no archives yet ( create) |
As we were saying...
About the provocations from a former editor on the Auden talk page: I could see that the best thing to do was to ignore them, and never to get into any further arguments, no matter what the provocation, because nothing good could come of it. As you say, User:SilkTork and User:Sadads turned an ugly situation into something very productive, and I watched that process with genuine admiration, gratitude, and even awe.
I also admired - and envied - the superhuman patience with which you and SilkTork and MelanieN and other admins dealt with that other editor, always hoping to educate, always looking for some potential merits. And then I also admired the decisive way the situation got dealt with when there was provocation too many. I'm genuinely impressed, and not saying this to be polite.
While we're more or less on the subject, I was puzzled for a while by that editor's insistence that there were two book-length studies of the connection between Yeats and Auden, because I knew for a fact that no such book-length studies existed. The other editor said something like "You could search for them on Google or Amazon and then claim you knew about them already." Eventually, the other editor identified the two books, but seemed only to know their titles, probably discovered by searching on Google or Amazon. The book by Richard Ellmann, Eminent Domain (a terrific book, by the way), isn't a "full-length study" of Yeats and Auden; in fact only one of its six chapters is about Auden. The other book, Saving Civilization, by Lucy Macdiarmid, is an excellent compare-and-contrast account of Yeats, Eliot, Auden as they separately confronted the social issues of the 1920s and 1930s, not a study of the "connection" between any of the three.
What baffles me is why anyone should want to waste their time inventing this kind of thing, but I suppose the admins have seen it all too often. I'd be fascinated to read any books or essays about the twists and turns of Wikipedia-editing. I expect some of the stories are hair-raising.
And thank you for the barnstar! And apologies for rambling on like this... - Macspaunday ( talk) 02:19, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Thing is, they care greatly about poetry and not a lot of people here do, so I was hoping maybe we could work with them. In the end, they were unworkable with, so to speak, but I held out as long as I could. With the disruptive editor whose siteban seems to be all but decided on ANI, I feel the same way: I don't think they should be banned for the charges on which they are brought up, though they'll probably end up getting themselves indef-blocked for their behavior. Melanie tried hard with MusicAngels (harder than me) and I truly commend those editors and admins who have so much patience. The downside is that we get called out for "enabling". Well, that's not fun, but I'd rather live with that reputation than block and ban too quickly. Alright--sorry for my ramblings; perhaps this is yet another argument for a siteban, haha. Sadads is a really nice guy, by the way. (He should go to that Computers and Writing conference in Rochester, NY, and work on his resume.) All the best, Drmies ( talk) 02:33, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
@ Sadads: And here I thought I was going to be able to reminisce about Henry Esmond and Vanity Fair with a real Thackeray fan! I've been waiting for that chance for years.... I can still hope... - I've actually made a start on that styles and themes section for the Auden page, but need some more time before posting anything for comment. Meanwhile, on the subject of Blake, and styles, compare the opening of the third section of Auden's "In Memory of W. B. Yeats" with the opening of Blake's "The Tyger". Auden's goes like this (quoting from memory): "Earth, receive an honoured guest. / William Yeats is laid to rest. / Let the Irish vessel lie / Emptied of its poetry." Basically the same rhyme as "eye" and "symmetry", which is very neat, I think. - Macspaunday ( talk) 13:22, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
I don't frequently teach the modern Brits; I may never have taught them at all, so I don't have them at heart. My intimate encounters with them were in grad school, under the tutelage of the now-retired and model New Critic Dwight Eddins. Turns out he was secretly a Cormac McCarthy fan anyway, haha. But I tell you what, Macspaunday--if you tell me what you do with this literature, professionally or otherwise, and how you find the time to read those long sentences, I'll read a Thackeray novel, and you get to pick it. For my part, I'll just say I'm a tenured "medievalist" at a fair to middling satellite campus. Drmies ( talk) 23:23, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Now, I'll get a copy of Vanity Fair (it will have to wait until I finish The Wake and Miles Davis's autobio). My medieval suggestion? Hmm. How about the Lays of Marie de France? The Glyn Burgess translation is fine; the more recent Hackett edition is good for class use. Wonderful stuff. Drmies ( talk) 14:53, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I am new and not yet familiar with all the technicalities. May I bother you from time to time with my questions? I need some guidance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Examen Intelligentia ( talk • contribs) 21:29, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Any theories on why this page in particular? Is it something in the water? EEng ( talk) 07:10, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Dear Drmies,
I agree that the Fort Worth Circle article needs at least a few illustrations. A lot of issues to consider (copyright, etc.) but I am working on it and hope to have the article illustrated soon. Papernpencils2015 ( talk) 02:19, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
When you read this, make sure you read every word. It's enthralling.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 04:01, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, I filed
truecrimebookreviews.com at meta blacklist. I removed 20+ links to this after seeing your removal.
