Jump to content

User talk:Drmies/Archive 71

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...---...---...

[edit]

And you may want to read this. Or am I being too long? Hafspajen (talk) 03:17, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, everybody is giving up. Do you see that last comment? [1]. Do you see where that was inserted? And I wondered why on eart nobody cares nore for this nomination. Put it right in the middle of the starting info - so it looked like the whole thing was of. Bloody impudent. It makes absolutely no difference if lately the picture might been considered have a different painter. One might make a note later that it might be an other artist's work - or not. There are hundreds of great paintings like that, it doesn't matter. Hafspajen (talk) 07:11, 24 July 2014 (UTC) Disruptive editors sometimes attempt to evade disciplinary action by using several practices when disrupting articles:[reply]

  • Their edits occur over a long period of time; in this case, no single edit may be clearly disruptive, but the overall pattern is disruptive.
  • Their edits are largely confined to talk-pages, such disruption may not directly harm an article, but it often prevents other editors from reaching consensus on how to improve an article.
  • Their edits often avoid gross breaches of civility, by refraining from personal attacks, while still interfering with civil and collaborative editing meant to improve the article.
  • Their edits remain limited to a small number of pages that very few people watch.
  • Conversely, their edits may be distributed over a wide range of articles to make less probable that some user watches a sufficient number of affected articles.

Nonetheless, such disruptive editing violates site policy. And have you heard of Wikipedia:Disruptive users? One of their interesting features is: #Creating disturbances on featured article candidate pages, e.g. objecting just to object. ... Hafspajen (talk) 14:31, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hafspajen, even if this person is a supreme irritator, I can't take administrative action for all the reasons I've indicated, and since I don't know this area very well I can't assess the situation in the first place. But I do have a suggestion, and I think you should take it: start an WP:RFC/U. That is the first step, regardless of what road we're on, for a situation like this one. I'll be glad to help, but you have to start this, and I suggest you read the guidelines and then think carefully about what to write up. Drmies (talk) 23:00, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Aha, brilliant. Hafspajen (talk) 23:02, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The point about the school of Raphael image that Hafs nominated was that it has a pronounced yellow colour cast as a result of the processing it had received. That's inevitable when you make these kinds of edits in RGB space equalising 10% or more of the histogram. I simply opposed it, quite vigorously it is true but then the issue had arisen before. It was Hafs' fankly aggressive response that provoked the drama and in the course of researching the history of the painting (not my period) I ascertained its true provenance and of course I commented that, in an entirely neutral and non-challenging way (and I'm afraid the response was likewise extremely aggressive, the plainest of personal attacks by any standard). I also took the trouble to upload to Commons an annotated file on the painting Commons:File:Giulio Romano (school of Raphael) - Portrait of Doña Isabel de Requesens - Louvre 612 Joconde 000PE026978.jpg where I used a beautiful image by Hervé Lewandowski, the tinkering of another image by him of Manet's Olympia being the original source of all this drama.
And now we have this issue of Renoir's Bal du moulin de la Galette, where I pointed out (as a comment, not as an oppose) that the image nominated was in fact not the holding museum's image (as claimed I mean in the file description). When I nominated that as an Alt, a Google Gigaplex image if you please, following another long established editor's objection to the original that it lacked resolution, more drama culminating in a withdrawal of the nomination in what can only be described as a fit of screaming pique, ensued on the grounds, if you please, that the Google Gigaplex image's colours were inauthentic. And what is droll is that in this case too there seems a real possibility that the image nominated was in fact of an earlier version famously auctioned in 1990 for a record price at the time. I can't comment because I've never seen the painting, but I have ordered the relevant catalogue (I collect them anyway and this is something of a collector's piece) and I shall likewise upload an image of painting to Commons when I receive it if there's one suitable (though unfortunately these major efforts are generally illustrated with fold outs which can't really be scanned effectively).
What piques me about this is that following the original drama this editor love-bombed my Talk page, the only way I can describe it, in a way that ultimately made me uncomfortable. And then finally this, what seems to me a frank threat.
It worries me that if this drama exceeds its local boundaries, it really wouldn't be difficult to identify me. Not at all because I'm a celebrity or anything of the sort, but nevertheless if all this were seen by a number of former colleagues, one of which at least I know edits Wikipedia quite actively, then certainly I would be identified, and that would be a very considerable embarrassment indeed for me.
I would be glad therefore if you discouraged Hafs from this kind of activity. And in any case I'm awaiting the resolution of another matter not related to this or Wikipedia, and after some possibly concluding edits, I shall probably cease editing Wikipedia, or at least rarely contributing. Editing at Commons seems to be a gentlelady's pursuit, at Wikipedia my experience is not. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 23:13, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hafspajen wears his heart on his sleeve. I can't tell him to wear it anyplace else. As I've said before, I simply don't know enough about this entire process, so I can't decide, for instance, if nominating an alternate picture is acceptable or disruptive. The only thing I know is that I like Hafspajen and he's clearly disturbed by your behavior--whether he's right or wrong I'm not sure but I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, though I wish he didn't care so much.

    Now, I've known Hafspajen for a number of years, and I don't know you from Adam, so I'm not a very good candidate to tell him on your behalf what he should do. If he's the only one who's bothered by your comments in those FP discussions, then maybe he should reconsider, but if he's not, then perhaps a community discussion (which is what an RfC/U is--it's not some process that ends with a block or a ban, quite the opposite) is helpful. At the very least, I'd like to hear from some other people, privately or otherwise, whether his concerns have any validity to them or not: I have no interest in judging when I am not a judge and don't understand or know the evidence. And that's really all I have to say right now, to both of you I suppose.

    Oh, one last thing: your "identity" should not be of interest, at least not your real-life identity, and I trust that no one here will consider outing you or anyone else. Whether you have been here before, wearing a different coat, that may be of interest, but let no one start fishing around for your name and job title, and cause embarrassment. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 23:57, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Trying to be nice with somebody is not a crime. Yes, I tried to be nice, but I also told C.o.m.c. not to do this kind of things, but it went on and I couldn't stop it. If one wants to participate in the project - ANY project - first - one has to be respectful, show respect for others edits, leave place for all the editors participating, one or two lines of comment in a polite neutral way is QUITE enough. One has to make intelligent, calm, moderate comments, and not starting throwing around words like horrible and silly and such. This kind of comment is not a comment but crap, a five year old can say things like this. Also showing respect for other peoples edits, you edited MY edits, changed files, and so on. Everybody knows one should not to start editing others works, others nominations - if not asked. Also it is important not to overwhelm everything with loads of comments because it is scaring away the other editors who just see it as problems - and stop participating in the nomination. The goal is that everybody should be able to participate. And yes, the so called 'what seems to me a frank threat - using big words again - it was simply meant - you will lose respect and appreciation, if you go on like this. I am not interested in real life identity at all, who cares. But after all this not so constructive discussion I might be interested in that fact, as Drmies said: whether you have been here before, wearing a different coat, that may be of interest. Hafspajen (talk) 00:46, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)The kind of language you used in the Featured picture candidates nomination WAS NOT AS YOU SAY: an entirely neutral and non-challenging way , NO, it was like: horrible, a kind of art botox, just silly, inauthentic, and derisory, and you're wilfully not going to get the point , Chto xudshee sanskrtiskee akkcentee ya kagdee-libo slishal and the rest of similar expressions as: chocolate botox kitsch of trusty old DCoetzee's restoration and other personal attacs like he tries his hand at wit and subtlety, then he must expect me to respond in kind - should not be alowed to be used more in any nominations, not here, not anywhere. It is framed in with red: Please remember to be civil, ... to comment on the image, not the person. Which is why we have "All objections should be accompanied by a specific rationale. The above is not a specific rationale. Hafspajen (talk) 00:55, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Coat of Many Colours, may I request that you explain in language that is not veiled what exactly you mean in your comment just above re: people who wear their hearts on their sleeves... I allow this courtesy before I read it how I wish. Referring to what is tucked away upfront in their pants sounds alarmingly misguided in courteous talk page discussion. Please convince me otherwise. Thanks. Fylbecatulous talk 15:40, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, C.o.m c. what you say above is not true. You see a threat where is nothing of the kind, that's one. I came here after you edited MY NOMINATION so it looked like you were in charge and YOU had the responsability of dismissing it, NOT ME, you treated it like you had the right to insert this kind of text there. WHERE YOU PUT THAT TEXT - THAT is the NOMINATOR's part. Do you see that last comment? [2]. After all this you just put a big remark in the middle of the information about the artwork. That was when I had enought. And when you kept reverting my edits when I decided am going to witdraw it but you editwarring with me and won't let me do that. It is my nomination, I can witdraw it if I decide that. If I wan't to remove it it is not up to you to revert me. AND on top of everything you go and nominate the very same picture again, the one that I witdraw. Yes I think it is disturbing and disruptive and disrespectful - sorry. Hafspajen (talk) 01:07, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Do you see that last comment? [3]." Yes I did. You deleted an edit I made indicating the proper provenance of this painting. You were very aggressive in my estimation. I shan't continue here.Coat of Many Colours (talk) 01:18, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't deleted it, I moved it, down, as a last comment, where it belongs. WHERE YOU PUT THAT; THAT is the NOMINATOR's part. YOU HAVE NOTHING TO DO THERE. After that you got the ansver you try to make it sound like the way you did above, you say: I'm afraid the response was likewise extremely aggressive, the plainest of personal attacks by any standard. Really ? That came after all this happened FIRST:

  • After you changed the picture I nominated.
  • After you used the above language in the nomination, not a calm rationale but horrible, a kind of art botox, just silly, inauthentic, and derisory.
  • After you put a giant distracting big picture in the nomination that had nothing to do with it, bigger then the nominated picture. I remove it and you put that back, and refused to remove it, even after you were asked twice. It was an administrator had to remove it, because you won't do that.
  • After you were editwarring with me trying to force not to withdraw a nominantion 'I wrote above: Withdrawn nomination, with big letters - something you call here: can only be described as a fit of screaming pique. Oh, really? Reverting twice my witdrawal how can that be described??
  • After you were nominating MY nominated picture that just got withdrawn
  • And after I discovered that you started editing in an other nomination the very nominators text area (my nominations ) : YES, I did said: Don't you make comments in the MIDDLE OF THE nomination text, got that because I got enough.


And you are not coming here to say - sorry this the above was wrong - you come here with a preposterous idea that then finally this, what seems to me a frank threat. That remark you are reffering to was the following :I don't like what you do. You may win the war, but you may lose something else. That remark was not a threat. I meant exactly what I said - you will lose goodwill. It was this what I was citing, Communication 101: If You Try to Win the Battle, You Might Lose the War:[Do you ever have an argument, and end up feeling badly even if you “win?” Winning and being “right” does not ensure that things will end well. In fact, if your sense of victory is dependent on another person’s defeat, the victory might be hollow, indeed]. Is that a threat? I don't think so. A warning - yes, threat - no.

