JUL 2013 - DEC 2013
If you do actually have the source you mentioned, I would like to read it. I would like to suggest those interested take the right direction. μηδείς ( talk) 03:59, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
I don't know whether you have already seen my original answer to your message on my talk page, but if you have you may like to look again, as I have posted an update. JamesBWatson ( talk) 12:50, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
I just wanted to make Baseball Bugs aware of Baseball Manager. Bus stop ( talk) 16:19, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, Bugs, but I think you've abused WP:NOTFORUM far too much on Talk:Edward Snowden - we have policies regarding what is appropriate talk page usage for a reason, and I don't see why you should be considered immune just because you have strong opinions on Snowdon. Consider this a friendly warning - or an unfriendly one - if you carry on as you are, I'm liable to raise this at ANI. I don't like having to say this, but you are setting an abysmally-poor example, and you surely know better by now. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 13:56, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
I mentioned your name here at AN/I in a thread about User:Capt S D Wong. Chris857 ( talk) 01:00, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Re this discussion, I'm not sure how you can call Rand Paul a "true libertarian" given his stance on abortion. (P.S. Can we please try to keep this sort of clutter off the talk page?) -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 22:23, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Totally anecdotal, but I heard some pundit say that self-defense as defined under the stand-your-ground law did not at all take into account anything such as the "defender's" prior provocative actions. Hence the stalk-provoke part of the stalk-provoke-kill sequence would have been blocked by the defense team as irrelevant under that law. I have no idea if that's actually the case. Isn't it comforting to know Z is perhaps back on the streets tonight, looking for more aholes to make sure they don't effing get away with it? μηδείς ( talk) 01:43, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
My post stated the opposite of your assertion. Maybe Wikipedia is ridiculed because positions are mischaracterized and molehills are presented as mountains. Tide rolls 17:43, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Pot, kettle, black -- NeilN talk to me 20:14, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Here's a direct link for your convenience. -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 07:41, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
After that ridiculous affair at AN/I I wanted to let you know I support you and I agree wholeheartedly that Snowden is not a hero and that I find it is a shame that Jimbo seems to be one of the "hero-worshippers". Camelbinky ( talk) 23:24, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
To be quite honest I find Want me to talk to a real admin and get your ass blocked? Ha! to be verging on a personal attack. Besides, aren't we all supposed to be neutral and leave our political views at the entrance to the wiki? MM (Report findings) (Past espionage) 10:15, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Here's a good old American cheeseburger to liven up your talk page a bit. Note the slice of (processed) American cheese, one of many pleasures your man Snowden will have to forego for the while. Drmies ( talk) 03:36, 28 July 2013 (UTC) |
Just letting you know I mentioned you in passing at AN/I based on my memory of some amusing trolls in the past. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:31, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Who's LC? μηδείς ( talk) 23:44, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
This comment was completely uncalled for. I make one comment and suddenly I'm abusing Wikipedia? I think you should step back and cool off for a bit. -- Chris 15:07, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm not saying that's the only side of the coin, but making statements saying "Everyone who has the opposing view to me is abusing Wikipedia" is a far cry from reasoned debate, and is offensive to those with different view points. Have some bubble tea and chill out.
Horatio Snickers ( talk) has given you a bubble tea! Bubble teas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a bubble tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy drinking!
Relax. Don't do it.
Spread the awesomeness of bubble teas by adding {{ Bubble tea}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!
Yours,
Horatio Snickers ( talk) 19:19, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Please avoid purposefully contentious discussion such as the comment at the end of this section and the one after it, and discuss the article in a civilized way. This should serve as a second warning. Shii (tock) 22:24, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Look, insults are not helping anyone. Slow down and try to put yourself in the liberal shoes (it may be tough, but that's how Wikipedia's consensus process works). If you can't contribute civilly, I may have to block you for an hour or so, to force you to step away from the keyboard. Shii (tock) 22:50, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
A beer on me! | |
Take a sip, dude. I fully agree with you, but getting blocked over this Bradley/Chelsea thing would be silly. Take a breather, have a beer. Cheers, and regards from (the apparently blathering and transphobic) Yintan 23:41, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
I'm no fan of Manning's, personally, but reading through the mess that is Talk:Chelsea Manning, your comment here stood out. Contentious as the issue may be, no person deserves to be dehumanized by being called "it." Please, reconsider your words. -- Fran Rogers ( talk) 01:11, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
or something to that effect. Toddst1 ( talk) 05:28, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Greetings, Bugs! Twice in responding to the Phobias... query on the Humanities Ref desk, you broadly associated "aversion" with "fear." Please take a look at what I consider a useful grouping of synonyms per the MS Encarta Dictionary's thesaurus:
As you see, there's no overlap between them, so I see this as worth consideration. In the ways "homophobia" and "Islamophobia" do or don't involve fear and hatred, I'd contend that the spectrum of {aversion > fear} varies directly with the degree of actual violence in the outsider group's activism (or militancy), plus (as I wrote in my response) perceived threat to the in-group's way of life. My professional field is Holocaust documentation, so I'm familiar with the historical components of antisemitism and how it was promoted. Goebbels took great advantage of the newly introduced channels of mass media in his day. Now consider the exponential developments in media distribution and sources of content from then till today, which I humbly suggest also includes what we're doing on the WP Ref desks. Anyway, I thought this was too extensive to post on the desk but am glad to share it with you here. Cheers, Deborahjay ( talk) 08:56, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
I just want to tell you're right, but you're unlikely to prevail. -- Niemti ( talk) 12:26, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
You have engaged in some rhetorical excess. I think this is making it substantially less likely that you will achieve what you want, and some editors have (with good reaosn) found several of your comments to be gratuitously offensive. Please tone it down. Remember, for trans people this is not a trivial issue and it will have direct relevance to reala nd painful experiences in their own lives. There's no need to allow changes that break policy due to political correctness, but please show some class. Guy ( Help!) 13:23, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
If I may weigh in. A traitor who doesn't want his - okay keep it nice, wants a sexual re-assignment. Sounds like a really good topic to walk away from. A glass of beer might not be such a bad idea. Slight Smile 13:41, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
...one reference that said Wikipedia is "ahead of the major news organizations". That, just by itself, demonstrates that Wikipedia has violated its own rules.'
