![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 110 | ← | Archive 112 | Archive 113 | Archive 114 | Archive 115 | Archive 116 | → | Archive 120 |
Land sakes child, I didn't know such a thing existed until you mentioned it. In a couple weeks I'll make my yearly trip to Vienna and have my usual welcome-to-town wienerschnitzel at Reinthaler's. If I can summon up enough of the German that good old Dr. Loock tried to teach me in 11th grade I'll ask if they can do a hühnerschnitzel. Most likely I'll just get a blank stare. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris ( talk) 01:36, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
Did you even READ my reasons?- K-popguardian ( talk) 01:39, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
I say your revert, don't worry, I won't touch it at all. I disagree (regarding your edit summary) that only the crats can remove things from the board, but it's not worth my making a big deal about it. ►К Ф Ƽ Ħ◄ R.I.P Trip Halstead 15:59, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
The wrong tree--
The Larch, the Larch, the Larch.
--
Dlohcierekim (
talk)
06:55, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
It came up in my watchlist that this article has been prodded on notability grounds. Ladyof Shalott 00:12, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Howdy. You have been cited as having blessed this edit (which bears the summary "Implementing consensus version from talk page and RfC result, given Drmies' explanation that their block warning was explicitly for Goldwater.) The diff resumes a long and odious edit war, fiercely and bravely waged on one side by the editor of that diff et al. At any rate, since it's quite quite clear there is in fact not consensus for this on the talk page, and since the cited RfC is falsely being cited to support these edits, therefore I am here to inquire: Do you know why this guy is citing you to support this stuff? I'm inclined to file a 3RR but I'm wondering whether I'm missing something. God help you if you are inclined to look at the article talk page for guidance. Signed, SPECIFICO talk 22:14, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
warned General Goldwater about edit warring,"not Jack Upland (or presumably others on the page who are not "General Goldwater"). 3) I've made substantial contributions to the talk page, actually quoting and evaluating sources at length: Talk:Useful idiot#Sources and attribution of phrase. By contrast your posts show no evidence of research through quotation of scholarly material, e.g. Talk:Useful idiot#Screw Saffire. I'm not sure why you are so resistant to DRN, where a mediator would require that we follow policy. Surely this is preferable to glib and invective-driven pronouncements, totally lacking in content, that can only be enforced by edit-warring or misused admin tools. - Darouet ( talk) 13:51, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
I was hoping I could bother you for a minute to take a look at this? A month ago I submitted a Request Edit asking to remove an uncited sentence that was recently added. I got a prompt response, but the answer seems to be to ask me where the sources are and suggest GA status needs to be reconsidered, in light of the very content I asked to be removed. Of course, that doesn't make any sense, so I might just be confused or misunderstanding something. Maybe they thought I was the one that added the content. I don't know. CorporateM ( Talk) 03:58, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
Would Drmies or any stalkers please look at Ignatius Elgin Shumate and check for neutrality? The article is newly created by me, and I have a COI, plus the sources are very much non-neutral. Thanks, Ladyof Shalott 04:10, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
was elected to the Georgia legislature in 1868is verifiable. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 04:13, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
The Roman Catholic vandal is back, using 47.215.23.90. It's a static IP they've been using since May. I've undone their damage, but could you do the necessary and block them? Considering it's static, and they've been using it for more than 10 months, a 1 year block (at least) would probably be a good idea. Thanks. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 18:12, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Talk:Gojira (band)/GA1 has been open a while so I was hoping you would be able to close it. Let me know if you need any help doing so. Regards AIRcorn (talk) 00:17, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
Hello Drmies, can you please take a look at Mike walt who was registered a day after you blocked Rubber man yash and recreated the same article. Thank you – GSS ( talk| c| em) 07:14, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Listing some more users below:
VRAJESH SHAH could be the master who was registered just before YASH SHAH (RUBBER MAN). Thank you – GSS ( talk| c| em) 07:47, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Let me have it on this one, if you please... last reference i added to Ricardo Sá Pinto, i don't think the translation is very good (yes, i admit i used Google Translate to try and sort it out, but then gave up after i could not).
Happy Easter and all that, take care -- Quite A Character ( talk) 21:35, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
Your words, not mine. Then there was some talk of vaginal steaming. It just went downhill from there. I have to go buy a new transit pass. And an Oh Henry! You can get your kicks on the remaining bot-added WP:UAA reports, I expect it clear by the time I get back.-- kelapstick( bainuu) 20:47, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Mr. Decan.reporter, an indefinite blocked user, is still fooling around at his talkpage. I maybe wrong but this (and especially the summary) does not look like "discussing the block" to me. The Banner talk 18:26, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Hello again. The editor responsible for many of the Joe Walz edits left a message on my talk page which I assume was meant to explain why they continue, but which made no sense. I wanted to let you know (and I can post this on the admin's notice board as well)t that the editor in question made it clear to me that he considers these edits to be funny, and has no intention to stop them. I would have let you know sooner (as the message in question was left on my talk page almost a month ago), but I have had a resurgence of the health issues I previously referenced which kept me away from Wikipedia for most of this month. I wanted to let you know that, due to the nature of this message on my talk page, all admins might need to be aware that this continues and that the editor behind this vandalism apparently plans to continue such edits. Just thought you'd want to know. Thanks. -- Jgstokes ( talk) 06:54, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, your edit summary at https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Robert_Byrd&diff=next&oldid=833284270 got me confsued. Anon attempted to re-add information which was clearly backed up by sources as shown in the KKK section. So I don't understand why your revert edit summary suggests the same knowledge he has, unless I'm not getting it right. Cheers, Optakeover (U) (T) (C) 17:23, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Hello, and thanks. You cleaned out the ASN page. Goodness knows it needed it; I chickened out on removing all the stuff you called "corporate and organizational spam", so I'm glad you didn't, and did. But I'm curious as to why you removed the "Corporate relationship concerns" section, as it doesn't seem to fit that description. HLHJ ( talk) 21:54, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
I think this is a dreadfully written article, full of promotion, useless trivia, and just poor writing. The guy may have been a prominent figure, but ... An editor reverted my rather large edits wholesale, and I don't want to fight about it. Anyone who feels like taking a look ... -- Bbb23 ( talk) 00:31, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
Not just comfortable but welcoming!-- Bbb23 ( talk) 12:41, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
For anyone who has a deep appreciation for lighthouses but lacks the opportunity to obtain one as a residence, do consider windmills as a second best alternative. They share many of the same qualities. MPS1992 ( talk) 18:57, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Drmies, I was wondering where this nomination stood at the moment. Have the sourcing issues been dealt with fully or partially, and are things so dire as to require the "X" icon or is an icon indicating less intransigent problems now appropriate. I'd like to get this moving again, one way or the other. Many thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 02:59, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
Looks like pink poodles are in the news - Extreme dog grooming: Harmless fun or threat to pets? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:59, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
(Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nkbreen ( talk • contribs) 05:18, 10 April 2018 (UTC) https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/politics/politics-report-candidates-cannabis-use/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nkbreen ( talk • contribs) 05:24, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
Just curious...about whether or not racism should/should not fall under the same guidelines as WP:MEDRS because it seems likely that it's somehow related to mental health. I did some quick research to see if my thinking was even remotely headed in the right direction, and the answer is yes. I gathered up a few diffs if you're interested:
The Western journal of medicine,
Psychology Today,
British Journal of Psychiatry,
WaPo article (to see what the media had to say), and
The Oxford Handbook of Personality Disorders. The latter is not an open access journal but if you can access it, I'm interested in their findings under Individual Differences of Prejudice, Racism, and Xenophobia.