And the way you go on like this it shows very well what kind of new atmosphere we have at the nominations. I don't like the way the words are used, I don't like the uncivil comments. I don't like the way Crisco has been attacked, I don't like the way I have been treated. When I make some remark or criticism, I try not to interfere with the votings, at least, unless it is some real big mistake going on. There was one picture, I didn't liked Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Skull with cigarette by Vincent van Gogh, but I waited until it got its votes with my comments. You maybe don't bother much but you destroyed at least two nominations like this. Hafspajen (talk) 01:20, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You may not bothered much, but you were showing quite an attitude towards Crisco 1492‎ - one of the best editors on the project too. That did disturbed me - to start with. But I tried to be nice, anyway. Hafspajen (talk) 02:29, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Yes the title has been factored as you express it - because it was an other one just exactly the same that confused the bot. What's wrong with it? Is it a crime or an offense for real - or you just try to make it sound like it, like the remarks above? And yes the Skull with cigarette - it was promoted because I did not interfered with it - not before it had five votes, as much as needed to be promoted. If I was not waiting patiently with expressing my comments it would have gone down the drain, for sure, 100%. BUT YOU have succeded to destroy several nominations by opposing it vigurously - as you say yourself: I simply opposed it, quite vigorously it is true - well, you did, and not only that but all the rest above. Nobody has to belive me, it is all in the Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates project pages. Hafspajen (talk) 02:35, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And a last thing. The picture mentioned above did not had a pronounced yellow colour cast as a result of the processing it had received - it looks like that - just as yellow in the original. Hafspajen (talk) 03:45, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • You were on my Talk page rather a lot these past few weeks. I would come down in the morning to check my email and find another dozen messages from you. I trust you agree I responded courteously enough, and of course I was flattered. Now I see you are engaged in the process of reverting your kisses on that page and that's OK. But I've already told you I think you have overstayed your welcome there and I don't want to see any further interaction other than, what would be courteous, giving me a heads up about your complaints you make about me in various forums, this by no means being the only such. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 17:55, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I won't. But I have to tell you two things. 1) You said, you felt it was too much. 2) I did not reverted it as you say above, I changed it to a smiley. It was entirely because you said you were not confortable with it. And you said you won't reply. Hafspajen (talk) 17:59, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Additional question on behavioural problem

[edit]
Thank you for this edit. here - even if Adam remove it - and he was quite right about it. Hafspajen (talk) 20:41, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Also Drmies, please remove those pictures, with the unpolite "Hafs' trusty old DC" comment on it. If anyone is interested in the discussion, there is a much more complete version here - Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Portrait de Jeanne d'Aragon, by Raffaello Sanzio, from C2RMF retouched.jpg. Also it would be appropiate to remove them from here: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:The Scream Pastel.jpg - it has nothing to do with the Munch Scream. Hafspajen (talk) 20:48, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Portrait de Jeanne d'Aragon, by Raffaello Sanzio, from C2RMF retouched.jpg.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Fascist government of Ukrain finally dismantled: Jatsenjoek resigned

[edit]

For your information, and since you made a post on my 'talk' page about my usage of the phrase "fascist Kiev government", let me share you some good news. The fascist government of Jatsenjoek finally resigned! Enough of the bloodshed and financial crisis and attacks on the standard of living of the people of the Ukrain! They will elect a new government in october this year. It will be released now soon enough what hands the Ukrain fascists had in this airplane crash (they have not released their data - e.g. radio communication with the airplane - about the crash, all they come with is false allegations without proof), which killed more then 280 people, of which 193 of the Netherlands. We know they have blood on their hands! Robheus (talk) 19:42, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Had to come by and say hi simply after seeing that section title on my watchlist. Everybody's a nazi in Ukraine, that's been my conclusion from twitter.--Milowent • hasspoken 20:31, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, tis an attention getter. "Twitter"--I know what it is, I just don't believe it has an independent existence outside of TV programs reporting on what someone Twittered. Drmies (talk) 22:51, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, well, you know--Yngvadottir took the bull by the horns. Thank you Yngvadottir. Drmies (talk) 22:55, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AN

[edit]

Hi,

I posted an appeal of topic ban you issued to me at AN (diff). All the best.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:00, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Even though you will be notified because i highlighted your username...

[edit]

...please read and/or participate in here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dennis_Brown#PANHEAD2014_block). Vaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaasco!

Tube Steak

[edit]

Was looking at some ZZ Top and curious as to some redirect (steak and snake) and found that we are redirecting Tube Steak -> hot dog. Now, I'm pretty sure that if a burly man walks up and says he wants to give you a tube steak, he isn't going to hand you a Nathan's Hot Dog. Not sure if this needs an RFC, but topics of this nature are your specialty, so I wanted to throw it on your lap to fix. I'm busy, about to make some crab cakes, broiled shrimp over saffron rice and garlic cheese bread. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 20:14, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Now my planned dinner for tonight of roast chicken with white rice sounds really boring.--Mark Miller (talk) 22:01, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Guess that's gonna be for tomorrow night. A bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken just came through the front door.--Mark Miller (talk) 22:20, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tube steak is also a slang word for "hot dog" though I don't think its in much current use for that meaning anymore. It is attested on p. 1013 of The Routledge Dictionary of Modern American Slang and Unconventional English (2008 ed.), which also lists "penis" as a second meaning.[4]. However, this confusion can make old articles like these[5][6] amusing.--Milowent • hasspoken 21:08, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not clicking on that link! And I hereby disclaim being User:Tubesteak. My earliest edits were indeed in 2007, but that was when I feared editing. I think redirecting it to hot dog is fine, it was a legitimate use in the 1960s-80s at least. And in the internet age, every word will eventually also be a sexual euphemism, so we can't just redirect 4.5 million articles to penis and such. BTW, I just googled images of Stonner kebab (with my eyes half-shaded just in case), but boy that looks tasty.--Milowent • hasspoken 21:26, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is why I drop stuff like this here, for people may giggle, but they still see the serious question behind it. I'm still not sure where it should redirect, but a discussion here might eventually come up with a good argument. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 21:45, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
👍 Like--Mark Miller (talk) 21:58, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmmm...the most common use of "tube steak" is indeed for a hotdog. I used to be involved in some pretty cheap pRon, and "tube steak" was never ever in the dialogue - although I've heard it occasionally used in a puerile manner the panda ₯’ 22:54, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ok, I will ask: wtf do you mean by "I used to be involved in some pretty cheap pRon"? Are you really Ron Jeremy? You can't just say that without providing enough details so that we can judge you. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 00:18, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm better-looking and darker-skinned than the porcupine, but you're pointing in the right direction. Hey, I grew up in a small, poor country ... education isn't cheap the panda ₯’ 00:26, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See, now I'm just jealous. I never had the muscular body for that. But then, neither did Jeremy. Anyway, getting back to the point, I've never heard a hot dog being called tube steak. I accept it was, and we have a couple of rather hilarious citations above proving it was, that is just new to me. I didn't hear it much regardless, but when I did only as a dick joke. For instance, in Cheech and Chong's Next Movie, I'm wanting to say it was Red (Cheech as his own cousin) that said "I got you a tube steak smothered in underwear", which spawned a small smutculture around that phrase, which I tried to link but it appears both are blacklisted. Probably a good thing. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 00:43, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, Cheech and Chong also did "you ordered a pepperoni pizza? Well here's your pizza, *unzip* and here's your pepperoni!" (which is sadly very similar to a line I once performed). They did a lot of turn-food-into-drug-or-sex jokes the panda ₯’ 10:05, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Ain't that a peach" is another example from Next Movie. Drmies needs to start Food related innuendo in film with all this gold. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 12:50, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I heard pizza? Good news from Italy and Ukraine, for a change, I call it peace music, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:28, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dennis, write it yourself. It's in the same realm of culture and importance as that muscle car of yours. Gerda, I have yet to hear good news from the Ukraine: I read the list of victims, with brief bios, in de Volkskrant--and I was selfish enough to feel relief that I knew no one on that list. Drmies (talk) 14:46, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, Drmies. I know, however, victims of a war here, and appreciate the most minimal signs of peace. The heart-warming hook was not taken but appears on my user page, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:16, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Gerda is entirely too kind to me. And thanks for the talk page space Drmies. I was serious about whether or not those redirects were proper, and now I know. I won't be using that slang term to describe my Ball Park dawgs, however. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 00:56, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cheech and Chong have nothing on the finest lines from any movie, anywhere: Naked Gun
Frank: [looking up woman's skirt] "Nice beaver"
Jane: [climbing down ladder] "Thanks, I just had it stuffed" [hands man stuffed beaver]
Now that's some funny shit the panda ₯’ 20:50, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

18th-century Dutch Patriot -red link

[edit]

The Keeshond was named after the 18th-century Dutch Patriot, Cornelis (Kees) de Gyselaer (spelled 'Gijzelaar' in Modern Dutch), leader of the rebellion against the House of Orange. The dog became the rebels' symbol; and, when the House of Orange returned to power, this breed almost disappeared. The word 'keeshond' is a compound word: 'Kees' is a nickname for Cornelius (de Gyselaer), and 'hond' is the Dutch word for dog.

Nothing on the patriot? Hafspajen (talk) 20:24, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) nl:Cornelis de Gijselaar. Not much, but there are two sources. And so much for modern spelling. (awwwww, doggie!) Yngvadottir (talk) 20:34, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You are so smart, Yngvadottir. Correct link. Hafspajen (talk) 20:38, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.petwave.com/Dogs/Breeds/Keeshond/Overview.aspx - dog ref. Hafspajen (talk) 22:06, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What categories? Citrus fruits? (you can tell he's an opponent of Oranges, as he is sucking a Lemon) Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 06:55, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of response?

[edit]

Hi, Drmies! I just saw your comment about me on Bgwhite's talk page, and I have to admit I'm puzzled and confused... What lack of response are you talking about? Was I supposed to respond to someone and I failed to do so? I saw your comment on my talk page, I realized where I have failed and, as you saw, I took no further action on your edits at Intruders (TV series). Did I have to do anything more than that? You didn't mention anything. Please, assist me on this, 'cause I'm really at a loss here. Respectfully, CostaDax (talk) 13:53, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for your note here, CostaDax: all I was looking for was a kind of "OK", but all I saw was that you deleted the message. In wikispeak that means "I read it", of course, but I thought it was a somewhat serious matter that warranted a comment. (I see now that that's how you "archive" your talk page...?) Anyway, I understand now that you understand, and that's all I'm looking for (Bgwhite, disregard my comment). Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:19, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your response. I take for granted that you are more experienced than me, and I'm always willing to listen to more experienced editors. And just so I can explain a little more why I included that passage on Intruders (TV series):
  • the passage came from a press release from BBC America which can be found here: [7]
  • I read on Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright that "while press releases are by nature intended to be reproduced widely, there is no inherent permission to alter them or create derivative works based on them, or to use them for commercial purposes". That's the reason why I did not alter it.
  • the reason I did write it in the first place, was because it has been so widely reproduced (even released as such by BBC America on facebook: [8]), that I assumed that it is considered part of the public domain; according to Wikipedia:Public domain, the copyrights do no longer hold for works "that were released into the public domain by the copyright holder".
Maybe I misunderstood the instructions and maybe I made the wrong assumptions. But I did not intend to violate any principles and guidelines. I just did what I thought was compliant with Wikipedia's policy.
I'm glad that you contacted me, I just couldn't realize why you did what I thought was an attempt by you to chastize me. In any case, I know now that you did not have any intention to do so, and I'm glad. I hope this offers a bit more insight on my actions (and general philosophy), and that it clears the air. Take care! CostaDax (talk) 14:56, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ha, yes--you may not alter them, etc. and are to be treated like other copyrighted content, "and may not be freely reproduced". That they print it all over the place does not mean it's released into the public domain, though; if it is released as such, it's usually accompanied by a notice of some sort. Well, this is my understanding, anyway: if I'm wrong one of the many helpful talk page stalkers will set me straight quickly, I suspect. Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 15:08, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • (standard disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.) You're more or less right, Drmies. This is a thing that many many people don't realize, but "public domain" is a very specific term in copyright jargon, and it does not just mean "the domain of things that are available to the public". One can release things to the public while retaining copyright all the time--which is why music/movie/etc. piracy is illegal, even though the works in question are being distributed widely; the copyright holders own and maintain their copyrights over the work even as they're distributing it. "Releasing something into the public domain" means that one relinquishes all rights to it permanently, and it takes more than simply making something available to the public to do that. One has to explicitly state that they're releasing all their rights to a work; disseminating one's work widely isn't the same thing. It's simply just a case of unfortunate linguistic coincidence that causes the confusion, I think. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:23, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think I made a mistake like that early in my career, thinking that since something (an image, or a photograph, can't remember) was on the internet, it was OK to use. It wasn't. Funny, though: we seem to be the only ones on the entire internet to take this seriously. Drmies (talk) 22:37, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Forezine Deletion

[edit]

You deleted such informative article it is a part of history it was the first digital anime magazine ever built, plus its free and no business occurs. Without the information from Wikipedia everybody could just claim that they are the first to launch a free digital anime magazine. Please participate in regaining the article its serious. Don't accuse an article to be an advertisement if its free and a non-business society do you even read the sources? You also deleted it without any warnings, please state your side. --Carlo ramos08 (talk) 17:44, 26 July 2014 (UTC)-- User: carlo ramos08 12:39, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • It was a Facebook page; calling it a magazine is a bit of an exaggeration. You have no proof, by the way, that this was the first digital anime magazine, but more importantly, the article met all the qualifications for speedy deletion (see WP:A7); administrator Randykitty deleted Forezine (Anime Magazine) as advertising, a decision I agree with since it is written as a promotional piece, not a neutral, well-verified encyclopedic article (there were no sources). That the advertised product is free is irrelevant. Now, I didn't "warn" you because I didn't nominate it for speedy deletion; that was Largoplazo, whose notification is on your talk page, surrounded by similar notifications. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 18:30, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request advice

[edit]

Hi, Drmies. I have a question regarding Dan56. As you know, we clashed at a couple of articles last month, and I subsequently took some time off and tried to edit pages that he doesn't. The problem is, no matter how little I interact with him, every time we cross paths he accuses me of following him, most recently here. I feel that he is inappropriately crying wolfhound every time I edit a page that he edits. What should I do, because as much as I try to avoid him, I am getting really frustrated by his repeated accusation that I "follow him" for some reason. I think that his continued actions in this regard constitute personal attacks that harm my reputation. What should I do? I also welcome input from Malik Shabazz. Harmelodix (talk) 18:49, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Malik, I find this whole thing odd. Why would someone go around and canvass (OK, "invite") a hundred people for an FAC and and RfC? Some clicking around is insightful. The charge of canvassing was not supported by two "outsiders" (Maunus and Simon Burchell), the latter of which says "it's not a problem if an FAC has stagnated". But while it may be true that some were sent while there was little activity at the FAC, there were others that were sent out on the 28th, right after Froglich's comments. See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Of Human Feelings/archive5. (BTW, if Dan56 is looking at this, that was a lousy, lousy way to handle an oppose. Not just lousy in the sense of bad tactics--it's not an FA--but also just shitty, in that you seem to accuse a valid oppose of judging on the base of personal blah blah, and I don't see that there: awful wikilawyering.)

