User talk:Drmies

"Drmies is the only rational editor here."

Note to self

Category:Articles with a promotional tone from December 2017

Ray's Rules

That is a nice list. Think it would be OK to make that into a projectspace page people can link to? 28bytes (talk) 14:19, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Might I suggest WP:RAYSRULES as a shortcut redirect either to that section on his talk page, or to a new subpage in his userspace? Seems a fitting tribute. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:24, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

"I want to share with you, something we found in his work desk that one of my sons had heard about--Ray's Rules. ... They are worth sharing and help explain his kind and generous nature"--I think that's your answer. Thanks y'all. Drmies (talk) 16:20, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Something to live by. Ever so proud to have another inspirational man on the Main page, and that he was just Mike for me, and I knew nothing about the story until I researched because I was sure he deserved an article ;) - Yoninah wrote most of it. - It was also nice to see the church that someone wanted deleted pictured ;) - I will give Ray's Rulez prominence in my edit notice in 2019, - new year's resolution. Haven't changed it in years. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:36, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

I included them in my good wishes and resolutions for 2019. Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

pictured:

Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy 2019 -

begin it with music and memories

Thank you for brightening many of my days last year! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:22, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Now I also changed User talk:Gerda Arendt/Editnotice. I should read it myself often ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:04, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Please check out "Happy" once more, for his smile, and sharing (a Nobel Peace Prize), and resolutions. I wanted that for 1 January, but then wasn't sad about having our music pictured instead. Not too late for resolutions, New Year or not. DYK that he probably kept me on Wikipedia, back in 2012? By the line (which brought him to my attention, and earned the first precious in br'erly style) that I added to my editnotice, in fond memory? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:23, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Lost content

Opéra Royal de Wallonie, mentioned in a BLP, was a sad stub. I suggested to my most prolific and cooperative French friend LouisAlain to expand, along with a request to create said BLP. He did. All could be fine. But somebody (even somebody whom I had sent Ray's Rules) not only noticed and warned that an attribution declaration was missing, but also deleted it all as a copyright violation. LouisAlain is usually meticulous about such tags, not only saying which article, but even which version by whom, see? In this one case of thousands he forgot. The result is sad for everybody involved, especially potential readers of the translation. Help, anybody? It needs an admin, or I'd restore it myself, attributed of course. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:49, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

 Done by talk page stalker. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:07, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

thank you for stalking, much appreciated ;) - please keep stalking LouisAlain also, who was recently templated with an overly sugared wording requesting references ;) - as if you could , when translating, translate more than there is. He had to face other questions regarding his skills, but is really the one I'd single out for super effecient, speedy, friendly help, consistently over six years. DYK that, thanks to him, all Bach cantatas have French articles? More than German that is. - Other question: the sugary template (Ways to improve ...), shouldn't it "notice" when it was applied to the same user on the same talk? Instead of presenting the same sugary nonsense again and again? If my math is right, 39 times here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:32, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Dda

Martinevans123 ^{(Santa's Hard Brexit Grotto)} ... sends you ...

... warmest seasonal wishes for ...... Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Dda.

---

Merry Christmas Baby... and hoping that you have a good New Year  !!

Merry Christmas !!!

CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 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 Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

UMT

That was well spotted, if I may say so, although I don't quite see the link; are they working towards autoconfirmed? ——SerialNumber54129 17:29, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

• Ha, not well spotted at all if you have my particular set of skills glasses. ;) I don't know exactly what they're doing, which is why someone should maybe do a short rundown of the kinds of edits they're making, in an SPI. Take it easy, and happy new semester! I taught Rilke this morning. Drmies (talk) 17:38, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

You taught Rilke this morning? Are they enrolling ghosts at 'Bama now? -- MelanieN (talk) 22:59, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

MelanieN, I never got that corner office in Morgan Hall; I work for the competition. Drmies (talk) 01:09, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

And we'll enroll anything that can sign a check. Drmies (talk) 01:09, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

heh

User_talk:Wiggitywack24 & Draft:Palin Communications-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 04:10, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