Atsme
📞
📧
15:34, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your encouragement. I was trolled by a fellow wiki last week, and when I wasn't laughing at the absurdity of the personal attack, I was feeling discouraged to contribute further to wikipedia. But I forged ahead and kept editing anyway because I love this project and want to improve it whenever possible. Thanks again for your kind words of encouragement. Kinkyturnip ( talk) 19:30, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
I downgraded this from CSD to AfD as I think we could do with consensus. It's in the usual place. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:11, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
My edit to the marshal page was legit, look up far cry 5. Dont be an autist just because you don't believe my changes off the bat queer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1003:b452:6eea:51d2:20df:86a1:69a9 ( talk • contribs)
I saw that you had protected The World Tomorrow (radio and television). In the protection log, you said "you can't fix stupid, but you can semi-protect it". However, you actually extended-confirmed-protected the article. Was that a mistake and was it supposed to be semi-protected? — MRD2014 Talk 21:23, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, can you protect the Philadelphia Flyers article? Thanks. - KH-1 ( talk) 01:43, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
EJI published those studies, and received international media coverage for the last one, Lynching in America (2015), which is now in its 3rd edition. The discussion was from the report itself, and I had sources such as NPR and the NY Times discussing the report when first published. The LA Times covered it, as did the Guardian, as I recall. Founder Bryan Stevenson has talked about the lynching report, and its connection to his work on building a memorial to lynching victims in Montgomery, Alabama. The more detailed material about the 2015 report and the earlier studies, all published by EJI, has been in this article for three years. Parkwells ( talk) 01:52, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Serenade (poems) 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)
00:21, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
Can you allow me to re do my article I am the creator of the article contents you deleted? Lobosuperstar ( talk) 00:26, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 27, February – March 2018
Arabic, Chinese and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 14:50, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
Wait, hang on...I was in the middle of some restructuring. It looks like you may have straight-up reverted again, but really, I don't think we want to start with that material. Before you started trimming things, a newbie had come along and astroturfed the fuck out of the article. The older source material, while pretty bad, is really better than what you were trimming and cite-tagging. Chubbles ( talk) 00:20, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for thanking me on my edit. You seem pretty blunt, yet pretty straightforward, and I respect that. Rock on. UnsungKing123 ( talk) 02:21, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Drmies
FYI. This user is evading your block of 2A02:4780:BAD:25:FCED:1FF:FE25:109 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), using yet another web host proxy, this time in the Ukraine.- Mr X 🖋 18:18, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Warning: 22:06, 6 February 2018
Since you have experience trying to work with @ T.D. Hoxey:, I thought it best to first see what you think rather than immediately escalating it to a wider audience. The most recent edit that changes verified information without changing the sources or indicating a verifying source seems over the line to me. -- Ronz ( talk) 15:34, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Good call on the possible socking. It doesn't smell of paid editing, but rather BATTLE and OWN to an extreme that I've rarely seen. Very strange. -- Ronz ( talk) 00:16, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
On 22 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Serenade (poems), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that J. Slauerhoff's 1930 poetry collection Serenade provoked critical responses ranging from "childish" to "pure lyric" with "refined technique"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Serenade (poems). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Serenade (poems)), 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.
Gatoclass ( talk) 12:02, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Drmies. I'm new to wikipedia, so I'm not sure if this is how you respond. You wrote regarding my edit to Photogram, just wanted to reply. Actually Kwangho Cheh (최광호) is actually super well know in the korean art world although not so much in the US. There are a lot of newspapers, blogs, and textbooks that discuss/teach about him in korea. The reference I added was actually a link to a newspaper that wrote about him. I went to a couple of his galleries in korea as well. What would be the proper way to add this information to wikipedia?
Stephjaelee ( talk) 01:29, 23 April 2018 (UTC)Stephjaelee
Ahhh that makes sense thank you. I will consider adding a page about him....but this will require me to research his work on Korean websites or reaching out to him or someone on his team...which would be more than just going to galleries and reading about him in books.... I was looking for a quick way to add to the information about a Korean Photographer who was well known in one country but not in another due to language. I also added links to my edit that were newspapers or detailed in a blog, so people would know what I was talking about...would this not be enough? [1] [2]He also doesn't have a korean page, because korean people seem to use Naver or Daum more. He does have a Naver page written in Korean, but I'm guessing that for these lists you only accept english articles correct? Stephjaelee ( talk) 01:45, 23 April 2018 (UTC)Stephjaelee
References
Hi, could you please take a look at Talk:Douma chemical attack? Regards. -- Mhhossein talk 18:19, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Fleurs de Marécage 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!
Meanderingbartender (
talk)
13:15, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Are you sure this is what you wanted to do? Corbitt built 3,077 prime movers (including pre-production models). White, whose name you deleted, built 3,547 prime movers, more than Corbitt. They built over 6,500 standard models total, making White the largest prime mover and standard model producer. (All other manufacturers combined built about 6,000 standard models plus a few hundred pre-standard models).
I am not saying my wording was correct, only that you changed the meaning. I am not editing anything, but you may want to. No answer needed. Thank you. Sammy D III ( talk) 14:05, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
Can I please have my page back? I had a lot of stuff in it and I need it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farnell45 ( talk • contribs)
I mean back. Its self explanatory.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Farnell45 ( talk • contribs)
I am pretty sure he is doing it for WP:ECP flag-- Shrike ( talk) 13:46, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, this is الناز ( talk page). I couldn't leave a comment here with the other username (I'm guessing because it was a user name for fa.wikipedia). As you observed I have edited wikipedia a lot but back in the days, it has been 10 years since I edited wikipedia on daily basis. So disruptive editing that you mentioned in my talk page was a new thing to me. I went ahead and read the guidelines. I would appreciate if you could help my understand this better by telling me which one of my edits falls into this category so I can avoid that in the future. Thanks for making Wikipedia better! :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elnaz ( talk • contribs) 18:35, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Is this unusual account blockable as WP:NOTHERE? Over 12,000 edits to userspace!-- Bbb23 ( talk) 17:41, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
(plus we have p-batch for "batch protection")- if we wanted to undelete the whole mess, we'd have to use und-batch (which only exists when there's a list of redlinks). Primefac ( talk) 13:12, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Drmies. Just a question really - you said on Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Topic_ban_on_Baseball_Bugs_from_Wikipedia_Space that the term witch hunt has a very specific meaning and a set of connotations that is frequently highly inappropriate. For my benefit could you let me know what those are? I've used the term myself in the past (in the sense of "a campaign directed against a person or group holding views considered unorthodox or a threat") and wasn't aware it was potentially offensive. Thanks, Fish+ Karate 14:46, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
It is not an excuse or a claim for mercy. Just a frustrating fact that I again have fallen into the trap of my own body. Disclosure: I am again in a depression, a type of depression causing - amongst others - loss of self-control. I am aware that my block log and my depressions have a close relationship, but even that realisation comes on hindsight.
Now, on the eve of what looks to be an indefinite block, I just have to admit that I am again let down by my body. Medication works far too slow, fighting back on my own is far quicker. But the pitfall is there... The Banner talk 13:23, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for sorting out splitting details. It is so nice to know that in this big wiki universe, I can always count on you to know what's the right thing to do.
Rosiestep (
talk)
15:01, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for taking control of Clyde Lewis last night. I see my reverts might have been a bit hasty, will make note of that. Wish they would provide an explanation instead of just blanking stuff...
Home Lander (
talk)
13:31, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
Regarding Nicole Louise Pearce ( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive268#Nicole_Louise_Pearce) – there has been no discussion on the Noticeboard or at the article's talk page. Is it normal and acceptable for an article to be vetoed, criticism unanswered? I had expected that issues raised would be discussed. The users who took objection haven't justified their reasons, and do not engage beyond taking general issue. I suppose I just expected there to be a discussion rather than a seemingly indefinite vanishing of the subject. Crimescrutineer ( talk) 02:13, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
I'll just republish it privately elsewhere, with comment about the simplistic unreasoned criticism found here that had it removed. Dismissal on paragraph length and extent of detail per se alone aren't helpful or editorial.
This wasn't an article about transexual crime, it included the subject's sex change while incarcerated having been the route to their release (chemical castration). This is clear beyond the third sentence ( TonyBallioni).
The idea that too much detail can be present isn't befitting an actual encyclopaedia, particularly when the article at the redirect is scant. I mistakenly expected genuine criticism, not silence followed by paltry contempt.
If you have issue with the nature of the article I encourage you to attempt taking to task other blackballing creations with more followers, such as /info/en/?search=Ted_Bundy and /info/en/?search=Jeffrey_Dahmer, which are loaded with the same purported problems.
After making ~30 donations to Wikipedia over the years I won't do so again. I now clearly understand the wariness academics have about this resource.
