Misplaced Pages

User talk:Eric Corbett: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:49, 24 July 2009 view sourceMalleus Fatuorum (talk | contribs)145,401 editsm GA notability?: indenting← Previous edit Revision as of 20:17, 24 July 2009 view source Mattisse (talk | contribs)78,542 edits Advice?: new sectionNext edit →
Line 244: Line 244:


:There's no will for change among the entrenched minority in positions of authority here. If there was, then the daft civility police would have been put up against a wall and shot ages ago. --] ] 15:02, 24 July 2009 (UTC) :There's no will for change among the entrenched minority in positions of authority here. If there was, then the daft civility police would have been put up against a wall and shot ages ago. --] ] 15:02, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

== Advice? ==

Malleus,

Since you are one of my mentors, what should I do about You will probably say do nothing. Regards, —] (]) 20:17, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:17, 24 July 2009

I feel that I'm getting close to the end of my time here. There are many aspects of wikipedia's governance that seem to me to be at best ill-considered and at worst corrupt, and little recognition that some things need to change.

I appreciate that there are many good, talented, and honest people here, but there are far too many who are none of those things, concerned only with the status they acquire by doing whatever is required to climb up some greasy pole or other. Increasingly I feel that I'm out of step with the way things are run here, and at best grudgingly tolerated by the children who run this site,

Archiving icon
Archives

2007

AprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember

2008

JanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember

2009

JanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJuly



This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

WikiProject Greater Manchester Announcements

Alt text

Where under "Preferences" to I uncheck what you said to uncheck, so that so much text does not show up for an image? I have hunted around under browser Options and Preferences but can't find anything relevant. —Mattisse (Talk) 15:24, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

It's the second option under Content, "Load images automatically". --Malleus Fatuorum 15:32, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! I also discovered that the web developer add-on has an alt option which shows the alt text. Guess I was freaked out. Hey, would you look at an article Fertilisation of Orchids, currently an FAC, and tell me if there is anything hugely wrong with it, from your point of view? Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 20:33, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
That's a really useful add-on, I've just installed it myself. I'm not really sure I can help much with the orchid article though; my wife's forever chastising me for digging up plants from the garden I thought were weeds. I was brought up in Scotland, where we believe that anything green is poisonous, or at least I do anyway. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 23:46, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Fertilisation of Orchids is a monograph by Darwin on evolutionary theory, not gardening. —Mattisse (Talk) 16:02, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Ah! --Malleus Fatuorum 02:06, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Peace?

If I have, I didn't intend to piss anyone off in this situation. You are right, it is Noloop that is the problem. I say that we let the admins deal with Noloop and WebHamster. Between us, how about we just move on and let the situation go.--Sky Attacker 23:25, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I encourage you to sign your name here Misplaced Pages:NODRAMA. Let's have 5 days of solid article bulding, yes?--Sky Attacker 23:31, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Interesting to see how that works out. I won't be signing up though, as I'm not prepared to watch good editors like WebHamster be thrown to the lions no matter what the date is. Where there is evil ... well, you get the idea. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 23:41, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Just saying