—
Berean Hunter
(talk) 01:03, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi Drmies. 009o9 ( talk · contribs) is a COI editor, who in compliance with Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure disclosed on Talk:Anthony Marinelli:
This template certifies that this article contains contributions from 009o9 ( talk · contribs), an editor paid by Real Publicity Genius (RPG), in compliance with Wikimedia's Terms of Use. |
009o9 is asking for a review at Talk:Anthony Marinelli#Biography update of the proposed changes at User:009o9/Draft Anthony Marinelli. He contacted me here, asking me for a review. I've already copyedited the article and removed some promotional wording (e.g. "star-studded montage of musicians such as ( David Bowie, Cher, Blondie); a loaded cast of Rodney Bingenheimer's "A-list" friends").
Would you (or a helpful talk page watcher) take a look at the article draft at User:009o9/Draft Anthony Marinelli to determine whether it is sufficiently neutral to be moved to mainspace? Thanks, Cunard ( talk) 04:22, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
I didn't say referencing needs to meet WP:N--that doesn't make a lot of sense anyway. What I said was that the references need to discuss something, not just mention it. We don't insert every single factoid just because it happened: we need to insert facts that are meaningful and relevant, not to the person who is the subject of the article but to the reader. What does it mean that he was a musician on a 1984 Lionel Richie album? Synth programming--it's meaningful enough to be on the cover, I suppose, cause he got paid for it, but that really doesn't mean it's meaningful in a larger sense: for all I know he was just one of dozens of studio cats who got hired to do a job, maybe a really small job (there's three more synth programmers on that album, for instance). And so speaking engagements are really nothing. Good for him, but nothing in the larger sense, until you prove that it was a notable event in the way that Tolkien's 1936 lecture on Beowulf was. (Not to the same extent, but in the same way.) And that some "giving back" would be of interest to colleges, that's not for here: it's for his agent, or his website; calling a speaking engagement "teaching and mentoring" is just window dressing. No, you need to get away from the resume building. If you want to put this up in mainspace, go ahead; I was asked for my opinion and I gave it. If it goes up, expect serious pruning (not necessarily by me, though that's the first thing I would do) and some tagging. Them's the shakes. Good luck, Drmies ( talk) 01:38, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
I was in the middle of writing a shocked "what the hell are you talking about?!" reply to AmericanDad86's bizarre ramble on my talk page before I noticed that he was indeffed and saw some of the other garbage he wrote. So weird. Hacked? Whatever. For the record, I edited the Raven-Symone article months before he did. His article indeed... Sad story. Maybe he got tired of the long con? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 05:42, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Does this look like a light copyvio of this to you? We can use Wikia for content, but there's no attribution here. Also, what's a "goo-themed girl"? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 05:56, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Wow.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 12:22, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
On 22 October 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Aiol and Mirabel, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the hero of the Old French Aiol and Mirabel marries a Saracen woman? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Aiol and Mirabel. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), 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. |
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 13:13, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
I wasn't sure if this was a problem, but after Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:Anti-feminist, concerning the same editor, I thought I should let you know about it after I patrolled it. Thanks, -- Rubbish computer ( HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 14:44, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
While I reverted your edit, I concur with your worries. For quite some time I am watching the fancruft blossoming around The Witcher Saga. I've been planing to trim it myself. Could you please indicate me an the policy how to handle these fictional worlds? Staszek Lem ( talk) 18:31, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
FYI - I have renominated User:Kajit paron for speedy deletion: like you I believe this was perfectly ok as a user page but IMO this subsequent version is not; it was previously deleted when it was the same or broadly the same as the latter. RichardOSmith ( talk) 19:22, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Please do, and do let me know how they turn out. I'm almost tempted to watch to see the latest incarnation of Trey Gowdy's hair. (Notice I said "almost"...)
I'm about done with the Cat-a-Lot for now, though, if you wish to poke your head back in the Recent Changes section. :-) -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 01:53, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
no archives yet ( create) |
As we were saying...