    I find this habit of sending out these invitations to be odd and bothersome. A note on the project page, that should be enough. And look at who those invites went to--who on earth would send a note about an FA review to Werieth (hey, Betacommand, how you doing?), who doesn't know FA from FU and may never have made a content edit in their life under any of their accounts? Strange. Drmies (talk) 21:19, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Before requesting community comment, at least two editors must have contacted the user on their talk page, or the talk pages involved in the dispute, and tried but failed to resolve the problem. Any RfC not accompanied by evidence showing that two users tried and failed to resolve the same dispute may be deleted after 48 hours as "uncertified". The evidence, preferably in the form of diffs, should not simply show the dispute itself, but should show attempts to find a resolution or compromise. The users certifying the dispute must be the same users who were involved in the attempt to resolve it."
Can I assume that either or both of you guys are willing to certify? Are the contacts that you two made with Dan56 at his talk page and at article talk pages sufficient to satisfy the minimum requirements? Please advise. Harmelodix (talk) 17:47, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that's tricky. Unlike Malik (I think) I'm somewhat involved in the content of some of those articles, so I suppose I should check my admin bit at the door if those provide prime evidence--but I wasn't going to close this RfC/U anyway. Then again, participating in an RfC about Dan will probably mean I can't take any administrative action--not that I foresee having or wanting to do that. Anyways, yes, I will probably be willing and able to certify, though I will not likely go in great detail, and I'd love to have Malik's input as well. I think that those discussions on that one Black Sabbath page are probably enough to legitimize an RfC/U. The real question is whether it will serve much of a purpose. Dan56 seems a bit intransigent to me, and the end result of an RfC/U is typically a "word to the wise"--but then, it's frequently the first step, if more steps are ever necessary. Drop me a line when you're working on it. I will have to look at some diffs again. Tomorrow is not a good day for, but I'll have 48 hours. Make sure you define quite clearly a. what the problems are, accompanied by our alphabet soup (WP:EW, WP:NLT, WP:OWN, whatever) and b. what you think the wished-for conclusion of this RfC/U should be. Good luck. Drmies (talk) 18:56, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Drmies. I too will be busy at work today and most of tomorrow, but I should have something for you to look at by Wednesday. Harmelodix (talk) 17:22, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I started a draft here. Please feel free to add or alter anything as you see fit. Harmelodix (talk) 18:55, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I hope that you are willing to give me some notes on the RfC/U; I don't want to go through all this effort if I'm not doing it right. I don't have the slightest idea what people expect, so I hope you will make some suggestions and even better some contributions. Harmelodix (talk) 00:10, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! What do you think of the draft so far? Also, I stumbled upon something while collecting diffs, and I wonder what you make of it. You know of course that Dan56 reverted me numerous times at Black Sabbath (album), but strangely, an account was created in the midst of our dispute, User:Twain23, and they immediately set about adding loads of unsourced material to a wide range of Sabbath albums, including 28 edits to Black Sabbath (album). The thing is, as far as I can tell, Dan56 never once reverted this account. This seems odd to me; what do you think? Harmelodix (talk) 21:38, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I saw that account and the edits. Look, your RfC/U is already very ambitious; better to make the current accusations stick as best you can. A sock accusation--well, let's not go there, really. I will have a look at it (didn't have the time to do it earlier); it's an interesting little edit war. Drmies (talk) 22:15, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, I'll follow your advice and drop that shit. I hope you can take a look at the RfC/U and please tell me what's too ambitious. I don't know how to frickin' do this right, man, and I get the feeling that few people do because they either avoid them at all costs or never frickin' do one again! Can you please tell me if and when you think it's ready to go live? Harmelodix (talk) 23:06, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do you think the draft is ready to go live? If not, can you please make a few suggestions to help tighten it up? Harmelodix (talk) 19:14, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning an editor you mentor

[edit]

Regarding the editor you mentor who has taken such an aversion to me, I wonder whether it would be worth mentioning to him that sometimes when you have an insufficient command of a language (clearly English is a second language for this editor) misunderstandings can arise. The edit in full to which he took such violent exception is as follows:

  • Oppose - No way. I don't have enough computer memory to process these enormous images, but I did manage to get the retouching editor's last effort at FPC into Nikon X2 long enough to see that basically what's he's doing is "equalizing" the histogram (essentially pushing the "auto-level" button). That may be appropriate for a digital image, but it won't do for an art image. These images have simply aged, and they darken for a variety of complex reasons. Only expert restoration can bring them back to an approximation of their original appearance. This kind of processing is just silly, inauthentic, and derisory. The original still beautiful: " ... thy eternal summer shall not fade / Nor lose possession of that fair thou ow'st": but this is just horrible, a kind of art botox. Not on my account, sorry. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 05:18, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's quite forthright of course, but it's not an 'attack' and it didn't merit his vehement response. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 22:43, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

erm ... what's that about W above by the way :}? Coat of Many Colours (talk) 22:46, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


I have to seriously ask you stop editing this nomination, stop posting more pictures here ( I removed some new ones added here again) and stop adding comments like this image sucks and now I am asking for administrators intervention agains Wikipedia:Harassment on this nomination, Drmies.
And also ask for stop telling Fylbecatulous not to vote here, above in the nomination Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:The Scream Pastel.jpg. I care because it is my nomination, because it is a beautiful picture, it has character, grace and it is lovely. If it is attributed to several painters - this kind of doubt happens in the world of art history. Why do you C.o.m.c. care som much, that is on the other hand a mystery, that nobody seems to want to deal with. Hafspajen (talk) 22:55, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And what a shame that nobody dares to raise their voices to tell you that you are a clearly Wikipedia:Disruptive editor, that nobody say stop - while you are sprinkeling the whole Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates with agressive remarks and behaving absolutely disruptively and no matter how many times you are told to stop you just go on like this and will NEVER stop, whatever happens. It is YOU, C.o.m.c. the person that you try to make poor Fylbecatulous into telling him: In this case we have a newbie wrong about everything and apparently unwilling to cooperate. It would likewise be kind, tolerant and generous of him simply to admit his mistakes, embarrassing and possibly unpleasant though that might be, and move on. That's you, C.o.m.c., not him.

'You started editing Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates for a month ago and succeded to turn it upside down completely. You can always pick up one or two webbsites here and there aboutsome ongoing nomination or one certain painting but you don't have the training and ability to judge art or pictures. You are filling that project with a lot of weird nominations, and both your nominations and your comments show that you don't understand art, art history, have no deep understanding of most things that this project is about. Hafspajen (talk) 00:41, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And I sincerely belive that you should be banned from editing Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Hafspajen (talk) 00:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Coat, I don't know who's being pointed at as the "retouching editor". Maybe not a personal attack, but not difficult to see how someone could take it that way. Drmies (talk) 01:28, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Luckily I don't have to get involved into looking through everything that's gone on in detail. In fact some of the passionate writing above makes me less than 100% sure even as to who is being alleged to have said which part. But it's worth noting a significant difference in emphasis between the phrase "This kind of processing is just silly, inauthentic, and derisory" (pretty much the strongest phrase from the first paragraph), and "you don't have the training and ability to judge art or pictures ... you don't understand art, art history, have no deep understanding of most things that this project is about" (the key phrases from the last paragraph). I suggest to the participants (or some of them) that thinking over that difference may be useful in finding ways to de-escalate this dispute. (If that is the aim...) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 04:08, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, the retouching editor would be DCoetzee I suppose (an editor I admire and god knows I have spent significant time doing the same sort of thing he accomplished by bots - my position on copyright is a practical and realistic one, but off-topic here), but that's not quite what I meant. The point about DC's edits (I mean his 'retouched' edits) is that they serve a limited function as thumbnails. The fact is that these gigapixel images often simply don't thumbnail well. Nor even necessarily display well within the resolution of ordinary screen monitors. Why should they? I agree absolutely with JohnBod about the limited applicability of these images. But to take an image that has been digitally processed so severely and use it as Wikipedia's "best" strikes me as perverse in the extreme when a casual glance at it is sufficient to show it has suffered an egregious colour cast as a result.
As for our editor's latest intervention (if I call it "hysterical" I can be certain that another unpleasant posting will ensue), I think Demiurge is quite right. I shall just try and distance myself from him. I shall be sorry if I'm not able to contribute at that forum, but if it really is just a shoe-in service for a matey clique of friends, then I'm sure I'm best out. Happy to leave him to you to cherish all to yourself :). I notice by the way that he appears to have put me down for a Welsh Muslim - that will indeed please my ex-boss if he happens to alight upon it ... I await the blast any moment, he will go absolutely critical in several higher dimensions and beyond, and I really *will* have to close my account then. Oh well. Just a hobby. Thank god for booze.
Thank you for your time. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 05:45, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And all that stuff that about ChildOfMidnight explains the weird allusions to 2009 he suddenly introduced into my Talk page. I spent most of 2009 in and out of hospital being replumbed and rewired and god knows what else - socking Wikipedia wouldn't have been a priority. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 06:19, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I did manage to get the retouching editor's last effort at FPC into Nikon X2 long enough to see that basically what's he's doing is "equalizing" the histogram (essentially pushing the "auto-level" button). You appear here to be confusing two separate processing functions (and somehow using a lens or something to carry them out). You're making all this stuff up, aren't you? Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:27, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well I'm not going to start another long series of responses. I do a bit of photography at entry level. I have Nikon Capture X2 as imaging process software. The most basic edit you can make there is to equalise the histogram, i.e. to map the lightest pixel to pure white and the darkest pixel to pure black, linearly interpolating the tones in between. You can accomplish this with sliders on the histogram or by pushing AutoLevel. It's usually quite a pleasing edit since it naturally gives a full range of tones, but its defect of course is that in RGB space it necessarily introduces colour imbalances. Now I don't have enough memory on my computer to input the very large files involved,but by dint of waiting long enough I was able finally, after several crashes, to get the source file DC was editing into the program and again, by waiting, able to perform the AutoLevel edit and confirm that basically that was what had been done (the image lacked the 10% lightest tones) and that that was the source of the yellow colour cast. DC himself has commented that he used the Curves function in Photoshop. I assume that's the same thing. I hope that satisfies your concerns about my integrity.
This is the last from me here. My intention was merely to make a constructive suggest to Drmies about this editor. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 07:50, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's a weird effect- use of levels in that manner produces gaps in the histogram, but doesn't tend to introduce colour casts. The yellow cast could be produced in curves by ramping up the R and G curves individually; if curves was used to increase the contrast, more than likely the RGB curve was put into an S shape. Introduction of casts could be avoided by using an adjustment layer in luminance blend. I did look at the two files cursorily and my impression was that (saving what you described as the "piss colour") the yellow one was superior in detail. I used to whop out the casts by picking, making a new layer, filling with foreground and inverting, then increase the transparency. In this case, a yellow layer inverts to blue, drop the opacity down to about 10%. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:07, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The original Commons:File:Portrait de Jeanne d'Aragon, by Raffaello Sanzio, from C2RMF.jpg has a cast as well I notice. The nicest image is, or so at least I think, the museum image I uploaded to my file upload Commons:File:Giulio Romano (school of Raphael) - Portrait of Doña Isabel de Requesens - Louvre 612 Joconde 000PE026978.jpg by a very noted art photographer and which I think you will agree is absolutely stunning. I mean truly beautiful as all his images are. Unfortunately it's not high resolution so can't be offered as a Featured image. When I put the two images side by side in a multiple I'm afraid our editor just deletes it. Don't misunderstand me about digital processing. While not really a very keen photographer, I do know that it's always been the case that there's no "correct" print for a photograph, and that is truer than ever in today's digital age. But that is not so for a painting, and beyond that I don't want to spend the time. I don't mean to be in any way off hand, but I've reached saturation point with this drama. I can't understand how an editor who professes to love this painting can champion such a piss (yes indeed, literally) poor image of it, but I can see right now it's going to be shoed in for Featured by (so it seems) a bunch of Welsh jihadists waiting in the wings, and there's nothing I can do about it. Thank you for your time. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 08:37, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well yes, of course. In the end that's what one does, isn't it? Concerning the Renoir, I got the 1990 Sotheby's sale catalogue yesterday. That image is indeed the smaller version; they're practically indistinguishable, historians uncertain which was the first. I'll upload and write up if I have time before I go. I fessed up to my ex by the way (had to). He was very touching. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 05:09, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Munich001

[edit]

User:Munich001 has added unsourced material to Bastian Schweinsteiger's article which was subsequently reverted here. Not sure if you want to deal with him. Kingjeff (talk) 05:35, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Archived??