re: this. I thought I saw a comment recently about "sauce for the goose...". For some reason I was remembered of that. ;-) — Ched :  ?  13:07, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I have never attempted to justify my behaviour here to anyone Ched, and neither have I ever formally complained about the behaviour of anyone else by going crying to AN/ANI/WQA when someone is rude to me. If there were more like me this place would run a lot more smoothly. Just my opinion, of course. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 13:14, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
It does seem that noloop's desire to put me against the wall does have all the appearances of a perpetual motion machine, but what the hell eh? :) I can attest to Mal's non-hypocrisy (I wonder if that should be called hypercrisy?) when it comes to his response to being the recipient of 'rudeness'. And I also agree with his contention that the place would run smoother if the request for donations accompanied a similar request for editors with thicker skins. --WebHamster 13:54, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I've been wondering for a while whether there isn't a quite fundamental difference in attitude towards this whole civility issue between UK and US editors. It's certainly my impression that we in the UK are by-and-large much less precious about the odd ding-dong or a bit of honest name calling than the Americans currently running so much of this site. Thinking of Giano, perhaps it's a European thing. --Malleus Fatuorum 14:05, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm with you on this one. It could be that beneath the false facade of "have a nice day" friendliness and overly patriotic behaviour the citizens of the US are actually quite emotional and sensitive. Perhaps our brusqueness cuts right through fake politeness and political correctness and hits them where they really are and they just can't handle the fact (I'm so tempted to put "truth" here instead) that some countries tend to see life as it is and now how they'd prefer it to be. Who knows muahaaaa! --WebHamster 14:13, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
For some reason that reminds me of the Sam Goldwyn quote: “I don't want any 'yes-men' around me. I want everybody to tell me the truth even if it costs them their jobs.” --Malleus Fatuorum 14:33, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
There might be merit to a cultural divide regarding free speech in the U.S and civility on Misplaced Pages. It's an interesting question at least. In my experience, Americans tend to use the phrase "free speech" without understanding what it really is, or disappointingly short-sightedly. When many cry "free speech!" they of course mean that no one should argue, verbally attack, or otherwise judge or respond in any way other than being supportive. That is not what the guys who wrote the Bill of Rights intended it to be. Americans sometimes forget the courage it takes to speak one's mind, then stand and accept/listen to what others think of their opinions. I used to tell my students that yes, it is legal for someone to carry a sign on a sidewalk that states "I hate (group)", but it is also legal for someone to come and say that the sign holder sucks. They were surprised at both. The safe environment that is trying to be set in schools for kids to have the freedom to begin to express themselves while demonstrating patience for other opinions carries over into general culture, and clearly here on Misplaced Pages. In sanitizing these environments to make them safe, students aren't really taught the responsibilities that go with their rights. --Moni3 (talk) 14:34, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps an analogy might be our modern passion for hygiene and anti-bacterial cleansers everywhere. I think it's well established now that children fare better when they're exposed to a bit of muck and germs when they're young, helps them build up their resistance. I remember when I was a kid if a friend or neighbour had something like mumps or chickenpox my mother would rush us all round so that we would catch it as well and get it over with. No mollycoddling. The PC craziness has seeped in here as well though. One of my favourite stories is of a junior school football (soccer) match, in which one side was getting badly beaten. They were 9–0 down at half-time, but instead of their coach taking them to one side and giving them a shot in the arm and sorting them out, the match was abandoned to save the poor darlings the humiliation of getting beaten by an even greater score. Pathetic. Life's at least as much about losing as it is about winning. Anyone can win gracefully, it's how you take the knocks that defines you. --Malleus Fatuorum 14:50, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
America is a country descended from outcasts and political/religious refugees. We all have persecution complexes. People call each other assholes only from behind the relative safety of the their tinted SUV windows. If you call a spade a spade, you either get shot (West of the Mississippi) or you become the CEO (East of the Mississippi). --Laser brain (talk) 14:54, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Australia though is famously a British penal colony, and you don't get much more straight-talking than Australians. Tony1 is a pretty good example, so it looks like the cultural divide is between the US and the rest of the world. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 14:58, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Remember the story of the English tourist going through passport control at Sydney Airport? When the immigration officer asked if he had a criminal record he replied: "I didn't realise that was still obligatory". --Malleus Fatuorum 15:00, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Realizing that I'm vastly outnumbered here, I'll still risk the following comment. There's a "rest of the world"? ;)
A "World Series" in a sport that no other country plays might be a clue ;) --WebHamster 17:08, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Poor maligned and forgotten Canada. Will no one ever notice her mapleness, even in the lead sentence? --Moni3 (talk) 17:11, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm not surprised based on the second paragraph "and one club from Canada". :) --WebHamster 18:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Salford,_Greater_Manchester#Early_history