About the provocations from a former editor on the Auden talk page: I could see that the best thing to do was to ignore them, and never to get into any further arguments, no matter what the provocation, because nothing good could come of it. As you say, User:SilkTork and User:Sadads turned an ugly situation into something very productive, and I watched that process with genuine admiration, gratitude, and even awe.
I also admired - and envied - the superhuman patience with which you and SilkTork and MelanieN and other admins dealt with that other editor, always hoping to educate, always looking for some potential merits. And then I also admired the decisive way the situation got dealt with when there was provocation too many. I'm genuinely impressed, and not saying this to be polite.
While we're more or less on the subject, I was puzzled for a while by that editor's insistence that there were two book-length studies of the connection between Yeats and Auden, because I knew for a fact that no such book-length studies existed. The other editor said something like "You could search for them on Google or Amazon and then claim you knew about them already." Eventually, the other editor identified the two books, but seemed only to know their titles, probably discovered by searching on Google or Amazon. The book by Richard Ellmann, Eminent Domain (a terrific book, by the way), isn't a "full-length study" of Yeats and Auden; in fact only one of its six chapters is about Auden. The other book, Saving Civilization, by Lucy Macdiarmid, is an excellent compare-and-contrast account of Yeats, Eliot, Auden as they separately confronted the social issues of the 1920s and 1930s, not a study of the "connection" between any of the three.
What baffles me is why anyone should want to waste their time inventing this kind of thing, but I suppose the admins have seen it all too often. I'd be fascinated to read any books or essays about the twists and turns of Wikipedia-editing. I expect some of the stories are hair-raising.
And thank you for the barnstar! And apologies for rambling on like this... - Macspaunday ( talk) 02:19, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Thing is, they care greatly about poetry and not a lot of people here do, so I was hoping maybe we could work with them. In the end, they were unworkable with, so to speak, but I held out as long as I could. With the disruptive editor whose siteban seems to be all but decided on ANI, I feel the same way: I don't think they should be banned for the charges on which they are brought up, though they'll probably end up getting themselves indef-blocked for their behavior. Melanie tried hard with MusicAngels (harder than me) and I truly commend those editors and admins who have so much patience. The downside is that we get called out for "enabling". Well, that's not fun, but I'd rather live with that reputation than block and ban too quickly. Alright--sorry for my ramblings; perhaps this is yet another argument for a siteban, haha. Sadads is a really nice guy, by the way. (He should go to that Computers and Writing conference in Rochester, NY, and work on his resume.) All the best, Drmies ( talk) 02:33, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
@ Sadads: And here I thought I was going to be able to reminisce about Henry Esmond and Vanity Fair with a real Thackeray fan! I've been waiting for that chance for years.... I can still hope... - I've actually made a start on that styles and themes section for the Auden page, but need some more time before posting anything for comment. Meanwhile, on the subject of Blake, and styles, compare the opening of the third section of Auden's "In Memory of W. B. Yeats" with the opening of Blake's "The Tyger". Auden's goes like this (quoting from memory): "Earth, receive an honoured guest. / William Yeats is laid to rest. / Let the Irish vessel lie / Emptied of its poetry." Basically the same rhyme as "eye" and "symmetry", which is very neat, I think. - Macspaunday ( talk) 13:22, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
I don't frequently teach the modern Brits; I may never have taught them at all, so I don't have them at heart. My intimate encounters with them were in grad school, under the tutelage of the now-retired and model New Critic Dwight Eddins. Turns out he was secretly a Cormac McCarthy fan anyway, haha. But I tell you what, Macspaunday--if you tell me what you do with this literature, professionally or otherwise, and how you find the time to read those long sentences, I'll read a Thackeray novel, and you get to pick it. For my part, I'll just say I'm a tenured "medievalist" at a fair to middling satellite campus. Drmies ( talk) 23:23, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Now, I'll get a copy of Vanity Fair (it will have to wait until I finish The Wake and Miles Davis's autobio). My medieval suggestion? Hmm. How about the Lays of Marie de France? The Glyn Burgess translation is fine; the more recent Hackett edition is good for class use. Wonderful stuff. Drmies ( talk) 14:53, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I am new and not yet familiar with all the technicalities. May I bother you from time to time with my questions? I need some guidance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Examen Intelligentia ( talk • contribs) 21:29, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Any theories on why this page in particular? Is it something in the water? EEng ( talk) 07:10, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Dear Drmies,
I agree that the Fort Worth Circle article needs at least a few illustrations. A lot of issues to consider (copyright, etc.) but I am working on it and hope to have the article illustrated soon. Papernpencils2015 ( talk) 02:19, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
When you read this, make sure you read every word. It's enthralling.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 04:01, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, I filed
truecrimebookreviews.com at meta blacklist. I removed 20+ links to this after seeing your removal.