• Ha, I blocked the other one, so you could consider this a name change. I've pruned the draft a bit... Drmies (talk) 04:17, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Only where absolutely necessary. I reiterated my spiel about WP:42 and WP:CORP.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 04:24, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
    • On another note, let's listen to some metal from The Hu. Kelapstick, did you bring any tapes back? Drmies (talk) 04:42, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Excuse me for butting in, but I was just roaming around, and happened to watch the video you posted from The Hu. It's the most unique music I've seen in a long time. I enjoyed it very much. Thanks for sharing! Huggums537 (talk) 23:09, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

• It is, isn't it. I'm bothered by the swastika on the dude's horsehead fiddle, but it's also a standard and really old symbol in Mongolian shamanism. Still, if I were him, I'd have someone make a neck with different inlays. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 00:31, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Oh, well I was too busy appreciating the music to notice anything that resembled a swastika, so I never saw it, but those kinds of things don't bother me anyway. Being offended by things is for overly sensitive people who probably don't have anything else better to do with their time I guess (Not that I don't understand how the symbol might be troubling to some minorities, I just don't belong to those groups even though my forefathers did...) Huggums537 (talk) 02:21, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Low-level harassment by Ktrimi991

Hi Doc. Long time no see. Sorry for the intrusion, but I would like your intervention regarding wp:baiting and associated wp:harassment tactics by Ktrimi991. I had a conflict recently with another editor, and Ktrimi991 went to his talkpage to taunt me, knowing full well that I would be reluctant to respond there. That was in retaliation for me supporting his block during a recent report at 3RRN for restoring CLOP at Byzantine empire (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). At first, I chose not to respond to his taunt and decided to just ignore the baiting. But when Alexikoua today reverted his low-level harassment, Ktrimi991 reverted Alexikoua and restored the baiting. That had the effect of pinging me again. So I responded to Ktrimi warning him to stop his bullying and baiting tactics. However, I am concerned that Ktrimi991 will not stop that easily. Therefore, I would really appreciate your assistance in this matter. Happy New Year by the way. Take care. Dr. K. 23:12, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

• Ha, thanks, and happy new year to you too--but I'm going to sit this one out. I got involved with something involving Ktrimi and someone else, and I don't want to do that again. Anyway, that comment doesn't really look like a taunt to me; if the statement is a lie, well, your edit history bears that out easily. If the pinging gets too much--well, you can ask someone to not ping you, and like a request that someone not post on your talk page, you could ask an admin or the community to enforce that. Drmies (talk) 23:48, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Fair enough. The reason I called this "low-level bullying" is because it is. But being low-level it may not be glaringly obvious to someone who does not delve deeper into this person's behaviour. In any case, if the taunts continue, I will take additional steps, as you mentioned. Dr. K. 00:10, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • I also forgot the wp:stalking. He also follows me to articles he never edited before. This is the latest example. He never edited the article Persecution of Christians, and jumps straight in into another editor's talkpage with whom I had a conflict to ping me with advice about edit-warring. I know you don't want to get involved, but this is ridiculously obvious stalking harassment. Dr. K. 00:28, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
    • That article is on my watchlist. The first edit of mine on that article was made a year ago (January 2018). I started to discuss about the Modern Persecution section on the talk page on 6 January 2019. Two days later I reverted an edit of yours that was related with that section. The community consensus supported my edit because your content was fringe. Where is the "stalking" here? Ktrimi991 (talk) 00:46, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
      • And that's why I prefer to stay out of these kinds of things. Drmies (talk) 00:51, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