Malleus I've just emailed you a scan of a book, I wondered if you wouldn't mind taking a quick look at the above link, and seeing if the changes I've made around 'Burgesses' makes sense? I'm not quite certain I've gotten it right. Parrot of Doom (talk) 18:08, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll check my email shortly. --Malleus Fatuorum 18:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Looks good to me. I don't know whether you added this or not, but I just don't understand what it's getting at all: "Information about Salford during the Tudor period and beyond is available from the surviving volumes of the Portmote Records. 'October 03, 1601 - A tusellment made ye 3 October betwixt Robert Tetlow and Mr Dainsford man and James Hilton and no blud shed.'" The first bit's fine, but what the Hell is account of the "tesellment" doing there? --Malleus Fatuorum 20:52, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
No idea, I didn't add that bit. I did see the Portmote records in the library, but they had centuries of dust on so I didn't touch them :) Parrot of Doom (talk) 21:00, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Let's dump it then, and get to GAN. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 21:02, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Here, here. I think we can handle GAN without much trouble. Nev1 (talk) 21:04, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
OK then, who's going to do the honours? --Malleus Fatuorum 21:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Not yet. There's still lots to do IMO. I added some stuff on mills, but I think there are two mentions of the same 'twist' mill now, that needs sorting out.
I also have mucho to input, about trams, horse carriages, omnibuses, broughton, pendleton, and ordsall, as well as a couple of odd bits here and there.
I should be able to add a fair bit tomorrow, Sunday I'm working all day, so I reckon you'd be best waiting until Monday - unless GAN is particularly slow right now (actually I have 4 articles there, only 1 has been reviewed so far). Parrot of Doom (talk) 21:58, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Also, I've come across more than a few instances of 'too many references' syndrome (same reference 3 times in one paragraph, uninterrupted by others) that could do with being tidied up.
I'll leave it to you to decide when you think it's the right time for GAN then. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 22:02, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
PS. One way to get some priority at GAN is to review other people's articles. Admittedly I've been a bit lazy in that respect, I've only reviewed 300 or so. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:07, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I think it'd get torn to bits at FAC tbh :) I do review the odd article at GAN, the trouble is I'm a bit...picky, and tend to end up asking for corrections and clarifications on every single sentence :) For instance. I don't know if thats normal or not, but I've had 'my' articles pass GAN with barely a comment. Parrot of Doom (talk) 22:18, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I think we'd struggle at FAC as well. When you've finished your additions and it's a GA we can look to tidy it up for the lions. Of which I'm often one, to be fair. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
If I only read what people said about you here, I'd have you down as a Hyena tbh :) Parrot of Doom (talk) 22:32, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I think of myself more as a wolverine, solitary and misunderstood. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:55, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

I just want to let you know that I appreciate your input in the recent ANI thread regarding civility. I am eager to see our community's notion of civility become more sophisticated than a list of no-no words. Your input in that direction is valued, and I'll continue to think about what you said. I may disagree with you about certain things, but don't think I'm not listening. :) -GTBacchus 19:54, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I see the questions you're asking as a good faith effort to open a sensible discussion on a subject too many have closed minds on. I don't expect you or anyone else to agree with my point of view, but I think the discussion needs to be had nevertheless. Even if all I achieve is to make people stop and think about the present daft situation, that'll be better than blindly going on down a path that is leading nowhere good. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:19, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

The Falcon, Chester

I'm always willing to learn, but did I do anything wrong by giving the article this title? Before I could blink it had been moved to The Falcon (public house) and I still cannot understand why. The discussion with the perpetrator has been copied to the article's talk page (as s/he suggested). I still think the new title demeans the article - it was not written because it is a pub, but because it is one of the outstandingly important buildings in Chester. Was my title wrong? If so, OK. If not, what do you advise (or should I just calm down)? Peter I. Vardy (talk) 20:23, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't agree with the move either, and if necessary I'll write another "The Falcon" article to force the issue. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:15, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your support. Nev1 has done the necessary move back. And List of listed buildings in Runcorn (rural area) has been accepted as a FL. I know you're not keen on FLs, but the two matters together have made MY day. Cheers. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 07:52, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

