...caretaking the news of the day. Agreed that such articles need to be locked down early. Congratulations to you and other responsible editors. Of the events, words do little justice. Just sadness. Have a good evening, 99.153.143.227 ( talk) 01:38, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
From Cjr100B, on my talk page. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 02:46, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi there, please reconsider the semiprotection. People making sourcing mistakes is not good enough a reason to semiprotect according to the policy. It's not even a BLP. 219.78.115.184 ( talk) 15:46, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Talk:Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. See also Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive83#Virginia Tech massacre subarticles for my experience with the London bombings. I've been WikiGnoming the talk page for several hours, fixing up edits by people who seemingly just hit "create new section" when they want to reply to things, or discuss something already being discussed. Tag! You're it. ☺ Uncle G ( talk) 01:50, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Do you think an editor should be notified everytime their name is mentioned, regardless of how unimportant the mention is? If so, please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#protector. If not, please delete this message before reading it. NE Ent 13:09, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
I was thinking of throwing together a proposal for a generic editnotice to put up on any major in-progress news event; I feel like the "current event" ambox doesn't really cut it. My thinking is that, here, the vast majority of the problematic edits were indeed in good faith, but people weren't really thinking about the consequences - so create an editnotice for anything like this, that reminds people that the standards for sourcing are heightened, not lowered, that Wikipedia is not a newspaper, and that verifiability and coherence is more important than reporting every latest detail. If you could get even 20% of people updating the article with the newest 50%-chance-of-being-false tidbit from CNN to stop and reconsider, it'd take quite a load off... which would be pretty helpful, considering the defamation risks in these areas - last I checked we were at 8 or 9 revdels and 2 Oversights. What do you guys think? I can draw up a sample, if people are interested in the idea. — Francophonie&Androphilie( Je vous invite à me parler) 05:07, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Old man, you have an email. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:19, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
If I speedy delete an article that has an ongoing AfD, is there something I'm supposed to do with the AfD?-- Bbb23 ( talk) 00:56, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
On 16 December 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Amina Mama, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that after twice fleeing civil unrest in Nigeria, Amina Mama moved to South Africa, where she became director of the African Gender Institute and founding editor of its peer-reviewed journal, Feminist Africa? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Amina Mama. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 08:03, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
On 16 December 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article African Gender Institute, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that after twice fleeing civil unrest in Nigeria, Amina Mama moved to South Africa, where she became director of the African Gender Institute and founding editor of its peer-reviewed journal, Feminist Africa? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 08:04, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
On 16 December 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Feminist Africa, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that after twice fleeing civil unrest in Nigeria, Amina Mama moved to South Africa, where she became director of the African Gender Institute and founding editor of its peer-reviewed journal, Feminist Africa? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 08:04, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that you watch the goings-on but in case you miss this one, I've mentioned you here and, well, I'm lost in a miasma of grammatical correctness. Your thoughts would be appreciated. - Sitush ( talk) 00:22, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
I made myself a promise some years ago, when I was a new editor and saw that an admin was guarding her fringe POV in Animal rights and would never allow any compromise, that I would not engage in editing wars. So, rather than reposting the info and adding the Time Magazine link I was preparing I'll move away from the argument. There is nothing to talk about with people who have a social agenda. Regards. Trilobitealive ( talk) 02:44, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Bigh Whigh has been adequately warned about edit warring by me, fully explained on his talk page, but I get the feeling he doesn't get it. I've been sick all weekend but watching the article talk page closely. I gonna get some sleep, so it's your turn to babysit. Bring a stick. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 02:52, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
I was snooping around your user page and wanted to commend you for your work on this very unusual article. Writing about George Washington or Helen Keller is all well and good, but it's articles like yours that keep me perpetually in love with Wikipedia. -- Khazar2 ( talk) 03:00, 17 December 2012 (UTC) |
It appears that this page has not been locked after all, and user [Alan Stenberg], despite numerous warnings, continues to vandalize this page. Why can't his vandalizing be controlled?
Semperfly ( talk) 03:54, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks- IF you read the talk pages for some of these sock puppets, esp. [Alan Stenberg], you will see recent warnings of suspension. Changing a caption from the subject's given, legal name to "dilletante" is not really a content dispute- it's outright vandalism.
It appears you may have blocked user kimocaraw for sock-puppetry. If you re-examine his post, you will see that another editor added text within his text box. The context of the final edit shows conflict within the text. I have nothing more to add on these pages. thank you. Semperfly ( talk) 20:34, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
A- one, a- two. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:56, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
I've noted your comments, but the problem seems to be that IPs and, now, newly registered users - seemingly linked to the Exaro site or at least with non-public knowledge of the investigation - are repeatedly adding unsourced or very poorly sourced information, to an article about an ongoing police investigation which could potentially have significant political repercussions. The legal implications of WP repeatedly adding such allegations need to be addressed in the light of the McAlpine affair, and I would have thought that some form of page protection was the best solution. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 11:19, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
I have been lurking at Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting and its associated talk page and have a dumb question. I would rather appear dumb to you than appear dumb to the thousands of editors at those pages, so here goes: as a Wikipedia editor I am curious to learn why the Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection (DESPP) has not been used in the article for fact reporting. Specifically, their press releases on this incident, which can be found here. I am particularly intrigued because during this incident, there has been proven misreporting by some of the sources currently still used in the article (CNN, Fox News and Huffington Post for example) -- Senra ( talk) 12:26, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
{{
cite press release}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)I can give you a philosophical answer: in general we use secondary sources, not primary ones, so mistakes in reporting may seep into the article, yes. Personally, I don't think I would have a problem with citing reports such as the one you linked--I think you can make a case on the talk page that such reports ("According to the Connecticut State Police,...") are acceptable. Now, the reminder there that social media may not be used to harass people, I'm not sure if that could find a way into the article: we all know what it means, most likely--people have been harassed, but that's not a conclusion that we could write up. (I'm not saying you'd want to consider that; I'm sure you know better than I do what is and what isn't acceptable.) There may be a practical answer as well--editors just haven't looked at it; I'm sure those communications don't have the highest ranking among Google results...
The way to go about it is probably to identify one or more problematic statements in the article (I'm almost afraid to see what happened between 11 PM last night, when my internet connection gave up, and now) and bring them up on the talk page with the relevant links to the correct information. I hope you will engage this on the talk page: it needs cool heads, experienced Wikipedia editors. Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 15:08, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faithful amplification and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jumping to conclusions, I don't suppose you'd be interested in making it a hat-trick of "articles expanded lots of by Uncle G and friends to make an AfD collapse" and early close this? -- Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:29, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
{{
Drmies-user-talk-substub}}
template for combatting this, used to great effect at
/Archive 42#Asega.
Thorsø, Norway (
AfD discussion) required the abilities of an editor who could read Adûnaic.
Uncle G (
talk) 15:42, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Could you perhaps have a quick look at the discussion at Talk:Seminars of Jacques Lacan when you have a moment to see whether I really have gone totally bollocks? Thanks! -- Randykitty ( talk) 15:34, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
With this page we are moving previously used references to the bottom of the reference section and hiding them in a HTML comment section so that if they are reused we dont have to dig through 100's of revisions looking for the reference content. Thanks, Werieth ( talk) 17:26, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi. You recently removed a picture of a rifle from the article and said to see the edit summary of North8000. I looked at that edit summary and no factual sources were presented. I've started a section on the talk page regarding the picture. Somedifferentstuff ( talk) 18:18, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Since you mentioned Borges and confusion, I think that it has finally reached the time that we had a small walled garden of substub encyclopaedia articles.
Uncle G ( talk) 18:41, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for taking a look at Breast cancer awareness. I agree with you both about the fundamental POV issues and also about the toxicity of the talk page conversations. I'm hoping that the article will improve with the involvement of experienced outside editors. GabrielF ( talk) 06:17, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
In case you miss it blended with the other traffic, perhaps this is an essay you would be well suited to create. WP:BEANS and all that, but there appears to be a void. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:37, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Just a curtesy FYI as you're the protecting admin: I've submitted a page move request at WP:RM/TR (a technical move, as I don't believe it's controversial as it's not part of the content dispute, and is supported by the article text and by all the sources attached to the article). The proposed move is: Jay Westervelt ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) → Jay Westerveld ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). I would move it myself, but I am involved in the content dispute over the career label, so do not want to use my admin abilities to move the article through the page protection. --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 17:49, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Re [1]: [2] -- 213.196.212.146 ( talk) 22:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Talk:Universalist Church of West Hartford and the relatively slow - and very lame - edit war on the article - between two established users who should probably have an interaction ban. Thanks, Ladyof Shalott 23:18, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Nathan2055 talk - contribs 23:49, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Drmies. After our discussion yesterday on the Sandy Hook talk page, someone changed Hammond's title from vice principal/lead teacher to vice principal/teacher, and removed two of the three sources. And the cite that remains even verifies she is vice principal and lead teacher. Can you restore the content? Thanks. -- 76.189.123.142 ( talk) 01:36, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
— David Levy 02:51, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Drmies. Nice to meet you. Sorry for my very bad english. But, the user Zz2zz I'm sure he edited from before with an IP ( 76.228.74.139; I'm sure he is, just have to go with a CU). The problem is that he endeavors to remove references equally reliable and, edit arbitrarily, for example: [3] or [4]. And in "Thalía" he removes all without consensus or, as I say, arbitrarily. With your account, he does the same. What I can do?, I do not know English very well But please, could you help me?. I just want to do a job in good faith. Best regards, Chrishonduras ( talk) 05:29, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Drmies, and good choice on the block length. It is probably just enough time for the user to step back and re-evaluate. Ryan Vesey 05:41, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Someone renamed them without my realsing and now I can't seem to move them back.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 06:18, 19 December 2012 (UTC) There are redirects on the others so it must be because I have been copy pasting the titles without seeing that they were named wrong. I will redirect the new archive.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 06:21, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
* <-- That's a tiny barnstar for Drmies for making me laugh on that talk page. :) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 20:42, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for all your help in dealing with User:MikeFromCanmore. Halo Jerk1 ( talk) 07:50, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
You've nominated something for deletion by proxy. Also note the copying and pasting from tourist brochures that I've pointed out to Prioryman. Uncle G ( talk) 13:35, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Apparently, your application of the BLP policy to roads is faulty. Uncle G ( talk) 03:47, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
I've tried to explain what you meant, but it would be better coming from you. Uncle G ( talk) 11:11, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
"you may do so, in a calm and non-accusatory manner" - "if you want to persist living in dreamland"
Aren't these two statements of yours contradictory?
