, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Oshwah has posted a warning on Abdulahbkhan's user talk so perhaps that will be sufficient. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:23, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Marchjuly, there was also this threatening post at talk:Muhammad and this edit marked as "fixed typo" which was not fixing a typo, which I have now reverted. The user page was moved to article space on 1 June as Abdullah B Khan, tagged for speedy deletion under A7 by GSS-1987 and then (correctly) deleted by Bbb23. Abdulahbkhan removed the CSD notification from his user page on 7 June (as he is entitled to do, of course). He has also removed maintenance tags without addressing the issues (the Aziz Fatimah Medical and Dental College article is still unreferenced). As he has made a total of 100 edits and so is new to Wikipedia, hopefully he will adapt to being a Wikipedian, but there are certainly reasons for some concerns. EdChem (talk) 09:05, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

After some deliberation, I have deleted their userpage; per fakearticle, U5 and borderline G11. Lectonar (talk) 09:34, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Good call. Drmies (talk) 13:06, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

And that went nowhere rather quickly... Drmies (talk) 13:08, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

For those watching at home, Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#User:Abdulahbkhan has just been opened up. Yunshui ^雲_水 13:53, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

• Blocked, and blocked. Also, was not a new user, per acknowledgement here. Bishonen | talk 18:49, 13 June 2017 (UTC).

Funny feeling. Would the proposer of this [[9]] be linked in any way with the above? Irondome (talk) 19:34, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

IP blocked for block evasion by Bbb23. Popped up again with this gem. If it is Abdulahbkhan then seriously good calls at WP:AN strongly reaffirming the indef. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:03, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Gem & non-mainstream? What about Thirty-fourth Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland? The Banner talk 21:24, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I did not think they hung the offenders from cranes in Dublin prior to 2015 however. Irondome (talk) 21:29, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

No, only the usual things as beating up and discriminating. The whole country would fall apart when the proposal was accepted etc. etc. But to get a referendum accepted nationwide is an clear indicator that the issue is mainstream. The Banner talk 21:35, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Based on what I saw earlier, those IPs are unlikely to be Abdulahbkhan. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:27, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Still...I cannot shake a rather bad feeling concerning the now-blocked user. I had a look at his twitter account and especially the one of his father. I think @Boing! said Zebedee:'s idea in the AN thread was not the worst one. Lectonar (talk) 20:32, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

FWIW, the emergency@ team is aware of the edits. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:39, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

(e/c)Would that fall under the foundation's area of responsibility? It may be wise. Irondome (talk) 20:42, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Are we in the real world? Drmies (talk) 21:09, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Dolly Rudeman has been nominated for Did You Know

Hello, Drmies. Dolly Rudeman, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 12:00, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Asilah1981 socking?

After leaving it for a while, I edited Catalan Countries yesterday. Most of my edits were either reverts or edits for neutrality of edits made by Asilah1981 in May. I made seven edits, each with a clear edit summary. It was reverted en bloc by 92.23.28.53 at 10.37 (UTC) this morning, right in the middle of Asilah's sudden spate of editing before you blocked him, and with an edit summary typical of Asilah. I don't know where to go with this: SPI will not do a checkuser on an IP, RFPP will not protect on the basis of a single edit, and ANI is unlikely to take notice. Can you advise me? Scolaire (talk) 15:45, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I have pending-changes protected for one month; any more edits by IPs will not go live and can be evaluated. If there is quacking, we can block. Lectonar (talk) 15:49, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Lectonar. --Scolaire (talk) 17:44, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

In addition, he violated his topic ban on topics related to the Iberian peninsula. Of itself valid reasons for a block. WCM_email 16:03, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

• Yeah... Drmies (talk) 18:00, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

(Me again)

Sorry to intrude when you seem to be... fully invested in the moment, as it were?! But just FYI, Gregory's Chronicle is live, and I thought you might like to (so, actually not just for information after all, I lie!) cast a lazy eye over it, sometime. No pressure. In the mean time, good luck with the cabaret! — O Fortuna ^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 19:29, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Regarding myself

Drmies thanks for your advice and for staying neutral on this matter. I cannot act in self-interest and pretend to be apologetic. It's not something I like to do and tbh I don't like playing politics on wikipedia, I deal with enough politics in real life. In any case, I have done nothing to merit a topic ban instigated by edit warriors, as can be seen in my editing history. It is an attempted character assassination and I am remaining firm on principle. If I don't it will just lend credence to the whole thing.Asilah1981 (talk) 08:28, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

• Last time I looked that topic ban seemed to be a happening thing; this can't be a pleasant experience. But I gotta say also, those edits to the White Helmets article, for instance, that's not going to help you: the area is simply that prone to disruption that firm rules were installed. Take care Asilah, Drmies (talk) 13:09, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Drmies. I think with the white helmets thing I accidentally bumped into something. Was told about that Eastern European anti-russian mailing list which was busted by admins some time back. Maybe I should back off from Syria topics altogether, which are new to me... but someone has to do it, they all seem "owned" to me by a very militant crowd. Iryna Harpy is ok though, even though we disagree...Asilah1981 (talk) 15:59, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Asilah, you tell you "was told". Who is telling this? There was a mailing list, but there was nothing "anti-russian". My very best wishes (talk) 16:22, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

From the finding of fact:

• Much of the traffic on the list that is material to the case was members coordinating in order to protect each other and their point of view in articles against a perceived "Russian cabal" .

I don't know whether the issue is one of language or comprehension but I'm frankly surprised we have an editor who would write: Asilah, you tell you "was told". Who is telling this? regularly editing encyclopedic articles. James J. Lambden (talk) 16:46, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

I asked Asilah and would like to hear his response to the question. My very best wishes (talk) 17:15, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

• James, are you raising a point of grammar? If so, there is no need for that. Asilah, I find this phrasing odd as well. I can go years without ever being told anything about Wikipedia. As for the White Helmets, I am still having a hard time understanding how they're supposed to be some sort of propaganda force, what with all the dying and pulling people from rubble, but hey, to each his own. Drmies (talk) 20:38, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

My very best wishes So you confirm you are part of this group? You seem aware of the matter and very defensive of their activities.Asilah1981 (talk) 21:03, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Asilah, please don't employ this rhetorical tactic on my talk page or anywhere else on Wikipedia. Thanks! (My very best wishes, it is a good idea to ignore loaded questions--don't answer.) Drmies (talk) 21:04, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Ok but it was a very odd question!! "Who told you". Good night.Asilah1981 (talk) 21:08, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Drmies: actually two points:

(1) The expectation that editors on english wikipedia speak english fluently. That's not meant to discriminate against international contributors (for example we have several Swedish editors whose writing is indistinguishable from native speakers) or to disparage non-native speakers (I myself am a non-native speaker); it is to produce articles that conform to basic standards of english language and grammar.

(2) I've seen several, recent instances where MVBW has difficulty understanding or expressing himself. Misunderstanding makes already difficult discussions in contentious articles more difficult. MVBW's focus on contentious articles exacerbates the problem.

I see Asilah has retired as a result of his topic ban so this particular dispute is no longer relevant but I'm concerned that until the problems in (2) are addressed the pattern of misunderstanding and conflict will continue. James J. Lambden (talk) 22:17, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

James, I think My Very Best Wishes (man I dislike such user names! "James" or "Drmies" are much better...) is not a trained grammarian in English, and what they are doing here, I think, is finding a way to work the writer's phrasing into their own sentence, which is not always an easy thing to do. You probably recall (cause I'm guessing you're an American) being taught how to do that, with your square brackets and all, from Freshman Comp, and so do I, which is why we look so suave and intelligent. But My Very etc., I've ran into them once or twice and haven't had a problem figuring it out (I'm not yet checking your diffs since it's dinner time here). As for this editor, sure, they may have retired but that doesn't mean the "case" is over--however, let's leave that be, since a little birdie tells me that ArbCom is on it, and believe me when I say that of all the things that matter to me here on Wikipedia, privacy is possibly the most important thing, whether I like or agree with an editor or not. Thanks James, and take care, Drmies (talk) 23:38, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Vandal

Can you deal with this edit, and the one just previous to it, to User talk:Oshwah?  – Corinne (talk) 01:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC) I see it has been removed.  – Corinne (talk) 01:59, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) It's been dealt with, FYI. Vanamonde (talk) 13:36, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Christophe Guye Galerie

You know more about art than I do. Could you take a look at this article and the edits of the user who created it. I became involved in this because an article she created about a photographer was tagged A7 and I deleted it. Because everything she does seems to directly or indirectly revolve around this art gallery, I asked her if she had a COI (see this discussion). She said no, although frankly it's hard to believe. Putting that aside, is the gallery article notable? Are her edits to artist pages constructive? If you or one of your art-savvy tpws have the time to take a look, that would be good.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:57, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

• All those resumes--I'm tempted to just slash all of them, since none of them have secondary sources. But then I'd remove Seydou Keïta's group show in the Guggenheim. These spammers are not doing us many favors. Drmies (talk) 17:39, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks, Drmies.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:56, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you.