That section

I thought it was time it went after it had been flagged for so long. I thought briefly about retaining the stuff where a ferret was an important element of a story but then released that that was a fact about the story and not one about ferrets. I was going to say that after all Ring (jewellery) doesn't mention Wagner or Tolkein, but I've just gone and checked and had to remove the latter.--Peter cohen (talk) 22:53, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I think the only significant thing in that section was the Aristophanes info, which suggests a date for when ferrets may have been commonplace, but as you say, that was already mentioned in the History section anyway. I'm also not happy about all the airline info, which is going to be liable to change and is really not about ferrets at all. I've really wanted this article to become properly encyclopedic for ages now, but it still looks like an owner's manual to me. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:05, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Not an owner's manual? You mean I can't add something about the dangers of ferrets vandalising Misplaced Pages (User_talk:Peter_cohen#April_2009)? I'll leave the airline info for you to deal with. I appreciate your point that the info is liable to get out of date and mislead people. Perhaps it falls under something in WP:NOT or you can propose an addition there. At least we haven't got the problems like Rottweiler and Pit Bull where there is a lobby trying to downplay the hazards. I'm waiting for someone to sue Misplaced Pages claiming they were misled. I notice that Dobermann Pinscher at least has started to link good references to academic research on dog aggression which highlight the fact that while Dachshunds and some other toy breeds may be more snappy, the larger dogs can do more damage. --Peter cohen (talk) 12:03, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Mwah ha ha ha

Some people asked me to run for the Wiki Board. I would probably just be running against Kohs and have a complete bonkers of a campaign. What do you think? Ottava Rima (talk) 15:13, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

If that's something you think you might enjoy then why not? --Malleus Fatuorum 17:22, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
I am tempted to use my image with an image of Cthulhu in the background, as if I was his puppet. :D Ottava Rima (talk) 17:44, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

You Know

I knew I was asking for it. I hit save and thought, you know what, there goes my article. Tilted Kilt is of a higher calibre, I believe, solely because the food really is the focus. Law type! snype? 03:20, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

That's a much more interesting article; pity we don't have them over here. Needs more pictures though :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 03:30, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Should you find yourself in the great state of Southern California, I'll buy you a pint and a chicken wing. Law type! snype? 03:33, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
By the time I get back to California they'll have made alcohol illegal. Again. --Malleus Fatuorum 03:41, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Well good. I'll stock up on Boddington's and some mash, just in case. Law type! snype? 04:01, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Donnchadh again

After (and of course if) hamiltonstone's concerns are resolved, I'm gonna print this thing off and have a final copy-edit. I'm going to co-nom you on the Donnchadh article, whenever it is ready to go forward, owing to the work you put in. Because of that you'll probably want some final say about when it's ready, so after my final copy-edit I'll leave you a notice to check. Would that be ok? All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 09:56, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll be happy to check it through again when you think it's ready, but I really didn't do enough to warrant a co-nom. --Malleus Fatuorum 12:28, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
  • 80-odd edits is more than enough I think. I'm gonna go ahead and nom it tonight. I've given it another serious copy-edit and slightly reformatted it. If you have time can you double-check for any potential problems I may have created (trailing typos, and so on)? :) All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 22:30, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Will do. I thought it was just about ready before anyway. I've been slaving over the Samlesbury witches for much of the day. Honestly, I think GA is getting to be almost as hard as FA. :lol: --Malleus Fatuorum 22:33, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Argh, maybe, but its a bit of a lottery on what reviewer you get. Ready before? Maybe, but there are a lot of very particular users, and if you don't present FAs often you can get a hard time for so many things. The readier the better! :) I've went ahead btw. All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 23:51, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm going to try to review Seward and Donnchadh tomorrow, after my eyes recover. (pokes Deacon) Urse??? Ealdgyth - Talk 23:52, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
A yes, Urse. Almost forgot about that! I'll try to do some work on it tomorrow ... that is depending on the presence and/or size of any fix list on either of those noms. :) Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 00:05, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Nikita Zotov

I just wanted to thank you for the work you did on the Nikita Zotov article while the article was on the front page. I have been toying with the idea of possibly getting the article to GA standard, and I was wondering what additional work you think would be necessary to do so (aside from the abysmal lead, of course). Thanks, NW (Talk) 14:04, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I think there's still quite a bit of work to do before it'll be ready for a GA nomination. I'll leave a few notes on the article's talk page for you. --Malleus Fatuorum 15:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
I figured it would be as much. Thank you for all your help. NW (Talk) 15:55, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Formatting