Jayron32, Drmies, LadyofShalott, GorillaWarfare, Cullen328, Nomoskedasticity, Bonadea, Euryalus Crimescrutineer ( talk) 03:53, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
Power~enwiki Overused by whomever, that's my position irrespective.
Drmies I believe the comment on the talk page was more substantial than the criticism, in any event there was no input of any kind after a week despite the strong views against it.
I presumed that to take issue with something negatively here there would also be something constructive and reasoned returned. This wasn't a "talk" let alone a discussion.
The BLP isn't taken seriously when editors are derisive, proud of hasty wanton behaviour and discussion is a farce.
There was nothing defamatory or unkind in the opening sentence of the article, the descriptors included various scientific diagnoses, all of which were referenced. The opening sentences in the articles about other criminals aren't complimentary either, but they are factual.
There is nothing condescending about pointing out an individual's gender. It is simply fact. As this individual had several genders and a transitioning period over two decades under the public's eye, it is mentioned for clarification.
I don't believe in the veracity of contributing here, it is too emotive and unprofessional on the editorial side. The time and effort spent was too easily degraded (in fact banished) by people from outside the subject matter. I won't be commenting further. There is no reason to publish here when the editorial process can rapidly fail to meet even common-sense standards. The editorial here has been about control, not truth. Donating time or money here is counter-productive. Give your time and money to projects that only repair damage.
Crimescrutineer ( talk) 04:43, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
About to send you an email. Could you please check it in a minute. Thanks. Home Lander ( talk) 18:11, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
OMG!
No good deed goes unpunished, it seems. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:55, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
the best we can muster here. That said, I think the last places on Wikipedia that TRM wants to be mentioned on are AN/ANI and ArbCom. It's only been a short while since a certain admin tried to drag TRM through the arbitration process. Drmies, you tried to do a nice thing and it went a bit south. I've had the same happen to me. I'd just live and let live. Don't get worked up about it. Just shrug and move on. Mr rnddude ( talk) 21:10, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
why did only you block me when other members were violating the rules and I didn't threaten anyone nor do I plan to threaten anyone here so why did you accuse of threatening? Saad123890 ( talk) 16:55, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
yes, I have read the policies regarding BLP and RS and second, those experienced editors weren't replying me back after repeatedly asking them so and telling them how should I can improve the two pages which I edited. its not easy when you waste so much time on editing and cite the information with credible sources and in the end some experienced editors who don't know anything about those people come and undo your editing and then don't even reply. sorry, but what I read on the talk page of one editor you clearly said you shouldn't threaten but it's ok that's in the past. yes, I am good reader sir but its ok and yes i have but what i want to know that why some two experienced editors can undo credible work of some who is new? how should i complain about them because they don't even reply me back? you say they don't agree but when they don't even reply what should say? so i would like to know how should i complain about them? lastly, i did read about the polices but I need to edit some information with credible sources can you please at least tell me why can't I put the real age of the actors? or should go read BLP policies again? Saad123890 ( talk) 18:38, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
how should i complain about them-- if your complaints would resemble this paragraph to which I am responding, then the best advice to you is not to complain about other editors at all. It may result in more problems for you.
when they don't even reply what should say?-- when they don't reply, you should start a New Section on the Talk Page of the article explaining what material you want to add and listing the reliable sources for the material. And asking for other editors' views about whether the material is appropriate based on those sources. You don't seem to have done this. MPS1992 ( talk) 21:16, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
yeah sure I will do that start a new section and if still, they don't reply? and why there will be problems for me? can't we complain about editors who cross the lines? Saad123890 ( talk) 23:02, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
thanks thats what i will do then go to dispute resolution if they don't respond within a week. Saad123890 ( talk) 07:53, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
Do you know anyone taking care of the Louis Farrakhan page?
We are about to have an edit war and I don't know if I can stop it. Editors Seraphim System and MShabazz both have valid points but I can't seem to get them to work together. Peacemaker is not something I have a lot of practice at on wiki, so perhaps you can refer this on for me. Thanks, C. W. Gilmore ( talk) 20:29, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Sorry to bother, but a while back, you helped put a stop to some ping-pong editing on the Steven Soderbergh page. Basically, a user named User:LivinRealGüd and I were debating whether to add the fact that Steven Soderbergh conceived a love child out of wedlock. I thought the debate was settled, and you agreed that the love child fact should stay on the page. Just wanted to let you know, that the user reverted the edits and is starting a vandalism war again. Isn't this against Wiki policy? I thought as a mod you had the right to decide this. Why can she/he/it go back and restart the debate? Zeldathequark ( talk) 02:37, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Please see my talk and related mfd and deleted versions. Need some laundry done.-- Dlohcierekim ( talk) 01:03, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Hey, Drmies! I've noticed that there's a significant content dispute over on University of Dhaka, and I was wondering if it wouldn't be more productive to discuss the issue with Mizan Al Mim rather than just blocking or censuring the editor. I received a chat message on my talk page which seems to indicate that we should possibly assume good faith even though there is an edit war. Thoughts? - zfJames Please ping me in your reply on this page ( chat page , contribs) 21:16, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
On 10 May 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Aartswoud, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that around the Dutch village of Aartswoud, the former polder landscape and its seasonal water levels are being restored? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Aartswoud. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Aartswoud), 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.
Gatoclass ( talk) 00:02, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
Just an FYI, your name came up at an ANI discussion regarding 72bikers. Apparently this editor has been doing what you advised them to do? – dlthewave ☎ 01:38, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
You've probably already seen this, but wow. Also, if you're not watching Atlanta, your life is the poorer for it. MastCell Talk 00:05, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Vanamonde93 is proposing a topic ban against me, he is basing his aspersions on these diffs, [9] [10] [11] (these were legit reverts that I succinctly explained in my edit summaries) claiming that I have played my "part in the recent edit-wars", besides citing this as evidence against me, saying "has much the same attitude of treating Wikipedia as a battleground; for further evidence take a look at his talk page, where both Drmies and I told him off for making blanket reverts of suspected socks without sufficient thought or explanation". Can you comment there please? MBlaze Lightning talk 16:11, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Hello. You recently reverted 1 sentence of my argument on the Nazi gun control argument for being not cited. However, there was in fact a citation at the end of the sentence. I will add another citation and make it seem less POV for reversion. In the future, if a warning template doesn't fit the reason, you can type a message. Thanks for the consideration! Lightningboltz03 ( talk) 10:20, 15 May 2018 (UTC)Lightningboltz03
There's a tricky BLP issue at Stephen Tompkinson, an article where you assisted in a big clean up some years ago. Daisyet17 ( talk · contribs) claims to be his daughter and has been making a couple of changes which, on the face of it, are fairly trivial but nonetheless concern me. She has had advice from me on both their talk page and my own but continue to assert that it is self-evident that she is his daughter. While it all might seem a bit draconian on my part, I am concerned because there are ways that she or her (alleged) father could resolve this, eg: via publishing the info on his agent's website. In addition, he has had a somewhat chequered personal life (not all of which is mentioned in the article) and there is potential for bad blood when an alleged child of a failed marriage starts making edits to a bio article. She is way over 3RR (so am I, but claiming the BLP exemption). Should I just let it go? - Sitush ( talk) 18:53, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Not even surprising, given these latest changes. Raymond3023 ( talk)
Stay in touch with Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wikiexplorer13. Raymond3023 ( talk) 04:58, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in 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/German war effort. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 30, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:01, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Hey! Thank you for blocking Wario's Woods expert ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). I have pretty good reason to believe they are a sock of Iodhogushuiodgbhusaishyb ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (just check out their edits!). Would you recommend opening an SPI? HickoryOughtShirt?4 ( talk) 02:16, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
And that is why I am not an administrator.
General Ization
Talk
22:26, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi. My name is Kristin Hodgson, and I work on the Brand team at Meetup. Over the past several months, I've noticed unusual edits to the Meetup Wikipedia page.
For example, the article has been experiencing edits like Meetup “put the future of the company on the line” [13] and saying that Meetup’s # resist political groups were contrary to Meetup’s mission statement (citing only Meetup’s own mission statement) [14]
The current article still says stuff like “after years of declining usage, and lacking the funding necessary to compete against rising competition," which is not supported by the citations given.