Thank you for accepted my apologize. 100.38.114.244 (talk) 18:03, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

• Sure thing. Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 20:21, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 22

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 22, April-May 2017

• New and expanded research accounts
• Global branches update
• Spotlight: OCLC Partnership
• Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:35, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Brut Chronicle

On 21 June 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Brut Chronicle, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Brut Chronicle was one of the most-copied chronicles in medieval England? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Brut Chronicle. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Brut Chronicle), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Vanamonde (talk) 00:02, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Trump Tower: A Novel

JFG moved the page with no consensus. JFG changed the article information, against the sources, against your and my talk page comments. The title is short. There are no other book articles by this title on Wikipedia. The title should remain as Trump Tower: A Novel, per WP:SUBTITLES. JFG article content changes are against sources and against your and my multiple comments on the talk page. What can be done here? Sagecandor (talk) 17:15, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

• Well, you asked them on their talk page; let's see how they respond. A next step could be you and me gang up on them and beat them up when they leave their home to go grocery shopping--or we could see if someone else is interested in weighing in. Take it easy--it'll all work out. If only the simple matter of authorship wasn't so obfuscated for commercial reasons. Drmies (talk) 20:47, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Now I'll starve alone in my bed because I'm terrified for life of grocery shopping. Shame on you guys! Seriously, I opened a move request to debate the title. However, authorship is unambiguous: I restored Robinson. — JFG ^talk 21:17, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Drmies, user reverted again, against the multitude of research and cited sources I gathered together already present in the article. Sagecandor (talk) 01:50, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Well, I can't hardly beat them up: it's late and I have two books of the Aeneid to read tonight. Have a look at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution--or maybe one of my talk page visitors might want to have a look? Drmies (talk) 01:52, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Dispute resolution is helpful, but about what? It is incontrovertible that Trump is listed as primary author of the original, first edition. We don't write Wikipedia articles as if the book is about the 2nd edition. That would be unencyclopedic. Sagecandor (talk) 01:54, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

If it is "incontrovertible" then go ahead and revert, and cite vandalism--I'm kidding. Don't. It's not incontrovertible. Argue your case. Drmies (talk) 02:06, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

[10] user themselves admits first edition is attributed to Trump as primary author. Wiki articles on books are about first editions. Sagecandor (talk) 02:07, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Drmies, thank you, I took your advice, and went to dispute resolution. Sagecandor (talk) 02:59, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

That sock

Sorry about DieNoob. I should have checked the history. I was being distracted and annoyed off-wiki by someone who is hungry and can't work the fridge door. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:44, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

• My dear Anna, why are you apologizing? For being kind? I just happened to run CU, that's all. Let's just hope that it's over. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 01:45, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:46, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi - My goal is to simply get some pages I've seen in the past that have old information updated. I have no methodology in how I pick editors. If you have tips on how to choose editors to write to, please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yourstorysmith (talk • contribs) 19:47, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

David Duke

Agree whole heartedly with your deletion of canvassing links at david duke. Suggest leaving in one of the interviews and leaving it at that inso far as information on his public speaking is concerned. One link might be of interest to someone who actually wants to see him live in that kind of situation. Edaham (talk) 05:17, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

• One of the things I noticed was that a couple of those interviews seemed to be on some Nazi site--that's not the link we should keep, but one of those C-SPAN ones, maybe? Drmies (talk) 11:59, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

In case this is of interest

Since I noticed that you had previous interaction with this editor (which I think I only encountered for the first time now), in case this is of interest, I have just left a message on Ccawblake's talk page about a promotional link added to an article (website registrant also has the same family name). Thanks, —PaleoNeonate - 17:56, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Montgomery Industrial School for Girls did-you-know

Greetings Drmies, I apologize if you have seen these already, but I wanted to bring to your attention some comments I made at Template:Did you know nominations/Montgomery Industrial School for Girls. Basically I think you did a great job and there are just a few things to clear up before forwarding the nomination along. And I hope you're having a wonderful St. John the Baptist Day. Most sincerely, groupuscule (talk) 01:57, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

• Shoot, I'm sorry--I looked at it, but hadn't finished it up yet. I'll get back to you ASAP. Happy Pride weekend! Drmies (talk) 01:58, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

stellingen

Hi Drmies, i'm helping out on Abel Herzberg, and I have come across the word stellingen. What's it mean? It is within the context of this sentence;

In 1918 Herzberg obtained his doctoral degree in law from the University of Amsterdam, and in one of his stellingen posed that the Jewish people should have a homeland in Palestine. I am assuming it means a paper, lecture, or another academic term. If so, I am guessing it is meant to read and in one of his stellingen posited that the Jewish people.. Any thoughts? Simon Irondome (talk) 00:01, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

• I was hoping for a Dutch person to find a translation: it's a habit that we don't have in the US. Does this translate? Drmies (talk) 01:42, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Cool. Thesis or dissertation. Now it fits. Appreciated D Irondome (talk) 01:45, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

• in 1915 he wrote Victor E. van Vriesland, "God is dead". versus he wrote to…. I were going to change it, but then realised the former is better. After reading around the topic of Christophe Guye Gallery I realised there's a difference between advertising and marketing (he's a former ad man). The gallery's just a shop with some framed photos. If one doesn't work there, but go every day as part of one's work, then one is delivering the Swiss rolls. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:39, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Betsy Perk

Hi there. I've done about all I can on Betsy Perk. When you have a moment, would you please take a look at my translation and fix what needs fixing? If you have time to finish the translation or expand otherwise, that would be grand, but no worries if you don't have time or inclination, or if the sourcing isn't up to par. As usual, thanks! --Rosiestep (talk) 14:19, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:Owic car rental

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on User talk:Owic car rental, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. — O Fortuna ^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 18:44, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorted. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 19:08, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, Drmies, look at that guide on how to write your first article, you n00b. hahahaha LadyofShalott 19:19, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

^{(talk page stalker) Uh oh...did Drmies try to write an article about his Prius, which is almost a homophone for...er, uhm...nevermind. 🚙 Atsme📞📧 19:46, 25 June 2017 (UTC)}

DYK for Warkworth's Chronicle

On 26 June 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Warkworth's Chronicle, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Warkworth's Chronicle, covering the years 1461 to 1474, reports on the double bleeding of Henry VI and a headless man who cries, "Bowes, bowes, bowes"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Warkworth's Chronicle. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Warkworth's Chronicle), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

IronGargoyle (talk) 00:04, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Revdel needed

Edit and edit summary of this defamatory edit. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 19:28, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Self-block

I would like you to indefinitely block my account, so that I avoid being drawn back in to the AN/I report. I have no intention of returning, and this is definitely what I want. L.R. Wormwood (talk) 13:27, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Can you also block account creation to satisfy the people misrepresenting my actions on ANI. L.R. Wormwood (talk) 13:46, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

• My dear Wormwood, contrary to popular belief I'm really not that block-happy, and I prefer that a more experienced administrator, in this case Bishonen, have a look at this. Let me just say that I rather have you on board than not. Drmies (talk) 17:24, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
  • To go after Jytdog is a dangerous hobby although he is frequently brought to an/i The Banner talk 17:31, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
    • Maybe, but surely someone can stop going after someone else. There's lots of people I don't go after, seek out, engage, or otherwise think about. Drmies (talk) 17:39, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
• @L.R. Wormwood: Generally, blocks are not given on request. Please see WP:BLOCKME. There's an alternate option there, too (WP:BREAKENF). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 05:46, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!

I am grateful for your comments on my web page. I have responded, as has the other editor. However, since this issue has raised a certain amount of bad blood, I will shortly delete that section, rather than let matters fester; and once you have read this, perhaps this should be deleted also! Once again, thanks. Arrivisto (talk) 00:16, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

• Oh, I have a little robot that archives for me. I hope you can try to get along better with 72bikers. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 03:03, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Auréli1 aka TIGA

I need some advice how to handle Auréli1 aka TIGA. This article is edited by a number of SPAs and the way they edit/edited, I have the strong feeling that all those accounts are identical to the pages subject: Aurélien Tigalekou.

There is no sockpuppetry as far as I can see. But the problem - to my opinion - is that the edits are often highly promotional but seldom sourced. As far as I know, the other editor never replied. Where to go to now? The Banner talk 21:14, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

The Banner, see the top tag at the article. ^{Atsme📞📧} 02:59, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

It looks like you had one COI user who lost their account/password and came back. There's no point in running CU since there is too much of a gap between AT241 and MusicIsLife241. If they don't respond, if they add unverified/promotional material, at some point I'd just report them at AIV, maybe. Drmies (talk) 03:06, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Drmies - are the articles created/maintained by blocked socks subject to speedy-d? ^{Atsme📞📧} 03:10, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, G5, but only if they "have no substantial edits by others". So in this case...well, if there is a link between Earflaps and the 241 editors, then in principle yes, but that may be hard to prove. (You'd have to present some diffs etc. for CU to be run or to make a behavioral case.) Drmies (talk) 03:14, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Earflaps...Earflaps...that name sounds so familiar. Drmies (talk) 03:14, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Suddenly, my concern gets a totally different twist. The Banner talk 07:03, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you

And "guzan watch out." Hope you're well. Couldn't be better here; a mild spring so far, and unusually windy, which makes painting large outside a bit challenging. So I'm painting large inside. And writing small. Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 13:03, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

• Ha, enjoy, and keep busy. We're having much, much rain; we must have had 10 or more inches this month already, and today it's raining again. On the bright side, I'm not burning up--you know I hate Alabama weather, except for a few days in the spring and a few weeks in the fall. And football Saturdays! Yes, guzan watch out, and much covfefe to you and yours. Drmies (talk) 21:00, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Wanted to let you know that I'd retired

Thank you for earlier affirming interactions. See User:Leprof_7272 page for details regarding my departure, if interested. Restrosepctively, on a previous difference of opinion, I would state again (with source for argument): by the standards of doing honest scholarly work, failing to cite ideas (not just quoted material) and failing to cite out-of-copyright source materials both constitute plagiarism. Well, if not at Wikipedia, then everywhere else in the scholarly publishing world. Bonne chance. Le Prof 73.210.155.96 (talk) 16:09, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

The problem with that noble sentiment being, of course, that Wikipedia is not part of the "scholarly publishing world", nor does it aspire to be, nor should it aspire to be. And of course, see [11]. EEng 04:51, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

A net negative-NOTHERE matter

Per this and this, I think it may be time for a "...block...and/or...topic ban..."

Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:11, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

• I don't want to block them on the spot, though they probably have that coming... Thank you Anna, Drmies (talk) 18:18, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Bludgeon v Discussion

May I ask how a couple of proactive responses, one of which even mentions bludgeon and how I'm aware of it, counts as committing it? Thanks, L3X1 (distænt write) )evidence( 18:23, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

• Well, "So i don't violate bludgeon" doesn't mean you're not; it's a variation of the non-apology apology. It's not a huge big deal to me, but still. Besides, "Not a personal attack on you, Andy Dingley, but it appears that this MfD has begun to collect drive-by !voting and parroting" really does the same thing: given that Andy's "delete" was only the second "delete" after a bunch of "keeps", it's pretty obvious that Andy's vote is to be considered drive-by parroting. You may not call that a personal attack, and maybe I won't either, but saying "it's not a personal attack" doesn't make it not a personal attack. Besides, personally I'm never sure what "proactive" means, and how it's different from "active", but that's probably just my own jadedness from having served in the SGA so many years ago. Words to matter, though. Drmies (talk) 18:30, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Proactive as opposed to reactive, as in rather than responding to someone in a discussion, I was trying to start a discussion with a !voter. The reason I considered it parroting is "NOTWEBHOST" is basically what Softlavender has been saying, despite being told by others besides myself (admins as well) that NWH is probably inapplicable. I have been trying to get a detailed response (Softlavender just posted one), but feel as if I am being ignored. Thanks, L3X1 (distænt write) )evidence( 18:38, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
    • Well, it's fine to ask for clarification, but I wouldn't preface it by saying "not a personal attack" when you are making what might well be one: "yours is a drive-by edit" violates AGF. As it happens, Softlavender just added a comment, with which I agree: NOTWEBHOST is a matter of balance, and if you look carefully you'll see that there is just way too much speculation for this not to be someone's essay--and not an essay on how to edit Wikipedia or whatever. Did you see note 7, on singularity? Pure speculation. Anyway, the discussion may well be going your way, so good luck. Drmies (talk) 18:45, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

• Surely "parroting" would be posting to AfD with a comment like, "Basically the above reasonings" and nothing more. Wonder where I read that? Andy Dingley (talk) 21:49, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Some Help

Would it be at all possible if I could get your help in getting an IP-hopping user who I'm edit-warring with at Great auk to discuss its grievance over the use of "was" versus "is" at the talkpage? Or at least semi-protect the page?--Mr Fink (talk) 21:53, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

• Well, neither of you look real good in those edit summaries, but since the IP was reverted also by Elmidae it's not hard to consider their edits disruptive. Besides, there's the a-holish edit summaries. Mr. Fink, please don't allow yourself to get baited into an edit war or an exchange of insults. I know that's not easy, and I'm a fine one to talk, but still. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 22:53, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Gojira

You ordered something? Which one you get? :) dannymusiceditor ^{Speak up!} 23:25, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

• Magma. Let's see if it's as good as the critics say. I haven't bought anything metallic in a long time, so this is important, haha. (I'm not counting Circle, since they're too weird.) Drmies (talk) 22:59, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Teahouse disruption

Hello Drmies and friends,

Can you or another administrator take a look at the contributions of User: That Random Edmontonian. Tiresome for me, and quite possibly alienating for new editors. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:32, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

• There's a bad Canadian? Drmies (talk) 13:06, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

  Shocking, eh? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:56, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

• Berean Hunter, thank you. Cullen, one wonders how no one saw this earlier! Thanks, Drmies (talk) 13:07, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Since Cullen328 and the others at the Teahouse had to put up with the grief I felt it was worthwhile to look into this and have filed an SPI case.
     — Berean Hunter (talk) 22:01, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
    • Thank you, Berean Hunter. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:22, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

David Van Wie

Hey Drmies. David Van Wie could use your attention again. Yngvadottir may also want to look. — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:16, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

• Van wie? Drmies (talk) 22:53, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

  Thanks. Maybe the blocks will keep it under control. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:31, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

• Two David Van Wies? One's got an annual hundred million dollar research budget and a staff of 5,000 at Johns Hopkins, the other's… no, sorry, I take that back, there's hundreds of David Van Wies. I'll just repeat that figure- $100,000,000 per year research budget. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:21, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Twoja twarz brzmi znajomo

Why have you deleted links to the show's official Facebook page in Twoja twarz brzmi znajomo (season 8)? - 78.11.12.10 (talk) 20:45, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

• Because this is an encyclopedia and you should find better sources than a Facebook page... Drmies (talk) 20:46, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

• Even if it is an official page and it presents information that is officialy confirmed? - 78.11.12.10 (talk) 20:48, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

• Official information that's officially confirmed? That's still not a secondary source. What are you confirming? That someone with a certain name is on the show? If Facebook is the best confirmation of that fact you can find, it's probably not a very notable show. Drmies (talk) 20:51, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Red noise.jpeg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Red noise.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:28, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

User:Purplebackpack89 and User talk:Purplebackpack89

Would you mind indef silver-locking these? I've been getting a lot of sock vandals of late. pbp 04:18, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

• Thank you 28bytes. Drmies (talk) 12:54, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

"Track list"

Hello. In future album articles, please title "Track list" as "Track listing". This is per the album style guide, WP:MOSALBUM. Thank you. I cleaned up Sarcelles - Lochères to adhere to the album guidelines, also. --Jennica✿ / ^talk 04:35, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

• Well now. Drmies (talk) 12:59, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Striking out additional comments

Thank you for striking out Nigario.sss' comments on the CNN controversies page. Would it be appropriate for us to strike out the other accounts blocked for sockpuppetry, such as DraKyry? DARTHBOTTO _talk•cont 20:22, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

• Oh, I didn't strike those out--I usually think that's too much trouble, and for most of those POV sock warriors their comments aren't worth the effort. But go for it, if you like. An admin will know what they're worth anyway. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 21:18, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Okay, thank you very much for letting me know! DARTHBOTTO _talk•cont 21:39, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Cosmetics_in_Korea

It is not as bad as it sounds, but a new editor is advertising. If have already reverted her three times today, but she replaced it again, this time because of a school project. Now I am confused what to do... see here. The Banner talk 00:35, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Help me doctor...

This article seems to me to be on very shaky grounds with respect to BLP because it names a minor who was arrested; yet I don't think it qualifies for CSDG10. It's at AfD, but that takes a while. Thoughts? Vanamonde (talk) 17:25, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

• For starters, it's now at 2017 Basirhat communal violence. Drmies (talk) 21:32, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

• Good call, thank you. Vanamonde (talk) 04:39, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Dolly Rudeman

Hello! Your submission of Dolly Rudeman at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 15:57, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Drmies, I posted this template on Fortuna's page, and received a reply requesting that I ping you instead. I hope you'll be able to take over. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:57, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Not today, friend, but soon. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 01:27, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks v much for that Drmies. — fortunavelut luna 11:52, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Once again...

Hi, Can you please do something to stop this kind of thing: my modification than the revert from Panam2014 with a false reason "No source for the flag stop now" while in fact the flag is sourced with an academic source (Houari Touati, Aux origines du drapeau algérien : une histoire symbolique (The origins of the Algerian flag: a symbolic history), Zaytūn Editions, 2014, p. 38. Pr Touati is an historian specialized in the medieval arabic world. Panam2014 continues his Wikipedia:Wikihounding (Panam2014 modifies this page only to revert me). He is in fact importing the dispute from Commons [12] where he failed to push his pov. Best regards --Ms10vc (talk) 17:12, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi. It is clearly a lie. First, the conflict began in french Wikipedia. After that, the groupe attempted to provok a new conflict here. Then, it is clear that there are no consensus to add that fictitious flag (see talk pages). And, in the end, from 15 April to 1 July Ms10vc attempted to impose the flag in english wikipedia, arabic, italian, spanish, and turkish (and has been reverted).