—
Berean Hunter
(talk) 01:03, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi Drmies. 009o9 ( talk · contribs) is a COI editor, who in compliance with Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure disclosed on Talk:Anthony Marinelli:
This template certifies that this article contains contributions from 009o9 ( talk · contribs), an editor paid by Real Publicity Genius (RPG), in compliance with Wikimedia's Terms of Use. |
009o9 is asking for a review at Talk:Anthony Marinelli#Biography update of the proposed changes at User:009o9/Draft Anthony Marinelli. He contacted me here, asking me for a review. I've already copyedited the article and removed some promotional wording (e.g. "star-studded montage of musicians such as ( David Bowie, Cher, Blondie); a loaded cast of Rodney Bingenheimer's "A-list" friends").
Would you (or a helpful talk page watcher) take a look at the article draft at User:009o9/Draft Anthony Marinelli to determine whether it is sufficiently neutral to be moved to mainspace? Thanks, Cunard ( talk) 04:22, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
I didn't say referencing needs to meet WP:N--that doesn't make a lot of sense anyway. What I said was that the references need to discuss something, not just mention it. We don't insert every single factoid just because it happened: we need to insert facts that are meaningful and relevant, not to the person who is the subject of the article but to the reader. What does it mean that he was a musician on a 1984 Lionel Richie album? Synth programming--it's meaningful enough to be on the cover, I suppose, cause he got paid for it, but that really doesn't mean it's meaningful in a larger sense: for all I know he was just one of dozens of studio cats who got hired to do a job, maybe a really small job (there's three more synth programmers on that album, for instance). And so speaking engagements are really nothing. Good for him, but nothing in the larger sense, until you prove that it was a notable event in the way that Tolkien's 1936 lecture on Beowulf was. (Not to the same extent, but in the same way.) And that some "giving back" would be of interest to colleges, that's not for here: it's for his agent, or his website; calling a speaking engagement "teaching and mentoring" is just window dressing. No, you need to get away from the resume building. If you want to put this up in mainspace, go ahead; I was asked for my opinion and I gave it. If it goes up, expect serious pruning (not necessarily by me, though that's the first thing I would do) and some tagging. Them's the shakes. Good luck, Drmies ( talk) 01:38, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
I was in the middle of writing a shocked "what the hell are you talking about?!" reply to AmericanDad86's bizarre ramble on my talk page before I noticed that he was indeffed and saw some of the other garbage he wrote. So weird. Hacked? Whatever. For the record, I edited the Raven-Symone article months before he did. His article indeed... Sad story. Maybe he got tired of the long con? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 05:42, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Does this look like a light copyvio of this to you? We can use Wikia for content, but there's no attribution here. Also, what's a "goo-themed girl"? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 05:56, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Wow.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 12:22, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
On 22 October 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Aiol and Mirabel, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the hero of the Old French Aiol and Mirabel marries a Saracen woman? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Aiol and Mirabel. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), 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. |
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 13:13, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
I wasn't sure if this was a problem, but after Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:Anti-feminist, concerning the same editor, I thought I should let you know about it after I patrolled it. Thanks, -- Rubbish computer ( HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 14:44, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
While I reverted your edit, I concur with your worries. For quite some time I am watching the fancruft blossoming around The Witcher Saga. I've been planing to trim it myself. Could you please indicate me an the policy how to handle these fictional worlds? Staszek Lem ( talk) 18:31, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
FYI - I have renominated User:Kajit paron for speedy deletion: like you I believe this was perfectly ok as a user page but IMO this subsequent version is not; it was previously deleted when it was the same or broadly the same as the latter. RichardOSmith ( talk) 19:22, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Please do, and do let me know how they turn out. I'm almost tempted to watch to see the latest incarnation of Trey Gowdy's hair. (Notice I said "almost"...)
I'm about done with the Cat-a-Lot for now, though, if you wish to poke your head back in the Recent Changes section. :-) -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 01:53, 23 October 2015 (UTC)