My complaint is that debate is being stifled. What is wrong with that? Why aren't you allowing a debate to happen? -- MacRùsgail ( talk) 14:42, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. HarryZilber ( talk) 18:03, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
If you go out as a private citizen and buy a gun you do not do so in a value-free environment. First of all, you (US citizens here) do so in a country that has long supported the private ownership of guns, and has extended those rights in recent history, some might argue to a ridiculous extent. When you do buy a gun, then, you affirm that you believe in that right--or, if you say no one has that right, but you buy your gun anyway because others buy guns and you need to protect yourself from them, you still affirm the basic right to ownership, pragmatically if not theoretically. Ergo, if you buy a gun, if you consider buying a gun, if you decide not to buy a gun, you are making a political statement one way or the other.
If you buy a gun, the gun makers make a profit, you support their industry--and they in turn can influence politics in the way you were using "political". If you buy a gun, you say to yourself and to others (and possibly to God, if you believe in such an entity) that you have a moral right to it, that you are responsible, that you can handle it, that your kids will NEVER have access to it, that you won't do crazy shit with it, that you will make sure it won't get stolen by a criminal (which is what happens to a lot of guns, and you know it)--all those are political statements also since they take place in an environment where none of those things are value-free.
You know I respect you all as Wikipedia editors and chances are I love you like a brother, but when you say "I don't get into the politics of it" you're fooling yourself. I'm not going to chastise you for it, but you're fooling yourself. Every gun that's bought supports the industry, the gun lobby, the NRA, the general sentiment that guns (at least some kinds of guns) are OK to be handled by private citizens. That's fine--you just need to be aware that you can't be unaware of that. Every gun that's bought without FBI background check (40% of all sales go without check) adds, possibly, to the amount of poorly monitored guns and gun owners floating in the country and out of it, to the south, into Mexico. All these are political acts, yes, in the broad sense of the word.
You can say "I'm not interested in the politics of it", but that just tells me that, usually, someone is unwilling to think through the larger ramifications of their private act. Don't think you can buy or own a gun and it have no consequences. Even if that gun is buried deep underground, it's still loaded with ideology, with market values, with politics. I don't care if you believe what some say the second amendment says (personally, I don't care very much about what some white guys centuries ago came up with), I'm a realist--but don't say that "politics" has nothing to do with it, because it has everything to do with. The Soldier of Fortune is easily laughed at, but Mr. Lanza didn't get his guns from a soldier of fortune; he got them from his mommy (a fine, tax-paying citizen), who got them legally from a gun dealer (a fine, tax-paying citizen), who got them legally from a gun manufacturer--who provides a fine boost to our economy with an impact of almost $14 billion in 2011, thanks to Prez. Obama (by proxy). So, of course it's political. Christ, I'm sounding like Christ here, crying in the desert. You think Christ would have advocated gun ownership? A bumper sticker sure to get me my car keyed down here. </soapbox> Now, where were we? Drmies ( talk) 23:44, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
...when Miszabot came by to do her chores. I'm flattered it took you only six months to see it, shows how you've stopped visiting my TP after Miss Silverstone was banished. I'm still sort of around, just not active anymore. It's just way too much nonsense to deal with, all the way from the standard POV pushing in India articles to sometimes having to deal with rather strange interpretations of policy etc. I'm also glad that you've finally come out of the closet and identified yourself as an NRA member. And apparently I'm now back just in time to pop some corn in the microwave and watch the arbcom case page. Jeez! — Spaceman Spiff 19:17, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
AutomaticStrikeout (
T •
C) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Nice op-ed (and I agree thoroughly). But I found a cute ass for my write-up. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 23:01, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Who is our best Reliable Sources expert on Wikipedia? I need to gain a better understanding on using some particular sources quickly.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 01:45, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Well done. Toddst1 ( talk) 02:28, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
The Writer's Barnstar | ||
For your Sandy Hook Signpost article. Excellence is so common with you it makes me sick. LOL! Amadscientist ( talk) 03:05, 20 December 2012 (UTC) |
Yeah, those warnings aren't working. I reverted per your previous revert "edit-warring, previously warned by admins". Time for a block. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:15, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
That article is hard to revise at the moment due to edit conflicts, but the father's name is worth including in article space, though his employer is not relevant. We include the father's name in one of the refs, and it helps clarify that Adam Peter Lanza and Peter Lanza are different people. I am sure we will also be hearing more from the guy about his involvement with his son (or lack thereof) in the time leading up to the murders. Jokestress ( talk) 03:52, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Somehow, Wtmitchell accidentally reverted the father's name back into the article when he was trying to ungroup a reference. I left him a note here, although for some reason when you look at his talk page, the text of my comment doesn't show up. Regards, AzureCitizen ( talk) 04:35, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
As you have experience it protecting breaking news stories, could you pre-protect the soon to be created 'end of the world' page? When the world ends on Friday, I don't want to be reverting some IP's BLP violation while dodging brimestone, bombs, earthquakes or whatever happens. Hmmm, maybe it will be like the Dr. Who episode, The End of Time, where everybody will be turned into Bieber or Honey Boo Boo. Eh, my world ended when I got married, so I'll enjoy the end of my suffering. Bgwhite ( talk) 09:44, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Wait, what?? Are you saying that "standing someone a drink" is a Britishism?? Gosh. I honestly had no clue - I just thought it was general-use English! Holy moley, one learns something every day. I'm going to have to go and waste time looking it up now ... Cheers! DBaK ( talk) 15:13, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
I reverted the blanking of user:Lis4930's page by User talk:Lowczarek. I then got an email from Lowczarek: Please delete the wiki Lis4930 as it was only used for instructional purposes, and the course it was used for has ended. Thank you. I replied on Lowczarek's page, why I could not / and suggested that Lis4930 blank it. A reply on Lowczarek's page by an IP was I created the Lis4930 account with no e-mail and cannot retrieve the password. Please delete the page as previously requested and as mentioned in the first line of the wiki (the course has ended, the students want that information down). Any suggestions? Willing to help? Best Jim1138 ( talk) 20:09, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
"Hello, This wiki is for the class LIS 4930 at the University of South Florida. This page has been set up for students in the course to learn how to use and edit a wiki. At the end of this course, this page will be deleted."
{{
Indian English}}
on this page, but Sitush would come after me with an
aruval. —
Spaceman
Spiff 06:58, 21 December 2012 (UTC)This has kept my nieces/nephews etc amused in recent years. And driven me barmy as it whips up their expectations. Enjoy, with my best wishes. - Sitush ( talk) 21:54, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Here's wishing you happy holidays and a successful Wiki New Year! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 23:28, 20 December 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks for your timely op-ed in the Signpost. Pine ✉ 08:59, 21 December 2012 (UTC) |
Sorry to bother you, but you have been involved with this editor before. Thanks to your warning he stopped attempting the change that article. However more recently he made the same change to another article - in this case a list. He must have know it was controversial but engaged in an edit war while making no comments on the talk page. This included "revert vandalism", "revert recidivistic vandalism and started with "Persistent nationalistic vandalism from single-issue editor: blocking of this editor is now officially requested". The editor concerned has an outstanding track record of article creation and work by the way, as a simple check by Varlaam would have revealed.
As in previous incidents Varlaam ignored the talk page until this morning. This edit involves him calling the other editor a "punk" and a "parasite" as well as exhibiting ownership issues. Now all of that said, this is an editor who is putting a lot of work into many articles, but seems incapable of interacting with other editors. If thwarted s/he lashes out. The block history speaks for itself. Is it possible to have a word? I half thought about taking it to ANI but that history an indef would have probably been the result and we would have lost someone who is making valuable contributions.