Well said on many points. WP has been falling over itself to be liberal in its gender politics, to the extent that it has lost sight of the need for a basis on reliable sources, not the transitory. Andy Dingley ( talk) 19:36, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Anythingyouwant ( talk) 09:27, 29 August 2013 (UTC) (surveilling conversation in dimly lit bar where the participants also revealed whether Bobby Riggs threw the match with Billie Jean King, where Hoffa is, who hired Oswald, etc)
I've started a discussion on the CM page. I said elsewhere I'd tag you, but couldn't figure out how to work it in, so I'm bringing it to your talk page instead. I found very little other than the AP using either name in the last week. The Washington Post articles I'd seen were really from the AP, but there was exactly one article I could find on Manning on the WP that was after the 22nd and it used CM. Please feel free to comment or add sources you can find. Hobit ( talk) 00:07, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Chelsea Manning and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks,--v/r - T P 22:35, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
link - Kelly hi! 13:25, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Barring a return of common sense to the project ( WP:Tiptibism has reared its ugly head, indeed) Collect ( talk) 12:11, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
I am to the Libertarian right of the Tea Party, but seem to agree with you 90% of the time. μηδείς ( talk) 03:31, 6 September 2013 (UTC)Ś
The Arbitration Committee has passed a temporary injunction in the case in which you are a party to. The full text of the injunction follows:
The articles " Bradley Manning", " United States v. Manning", and " Chelsea Manning gender identity media coverage" are placed under standard discretionary sanctions for the duration of the case. Unless otherwise provided for in the final decision, any sanction imposed pursuant to this injunction will automatically lapse upon the closure of the case.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,
-
Penwhale |
dance in the air and
follow his steps 23:09, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Evidence. Please add your evidence by September 23, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Seddon talk 10:57, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
For TPS context, about The Bible: (Copied from Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science September 6, 2013)
“ | I'm kinda starting to believe that there may be a few plot holes in this book! SteveBaker (talk) 00:31, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
|
” |
"Ahh, what's so special about the" Dutch? Surely it applies to any manufacturers of dairy products! ROTFL!
--
220
of
Borg 11:07, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Pedro and Aconcagua.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth ( talk) 17:15, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Please don't continue this nonsense calling Tea Party members teabaggers. I find it personally ofensive, my father being tea party chairman of his county, and no bigot or fool. You are aware the term is used derogatively, and is no more appropriate than calling gay men c@cksuckers. μηδείς ( talk) 19:55, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Just a heads up, they're proposing findings about you over at the ArbCom on the Chelsea Manning dispute. [3] Phil Sandifer ( talk) 21:07, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Proposed decision
Bugs, as you know, we haven't really crossed paths much at Wikipedia, but I would like to ask whether you're interested in me speaking up for you a bit at your ArbCom "proceeding". If you're indifferent then I won't bother. But, as usual, I think ArbCom is exploring new ways to violate WP:NPA from their lofty perch. They start by putting the word "malice" in your mouth, as if your defense of WP:NPOV is forbidden by some higher rule against criticizing other editors; you never accused anyone of "malice" AFAIK (if ArbCom doesn't know the difference between malice and malfeasance then they are mal-educated). Anyway, I guarantee that ArbCom would be swayed (if at all) the wrong way by anything I might say to them. Cheers. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 12:21, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Here's a little something and just the way you like it. Slight Smile 17:20, 29 September 2013 (UTC) |
This is a message to inform you that an finding has been proposed in regards to you in the Manning naming dispute arbitration case. You may find it useful to review the guide to arbitration. Regards, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 12:37, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello. You have
a new message at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Miscellaneous#Ubersexual's talk page.
I can't take this anymore Bugs. I have attempted to defend you at the ANI, where you are in trouble for comments in part in regard to someone's sexuality.
You continue to use what's considered the name of gay sexual practice to deride your political enemies. Let's say as gay person I agreed with your political stance. Why in the world would I think using an anti-gay slur against them would be acceptable? Please revert your last use of the term, and feel free to delete my response. Otherwise I'll have to take this to an admin because you are making it impossible for me to contribute civilly to wikipedia by your insults. μηδείς ( talk) 23:16, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
FYI, in February 2009, a conservative protester was photographed with a sign using the words "tea bag" as a verb, which swiftly led to left-leaning websites like Wonkette introducing teabagger as a term for Tea Partiers. [4] [5] Thus, the term "teabagger" originated with lefties. The latter link has some good advice: "it’s good to call people what they want to be called, and for that reason I refer to them as 'Tea Party protesters' and 'Tea Party activists.'" It's completely understandable if you weren't aware of this actual history, since the pertinent Wikipedia articles tell a different story. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 00:30, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Warning, Baseball Bugs I admire your intelligence & expertise despite your use of sexual terms for two subjects during a political discussion. The "skew" in your political responses are also getting progressively worse. Please remove or strike these at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#Succession_of_the_U.S._Speaker_of_the_House per Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines. Thank you and sincerely do not misinterpret this as anything other then a friendly warning. Market St.⧏ ⧐ Diamond Way 12:40, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
When your wording has clearly dysphemistic and pejorative connotations, it is rational to remove the term from your posts and relegate it to the Wiki trash bin. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 15:25, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Did you see the catch by the LA left-fielder in the stands in the 8th inning? I don't think it is worth taking the chance of getting hurt to catch a foul in the 8th with a 10-4 lead. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:19, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Bugs, would you like to sign my guestbook. Thanks! Miss Bono [hello, hello!] 20:01, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
For your mastery of 'Diffs' research and ability to always give your best to 'call it like you see it'. All this in addition to your attempts to make Wikipedia a better and more knowledgeable place. Market St.⧏ ⧐ Diamond Way 01:40, 13 October 2013 (UTC) |
I found this paragraph in the article Toronto Islands, History:
I doubt it is true. In Babe Ruth, the claim is that his first professional home run was in an inter-squad game in March, 1914. March on Toronto Island would not be a time to be playing baseball.