I don't suppose you know how to make the verse quoted at the bottom of Mary Toft behave itself, do you? I'm rubbish at html thingies. Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:09, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I do. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:11, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Malleus's reputation is so great that language reformats itself before him. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:20, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
If only. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:24, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
It still appears to have a loads of whitespace around it. I wonder if a load of carriage returns would fix that. Failing that, I could just remove it from the box.
I'm almost ready to take this to FAC now. Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:30, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Try that, I just butchered out all of the formatting that could cause any "white" in it. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:36, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
It still has loads, on both Firefox and Opera. Odd, because in this version it works fine. The only difference is the third image in that section. Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:40, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Try refreshing your cache. It works fine in all versions of my firefox and internet explorers without any white space. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:46, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Wait, do you mean -outside- of the box? You silly git. It has a template that causes it to end the section only after everything else. Look at the very bottom of the section. :P Ottava Rima (talk) 23:47, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't think the box works there, but if you stagger the images I think you should be able to reduce the whitespace. It's the images that are forcing the whitespace. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:48, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Didn't you add a third image between the version that worked and the one that doesn't? --Malleus Fatuorum 23:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Aww you killed my box :( Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:53, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
It just wasn't right. You'd have had to remove it at FAC anyway. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 23:55, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
pfft, what do they know, they passed that stupid car mascot article that was TFA a few weeks back! :) Parrot of Doom (talk) 00:11, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Much better now, thanks. I had thought there was too much text for smaller images but actually its fine. That Ottava character clearly doesn't know anything ;) Parrot of Doom (talk) 00:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Samlesbury witches

Hi there. I've done a review of this here if you want to check it out. Ping me at my talk page if you want, or I've got your talk page and the article on my watchlist anyway. Cheers. hamiltonstone (talk) 04:58, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your review. It shouldn't take me long to make the changes you've suggested, most if not all of which I think I agree with. --Malleus Fatuorum 12:03, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
When I get unburied from this current set of work, I tend to force you to work on some similarly themed topics (and other works by Ainsworth). Ottava Rima (talk) 00:09, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
I look forward to working on Ainsworth's Lancashire Witches, and I can feel an overarching Lancashire witch trials article coming on, perhaps even a Cheshire witch trials as well. But before then I've got to at least try and do the Moors murders article justice. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:19, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, I can help you on the Lancashire witch trials article. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 00:36, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Good, 'cos I'm not sure where to start with it. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 00:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Easy. "Once there was an old woman. People didn't like her. They declared her a witch." :) Ottava Rima (talk) 00:40, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
To be serious, just for a moment, many of those convicted of witchcraft were male, and many witches who hadn't committed a capital offence by actually causing death were dealt with in the lower courts, and maybe put in the stocks or whatever, not hanged as they could have been in the high-profile assizes.</serious> --Malleus Fatuorum 00:49, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh great template expert...

Can you figure out how to add an alt text parameter to Template:Horse infobox? I'm just off spending 11 hours in Photoshop, so my brain is not up for finicky things. I need a good black and tan right now... Ealdgyth - Talk 23:50, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

It's no great trick really Ealdgyth, although I'd like to be able to claim that it requires a brain the size of a planet. :-) I'll sort it tomorrow if nobody else has before then. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:59, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

New list?

Enjoyed doing that review. I was thinking of creating List of witch trials. Any thoughts as to the wisdom of this before I go ahead? hamiltonstone (talk) 01:31, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Only one, which is that I think it's a great idea. Probably better to narrow it down though, perhaps to English, Scottish, or American trials though? Those Europeans went mad, so it would be a big list if it included every witchcraft trial everywhere. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:37, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Ah. OK, will ponder. What about a template (navbox) for the bottom of the pages. I find them useful, and have just done one for Business in Australia. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
I think a navbox could work to link the various List of witch trials in ... articles that you haven't written yet. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 01:46, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Is there a person slower on the uptake at WP than I? There at the bottom of the relevant articles, is Template:Witch Hunt. Oh look! So. Anyway, I did some work on it to make it more readable. That will do for now I think. hamiltonstone (talk) 02:14, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

GA notability?