If you don't want to take it up fair enough! ---- Snowded TALK 10:08, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
PS: Another revert (up to four now) with the same vandalism accusation this morning
I know you've opened a discussion of this block at AN, but I wanted to take a moment to thank you for finally doing something about Varlaam. Having been the object of his ire in the past, to the degree he once likened me to Joseph Mengele because I removed one of his pet bits of trivia from an article, I have long believed that Varlaam's copious editing has allowed him to skate by with this kind of abusive battleground behavior far too long. I have also long questioned the quality of many of his edits and his obsession with numbers of edits versus content. I'm glad to see an admin finally stand up to him and draw the critical line in the sand. Behavior like his and a coterie of others (and we all know who the president of the club is) must stop if this community is to survive. -- Drmargi ( talk) 16:17, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Please keep Sitush in mind today; he's in hospital for a procedure. I don't know if he wants to handle best wishes on his talk page since that might flood his little smartphone, but I'll gladly accept flowers on his behalf. Hope all goes well, Sitush. Drmies ( talk) 15:00, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
For your continued good work to enforce policy and maintain order. ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 16:39, 21 December 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks for stepping in over there. Hopefully, with the request at WP:BLP/N#Jay Westerveld, the article will get the attention it needs to clean it up. I had never heard of him before I saw the post on a user talk page (now archived at User talk:LadyofShalott/Archive 24#Jay Westervelt), and I had done some initial cleanup of the most egregious unsourced promotional content, but then got bogged down in the career naming nonsense. At this point, I'm feeling a bit burned out on a subject I have no strong connection about, so am thinking of just taking it off my watch list for a while and focusing on areas I can be more productive. Thanks again for your involvement over there - and good luck! --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 19:41, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Happy children join me in extending the best possible Season's Greetings to you and your loved ones at this time of year, and if you don't celebrate the usual holidays ( Diwali, Xmas, Hanukkah, Eid, Kwanzaa, etc....), then we will still wish you a Happy Festivus. All the best: HarryZilber ( talk) 20:59, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your support during my "block". As for my Survivor habit, well... we all have our guilt pleasures. =) -- Gogo Dodo ( talk) 04:27, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
Nun's Well, Cannock Wood was unmitigated drivel for six years. I'm not convinced that it is properly a primary topic, either. An equal weight disambiguation seems the best. I am more persuaded of this having found Nun's Well, Brigham, a poem by William Wordsworth that doesn't seem to rate much literary analysis by itself, but which is discussed in the context of an aspect of Wordsworth that we don't appear to have. That would make for an equal weight disambiguation between Nun's Well, Cannock Wood, Nun's Well, Gibraltar, Wordsworth's friendship with geologists (when it is written), and the other Nun's Wells that there are. If you turn the English Professor Vacuum up to a higher setting, maybe one of those English professors being sucked in by it will remedy this gap in our coverage of literature and Wordsworth.
And maybe Senra might be persuaded to deal with the St Nun's Well in Pelynt, U.K. (after the saint variously named Nynnina, Nenyna, or Ninnie) which is listed at Hope 1893, pp. 17–19 , the St Nun's Well in Altarnum (also called Altarnun) U.K. (after Nonna) that is at Hope 1893, p. 19–20 , and the Nun's Well at Sedgwick Castle (also called Sidgwick Castle) that is in Sedgwick Park ( Hope 1893, p. 165) .
I found all of this as fallout from the Gibraltarian devilry. I'm dropping it off here for much the same reasons that I dropped off some cat in Staffordshire elsewhere. I have work on Gibraltar International Airport on my to-do list.
{{
cite news}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite encyclopedia}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)Uncle G ( talk) 12:08, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
Black Kite has been secretly writing about that cat in Staffordshire, by the way.
Uncle G ( talk) 15:55, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
Martinevans123
Santas Grotto wishes you and yours
"Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Dda"
May the true spirit of Christmas bless you with warmth and peace ....
Holiday Cheer | ||
Michael Q. Schmidt talkback is wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings. |
Since you seem to have done a wonderful job with another recent problem, how about devoting some admin electrons to this? cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 05:21, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
The copyright violation problem is the perennial one, of course: people who cannot write their way out of a paper bag "write" by filching the work of others. I notice the influence of tabloid journalism rearing its ugly head in the article, too. People are "rapped". Police make "probes". Gah!
Uncle G ( talk) 11:06, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
DR/N filing, and the history of the article (which seems to show a long standing slow revert war. [8] I am not sure if it is even a content matter as it is looks like edit warring back and forth. If you could take a look and see if a hammer is need for anyone...be great. If you feel the soft touch is appropriate I will let another DR/N volunteer decide whether to close or not. I reverted the last blanking as unexplained and the talk page looks like an argument but is not extensive enough for a DR/N filing at the moment.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 07:21, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
sslstrip
and the NUL attacks, in contrast, can be found supported by books on computer security and cryptography written by other people, with a quick Google Books search. It's daft to lump the two together. Once again we have edit warriors who only use the undo tool, and don't confine themselves to editing only the bits that they actually disagree on.
Uncle G (
talk) 09:11, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Sole Soul ( talk) 15:00, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi.
I have started at discussion at Wikipedia talk:Pending changes#PC for a content dispute about the protection of the article on Jay Westerveld. Your opinion would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Yaris678 ( talk) 15:03, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, peoples rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension.
Drmies: You are far more experienced than I. How should one reason with an experienced editor who has a self-declared annoyingly high IQ when, it appears to my inexperienced eye, she is at best not assuming good faith and at worst may even be displaying signs of article ownership? For example, I do not see a coherently supported rebuttal from her either here or here. In the first case, she has since obfuscated my proposal and in the second case, I have taken the unusual (for me) step of serving notice to change following what I thought was a reasoned and supported argument -- Senra ( talk) 16:27, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
[Puts admin hat on:] I'll repeat what I said earlier: I think the article will be much better off if the two main editors stay away from it, and by "two main editors" I mean Whatamidoing most of all. That's kind of a sad statement, and one I make reluctantly, since those two main editors seem to have some knowledge but there is too much zeal in their edits. Moreover, Whatamidoing's attitude on the talk page makes moving the article forward a practical impossibility, and both suffer from TLDNR-itis (that is, they cause it in others). I would fully support a motion somewhere to have those two editor back away from the article and its talk page. Drmies ( talk) 17:53, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Senra, getting hyperlinks in whilst preserving the Harvard parenthetical cross-linkage style is dead easy. Just replace (Levine 2005)
with {{harv|Levine|2005}}
everywhere and ensure that the citation for Levine begins {{Cite news|ref=harv|
…. That's it.
Uncle G (
talk) 22:08, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Seriously, I don't understand the ins and outs and pros and cons of sfn and a bunch of other things. I have tried to read those pages and defenses of it on talk pages (MF's and others), and I just don't get it. Also it bores me terrifically. I understand how the older generation (MF, Uncle G, Dennis B) finds some attraction in those technicalities, but they don't see, I believe, that we, the others (Bbb and myself, for starters), are young and beautiful and have so much to live for. We can't be bothered by your persnickety detail--we want to LIVE. Oh yeah, I just opened up a rad beer, "Lucifer", by Het Anker Brewery. Someone should give them a decent article one of these days. Drmies ( talk) 23:29, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
By the way: Professor Gayle A. Sulik, who has been proposed as the "highest quality academic source", is a sociologist at Texas Women's University. Of the next most often used, James S. Olson is a professor of history and Samantha King is a professor of the Sociocultural Studies of Sport, Health and the Body at Queens University. Sulik's viewpoint is very clear in Sulik 2011, pp. 1104–1105. One of the things to counter that reliance on one viewpoint is to use Klawiter 2008 , which is languishing unused in the Further Reading section. Marin Klawiter was a professor at Georgia Tech and is now at Yale Law School, and the cited book points out the at least two viewpoints on the subject. Page 174 et seq. of the book discusses the conflicts between the screening activists and the feminists over the issues, and why they clash. Here's a quotation:
The culture of empowerment and feminist breast/cancer activism thus took shape, in part, through conflict with the culture of screening activism.
— Klawiter 2008, p. 176
One wouldn't know any of the history from the article at hand. Such a lot of the waffle on that talk page could be eliminated if editors knew what they were about and pointed out that the neutrality issue is that there are several major viewpoints in the history of breast cancer awareness. Kirsten E. Gardner, assistant professor of history and women's studies at the University of Texas at San Antonio, isn't even mentioned on the article and the talk page, yet her book ( Gardner 2006) documents the historical shifts in breast cancer awareness, setting the post-1970s feminist viewpoint in historical context showing how it came about and how it challenged the viewpoints that preceded it. The answer to the person only using the single academic source is a whole lot of other academic sources from historians rather than sociologists, putting Sulik's views into historical context.
Get the history in, and you'll discover that we didn't even know that we didn't have Joseph Colt Bloodgood ( Mansel, Sweetland & Hughes 2009, pp. 16–20) and didn't mention the Amanda Sims Memorial Fund (that Bloodgood founded) anywhere in the encyclopaedia at all. I thus leave Drmies' talk page lurkers with a present:
No, we don't have John Birkett ( Mansel, Sweetland & Hughes 2009, pp. 12–14), George Lenthal Cheatle ( Mansel, Sweetland & Hughes 2009, pp. 14–16), or Charles F. Geschickter ( Mansel, Sweetland & Hughes 2009, pp. 20–22), either.
{{
cite encyclopedia}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help){{
cite journal}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite journal}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)Uncle G ( talk) 06:12, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Enjoy #Drmies (Drmies character), by the way.