I went to have a look at the ref in the Babe article (there was none in the Toronto Islands' article) which is #33, Creamer, but I can't find any reference in full with Creamer as the author. Can you help?
Thanks Bielle ( talk) 20:21, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
For the Arbitration Committee, Rs chen 7754 01:29, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Arbcom is fundamentally defective in many ways, as I showed, but there's no value in that outburst. "Shooting the messenger", y'know? Grab a beer and go watch the first half of your namesake, the Cards are up 4-2 n the 7th. Tarc ( talk) 02:27, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Your God viewpoint, Alpha Centauri, their "now". Your brilliance is exceeded only by your magnificence! Slight Smile 03:05, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
"they were Kenyans, moor or less". Kudos to you. (Or any other candy bars of choice.) Edison ( talk) 05:25, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
For your comments. I note MC and RD seem quite adamant in their insistence that my words were so offensive to polity that I must needs be chastised. I am more than half tempted to list some "nice quotes" from their own editing careers <g>. And be sure to vote the "B&T ticket" for the ArbCom elections! Collect ( talk) 18:55, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
I have posted a motion supporting rewording of the finding of fact regarding you in the Manning naming dispute arbitration case here. Risker ( talk) 01:28, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
" The Decline of Wikipedia" - new on Oct 22, 2013.
![]() |
I was going to leave you a hot dog, since that's baseball food, I hear, but this is the best the cafeteria could come up with. Later Bugs. Drmies ( talk) 05:19, 22 October 2013 (UTC) |
Hi BB. As I've announced on the arbitration noticeboard, please be aware that the committee has carried the motion to amend the Manning naming dispute finding of fact relating to you. I have also implemented this motion, including by replacing the old finding on the actual decision page. Please let me know if anything is unclear or you have any questions. Regards, AGK [•] 22:28, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I got your message. I understand your point. Are you saying we can't ask about fictional creatures or alternate history theories on the Refdesk? I didn't mean to disrupt, I didn't see any prohibition of such on the RD main page. Fishface gurl ( talk) 04:01, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Sorry about unhatting your post in the Science RD. It honestly never occured to me that you would have hatted your own post, I just assumed someone else had done it - guess I should have checked the history. Anyway, I have added a more informative header to the template to explain that you have hatted your own post, so no-one else will make the same mistake. Gandalf61 ( talk) 14:37, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm just curious to understand, the logic behind your effort to identify Fishface as a sock, for presumably banning or blocking that user. (I mean, even if you are successful, identify him, get him blocked or banned as a sockpuppet, he is just going to create a new user, User:Birdfaceboy, and there we are, back to the starting line once more. And again. And again. And again. And again. And again. You see the idea. So I'm wondering if that is what you like to do with your time, supporting ill-conceived and illogical/dysfunctional Wiki practices, that accomplish nothing, except perhaps amuse the hell out of Fishfacegirl [whom there's no shadow of a doubt is obviously OGB], but again, what's the point? The time/effort expended in the apparent dysfunctional Wiki practice of identify & destroy, brings an image to my mind [I can't help it; if it's not true please explain how it isn't true] of a dog chasing its tail. Pointless effort; amusing Braniff.]) Ihardlythinkso ( talk) 22:32, 25 October 2013 (UTC) p.s. Braniff isn't all bad; he has something to contribute, but his contributions are uneven. Meanwhile, he's also a prankster. Really he is just showing the WP how dysfunctional its current troll-handling practices are, isn't he? And that should be of some value too. (Like hiring a hacker, to test the soundness of a security software implementation.)
...issues a personal attack against me on the ref desk talk page, and then blocks me when I won't take the bait. Cute. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:23, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
fyi Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Adam_Bishop NE Ent 22:28, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
You've been through a lot lately, you might want to consider the idea of taking a short Wikibreak to re-charge the batteries and re-set the circuit breakers. When you come back, you'll be able to paste all the pathetic palookas with your powerful paralyzing perfect pachydermus percussion pitches. Warmest regards, Beyond My Ken ( talk) 07:25, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello Baseball Bugs, Miss Bono has given you an lovely bat, to wish you a Happy Halloween! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a lovely bat! Enjoy! |
Spread the goodness of a lovely bat by adding {{ subst: User:Miss Bono/Halloween}} to their talk page with a friendly message. |
Thanks for your input; you and StuRat easily answered my question. FYI, per Mississippi River#Lower Mississippi, the Ohio is actually the dominant factor below Cairo (Google Satellite View shows that it's wider, not just "bigger"); and per Missouri River#Passage to Sioux City, it's only six feet deep at St Louis as well as being narrower than the Mississippi. Nyttend ( talk) 13:26, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Surreal Barnstar |
For a very unique and yet tireless Wikipedia reference desk contribution streak. Surreal in every sense of the word Baseball Bugs, and a big thanks for making me smile and laugh. Market St.⧏ ⧐ Diamond Way 08:18, 4 November 2013 (UTC) |
Bugs, you're topic banned from "all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed".
This reference desk thread mentions such an individual in its section title and also as part of the original poster's question. You then responded by, inter alia, making comments about what the U.S. government should have charged that individual with, along with your own commentary about the individual's actions, like "theft is theft". As well as where you believe the individual would be "better off". (You then also very quickly got into an argument, though not mostly one about that individual.)
To me this does not seem to be compatible with your topic ban. But I'd rather not bother going to
WP:AE to find out if I am right or wrong about that, so just knock it off, OK?