I posted at NPOV [15] hoping to attract one or two disinterested watchlisters/participants. I was happy that this attracted two un-involved editors that started making edits [16][ https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Meetup_(website)&type=revision&diff=834047873&oldid=834046789&diffmode=source], but both were immediately reversed.
Is this something you'd be willing to look into? There is a discussion on Talk about the list of competitors on the page.
Thanks, Kristin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kristin hodgson at meetup ( talk • contribs) 17:52, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Dear fellow WP editor, what rode you to delete a message by another user on my talk page??? -- Bernd.Brincken ( talk) 22:17, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Black Kite: Windows 10, you say? Is that why my computer cuts off in the midst of making a post.-- Dlohcierekim ( talk) 22:47, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
You're a recovering arbitrator so perhaps you can prognosticate. How much longer do you think the dispute-resolution apparatus of the English WP will continue to be tied up by a handful of narcissists seeking salve for their bruised egos? E Eng 22:55, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Not sure why you removed the detour description for just one leg? Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 03:18, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I have moved your comment from the "comments" section to the "threaded" section as it seems to fit in better there. You may wish to leave a !vote in the "comments" section as well. Regards, -- LK ( talk) 08:13, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm somewhat hurt at finding my special skill unlisted. E Eng 16:14, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Please leave any skills I may have unlisted. Special or not. Martinevans123 ( talk) 16:25, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I am gratified to find myself not included in the list. Yngvadottir ( talk) 18:38, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm questioning the deletion of the Publication list on the page for David Silva (linguist). My understanding is that for academics, listing major publications ia part of the case for notablity, as it gives a place to link to reviews of the work, etc. I'm in agreement that a Wiki page should not be a resume, and so should not list everything he's written. But I also would find a selection of the scholar's works to be something a reader would want to know about this person when they are reading the page. Thanks. LingLass ( talk) 15:54, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
On 25 May 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Félix-Marie Abel, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Félix-Marie Abel, a Dominican priest and archaeologist, identified several battle sites from the Maccabean Revolt? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Félix-Marie Abel. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Félix-Marie Abel), 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.
— Maile ( talk) 00:36, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Please stop following me around, undoing my edits, thanks. There is a policy against that. Attack Ramon ( talk) 14:20, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at
Monte Testaccio. Your edits appear to be
disruptive and have been or will be
reverted.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Attack Ramon ( talk) 14:37, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Hello. Do you remember who you thought 194.68.94.68 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) was when you blocked it in August 2017 for block evasion? I have created a SPI report for Hyperboreangiant as you blocked 194.68.94.68 soon after blocking other Hyperboreangiant socks, but I now think 194.68.94.68 may be a sock of someone else. Hrodvarsson ( talk) 23:23, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
For your help with Middle Eastern/Jewish articles Shrike ( talk) 18:19, 25 May 2018 (UTC) |
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doria Ragland (2nd nomination).
NeilN
talk to me
23:27, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
But I prepared another draft [20].Any help will be appreciated - Shrike ( talk) 14:44, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Why block that user so quickly... Abelmoschus Esculentus ( talk to me) 06:44, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
...that the evidence phase of the German War Effort arbitration closes on the 30th, so you only have a few days to fill out your placeholders.
Best, Beyond My Ken ( talk) 05:27, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
Hello Drmies,
Can you or one of your stalkers give me a link to guidelines about the use of user talk pages by blocked editors? My understanding is that their talk pages should be used for unblock requests with perhaps some allowance for "venting" about the block, but should not be used for edit requests while they are blocked. Am I correct? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 08:31, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Want me to walk you through the BLP violations? -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 05:45, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
-- JustBerry ( talk) 22:12, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
I thought I'd let you know about this. -- JustBerry ( talk) 04:38, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
You may also wish to revoke talk page access.-- Cahk ( talk) 07:43, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Miesmuscheln. Since you had some involvement with the Miesmuscheln redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Plantdrew ( talk) 19:49, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
They're called the Westboro Baptist Church, and our article about them is very NPOV. They're widely considered a hate group, and other Christian denominations have condemned them. Good for them. Andrevan @ 02:31, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I was going to write an article on the Australian architect Pia Ednie-Brown but I see an article about her has previously been deleted/ moved to your user space. Can it be retrieved so I can edit it, or do I have to start over? Was it deleted because an editor thought she wasn't notable enough? TIA, MurielMary ( talk) 08:07, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Adso of Montier-en-Der 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!
North America
1000
08:00, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Adso of Montier-en-Der 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)
23:59, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
As the only rational editor here, what do you think of these changes? Is the use of would in this manner a US English thing? I see it a lot and it pisses me off for some reason I can't explain. - Sitush ( talk) 07:45, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
219.79.126.90 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) has asked for a deletion review of Doria Ragland. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. — Cryptic 08:06, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
We are preparing a list of tools and techncial support for Women in Red. I have tentatively added your name as you have provided assistance establishing the editing history of split articles. Please let me know whether you agree to be listed. You are of course welcome to make any additions or corrections.-- Ipigott ( talk) 07:04, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
... As is my wont, a hairy article topic fell into my lap. I've asked about it at the BLP noticeboard. I think I can see how to write this gentleman up neutrally, and there are certainly sufficient sources: not only the new coverage but stuff going back years including the WaPo. I would describe him in the lede as a perennial candidate rather than a politician or an anarchist. The thing is, should I do this? There are obvious BLP concerns: even if I (or someone else) managed to do a good job, it would be a magnet for non-neutral embellishments. I believe there is also a policy against writing up candidates right before elections, though I may be thinking of a DYK rule, and I can't imagine an article based on the reliable sources being interpreted as an endorsement. I'm also aware that there's also a whole complex of terrifying ArbCom rules, regulations, and official inscriptions in log-books that concern post-WW2 American politics and that I doubt I will ever understand. (The ArbCom rulings on pedophilia I feel more confident I can both understand and avoid being entrapped by.) I place this set of queries before the brains trust here, partly in the hope that someone else will do it. Yngvadottir ( talk) 17:19, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Aha, via pix on Commons I finally found where there was a deleted article. Could you or someone else with the admin glasses please tell me whether there are any links there to 3rd-party coverage of his platform back then in his first run for Congress? All I can find are blogs and forum posts, and the actual campaign page didn't get archived in time. (If anyone wants to evaluate my wording or the stances I'm taking on the talk page, or tell me I'm wrong not to include his misdemeanor convictions, this is also a good time for that. I know my article topics are all over the place, but this is quite a stretch and I don't have your or others' BLP expertise.) There is a requested move on the article talk page right now for a move to (politician), and my usage and that of the other person opposing may be out of step with modernity or US conventions or something; if so and if it was a decent article except for TOOSOON, maybe its history should even be undeleted along with the move??? Yngvadottir ( talk) 18:12, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
I suggest you do something about Hijiri88. As soon as I was blocked and unblocked for a minor violation of the 3RR (which had absolutely zero to do with him), Hijiri88 immediately started stalking me ( [27], [28], [29], [30]), and he blatantly canvassed both Curly Turkey and Softlavender in an attempt to WP:GAME the original 3RR noticeboard and have me blocked again. Given that I haven't interacted with Hijiri in months, I suggest you intervene before I take this whole mess (going back to February 2017) to the Arbitration Committee. Dark Knight 2149 17:55, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Drmies. In light of your persistent and aggressive rudeness, I ask that you stay off my talk page in future. Thank you. FreeKnowledgeCreator ( talk) 23:22, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
It’s clear that your political biases are coming through. Every bit of information on Dave Williams (Colorado politician) page was correctly sourced and cited. You can accuse me of COI but it’s obvious that you have a political agenda and if you won’t stop in your aggressiveness and disruptive editing then I will submit a complaint and seek assistance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by UostwisRDewoh ( talk • contribs) 07:22, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
This makes me think that we should perhaps protect closed RfAs, or at least those of people who died? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:10, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for this one, Tony. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:32, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
User:Shrike/Mount_Hope(Ottoman_Empire) any help would be appreciated.-- Shrike ( talk) 10:49, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
On 12 June 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Adso of Montier-en-Der, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that 10th-century monk Adso of Montier-en-Der wrote a biography of the antichrist? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Adso of Montier-en-Der. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Adso of Montier-en-Der), 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.