Hey Drmies, could you move NBC Nonstop to Cozi TV? "Cozi TV" is the new name for the network as of December 20, 2012. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 20:09, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Drmies, I hope you have a Merry Christmas and hope your day is full of the true spirit of the day. Plus, good food, good family and good times. :) Have a Great Day! :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 07:20, 24 December 2012 (UTC) Spread the joy of Christmas by adding {{subst:User:Neutralhomer/MerryChristmas}} to their talk page with a friendly message. |
Articles on individual rocks. Happy holidays! — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 12:47, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Merry Christmas | |
Hey Drmies, hope you like all the eggnog. We need bacon-nog next, get on it! Keep safe over the holidays, and hopefully I can see you at the next Wikimania! Merry Christmas for you and yours! — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 16:26, 21 December 2012 (UTC) |
Christmas Greetings. Kierzek ( talk) 14:48, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Merry Christmas! I have a question for you (or any of your stalkers) regarding a question I got at the Teahouse. Can you link to a category within an article (e.g., There are many metaphors referring to elephants)? I had never really thought about that, but I figured perhaps you'd come across a situation like that in one or two of your 100000+ edits. Sorry to bother you on Christmas Eve, I told the asker it may take a few days to get a response, but I didn't even know where to look for something of that nature. Thanks in advance. Go Phightins ! 21:15, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Merry Christmas | |
Wishing you a Merry Christmas and all the best for 2013. Blethering Scot 22:43, 24 December 2012 (UTC) |
Have a happy holiday and a great new year!-- Amadscientist ( talk) 00:46, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
I have been allowed to escape and Malleus now knows of the wotsit and seems to be agreeable, so thanks for the thoughts etc relating to both of us. I need to catch up on talk page replies and will do. On a totally different subject, I've mentioned you towards the end of the thread at User talk:The Blade of the Northern Lights#Thank you. My gut feeling - and my gut is one of the few bits of me that have so far escaped medical interest - is that this is a pretty significant subject and that it would be useful to involve people who have or have access to specialist knowledge. I'm not sure whether Chomsky etc really figure in what you do but, hey, you understand non-English English and that makes you better than me. - Sitush ( talk) 01:28, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Happy Holidays! | |
Hope you and your family are enjoying the holiday season, Drmies! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:06, 25 December 2012 (UTC) |
So, I looked at this article in preparation to do a DYK review. In the original version, each time a candidate was mentioned his exact vote count was included in parentheses. I thought this was distracting from the prose, so I removed these parentheticals in favor of a couple of vote-count summaries.
What I'd really like to do is to include a table of results with the precise vote count. Such a table is included in the google books source by Zuwiyya [13] on page 19.
I seek advice. All the information in this table was included in the previous version of the article, just in an annoying and hard to read manner. Is it legit, though, just to reproduce this table? And if so, would it be okay to re-order the table to group the Sunni, Shiite, and minority candidates separately? And if not, is my general summary of vote-counts okay with folks, or would people prefer the exact count appearing after each candidate's name?
And oy, reading election tables from Lebanon 1968 is far preferable to listening to my motherwhomIlovedearly ask repeatedly whether it's safe to let Amazon.com know her credit card number... Thanks! (P.S. I can't for the life of me figure out how to get this message out of Ed's greeting, so I'm sorry, Ed, and those who have the knowing of the wikitext please reformat for me!) Moishe Rosenbaum ( talk) 22:08, 25 December 2012 (UTC) Thanks, Dennis! Moishe Rosenbaum ( talk) 23:59, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Seasons greetings to you and yours
Dougweller (
talk) 13:55, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Happy holidays to you and everypony. /)(\ 174.141.213.63 ( talk) 21:56, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
I broke my usual habit of avoiding wheat, sugar and corn syrup to have some of my wife's pecan pie. Best. Pie. Ever. Wish I could have shared some with you. She baked 6 for the family get together, but held one back in case she needed it as a gift for a family or friend that was in need (Mrs. Brown is very thoughtful that way, one reason I completely adore her). If you lived nearby, it would have been yours. Of course, since you don't live nearby, I just might have to sneak in the kitchen, make a half pot of decaf and carve me up a slice. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:58, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Ambrosia (fruit salad), yes--but I got a pretty decent recipe, involving fresh citrus fruit and pineapple, whipping cream mixed with orange zest and powdered sugar and sour cream, and toasted sweetened shredded coconut. My guide for this and many other recipes from Americana is Cook's Country (the magazine), besides The Joy of Cooking. Drmies ( talk) 17:12, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Dear Drmies, would it be possible to redo a little article on a retired now "emiritas" prof of economic history that you deleted. The old afd is here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George W. Grantham and my current version is here: User:Msrasnw/George W. Grantham.
Best wishes,( Msrasnw ( talk) 12:41, 26 December 2012 (UTC))
On the Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zimmermanh1997 front, User:Hollisz has, once again, posted more "poor edits" here and here. These are the first two edits after coming off a 31 hour block by you. I will post this information to the SPI page and have alerted User:Dennis Brown (the clerk on the SPI). - Neutralhomer • Talk • 16:21, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Where's your lovely pair of tits? I feel like life has lost all meaning... — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 22:51, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello, doc! Someone has stuck in a stupid phrase ("singapore fucking sux !! they have no future !! singaporeans are total bitches !!!! sg sux !!! never go there") in between the topics at the bottom of the article. It's not visible when I try to edit the article itself, so it seems to be coming from elsewhere. I haven't been able to find it in the topic templates or anywhere else that is obvious (to me). Can you help? Thanks and a belated Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Cheers! Geoff Who, me? 00:55, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
I understand why this page was full-protected at the time given the mistaken identification of his brother as the perpetrator, but at this point there appears to be no reason for keeping the protection as Adam Lanza has been confirmed as the perpetrator. History tells us that individuals involved in spree killings of this magnitude will have enduring notability and be mentioned in detail for many years to come in scholarly papers and books. Already there is talk of geneticists studying his DNA.-- The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 17:30, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
User_talk:Cyberpower678#Update_request. You seem like someone with clue who isn't already involved in the debate. Thanks. MBisanz talk 03:27, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
I notice you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Della McCullers because you were moving the article(s) to userspace. Would you be able to move Aunt Hassie Fletcher as well? It was also included in the AfD. St Anselm ( talk) 08:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Well, looks like there is officially some crossover between the two named accounts and 98.204.145.138. What should I do? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 15:07, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Lieve professor, please see this. As I stated in my preliminary response, the post is impressive (big words and all). The article the IP is referring to is Andy Kindler. Is the IP right? If so, why? Am I right? If so, why? Neither of the above? If so, why? Please keep your answers brief. Incorrect answers may result in a block of your brain.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 16:07, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
In case you missed it, Drmies, the newspapers just published this three-month-old story, yesterday and today. Bwilkins, Beyond My Ken, and others, do not get sucked into this, here or elsewhere. I also recommend an immediate visit to User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 122#San Francisco and Stanford University. Journalists reading this: Drmies is no more an "official" than I am, and despite some erroneous statements here, there is a subtle but important distinction between a "block" and a "ban". This discussion is closed. Uncle G ( talk) 23:56, 28 December 2012 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I believe the blocking of Roger Ellory was wrong. Here's why:
Please try to understand that most normal people have difficulties in understanding what it means to use socks to avoid scrunity. Most normal people who just started editing Wikipedia sometimes simply forget to log in. Yes, the user made some mistakes, but I know quite a few prominent Wikipedians, including Jimbo Wales, who edited or even created their own bios and have never been even warned. The difference between Roger Ellory and these Wikipedians is that they knowingly violated the polices while Roger Ellory did not understand how Wikipedia works. He simply needed some help. I believe you should AGF and lift the block now. Thanks for considering my request. 71.202.120.247 ( talk) 17:24, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
|
I still have a question, if I may please. Uncle G, why did you link to this discussion User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 122#San Francisco and Stanford University? I hope you do not imply I am Carl Hewitt. 71.202.120.247 ( talk) 01:25, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Well, the end of the world came and here we've all been raptured. I missed my chance to go out in style, though — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 14:29, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Drmies, I've blocked you for 24 hours. Your comments on Scottwong's talkpage was completely unacceptable - leaving aside, for a second, the utterly inappropriate tone, you do not insult or denigrate another editor for not adhering to your view of What Makes An Editor. Whether he has 10 edits, 100 edits or a thousand and a dozen TFAs in a row, Scottywong is an editor in good standing and you will treat him as the colleague he is. We do not argue for supremacy based on extent of contributions, because to do so is to set up a wiki based on the principle that he who jumps through the most hoops gets to shout loudest. That's not how the wiki model works.
Incidentally, even if we entertained, for a second, the possibility that "I don't have to listen to you, you're not as good an editor as I am" is a valid argument: Scottywong is one of the most hard-working new page patrollers I know. You can argue all you want for the people who improve the quality of existing articles: he's one of the people who ensures they're not diamonds in a turd.
Ironholds (
talk) 22:28, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
That you felt it incumbent upon yourself to intervene where there was no need for intervention made the whole thing so much worse, and no amount of ":p"'s on talk pages is going to make up for that. Instead, Bbb catches heat for undoing your bad block, the poor guy, and gets blasted for being involved when he only did what was right. Having a block log is not funny, you know, "gentleman-assassin". And if you want to know how it makes it worse: I feel like shit, and Scotty may not be back for a while. So great job. Again, I'll take your apology, nothing less.