According to others academic sources, the flag was different:
"

1. Alexandre Rang, Histoire d'Aroudj et de Khaïr-ed-din. « le déploiement d'un grand drapeau national formé de trois bandes de soie, rouge, verte et jaune, et orné de croissant d'argent » [13]
2. Nadir Assari, Alger: des origines à la régence turque. «  A l'époque turque, le drapeau d'Alger était formé de trois bandes de soie rouge, verte et jaune.  » [14]
3. Marius Bernard, L'Algérie qui s'en va. « Rien n'y manque, pas même la longue hampe où flotta si longtemps l'insolent drapeau de la régence avec ses trois bandes horizontales, jaune en bas, rouge en haut, vert au milieu. » [15]
4. Sander Rang,Ferdinand Denis,Jean-Michel Venture de Paradis, Fondation de la régence d'Alger: histoire des Barberousse, « ; c'était du haut de ses vastes terrasses sur lesquelles flottait l'étendard rouge, jaune et vert ». [16]
5. Mouloud Gaïd : L'Algerie sous les Turcs, p.58 : « Le grand drapeau d'Alger, formé de trois bandes de soie, rouge, verte, jaune, se déploya majestueusement au-dessus de la porte »"

But, if another member of the group such as Buxlifa, etc, I will also revert too. It is not a wikihounding. That pov pushing should be stopped. --Panam2014 (talk) 19:41, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

• This is exciting--I see that Historian Student and Omar Toons were already duking it out over this matter years ago. Ah the good old days! I can't easily see which one of y'all's versions can claim to be a "stable" version. What I can tell you is that you all need to hash this out on the talk page, and find a way to solve this content dispute. Neither one of you have sought the talk page; if this is part of a bigger conflict on other wikis, we'll need a decent way to solve this--an RfC. Without accusations and bullshit, and with facts. Panam2014, announcing an edit war is not a way to ingratiate yourself with the admins here, and it would be a good idea for you to contextualize your sources a bit better: Fondation de la régence d'Alger, for instance, appears to be a tad slanted. Drmies (talk) 22:02, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
  • I have not violated any "en.wiki" rule, Ms10vc has been banned from fr.wiki so it pulls the strings from here. And for the rest, he and his band try to modify the other wiki (without source) in order to influence the french page. And before trying to impose this flag everywhere on the projects, he never contributed on these pages. We are in the midst of disorganization of the projects "WP: POINT". I am not announcing an edit warring, this one was caused by this group and as I am a regular contributor here, I will not let the addition of false information without consensus. First time when Ms10vc added the controversial flag without consensus and before that, there have no flag. It is up to them to obtain a consensus to modify from the contradictory sources. Why giving reason to Ms10vc? Also, I have a witnesse Jean-Jacques Georges. --Panam2014 (talk) 22:35, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi, since I'm notified : I have no idea about the gist of the current dispute and no personal opinion about the history of the Algerian flag, however there have been lengthy discussions on the French wikipedia, in which I did not participate (see here) and apparently the conclusion was that this flag was not the correct one.

I also confirm that Ms10vc's behaviour on fr.wikipedia has been quite problematic : he tried for many months to impose an "Algerian nationalist" point of view in various articles, and was ultimately banned. There have been loooooooooong disputes about this "Algerian flag" matter - most of them caused by Ms10vc and some users with similar opinions - and it would be better for all not to import them here. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 07:40, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi. I have asked @Colokreb: to send to you a scan of page 38 of the book [17]. Once you have read it, you can decide by yourself who is telling the truth and who is lying. Best regards --Ms10vc (talk) 11:45, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

The source is not enough. We have specialists who do not agree and who are divided between at least two flags. I have added four book's scans. So per neutrality, we shouldn't add a flag. Touati is not above the others. --Panam2014 (talk) 21:05, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

• This is not ANI, this is not the article talk page. And both of you please pay more attention to correctness: it is not always clear what you are trying to say. Now, please hash this out on the talk page, and get input from other editors at the relevant noticeboards. What happened on fr.wikipedia is, at least for now, irrelevant. Solve a problem on this wiki and you might solve it elsewhere also. Drmies (talk) 22:14, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
  • I never said that it not irrelevant. The greater the concordance of the actions shows that there is a good link. For the rest, in this case, there are an user who adds a controversial flag, I remove it according to the sources, and then he insisist. It is an editorial conflict. After, I launched the "RfC". Finally, Colokreb never contributed here and since he offered to come here, we are well confronted with an import of conflicts. The conflict must be solved by the contributors of this encyclopedia. --Panam2014 (talk) 22:31, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Vian bruits.jpeg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Vian bruits.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:35, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

• Will no-one give a hoot if the bruit is moot? Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:57, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

• Xanthomelanoussprog, that album is really worth it. Drmies (talk) 11:58, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

My collected material

Hello! Sorry for that. Could you give me my collected material so I could make this case stronger? Also please guide me how to start SPI? Greenbörg (talk) 12:34, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Montgomery Industrial School for Girls

On 13 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Montgomery Industrial School for Girls, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that white reformist Northern women founded the Montgomery Industrial School for Girls (pictured) in Montgomery, Alabama, to educate black girls, who included Rosa Parks and Johnnie Carr? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Montgomery Industrial School for Girls. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Montgomery Industrial School for Girls), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:02, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Huntley, Illinois

Hi Dr; please revert any content removal that may have been overzealous. I'm uncertain, for instance, if we approve of listings of town churches, but it strikes me as directory stuff. Very best, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 15:20, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

• I was merely admiring your work and expressed my gratitude testicularly. :) Drmies (talk) 17:52, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Grand. Now I can never 'unread' that. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:44, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Random, spontaneous HOUNDing my three new users?

Hey, I'm not sure if "Inactive" Arbs see the emails, but whether or not you have seen that email I sent today about the off-wiki harassment ... well, the on-wiki harassment is frustrating enough. In the last week, not one, not two, but three separate accounts have started "coming after" me. I undermined one of them on a frivolous ANI thread she started, so I can tell why she might just be angry, and I !voted in support of the deletion of a page created by another, but the third is just completely baffling to me -- I had a good faith disagreement with them over the definition of a word, but the more I have tried to back down the more aggressively they have attacked me.

And the fact that they all happened in such close proximity to each other makes me really think there is some connection. Some other stuff elaborated on in that email makes me really think that at least the first and third received the same "warning" about me through an abuse of the Wikimedia email facility by some slimey, cowardly wiki-stalker who instead of confronting me directly has been going around badmouthing me off-wiki for months or years.

Since I can kinda guess what the result of the Committee's deliberations regarding the off-wiki harassment will be (after how the last two incidents were addressed), any advice you could offer on dealing with the on-wiki stuff would be appreciated. And yes, I know the best idea from the perspective of my own enjoyment of Wikipedia would be to just give up and go write about Tang poetry, but the last time I tried that it made the problem worse for everyone else (you closed the resulting ANI thread in February and this page subsequently played host to yet more drahms). Is ANI really the only answer? It feels kind of like they are deliberately avoiding my talk page to keep my talk page stalkers from noticing them; all three of them have posted extensive commentary directed at me on a whole bunch of other fora.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 10:21, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Also, sorry if I was misleading above. "new" refers to the number of edits, not the date the account was created, although in the case of one (the first) it's not even accurate in that sense; I "borrowed" it from a comment by Softlavender on the aforementioned ANI thread. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 10:27, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

• Where is S.tollyfield hounding you? Besides the AfD I only see their talk page. Drmies (talk) 13:15, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Two of them have made out-of-the-blue comments about "my history" even though my conflicts with them were very localized (the other one ... well, I have other reasons for believing they have either been hounding me or receiving off-wiki contact). The relevant diff for S.tollyfield is here, although you appear to have noticed that yourself within two minutes of the above. Anyway, thank you for cautioning the user on their talk page. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 20:15, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

• Sorry, but this is all a bit much, and I don't see a lot of hounding. I see a lot of mediocre and poor behavior, that's true, but as so often I don't quite see how you get involved in these situations. Drmies (talk) 13:25, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Me neither. If you look at my first comments on the ANI thread with Pyxis, I was actually quite cordial; she elevated it almost immediately. And ... well, my life would probably be easier if I watched movies but limited my Wikipedia editing to classical poetry. But ironically almost everyone who commented at WT:FILM agreed with me. It wasn't until Huggums showed up and started (deliberately?) misreading what the problem was. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 20:19, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Attack on Pearl Harbor

From the USS Arizona (BB-39) page: "After a bomb detonated in a powder magazine," "The last bomb hit at 08:06 in the vicinity of Turret II, likely penetrating the armored deck near the ammunition magazines located in the forward section of the ship."