Gatoclass ( talk) 00:02, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 110 | ← | Archive 112 | Archive 113 | Archive 114 | Archive 115 | Archive 116 | → | Archive 120 |
Land sakes child, I didn't know such a thing existed until you mentioned it. In a couple weeks I'll make my yearly trip to Vienna and have my usual welcome-to-town wienerschnitzel at Reinthaler's. If I can summon up enough of the German that good old Dr. Loock tried to teach me in 11th grade I'll ask if they can do a hühnerschnitzel. Most likely I'll just get a blank stare. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris ( talk) 01:36, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
Did you even READ my reasons?- K-popguardian ( talk) 01:39, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
I say your revert, don't worry, I won't touch it at all. I disagree (regarding your edit summary) that only the crats can remove things from the board, but it's not worth my making a big deal about it. ►К Ф Ƽ Ħ◄ R.I.P Trip Halstead 15:59, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
The wrong tree--
The Larch, the Larch, the Larch.
--
Dlohcierekim (
talk)
06:55, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
It came up in my watchlist that this article has been prodded on notability grounds. Ladyof Shalott 00:12, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Howdy. You have been cited as having blessed this edit (which bears the summary "Implementing consensus version from talk page and RfC result, given Drmies' explanation that their block warning was explicitly for Goldwater.) The diff resumes a long and odious edit war, fiercely and bravely waged on one side by the editor of that diff et al. At any rate, since it's quite quite clear there is in fact not consensus for this on the talk page, and since the cited RfC is falsely being cited to support these edits, therefore I am here to inquire: Do you know why this guy is citing you to support this stuff? I'm inclined to file a 3RR but I'm wondering whether I'm missing something. God help you if you are inclined to look at the article talk page for guidance. Signed, SPECIFICO talk 22:14, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
warned General Goldwater about edit warring,"not Jack Upland (or presumably others on the page who are not "General Goldwater"). 3) I've made substantial contributions to the talk page, actually quoting and evaluating sources at length: Talk:Useful idiot#Sources and attribution of phrase. By contrast your posts show no evidence of research through quotation of scholarly material, e.g. Talk:Useful idiot#Screw Saffire. I'm not sure why you are so resistant to DRN, where a mediator would require that we follow policy. Surely this is preferable to glib and invective-driven pronouncements, totally lacking in content, that can only be enforced by edit-warring or misused admin tools. - Darouet ( talk) 13:51, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
I was hoping I could bother you for a minute to take a look at this? A month ago I submitted a Request Edit asking to remove an uncited sentence that was recently added. I got a prompt response, but the answer seems to be to ask me where the sources are and suggest GA status needs to be reconsidered, in light of the very content I asked to be removed. Of course, that doesn't make any sense, so I might just be confused or misunderstanding something. Maybe they thought I was the one that added the content. I don't know. CorporateM ( Talk) 03:58, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
Would Drmies or any stalkers please look at Ignatius Elgin Shumate and check for neutrality? The article is newly created by me, and I have a COI, plus the sources are very much non-neutral. Thanks, Ladyof Shalott 04:10, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
was elected to the Georgia legislature in 1868is verifiable. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 04:13, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
The Roman Catholic vandal is back, using 47.215.23.90. It's a static IP they've been using since May. I've undone their damage, but could you do the necessary and block them? Considering it's static, and they've been using it for more than 10 months, a 1 year block (at least) would probably be a good idea. Thanks. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 18:12, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Talk:Gojira (band)/GA1 has been open a while so I was hoping you would be able to close it. Let me know if you need any help doing so. Regards AIRcorn (talk) 00:17, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
Hello Drmies, can you please take a look at Mike walt who was registered a day after you blocked Rubber man yash and recreated the same article. Thank you – GSS ( talk| c| em) 07:14, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Listing some more users below:
VRAJESH SHAH could be the master who was registered just before YASH SHAH (RUBBER MAN). Thank you – GSS ( talk| c| em) 07:47, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Let me have it on this one, if you please... last reference i added to Ricardo Sá Pinto, i don't think the translation is very good (yes, i admit i used Google Translate to try and sort it out, but then gave up after i could not).
Happy Easter and all that, take care -- Quite A Character ( talk) 21:35, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
Your words, not mine. Then there was some talk of vaginal steaming. It just went downhill from there. I have to go buy a new transit pass. And an Oh Henry! You can get your kicks on the remaining bot-added WP:UAA reports, I expect it clear by the time I get back.-- kelapstick( bainuu) 20:47, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Mr. Decan.reporter, an indefinite blocked user, is still fooling around at his talkpage. I maybe wrong but this (and especially the summary) does not look like "discussing the block" to me. The Banner talk 18:26, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Hello again. The editor responsible for many of the Joe Walz edits left a message on my talk page which I assume was meant to explain why they continue, but which made no sense. I wanted to let you know (and I can post this on the admin's notice board as well)t that the editor in question made it clear to me that he considers these edits to be funny, and has no intention to stop them. I would have let you know sooner (as the message in question was left on my talk page almost a month ago), but I have had a resurgence of the health issues I previously referenced which kept me away from Wikipedia for most of this month. I wanted to let you know that, due to the nature of this message on my talk page, all admins might need to be aware that this continues and that the editor behind this vandalism apparently plans to continue such edits. Just thought you'd want to know. Thanks. -- Jgstokes ( talk) 06:54, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, your edit summary at https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Robert_Byrd&diff=next&oldid=833284270 got me confsued. Anon attempted to re-add information which was clearly backed up by sources as shown in the KKK section. So I don't understand why your revert edit summary suggests the same knowledge he has, unless I'm not getting it right. Cheers, Optakeover (U) (T) (C) 17:23, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Hello, and thanks. You cleaned out the ASN page. Goodness knows it needed it; I chickened out on removing all the stuff you called "corporate and organizational spam", so I'm glad you didn't, and did. But I'm curious as to why you removed the "Corporate relationship concerns" section, as it doesn't seem to fit that description. HLHJ ( talk) 21:54, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
I think this is a dreadfully written article, full of promotion, useless trivia, and just poor writing. The guy may have been a prominent figure, but ... An editor reverted my rather large edits wholesale, and I don't want to fight about it. Anyone who feels like taking a look ... -- Bbb23 ( talk) 00:31, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
Not just comfortable but welcoming!-- Bbb23 ( talk) 12:41, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
For anyone who has a deep appreciation for lighthouses but lacks the opportunity to obtain one as a residence, do consider windmills as a second best alternative. They share many of the same qualities. MPS1992 ( talk) 18:57, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Drmies, I was wondering where this nomination stood at the moment. Have the sourcing issues been dealt with fully or partially, and are things so dire as to require the "X" icon or is an icon indicating less intransigent problems now appropriate. I'd like to get this moving again, one way or the other. Many thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 02:59, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
Looks like pink poodles are in the news - Extreme dog grooming: Harmless fun or threat to pets? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:59, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
(Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nkbreen ( talk • contribs) 05:18, 10 April 2018 (UTC) https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/politics/politics-report-candidates-cannabis-use/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nkbreen ( talk • contribs) 05:24, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
Just curious...about whether or not racism should/should not fall under the same guidelines as WP:MEDRS because it seems likely that it's somehow related to mental health. I did some quick research to see if my thinking was even remotely headed in the right direction, and the answer is yes. I gathered up a few diffs if you're interested:
The Western journal of medicine,
Psychology Today,
British Journal of Psychiatry,
WaPo article (to see what the media had to say), and
The Oxford Handbook of Personality Disorders. The latter is not an open access journal but if you can access it, I'm interested in their findings under Individual Differences of Prejudice, Racism, and Xenophobia.