Oh, you wanted to know how you being you makes it worse? You represent Wikipedia in ways that I do not. That makes your bad block worse, first of all, since you should know even better. And it makes it worse for me, since anyone looking at my damn block log now will think, 'Oh, blocked by Okeyes/Ironholds, must be really bad.' And now you got me pissed off enough that I'll Drmies ( talk) 03:57, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 22:44, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Drmies. I saw your name listed as a closer [16]. I am involved in an obviously non-neutral RFC [17] that I suspect needs to be closed prematurely with a request to re-write a neutral RFC. This user has been trolling me for more than a month and this kind of thing is standard fare. I wasn't sure if I should be doing something or just let it run? CorporateM ( Talk) 01:55, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
I guess you need them. All this drama makes more harm than good. — ΛΧΣ 21 02:29, 30 December 2012 (UTC) |
It appears that this has been an eventful day on the wiki. I'm not sorry to have missed it, and I'm way too tired to want to know what it was all about. Ladyof Shalott 04:08, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyoA4LXQco4
I hope I keep such good humour when one of them finally gets me for ... nothing. Keep up the good work, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 03:10, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
See my user for "he who speaks a word of consolation" ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:36, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
- Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
...owes me a new pair of underoos. /)(\ 174.141.213.63 ( talk) 13:33, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
...caretaking the news of the day. Agreed that such articles need to be locked down early. Congratulations to you and other responsible editors. Of the events, words do little justice. Just sadness. Have a good evening, 99.153.143.227 ( talk) 01:38, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
From Cjr100B, on my talk page. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 02:46, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi there, please reconsider the semiprotection. People making sourcing mistakes is not good enough a reason to semiprotect according to the policy. It's not even a BLP. 219.78.115.184 ( talk) 15:46, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Talk:Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. See also Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive83#Virginia Tech massacre subarticles for my experience with the London bombings. I've been WikiGnoming the talk page for several hours, fixing up edits by people who seemingly just hit "create new section" when they want to reply to things, or discuss something already being discussed. Tag! You're it. ☺ Uncle G ( talk) 01:50, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Do you think an editor should be notified everytime their name is mentioned, regardless of how unimportant the mention is? If so, please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#protector. If not, please delete this message before reading it. NE Ent 13:09, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
I was thinking of throwing together a proposal for a generic editnotice to put up on any major in-progress news event; I feel like the "current event" ambox doesn't really cut it. My thinking is that, here, the vast majority of the problematic edits were indeed in good faith, but people weren't really thinking about the consequences - so create an editnotice for anything like this, that reminds people that the standards for sourcing are heightened, not lowered, that Wikipedia is not a newspaper, and that verifiability and coherence is more important than reporting every latest detail. If you could get even 20% of people updating the article with the newest 50%-chance-of-being-false tidbit from CNN to stop and reconsider, it'd take quite a load off... which would be pretty helpful, considering the defamation risks in these areas - last I checked we were at 8 or 9 revdels and 2 Oversights. What do you guys think? I can draw up a sample, if people are interested in the idea. — Francophonie&Androphilie( Je vous invite à me parler) 05:07, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Old man, you have an email. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:19, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
If I speedy delete an article that has an ongoing AfD, is there something I'm supposed to do with the AfD?-- Bbb23 ( talk) 00:56, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
On 16 December 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Amina Mama, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that after twice fleeing civil unrest in Nigeria, Amina Mama moved to South Africa, where she became director of the African Gender Institute and founding editor of its peer-reviewed journal, Feminist Africa? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Amina Mama. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 08:03, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
On 16 December 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article African Gender Institute, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that after twice fleeing civil unrest in Nigeria, Amina Mama moved to South Africa, where she became director of the African Gender Institute and founding editor of its peer-reviewed journal, Feminist Africa? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 08:04, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
On 16 December 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Feminist Africa, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that after twice fleeing civil unrest in Nigeria, Amina Mama moved to South Africa, where she became director of the African Gender Institute and founding editor of its peer-reviewed journal, Feminist Africa? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 08:04, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that you watch the goings-on but in case you miss this one, I've mentioned you here and, well, I'm lost in a miasma of grammatical correctness. Your thoughts would be appreciated. - Sitush ( talk) 00:22, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
I made myself a promise some years ago, when I was a new editor and saw that an admin was guarding her fringe POV in Animal rights and would never allow any compromise, that I would not engage in editing wars. So, rather than reposting the info and adding the Time Magazine link I was preparing I'll move away from the argument. There is nothing to talk about with people who have a social agenda. Regards. Trilobitealive ( talk) 02:44, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Bigh Whigh has been adequately warned about edit warring by me, fully explained on his talk page, but I get the feeling he doesn't get it. I've been sick all weekend but watching the article talk page closely. I gonna get some sleep, so it's your turn to babysit. Bring a stick. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 02:52, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
I was snooping around your user page and wanted to commend you for your work on this very unusual article. Writing about George Washington or Helen Keller is all well and good, but it's articles like yours that keep me perpetually in love with Wikipedia. -- Khazar2 ( talk) 03:00, 17 December 2012 (UTC) |
It appears that this page has not been locked after all, and user [Alan Stenberg], despite numerous warnings, continues to vandalize this page. Why can't his vandalizing be controlled?
Semperfly ( talk) 03:54, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks- IF you read the talk pages for some of these sock puppets, esp. [Alan Stenberg], you will see recent warnings of suspension. Changing a caption from the subject's given, legal name to "dilletante" is not really a content dispute- it's outright vandalism.
It appears you may have blocked user kimocaraw for sock-puppetry. If you re-examine his post, you will see that another editor added text within his text box. The context of the final edit shows conflict within the text. I have nothing more to add on these pages. thank you. Semperfly ( talk) 20:34, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
A- one, a- two. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:56, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
I've noted your comments, but the problem seems to be that IPs and, now, newly registered users - seemingly linked to the Exaro site or at least with non-public knowledge of the investigation - are repeatedly adding unsourced or very poorly sourced information, to an article about an ongoing police investigation which could potentially have significant political repercussions. The legal implications of WP repeatedly adding such allegations need to be addressed in the light of the McAlpine affair, and I would have thought that some form of page protection was the best solution. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 11:19, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
I have been lurking at Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting and its associated talk page and have a dumb question. I would rather appear dumb to you than appear dumb to the thousands of editors at those pages, so here goes: as a Wikipedia editor I am curious to learn why the Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection (DESPP) has not been used in the article for fact reporting. Specifically, their press releases on this incident, which can be found here. I am particularly intrigued because during this incident, there has been proven misreporting by some of the sources currently still used in the article (CNN, Fox News and Huffington Post for example) -- Senra ( talk) 12:26, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
{{
cite press release}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)I can give you a philosophical answer: in general we use secondary sources, not primary ones, so mistakes in reporting may seep into the article, yes. Personally, I don't think I would have a problem with citing reports such as the one you linked--I think you can make a case on the talk page that such reports ("According to the Connecticut State Police,...") are acceptable. Now, the reminder there that social media may not be used to harass people, I'm not sure if that could find a way into the article: we all know what it means, most likely--people have been harassed, but that's not a conclusion that we could write up. (I'm not saying you'd want to consider that; I'm sure you know better than I do what is and what isn't acceptable.) There may be a practical answer as well--editors just haven't looked at it; I'm sure those communications don't have the highest ranking among Google results...
The way to go about it is probably to identify one or more problematic statements in the article (I'm almost afraid to see what happened between 11 PM last night, when my internet connection gave up, and now) and bring them up on the talk page with the relevant links to the correct information. I hope you will engage this on the talk page: it needs cool heads, experienced Wikipedia editors. Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 15:08, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faithful amplification and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jumping to conclusions, I don't suppose you'd be interested in making it a hat-trick of "articles expanded lots of by Uncle G and friends to make an AfD collapse" and early close this? -- Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:29, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
{{
Drmies-user-talk-substub}}
template for combatting this, used to great effect at
/Archive 42#Asega.
Thorsø, Norway (
AfD discussion) required the abilities of an editor who could read Adûnaic.
Uncle G (
talk) 15:42, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Could you perhaps have a quick look at the discussion at Talk:Seminars of Jacques Lacan when you have a moment to see whether I really have gone totally bollocks? Thanks! -- Randykitty ( talk) 15:34, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
With this page we are moving previously used references to the bottom of the reference section and hiding them in a HTML comment section so that if they are reused we dont have to dig through 100's of revisions looking for the reference content. Thanks, Werieth ( talk) 17:26, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi. You recently removed a picture of a rifle from the article and said to see the edit summary of North8000. I looked at that edit summary and no factual sources were presented. I've started a section on the talk page regarding the picture. Somedifferentstuff ( talk) 18:18, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Since you mentioned Borges and confusion, I think that it has finally reached the time that we had a small walled garden of substub encyclopaedia articles.
Uncle G ( talk) 18:41, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for taking a look at Breast cancer awareness. I agree with you both about the fundamental POV issues and also about the toxicity of the talk page conversations. I'm hoping that the article will improve with the involvement of experienced outside editors. GabrielF ( talk) 06:17, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
In case you miss it blended with the other traffic, perhaps this is an essay you would be well suited to create. WP:BEANS and all that, but there appears to be a void. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:37, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Just a curtesy FYI as you're the protecting admin: I've submitted a page move request at WP:RM/TR (a technical move, as I don't believe it's controversial as it's not part of the content dispute, and is supported by the article text and by all the sources attached to the article). The proposed move is: Jay Westervelt ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) → Jay Westerveld ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). I would move it myself, but I am involved in the content dispute over the career label, so do not want to use my admin abilities to move the article through the page protection. --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 17:49, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Re [1]: [2] -- 213.196.212.146 ( talk) 22:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Talk:Universalist Church of West Hartford and the relatively slow - and very lame - edit war on the article - between two established users who should probably have an interaction ban. Thanks, Ladyof Shalott 23:18, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Nathan2055 talk - contribs 23:49, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Drmies. After our discussion yesterday on the Sandy Hook talk page, someone changed Hammond's title from vice principal/lead teacher to vice principal/teacher, and removed two of the three sources. And the cite that remains even verifies she is vice principal and lead teacher. Can you restore the content? Thanks. -- 76.189.123.142 ( talk) 01:36, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
— David Levy 02:51, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Drmies. Nice to meet you. Sorry for my very bad english. But, the user Zz2zz I'm sure he edited from before with an IP ( 76.228.74.139; I'm sure he is, just have to go with a CU). The problem is that he endeavors to remove references equally reliable and, edit arbitrarily, for example: [3] or [4]. And in "Thalía" he removes all without consensus or, as I say, arbitrarily. With your account, he does the same. What I can do?, I do not know English very well But please, could you help me?. I just want to do a job in good faith. Best regards, Chrishonduras ( talk) 05:29, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Drmies, and good choice on the block length. It is probably just enough time for the user to step back and re-evaluate. Ryan Vesey 05:41, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Someone renamed them without my realsing and now I can't seem to move them back.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 06:18, 19 December 2012 (UTC) There are redirects on the others so it must be because I have been copy pasting the titles without seeing that they were named wrong. I will redirect the new archive.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 06:21, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
* <-- That's a tiny barnstar for Drmies for making me laugh on that talk page. :) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 20:42, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for all your help in dealing with User:MikeFromCanmore. Halo Jerk1 ( talk) 07:50, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
You've nominated something for deletion by proxy. Also note the copying and pasting from tourist brochures that I've pointed out to Prioryman. Uncle G ( talk) 13:35, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Apparently, your application of the BLP policy to roads is faulty. Uncle G ( talk) 03:47, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
I've tried to explain what you meant, but it would be better coming from you. Uncle G ( talk) 11:11, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
"you may do so, in a calm and non-accusatory manner" - "if you want to persist living in dreamland"
Aren't these two statements of yours contradictory?