• • • • • Yes, if someone doesn't want to get involved, such arguments may appear irksome. But I am not asking for your assistance any longer. Dr. K. 01:20, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
      • The content at the time was still under discussion. But the article reverts are not the issue. You followed my edits on the talkpage of the article because my first edit was on the 5th of January, a day before you followed my edits there. You replied on the 6th of January, on the article talk three minutes after I supported a block for you at 3RRN. Then you followed my edits on the talkpage of Simonm223 ‎to tell me how many reverts I had made and to give me "advice" about talking on the article talkpage. I think your stalking is obvious. Dr. K. 01:12, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
        • And now you're having a conversation with another editor on my talk page. And then the editor will respond. And then their friend will weigh in. That's why I don't want these kinds of things anymore here. If you need me, you know where to find me. If someone is stalking you, take it to ANI. Drmies (talk) 01:23, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
          • I thought this whole thing was reverted and rushed to put my final answer before I removed it again. I saw you restored it back, and just saw your reply here. Ok, doc. I see your point and advice. Thank you. Dr. K. 01:27, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
            • User:Dr.K., this is just one of those conflicts that have way too many angles and interests. As you know I'm always happy to jump in with my Gordian sword, but this is not one of those occasions. Thanks for understanding, Drmies (talk) 01:00, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

• • • • • • • • Doc, I thought this discussion was over, so your reply caught me by surprise. I don't want to take much more of your time, so I will be brief. You know that I rarely come to you, or even individual admins, for help. I prefer to go to an appropriate forum for any problems that I see. I came to you in this case because I considered this to be an open-and-shut case of low-level harassment and stalking and I was seeking a quick resolution because you have helped me in the past on exactly this subject. But I guess the Balkans ain't K-pop. I realise that the Balkans is a toxic and contested area, but I assure you, I would not use you, an editor I consider a longtime friend, to prevail in a dispute. I hope you understand that much about me. On the other hand, I realise that my request imposed a burden on you and I quite understand your wish to not get involved; I respect that, going so far as to apologise for the disturbance. Thank you for your time. Dr. K. 02:50, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Note

[1]. Interesting first edit to article space. Home Lander (talk) 17:02, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

• Didn't we have a weather sock? But they were seasoned enough to not attract this much attention the first time around, I think. Drmies (talk) 17:07, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Drmies, WP:LTA/UAK is the first one I think of. But I don't think this account fits his MO. Home Lander (talk) 17:09, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Knew I had seen something else too recently - here it is: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hurricane Editor Only. Home Lander (talk) 17:14, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
    • Thanks, and thank you Bbb23. Yes, Bbb, I'm still sad. Drmies (talk) 00:59, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
      • Very sorry to hear that.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:40, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Old AfD multi oddity

In this edit, you added a {{Old AfD multi}} (with the now-closed AFD as its only entry), but there was already a {{ArticleHistory}} with (among other things) a previous AFD. Could you merge all that? Looks like a bug that XFDcloser doesn't know to look for that more comprehensive history template, but I don't work with XFD closing on en.wp, so I don't know what tools have what features/bugs for tagging. DMacks (talk) 23:31, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

• DMacks, I am sorry for doing things when, you know, I don't know that I'm doing that. (I'm not quite sure I understand your question, but it's been a long day.) Maybe there's a smart person who can fix whatever I broke? Oh, I know: Writ Keeper can repair everything... Drmies (talk) 00:57, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

I fixed the talk-page tagging for you. DMacks (talk) 04:41, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

More eyes needed at Ro Khanna

I am tangling with an editor who is determined to portray this Silicon Valley Congressman as a hypocrite because rich tech executives donate lots of money (legally) to his campaigns. This editor posted a Google Docs screed on the talk page calling Khanna a "neoliberal warmongering fracking pro-TPP pawn". Despite my attempts to explain NPOV and BLP policies, that are persisting and have suggested (quite absurdly) that I am a Khanna employee. There is discussion on my talk page and I opened a thread at WP:BLPN as well. Because I am heavily involved now, it would be great if uninvolved adminstrators and other experienced editors could evaluate the situation and offer some words of wisdom. Thanks a lot. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:27, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, Drmies, his full name is Rohit Khanna, and his parents are from the Punjab, but he was born in Philadelphia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:10, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Aha. I see now: he's listed at Rohit. BTW it's also short for "Rosie", who's sitting next to me. What do you make of this, and this? Drmies (talk) 01:15, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Surely plausible but . I am in a pedantic mood. As for Rosie, you tell her that a guy in California is very impressed with her. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:26, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