[edit]

Why did you removed this materials from someone else's talk page?? 101.221.128.62 (talk) 09:55, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What did you mean by Who's asking? Are you suspecting me a sock?? No no I'm not a sock friend. I'm just a wandering IP moving here and there, reading comments by experienced editors. I have a habit of checking history to see if the page has been vandalised or not. While doing that I came across to that IPs talk page. When I checked the history, I'm surprised to see that an admin removed most of the stuffs with an edit summary "archived". Why did you do that on someone else's talk page?? 49.136.27.35 (talk) 19:57, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm asking who's asking so I can guesstimate how much I will say. The IP is used by a friend of mine who announced his retirement. That's all. Drmies (talk) 19:22, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war

[edit]

Editor Panhead2014 returned to make the same edits before being blocked by edit war. See:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Panhead2014 Gringoladomenega (talk) 27 July 2014 (UTC)

  • Maybe so, but I don't understand this edit. I mean, there's a reference (that you removed) which clearly has him play 15 years in the Spanish league (and score eight, not seven goals). You removed an archived link, some information from templates... Drmies (talk) 15:13, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • That link--it's always better to have something as a reference than as an external link. Now, edit warring, I don't know: their last three edits seem fine to me, and they are explained. Whether they're really reverts, well, probably they are in the broad sense of the term, but they improve the article. Sorry, but your English can do with some maintenance sometimes. I'm about to look into the ANI report. Drmies (talk) 15:16, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Randykitty has kindly done the honors. I'm just baffled at the complete lack of consideration shown by that editor: when you're in a hole, stop digging, and if someone does not want to block you, don't beg them to. Now, Gringo, you should be wary of committing the same mistake again (edit warring); however, as Panhead pointed out in the ANI thread that boomeranged so quickly, I am an "involved" editor and so cannot take action against you, in the same way that I did not take action against them--I'm sure he appreciates that. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 18:24, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

YGM

[edit]

Not good having to teach in the summer. I used to have to do this when I taught at the University of Birmingham. Dougweller (talk) 16:30, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Frau Antje

[edit]

werde ich demnächst unter Händen nehmen ... :-) --Randykitty (talk) 20:16, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Katowice Film School

[edit]

This article was written before the web page which is suspicious to be copied. English description at http://www.writv.us.edu.pl/strona/english was based on wikipedia article! I didn't change it, I've just only redirect it to the correct name of the faculty. Krzyztopor (talk) 02:31, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Probably you are right, I am sorry. Isn't better to leave only basic informations from this article? Krzyztopor (talk) 02:44, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, here's the thing--it's only rarely that individual departments are notable by our standards. It's possible that a valid addition can be made to University of Silesia in Katowice, which is not a great article, but only if reliable sources prove, one way or another, that the department is worth mentioning. What you need to beware of is that such articles frequently turn into directories, and those are typically removed. So think of notable people, important projects that have been written up in magazines or the paper, etc. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 02:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think this faculty is worth mentioning, even in short article, because of it's rare specialization. There are not so many filmschools in Europe and each one is quite known. This school produce short films and documentary which are presented at the most important film festivals, like San Sebastian FF, Palm Springs, etc. That's why I think it's untypical faculty. It's also untypical for any university to produce films. Katowice Film School at FB Krzyztopor (talk) 03:20, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Could you undelete article and delete those paragraph which are beaking rules please? I will add reliable sources to provide my argument. It doesn't have to be deleted from cover to cover. Krzyztopor (talk) 12:24, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies admin help line

[edit]

Suzanne Marie Olsson is a page up for deletion at AfD. Editor now wants it deleted. Why they want it deleted depends on what talk page the editor has left a message at. Suzanne Olsson, same person, was deleted at AfD in 2008. After finding out about the 2008 article, reading it and other talk page messages, my instinct says to delete, but salt. But, I'm not sure. Bgwhite (talk) 06:14, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's a different article, as I'm sure you saw, so G4 certainly doesn't apply. That user changed their mind very quickly, didn't they. Why not just let the AfD run its course? The editor suggests BLP concerns, but I don't see that there is a clear and present BLP violation happening. Drmies (talk) 15:00, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Same person and about 75% the same article. The latest keeps getting additions and deletions by the creating editor, so they share a majority of the same content depending on what version is read. Thanks, I'll let it run its course. Bgwhite (talk) 20:27, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for calling the Drmies admin help line, Neutralhomer speaking, how may I help you? :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 15:12, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

YGM

[edit]

…take two aspirin immediately. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:07, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to find a sexy asprin costume for the "take two and call me in the morning (to tell me about it) joke, but this was the best I could find [9] Rule 34 has failed me!!!!19:39, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
I didn't even bother to read the page first, granted that it is about sex, with a famous-ish and highly parody-able quote, I am very suprised about the Rule 34 violation. I may have to report this to Reddit! Gaijin42 (talk) 19:47, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ERR you lost me??

[edit]

Did I say something wrong? I thought it was actually thoughtful advice. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 19:35, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, the "walk away" part probably was if it was intended generally, though I think that "Peoples edits are discussed regularly here" sounds like you think it's perfectly alright what Scal did, the invitation to the coterie, and I strongly disagree with that. The law probably does not forbid it, but it's a very unfriendly thing to do, very uncollaborative. I haven't been keeping up with the latest installment of their drama, but these talk page/archive edits by Scal--I would never do something like that to the talk page of someone I disagree with so strongly, unless it was a certified administrative action. It's unwise and provocative. So in this case, I side with LB, who finds it a kind of stalking, and to tell her to walk away from that, well, that's not fair. Scal needs to walk away from LB's edits and pages, in my opinion. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 19:39, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[[10]] was a message to them both, I understand what you mean about it being unfriendly and I haven't read through that entire thread to see if it was entirely offbase but the failure of both to drop the stick and multiple ANI filings lead to blocks and most times not blocks based on accuracy but blocks to just stop the madness. Sometimes they need a reminder hey go take a break come back, my last comments were aimed at LB because they had replied back and was continuing the dispute more, Scal at that point had basically stated hey the break sounds like a good deal [[11]] but the overall message was take a break, too much drama. I pointed out my own sanctions because to this day I think that the Arbcom findings were based on precisely what I mentioned above. On that note I just ran across this on AN so was researching and commenting but I'm not invested. Didn't mean to be misunderstood. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 19:48, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a brand new one [[12]] Hell in a Bucket (talk) 19:54, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please reopen

[edit]
I'm glad everyone got to vent some in this free speech zone. I hope we can go back to work, and that we can work together. Some things were said unwisely, perhaps, but you are free to think that it was the other person who is responsible for the unwisely-said things. As is proper, Dennis "sexist pig" Brown has the last word--pity that the last word is "resentment", but I will accept this as a meaningless coincidence, though I'll remind the reader that one should never go to bed without resolving the fight, and never leave the house without kissing the dog/spouse/children: you never know. I promise to do better tomorrow. But Dennis, I disagree with your conclusion, "All this discussion has only served to divide the community and build resentment": it's better to have it out here, somewhat directly, than on the drama boards, indirectly. I feel as if we've made some progress, though I can't exactly detail it. Thank you all. Drmies (talk) 15:04, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Please reconsider and reopen my request. My concerns are real, and they are NOT being properly addressed. Lightbreather (talk) 20:19, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I might add, today, he joined the Gender Gap project. WTF! Do you think he would have done that if I hadn't asked about a civility board and that whole, simple request devolved into a discussion about what "c*nt" means in different countries? Please. As a mature woman, I know what harassment is, and this behavior is harassment. Lightbreather (talk) 20:27, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How do you know he joined the GenderGap, also can you explain the significance as I am unfamiliar with what it is? Hell in a Bucket (talk) 20:36, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Because I only joined it a few days ago myself. Lightbreather (talk) 20:38, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I joined it [13] by invitation from another editor.[14] Scal joined it today,[15] less than 48 hours after I joined. Lightbreather (talk) 20:42, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Drmies, only six days ago, Scalhotrod speculated that I'm going to edit as an IP or create a second account.[16] Callanecc warned him.[17] During the civility board discussion, another editor called me a c*nt [18] (others disagree that it was personal), and Scal called the comment that included that gem, "Brilliant!"[19] One of the guys in that discussion who insisted that I acknowledge that c*nt is a friendly greeting among men in Australia, started a discussion on my page headed "Poor manners."[20] I humored him. When it started to circle back in on itself, I asked him to leave me alone. He and others commented further. I deleted what was added after I asked to be left alone.[21] In swoops Scal to revert my deletion [22] and to tattle on me.[23] The same guy who started the poor-manners discussion? Scal goes to his talk page, gives him at atta boy, and once again starts gossiping about bad old LB.[24]

You have to understand that regardless of what WP policy says or how its interpreted and/or enforced, LB believes that anything said to her, about her, or simply perceived in reference to her that she does not like, IS a personal attack in her mind. Its how her mind works and no one will change it unless she wants to. She won't listen to (or be convinced by) any reason or logic that diverts her from her particular goal or objective when editing an article regardless of how sound or commonsense it is. Once I realized this, I gave up and just tried to keep doing what I always do, expand and cleanup articles and try to maintain article neutrality where ever it makes sense. She didn't like that on one article and took me to Arbitration Enforcement which resulted in both of us being Topic Banned for 6 months. Personally I consider it a very small price to pay now that others are becoming aware of her tactics and attitudes. (Scalhotrod)

Then, as a cherry on top, he joins the Gender Gap.[25]