My complaint is that debate is being stifled. What is wrong with that? Why aren't you allowing a debate to happen? -- MacRùsgail ( talk) 14:42, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. HarryZilber ( talk) 18:03, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
If you go out as a private citizen and buy a gun you do not do so in a value-free environment. First of all, you (US citizens here) do so in a country that has long supported the private ownership of guns, and has extended those rights in recent history, some might argue to a ridiculous extent. When you do buy a gun, then, you affirm that you believe in that right--or, if you say no one has that right, but you buy your gun anyway because others buy guns and you need to protect yourself from them, you still affirm the basic right to ownership, pragmatically if not theoretically. Ergo, if you buy a gun, if you consider buying a gun, if you decide not to buy a gun, you are making a political statement one way or the other.
If you buy a gun, the gun makers make a profit, you support their industry--and they in turn can influence politics in the way you were using "political". If you buy a gun, you say to yourself and to others (and possibly to God, if you believe in such an entity) that you have a moral right to it, that you are responsible, that you can handle it, that your kids will NEVER have access to it, that you won't do crazy shit with it, that you will make sure it won't get stolen by a criminal (which is what happens to a lot of guns, and you know it)--all those are political statements also since they take place in an environment where none of those things are value-free.
You know I respect you all as Wikipedia editors and chances are I love you like a brother, but when you say "I don't get into the politics of it" you're fooling yourself. I'm not going to chastise you for it, but you're fooling yourself. Every gun that's bought supports the industry, the gun lobby, the NRA, the general sentiment that guns (at least some kinds of guns) are OK to be handled by private citizens. That's fine--you just need to be aware that you can't be unaware of that. Every gun that's bought without FBI background check (40% of all sales go without check) adds, possibly, to the amount of poorly monitored guns and gun owners floating in the country and out of it, to the south, into Mexico. All these are political acts, yes, in the broad sense of the word.
You can say "I'm not interested in the politics of it", but that just tells me that, usually, someone is unwilling to think through the larger ramifications of their private act. Don't think you can buy or own a gun and it have no consequences. Even if that gun is buried deep underground, it's still loaded with ideology, with market values, with politics. I don't care if you believe what some say the second amendment says (personally, I don't care very much about what some white guys centuries ago came up with), I'm a realist--but don't say that "politics" has nothing to do with it, because it has everything to do with. The Soldier of Fortune is easily laughed at, but Mr. Lanza didn't get his guns from a soldier of fortune; he got them from his mommy (a fine, tax-paying citizen), who got them legally from a gun dealer (a fine, tax-paying citizen), who got them legally from a gun manufacturer--who provides a fine boost to our economy with an impact of almost $14 billion in 2011, thanks to Prez. Obama (by proxy). So, of course it's political. Christ, I'm sounding like Christ here, crying in the desert. You think Christ would have advocated gun ownership? A bumper sticker sure to get me my car keyed down here. </soapbox> Now, where were we? Drmies ( talk) 23:44, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
...when Miszabot came by to do her chores. I'm flattered it took you only six months to see it, shows how you've stopped visiting my TP after Miss Silverstone was banished. I'm still sort of around, just not active anymore. It's just way too much nonsense to deal with, all the way from the standard POV pushing in India articles to sometimes having to deal with rather strange interpretations of policy etc. I'm also glad that you've finally come out of the closet and identified yourself as an NRA member. And apparently I'm now back just in time to pop some corn in the microwave and watch the arbcom case page. Jeez! — Spaceman Spiff 19:17, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
AutomaticStrikeout (
T •
C) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Nice op-ed (and I agree thoroughly). But I found a cute ass for my write-up. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 23:01, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Who is our best Reliable Sources expert on Wikipedia? I need to gain a better understanding on using some particular sources quickly.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 01:45, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Well done. Toddst1 ( talk) 02:28, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
The Writer's Barnstar | ||
For your Sandy Hook Signpost article. Excellence is so common with you it makes me sick. LOL! Amadscientist ( talk) 03:05, 20 December 2012 (UTC) |
Yeah, those warnings aren't working. I reverted per your previous revert "edit-warring, previously warned by admins". Time for a block. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:15, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
That article is hard to revise at the moment due to edit conflicts, but the father's name is worth including in article space, though his employer is not relevant. We include the father's name in one of the refs, and it helps clarify that Adam Peter Lanza and Peter Lanza are different people. I am sure we will also be hearing more from the guy about his involvement with his son (or lack thereof) in the time leading up to the murders. Jokestress ( talk) 03:52, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Somehow, Wtmitchell accidentally reverted the father's name back into the article when he was trying to ungroup a reference. I left him a note here, although for some reason when you look at his talk page, the text of my comment doesn't show up. Regards, AzureCitizen ( talk) 04:35, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
As you have experience it protecting breaking news stories, could you pre-protect the soon to be created 'end of the world' page? When the world ends on Friday, I don't want to be reverting some IP's BLP violation while dodging brimestone, bombs, earthquakes or whatever happens. Hmmm, maybe it will be like the Dr. Who episode, The End of Time, where everybody will be turned into Bieber or Honey Boo Boo. Eh, my world ended when I got married, so I'll enjoy the end of my suffering. Bgwhite ( talk) 09:44, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Wait, what?? Are you saying that "standing someone a drink" is a Britishism?? Gosh. I honestly had no clue - I just thought it was general-use English! Holy moley, one learns something every day. I'm going to have to go and waste time looking it up now ... Cheers! DBaK ( talk) 15:13, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
I reverted the blanking of user:Lis4930's page by User talk:Lowczarek. I then got an email from Lowczarek: Please delete the wiki Lis4930 as it was only used for instructional purposes, and the course it was used for has ended. Thank you. I replied on Lowczarek's page, why I could not / and suggested that Lis4930 blank it. A reply on Lowczarek's page by an IP was I created the Lis4930 account with no e-mail and cannot retrieve the password. Please delete the page as previously requested and as mentioned in the first line of the wiki (the course has ended, the students want that information down). Any suggestions? Willing to help? Best Jim1138 ( talk) 20:09, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
"Hello, This wiki is for the class LIS 4930 at the University of South Florida. This page has been set up for students in the course to learn how to use and edit a wiki. At the end of this course, this page will be deleted."
{{
Indian English}}
on this page, but Sitush would come after me with an
aruval. —
Spaceman
Spiff 06:58, 21 December 2012 (UTC)This has kept my nieces/nephews etc amused in recent years. And driven me barmy as it whips up their expectations. Enjoy, with my best wishes. - Sitush ( talk) 21:54, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Here's wishing you happy holidays and a successful Wiki New Year! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 23:28, 20 December 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks for your timely op-ed in the Signpost. Pine ✉ 08:59, 21 December 2012 (UTC) |
Sorry to bother you, but you have been involved with this editor before. Thanks to your warning he stopped attempting the change that article. However more recently he made the same change to another article - in this case a list. He must have know it was controversial but engaged in an edit war while making no comments on the talk page. This included "revert vandalism", "revert recidivistic vandalism and started with "Persistent nationalistic vandalism from single-issue editor: blocking of this editor is now officially requested". The editor concerned has an outstanding track record of article creation and work by the way, as a simple check by Varlaam would have revealed.
As in previous incidents Varlaam ignored the talk page until this morning. This edit involves him calling the other editor a "punk" and a "parasite" as well as exhibiting ownership issues. Now all of that said, this is an editor who is putting a lot of work into many articles, but seems incapable of interacting with other editors. If thwarted s/he lashes out. The block history speaks for itself. Is it possible to have a word? I half thought about taking it to ANI but that history an indef would have probably been the result and we would have lost someone who is making valuable contributions.