User:Cullen328, I wonder if Asaturn is trying to skirt around the edges of neutrality. I can't find too much fault with the article in its current condition, but there's this comment, which begs the question of whether we should start including such commentary for all fundraising politicians. Drmies (talk) 17:47, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Overfinch is back

Your reversion to Overfinch was reverted. I've reverted the revert revert, and added a short desc, you or some other admin might want to check the account involved. Anything else I can do let me know, (I'm more of a content guy). --Cornellier (talk) 00:50, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks! DominicHowlett, this is not the way to go. It's pretty obvious you have a COI, and you can't turn this article into basically an ad for the company. Drmies (talk) 05:05, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

• I'm failing to see how this repeated blanking is in any way constructive, rather than just an excuse for dogma and power tripping over new editors. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:56, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

• Well, apart from the promotional nature of the expanded article ("enhancing the vehicle with standout looks and exclusivity with superlative performance"" or "The application of Bridge of Weir leather upholstery, with a choice of seat design, stitch patterning and hide colours, enables the customer to create a reflection of their style" - c'mon) the text is plagiarised - if you put in random sentences you will often find they're lifted straight from the sources - I found directly copied text from overfinch.com, motors.com and salonpriveconcours.com in less than a couple of minutes. Black Kite (talk) 12:15, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

• So fix it. But we don't have to do it in such a BITEy way. It's the classic Wikipedia Way – a new editor turns up, topic expert, connected with the subject or whatever, and the response is to lynch them for not being part of the social network. Block them as group accounts, as COI, or for OR, or even for copyvio on using materials that they hold the rights to, and might even have freely licensed as such, if only we asked. But every time, the response instead is to find a reason to start swinging the banhammer instead. Look at the article quality of the two versions – or the potential article quality of an edited version of the larger one: remove the ad copy, but keep the content. As it is, the "approved" version of this article is useless and incomprehensible. I doubt that anyone who is gatekeeping it has even seen an Overfinch, or knows why we might want an article on them. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:00, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

When I saw the word overfinch on my watchlist for this page, I was curious to see if it was about the car mechanic. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 13:06, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Were you any the wiser, for having read it as it is now? Andy Dingley (talk) 13:08, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

No, It just confirmed what I thought I knew. I know nothing about the background to this other than they modify Range Rovers. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 13:11, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

But as it reads at present, you'd just think they were tinting the windows. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:47, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

I don't think so no. Ford wouldn't have given them a design award if that were all they do! -Roxy, the dog. wooF 14:21, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

That contributor seems to have been editing the article for years, eg: as DomHowlett (talk · contribs). - Sitush (talk) 14:23, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

As might be expected, I favour the current version, rather than the promotional, company sanctioned one I just saw. I doubt it would be possible to reliably source that. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 14:25, 16

Hi there, i'm an Overfinch employee and i've been tasked with returning the information back onto our wikipedia page. I updated the page a long time ago with the correct information. I will admit I don't have the greatest understanding of wikipedia but I reverted the page and removed any links to the "promote" the page. Please can we return the information, i.e. the timeline which can be found on the Overfinch website and the current models etc. that I updated. The aim isn't to advertise just provide people with information on the company. Any help will be appreciated. -DomHowlett (talk) 17.05, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

User:DominicHowlett thanks for the note. First of all, you're not User:DomHowlett... Wait, you are, you are both. That's confusing and you need to pick one. Second, one of the edits you made removed the COI template. You can't make COI edits that are challenged (they were, by a number of seasoned editors) and then remove that template. Please listen to the advice of other editors--Black Kite knows what he's talking about, and so does Sitush. Third, please pay attention to the COI note that User:Galobtter placed on your talk page (your other talk page): you must disclose in a more formal way, and instructions are in that note. Do that, and then we can start talking (on the article talk page) about what content is acceptable, and in what form it should be placed, and how it should be referenced. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 17:54, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