P.S. if you're wondering why I'm the one giving you this reminder, it's because you prohibited everyone else from posting here! --
Demiurge1000 (
talk) 20:13, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, Bugs. As far as the topic ban on "all pages (including biographies) related to leaks of classified information, broadly construed", it would be prudent to avoid edits like these: [8] [9]. You are a good editor and I would hate to see you get into worse difficulty. Jonathunder ( talk) 21:26, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Were you asking me specifically? No, I don't think it's blockable. BTW, I understand if someone gets irritated at the chit-chat that some of us enjoy so much, and I'd just let it slide. Later, Drmies ( talk) 03:17, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for cluing me into the Monty Python - Star Trek crossovers on You Tube. I found several but I think my favorite was the mix of clips to the Camelot song from ...Holy Grail. It looks like the put some thought into what clips to use and having Trelayne singing "In-de-fat-e-gable" was a real treat. Thanks again and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 19:33, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Only Clarityfiend and Someguy1221 gave a decent answers to the legitimate question /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science#Why_does_ice_do_more_damage_than_liquid_water.3F. Its a science board where people expect more in-depth answers than just "oh its obvious, because it is hard". Straws are solids and water drops are not so its a legitimate question and the OP followed up with a similar question where the velocities are equal, so you are reframing his question and assuming bad faith with a strawman. Please for the sake of sanity on this board, refactor or remove your insult there. [10] I did not see him jerking anyone, but you and your strawman. Consider too that simply dropping a large block of ice will also hurt [11], (for it doesn't have to be moving very fast. -- Modocc ( talk) 16:05, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Enough, Aldrete. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:23, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
As per Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents, it is expected that people try to resolve problems with an editor on their talk page first. This is what I am doing. I refer to this diff of yours. I believe this is part of an annoying pattern on your part. It consists of making constant, slightly irritating off-topic remarks that wind people up, and poke at them, as if looking for trouble. Then someone makes a reference to your annoying conduct, and you always escalate by criticising them back. I do not remember you ever taking criticism gracefully, or attempting to defuse the situation. The difference between your conduct and theirs is not based on explicit adherence, or lack thereof, to specific rules, but a difference in apparent attitude. You invariably retaliate. One of the more blatant cases I have seen was here, specifically, your comment "...which is more than you can say for yourself. " Is there anything that will make you see my point, and change your editing? It is not primarily the side comments that I often find irritating, but the predictable retaliation that follows when you get on someone's nerves, and they are finally provoked to express this. Is it possible for you to change, and seek to defuse situations that pop up? IBE ( talk) 23:33, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Hey there. Hope you are doing well. Had a question that may or may not be in your wheelhouse. As an idle exercise I ran this search) at Baseball Reference, wondering: if the National League made up an equivalent to the Edgar Martínez Award, that is, an award to be given to the pitcher who hits the best, who would they name it after? I limited it to NL players, since it could only ever be an NL award. I don't subscribe to BR, so I can't see the best answers to that question (though I know from previous searches the number 6 guy, with the .270 BA, is Don Newcombe, who would be far from the worst choice as far as naming the thing hypothetically goes). I'm not asking who the top guys are. My question is this: I am seeing "TOT" listed as a team that some players played for. This makes no sense. Not only is there not a team that is abbreviated TOT, it can't stand for "total" either (else why would it sometimes appear in the midst of a player's list of teams played for, rather than exclusively at one end?). Any ideas? ☯.Zen Swashbuckler .☠ 19:08, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
While unsourced :), I thought this was a very perceptive comment: "I expect a lot of suicides don't necessarily want to die, they just want the pain to go away." Thanks, Bielle ( talk) 05:03, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Your upload of File:3RR sign.JPG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.
This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot ( opt-out) 11:08, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
The personal "insults" aimed at me are so bad they are fun on a very rare occasion--kind of like having one or two small fencing scars--that's why I am keeping them. But your defense, while appreciated by me (here and on many other occasions), detracts from the effect, hence my reversion. μηδείς ( talk) 02:31, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
I've hatted the subthread on the basis that the comment is OR about a living person, which is really all that matters, even if your conclusion is right.
As a side issue irrelevant to the reason for the hatting, and only since you ask, I will suggest you consider whether a comment saying that the reason his magic spell didn't work is because he either said it wrong or read the wrong magic book. Obviously those are not the only two possibilities. Your conclusion does not follow. Perhaps the proper Bible simply doesn't allow the prediction whether it is misread or not. In any case, discussing the BLP's actions based on OR remains inappropriate. μηδείς ( talk) 22:44, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm just giving you a 'heads up' in regards to a recent ANI you and I both commented on. More info here. Cheers - theWOLFchild 17:38, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, your edits in 2007 produced the same text as http://www.thebaseballpage.com/season/1911-world-series-philadelphia-athletics-over-new-york-giants-four-games-two . There's no archive.org for that page, so I can't tell which came first. The Baseball Page may be copying from Wikipedia, which would explain the "By WIKI" note. On the other hand, The Baseball Page is claiming copyright. Do you happen to remember the source you used in 2007? vzaak 21:09, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
It has been mentioned at ANI that you are being obnoxious at the reference desk here, courtesy notification. -- kelapstick( bainuu) 23:45, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
You'll notice from the history, the nutritional advice question was hatted, wickwack unhatted it, and you responded. I reverted the section to before the unhatting, removing your comment. Letting you know in case you think it should be restored outside the hatting. μηδείς ( talk) 02:46, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I have filed an ANI against User:54.242.221.254 here, you are mentioned. μηδείς ( talk) 03:31, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Dude, It's not the end of the world. :) Toddst1 ( talk) 14:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
I've pointed out to Mark Arsten that the IP you reported and he declined to block is apparently a sock of blocked user User_talk:54.242.221.254. μηδείς ( talk) 03:01, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
54.224.35.46 (
talk ·
contribs)
54.224.206.154 (
talk ·
contribs)
54.242.221.254 (
talk ·
contribs)
Too large a range to block, but at least awareness is raised. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:15, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
These exchanges are an embarrassment. You are failing to assume good faith. You are not being civil. You are engaging in personal attacks. You are disrupting Wikipedia to make (some kind of) a point. Either grow up and start improving the encyclopedia, or repair to an elementary school playground and spare the rest of us your petty childishness. — Steve Summit ( talk) 14:31, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