If you don't want to take it up fair enough! ---- Snowded TALK 10:08, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
PS: Another revert (up to four now) with the same vandalism accusation this morning
I know you've opened a discussion of this block at AN, but I wanted to take a moment to thank you for finally doing something about Varlaam. Having been the object of his ire in the past, to the degree he once likened me to Joseph Mengele because I removed one of his pet bits of trivia from an article, I have long believed that Varlaam's copious editing has allowed him to skate by with this kind of abusive battleground behavior far too long. I have also long questioned the quality of many of his edits and his obsession with numbers of edits versus content. I'm glad to see an admin finally stand up to him and draw the critical line in the sand. Behavior like his and a coterie of others (and we all know who the president of the club is) must stop if this community is to survive. -- Drmargi ( talk) 16:17, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Please keep Sitush in mind today; he's in hospital for a procedure. I don't know if he wants to handle best wishes on his talk page since that might flood his little smartphone, but I'll gladly accept flowers on his behalf. Hope all goes well, Sitush. Drmies ( talk) 15:00, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
For your continued good work to enforce policy and maintain order. ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 16:39, 21 December 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks for stepping in over there. Hopefully, with the request at WP:BLP/N#Jay Westerveld, the article will get the attention it needs to clean it up. I had never heard of him before I saw the post on a user talk page (now archived at User talk:LadyofShalott/Archive 24#Jay Westervelt), and I had done some initial cleanup of the most egregious unsourced promotional content, but then got bogged down in the career naming nonsense. At this point, I'm feeling a bit burned out on a subject I have no strong connection about, so am thinking of just taking it off my watch list for a while and focusing on areas I can be more productive. Thanks again for your involvement over there - and good luck! --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 19:41, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Happy children join me in extending the best possible Season's Greetings to you and your loved ones at this time of year, and if you don't celebrate the usual holidays ( Diwali, Xmas, Hanukkah, Eid, Kwanzaa, etc....), then we will still wish you a Happy Festivus. All the best: HarryZilber ( talk) 20:59, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your support during my "block". As for my Survivor habit, well... we all have our guilt pleasures. =) -- Gogo Dodo ( talk) 04:27, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
Nun's Well, Cannock Wood was unmitigated drivel for six years. I'm not convinced that it is properly a primary topic, either. An equal weight disambiguation seems the best. I am more persuaded of this having found Nun's Well, Brigham, a poem by William Wordsworth that doesn't seem to rate much literary analysis by itself, but which is discussed in the context of an aspect of Wordsworth that we don't appear to have. That would make for an equal weight disambiguation between Nun's Well, Cannock Wood, Nun's Well, Gibraltar, Wordsworth's friendship with geologists (when it is written), and the other Nun's Wells that there are. If you turn the English Professor Vacuum up to a higher setting, maybe one of those English professors being sucked in by it will remedy this gap in our coverage of literature and Wordsworth.
And maybe Senra might be persuaded to deal with the St Nun's Well in Pelynt, U.K. (after the saint variously named Nynnina, Nenyna, or Ninnie) which is listed at Hope 1893, pp. 17–19 , the St Nun's Well in Altarnum (also called Altarnun) U.K. (after Nonna) that is at Hope 1893, p. 19–20 , and the Nun's Well at Sedgwick Castle (also called Sidgwick Castle) that is in Sedgwick Park ( Hope 1893, p. 165) .
I found all of this as fallout from the Gibraltarian devilry. I'm dropping it off here for much the same reasons that I dropped off some cat in Staffordshire elsewhere. I have work on Gibraltar International Airport on my to-do list.
{{
cite news}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite encyclopedia}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)Uncle G ( talk) 12:08, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
Black Kite has been secretly writing about that cat in Staffordshire, by the way.
Uncle G ( talk) 15:55, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
Martinevans123
Santas Grotto wishes you and yours
"Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Dda"
May the true spirit of Christmas bless you with warmth and peace ....
Holiday Cheer | ||
Michael Q. Schmidt talkback is wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings. |
Since you seem to have done a wonderful job with another recent problem, how about devoting some admin electrons to this? cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 05:21, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
The copyright violation problem is the perennial one, of course: people who cannot write their way out of a paper bag "write" by filching the work of others. I notice the influence of tabloid journalism rearing its ugly head in the article, too. People are "rapped". Police make "probes". Gah!
Uncle G ( talk) 11:06, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
DR/N filing, and the history of the article (which seems to show a long standing slow revert war. [8] I am not sure if it is even a content matter as it is looks like edit warring back and forth. If you could take a look and see if a hammer is need for anyone...be great. If you feel the soft touch is appropriate I will let another DR/N volunteer decide whether to close or not. I reverted the last blanking as unexplained and the talk page looks like an argument but is not extensive enough for a DR/N filing at the moment.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 07:21, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
sslstrip
and the NUL attacks, in contrast, can be found supported by books on computer security and cryptography written by other people, with a quick Google Books search. It's daft to lump the two together. Once again we have edit warriors who only use the undo tool, and don't confine themselves to editing only the bits that they actually disagree on.
Uncle G (
talk) 09:11, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Sole Soul ( talk) 15:00, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi.
I have started at discussion at Wikipedia talk:Pending changes#PC for a content dispute about the protection of the article on Jay Westerveld. Your opinion would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Yaris678 ( talk) 15:03, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, peoples rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension.
Drmies: You are far more experienced than I. How should one reason with an experienced editor who has a self-declared annoyingly high IQ when, it appears to my inexperienced eye, she is at best not assuming good faith and at worst may even be displaying signs of article ownership? For example, I do not see a coherently supported rebuttal from her either here or here. In the first case, she has since obfuscated my proposal and in the second case, I have taken the unusual (for me) step of serving notice to change following what I thought was a reasoned and supported argument -- Senra ( talk) 16:27, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
[Puts admin hat on:] I'll repeat what I said earlier: I think the article will be much better off if the two main editors stay away from it, and by "two main editors" I mean Whatamidoing most of all. That's kind of a sad statement, and one I make reluctantly, since those two main editors seem to have some knowledge but there is too much zeal in their edits. Moreover, Whatamidoing's attitude on the talk page makes moving the article forward a practical impossibility, and both suffer from TLDNR-itis (that is, they cause it in others). I would fully support a motion somewhere to have those two editor back away from the article and its talk page. Drmies ( talk) 17:53, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Senra, getting hyperlinks in whilst preserving the Harvard parenthetical cross-linkage style is dead easy. Just replace (Levine 2005)
with {{harv|Levine|2005}}
everywhere and ensure that the citation for Levine begins {{Cite news|ref=harv|
…. That's it.
Uncle G (
talk) 22:08, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Seriously, I don't understand the ins and outs and pros and cons of sfn and a bunch of other things. I have tried to read those pages and defenses of it on talk pages (MF's and others), and I just don't get it. Also it bores me terrifically. I understand how the older generation (MF, Uncle G, Dennis B) finds some attraction in those technicalities, but they don't see, I believe, that we, the others (Bbb and myself, for starters), are young and beautiful and have so much to live for. We can't be bothered by your persnickety detail--we want to LIVE. Oh yeah, I just opened up a rad beer, "Lucifer", by Het Anker Brewery. Someone should give them a decent article one of these days. Drmies ( talk) 23:29, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
By the way: Professor Gayle A. Sulik, who has been proposed as the "highest quality academic source", is a sociologist at Texas Women's University. Of the next most often used, James S. Olson is a professor of history and Samantha King is a professor of the Sociocultural Studies of Sport, Health and the Body at Queens University. Sulik's viewpoint is very clear in Sulik 2011, pp. 1104–1105. One of the things to counter that reliance on one viewpoint is to use Klawiter 2008 , which is languishing unused in the Further Reading section. Marin Klawiter was a professor at Georgia Tech and is now at Yale Law School, and the cited book points out the at least two viewpoints on the subject. Page 174 et seq. of the book discusses the conflicts between the screening activists and the feminists over the issues, and why they clash. Here's a quotation:
The culture of empowerment and feminist breast/cancer activism thus took shape, in part, through conflict with the culture of screening activism.
— Klawiter 2008, p. 176
One wouldn't know any of the history from the article at hand. Such a lot of the waffle on that talk page could be eliminated if editors knew what they were about and pointed out that the neutrality issue is that there are several major viewpoints in the history of breast cancer awareness. Kirsten E. Gardner, assistant professor of history and women's studies at the University of Texas at San Antonio, isn't even mentioned on the article and the talk page, yet her book ( Gardner 2006) documents the historical shifts in breast cancer awareness, setting the post-1970s feminist viewpoint in historical context showing how it came about and how it challenged the viewpoints that preceded it. The answer to the person only using the single academic source is a whole lot of other academic sources from historians rather than sociologists, putting Sulik's views into historical context.
Get the history in, and you'll discover that we didn't even know that we didn't have Joseph Colt Bloodgood ( Mansel, Sweetland & Hughes 2009, pp. 16–20) and didn't mention the Amanda Sims Memorial Fund (that Bloodgood founded) anywhere in the encyclopaedia at all. I thus leave Drmies' talk page lurkers with a present:
No, we don't have John Birkett ( Mansel, Sweetland & Hughes 2009, pp. 12–14), George Lenthal Cheatle ( Mansel, Sweetland & Hughes 2009, pp. 14–16), or Charles F. Geschickter ( Mansel, Sweetland & Hughes 2009, pp. 20–22), either.
{{
cite encyclopedia}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help){{
cite journal}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite journal}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)Uncle G ( talk) 06:12, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Enjoy #Drmies (Drmies character), by the way.