• I know exactly what an Overfinch is, Andy. And, yes, the current version is useless. But the "expanded" version was promotional and copyvio, so it can't stand, and you know that. As you say, WP:SOFIXIT. Black Kite (talk) 14:48, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Move request

Hi Drmies. Accept my belated congratulations for the new year, plz! Could you please restore the former title of this article which was changed to an improper one? There's actually no single source supporting the new title. I've already discussed the matter with the user, who seems to be a newbie. Regards. --Mhhossein ^talk 13:40, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks, you too! Sorry, can't help now--I have a class full of students waiting for me; we're reading The Love Suicides at Amijima. Drmies (talk) 15:24, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Cool. After you and your students are done, perhaps y'all can improve our article, a mostly unsourced piece of... --Bbb23 (talk) 18:39, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
    • ...and now? --Mhhossein ^talk 06:15, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

      ​ Done — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:48, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Viktor Prokopenya

Dear Drmies, can you help with whitewashing of the article by 可愛い? Just because you were involved once and probably remember this your comment - https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AViktor_Prokopenya&type=revision&diff=868832047&oldid=868763262. Recently there was an event in Prokopenya life - new business launch, so he appeared again and without any discussion or consensus editwars in the article. I tried to report him - but no one seems available (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#可愛い_reported_by_User:Belbrabas_(Result:_)) Belbrabas (talk) 18:25, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Dear Drmies Belbrabas has made several vandal changes to the page. He does not look like a real user, doesn’t have any edits on other pages, except related to Prokopenya. (надо проверить) He is one of the haters of Prokopenya and is editing the article and is making a number of vandal and wiki rules noncompliant edits of the page. He is not interested in making wikipedia page look neutral and compliant with rules, - all he wants is to add a few false or tabloid style statements to the article. As a person who was engaged in major revision of this page I’ve seen the vandal changes - cancelled them, provided detailed explanation why he is wrong. He didn’t answer anything for a week. I’ve pushed my changes back and then he is trying to push his version back, without discussions. You can check the discussion page - all his vandal changes were addresses and explained why his changes are wrong. He wants to add to the page phrases, which are completely incompatible with wiki like: “tits are new brains” and things like that. 可愛い (talk) 09:09, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

As exciting as all this is, I'm getting ready for Intro to Linguistics, and then some Brit Lit. No exciting Japanese literature today, I'm afraid. Drmies (talk) 15:16, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Dennis Hastert

Looks like we might have set page protection at the same time -- I was actually looking at setting the expiration for a bit longer (I had set 3 months at pending changes), as those sorts of edits that I just reverted seem be a constant issue with the article. Thoughts? Connormah (talk) 04:29, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

• Great minds! Well, I am not a big believer in pending changes--oh, yes, I see now that I accidentally overruled you, I suppose. Well, I'm fine with whatever you do, and certainly with lengthening it. And if you want to go back to pending changes, do it. Thanks Connormah, Drmies (talk) 05:15, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
  • (talk page stalker) Actually, since PC-protection and semi-protection are not mutually exclusive, the article is currently semi'd for a month and PC-protected for three months; which, given its history, may not be a bad thing at all. I use similar combinations fairly frequently. Vanamonde (Talk) 05:26, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
    • Ah you young people, with your fusion cooking and your beer in bourbon barrels... Drmies (talk) 05:27, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
      • Here in the Napa Valley where I live, many wineries have side businesses selling used barrels to whiskey distillers. Check it out. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:37, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

{outdent}}I just want to apologize for accidentally rollbacking you on this article.LM2000 (talk) 11:58, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Layne Staley

Not as bad as that blind hymn-writer that you, I and the Lady dealt with some years ago, but the Layne Staley article is a mess. I've just chopped a fair few 1,000 characters after leaving two notes on the talk page and getting no response. How do fans get away with this? Do the rest of us just emit some sort of collective sigh and let them continue their obsession? It's a shame if we do because ultimately they end up wasting a lot of their own time. - Sitush (talk) 18:06, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