JUL 2013 - DEC 2013
If you do actually have the source you mentioned, I would like to read it. I would like to suggest those interested take the right direction. μηδείς ( talk) 03:59, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
I don't know whether you have already seen my original answer to your message on my talk page, but if you have you may like to look again, as I have posted an update. JamesBWatson ( talk) 12:50, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
I just wanted to make Baseball Bugs aware of Baseball Manager. Bus stop ( talk) 16:19, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, Bugs, but I think you've abused WP:NOTFORUM far too much on Talk:Edward Snowden - we have policies regarding what is appropriate talk page usage for a reason, and I don't see why you should be considered immune just because you have strong opinions on Snowdon. Consider this a friendly warning - or an unfriendly one - if you carry on as you are, I'm liable to raise this at ANI. I don't like having to say this, but you are setting an abysmally-poor example, and you surely know better by now. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 13:56, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
I mentioned your name here at AN/I in a thread about User:Capt S D Wong. Chris857 ( talk) 01:00, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Re this discussion, I'm not sure how you can call Rand Paul a "true libertarian" given his stance on abortion. (P.S. Can we please try to keep this sort of clutter off the talk page?) -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 22:23, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Totally anecdotal, but I heard some pundit say that self-defense as defined under the stand-your-ground law did not at all take into account anything such as the "defender's" prior provocative actions. Hence the stalk-provoke part of the stalk-provoke-kill sequence would have been blocked by the defense team as irrelevant under that law. I have no idea if that's actually the case. Isn't it comforting to know Z is perhaps back on the streets tonight, looking for more aholes to make sure they don't effing get away with it? μηδείς ( talk) 01:43, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
My post stated the opposite of your assertion. Maybe Wikipedia is ridiculed because positions are mischaracterized and molehills are presented as mountains. Tide rolls 17:43, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Pot, kettle, black -- NeilN talk to me 20:14, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Here's a direct link for your convenience. -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 07:41, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
After that ridiculous affair at AN/I I wanted to let you know I support you and I agree wholeheartedly that Snowden is not a hero and that I find it is a shame that Jimbo seems to be one of the "hero-worshippers". Camelbinky ( talk) 23:24, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
To be quite honest I find Want me to talk to a real admin and get your ass blocked? Ha! to be verging on a personal attack. Besides, aren't we all supposed to be neutral and leave our political views at the entrance to the wiki? MM (Report findings) (Past espionage) 10:15, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Here's a good old American cheeseburger to liven up your talk page a bit. Note the slice of (processed) American cheese, one of many pleasures your man Snowden will have to forego for the while. Drmies ( talk) 03:36, 28 July 2013 (UTC) |
Just letting you know I mentioned you in passing at AN/I based on my memory of some amusing trolls in the past. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:31, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Who's LC? μηδείς ( talk) 23:44, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
This comment was completely uncalled for. I make one comment and suddenly I'm abusing Wikipedia? I think you should step back and cool off for a bit. -- Chris 15:07, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm not saying that's the only side of the coin, but making statements saying "Everyone who has the opposing view to me is abusing Wikipedia" is a far cry from reasoned debate, and is offensive to those with different view points. Have some bubble tea and chill out.
Horatio Snickers ( talk) has given you a bubble tea! Bubble teas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a bubble tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy drinking!
Relax. Don't do it.
Spread the awesomeness of bubble teas by adding {{ Bubble tea}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!
Yours,
Horatio Snickers ( talk) 19:19, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Please avoid purposefully contentious discussion such as the comment at the end of this section and the one after it, and discuss the article in a civilized way. This should serve as a second warning. Shii (tock) 22:24, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Look, insults are not helping anyone. Slow down and try to put yourself in the liberal shoes (it may be tough, but that's how Wikipedia's consensus process works). If you can't contribute civilly, I may have to block you for an hour or so, to force you to step away from the keyboard. Shii (tock) 22:50, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
A beer on me! | |
Take a sip, dude. I fully agree with you, but getting blocked over this Bradley/Chelsea thing would be silly. Take a breather, have a beer. Cheers, and regards from (the apparently blathering and transphobic) Yintan 23:41, 22 August 2013 (UTC) |
I'm no fan of Manning's, personally, but reading through the mess that is Talk:Chelsea Manning, your comment here stood out. Contentious as the issue may be, no person deserves to be dehumanized by being called "it." Please, reconsider your words. -- Fran Rogers ( talk) 01:11, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
or something to that effect. Toddst1 ( talk) 05:28, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Greetings, Bugs! Twice in responding to the Phobias... query on the Humanities Ref desk, you broadly associated "aversion" with "fear." Please take a look at what I consider a useful grouping of synonyms per the MS Encarta Dictionary's thesaurus:
As you see, there's no overlap between them, so I see this as worth consideration. In the ways "homophobia" and "Islamophobia" do or don't involve fear and hatred, I'd contend that the spectrum of {aversion > fear} varies directly with the degree of actual violence in the outsider group's activism (or militancy), plus (as I wrote in my response) perceived threat to the in-group's way of life. My professional field is Holocaust documentation, so I'm familiar with the historical components of antisemitism and how it was promoted. Goebbels took great advantage of the newly introduced channels of mass media in his day. Now consider the exponential developments in media distribution and sources of content from then till today, which I humbly suggest also includes what we're doing on the WP Ref desks. Anyway, I thought this was too extensive to post on the desk but am glad to share it with you here. Cheers, Deborahjay ( talk) 08:56, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
I just want to tell you're right, but you're unlikely to prevail. -- Niemti ( talk) 12:26, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
You have engaged in some rhetorical excess. I think this is making it substantially less likely that you will achieve what you want, and some editors have (with good reaosn) found several of your comments to be gratuitously offensive. Please tone it down. Remember, for trans people this is not a trivial issue and it will have direct relevance to reala nd painful experiences in their own lives. There's no need to allow changes that break policy due to political correctness, but please show some class. Guy ( Help!) 13:23, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
If I may weigh in. A traitor who doesn't want his - okay keep it nice, wants a sexual re-assignment. Sounds like a really good topic to walk away from. A glass of beer might not be such a bad idea. Slight Smile 13:41, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
...one reference that said Wikipedia is "ahead of the major news organizations". That, just by itself, demonstrates that Wikipedia has violated its own rules.'