Hey Drmies, could you move NBC Nonstop to Cozi TV? "Cozi TV" is the new name for the network as of December 20, 2012. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 20:09, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Drmies, I hope you have a Merry Christmas and hope your day is full of the true spirit of the day. Plus, good food, good family and good times. :) Have a Great Day! :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 07:20, 24 December 2012 (UTC) Spread the joy of Christmas by adding {{subst:User:Neutralhomer/MerryChristmas}} to their talk page with a friendly message. |
Articles on individual rocks. Happy holidays! — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 12:47, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Merry Christmas | |
Hey Drmies, hope you like all the eggnog. We need bacon-nog next, get on it! Keep safe over the holidays, and hopefully I can see you at the next Wikimania! Merry Christmas for you and yours! — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 16:26, 21 December 2012 (UTC) |
Christmas Greetings. Kierzek ( talk) 14:48, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Merry Christmas! I have a question for you (or any of your stalkers) regarding a question I got at the Teahouse. Can you link to a category within an article (e.g., There are many metaphors referring to elephants)? I had never really thought about that, but I figured perhaps you'd come across a situation like that in one or two of your 100000+ edits. Sorry to bother you on Christmas Eve, I told the asker it may take a few days to get a response, but I didn't even know where to look for something of that nature. Thanks in advance. Go Phightins ! 21:15, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Merry Christmas | |
Wishing you a Merry Christmas and all the best for 2013. Blethering Scot 22:43, 24 December 2012 (UTC) |
Have a happy holiday and a great new year!-- Amadscientist ( talk) 00:46, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
I have been allowed to escape and Malleus now knows of the wotsit and seems to be agreeable, so thanks for the thoughts etc relating to both of us. I need to catch up on talk page replies and will do. On a totally different subject, I've mentioned you towards the end of the thread at User talk:The Blade of the Northern Lights#Thank you. My gut feeling - and my gut is one of the few bits of me that have so far escaped medical interest - is that this is a pretty significant subject and that it would be useful to involve people who have or have access to specialist knowledge. I'm not sure whether Chomsky etc really figure in what you do but, hey, you understand non-English English and that makes you better than me. - Sitush ( talk) 01:28, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Happy Holidays! | |
Hope you and your family are enjoying the holiday season, Drmies! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:06, 25 December 2012 (UTC) |
So, I looked at this article in preparation to do a DYK review. In the original version, each time a candidate was mentioned his exact vote count was included in parentheses. I thought this was distracting from the prose, so I removed these parentheticals in favor of a couple of vote-count summaries.
What I'd really like to do is to include a table of results with the precise vote count. Such a table is included in the google books source by Zuwiyya [13] on page 19.
I seek advice. All the information in this table was included in the previous version of the article, just in an annoying and hard to read manner. Is it legit, though, just to reproduce this table? And if so, would it be okay to re-order the table to group the Sunni, Shiite, and minority candidates separately? And if not, is my general summary of vote-counts okay with folks, or would people prefer the exact count appearing after each candidate's name?
And oy, reading election tables from Lebanon 1968 is far preferable to listening to my motherwhomIlovedearly ask repeatedly whether it's safe to let Amazon.com know her credit card number... Thanks! (P.S. I can't for the life of me figure out how to get this message out of Ed's greeting, so I'm sorry, Ed, and those who have the knowing of the wikitext please reformat for me!) Moishe Rosenbaum ( talk) 22:08, 25 December 2012 (UTC) Thanks, Dennis! Moishe Rosenbaum ( talk) 23:59, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Seasons greetings to you and yours
Dougweller (
talk) 13:55, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Happy holidays to you and everypony. /)(\ 174.141.213.63 ( talk) 21:56, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
I broke my usual habit of avoiding wheat, sugar and corn syrup to have some of my wife's pecan pie. Best. Pie. Ever. Wish I could have shared some with you. She baked 6 for the family get together, but held one back in case she needed it as a gift for a family or friend that was in need (Mrs. Brown is very thoughtful that way, one reason I completely adore her). If you lived nearby, it would have been yours. Of course, since you don't live nearby, I just might have to sneak in the kitchen, make a half pot of decaf and carve me up a slice. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:58, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Ambrosia (fruit salad), yes--but I got a pretty decent recipe, involving fresh citrus fruit and pineapple, whipping cream mixed with orange zest and powdered sugar and sour cream, and toasted sweetened shredded coconut. My guide for this and many other recipes from Americana is Cook's Country (the magazine), besides The Joy of Cooking. Drmies ( talk) 17:12, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Dear Drmies, would it be possible to redo a little article on a retired now "emiritas" prof of economic history that you deleted. The old afd is here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George W. Grantham and my current version is here: User:Msrasnw/George W. Grantham.
Best wishes,( Msrasnw ( talk) 12:41, 26 December 2012 (UTC))
On the Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zimmermanh1997 front, User:Hollisz has, once again, posted more "poor edits" here and here. These are the first two edits after coming off a 31 hour block by you. I will post this information to the SPI page and have alerted User:Dennis Brown (the clerk on the SPI). - Neutralhomer • Talk • 16:21, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Where's your lovely pair of tits? I feel like life has lost all meaning... — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 22:51, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello, doc! Someone has stuck in a stupid phrase ("singapore fucking sux !! they have no future !! singaporeans are total bitches !!!! sg sux !!! never go there") in between the topics at the bottom of the article. It's not visible when I try to edit the article itself, so it seems to be coming from elsewhere. I haven't been able to find it in the topic templates or anywhere else that is obvious (to me). Can you help? Thanks and a belated Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Cheers! Geoff Who, me? 00:55, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
I understand why this page was full-protected at the time given the mistaken identification of his brother as the perpetrator, but at this point there appears to be no reason for keeping the protection as Adam Lanza has been confirmed as the perpetrator. History tells us that individuals involved in spree killings of this magnitude will have enduring notability and be mentioned in detail for many years to come in scholarly papers and books. Already there is talk of geneticists studying his DNA.-- The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 17:30, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
User_talk:Cyberpower678#Update_request. You seem like someone with clue who isn't already involved in the debate. Thanks. MBisanz talk 03:27, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
I notice you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Della McCullers because you were moving the article(s) to userspace. Would you be able to move Aunt Hassie Fletcher as well? It was also included in the AfD. St Anselm ( talk) 08:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Well, looks like there is officially some crossover between the two named accounts and 98.204.145.138. What should I do? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 15:07, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Lieve professor, please see this. As I stated in my preliminary response, the post is impressive (big words and all). The article the IP is referring to is Andy Kindler. Is the IP right? If so, why? Am I right? If so, why? Neither of the above? If so, why? Please keep your answers brief. Incorrect answers may result in a block of your brain.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 16:07, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
In case you missed it, Drmies, the newspapers just published this three-month-old story, yesterday and today. Bwilkins, Beyond My Ken, and others, do not get sucked into this, here or elsewhere. I also recommend an immediate visit to User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 122#San Francisco and Stanford University. Journalists reading this: Drmies is no more an "official" than I am, and despite some erroneous statements here, there is a subtle but important distinction between a "block" and a "ban". This discussion is closed. Uncle G ( talk) 23:56, 28 December 2012 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I believe the blocking of Roger Ellory was wrong. Here's why:
Please try to understand that most normal people have difficulties in understanding what it means to use socks to avoid scrunity. Most normal people who just started editing Wikipedia sometimes simply forget to log in. Yes, the user made some mistakes, but I know quite a few prominent Wikipedians, including Jimbo Wales, who edited or even created their own bios and have never been even warned. The difference between Roger Ellory and these Wikipedians is that they knowingly violated the polices while Roger Ellory did not understand how Wikipedia works. He simply needed some help. I believe you should AGF and lift the block now. Thanks for considering my request. 71.202.120.247 ( talk) 17:24, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
|
I still have a question, if I may please. Uncle G, why did you link to this discussion User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 122#San Francisco and Stanford University? I hope you do not imply I am Carl Hewitt. 71.202.120.247 ( talk) 01:25, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Well, the end of the world came and here we've all been raptured. I missed my chance to go out in style, though — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 14:29, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Drmies, I've blocked you for 24 hours. Your comments on Scottwong's talkpage was completely unacceptable - leaving aside, for a second, the utterly inappropriate tone, you do not insult or denigrate another editor for not adhering to your view of What Makes An Editor. Whether he has 10 edits, 100 edits or a thousand and a dozen TFAs in a row, Scottywong is an editor in good standing and you will treat him as the colleague he is. We do not argue for supremacy based on extent of contributions, because to do so is to set up a wiki based on the principle that he who jumps through the most hoops gets to shout loudest. That's not how the wiki model works.
Incidentally, even if we entertained, for a second, the possibility that "I don't have to listen to you, you're not as good an editor as I am" is a valid argument: Scottywong is one of the most hard-working new page patrollers I know. You can argue all you want for the people who improve the quality of existing articles: he's one of the people who ensures they're not diamonds in a turd.
Ironholds (
talk) 22:28, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
That you felt it incumbent upon yourself to intervene where there was no need for intervention made the whole thing so much worse, and no amount of ":p"'s on talk pages is going to make up for that. Instead, Bbb catches heat for undoing your bad block, the poor guy, and gets blasted for being involved when he only did what was right. Having a block log is not funny, you know, "gentleman-assassin". And if you want to know how it makes it worse: I feel like shit, and Scotty may not be back for a while. So great job. Again, I'll take your apology, nothing less.
Oh, you wanted to know how you being you makes it worse? You represent Wikipedia in ways that I do not. That makes your bad block worse, first of all, since you should know even better. And it makes it worse for me, since anyone looking at my damn block log now will think, 'Oh, blocked by Okeyes/Ironholds, must be really bad.' And now you got me pissed off enough that I'll Drmies ( talk) 03:57, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 22:44, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Drmies. I saw your name listed as a closer [16]. I am involved in an obviously non-neutral RFC [17] that I suspect needs to be closed prematurely with a request to re-write a neutral RFC. This user has been trolling me for more than a month and this kind of thing is standard fare. I wasn't sure if I should be doing something or just let it run? CorporateM ( Talk) 01:55, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
I guess you need them. All this drama makes more harm than good. — ΛΧΣ 21 02:29, 30 December 2012 (UTC) |
It appears that this has been an eventful day on the wiki. I'm not sorry to have missed it, and I'm way too tired to want to know what it was all about. Ladyof Shalott 04:08, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyoA4LXQco4
I hope I keep such good humour when one of them finally gets me for ... nothing. Keep up the good work, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 03:10, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
See my user for "he who speaks a word of consolation" ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:36, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
- Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
...owes me a new pair of underoos. /)(\ 174.141.213.63 ( talk) 13:33, 30 December 2012 (UTC)