• Dude I ran into an article about some voice artist yesterday: hundreds of lines of resume. No text. No secondary proof of notability--just an accretion of lines from which some fan of anime or video games builds a resume. Drmies (talk) 21:56, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
• Ha, "get over it"? Never, Sitush. I'm going upstairs to pull Dirt of the shelf. Maybe, sir, you should listen to "Would?", which is one of the BEST SONGS EVER. Yeah, that article--I saw what you did, and I pruned some more. Haven't looked at the talk page. Drmies (talk) 22:22, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
  • DYK that "Would?" appeared on the soundtrack for Singles, which happens to be one of my favourite soundtracks of all time, outside of Trainspotting and The Royal Tenenbaums?-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:00, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
    • You youngsters and your tunes. I stopped following music not long after George Formby died. Although someone may have subsequently bought me the record sung Clive Dunn, which was heavy something but not metal. Slush, perhaps? - Sitush (talk) 20:18, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
      • Sitush I'm a few years younger than you are, but I actually do know Formby--saw a few movies, and remember Alexei Sayle doing an impression of him and Mussolini simultaneously. Can't find the video. If I remember correctly, this is wrong--he said something like "'n if you need me, you'll find me hanging from a lamppost!" But go light up a spliff, play "Would?", and turn up the volume. Drmies (talk) 02:26, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks for that. We'll see what happens next. I anticipate some large reverts. - Sitush (talk) 06:33, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Picture of a seal in the sub thread I started at Gab

Seal, not sea lion--though I wouldn't be able to tell one from the other.

How is an aquatic mammal relevant to that discussion? I'm very confused. PaulCHebert (talk) 02:26, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Please read Sealioning. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:28, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Am I being accused of "a type of trolling or harassment which consists of pursuing people with persistent requests for evidence or repeated questions, while maintaining a pretense of civility"? Because if so, that is a really poor reading of my post. PaulCHebert (talk) 02:31, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

It is not your post even though you began it. Other people are engaging in problematic behavior there. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:39, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I didn't mesn to imply ownership of the thread; just of the comment I made. As long as the obscure-but-snarky comment wasn't directed at me (...'cuz I do actually have an issue with saying something "is known for X" instead of saying "something is X" and it's pretty clear to me that there's a clear case that Gab is a hate platform and should be unambiguously described as such) I withdraw my concerns. PaulCHebert (talk) 02:44, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

• Yes, I wasn't making reference to you. Pity you removed it. Real mammals brighten up every conversation. Drmies (talk) 04:50, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Legit had no idea what the hell was going on. Now I wish I hadn't. Peace. PaulCHebert (talk) 04:54, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

YM1K

And there you have it. The oldest trick in the book. You were...sufficiently subtle, JamesBWatson  ;) ——SerialNumber54129 18:57, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

• JBW is a sly old fox. Drmies (talk) 02:19, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
  • It wasn't actually meant to be sly, Drmies, or a trick, Serial Number 54129. It was just meant to be a slightly tongue-in-cheek way of giving a warning that continuing as before would lead to an indef-block, but I grossly underestimated the editor's naivety, and was, as it turned out, more than "sufficiently subtle". Oh well... The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:42, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
    • Their talk page message, which they also emailed to me, was plenty cryptic. They'll need to do some hard thinking before composing an unblock request. Drmies (talk) 15:59, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Doug Weller talk 17:14, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Drmies I have one question , there are many wikipedia page like Liza Soberano and Yael Shelbia that included beauty ranking in bio section and public image section, now i did this for kpop idol too: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Kim_Seok-jin&oldid=879690354 i added relatable source from well known websites like metro and insight too but it seems to of kpop fans keep undoing these edites, they continiusly undoing this and write their own reviews, as an korean language user i saw many of these posts in korean wiki pedia, is en.wikipedia different than ko.wikipedia? if yes why these female celebrities en.wikipedia page is like them but we can not write this for male celebrities? or users User:Snowflake91 and User:Ukiss2ne14lyfe Sabotaging? can you check Kim Seok-jin history? thank you alot — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shin hi (talk • contribs) 20:46, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