Maryland Route 284 - would you say that such an article warrants GA? I've been looking through the list, I've 'quick'failed a couple of articles that were very poorly referenced, but looking at this I'd suggest that it barely covers the basics. For that to be a GA, I'd want the road's entire history, its phases of construction, signage used, traffic levels, etc. Right now it looks start-class or a stub. Parrot of Doom (talk) 09:51, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Another example is The Beatles in the United States - I'm considering reviewing it but frankly the prose is poor throughout. What would you do, a quick single-paragraph summary of your concerns, or would you go right through the article pointing out all the errors, knowing that none of your recommendations might be acted upon? Parrot of Doom (talk) 10:06, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
I'd agree with you about Maryland Route 284, it's little more than a stub. So far as The Beatles in the United States is concerned though, while I agree with you that the prose is fairly poor throughout the question is, is it good enough? I don't think it is quite, but we need to be careful not to expect too much of a GAN, it's not FAC. I'd have some concerns about the content too, for instance it doesn't even tell me how many concerts The Beatles did on their August 1965 tour; I'm also concerned about the tone is some places, such as "a shocking event had taken place there". I'd tend not to pick up an article like that one unless I was prepared to have a go at the prose myself, as I don't like having to fail an otherwise good article just because of its prose. If you took on the review and were uncertain about how your comments would be received, or whether they'd be acted on, then I'd make a short list of some important things that need to be addressed and see how that's responded to. --Malleus Fatuorum 12:31, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
So were you to review MR 284, what would your suggestion be? I'd like to fail it on a lack of comprehensiveness but I don't want to look a fool if that isn't allowed. Parrot of Doom (talk) 13:29, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
I'd fail it because it doesn't (IMO) meet good article criteria 3a, i.e., it doesn't address the main aspects of the topic. GAs don't need to be comprehensive—that's for FAs—but there ought not to be obvious and big gaps in their coverage. --Malleus Fatuorum 13:34, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
I failed it on just the criterion you suggested. I don't like to do it, especially as I've reviewed one of his articles last year (and he worked hard to improve it), but IMO it was just too short. I gave my reasons on the article's talk page. Parrot of Doom (talk) 15:19, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to intrude, as it's not my business. But to have allowed this article as a GA would have been a nonsense. If this article were to have succeeded as a GA, virtually everything I have written would pass as a GA, and that would make a mockery of the assessment. Cheers. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:37, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
I completely agree Peter. Just look at the work we had to do to get Salford through GA, or the Samlesbury witches.
PS. Feel free to "intrude" whenever you like. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 16:44, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Justiceout

The trouble with bringing this up is that Misplaced Pages is often rude and harsh. It is not inconceivable that I will be attacked for bringing it up. I have seen the reporter of a problem being attacked in ANI before. Besides, the incident happened about 3 months ago so the blocked user is unlikely to keep checking their account. There is no point in trying to discipline the administrator because that is always fruitless. The threshold is much, much higher than regular users. (One might argue that the threshold should be much, much lower because administrators are supposed to be WP's best users).

The best way to resolve this would be to discuss the matter with all parties and the community at the time it happened. I only discovered it because I was researching an article for the dramaout article writing campaign and was clicking on links of related topics, one of which had a failed AFD. I noticed that the AFD submittor was an administrator with a bold looking, custom made signature and the author of that article was blocked by the same admin.

In Misplaced Pages, maybe we should adopt the "highest possible ethics" as the standard. American dentists cannot date patients because the dental licensing board wants to be very cautious. In some universities, professors cannot date or have sexual relations with students or recent former students. In Misplaced Pages, we don't have such standards. Administrators and long time users should abide by high standards. Such high standards would serve to differentiate Misplaced Pages from a message board, from knowledge websites like Yahoo answers, and from social sites, like facebook. User F203 (talk) 14:45, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

There's no will for change among the entrenched minority in positions of authority here. If there was, then the daft civility police would have been put up against a wall and shot ages ago. --Malleus Fatuorum 15:02, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Advice?

Malleus,

Since you are one of my mentors, what should I do about this? You will probably say do nothing. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 20:17, 24 July 2009 (UTC)