A bomb and a shell are different munitions altogether. Bombs are dropped from planes, shells have fired from guns. It was a BOMB that hit the Arizona as no IJN ships were within gun range. Zzsignup (talk) 02:23, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

• I know the difference between a shell and a bomb, thank you. I was looking at an earlier instance of "shell"--but indeed it says "shells modified into bombs", so you seem to be right; User:Beyond My Ken, I think we're both wrong. Next problem, though--verification. Zzsignup, you can import a reference from the Arizona article, that would certainly improve the article. Drmies (talk) 02:27, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Sorry if I sounded cross. I was a little frustrated a basic history based edit (Pearl Harbor was attacked with bombs and torpedoes, not large caliber naval guns) got reverted... twice. Is a reference really necessary? This isn't really a controversial assertion... That Arizona was attacked with bombs and torpedoes is well documented. Thought basic facts do not need to be referenced as they clutter up the article. Zzsignup (talk) 02:38, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

• No problem, I understand--and you were right! Yes, that's the kind of thing that needs verification--ha, if three people had to fight over it...the article really is not looking good in terms of verified content, and in that section there are lots of things missing. Ha, the footnote for the Shaw sentence is simply the Wikipedia article Look at that Arizona article--it's a Featured Article, and looking at what it verifies and how will give you an idea of a good standard. If I had to guess The ed17 or one of his pals had something to do with it; they may be interested in improving this article as well, and they can certainly tell you very precisely what the standards are in that WikiProject. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 02:45, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

• Apparently 16.1 inch armour-piercing shells, weighing circa 1,500 pounds and possibly type 88 as used by Nagato-class battleships (haven't got an RS for this). I've probably spent an hour trying to find mention of an 18mm caliber gun or rifle to identify an old bronze cartridge I pulled out of a junk box (base marked "T"). Sorry about the gun stuff. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:54, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

A great many World War I sources written before the use of grenades was widespread, use phrases like "we endured constant bombing" to mean "the enemy threw lots of grenades at us". And also confused some of this with shelling, which they also endured in close proximity. I think the shell versus bomb confusion also extended later, and to larger projectiles. The "shells modified into bombs" added to the confusion, as did the fact that aircraft laid mines from the air (i.e. into the sea for later use), but also dropped mines onto land targets (with parachutes sometimes) with the intention of their detonating in the manner we understand bombs. Large numbers of primary sources, and some secondary sources that draw from them, continue using the words shell/bomb/mine in a manner contrary to the clear distinctions ZZsignup rightly makes above, well into the middle of the 20th century. MPS1992 (talk) 20:35, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

• That bit I posted above appears to be a pile of crap. Haven't found anything online that is definitive as regards these "projectiles"- c.f. this page which manages to assign two different types to the bombshell that sunk the Arizona. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 21:56, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

• @Zzsignup: I helped write the Arizona article! As Xanth has noted, I suspect the confusion is coming from the explosive in question. From memory, the Japanese used converted armor-piercing shells, originally intended for naval guns, during the attack. See eg [18] and Nathan Okun.* I don't have my reliable sources with me right now though. *Note that while I'm pretty sure Okun would meet WP:SPS' "established expert on the subject matter" criterion, this particular link goes to a non-reliable forum, so I wouldn't use it as a source. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 05:49, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

• So… (Okun's theory is) some old geezer holds up the replacement of Shimose powder by Trinitroanisole for years until he retires or dies circa 1930. The geezer's attachment to Shimose may be connected to its use at Tsushima in 1904. The Japanese immediately give up a futile research project to stop Shimose-filled shells detonating prematurely and produce a new AP shell. The stockpile of obsolete AP shells is converted to bombs. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 06:35, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

User Joobo - weird edits

Joobo (talk · contribs), having been warned re Slovakia, is acting strangely. See [19] (changed New York to Los Angeles in List of films set in New York City, then changed it back), deleted a table of political history from New Orleans [20], is involved in an edit war at Islamic Extremism, where identical edits are being made by Joobo and various IP addresses, and is changing numbers slightly at Economy of Slovakia.[21]. Suggest keeping an eye on this. While I was writing this, someone who watches for vandalism picked up on the problem at Islamic Extremism, so this has more eyes on it now. John Nagle (talk) 06:29, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

This action by you almost appears to be harassing and Wikihounding. There simply are no so-called "weird edits" at all. Is there any Wikipedia guideline against "weird" editing or are there criterias for that? It looks more that you by accident came accross my account and cannot comprehend that i changed some "church images" in an article, since you would not do it yourself. And now you checked some edits by me and did not understand a couple of them or did not even bothered to try to understand them, and basically assumed bad faith in most of them - hence leading to your false conclusion of "weird editing". Concerning your: "is acting strangely. See [1] (changed New York to Los Angeles in List of films set in New York City, then changed it back)," Never did I changed NY to LA and changed it back: I merely copied a part of the lede entry from the parallel article from Los Angeles into the one of NYC and forgot to change Los Angeles with New York, when pasting it into the NYC movie article. After seeing the mistake I obviously corrected it. Concerning your: "is involved in an edit war at Islamic Extremism, where identical edits are being made by Joobo and various IP addresses" — so a permanently globally changing IP is deleting sourced content most likely for agenda purposes (ignoring the hint to the good rated main article of the subject which points out to exactly what the IP has "doubts" about)- I do not think that falls under edit war if you revert that, do you? it also does not look like I am the only more experienced user having concerns about the IP edits, if one has a look on the edit history of the article. Concerning your :"deleted a table of political history from New Orleans [2]," I excluded the fresh included table for two reasons. One, it was too huge to fit adequately into the section as it was crushing into the following section. Two, it had no direct relation to the actual section. The table was about nation wide elections, whereeas the section concerned merely focused on the local gvnmt. If there is no direct relation from an imge or table to the section there is no need for inclusion. That is according to basic Wikipedia guidelines. Concerning your: "and is changing numbers slightly at Economy of Slovakia.[3]" Yes i reverted "slightly" back to the prior numbers after an IP changed them without giving an edit summary or using a source. I did the same for instance in the Economy of Italy article, after IP vandalism took overhand and I reported the article for semi-protection. Can you explain to me why reverting unsourced changes of an IP address is weird? Guess the case here is settled; and I hope from now on you stick to actual WP issues- foremost editing, instead of harassing other users.--Joobo (talk) 08:49, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

If I can chip in here, as it relates to a question recently asked by Joobo at the Help Desk. I've had a look at Islamic extremism since I had reason to edit it recently on an unrelated matter. The IP editor in question is undoubtedly from Iran (which obviously has an interest in Hezbollah) and they're using proxies - a lot of Iranian editors do, presumably to avoid some firewall or censorship rather than any restriction that we've placed. This does look a bit like POV editing by the IP address, but it also does start to resemble an edit war. The IP is using the talk page in a reasonable manner, and I'd suggest other editors also do that. But there's nothing really suspicious going on there. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 08:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you zzuuzz; I am so happy you're still around. Joobo, WTF? Can you not jump on the harassment horse immediately? Drmies (talk) 11:58, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

What would you then qualify such insinuations of another user pointing out to "weird" editing if there is nothing weird about it? Sorry, but no sorry, I have nothing to hide nor to excuse and I cannot comprehend how one can neglect WP:CIVIL by raising such a non-issue. I gave detailed and coherent explanation for every edit that was apparently "weird"- which should eventually settle this actual itself weird accusation. --Joobo (talk) 12:24, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Joobo, if you like, I can play admin here. You said: "This action by you almost appears to be harassing and Wikihounding." No. That is wrong, utterly wrong. It does not appear to be harassment or hounding, it does not even almost appear to be that. Your weaponizing a relatively ordinary question turns Wikipedia into a battlefield, and that shouldn't happen. I have no dog in this fight, I don't even know what the fight is about and who the dogs are, nor do I have an undisclosed relation with John Nagle or any particular reason to side with him in an unfair manner; to put it more succinctly, if you don't back down with those accusations I will block you for violating our civility code and for doubting the good faith of an editor in good standing. Drmies (talk) 17:58, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Though the Iranian IPs might have a valid argument, the edit war at Islamic extremism can't be allowed to continue. In particular, two IPs are editing from the same range there and are obviously the same person. I've semiprotected Islamic extremism for a month. If other admins want to handle it differently they should take whatever steps they prefer. EdJohnston (talk) 15:49, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Ed--like I said above, I've not looked into these matters at all and, as always, I trust your judgment and appreciate your dedication to our beautiful project. Drmies (talk) 17:58, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

I do not want to accuse someone of anything or point a finger but I also do not like the same done to me for truly no logical reason. I hope and believe that this is in some way understandable. Maybe it is just a misunderstanding but I am hoping that the user is going to review the brought up edits once again and realizing that there is nothing "weird" about it at all. I am sure you would agree with the statement, that in case one brings such an claim, there should be some basis backing that up- otherwise it is inconsiderate. Perhaps there is some more mutual understanding now. --Joobo (talk) 19:50, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

The aforementioned behaviour seems typical for this user. Joobo keeps whitewashing the article on Germany's Frauke Petry, who falsely quoted German law (as expressly stated and explained in detail by the given source, one of Germany's most respected newspapers, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung). See for instance this edit. --Mathmensch (talk) 07:01, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Dear Mathmensch, you as well do not seem to even have checked the edits. You just, for whatever reason, looked into my edit history, found this discussion here on Drmies talk and jumped on the train to defame me because I some time ago reverted your BLP violating entry. If you have any problem with the revert do something adequate about it (which will be hard since the answer you hope for simply technically cannot be found- as it would violate BLP guidelines). Furthermore get to know the basic WP pillars and ways of editing. You simlpy cannot put everyting into articles according to your gusto or your personal belief. --Joobo (talk) 14:38, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Could please an admin become active in this case? The edits of Joobo are counter-productive, and arguing about them, resp. explaining the mistake, has no effect. I'm thinking about putting something on the admin's noteboard. --Mathmensch (talk) 14:54, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Drmies is an admin. Before saying "The edits of Joobo are counter-productive" simply because you do not seem to like me for whatever reason (perhaps the revert on the BLP is enough for you to feel like that) you should get familiar with WP:Civil and basic WP pillars. What you do is everything but productive WP activity with behaviors like this one.--Joobo (talk) 15:13, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