Atsme
📞
📧
15:34, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your encouragement. I was trolled by a fellow wiki last week, and when I wasn't laughing at the absurdity of the personal attack, I was feeling discouraged to contribute further to wikipedia. But I forged ahead and kept editing anyway because I love this project and want to improve it whenever possible. Thanks again for your kind words of encouragement. Kinkyturnip ( talk) 19:30, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
I downgraded this from CSD to AfD as I think we could do with consensus. It's in the usual place. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:11, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
My edit to the marshal page was legit, look up far cry 5. Dont be an autist just because you don't believe my changes off the bat queer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1003:b452:6eea:51d2:20df:86a1:69a9 ( talk • contribs)
I saw that you had protected The World Tomorrow (radio and television). In the protection log, you said "you can't fix stupid, but you can semi-protect it". However, you actually extended-confirmed-protected the article. Was that a mistake and was it supposed to be semi-protected? — MRD2014 Talk 21:23, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, can you protect the Philadelphia Flyers article? Thanks. - KH-1 ( talk) 01:43, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
EJI published those studies, and received international media coverage for the last one, Lynching in America (2015), which is now in its 3rd edition. The discussion was from the report itself, and I had sources such as NPR and the NY Times discussing the report when first published. The LA Times covered it, as did the Guardian, as I recall. Founder Bryan Stevenson has talked about the lynching report, and its connection to his work on building a memorial to lynching victims in Montgomery, Alabama. The more detailed material about the 2015 report and the earlier studies, all published by EJI, has been in this article for three years. Parkwells ( talk) 01:52, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Serenade (poems) 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)
00:21, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
Can you allow me to re do my article I am the creator of the article contents you deleted? Lobosuperstar ( talk) 00:26, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 27, February – March 2018
Arabic, Chinese and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 14:50, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
Wait, hang on...I was in the middle of some restructuring. It looks like you may have straight-up reverted again, but really, I don't think we want to start with that material. Before you started trimming things, a newbie had come along and astroturfed the fuck out of the article. The older source material, while pretty bad, is really better than what you were trimming and cite-tagging. Chubbles ( talk) 00:20, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for thanking me on my edit. You seem pretty blunt, yet pretty straightforward, and I respect that. Rock on. UnsungKing123 ( talk) 02:21, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Drmies
FYI. This user is evading your block of 2A02:4780:BAD:25:FCED:1FF:FE25:109 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), using yet another web host proxy, this time in the Ukraine.- Mr X 🖋 18:18, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Warning: 22:06, 6 February 2018
Since you have experience trying to work with @ T.D. Hoxey:, I thought it best to first see what you think rather than immediately escalating it to a wider audience. The most recent edit that changes verified information without changing the sources or indicating a verifying source seems over the line to me. -- Ronz ( talk) 15:34, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Good call on the possible socking. It doesn't smell of paid editing, but rather BATTLE and OWN to an extreme that I've rarely seen. Very strange. -- Ronz ( talk) 00:16, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
On 22 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Serenade (poems), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that J. Slauerhoff's 1930 poetry collection Serenade provoked critical responses ranging from "childish" to "pure lyric" with "refined technique"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Serenade (poems). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Serenade (poems)), 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.
Gatoclass ( talk) 12:02, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Drmies. I'm new to wikipedia, so I'm not sure if this is how you respond. You wrote regarding my edit to Photogram, just wanted to reply. Actually Kwangho Cheh (최광호) is actually super well know in the korean art world although not so much in the US. There are a lot of newspapers, blogs, and textbooks that discuss/teach about him in korea. The reference I added was actually a link to a newspaper that wrote about him. I went to a couple of his galleries in korea as well. What would be the proper way to add this information to wikipedia?
Stephjaelee ( talk) 01:29, 23 April 2018 (UTC)Stephjaelee
Ahhh that makes sense thank you. I will consider adding a page about him....but this will require me to research his work on Korean websites or reaching out to him or someone on his team...which would be more than just going to galleries and reading about him in books.... I was looking for a quick way to add to the information about a Korean Photographer who was well known in one country but not in another due to language. I also added links to my edit that were newspapers or detailed in a blog, so people would know what I was talking about...would this not be enough? [1] [2]He also doesn't have a korean page, because korean people seem to use Naver or Daum more. He does have a Naver page written in Korean, but I'm guessing that for these lists you only accept english articles correct? Stephjaelee ( talk) 01:45, 23 April 2018 (UTC)Stephjaelee
References
Hi, could you please take a look at Talk:Douma chemical attack? Regards. -- Mhhossein talk 18:19, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Fleurs de Marécage 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!
Meanderingbartender (
talk)
13:15, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Are you sure this is what you wanted to do? Corbitt built 3,077 prime movers (including pre-production models). White, whose name you deleted, built 3,547 prime movers, more than Corbitt. They built over 6,500 standard models total, making White the largest prime mover and standard model producer. (All other manufacturers combined built about 6,000 standard models plus a few hundred pre-standard models).
I am not saying my wording was correct, only that you changed the meaning. I am not editing anything, but you may want to. No answer needed. Thank you. Sammy D III ( talk) 14:05, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
Can I please have my page back? I had a lot of stuff in it and I need it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farnell45 ( talk • contribs)
I mean back. Its self explanatory.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Farnell45 ( talk • contribs)
I am pretty sure he is doing it for WP:ECP flag-- Shrike ( talk) 13:46, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, this is الناز ( talk page). I couldn't leave a comment here with the other username (I'm guessing because it was a user name for fa.wikipedia). As you observed I have edited wikipedia a lot but back in the days, it has been 10 years since I edited wikipedia on daily basis. So disruptive editing that you mentioned in my talk page was a new thing to me. I went ahead and read the guidelines. I would appreciate if you could help my understand this better by telling me which one of my edits falls into this category so I can avoid that in the future. Thanks for making Wikipedia better! :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elnaz ( talk • contribs) 18:35, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Is this unusual account blockable as WP:NOTHERE? Over 12,000 edits to userspace!-- Bbb23 ( talk) 17:41, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
(plus we have p-batch for "batch protection")- if we wanted to undelete the whole mess, we'd have to use und-batch (which only exists when there's a list of redlinks). Primefac ( talk) 13:12, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Drmies. Just a question really - you said on Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Topic_ban_on_Baseball_Bugs_from_Wikipedia_Space that the term witch hunt has a very specific meaning and a set of connotations that is frequently highly inappropriate. For my benefit could you let me know what those are? I've used the term myself in the past (in the sense of "a campaign directed against a person or group holding views considered unorthodox or a threat") and wasn't aware it was potentially offensive. Thanks, Fish+ Karate 14:46, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
It is not an excuse or a claim for mercy. Just a frustrating fact that I again have fallen into the trap of my own body. Disclosure: I am again in a depression, a type of depression causing - amongst others - loss of self-control. I am aware that my block log and my depressions have a close relationship, but even that realisation comes on hindsight.
Now, on the eve of what looks to be an indefinite block, I just have to admit that I am again let down by my body. Medication works far too slow, fighting back on my own is far quicker. But the pitfall is there... The Banner talk 13:23, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for sorting out splitting details. It is so nice to know that in this big wiki universe, I can always count on you to know what's the right thing to do.
Rosiestep (
talk)
15:01, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for taking control of Clyde Lewis last night. I see my reverts might have been a bit hasty, will make note of that. Wish they would provide an explanation instead of just blanking stuff...
Home Lander (
talk)
13:31, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
Regarding Nicole Louise Pearce ( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive268#Nicole_Louise_Pearce) – there has been no discussion on the Noticeboard or at the article's talk page. Is it normal and acceptable for an article to be vetoed, criticism unanswered? I had expected that issues raised would be discussed. The users who took objection haven't justified their reasons, and do not engage beyond taking general issue. I suppose I just expected there to be a discussion rather than a seemingly indefinite vanishing of the subject. Crimescrutineer ( talk) 02:13, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
I'll just republish it privately elsewhere, with comment about the simplistic unreasoned criticism found here that had it removed. Dismissal on paragraph length and extent of detail per se alone aren't helpful or editorial.
This wasn't an article about transexual crime, it included the subject's sex change while incarcerated having been the route to their release (chemical castration). This is clear beyond the third sentence ( TonyBallioni).
The idea that too much detail can be present isn't befitting an actual encyclopaedia, particularly when the article at the redirect is scant. I mistakenly expected genuine criticism, not silence followed by paltry contempt.
If you have issue with the nature of the article I encourage you to attempt taking to task other blackballing creations with more followers, such as /info/en/?search=Ted_Bundy and /info/en/?search=Jeffrey_Dahmer, which are loaded with the same purported problems.
After making ~30 donations to Wikipedia over the years I won't do so again. I now clearly understand the wariness academics have about this resource.