Please Drmies, HiaB. Please re-open that request. This kind of behavior persists despite the assertion by many that the way it's currently handled now works just fine. Bullshit. Civility is a problem here. It needs to be fixed. The status quo is NOT working and it's driving away good editors. Lightbreather (talk) 20:38, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies is an Admin, DP is an Admin. There are two already involved. I would again suggest that you let this go, if they continue with inappropriate behaviors there is plenty of eyes in the both of you right now and it will be a quick stop. I really don't have a dog in this fight over you or him but honestly what you are doing in appealing to everyone and their brother won't help you, it will hurt you. I've been in your shoes. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 21:02, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
At the very least, it leaves a much more visible audit trail. If this were the real world, first, I ask Scal to stop. I've done that repeatedly. Then I report it to his manager and mine. I did that (Callanecc). Now, I want to take it to the top. Should I go to Jimbo or WMF? Honestly. I am fed up with it. My only crime here is insisting that I be treated with the kind of respect people who work together deserve. Lightbreather (talk) 21:07, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What the response I'm receiving now equates to is the middle manager saying, I'll talk with him; don't rock the boat. And then word gets out that I ratted on one of the guys, who's just being a guy, and then whamo! Not only is he a problem, now all his buddies are watching me. Please. This is not something to sweep under the rug. It is a rug to take out into the sunshine and beat the shit out of it. Lightbreather (talk) 21:10, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't equate to that, because Wikipedia doesn't have a corporate structure, and admins are neither one's superior nor one's manager. That's not a good analogy to make, because it makes it look like admins have more power over editors than they actually do. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:13, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I understand it's not the perfect analogy, but admins do have some power and authority that regular editors do not have. Lightbreather (talk) 21:28, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to Ryulong for restoring Writ Keeper's comment of 21:10, but could you AGF and watch it with the edit summaries?[26] I didn't delete it on purpose - it was probably an edit conflict that I failed to catch. Lightbreather (talk) 21:20, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah but there's no difference between the revisions.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 21:21, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I was in the middle of writing. I don't know what I did, but it wasn't on purpose. Couldn't you have just restored it and brought it to my attention here or on my talk page? That seems more AGF to me. Lightbreather (talk) 21:23, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's something I'm trying to impress on you, your good faith is on low reserves when you continue like this. That's why I explained reality or not the perception of people change how they view it the more you go on. I don't think you are familiar with ANI or AN it creates more drama most times. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 21:26, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So we AGF for an editor who, as of February 2012, had been blocked 13 times for incivility and disruption,[27] when he used the word "c*nt" in response to a request about a civility board, but we don't for an editor who has no history of vandalism - because she's been (I gather from other comments here and elsewhere) "dramatic"? That seems to be the consensus among the editors here? That asking to be treated civilly, and complaining when you're not, is "dramatic" behavior? Lightbreather (talk) 22:13, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Jimbo has almost zero power here anymore, you are welcome to do so but the first thing any number of editors on that page will link you to is Wikipedia:Appeals to Jimbo, WMF will refer you to the community boards or admin which has reviewed and declined actions. I'll let you pursue it and not interfere anymore because at this point I think you are too upset to WP:HEAR what I and many others are telling you. I know it's not your intention to be disruptive but it is one and raising more appeals only makes it more so. Writ Keeper is also admin btw Hell in a Bucket (talk) 21:17, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's almost like some sort of self-fulfilling prophecy of getting blocked for the subsequent flogging of the equine corpse stemming from her initial goal of trying to raise issues of the gender gap and then being able to cry sexism to her peers for daring to go on about it.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 21:20, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dear Lightbreather, don't go to the Hotrod's talk page please. Hot rod, don't go to Lightbreater's talk page please. Y'all leave each other alone. Ryulong, please no sexist jokes here--any hint of antifeminism will be met with involuntary castration. As for the rest of all the commentary here, it's hot, my battery is almost empty, I have a pool and it's in great shape, and I have a big bottle of an American-made tripel. So I'll comment on all of it some other time, or I'll let the rest of the world handle it. Much of this drama could have been avoided by, well, avoiding drama. I'm pretty sure the Panda and I can agree on at least that. Drmies (talk) 21:37, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Have you looked at the diffs in the paragraph I gave above? Have you anything to say to them? If you haven't yet, could you tell Scal, on his talk page, to stay off mine? I cannot promise to stay off his, because I check it once a week or so to see if he's talking about me. (The evidence shows that he's done so twice in the past six days.) I will not tolerate being gossiped about, especially when it involves allegations (explicit or implied) w/out evidence. Also, can you ask him to leave the Gender Gap project? It's obvious that he joined it because I did, and he doesn't need to be on it to create his "The Thalians" article. Do I need to make a formal request for amendment for this at AR?
  • @Drmies, so for formality sake, I'm proposing a self imposed Interaction Ban between Lightbreather and myself for the rest of the duration of the Topic Ban we are both currently under. For the record, I've already removed LB from my Watch list and stated it on my Talk page. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 21:48, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) WQA was shut down. PAIN was closed. Where is an editor supposed to go if they feel they're being attacked or harassed? I started the ANI per WP:DWH on the Harassment policy page. It says, "For simple, on-wiki matters, such as a user with whom you have arguments, see dispute resolution as the usual first step." "Dispute resolution" in that sentence directs to WP:DR#Resolving user conduct disputes. That gives two options, one of which is, "Ask an administrator to evaluate the conduct of the user. You can ask for an administrator's attention at a noticeboard such as the administrators' noticeboard for incidents (ANI)." People... I am following policy. Lightbreather (talk) 21:42, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • It isn't a matter of "where to go". You've gone to ANI a few times, WT:AN once in a giant discussion, you came here, you went to my talk page. You probably went other places, I haven't been keeping score. Believe me, everyone knows what you think about the matter. The problem is, there is a shortage of people who agree with your particular take on the issue, and you don't seem to accept this. Drmies is pretty outspoken about women's equality. So are lots of us, so it isn't like we are letting anything slide, you just disagree with everyone's take on policy. Until there is something actionable, you have to give it a rest, let Drmies swim, and the rest of us go edit articles. If not, people are going to just start ignoring you completely due to sheer exhaustion. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 22:10, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • That 15,000+ word donnybrook... and not even 2,000 were mine. I asked a simple and civil question, got a lot of opinions about how civility can't be enforced, I learned that I did !not get called a "cunt" (so reassuring for so many to help me figure out that the person who introduced that word into the conversation meant no harm by it, so it wasn't "actionable"). I accept that there was a shortage of people in those conversations who agree with my take on WP civility. I'm already ignored by some, or at least when I bring up a specific charge with specific diffs - those get ignored. If I say something offhand, that gets commented on like nobody's business. Lightbreather (talk) 22:51, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
People do care about gender equality around here. Drmies will slap a banhammer on someone in a New York minute for it, I've seen it. Many of us feel the same way and will use the full force of policy to rid the place of someone who is a sexist pig. There is an established culture here, and it is a multiculture, however, and we have to deal with that. We have to be able to read tea leaves and tell the intent of the comment when there is a chance it is a cultural misunderstanding. That isn't easy. In this case, we know Eric. I also know that half the people that he works with are women, which is unusual, and I know that in his culture, the "c" word is used differently than how I use in the USA. Eric is an enigma: he can be so course, yet he writes amazing prose, one of our finest by anyone's standards. It took getting used to for me. If your concerns are gender equality, then Eric is a huge fan, as am I and the majority of men around here. Wikipedia is much more enlightened than most "places". Around here, I never know if I'm talking to a woman or man, and it doesn't matter anyway. Our goal isn't to right the wrongs of society, it is to make a gender blind atmosphere. It isn't perfect, but it really is the best I've ever seen. But to be blind, we have to treat everyone equal, without gender. We don't make special accommodations or exceptions. THAT is equality. What you are complaining and how you are complaining, it is coming across as something different than this. Maybe it is a misunderstanding, but it looks like you are asking for special treatment for women, and that is counter to equality. We will never block for treating a woman in a certain way, but we will block for treating anyone in a certain way. When complaining about an editor's actions, gender shouldn't even be discussed unless they are the ones that made gender the issue. If YOU are the one making gender the issue, then you might be part of the problem. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 23:03, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you need me, Dennis, I'm to the left of you.

I like to think we're trying to be gender-blind but I think we are not, and that's fine, but we should not be fooling ourselves. You know I'm a guy, Dennis, and I know you're one--we're having conversations that are coded in all kinds of ways. And I think "cunt" shouldn't be used here, in a multi-national atmosphere. Has nothing to do with "US political correctness". In addition, I think that someone who says "I'm being singled out for my gender" should be given a fair hearing--there was an enlightening story on NPR today, with someone called Michelle, and her program is getting cancelled (I'm adding this detail so someone can find and link it), about how gender affects one in the working world. So I wouldn't discredit Lightbreather's complaint on that basis: it sounds too much like "Oh a black guy says black guys is disenfranchised, he must be playing the race card"--as if "the race card" is some sort of trump a black guy can pull out of his sleeve and it makes him win even though he's cheating. That's FOX news, and AM talk radio, and that's not how we should operate.

We had a fun little afternoon at the pool and it involved beer, friends, and tequila. I'm cooking dinner, so Mrs. Drmies can hang with her ladyfriend and talk about ladythings. And long after that and some instant coffee I'll be willing to look at some diffs. Cheers, Drmies (talk) 23:35, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) As so often, Dennis, I agree. Lightbreather, I live in the same region as Eric and, yes, the usages in our region may differ from some other places in the world, which is a big lump. But he is fundamentally one of the most giving contributors that we have. He really doesn't care about gender, race, creed etc and, as Dennis points out, is commonly seen consorting here with females who are not his wife. Being human (honest! I met him once), he does get upset when someone tries to stake a claim to "superiority" in what is at least theoretically a level playing-field. That is effectively what you are doing by demanding a treatment different from that accorded to others.
FWIW, I have on several occasions had death threats for stuff I've done on Wikipedia, I'm "insulted" pretty much daily for the same stuff and I've been hauled before everything from DRN to ANI and then ArbCom. I don't want to demean your obvious distress - you even called it that in a recent edit summary for a contribution to this page - but until you've had a death threat, you've really not been there. I can pretty much guarantee you two things: firstly, Eric will not issue a death threat (actually, that is a certainty) and, secondly, Lightbreather or not, if you take a few deep breaths, then when you need some help with fettling an article or sorting out the nuances of language etc then he is very likely to respond in a positive manner. Think of him - and me, and umpteen other experienced contributors whom you seem to be upset with - as some sort of distant, perhaps slightly gruff, relative. We love you really but it is only people like us, true friends, who will tell it to you like it is. And that has nothing to do with gender.
Sometimes, I take a break. Sometimes that is sort of enforced on me due to health issues but I've also done it simply to give myself some space, get things in perspective and, well, calm down. This may be one of those times where you might benefit from doing the same. I suspect Drmies loves it when I bugger off for a few days but he's too polite to say so Drum roll - cue Drmies with witty response involving refs to beer, bacon, bally Brits etc. - Sitush (talk) 23:43, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


@Dennis Brown:: "Maybe it is a misunderstanding, but it looks like you are asking for special treatment for women...." No, I don't want special treatment for women. What I want everyone to reconsider (if they've ever considered before) that the "treatment" anyone gets here, that is to say, that the way people treat each other is the norm. Where is the policy or guideline that decided unbusinesslike behavior is the norm here. Sure, most of us don't get paid to work here (I don't), but that doesn't mean we have a right to be coarse with each other, even after someone has said, "Hey, do you mind?" I've said this elsewhere, but it bears repeating: Wikipedia is not censored is about content, not conduct. (One of my newbie mistakes was not getting the difference between policies, guidelines, and essays. After that, I had to check myself on applying those to what they apply to. A lot of experienced editors still don't seem to get those basic differences.) And whether some like it or not, there are civility policies, like WP:NPA and WP:HARASS. I don't expect women to get special treatment, but if WP is anything like RL, women get attacked and harassed more than men, so they ought to be able to do something about it. They shouldn't just be told that content or prose is more important than being treated with a minimum of respect.
I don't know what to tell you. I'm not very utopian minded, and instead very, very practical. I try to just enforce the policies that the community puts in place, sometimes participating, but usually not. If this was a USA only website, it would still be difficult, as some very religious people would want to make it against policy to say "damn", and more liberal minded people wouldn't. As admin, I generally just try to get the two people to go to different corners. Gender never really factors into it, as I have no idea what most people's gender is. Most other people can't tell what gender the other person is, so I don't see any evidence that most personal attacks have anything to do with gender. It is a very unbusiness-like place, but we aren't getting paid to do this. Collegiate is one thing, but it takes debate, argument and a few heated exchanges to get things done sometimes. Honestly, if the place was as strict as an office, I wouldn't like it and leave. Not for the language, I'm not that salty of a speaker, but from the rigid construct. Again, I won't tolerate gender bias, but I find it hard to block for strong language simply because women might be more offended than men. If they make strong language against policy, then I will block for it. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 00:48, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As for Eric and that word, he's been banned or blocked numerous times for incivility. That word featured prominently in an ArbCom in which he was a party. If he's such a wordsmith, he knew what using that word could do in a conversation about civility - yet he chose to use it anyway. That's all I want to say about that here. I do NOT want to off on a second round about that damned word. Lightbreather (talk) 00:37, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why don't you compile a list of all the words that offend you and email it to me so that I can print it and burn it in a ritual bonfire? Eric Corbett 01:16, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've still got this page on my watchlist - for occasional entertainment as well as the other reason - and looking at this affair, has anyone realised the potential this has to blow up and go viral? Female editor gets called a c*unt - indirectly, I know, but still there it is - and her indignant complaints are dismissed. Perhaps someone wise in the ways of the media could offer some advice. We're trying to attract and retain female editors, but beyond that, it's a matter of being polite to everybody. Cheers. --Pete (talk) 23:51, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Eavesdropping also. And I do not think that a phrase like "...so Mrs. Drmies can hang with her ladyfriend and talk about ladythings" will go over well. Juan Riley (talk) 00:05, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • JuanRiley, I blocked you before, so I can guess what you're doing here. I love how you think you got something on me, but I think everyone can see the value of the "I'm cooking dinner" part right before your selective quote. I thought they did humor at Harvard? And proper, full citations? (FWIW, Mrs. Drmies's ladyfriend is pregnant, and they were talking about those cups you can use to "capture" menstrual fluid, and they were discussing whether they would use non-disposable versions of said cup. I said I'd have no problem washing them up, but no one ever listens to me.) I'll ask you as politely as I can to not come here again unless you need to notify me of something. That you try to insult me--water off a duck's back. But that you try to insult my guests, including Eric Corbett (that's Mr. Corbett to you), that's just not OK. So thank for your comments; they are gladly accepted in the spirit in which they were given. Drmies (talk) 02:17, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Uhm.......Skyring, a female editor was not called a "cunt".--Mark Miller (talk) 00:08, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