I have created the respective request here and hope that swift and resounding action will be taken. --Mathmensch (talk) 11:19, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

AfD/Simon Cohen

By my count there were 6 "Deletes", and 5 "Keeps". That is a majority of Deletes, to be sure, but how do you reckon it represents a clear consensus? The criterion for deletion is "consensus" not simple majority. The two are surely not the same, and there was no consensus in this case to delete. Several of the Deletes didn't come in until the AfD was extended. Indeed until a couple of days ago, even with the extension, it was tied. One of the Deletes came in yesterday, after the AfD was held open. At the end of the first round of AfD, there were in fact several more Keeps than Deletes. How come that wasn't considered a "clear consensus"? It seems like the cards were stacked against this article, and the AfD was held open until there was one more Delete than Keep. Come on, that isn't consensus. Person54 (talk) 23:00, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Meh. Most of the keeps were along the lines of 'This is promotional, but he is notable'; most of the deletes were 'This is promotional, and we don't do promo.' So, once again, we see how the WP:NOT policy outweighing the WP:N guideline. Just MHO, of cousre. Cheers, — fortunavelut luna 11:32, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

My point was that whatever might one think of the merits, there were arguments on both sides, and the closer shouldn't be substituting his judgement for that of the editors involved in the discussion. There was no consensus, which means in the case of deletion, "Keep" prevails. At least, the admin in question should have explained how he arrived at the conclusion that the discussion represented a consensus for deleteion, and had the courtesy to those who participated in it not to declare the outcome "obvious" when in fact it was essentially evenly divided. Person54 (talk) 18:36, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

• The arguments to "keep" basically boil down to "he is notable" without evidence provided. One of the best "keep" arguments is this, "It's true that the coverage in the mainstream media does relate to the event of giving his company away, but there is material from other times in business press and brief mentions in books"--but it's not hard to recognize that a. this argument is also a good "delete" argument (the 1E-ish argument of that one incident, the "brief mentions", which amount to nothing) and b. there are no specific articles linked, let alone discussed. Drmies (talk) 14:56, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Abel Herzberg

On 18 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Abel Herzberg, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Dutch-Jewish lawyer Abel Herzberg and his wife were moved by train from Bergen-Belsen in April 1945, liberated by the Soviets in May, survived typhoid, and arrived back in Amsterdam in June? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Abel Herzberg. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Abel Herzberg), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih^Talk 00:01, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

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

DRV FYI

Since you were the closer and don't appear to have been notified, there is a conversation underway at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2017 July 16 about your close of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CPC character set. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:29, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks TonyBallioni. It seems I see your name all over the place these days! Drmies (talk) 01:18, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Not a problem, and heh. That's likely not a good thing ;-) TonyBallioni (talk)

Spam campaign

Could you nuke Special:Contributions/72.201.34.177? It seems to me like a spam campaign. Tgeorgescu (talk) 23:22, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

• They seem to have stopped, for now. What strange edits. Drmies (talk) 01:20, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Southerners

I have absolutely no idea how my addition to the Stateless nations page was not impartial. I personally have no ties to the neo-confederate movement whatsoever, don't even agree with their stances, and don't even live in America. All the things I posted there were quotes from other places.

I'd appreciate it if you took another look at what I added, and looked at the linked articles. In all honestly it seems like you are the one not being impartial here, as you removed my post simply because it goes against your own political views. Specifically, read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Southerners and you will find that I copied the statement you called 'racist' directly from there.

• Sure--when all else fails blame the editor's political views. Take it back and maybe we can talk. BTW, the bit that's most obviously racist is the claim that they are somehow a "nation". Drmies (talk) 12:46, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm not a racist. I am not claiming them as a nation, I am literally quoting other articles. I apologise for assuming your politcal views, but you've got to understand I'm not American and so have no dog in this fight.

In terms of racism, the book I refereed to (https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Encyclopedia_of_the_Stateless_Nations_A.html?id=OLKKVXgEpkoC&redir_esc=y) isn't exactly a white supremacist book is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SMcM (talk • contribs) 12:52, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

That book is the definition of an unreliable source, the author lists himself as "a freelance writer and independent researcher", and no academic qualifications are available to verfity; Greenwood's editorial oversight also doesn't seem to inspire much confidence. I had to get the Featured Article status of Tamils removed because of this book, among other reasons. —SpacemanSpiff 14:05, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

• User:SpacemanSpiff, I'm interested in reading more about the Greenwood business. Drmies (talk) 15:03, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Fair enough, that book can be taken out of the equation then.

Still, there are other sources making similar claims. According to the Wikipedia article I linked (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Southerners), a number of academics consider Southerners to be an ethnic group. Now, either all the academics listed have questionable integrity and therefore this page needs to be revamped in such a way that makes clear such claims are ungrounded, or my entry on stateless nations is in fact valid; if Southerners are in fact arguably an ethnic group, and there is at least some autonomist/independence movement (which there is- see the league of the south), then this fits within what should be included in the list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SMcM (talk • contribs) 16:08, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

The other thing I would point out is this- one argument against Southerners being a stateless nation is the fact that the overwhelming majority of Americans in the South would reject this, however, you would most likely find that the vast majority of African-Americans would reject the notion of an African-American nation also, and they are included on this list also.

FYI, Wikipedia can not be used as a source for Wikipedia articles. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:14, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

• That there's a whole bunch of Confederate flag-waving white people gathering at NASCAR events doesn't mean they're a "stateless nation". The "League of the South" is a small group of idiots--surely size matters, and the size of any kind of group advocating some sort of Southern statehood is minute. Drmies (talk) 15:03, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

• Even if "white southerner" is an ethnic group (which is ridiculous), that doesn't make them a nation. Wait, do I need to declare a COI since I'm a white southerner? Niteshift36 (talk) 15:08, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

• Haha, I suppose! What we have here is a confusion between desire and reality (the desire for nationhood and nationhood itself), an important side effect of the Internet. Niteshift, I got a big fat Alabama A tattooed on my right butt cheek. What about you? Drmies (talk) 15:14, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

• Go Noles! First game of the season is gonna be huge. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:16, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

• Greenwood Publishing Group has a very unique history, having been part of many well reputed academic publishing groups including Reed Elsevier. However, in this particular case, they don't list the book(s) by this particular author in their general availability section, you have to search specifically for this book, also, the author isn't listed in their list of authors ; according to an Amazon review this book is a copy paste of many other books in the same series -- just a repackaging and that's my conclusion too based on various snippets from Amazon and GBooks. I see that you have access to the actual books, so perhaps you can have a look in detail. While Greenwood does have a lot of qualified authors, they also have a submissions/evaluations process that doesn't necessarily inspire confidence as they may be looking to expand their portfolio significantly -- one thing I did notice is that the notable author books appear to be priced lower as I suspect that volumes drive that. At the end of the day, for this kind of a book I'd expect a lot more scholarly citations, not just another book, and also I'd expect the author to have published in journals etc. We are left wondering what the specialization of the author is and don't know anything about their qualifications, somehting that's usually very easy to find out from books! —SpacemanSpiff 03:29, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Nicolás Pareja

It's me the prima-donna AL, still kicking and fussing (enough with the WP:VANISHES already, no one cares :)),

can you please help out in this player's PERSONAL LIFE section (there is a source there in Dutch, for the first paragraph, what the fudge does - original writings, i have since replaced them - "He also revealed that he "took my first football steps in our ward, where he played with the neighbourhood small team."" mean?! And isn't it supposed to be of SPANISH descent, instead of English?)

This user, in spite of several warnings not to overdetail, continues to engage in it, mentioning pretty much ALL of the goals a player scores. I admit i was a little trigger-happy when i rolledback, but now am in the process of salvaging some content (everything is now cleaned up, with the exceptions of the SPARTAK and the SEVILLA sub-sections, will take care of that after dinner). He was also warned several times for his poor English (as seen here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Timmy96#Disruptive_editing), i see that there have been no improvements whatsoever (i.e. "Pareja went on to make eighteen appearance and scoring two times"!).

Best regards, thanks very much in advance. --Quite A Character (talk) 17:22, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

• Oh, I don't really know what to tell them. Yes, that's a ton of material, much of it sourced to (Dutch) blogs (I was looking at Stefan Thesker also, with huge amounts of detail--too much, really. There's some writing problems as well. User:Timmy96, sometimes less is more... Drmies (talk) 17:52, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Not really asking that you interact with Timmy, ball's on your court there :) My request is: please read reference #28 (http://www.nieuwsblad.be/cnt/gk2v6h14) and "find" if he is of Spanish or English descent (i fail to see how the latter can be, with that name, but Timmy wrote it!), and also where on earth can "took my first football steps in our ward, where he played with the neighbourhood small team" relate to what is actually written in the Nieuwsblad article.