• We have beauty rankings now? I looked at Kim Seok-jin, but those sources are not good--then again, much of the sourcing in K-pop articles is terrible. The information in the Soberano article is pretty bad too. But let's ask Dr.K., who is not only a huge K-pop fan but also a classic beauty. Drmies (talk) 20:50, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

thank you so much(Shin hi (talk) 20:59, 22 January 2019 (UTC))

LOL, what did I do to deserve that? On the other hand, how can one argue with someone, a friend, who says something so nice about them? As far as beauty rankings in K-pop articles, I haven't been around in that area for some time but I have seen enough spam to last me a lifetime. Seeing this new parameter makes me worry that the avalanche of spam in that area may be reaching epidemic proportions and could possibly exceed the one-lifetime limit. Dr. K. 03:22, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Promotion COI

• ZyLAB Technologies (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

A piece of promotional, unsourced, self-sourced crud. I, uh, slimmed it down. However, I am battling with an obvious COI user who is probably a sock of another SPA editor of the article. I've reverted twice now and warned the user once, but that hasn't stopped them. The page has, of course, almost no watchers, so no one is ensuring that it meets any standards.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:29, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

• Where's Cléante when you need him? Drmies (talk) 16:47, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
• Bbb, what always gets my goat is this eternal clamor about oh we don't have enough diversity in the management of these companies blah blah blah. Look at this team--the ONLY thing they LITTERALLY have in common is that none of them button their shirts all the way to the top, but everything else just SCREAMS "we represent". I wish that people like Keilana and GorillaWarfare could grasp this. Drmies (talk) 16:58, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
  • They're your compatriots - talk to them! Meanwhile, I suggest you and I go to Paris immediately to fetch Cléante and maybe have some hot chocolate and pastries while we're there.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:02, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
    • You got it. Drmies (talk) 17:04, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
• Smartse, there may be a tidbit more in this version, like those PC Magazine and InfoWorld articles... Drmies (talk) 17:04, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes I did have a brief look at them, but not sure coverage in such specialist sources is enough to meet WP:CORP. I haven't looked at whether the products are notable though. SmartSE (talk) 17:25, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Reporting this user

Hey @ Drmies (talk) Just a report on this user. He/she has been vandalising for many days using dynamic IP range

• • 106.76.205.251 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
  • 106.76.242.17 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
  • 2402:8100:2846:4573:0:0:7553:E921 (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
  • 2402:8100:2848:6E10:0:0:75D6:A6DE (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
  • 2402:8100:2840:38B1:0:0:7622:D965 (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) Wiki KuthiVaiyans (talk) 19:16, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
• That is one irritating person. But who's our savior? DoRD, who else--almost a redundant note. Drmies (talk) 00:47, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Unfortunately, they've got access to a practically unlimited number of ranges, so unless someone can come up with something better, we're probably going to be playing Whac-A-Mole with them. —DoRD (talk)​ 03:02, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Edit warring

You're the one who has reverted twice in the last 24 hours and who only has one more to go before 3RR. I've reverted only once. You're the one who's starting an edit war. Bueller 007 (talk) 03:15, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.

@Bueller 007: Are you so sure about that? [2] [3]. Acroterion (talk) 03:20, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

What are those links supposed to be showing? That I made an identical reversion **more than two weeks ago** and that I haven't touched the article again until I re-reverted now? More than two weeks later? And that I have not reverted it again after this Drmies did his second reversion in the last couple of hours? That's not an edit war. At least not on my part. I suppose it is too much to ask people to actually read the 3RR. Bueller 007 (talk) 03:23, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

They disprove your "You're the one who has reverted twice in the last 24 hours and who only has one more to go before 3RR." Ronz made the other revert. I suggest a less aggressive approach to interactions with other users. Acroterion (talk) 03:25, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