Well said on many points. WP has been falling over itself to be liberal in its gender politics, to the extent that it has lost sight of the need for a basis on reliable sources, not the transitory. Andy Dingley ( talk) 19:36, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Anythingyouwant ( talk) 09:27, 29 August 2013 (UTC) (surveilling conversation in dimly lit bar where the participants also revealed whether Bobby Riggs threw the match with Billie Jean King, where Hoffa is, who hired Oswald, etc)
I've started a discussion on the CM page. I said elsewhere I'd tag you, but couldn't figure out how to work it in, so I'm bringing it to your talk page instead. I found very little other than the AP using either name in the last week. The Washington Post articles I'd seen were really from the AP, but there was exactly one article I could find on Manning on the WP that was after the 22nd and it used CM. Please feel free to comment or add sources you can find. Hobit ( talk) 00:07, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Chelsea Manning and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks,--v/r - T P 22:35, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
link - Kelly hi! 13:25, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Barring a return of common sense to the project ( WP:Tiptibism has reared its ugly head, indeed) Collect ( talk) 12:11, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
I am to the Libertarian right of the Tea Party, but seem to agree with you 90% of the time. μηδείς ( talk) 03:31, 6 September 2013 (UTC)Ś
The Arbitration Committee has passed a temporary injunction in the case in which you are a party to. The full text of the injunction follows:
The articles " Bradley Manning", " United States v. Manning", and " Chelsea Manning gender identity media coverage" are placed under standard discretionary sanctions for the duration of the case. Unless otherwise provided for in the final decision, any sanction imposed pursuant to this injunction will automatically lapse upon the closure of the case.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,
-
Penwhale |
dance in the air and
follow his steps 23:09, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Evidence. Please add your evidence by September 23, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Seddon talk 10:57, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
For TPS context, about The Bible: (Copied from Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science September 6, 2013)
“ | I'm kinda starting to believe that there may be a few plot holes in this book! SteveBaker (talk) 00:31, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
|
” |
"Ahh, what's so special about the" Dutch? Surely it applies to any manufacturers of dairy products! ROTFL!
--
220
of
Borg 11:07, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Pedro and Aconcagua.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth ( talk) 17:15, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Please don't continue this nonsense calling Tea Party members teabaggers. I find it personally ofensive, my father being tea party chairman of his county, and no bigot or fool. You are aware the term is used derogatively, and is no more appropriate than calling gay men c@cksuckers. μηδείς ( talk) 19:55, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Just a heads up, they're proposing findings about you over at the ArbCom on the Chelsea Manning dispute. [3] Phil Sandifer ( talk) 21:07, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute/Proposed decision
Bugs, as you know, we haven't really crossed paths much at Wikipedia, but I would like to ask whether you're interested in me speaking up for you a bit at your ArbCom "proceeding". If you're indifferent then I won't bother. But, as usual, I think ArbCom is exploring new ways to violate WP:NPA from their lofty perch. They start by putting the word "malice" in your mouth, as if your defense of WP:NPOV is forbidden by some higher rule against criticizing other editors; you never accused anyone of "malice" AFAIK (if ArbCom doesn't know the difference between malice and malfeasance then they are mal-educated). Anyway, I guarantee that ArbCom would be swayed (if at all) the wrong way by anything I might say to them. Cheers. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 12:21, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Here's a little something and just the way you like it. Slight Smile 17:20, 29 September 2013 (UTC) |
This is a message to inform you that an finding has been proposed in regards to you in the Manning naming dispute arbitration case. You may find it useful to review the guide to arbitration. Regards, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 12:37, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello. You have
a new message at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Miscellaneous#Ubersexual's talk page.
I can't take this anymore Bugs. I have attempted to defend you at the ANI, where you are in trouble for comments in part in regard to someone's sexuality.
You continue to use what's considered the name of gay sexual practice to deride your political enemies. Let's say as gay person I agreed with your political stance. Why in the world would I think using an anti-gay slur against them would be acceptable? Please revert your last use of the term, and feel free to delete my response. Otherwise I'll have to take this to an admin because you are making it impossible for me to contribute civilly to wikipedia by your insults. μηδείς ( talk) 23:16, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
FYI, in February 2009, a conservative protester was photographed with a sign using the words "tea bag" as a verb, which swiftly led to left-leaning websites like Wonkette introducing teabagger as a term for Tea Partiers. [4] [5] Thus, the term "teabagger" originated with lefties. The latter link has some good advice: "it’s good to call people what they want to be called, and for that reason I refer to them as 'Tea Party protesters' and 'Tea Party activists.'" It's completely understandable if you weren't aware of this actual history, since the pertinent Wikipedia articles tell a different story. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 00:30, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Warning, Baseball Bugs I admire your intelligence & expertise despite your use of sexual terms for two subjects during a political discussion. The "skew" in your political responses are also getting progressively worse. Please remove or strike these at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#Succession_of_the_U.S._Speaker_of_the_House per Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines. Thank you and sincerely do not misinterpret this as anything other then a friendly warning. Market St.⧏ ⧐ Diamond Way 12:40, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
When your wording has clearly dysphemistic and pejorative connotations, it is rational to remove the term from your posts and relegate it to the Wiki trash bin. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 15:25, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Did you see the catch by the LA left-fielder in the stands in the 8th inning? I don't think it is worth taking the chance of getting hurt to catch a foul in the 8th with a 10-4 lead. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:19, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Bugs, would you like to sign my guestbook. Thanks! Miss Bono [hello, hello!] 20:01, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
For your mastery of 'Diffs' research and ability to always give your best to 'call it like you see it'. All this in addition to your attempts to make Wikipedia a better and more knowledgeable place. Market St.⧏ ⧐ Diamond Way 01:40, 13 October 2013 (UTC) |
I found this paragraph in the article Toronto Islands, History:
I doubt it is true. In Babe Ruth, the claim is that his first professional home run was in an inter-squad game in March, 1914. March on Toronto Island would not be a time to be playing baseball.