She says she was, and that's what's important. I've seen this sort of thing play out before, and it rarely ends well for the men who say they were just joshing around. --Pete (talk) 00:21, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, that fact that she had to say she was is the entire issue. Give me a fucking break. The editor has said the exact same thing to men and that is a fact (should he have been treated her Differently because she is a woman?). Get over it. The truth is, Wikipedia has formalized calling editors a "Dick" and if cunt is wrong...so is that. But "Dick" has the full support of the Wikipedia community. The truth is....that is sexism against men. But this is calling wolf. This really is a word used a great deal in the UK. That makes this something of a cultural issue.--Mark Miller (talk) 00:44, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In fact despite what Lightbreather and others are claiming I've never called a woman a cunt, either here or in real life, and I can't imagine a situation in which I'd be tempted to do so; it's a word I reserve for particularly stupid or obnoxious males. Eric Corbett 01:12, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And if you think about it twice, Eric, is that not sexist? Juan Riley (talk) 01:19, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It would only be sexist if you believe that I wouldn't say exactly the same thing to a male editor, or had in any way made reference to Lighbreather's gender. Do you really believe that I wouldn't or that I did? Do you not consider Lightbreater's lie - "During the civility board discussion, another editor called me a c*nt" – to be sexist? Eric Corbett 01:26, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Eric CorbettI think he meant its sexist in that you said you reserve it for males. his irony got lost in the text. To your point, some time ago I annoyed you, and I think you posted the exact same comment "If you don't want to be called..." etc. and as I recall I also took you to ANI, and that also went nowhere. I think there is general agreement that Eric can often be rude when he needn't be, but also agreement that that rudeness does not rise to the level of wiki-disruption, or in the long run outweigh his contributions. In any case, there is ample proof that he is gender neutral in that rudeness, and of the specific use of the word in question. Gaijin42 (talk) 01:31, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Eric: Thought you were supposed to be bright..okay..let me say what you should have realized..the worse thing you can think of calling a male is a vulgarism for the female genitalia? And this aint sexist? Juan Riley (talk) 01:34, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I can think of much worse things to call anyone, you included, but sometimes an intensifier is the best option. A short sharp shock if you will. That's what you civility warriors don't seem to understand. You're choosing to focus on a word, while ignoring the persistent lie that Lightbreather is attempting to propagate. Why is that? Is that not incivil? Eric Corbett 01:42, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"A short sharp shock." How about not being shocking? Wouldn't that be a more polite way of being a human being? --Pete (talk) 01:54, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've been very polite with you so far, but don't push your luck sunshine. Eric Corbett 02:03, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's your problem right there. It's not the words but the attitude. Especially in a text-only medium. One doesn't need to use rude words to be rude. You do see this? No offence taken - sunshine - that's not the way I roll. 'Nuff said. --Pete (talk) 02:20, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You are quite obviously entirely bereft of any insight into your own behaviour, a not uncommon condition here. Eric Corbett 02:26, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No fighting in the war room, gentlemen. Pete, I can't help but wonder--what brings you here? My evil angel is suggesting that it's because HiLo is being discussed; I'm sure that angel is wrong. Please don't be curt with my guests; thank you. Drmies (talk) 02:37, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, that's OK. I did a search of this page before contributing. I subscribe to Zite, which pulls out internet stories on various topics I specify and one of them is Wikipedia. There was a flurry of items a while back on how Wikipedia doesn't do well on attracting and retaining female editors and hence there is a systemic bias. I can just see something like this being picked up by the same people and used as an example of exactly why women avoid us. If offence is taken, then offence is taken. That's how it works, regardless of whether someone here thought they were being as polite as possible. We all see things a bit differently. --Pete (talk) 06:51, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please let's us not let this discussion go off on a tangent about that word or what it means. Star another if necessary, please. Lightbreather (talk) 00:40, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Too late.--Mark Miller (talk) 00:44, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lightbreather, if anything is to be learned here, I hope it is that we differ on many things, but have the same basic ideals in mind: equity. We don't scream about our differences of opinion, we just try to get along. If someone does single you out because of your gender, no one here would put up with that. Drmies would beat us to the punch, but only because he's a bit of a show off. I still think you have to pick your battles wisely or people will quit listening, but that isn't the same as tolerating sexism. And admin can only enforce existing policy, not what policy should be, so if you want systemic change, you don't get that at ANI. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 00:15, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Look Lightbreather, I understand your frustration and have been in your exact situation. Overreaction to a comment or post that one feels crosses the line. OK, but when I protested to homophobic comments on Jimbo Wales talk page it didn't go any better for me and the outcome was.....I need a thicker skin and that some editors will have a negative opinion of gays in general. This isn't even that sort of thing. This is you coming to the community over an issue of personal attacks and needing a Noticeboard to deal with it. Many of us tried to discuss this with you but when the editor in question made the remark...I don't think your reaction was that of offense to what they had said, but that Scalhotrod had responded to it positively. I think you are projecting your anger with that editor and not the original comment. That seems to be what really pissed you off. This is a personal conflict that you are continuing over a broad range of venues and I think this clearly demonstrates that a noticeboard where this sort of thing is discussed at length would be nothing but a ticking time bomb.--Mark Miller (talk) 01:10, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • My exact comment was "'Added to which incivility as it tends to be invoked here on WP more often than not simply means saying something I don't agree with, or upsets me.' - Brilliantly put!!!" I was referring ONLY to this part of Eric's comment. Admittedly, I didn't catch the use of the c word right away either. Actually, not until LB made her comment. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 02:41, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Mark Miller: I would shut up if I were you. The longer you talk the more you give evidence for gender bias. Juan Riley (talk) 01:42, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Juan (didn't sign your post) I wouldn't hand out such bad or ill-conceived advice if I were you. I have a lot of biases as we all do, but gender...is not one of them. Or...is it your suggestion that as a homosexual I have an inherent bias against woman? If so...that was pretty fucking sick dude.--Mark Miller (talk) 01:28, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I like you have many biases which I do not let get the better of me. I was referring to your line: "The truth is....that is sexism against men." Juan Riley (talk) 01:46, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@MM. I'd suggest you take him to AN/I on a civility beef, but I have a hunch that if I did that Drmies would toss me for trolling... ;-) —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 01:50, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nah. There is nothing actionable there.....it pisses me off that someone can sit there and say cunt is not OK but Dick is not. But it isn't a matter to take to AN. Good lord....yes...... Drmies would toss me for trolling as well and rightly so. My point is, this is perception. LB had a perception and it was made worse by another jumping in. They should have known better than to do that and I find that to be actionable (the jumping in part), but yes, in my opinion, cunt and dick are similar. And here I thought I was sort of in the middle - niether for or against a gender, but just not willing to beat someone over the head for treating anyone in the same manner as they treat others. But, over time I have come to very much respect Drmies approach and understanding of things. Light breather's perception was that they were attacked and, while I disagree, I understand this. I do. But I am not going to support another for something I was not supported over. I still think LB needs to get over it, but...having said that I am also trying to discuss gender bias in other situations at the same time and guess what.....they seem to all come back to Lightbreather. I have no idea how to move forward, but I know Eric was not treating this person differently. To be honest here...I think Lighbreather wants to be treated differently. I just don't see why.--Mark Miller (talk) 02:26, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[ec] Carrite, you know I only disagree with you at AfD. I'd never ban you for anything (I'll remind you again that I supported your RfA), though I think you are wrong on a perpetual basis out of some kind of weird principle (ha!). I can't follow the whole who insulted who anymore--ha, I think Mark does have a tendency to stick his hoof in his mouth, and I say that with the most cheerful spirit towards him. I agree in part with his analysis, though I'll plead ignorance on whether his alleged gayness (OK, alleged by himself, but I'm trying to cover my BLP ass!) makes him more or less likely to be a sexist. Mark, I would ask you to be a bit more, you know, gentle: I don't think Lightbreather is actively seeking dramah; I honestly think she's not sure what to do or where to go, and I haven't helped her much. As for JuanRiley's comment, pay it no mind, and if you need scripture for support, re-read Paradise Regained, "Thereafter as I like the giver". Forgive me, Mark and Tim, if I don't kick either one of you out for trolling. I'll leave that for David Gerard, a user I'm not familiar with, but he was pinged here--I'm still waiting on that double-liquor version of a martini. Drmies (talk) 02:34, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I just asked my partner Jeff if I am gay. He says yes.
Let me be clear. I have been through this and I have no more sympathy for editors that go this route. You do so at your own risk. Lightbreather....if I have done or said anything to or about you that has offended you, let me know and I will reconsider if it was or was not appropriate. But you are a waoman and I am a gay man. I don't get support for complaining about taking offense to posts and you will not get support from me for that either...at least not at this point and only because I truly think you are just taking things out of context and trying to make a case where one does not exist. I tried to help yopu. I did....but now I just don't care any more. Call me an asshole and you may well be right, but seriously...me thinks you protest too much.--Mark Miller (talk) 02:47, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Jeff? What are the odds! My favorite gay American ever is called Jeff. I learned a lot from him, including that the cook should never have to clean the kitchen floor. I think about that every time I clean the kitchen floor. (I obviously turned into a woman when I married one.) And if you ever get ragged on for being a gay Wikipedia editor (I suppose you have a user box or something?) you know I'll be glad to block. Now, stop telling LB what to do--that's my job. Drmies (talk) 02:53, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh my god...don't get me started on the whole "cleaning the kitchen" things when you cook.....my kitchen proves that has yet to be overcome in this household! *Snicker*. Hey...I seem to remember you thought I was a woman at one time. ;-) Tis OK...gender is not something you can spot from writing nor something a user name like "Amdascientist" would disprove, but...and I say this from the bottom of my activist heart (which I try very hard to separate from my Wikipedia editing) I support women on Wikipedia. I fail too many times to mention when it comes to men, but I actively attempt to support female editors on Wikipedia. Why...because I know from first hand experience how the world can center around the straight male. Heck...I tend to give Eric a tad of bit of grief and heckling on the subject every now and then. But then...I have also complained loudly to Jimbo's talk page about him! Had to be talked down once by Dennis when he "knew" I was getting out of control over it. Since then I have read a lot of Eric's stuff and found him to be....unique. No other word describes him.--Mark Miller (talk) 03:16, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reopening

[edit]

Drmies, only six days ago, Scalhotrod speculated that I'm going to edit as an IP or create a second account.[28] Callanecc warned him.[29] During the civility board discussion, another editor called me a c*nt [30] (others disagree that it was personal), and Scal called the comment that included that gem, "Brilliant!"[31] One of the guys in that discussion who insisted that I acknowledge that c*nt is a friendly greeting among men in Australia, started a discussion on my page headed "Poor manners."[32] I humored him. When it started to circle back in on itself, I asked him to leave me alone. He and others commented further. I deleted what was added after I asked to be left alone.[33] In swoops Scal to revert my deletion [34] and to tattle on me.[35] The same guy who started the poor-manners discussion? Scal goes to his talk page, gives him at atta boy, and once again starts gossiping about bad old LB.[36]

I'm pasting Lightbreather's opening statement (editor abbreviated "LB", hoping she doesn't mind) here to respond one point at a time. I may not cover every single one of them; it may well be that no one likes what I have to say, but for one reason or another lots of people have opinions, and apparently I should have some too.

  1. Scalhotrod's remark, the first diff in this paragraph, is completely asinine and Callanecc's response is much appreciated. This is exactly the kind of thing that Hot Rod needs to stop doing or they'll be blocked for being an asshole--I don't have a policy link for it, and I am not calling him an asshole, but if he does something like that, he's suggesting that someone call him one and block him for it. Scalhotrod is a big boy, he can handle my comment.
  2. Eric did not call anyone a c*t, though he phrased his commentary (a general remark, where I would use the more gender-neutral "asshole", since I'm a good American) in his usual(ly) provocative way. Eric is not a very good misogynist, but he shouldn't be trying harder either. I wish he hadn't said it, because he said it in some expectation of being misunderstood and he got exactly that. Score!, one might say.
  3. Of course Scalhotrod is going to say something like "Brilliant"; it's par for the course. If one guy belches, the next one will fart. (In my household, it's my daughters who act like that; it's not that gendered anymore.)
  4. HiLo busts in without a by-your-leave, to complain about having been ignored twice; HiLo, old friend whom I've defended more than once, NO means NO. Someone is not interested in your commentary? Suck it up.
  5. Having looked at The Infamous Talk Page Deletion, well, there's nothing to it. I don't see any reason why someone wouldn't be able to delete the tail end of a conversation, esp. if it consists of commentary someone doesn't care for or invited. TPG my foot; there was nothing wrong with that edit, no context was removed, nothing.
  6. The rest, which is Hot rod "tattling" (in quotes since it's a quote, but a very appropriate word) and then inviting a little round table on his talk page to shoot the shit over a couple of beers with some bros (Gerda, that's not a conversation you want to join nor, Panda, is it one you should care for), well, I spoke my mind on it already. I don't think it's blockable or whatever, I just think it's in really poor taste, and I hope no one is encouraging that kind of chit-chat.
I have had my share of dealings with Lightbreather and not all of them have been fun. None of them have not been fun because of her gender, though I blame mine for my lack of patience. But to have a bunch of editors basically make fun of the matter, no, that's not alright. I cannot determine how much of the dismissive treatment she's been receiving has been based on gender; I wish some smart person, like LadyofShalott or Anna Frodesiak would read over all of this and tell me what's going on. But I can't escape the impression that it is relevant one way or another, that this makes her an easy target, with editors just waiting to pounce. Really, Eric, I love you like a brother--no, almost like a father--but I wish you could try harder not to provoke in this manner. I know you probably have nothing against Lightbreather, since for you it's the basic matter of our terrible civility policy or lack thereof, but you really hurt someone's feelings, and that someone is an innocent bystander in the civility debate, as well as a passionate editor who's been hit over the head by ArbCom and seems to be the target of some other editors. Honestly, I can't think of it any other way--without throwing stalking accusations around, I think I can say that there's more than one editor around who'd love to see Lightbreather get in trouble.