My apologies. I responded to the person who posted the nonsensical "Edit War" template on my page assuming that it was the same person who had reverted the edit. Nonetheless, it goes without saying that my having made ONE REVERT in the last two weeks is NOT AN EDIT WAR. Bueller 007 (talk) 03:29, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Edit warring isn't so much dependent on reverts/time--it's an indication of an attitude, and it is contingent also on the quality of the edits and their explanation, and a Piers Morgan-penned blog and a company link just aren't very good sources. So this isn't about 3RR at all, and thank you for not reverting again. That's all. Drmies (talk) 05:14, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

User talk:Lord Nicola Cassidy

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 10:54, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

• Hmm OK, thanks. Drmies (talk) 15:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Dinner time

I mentioned you in an edit-summary here, fyi. ——SerialNumber54129 14:27, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

• OK--so we don't receive a ping for that. Ha, maybe you should sign your edit summary? NO DONT DO THAT Drmies (talk) 15:24, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Ah! Don't the pings work? I admit I'm not sure to trust them, hence my post here. Thanks!——SerialNumber54129 15:38, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

That article needs some help. The other editor seems to be of good faith/intentions. Drmies (talk) 15:43, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

I liked your "typically" by the way  :) ——SerialNumber54129 16:06, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Don't want to overgeneralize, you know. Hey, do you like romance and hagiography? I reviewed a translation of Robert Le Diable (by Samuel N. Rosenberg), which is awesome, and now I'm reading Rachel J. D. Smith, Excessive Saints, a brand-new book. Drmies (talk) 16:39, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

• I believe that notifications in edit summaries work, but they are subject to the same proviso as other "mentions": the edit summary edit must be signed. That means they don't work in edits to article space.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:31, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Whoa Bbb23--thanks for checking. Drmies (talk) 17:19, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Ignaxiouslow reverted contents

Ignaxiouslow has reverted contents removed previously in Singapore Institute of Technology again. You may want to look through the contents. Applepineapple (talk) 16:53, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

• See above. Bbb to the rescue. Drmies (talk) 17:20, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

You should check this essay

You've just needlessly threatened me with ban just because I've disagreed with you. You should check this essay: Wikipedia:Crying_"BLP!". You should also check Twitter of person you're trying to save from reaction to her sexual post. [redacted--WTF?] _{Please use {{Reply to}}} Vivil 🗪 17:55, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

• Well, it would have been a block, not a ban, and since it involved the BLP it wasn't needless. Plus, it seems you stopped edit warring, so that's good. If you can make claims about what other editors can and cannot do, citing our guidelines, then I should be able to expect you to know what "BLP" means. I mean, it would be odd for you to claim, to an administrator, that "You're not following Wikipedia guidelines. According to them your threats don't have basis" but not know Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, one of the most important policies we have. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 18:00, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
• Wait, Vivil: WTF did you just say, at the end of your message? If that was not a typo, don't repeat it. Drmies (talk) 18:01, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with this acronym but I'm familiar with the guideline.

I'm mostly familiar with raging reaction of administrators when someone dares to disagree with or question their action.

That wasn't a typo. That was vocabulary used by author of tweet that was mentioned. Now I check it's considered vulgar. Breasts should be neutral word. _{Please use {{Reply to}}} Vivil 🗪 18:08, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

You claim on your user page to have a native understanding of English. You obviously don't. I don't think you understand what "raging" means either--but you don't have to report back. Now, I'm going to scrub that BLP violation from the history of my talk page, and I hope that you will think about whether your sexist language is in any way related to the edits you made in that article. Again, no need to respond here. Drmies (talk) 18:12, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

That's a personal attack. You should stop attacking me and accusing me of sexist language. That's extremely against Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks. Considering definition [4] and your personal attacks and accusations my use of words was correct.

I'll stop responding once you stop abusing power by attacking other users. _{Please use {{Reply to}}} Vivil 🗪 18:24, 25 January 2019 (UTC)