Jayron32, Drmies, LadyofShalott, GorillaWarfare, Cullen328, Nomoskedasticity, Bonadea, Euryalus Crimescrutineer ( talk) 03:53, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
Power~enwiki Overused by whomever, that's my position irrespective.
Drmies I believe the comment on the talk page was more substantial than the criticism, in any event there was no input of any kind after a week despite the strong views against it.
I presumed that to take issue with something negatively here there would also be something constructive and reasoned returned. This wasn't a "talk" let alone a discussion.
The BLP isn't taken seriously when editors are derisive, proud of hasty wanton behaviour and discussion is a farce.
There was nothing defamatory or unkind in the opening sentence of the article, the descriptors included various scientific diagnoses, all of which were referenced. The opening sentences in the articles about other criminals aren't complimentary either, but they are factual.
There is nothing condescending about pointing out an individual's gender. It is simply fact. As this individual had several genders and a transitioning period over two decades under the public's eye, it is mentioned for clarification.
I don't believe in the veracity of contributing here, it is too emotive and unprofessional on the editorial side. The time and effort spent was too easily degraded (in fact banished) by people from outside the subject matter. I won't be commenting further. There is no reason to publish here when the editorial process can rapidly fail to meet even common-sense standards. The editorial here has been about control, not truth. Donating time or money here is counter-productive. Give your time and money to projects that only repair damage.
Crimescrutineer ( talk) 04:43, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
About to send you an email. Could you please check it in a minute. Thanks. Home Lander ( talk) 18:11, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
OMG!
No good deed goes unpunished, it seems. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:55, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
the best we can muster here. That said, I think the last places on Wikipedia that TRM wants to be mentioned on are AN/ANI and ArbCom. It's only been a short while since a certain admin tried to drag TRM through the arbitration process. Drmies, you tried to do a nice thing and it went a bit south. I've had the same happen to me. I'd just live and let live. Don't get worked up about it. Just shrug and move on. Mr rnddude ( talk) 21:10, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
why did only you block me when other members were violating the rules and I didn't threaten anyone nor do I plan to threaten anyone here so why did you accuse of threatening? Saad123890 ( talk) 16:55, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
yes, I have read the policies regarding BLP and RS and second, those experienced editors weren't replying me back after repeatedly asking them so and telling them how should I can improve the two pages which I edited. its not easy when you waste so much time on editing and cite the information with credible sources and in the end some experienced editors who don't know anything about those people come and undo your editing and then don't even reply. sorry, but what I read on the talk page of one editor you clearly said you shouldn't threaten but it's ok that's in the past. yes, I am good reader sir but its ok and yes i have but what i want to know that why some two experienced editors can undo credible work of some who is new? how should i complain about them because they don't even reply me back? you say they don't agree but when they don't even reply what should say? so i would like to know how should i complain about them? lastly, i did read about the polices but I need to edit some information with credible sources can you please at least tell me why can't I put the real age of the actors? or should go read BLP policies again? Saad123890 ( talk) 18:38, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
how should i complain about them-- if your complaints would resemble this paragraph to which I am responding, then the best advice to you is not to complain about other editors at all. It may result in more problems for you.
when they don't even reply what should say?-- when they don't reply, you should start a New Section on the Talk Page of the article explaining what material you want to add and listing the reliable sources for the material. And asking for other editors' views about whether the material is appropriate based on those sources. You don't seem to have done this. MPS1992 ( talk) 21:16, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
yeah sure I will do that start a new section and if still, they don't reply? and why there will be problems for me? can't we complain about editors who cross the lines? Saad123890 ( talk) 23:02, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
thanks thats what i will do then go to dispute resolution if they don't respond within a week. Saad123890 ( talk) 07:53, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
Do you know anyone taking care of the Louis Farrakhan page?
We are about to have an edit war and I don't know if I can stop it. Editors Seraphim System and MShabazz both have valid points but I can't seem to get them to work together. Peacemaker is not something I have a lot of practice at on wiki, so perhaps you can refer this on for me. Thanks, C. W. Gilmore ( talk) 20:29, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Sorry to bother, but a while back, you helped put a stop to some ping-pong editing on the Steven Soderbergh page. Basically, a user named User:LivinRealGüd and I were debating whether to add the fact that Steven Soderbergh conceived a love child out of wedlock. I thought the debate was settled, and you agreed that the love child fact should stay on the page. Just wanted to let you know, that the user reverted the edits and is starting a vandalism war again. Isn't this against Wiki policy? I thought as a mod you had the right to decide this. Why can she/he/it go back and restart the debate? Zeldathequark ( talk) 02:37, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Please see my talk and related mfd and deleted versions. Need some laundry done.-- Dlohcierekim ( talk) 01:03, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Hey, Drmies! I've noticed that there's a significant content dispute over on University of Dhaka, and I was wondering if it wouldn't be more productive to discuss the issue with Mizan Al Mim rather than just blocking or censuring the editor. I received a chat message on my talk page which seems to indicate that we should possibly assume good faith even though there is an edit war. Thoughts? - zfJames Please ping me in your reply on this page ( chat page , contribs) 21:16, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
On 10 May 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Aartswoud, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that around the Dutch village of Aartswoud, the former polder landscape and its seasonal water levels are being restored? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Aartswoud. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Aartswoud), 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.
Gatoclass ( talk) 00:02, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
Just an FYI, your name came up at an ANI discussion regarding 72bikers. Apparently this editor has been doing what you advised them to do? – dlthewave ☎ 01:38, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
You've probably already seen this, but wow. Also, if you're not watching Atlanta, your life is the poorer for it. MastCell Talk 00:05, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Vanamonde93 is proposing a topic ban against me, he is basing his aspersions on these diffs, [9] [10] [11] (these were legit reverts that I succinctly explained in my edit summaries) claiming that I have played my "part in the recent edit-wars", besides citing this as evidence against me, saying "has much the same attitude of treating Wikipedia as a battleground; for further evidence take a look at his talk page, where both Drmies and I told him off for making blanket reverts of suspected socks without sufficient thought or explanation". Can you comment there please? MBlaze Lightning talk 16:11, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Hello. You recently reverted 1 sentence of my argument on the Nazi gun control argument for being not cited. However, there was in fact a citation at the end of the sentence. I will add another citation and make it seem less POV for reversion. In the future, if a warning template doesn't fit the reason, you can type a message. Thanks for the consideration! Lightningboltz03 ( talk) 10:20, 15 May 2018 (UTC)Lightningboltz03
There's a tricky BLP issue at Stephen Tompkinson, an article where you assisted in a big clean up some years ago. Daisyet17 ( talk · contribs) claims to be his daughter and has been making a couple of changes which, on the face of it, are fairly trivial but nonetheless concern me. She has had advice from me on both their talk page and my own but continue to assert that it is self-evident that she is his daughter. While it all might seem a bit draconian on my part, I am concerned because there are ways that she or her (alleged) father could resolve this, eg: via publishing the info on his agent's website. In addition, he has had a somewhat chequered personal life (not all of which is mentioned in the article) and there is potential for bad blood when an alleged child of a failed marriage starts making edits to a bio article. She is way over 3RR (so am I, but claiming the BLP exemption). Should I just let it go? - Sitush ( talk) 18:53, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Not even surprising, given these latest changes. Raymond3023 ( talk)
Stay in touch with Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wikiexplorer13. Raymond3023 ( talk) 04:58, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in 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/German war effort. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 30, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:01, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Hey! Thank you for blocking Wario's Woods expert ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). I have pretty good reason to believe they are a sock of Iodhogushuiodgbhusaishyb ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (just check out their edits!). Would you recommend opening an SPI? HickoryOughtShirt?4 ( talk) 02:16, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
And that is why I am not an administrator.
General Ization
Talk
22:26, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi. My name is Kristin Hodgson, and I work on the Brand team at Meetup. Over the past several months, I've noticed unusual edits to the Meetup Wikipedia page.
For example, the article has been experiencing edits like Meetup “put the future of the company on the line” [13] and saying that Meetup’s # resist political groups were contrary to Meetup’s mission statement (citing only Meetup’s own mission statement) [14]
The current article still says stuff like “after years of declining usage, and lacking the funding necessary to compete against rising competition," which is not supported by the citations given.