Lightbreather, I can't reopen that thread. I do not think it's a matter for ANI. I have seen nothing actionable, though I have seen plenty that's objectionable. Appearances matter, and those boys, those good old boys, that you've been duking it out with, they have not shown their best side. I do not think you've been the victim of a sexist attack, since that requires intent, but I suppose I should be happy I'm not in your shoes. For the time being, and since I am as limited as I am (and possibly insensitive to what maybe really important here), I can say only that I will act on what I think is actionable behavior. That includes provocation and hounding/stalking: Scalhotrod, man, you are on a short leash. HiLo, don't be a jackass, coming to people's talk pages and bitch about them not paying you attention--they probably did so for a reason, even if you don't like the reason. Y'all just chill out. LB, I'm going to have to ask you to take it easy also, not because you didn't have reason to get upset (you did, I see that now) but because I do not believe you are choosing a good path to seek redress. I am well well aware of the fact that we may not have good paths for redress, and all I can offer you is to act like a proper administrator. Perhaps the Lady and the Anna, already pinged, can offer more, or can offer it more appropriately. That's enough out of me. LB, feel free to email me if need be. Drmies (talk) 01:52, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies, I appreciate your looking at what I wrote above step-by-step. There are a couple of other things that seem to have been overlooked, at least by some.
The first time that I read Eric's response that had the "C" word in it, I skimmed it... Didn't read it through to the end. If I had, I most certainly would have said something immediately. What brought me back to the comment was when I noticed that Scal had replied "Brilliant" to another part of Eric's comment. At that point, I read the whole thing carefully, and realized what was there. So: No, it was NOT that Scal remarked on Eric's comment that I "suddenly" was offended by it. I was offended by it... the last sentence of Eric's comment.
No-one seems to have yet responded to the details I gave when I was allowed to re-open my complaint against Eric. No doubt many were skimming (as I'd done when I first read Eric's comment), or had simply made up their mind that what he'd done could not be considered a PA. The ANI and the details that I outlined have been archived, so here are those details again:
  1. The personal attack was in this reply,[37] in which Eric Corbett stated his opinion that Wikipedia shouldn't have a civility pillar. He ends with the sentence: "Besides, the easiest way to avoid being called a cunt is not to act like one."
  2. The post immediately after this one, by the same editor, opened with "Speaking as one who was once blocked for using the word sycophantic...."[38]
  3. It is clear from these two posts that the editor has a wide vocabulary, and chooses his words deliberately.
  4. At this point in the conversation, the only female poster in the conversation was me.
  5. Merriam-Webster defines cunt as 1. usually obscene : the female genital organs; also : sexual intercourse with a woman. 2. usually disparaging & obscene : woman
  6. The OED defines cunt as 1. The female genitals; the vulva or vagina. 2a. A woman as a source of sexual gratification; a promiscuous woman; a slut. Also as a general term of abuse for a woman. 2b. Sexual intercourse with a woman or women; women as a source of sexual gratification. 3. As a term of abuse for a man.
  7. And even Wikipedia says it is considered to be extremely vulgar.
  8. So, the word is a common term of abuse for women and, in some places, a term of abuse for men. Could EC have meant it as a general term of abuse? Possibly. Equally possible, considering the subject of the discussion and his vocabulary, if he wanted to keep it non-sexist, he could have chosen - just about any other word.
  9. However, so there would be no doubt, I told him that it was offensive, and I asked him to remove it.[39]
  10. He did not remove it, so I did, per WP:RPA.[40]
  11. Despite my telling him that it offended me, despite my removing it per policy, he restored it.[41]
As I concluded then: Insisting on using a word after your colleague has told you, more than once, that he/she finds it offensive is a personal attack. It's as simple as that, folks. This isn't about censorship - I'm not saying we should remove the word 'cunt' from Wikipedia - it's about observing workplace conduct policies.
--Lightbreather (talk) 02:53, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Numbers 4 and 8 through 11 are especially important above. Lightbreather (talk) 02:55, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lightbreather, I'm sorry if my (shorthand) explanation of that comment/exchange does not convince you. To repeat: Eric meant you no ill will, but chose a deliberately provocative word. I don't agree with it, but I do not find it blockable (sorry), though I wish he wouldn't have used it. He did not call you that word (despite your #4), nor did he call any specific editor that, though I accept that it hurt your feelings (for lack of a better phrase). I cannot apologize for him; I am not him. (He might wish me to say "I am not he".) In fact, he is principled to a fault, hence #11. I am fully aware of the above timeline, as I'm sure everyone else is, and I believe there is little to be gained from pursuing this line--if only for practical reasons. That's all I have to say. You are welcome to bother me anytime, and if you wish to do so in a less public forum, you can either post on one of socks' talk pages, or email me. Also, Mark Miller and Jeff would like to invite you for dinner, probably something vegetarian, some California thing with egg rolls and raw vegetables. Drmies (talk) 03:03, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies, it "hurt my feelings" no more than it would have hurt an African-American's if Eric had written, "If you don't want to be called a nigger, don't act like one." Or how that person would've felt if he/she, after saying, "That is offensive," and asking to have it removed, but not having it removed, then did it themselves... Only to have it restored. Oh... And then to have others say it wasn't offensive. Eric didn't "hurt my feelings." He insulted me, whether he meant to or not, and when I asked him to remove the insult, he didn't. And when I deleted it, per WP:RPA, he restored it. That is a personal attack. Do you guys really not get this? Lightbreather (talk) 03:38, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Son of a b....you just did the same thing Eric did! So you got your feelings hurt.....mine seem to mean nothing to you. I am done with you. Delete my post on your page. Go to the foundation...you are just complaining now as if you are the only social class that has ever taken offense to something someone has written. You offend me greatly.--Mark Miller (talk) 04:45, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry. I meant offense to no-one. I meant that to be a comment to Drmies that to say that Eric's comment "hurt my feelings" was as much an understatement as saying what I said (above) would merely hurt the feelings of a person of color. But you want to see the difference between what I've done and what Eric did? Watch:
@Mark Miller: I am sorry. I didn't even know that you were a person to whom that term would be offensive. I was using it to make a point to Drmies. I am very sorry, and I will redact it now. Lightbreather (talk) 05:07, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Accepted...But Eric was also just trying to make a point. I have been called nigger. And it hurts to the soul. It demeans the very existence of a person and on top of having an entire nation stolen out from under my family (seriously..not just my people but my actual family) while people called us nigger. I understand you very much...but I am begging you, BEGGING YOU to stop now!--Mark Miller (talk) 05:17, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That is the appropriate way to respond to a situation like this. You don't balk when the other person takes offense, asks you to remove what you've said, and then removes it herself - per policy. And you sure as hell don't restore what you've said. Lightbreather (talk) 05:07, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
How might one act like a nigger? We need to be told. Also, it strikes me as very odd that you're apparently quite happy to use the word nigger, which I find very offensive, but yet object so strongly to that other word. Maybe you need to have your logic chip serviced. Eric Corbett 04:01, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Eric, that was the point of her analogy. I wish you hadn't used the imperative and "you" in your statement, because addressed to a woman, I'm afraid that does amount to saying "If you don't want to be called a woman, don't act like a woman." ... with a very nasty choice of words for "woman". Perhaps you momentarily forgot the thread had been started by a woman? Yngvadottir (talk) 04:37, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps it's you who has forgotten a few things, including that so uncommon thing, common sense. Why does the gender of the editor who started this thread matter? Why do you assume that I am not myself a "nigger"? Why am I not entitled to register my objection to words I don't care for but your female compatriots are? "Is it because I'm black"? Eric Corbett 05:02, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps I am an African-American woman? Did you know that when African-Americans call each other that word, it's not necessarily an insult? It is similar to how homosexuals have reappropriated "queer." I don't know if any women have attempted to reappropriate the "C" word. But even if they did, even if I did (doubt that will happen, as I h-a-t-e it) reappropriate it... If I used it and someone said they were offended, I would apologize. Simple as that. Getting to use a word in a given social context is NOT a game that someone is supposed to win or lose. It's about respect. Lightbreather (talk) 05:15, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You've just shot yourself in the foot once again. What you've been told repeatedly but have failed to understand, is that the word cunt has equally been "reappropriated" in parts of the world you appear to be unfamiliar with. Maybe the town you live in has yet to catch up. Eric Corbett 05:28, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, I get that. So let's say you didn't mean it as an insult when you first said it, despite knowing that it has not been "reappropriated" by the entire English-speaking world. The fact is, once I told you that it was insulting, you should have just done what I did above with Mark. So is all this pain because I was insulted, or because you can't say "Sorry," and remove something someone else finds insulting? (And mind you, that word is still seen as very insulting to hundreds of thousands if not millions of people - not just me.) Apparently, because your prose is exquisite, or your content is solid gold, or something like that, I'm supposed to ignore the insult. As are others in similar situations. I'm going to bed now. Lightbreather (talk) 05:40, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I can tell you right now, I am not African American. I am of Hawaiian descent. But that doesn't seem to matter to bigots that feel being Pacific Islander is "no better". Like the first time I did South Pacific (musical) and I was confronted with that sort of prejudice and had to relive the instance when I was called that. Seriously Lightbreather...and Drmies can attest to this one, I once took great offense on an Arb Com post when someone used a cousin of mine in imagery to use as a "Head desk" comment. I flipped out. But it wasn't their intent and it wasn't yours...and it wasn't Eric's. I try to temper my isult with reality. Yes...it is very difficult, but we have to try...that is what civility is all about.--Mark Miller (talk) 05:49, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have absolutely nothing against Lightbreather, wasn't even aware of her until she asked about how to set up a civility board, and you know my opinion on civility enforcement. For those who may not, I'll simply say that I'll sign up to it when I see it being applied equally to everyone, although I'd rather it was removed as one of the pillars. As just one example, I consider LB's repeated insistence that I called her that naughty c-word to be way past the civility threshold now. Does she believe that allowing females to tell lies is likely to lead to an influx of female editors? Eric Corbett 02:22, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Eric, I trust that our repeated insistence that you didn't call her that will make her re-evaluate those statements. I'd not say "lies", of course. She's been pushed pretty hard, and now half the world is falling over her--not an easy position to be in. You're tough and you're kind of used to being pissed on, though you have feelings too. Thanks, and keep us posted on the ferrets--haven't heard about them in a while. Drmies (talk) 02:32, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, the ferrets. Well I lost my job, times were hard, the money was running out, so I had to bash them all on the head ... no, wait, that's an episode of The Archers I'm thinking of. They're all in the pink and enjoying our fine summer. Eric Corbett 02:44, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm told we should refrain from eating dried bats, since it might spread ebola. Same might apply to ferrets. "In the pink"--that's a funny expression. You Brits are so cute! Drmies (talk) 02:48, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
One of my abiding memories of a trip to the US was going into a bank and asking to cash some travellers cheques. The cashier looked at me for a second or two and then she said "Would you mind saying that again? I just love your accent." Think Alan Rickman. Eric Corbett 03:02, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Someone asked me the other day "where I was from". I hate that question, and was getting ready to answer with the punchline from a "don't end a sentence with a preposition" joke. I know it fascinates Americans, but it just makes me feel less, or singled out. Drmies (talk) 03:05, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I just thought it was funny, so I gave her a little quotation from the Scottish play as an added bonus, which she seemed to enjoy. Eric Corbett 03:21, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I gladly admit that this is a weak spot for me, and I don't handle it well. Hey, in my dreams I'm still naked, trying to run away, and I can't remember how to even walk. Drmies (talk) 03:31, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I guess we all have bad dreams. My recurring nightmare is turning up for my A-level exams - the ones we have to take here to get into university - knowing absolutely nothing about the subjects. And then having to go back and spend another three years in school, which just doesn't happen here. I even wake up in a sweat sometimes, wondering whether I actually passed or not. Eric Corbett 03:48, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My worst nightmare is being thrust on stage to perform a play I have not rehearsed at all. I just stand there and recite lines I am guessing at while the rest of the cast tries to push me off stage. That scares the hell out of me every time!--Mark Miller (talk) 04:02, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Correction - My exact comment was "'Added to which incivility as it tends to be invoked here on WP more often than not simply means saying something I don't agree with, or upsets me.' - Brilliantly put!!!" I was referring ONLY to this part of Eric's comment. Admittedly, I didn't catch the use of the c word right away either. Actually, not until LB made her comment. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 02:41, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Accepted. Thanks. (Sorry for moving this.) Hot rod, can you and I agree on something? That you can be right, at least to some extent, and the other side too? I think that would be a nice start toward deescalation. Wait--you already said you'd stay away, so you've made a start already. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 02:46, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • No worries, my "assholeness" aside [yes, I can handle your comment... :)] I'm sorry for how this whole thing played out and my part in it. And again, my apologies for the "round table" discussion on my Talk page. It was never my intention to stir up this much $#(*!. I hope that LB comes back to the Gender Gap Task Force and even if she does not participate in the IBan I proposed, I'm happy to hold up my end of the agreement as a gesture of good will towards everyone involved. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 03:04, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My take on Lightbreather's complaint