I went to have a look at the ref in the Babe article (there was none in the Toronto Islands' article) which is #33, Creamer, but I can't find any reference in full with Creamer as the author. Can you help?
Thanks Bielle ( talk) 20:21, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
For the Arbitration Committee, Rs chen 7754 01:29, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Arbcom is fundamentally defective in many ways, as I showed, but there's no value in that outburst. "Shooting the messenger", y'know? Grab a beer and go watch the first half of your namesake, the Cards are up 4-2 n the 7th. Tarc ( talk) 02:27, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Your God viewpoint, Alpha Centauri, their "now". Your brilliance is exceeded only by your magnificence! Slight Smile 03:05, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
"they were Kenyans, moor or less". Kudos to you. (Or any other candy bars of choice.) Edison ( talk) 05:25, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
For your comments. I note MC and RD seem quite adamant in their insistence that my words were so offensive to polity that I must needs be chastised. I am more than half tempted to list some "nice quotes" from their own editing careers <g>. And be sure to vote the "B&T ticket" for the ArbCom elections! Collect ( talk) 18:55, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
I have posted a motion supporting rewording of the finding of fact regarding you in the Manning naming dispute arbitration case here. Risker ( talk) 01:28, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
" The Decline of Wikipedia" - new on Oct 22, 2013.
![]() |
I was going to leave you a hot dog, since that's baseball food, I hear, but this is the best the cafeteria could come up with. Later Bugs. Drmies ( talk) 05:19, 22 October 2013 (UTC) |
Hi BB. As I've announced on the arbitration noticeboard, please be aware that the committee has carried the motion to amend the Manning naming dispute finding of fact relating to you. I have also implemented this motion, including by replacing the old finding on the actual decision page. Please let me know if anything is unclear or you have any questions. Regards, AGK [•] 22:28, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I got your message. I understand your point. Are you saying we can't ask about fictional creatures or alternate history theories on the Refdesk? I didn't mean to disrupt, I didn't see any prohibition of such on the RD main page. Fishface gurl ( talk) 04:01, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Sorry about unhatting your post in the Science RD. It honestly never occured to me that you would have hatted your own post, I just assumed someone else had done it - guess I should have checked the history. Anyway, I have added a more informative header to the template to explain that you have hatted your own post, so no-one else will make the same mistake. Gandalf61 ( talk) 14:37, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm just curious to understand, the logic behind your effort to identify Fishface as a sock, for presumably banning or blocking that user. (I mean, even if you are successful, identify him, get him blocked or banned as a sockpuppet, he is just going to create a new user, User:Birdfaceboy, and there we are, back to the starting line once more. And again. And again. And again. And again. And again. You see the idea. So I'm wondering if that is what you like to do with your time, supporting ill-conceived and illogical/dysfunctional Wiki practices, that accomplish nothing, except perhaps amuse the hell out of Fishfacegirl [whom there's no shadow of a doubt is obviously OGB], but again, what's the point? The time/effort expended in the apparent dysfunctional Wiki practice of identify & destroy, brings an image to my mind [I can't help it; if it's not true please explain how it isn't true] of a dog chasing its tail. Pointless effort; amusing Braniff.]) Ihardlythinkso ( talk) 22:32, 25 October 2013 (UTC) p.s. Braniff isn't all bad; he has something to contribute, but his contributions are uneven. Meanwhile, he's also a prankster. Really he is just showing the WP how dysfunctional its current troll-handling practices are, isn't he? And that should be of some value too. (Like hiring a hacker, to test the soundness of a security software implementation.)
...issues a personal attack against me on the ref desk talk page, and then blocks me when I won't take the bait. Cute. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:23, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
fyi Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Adam_Bishop NE Ent 22:28, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
You've been through a lot lately, you might want to consider the idea of taking a short Wikibreak to re-charge the batteries and re-set the circuit breakers. When you come back, you'll be able to paste all the pathetic palookas with your powerful paralyzing perfect pachydermus percussion pitches. Warmest regards, Beyond My Ken ( talk) 07:25, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello Baseball Bugs, Miss Bono has given you an lovely bat, to wish you a Happy Halloween! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a lovely bat! Enjoy! |
Spread the goodness of a lovely bat by adding {{ subst: User:Miss Bono/Halloween}} to their talk page with a friendly message. |
Thanks for your input; you and StuRat easily answered my question. FYI, per Mississippi River#Lower Mississippi, the Ohio is actually the dominant factor below Cairo (Google Satellite View shows that it's wider, not just "bigger"); and per Missouri River#Passage to Sioux City, it's only six feet deep at St Louis as well as being narrower than the Mississippi. Nyttend ( talk) 13:26, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Surreal Barnstar |
For a very unique and yet tireless Wikipedia reference desk contribution streak. Surreal in every sense of the word Baseball Bugs, and a big thanks for making me smile and laugh. Market St.⧏ ⧐ Diamond Way 08:18, 4 November 2013 (UTC) |
Bugs, you're topic banned from "all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed".
This reference desk thread mentions such an individual in its section title and also as part of the original poster's question. You then responded by, inter alia, making comments about what the U.S. government should have charged that individual with, along with your own commentary about the individual's actions, like "theft is theft". As well as where you believe the individual would be "better off". (You then also very quickly got into an argument, though not mostly one about that individual.)
To me this does not seem to be compatible with your topic ban. But I'd rather not bother going to
WP:AE to find out if I am right or wrong about that, so just knock it off, OK?