Hi Drmies,

I read your feedback and this is the first time I have responded to your comment. I want to tell you that the way I edited is my own style. I do admit I look for an article that is short and intend to expand the article. I do enjoy editing Wikipedia because it's fun and I really hope you don't have a problem with that. I acknowledged that you removed most of the references from Nicolás Pareja. I like to say I respect Quite A Character and Yngvadottir's decision to make changes to the article. No problem that majority of the references on this article were removed.

Regarding to your, Quite A Character, I have read the article, although I do admit I only look for "Pareja" name in this article to use it as my source. http://www.nieuwsblad.be/cnt/gk2v6h14 User:Timmy96 20:43, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

• You were warned over and over again not to overdetail (mention of all goals, several unimportant games and small injuries), you continue at it. Why? And why did you insert 100% false information in his PERSONAL LIFE section if you did not understand the contents? Seriously, i do not understand it.

Attentively --Quite A Character (talk) 20:31, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

• User:Timmy96, i have reinstated more of your references, some were actually good and for that i apologize. Now, it's not very difficult to understand but i'll repeat it again, please just insert the basic information, like transfer fees, duration of contracts, debut appearance or debut goal, important goals, important injuries (not EVERY injury and EVERY red card a player receives, that is completely not encyclopedical).

Please note that the administrator Drmies has told you the exact same thing (you insert too much info, too much), i am not making anything up. Attentively --Quite A Character (talk) 21:46, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Words of advice fell on deaf ears, as seen on Lars Unnerstall (and level of English still displayed in sentences like "Unnerstall have since become the first choice goalkeeper, even Hildebrand made a recovery"). Shame... I was this close to rollingback again, but then thought: 1 - what do I care; 2 - I don't want to get all WP:OWN --Quite A Character (talk) 09:55, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

You got mail!

I received your email, and I responded to you. Thanks again :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:31, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks Oshwah. Yes, I say we're a go for The Big Lebowski in September. Drmies (talk) 21:52, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

!

The kerfuffle on the RfA was actually nothing to do with you at all. I'll tell you all about it one of the days. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:09, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

• WHAT? something on wikipedia was not about me? i'm logging out and won't be back til summer's over. you and cullen can do the work

Indian universities

Morning! If you are considering taking up the plight of the vacationing Melanie while she's away, would you mind putting semi-protection back on Galgotias College of Engineering and Technology? I think there'll be a number of Indian universities coming off protection in the near future, which I'll then report as they are hit by the faithful cell phone spammer. Cheers --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 13:43, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Add Galgotias University, and the former has been hit twice more in the meantime. Based on prior experience, this will keep up until protection is applied. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 03:22, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

• Oh, so someone is on vacation? Sounds European. Drmies (talk) 14:57, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Please add: JSSATE Noida. Cheers! --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 15:08, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Three more please: MIT College of Engineering, Rama Medical College, Kanpur, Noida Institute of Engineering and Technology. Cheers --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 22:20, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Inshallah, this well shall not dry up on us: please add Lakshmi Narain College of Technology and, for a bit of variety, Heritage Hospital. Cheers --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:15, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

That's what I get for string-searching... please add all of these: Inderprastha Engineering College, Techno India College of Technology, Maharaja Agrasen Institute of Technology, Sinhgad College of Engineering, LNCT Indore, Krishna Engineering College. - That guy is really starting to get on my nubbins :| --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 02:29, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Another three please: Dr. D.Y. Patil College of Engineering, Pune, Inderprastha Engineering College, Sharda University. Cheers --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 20:44, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

RfA

Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. ) Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:55, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

You know how much I appreciate your support, as always. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:55, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

The honor was all mine. Thanks for your service. It's your kindness and helpfulness at the Teahouse and elsewhere that got you that awesome number of votes. Drmies (talk) 11:33, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

The Williams Record

Where can I go to have you removed?

Are you an admin? I don't think you are...stop removing my content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Genius (42nd power) (talk • contribs)

• User:Genius (42nd power), you betcha I am a big old meanie. Sorry for my rudeness. Drmies (talk) 02:13, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Apology definitely not accepted. Where can I go to have you removed?

• OK< stupid shit like that is just going to get you blocked. Anyone can click on the history and see what I really said: and most folks here know I never apologize, haha. Sorry Cullen--I know I should ! Drmies (talk) 02:17, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, too busy doing hit jobs for your friends! :p — fortunavelut luna 03:00, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Huang Zitao

Hello, can you take a look at the endorsements section? I have tried removing some information as some of them seems non-encyclopedic but my edits have been reverted.

• Which edits are you talking about? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 12:02, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Monkey D. Luffy

Hi Drmies,

I was thinking of removing all of the text from the Design, Personality, and Abilities sections of the article linked due to how the text IMO is presenting the character as real. I would like a second opinion before I take action. Thanks. -- 1989 20:25, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

• Oh dear, that's not a good article--and it's not even the worst of em. I just went through the "Design" section ("design" really is the wrong word...) to prune it some; one could argue that leaving some meaningful details has some use. But what is that sourcing? Do these things ever have proper secondary sourcing, and not from fan portals? Yes, those abilities--in rassling that's already stupid, and here it certainly is--Gum-Gum Pistol (ゴムゴムの銃(ピストル), Gomu Gomu no Pisutoru)? Drmies (talk) 21:50, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

• Faceache is also about a rubber-faced protagonist, with an unemployed father. Apart from that article about a relaunch there's probably no secondary sourcing at all. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:05, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

• X, will you please please come to my next party and dazzle my guests? Drmies (talk) 12:42, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

• In my butterfly costume? Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:15, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

• Just be yourself. Drmies (talk) 18:20, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Music

Remember the violinist whom I heard? More memories today: a choral conductor who inspired us, beginning with a Bach chorale, - that won my heart, of course. Chorale or not - that is the question in my FAC. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:29, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

• Gerda, you remind me of a perpetuum mobile. Good luck with the FA; I hope Schonken manages to stay out of it. --Oh, wait, it's that one... Drmies (talk) 12:56, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

You could just write a review ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:35, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I even called you to the scene, fondly remembering one of your reviews. Copyvio is in the air - or not? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:57, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Third day of Pentecost: some inspired music. What do you think about my idea to leave the FAC and pass it on to the new - well, what can we say if not owner? Your voice would also be welcome on ARCA (look for the cat picture, added on demand by an arb). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:37, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

I gave it up, following good advice (and avoiding to waste more time). - Are you following the chronicle DYK? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:05, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Compare first impression and now. (Looking for my name on the "first" page makes me sentimental, "Hammer. Nail. Door.", reformation.) - Then please respond to the open DYK, and close the top ARCA, or whatever needs to be done to end that misery. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:46, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

• Gerda, I'm sorry, but I'm not following. I do note that Brepols is slated to publish a book on medieval illustrations of the Tristan and Isolde romance. What's the DYK? Drmies (talk) 14:56, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
• Oh, and ARCA--that's about an editor I'm not very familiar with in a case I am not at all familiar with. Drmies (talk) 15:04, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I feel like explaining three jokes ;)

• Hammer. Nail. Door.
• Template:Did you know nominations/Warkworth's Chronicle
• Just because you are uninvolved you can support what Opabinia said: that the arbs can do nothing about that request. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:21, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I heard just now that we remember Telemann's 250th day of death tomorrow. Article has a tag. I told project composer's - no reaction. (I should add an infobox, then I'd get a reaction.) - I told project opera that all his operas are stubs, and promised to expand one, started Don Quichotte auf der Hochzeit des Comacho, nominated for DYK even if unlikely to appear tomorrow ;) Off to writing about Twelve Fantasias for Viola da Gamba solo. Ach Gott! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:46, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

ARCA archived, good news. Music: I heard this and even briefly met the composer, - more to write about! The soprano is outstanding, a red link in de, can't believe it. Makes me almost forget what we do to our readers. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:02, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Back to the beginning: do you remember Dirk Kaftan? Not much s left of that article, and I wonder what to do, - said so on the article talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:17, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. For Hengelbrock, I thought I'd place the missing info in a choir article? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:01, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK another of my recent memories (April) is on the Main page? - Different music: a senseless "speedy del" tag sits on Brandenburg Concerto No. 5, see talk. Are you (or someone watching) in a position to make it go away? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:50, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

That solved - thank you! - can you or another admin please move Gertrud Förstel to Gertrude Förstel, as explained here? I can't. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:51, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Moved — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:08, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! - Look at my talk: the most stunning collection of my music memories I remember, pictured! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:57, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Twice again...