I posted at NPOV [15] hoping to attract one or two disinterested watchlisters/participants. I was happy that this attracted two un-involved editors that started making edits [16][ https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Meetup_(website)&type=revision&diff=834047873&oldid=834046789&diffmode=source], but both were immediately reversed.
Is this something you'd be willing to look into? There is a discussion on Talk about the list of competitors on the page.
Thanks, Kristin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kristin hodgson at meetup ( talk • contribs) 17:52, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Dear fellow WP editor, what rode you to delete a message by another user on my talk page??? -- Bernd.Brincken ( talk) 22:17, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Black Kite: Windows 10, you say? Is that why my computer cuts off in the midst of making a post.-- Dlohcierekim ( talk) 22:47, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
You're a recovering arbitrator so perhaps you can prognosticate. How much longer do you think the dispute-resolution apparatus of the English WP will continue to be tied up by a handful of narcissists seeking salve for their bruised egos? E Eng 22:55, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Not sure why you removed the detour description for just one leg? Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 03:18, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I have moved your comment from the "comments" section to the "threaded" section as it seems to fit in better there. You may wish to leave a !vote in the "comments" section as well. Regards, -- LK ( talk) 08:13, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm somewhat hurt at finding my special skill unlisted. E Eng 16:14, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Please leave any skills I may have unlisted. Special or not. Martinevans123 ( talk) 16:25, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I am gratified to find myself not included in the list. Yngvadottir ( talk) 18:38, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm questioning the deletion of the Publication list on the page for David Silva (linguist). My understanding is that for academics, listing major publications ia part of the case for notablity, as it gives a place to link to reviews of the work, etc. I'm in agreement that a Wiki page should not be a resume, and so should not list everything he's written. But I also would find a selection of the scholar's works to be something a reader would want to know about this person when they are reading the page. Thanks. LingLass ( talk) 15:54, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
On 25 May 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Félix-Marie Abel, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Félix-Marie Abel, a Dominican priest and archaeologist, identified several battle sites from the Maccabean Revolt? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Félix-Marie Abel. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Félix-Marie Abel), 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.
— Maile ( talk) 00:36, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Please stop following me around, undoing my edits, thanks. There is a policy against that. Attack Ramon ( talk) 14:20, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at
Monte Testaccio. Your edits appear to be
disruptive and have been or will be
reverted.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Attack Ramon ( talk) 14:37, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Hello. Do you remember who you thought 194.68.94.68 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) was when you blocked it in August 2017 for block evasion? I have created a SPI report for Hyperboreangiant as you blocked 194.68.94.68 soon after blocking other Hyperboreangiant socks, but I now think 194.68.94.68 may be a sock of someone else. Hrodvarsson ( talk) 23:23, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
For your help with Middle Eastern/Jewish articles Shrike ( talk) 18:19, 25 May 2018 (UTC) |
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doria Ragland (2nd nomination).
NeilN
talk to me
23:27, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
But I prepared another draft [20].Any help will be appreciated - Shrike ( talk) 14:44, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Why block that user so quickly... Abelmoschus Esculentus ( talk to me) 06:44, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
...that the evidence phase of the German War Effort arbitration closes on the 30th, so you only have a few days to fill out your placeholders.
Best, Beyond My Ken ( talk) 05:27, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
Hello Drmies,
Can you or one of your stalkers give me a link to guidelines about the use of user talk pages by blocked editors? My understanding is that their talk pages should be used for unblock requests with perhaps some allowance for "venting" about the block, but should not be used for edit requests while they are blocked. Am I correct? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 08:31, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Want me to walk you through the BLP violations? -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 05:45, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
-- JustBerry ( talk) 22:12, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
I thought I'd let you know about this. -- JustBerry ( talk) 04:38, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
You may also wish to revoke talk page access.-- Cahk ( talk) 07:43, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Miesmuscheln. Since you had some involvement with the Miesmuscheln redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Plantdrew ( talk) 19:49, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
They're called the Westboro Baptist Church, and our article about them is very NPOV. They're widely considered a hate group, and other Christian denominations have condemned them. Good for them. Andrevan @ 02:31, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I was going to write an article on the Australian architect Pia Ednie-Brown but I see an article about her has previously been deleted/ moved to your user space. Can it be retrieved so I can edit it, or do I have to start over? Was it deleted because an editor thought she wasn't notable enough? TIA, MurielMary ( talk) 08:07, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Adso of Montier-en-Der 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!
North America
1000
08:00, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Adso of Montier-en-Der 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)
23:59, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
As the only rational editor here, what do you think of these changes? Is the use of would in this manner a US English thing? I see it a lot and it pisses me off for some reason I can't explain. - Sitush ( talk) 07:45, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
219.79.126.90 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) has asked for a deletion review of Doria Ragland. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. — Cryptic 08:06, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
We are preparing a list of tools and techncial support for Women in Red. I have tentatively added your name as you have provided assistance establishing the editing history of split articles. Please let me know whether you agree to be listed. You are of course welcome to make any additions or corrections.-- Ipigott ( talk) 07:04, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
... As is my wont, a hairy article topic fell into my lap. I've asked about it at the BLP noticeboard. I think I can see how to write this gentleman up neutrally, and there are certainly sufficient sources: not only the new coverage but stuff going back years including the WaPo. I would describe him in the lede as a perennial candidate rather than a politician or an anarchist. The thing is, should I do this? There are obvious BLP concerns: even if I (or someone else) managed to do a good job, it would be a magnet for non-neutral embellishments. I believe there is also a policy against writing up candidates right before elections, though I may be thinking of a DYK rule, and I can't imagine an article based on the reliable sources being interpreted as an endorsement. I'm also aware that there's also a whole complex of terrifying ArbCom rules, regulations, and official inscriptions in log-books that concern post-WW2 American politics and that I doubt I will ever understand. (The ArbCom rulings on pedophilia I feel more confident I can both understand and avoid being entrapped by.) I place this set of queries before the brains trust here, partly in the hope that someone else will do it. Yngvadottir ( talk) 17:19, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Aha, via pix on Commons I finally found where there was a deleted article. Could you or someone else with the admin glasses please tell me whether there are any links there to 3rd-party coverage of his platform back then in his first run for Congress? All I can find are blogs and forum posts, and the actual campaign page didn't get archived in time. (If anyone wants to evaluate my wording or the stances I'm taking on the talk page, or tell me I'm wrong not to include his misdemeanor convictions, this is also a good time for that. I know my article topics are all over the place, but this is quite a stretch and I don't have your or others' BLP expertise.) There is a requested move on the article talk page right now for a move to (politician), and my usage and that of the other person opposing may be out of step with modernity or US conventions or something; if so and if it was a decent article except for TOOSOON, maybe its history should even be undeleted along with the move??? Yngvadottir ( talk) 18:12, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
I suggest you do something about Hijiri88. As soon as I was blocked and unblocked for a minor violation of the 3RR (which had absolutely zero to do with him), Hijiri88 immediately started stalking me ( [27], [28], [29], [30]), and he blatantly canvassed both Curly Turkey and Softlavender in an attempt to WP:GAME the original 3RR noticeboard and have me blocked again. Given that I haven't interacted with Hijiri in months, I suggest you intervene before I take this whole mess (going back to February 2017) to the Arbitration Committee. Dark Knight 2149 17:55, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Drmies. In light of your persistent and aggressive rudeness, I ask that you stay off my talk page in future. Thank you. FreeKnowledgeCreator ( talk) 23:22, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
It’s clear that your political biases are coming through. Every bit of information on Dave Williams (Colorado politician) page was correctly sourced and cited. You can accuse me of COI but it’s obvious that you have a political agenda and if you won’t stop in your aggressiveness and disruptive editing then I will submit a complaint and seek assistance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by UostwisRDewoh ( talk • contribs) 07:22, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
This makes me think that we should perhaps protect closed RfAs, or at least those of people who died? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:10, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for this one, Tony. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:32, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
User:Shrike/Mount_Hope(Ottoman_Empire) any help would be appreciated.-- Shrike ( talk) 10:49, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
On 12 June 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Adso of Montier-en-Der, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that 10th-century monk Adso of Montier-en-Der wrote a biography of the antichrist? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Adso of Montier-en-Der. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Adso of Montier-en-Der), 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.
Gatoclass ( talk) 00:02, 12 June 2018 (UTC)