[edit]

So we AGF for an editor who, as of February 2012, had been blocked 13 times for incivility and disruption, when he used the word "c*nt" in response to a request about a civility board, but we don't for an editor who has no history of vandalism - because she's been (I gather from other comments here and elsewhere) "dramatic"? Please don't poison the well like that, Lightbreather. Eric Corbett's been blocked for calling people things. (Cue for Eric to come in and say that one of the things was "sycophant". Eric, it's a good point, but your repetition of it sitewide is well past boring, please let it go.) That's no reason at all to ABF for where he wasn't calling anybody anything, as in this case. I'll even stick my head out and say that you thinking it was aimed at you shows a poor sense of rhetoric, or poor attention to the rhetoric. It was aimed at annoying you, no doubt, but not at calling you anything.

As for your wish for support in removing Eric's "cunt" remark, there used to be a policy (or maybe guideline) encouraging the removal of personal attacks, but (fortunately IMO) not any more. Did you read what's at WP:RPA now, before you used it as your rationale for removal? I'm asking because the text there by no means supports your action: "Especially where such text is directed against you, removal should typically be limited to clear-cut cases where it is obvious the text is a true personal attack." Italics in original. Yours was obviously no kind of "clear-cut case", as most people disagreed it was even directed against you. So, if it wasn't directed against you, it wasn't a PA at all (because against who?) and if it was, you should have left it alone because it was, and in either case it couldn't possibly be called clear-cut. What are you hoping for by your insistence on it here on Drmies' page? Isn't it clear by now that community support won't be forthcoming? I think we should rather focus on the original issue: your proposal for a new civility board.

The reason the old civility boards WP:PAIN and WP:WQ became historical was that they worked so badly. Abyssmally, really. I know, I tried to work them as an admin, but gave up in disgust. The idea of trying to have them was well-intentioned, but the practice was they were principally used by POV-pushers trying to wikilawyer| that the content opponent they wanted taking out was being rude. It wasn't a 100% of those, but certainly a majority. Those boards were honeypots for aggressive POV-pushers trying a sideways approach for getting their perceived enemies blocked. Or to vary the metaphor, they were the armpit of Wikipedia. It's not surprising people who weren't here then to experience it again want a civility board, but it's also no surprise oldtimers are dead against it. To learn from history, you might go read some archives from those boards. I'm sorry, it's extremely depressing reading and will make you a misanthrope, but I think it would be eye-opening. And I can't see any kind of ruleset that would make them work better this time round, given that page instructions, too, have to be polite. "Aggressive newbies who don't know what a personal attack is are not welcome" or "Users who're pushing a nationalist POV aren't allowed to post here" would hardly be, uh… civil, or treating everybody the same. ;-)Bishonen | talk 06:25, 29 July 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Yeah, they didn't work well at all. In any event, people who do go too far here always get their come-uppance by other routes. I've just been falsely accused of distributing child pornography. Please will someone call me a cunt to make me feel better. - Sitush (talk) 07:26, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done. You wanted it on ANI, right? And lest anybody miss the point you're making in this context: yes, I'll attest that you get twenty times more, and abysmally dirtier, crap hurled at you for defending Indian articles than I've ever seen anybody get for being a woman. I'm well placed to say so, since I'm a woman and I watch your talkpage. In fact I rarely see anybody picked on for being a woman, though I'd never deny that it happens. Here's a big fat example that infuriated me at the time. Bishonen | talk 08:02, 29 July 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Yes, that was thump worthy, maybe even with a brick. What I find discouraging is painting everyone a sexist who disagrees with a perspective. I'm seeing some of that around by a few editors, including some ideas that I think actually hurts the cause. We should be able to be on the same side, yet be able to express different ideas on solutions with being called a sexist pig. All this discussion has only served to divide the community and build resentment. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 13:32, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Can you delete a redirect?

[edit]

It is good to see that you are still very active.

I wanted a redirect to be deleted so that I can create a big article. Reply me if you can. Bladesmulti (talk) 04:30, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity and Hinduism Bladesmulti (talk) 03:44, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Editor's Barnstar
Well done for writing Between you and I. I love it. John (talk) 19:39, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help, DrMies, or anyone who can move an article!

[edit]

DrMies, The article on Julián Castro,the US politician, has his name spelled incorrectly. His name is spelled the same as the name of the former president of Venezuela. The "a" in Julián has an acute accent. I emailed the HUD Press Secretary today, and he confirmed that "Julián Castro" is correct. I am not good at moving articles and my time is limited. Although I'm back on Wiki, I;m not fully active as before, yet. The article probably should be moved to Julián Castro (US politician). Thank for helping!; and thank you to anyone else who may be able to help and help to reduce your workload! Doc2234 (talk) 22:19, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Eh, I think you can move an article, can't you? Here's the thing: editors have lost their heads over diacritics, and I don't want to join them. Talk page stalkers, especially The ed17, isn't anybody gonna help that poor man? [Extra points for identifying the quote.] Also, I don't approve of such a whippersnapper being appointed by Obama. The president hasn't even left me a note on this here talk page, so I'm a tad jealous. Drmies (talk) 00:21, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I seem to remember a massive fight over diacritics in Novak Djokovic... it's part of a larger debate over names that I'd rather not get into. For example, do we call John VI of Portugal John or João? João was his actual name, while John is the anglicized form. The worst part is that no one is consistent, not even me! See this: is it Wikimedia Deutschland or Wikimedia Germany? I use the latter, anglicized form in the Signpost, but most people use the former, which is the actual name. Yet for the Minas Geraes-class battleship, I use the old name as that's what the battleship was actually named... but since then, Portuguese orthography has changed the nominal spelling to "Minas Gerais". Take that how you will. </end ramble> Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:33, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There was a very recent move discussion at Talk:Julian Castro#Requested move which ended in No Move, to the proposed Julián Castro (American politician). So there should be no bold moves to the version with the diacritic. As a practical matter, to have any chance of getting a new move discussion with a different result try to judge how commonly the 'Julián' version of his name is found in major US media. People are still influenced by WP:COMMONNAME arguments. EdJohnston (talk) 02:51, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wow: two Eds for the price of one! Thank you both. Doc, there you have it...two voices of authority. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 03:01, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

[edit]
The Barnstar of Diplomacy
You have a real talent Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:05, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just an FYI; no need to respond

[edit]

Four days ago, I was encouraged to patch things up with someone by TParis.[42] I did exactly as he suggested and reached out to her.[43] She deleted the request, citing a self-imposed interaction ban...[44] Though she did comment about me on Jimbo's page,[45] and today she reverted one of my edits.[46] Which I reverted using a reason I've been given dozens of times by her and others - and with a suggestion that we discuss.[47] Now that you've made it clear that is not a valid reason,[48]] I hope you will back me up if anyone else tries to use it on me again. Thanks. Lightbreather (talk) 02:16, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, thank you for patiently hearing me out yesterday. I appreciate it. Lightbreather (talk) 02:25, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sure thing--hey, I read the above account already, which is why I thought I'd mess around a little bit there. I can invoke a ban on the tradition argument since I live in Alabama--also, I'm just messing around a little bit. I thought that quote was quite nice; I've admired it for quite some time. Drmies (talk) 02:30, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mercy, man! Don't scare me like that. After I read JW's comments this morning I thought, maybe I'm not crazy. Maybe I'm an OK person after all. I let my neck muscles and stomach relax. Then you do that and I think, holy crap! I'm on somebody's blacklist again. I'm going to go watch the telly with my old man now. G'night. Lightbreather (talk) 02:43, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • We're all a good heck, as a wise man said a long time ago in a Jim Jarmusch movie. I'm about to log off and reboot one of my many socks, so I can mess around with impunity. On my "telly" is a BBC program about volcanoes and ants that decapitate themselves. There's an allegory in there somewhere. Drmies (talk) 02:52, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wanted to quote Ignatius J. Reilly, who (whom?) I empathize with, believe it or not - I cried at the end of that book the first time I read it... Anyway, where was I? I am too tired to be that clever tonight. Lightbreather (talk) 03:10, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Whom", but I think that rule is overrated and on its way out. Is he the guy who gives it a go with the hot dog cart? I'm reading--embarrassing!--a Percy Jackson book, though the Lady probably appreciates it. Where were you? Watching TV with the old man! Put the netbook down! Drmies (talk) 03:33, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • As for "whom", how about the equivalent but even more archaic word "whence"? I have in my dusty archives somewhere a pamphlet published by the Soviet Union, called, "Whence the Threat to Peace?", which blames militarism, not surprisingly, on the U.S. of A. The title was written by grammar pedants. On the other matter, as a Jew, I believe that we can say that the Messiah has finally come when Hollywood produces an excellent major motion picture based on A Confederacy of Dunces. And they better not change the title, or I will be ticked off. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:31, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Whence is that godly fragrance?

opinion

[edit]

Would you take a brief look at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Miss_Ivana_Humpalot&action=view and tell me what you think? Its setting off my SPIdey sense, but has some quirks. new account, All edits are to an obviously controversial area, no discussion on article talk page, no user page or user talk, and appears to be in a slow edit war with someone (haven't looked into who is on the other side of the war yet) primarily over repeatedly removing info from the infobox [49][50][51][52]

But confusingly, the first edits all appear to come from getting started suggestions - but I don't know a lot about those suggestions. Is there a way to manipulate that to get it to show up on a particular article you would like to edit?

Anyway, as I said, its triggering my SPIdey sense or at least the sniff test for some other undefined wrongness, but I'd like a second opinion before I stir the pot about it. They are certainly in repeated violation of the 1RR in the area if nothing else (but nobody has warned them if they are a legit editor) Gaijin42 (talk) 15:58, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Real quick: have they been warned about the ArbCom restrictions in that field? (Yes--I see they have been.) For edit warring? Have Sloane and others been warned/notified? Can you discern POV? Should that article be protected one way or another, if the diffs prove POV editing? And isn't that name really a username violation? Daniel Case, what do you think about the name? I mean, I want to hump a lot too, but I wouldn't advertise it...) Drmies (talk) 17:58, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Its from List_of_Austin_Powers_characters#Ivana_Humpalot, if you weren't aware (which may be a separate copyright/trademark name violation?) - The article is currently semi-protected, I don't think full protection is warranted at this time. I am unsure about the POVness of this users edits. There is nothing blatant (except the obvious 1RR violation), but it also doesn't pass the smell test to me. There is legitimate dispute on the talk page about how various casualty numbers should be reported, and how to take conflicting reports from Israel, Hamas, the UN etc for the same count. The user appears to not want to include some of those numbers, but has not contributed to the talk page discussion about that. I do not know about the other editors and if they are aware/notified of sanctions or not. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:09, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Trademark/copyright isn't an issue; anyone can use the name of a fictional character. Unless it violates policy in and of itself, which this one unambiguously does. Hardblock as an obvious sexual reference. Daniel Case (talk) 18:17, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)There have been far worse. I occasionally do a little work at WP:UAA. Also I find Ivana Humpalot from several years ago. The editor hasn't edited for a few hours and already has the big discretionary sanctions warning awaiting them on their talk page, so I'm going to drop them a note suggesting they change their name. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:05, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you all. Now, let's get back to humping, and let's be happy we're not one of those kids got sent to Vietnam, where humping was not pleasurable. Drmies (talk) 21:35, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pratyushkarna18

[edit]

Apparently he's been a problem with the Toni Kroos article to the point that he has been warned a couple times on his talk page. Maybe you want to monitor the user. Kingjeff (talk) 20:03, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drmies/Archive_71&oldid=1153315618"