P.S. if you're wondering why I'm the one giving you this reminder, it's because you prohibited everyone else from posting here! --
Demiurge1000 (
talk) 20:13, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, Bugs. As far as the topic ban on "all pages (including biographies) related to leaks of classified information, broadly construed", it would be prudent to avoid edits like these: [8] [9]. You are a good editor and I would hate to see you get into worse difficulty. Jonathunder ( talk) 21:26, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Were you asking me specifically? No, I don't think it's blockable. BTW, I understand if someone gets irritated at the chit-chat that some of us enjoy so much, and I'd just let it slide. Later, Drmies ( talk) 03:17, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for cluing me into the Monty Python - Star Trek crossovers on You Tube. I found several but I think my favorite was the mix of clips to the Camelot song from ...Holy Grail. It looks like the put some thought into what clips to use and having Trelayne singing "In-de-fat-e-gable" was a real treat. Thanks again and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 19:33, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Only Clarityfiend and Someguy1221 gave a decent answers to the legitimate question /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science#Why_does_ice_do_more_damage_than_liquid_water.3F. Its a science board where people expect more in-depth answers than just "oh its obvious, because it is hard". Straws are solids and water drops are not so its a legitimate question and the OP followed up with a similar question where the velocities are equal, so you are reframing his question and assuming bad faith with a strawman. Please for the sake of sanity on this board, refactor or remove your insult there. [10] I did not see him jerking anyone, but you and your strawman. Consider too that simply dropping a large block of ice will also hurt [11], (for it doesn't have to be moving very fast. -- Modocc ( talk) 16:05, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Enough, Aldrete. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:23, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
As per Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents, it is expected that people try to resolve problems with an editor on their talk page first. This is what I am doing. I refer to this diff of yours. I believe this is part of an annoying pattern on your part. It consists of making constant, slightly irritating off-topic remarks that wind people up, and poke at them, as if looking for trouble. Then someone makes a reference to your annoying conduct, and you always escalate by criticising them back. I do not remember you ever taking criticism gracefully, or attempting to defuse the situation. The difference between your conduct and theirs is not based on explicit adherence, or lack thereof, to specific rules, but a difference in apparent attitude. You invariably retaliate. One of the more blatant cases I have seen was here, specifically, your comment "...which is more than you can say for yourself. " Is there anything that will make you see my point, and change your editing? It is not primarily the side comments that I often find irritating, but the predictable retaliation that follows when you get on someone's nerves, and they are finally provoked to express this. Is it possible for you to change, and seek to defuse situations that pop up? IBE ( talk) 23:33, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Hey there. Hope you are doing well. Had a question that may or may not be in your wheelhouse. As an idle exercise I ran this search) at Baseball Reference, wondering: if the National League made up an equivalent to the Edgar Martínez Award, that is, an award to be given to the pitcher who hits the best, who would they name it after? I limited it to NL players, since it could only ever be an NL award. I don't subscribe to BR, so I can't see the best answers to that question (though I know from previous searches the number 6 guy, with the .270 BA, is Don Newcombe, who would be far from the worst choice as far as naming the thing hypothetically goes). I'm not asking who the top guys are. My question is this: I am seeing "TOT" listed as a team that some players played for. This makes no sense. Not only is there not a team that is abbreviated TOT, it can't stand for "total" either (else why would it sometimes appear in the midst of a player's list of teams played for, rather than exclusively at one end?). Any ideas? ☯.Zen Swashbuckler .☠ 19:08, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
While unsourced :), I thought this was a very perceptive comment: "I expect a lot of suicides don't necessarily want to die, they just want the pain to go away." Thanks, Bielle ( talk) 05:03, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Your upload of File:3RR sign.JPG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.
This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot ( opt-out) 11:08, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
The personal "insults" aimed at me are so bad they are fun on a very rare occasion--kind of like having one or two small fencing scars--that's why I am keeping them. But your defense, while appreciated by me (here and on many other occasions), detracts from the effect, hence my reversion. μηδείς ( talk) 02:31, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
I've hatted the subthread on the basis that the comment is OR about a living person, which is really all that matters, even if your conclusion is right.
As a side issue irrelevant to the reason for the hatting, and only since you ask, I will suggest you consider whether a comment saying that the reason his magic spell didn't work is because he either said it wrong or read the wrong magic book. Obviously those are not the only two possibilities. Your conclusion does not follow. Perhaps the proper Bible simply doesn't allow the prediction whether it is misread or not. In any case, discussing the BLP's actions based on OR remains inappropriate. μηδείς ( talk) 22:44, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm just giving you a 'heads up' in regards to a recent ANI you and I both commented on. More info here. Cheers - theWOLFchild 17:38, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, your edits in 2007 produced the same text as http://www.thebaseballpage.com/season/1911-world-series-philadelphia-athletics-over-new-york-giants-four-games-two . There's no archive.org for that page, so I can't tell which came first. The Baseball Page may be copying from Wikipedia, which would explain the "By WIKI" note. On the other hand, The Baseball Page is claiming copyright. Do you happen to remember the source you used in 2007? vzaak 21:09, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
It has been mentioned at ANI that you are being obnoxious at the reference desk here, courtesy notification. -- kelapstick( bainuu) 23:45, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
You'll notice from the history, the nutritional advice question was hatted, wickwack unhatted it, and you responded. I reverted the section to before the unhatting, removing your comment. Letting you know in case you think it should be restored outside the hatting. μηδείς ( talk) 02:46, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I have filed an ANI against User:54.242.221.254 here, you are mentioned. μηδείς ( talk) 03:31, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Dude, It's not the end of the world. :) Toddst1 ( talk) 14:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
I've pointed out to Mark Arsten that the IP you reported and he declined to block is apparently a sock of blocked user User_talk:54.242.221.254. μηδείς ( talk) 03:01, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
54.224.35.46 (
talk ·
contribs)
54.224.206.154 (
talk ·
contribs)
54.242.221.254 (
talk ·
contribs)
Too large a range to block, but at least awareness is raised. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:15, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
These exchanges are an embarrassment. You are failing to assume good faith. You are not being civil. You are engaging in personal attacks. You are disrupting Wikipedia to make (some kind of) a point. Either grow up and start improving the encyclopedia, or repair to an elementary school playground and spare the rest of us your petty childishness. — Steve Summit ( talk) 14:31, 31 December 2013 (UTC)