No mas.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hi Drmies, I am sorry to trouble you again, but after having been accused of lying ==> [22], I want to have your opinion about this ==> [23] and this [24]. Imho it's a patent breach of Wikipedia:Canvassing and this sort of things must be stopped. Thanks --Ms10vc (talk) 07:44, 26 July 2017 (UTC) Accusing someone of lying is not accuse it of being a liar. And I explained how it was a lie. For the second point, "this page documents an English Wikipedia behavioral guideline." And these contributors contribute to the English version and have knowledge on the subject, there is no harm in asking their opinion. And I have the right to write to a contributor in his own talk page if it is to let him know some clarifications. It is an appropriate notification. So I did not do anything who is prohibited by the rules. On this case, we are in full harassment of this account where it tracks down my messages on the contributor's talk pages. This behaviour should be stopped. --Panam2014 (talk) 11:11, 26 July 2017 (UTC) Accusing someone of lying is in fact accusing someone of being a liar, pretty much. Both of you, please take it to ANI. Thanks, and good luck getting each other blocked. Drmies (talk) 12:35, 26 July 2017 (UTC) At ANI, Ms10vc, you can try to argue that this George person who was pinged is not a neutral party. Panam, you are skirting the line of canvassing by pinging in the middle of an RfC. I don't know why you'd want to play dangerously. Please do not continue this here; ANI is the right venue, if you want something done. Drmies (talk) 12:37, 26 July 2017 (UTC) No, but we will not invent rules where there are none. I did not do anything reprehensible. Why give it reason? @Jean-Jacques Georges: is a good contrbutor and a good witness. But for his harassment I will create ANI. He has done canvassing here by asking a contributor who does not pass on "en.wiki" to come here for no reason. From then on, such a contributor no longer has any reason to reproach me with anything. Colokreb (talk · contribs). --Panam2014 (talk) 13:04, 26 July 2017 (UTC) Oh please. If JJ Georges has already picked a side in that debate, it's really canvassing. I don't know if he did or not, and it's not my business, but them's the rules. And who is Colokreb? And why are you pinging them from my talk page? What is this, a teenage party where you can just invite all your friends? They better be bringing beers. Now, stop it. This is my talk page, not a forum--that someone posts here doesn't mean you get to play as well. Drmies (talk) 15:14, 26 July 2017 (UTC) Ms10vc, I see what you did: don't do that again. Drmies (talk) 15:14, 26 July 2017 (UTC) No, the page "canvassing" shows that this is only a recommendation and not a rule. For the rest, Jean-Jacques Georges is an objective person and he only tells the truth about Ms10vc. But for the rest, JJG is objective and he does not always agree with me, that we sometimes agree is not a pledge of connivance. I invite you to see his actions. And also, it turns out that it is rigorous in the analysis of sources. For the rest, Ms10vc did "canvassing" at the beginning of the month trying to contact Colokreb who never intervened here. In view of this, he has no legitimacy to reproach me (wrongly) for what he is doing openly. And I remind you that Ms10vc is harassing me. Perhaps he should be forbidden to speak to me. --Panam2014 (talk) 15:58, 26 July 2017 (UTC) Please don't remind me of anything. Drmies (talk) 16:01, 26 July 2017 (UTC) No problem, it's your right but if the other contributor did not come here, I would not have defended myself. But suddenly could you kind of relieve yourself of this kind of story and make it clear to all? --Panam2014 (talk) 16:04, 26 July 2017 (UTC) Ugh. This is not a forum, and even Mrs. Drmies doesn't get to ask me to relieve myself. Sorry, but I'm tired of this. Drmies (talk) 16:06, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Homechallange55

Cab you pleeeeeassseee block him and ban him. He's taking edits way to seriously, all he does is threaten people to pay attention to him and he harasses them in the edit summaries in the articles after he reverts an edit, he even blames them over his edits and anger issues. Please stop him, he gone way too far with all this. 2600:1000:B010:8056:5406:2687:5DF9:82B9 (talk) 02:18, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

So that's how it's gonna be, your just gonna ignore my report message and do nothing about it, wow... your real helpful alright... I was only asking for you to stop him for what he's been doing, just... wow... 2600:1000:B007:352C:D575:EAFC:6964:600C (talk) 11:51, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

• Well, if you simply drop something like this here without explaining what's going on or why I should do something about it, yeah, that's how it is. Also, there is no "Homechallange55". Drmies (talk) 11:56, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
• Oh, I see--you're the one edit warring on Tails (character) and elsewhere. Surely there are better things to do than fighting over manga articles--that's what Wikia is for. And please mind the spelling of "psychopath". Drmies (talk) 11:58, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

I know how to spell it, I'm not stupid. Besides, yes... there "IS" a user named Homechallenge55 you moron! you even warned him a while back to stop yelling in his edit summaries and yet, you still let him get away with it. Also, don't blame me for edit warring on the Tails article, he started it. Don't tell me there's no such user named Homechallenge55, your just a liar, no offense. That's how much I hate it when people lie. 174.192.13.171 (talk) 04:07, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Besides, I was only trying to prevent information of being removed from the article, quit lying. 2600:1000:B018:97A6:D554:E0BE:9024:AAD2 (talk) 04:31, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

• It's Homechallenge, with an E, homeslice. Now go away--this website is for adults. Drmies (talk) 12:20, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

I was only trying to prevent him from vandalizing articles asshole!!!!, did you even read what I said!?!?!? All I asked for is for him to be banned so he won't mess up any articles anymore. All you've been doing is just making excuses! Geeeesh, no wonder why you won't take criticism... 2600:1000:B013:CD2:6D4E:3D57:3910:BBC4 (talk) 15:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

• Oh, I'll take criticism, but I like the gift as I like the giver. Please read WP:BAN since you don't seem to know what "ban" means, and also you are wrong, and they are right, so you're the one who keeps getting blocked. Drmies (talk) 15:29, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
• So that is you, User:Bigshowandkane64. I knew I recognized the obsessive interest in trivia, the lack of knowledge of what "encyclopedia" means, and the complete disregard for the spelling and grammar rules that keep polite society functioning. Sro23, perhaps you can compile some IPs and we call up a rangeblocker? Drmies (talk) 17:57, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Take it from me, rangeblocks have been requested many times, but they never work. This person will always have an army of dynamic IP's at his disposal. Semi-protection is the only thing we can do. Sro23 (talk) 18:04, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
    • If he thinks I'm such a bad hombre, why does he come to me asking me to ban somebody? How is that rational? It's funny that that linked post complains about the treatment of a user called Brad Dyer, who race-baited one of our admins, and who turned out to be NoCal100, trolling since 2009. I wonder if white supremacists exert some sort of magnetism onto each other, and that that's what's going on here. BTW, the author of that linked hit piece is cited above, haha. Drmies (talk) 20:19, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Dolly Rudeman

Hello! Your submission of Dolly Rudeman at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:30, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Question

Dr and talk page watchers, was I correct to give a stern warning to 81.100.38.1 (talk · contribs) for inserting criminal parameters into actors' infoboxes? The IP has a history of disruptive edits, and apparently a farm of socks [25]. Thanks and cheers from 99, 2601:188:180:11F0:C154:1F1A:21D8:7E70 (talk) 14:17, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

• Now blocked. I've seen that one before. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 14:21, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. 2601:188:180:11F0:C154:1F1A:21D8:7E70 (talk) 14:23, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

New strain of K-pop fancruft

Hi Doc. Hope everything is well. We've got heavy-duty edit-warring pushing a new mutation of fancruft. Please see this sample. Thanks. Dr. K. 03:09, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

• Ah, she is "represented by a deer and colour pastel rose"? That's my kind of singer. Drmies (talk) 14:22, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
• This torture just never stops, doesn't it. Band has one album, and a 20k article, plus a list of recorded songs, plus a discography, plus a million awards. New accounts are fully schooled in formatting and coding and pop up out of nowhere, then disappear. Drmies (talk) 14:45, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

• I know, and, as usual, they are also schooled in edit-warring once you revert their gems. Aside from the animals and the colours, we also have the fruits. It's a veritable menagerie. Dr. K. 15:22, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Humbert de Wendel

Could you please keep an eye on this one, maybe protect it to prevent IP edits? I see it as just a typical collection of biographical stuff grubbed together from online sources. The subject seems to have been a pleasant guy who did the normal things any company owner would do. But the IP seems to think it is very hostile. I have three more from this family on my "to do" list. Hope they do not get the same response. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 22:30, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Faculty of Organisation Studies in Novo mesto

Dear Sir,

Please understand this as polite writing in regard of your "fixing" the article on the Faculty of Organisation Studies in Novo mesto. I un-did your "fixing", skiped few things that you deleted and I consider them as "my bad" for the first time. You deleted the stuff for the second time. However, I have feeling you deleted few things completely in "no brain mode".

1. Jean Monnet chair and Local Action Group project are (especially first one) strongly recognisable things in academia. 2. List of International cooperations - discutable but not necessary redundant. 3. Remark on confussion with the institution of similar name in the same country - rather essential issue.

Article was "ok" last 6 months after quite lot of cleaning, redoing and fighting. Now you have the opportunity to help me and make it readable, if you belive that I am kinda weak in this article (help is appriciated) or you can simply undo your changes which reduced the added value of the article.

For your further reference:

Definition of encyclopedic for English Language Learners: dealing with or knowing a subject thoroughly or completely (Merriam-Webster dictionary). In this manner, putting back all the content you are deleting is a proper thing.

With regards

Colcody2000 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colcody2000 (talk • contribs) 07:47, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

• Hi Colcody2000, please, you don't have to "sir" me--plus, I might be ma'am. Anyway, sorry, I disagree; that article was not "ok" before, and it seems that others agree with me--we'll not mention their names and just refer to them as editors X and Y, but they know their stuff. In general, such an article really shouldn't look like the subject's website at all, and if there's not a wealth of secondary sourcing, that's typically what we have. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 07:00, 3 August 2017 (UTC)