Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:10, 30 March 2012

There are many aspects of Misplaced Pages'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. I'm out of step with the way things are run here, and at best grudgingly tolerated by the children who run this site. I see that as a good thing, although I appreciate that there are others who see it as an excuse to look for any reason to block me, as my log amply demonstrates.

Archives

2007 April May June July August September October November December 2008 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2009 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2010 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2011 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2012 January February March

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Windsor Castle

Hello. The thread we've both been contributing to at VP made me take a look at the list of FAs that haven't appeared on Main Page. I noticed that Windsor Castle is one of them. You seem to be one of three main contributors. I thought it might be a good option for Main Page on the day of the Jubilee and wondered what you thought of the idea. If you like it, I'm happy to drop the other two a line. --Dweller (talk) 16:15, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

The other two are probably the ones who wrote the article, as I certainly didn't. Malleus Fatuorum 16:41, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I chipped in with the odd minor edit, but the article is Hchc2009's. Nev1 (talk)

Fair enough. I'll drop him a line. But while I'm here, do either of you think it's a good/bad idea? You're both editors whose opinions I value. --Dweller (talk) 16:58, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Some editors dislike their articles appearing on the main page because of the extra maintenance it creates. My experience of TFAs is few and far between so I don't mind too much when articles I've edited find their way onto the front page. The Tower of London was TFA on 29 September 2010. Distance may be distorting things, but I don't recall it being too stressful and there were useful suggestions on the talk page. 71,000 people visited the article that day; if Windsor is to be TFA on the jubilee I'd expect the figures, and therefore vandalism etc, to be even higher. Nev1 (talk) 17:09, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

To summarise: it's clearly an appropriate article, but for me Hchc2009's opinion would strongly influence whether I support Windsor Castle being TFA. Nev1 (talk) 17:12, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

It's Hchc2009's choice, I agree. Ealdgyth seems to get an inordinate number of mainpage appearances, but I don't think she's entirely sold on the idea. I don't write that much myself these days, but I don't recall TFA as being anything other than a minor nightmare. Malleus Fatuorum 03:44, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

See User_talk:Hchc2009#Windsor_Castle. You two happy? I have no desire to go tramping on an FA I haven't improved! Would one of you like to raise it with Raul yourself? I have no axe to grind here - just would like to see it happen, rather than the day being marked with a ... --Dweller (talk) 19:24, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm certainly happy if Hchc2009 is. There's no reason to raise it with Raul though, just nominate it at TFAR as normal. Malleus Fatuorum 03:23, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I didn't make the world ...

... I just try to live in it. And change stuff where it can be improved.

Yup, in your ideal world, "the only good civility policy is one conspicuous by its absence." BUT ... that ain't gonna happen here. There's always going to be one. We're having some interesting, thoughtful and productive discussion over at WT:CIV, with some big hearts and good brains involved. If I had been putting together a working team to write something decent, you would surely have been one of my first choices. We need your points of view, and your intelligence, insight and excellent language skills over there. Bearing in mind that you're going to have to live with some kind of civility policy (and this goes for many like you but less outspoken), please will you join us in an endeavour to get something bearable and sensible in place? Pretty please? Mucho hugzies, offers of free beer, directions to the mushroom fields ... ;P Pesky (talk) 10:26, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I thought I'd take a look, ......but I couldn't finish. Everybody knows what it means, nobody will read it. It's too long and it will be unevenly enforced as before. I don't read anything I don't have to, I don't think many editors do. Most of it reminds me of school rules, it hardly treats editors as adults. If it can't be said in a couple of sentences it's not worth saying. I loathe this nicey-nicey stuff. It's a policy for the easily offended that's all. Sorry. J3Mrs (talk) 11:00, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not (personally) looking for yes-men (or yes-women) here. What we really need are lots of views from different angles, and your comments here show that you could be invaluable. I'm (personally) trying to get away from walls of text and more towards bullet points, do's and dont's, almost-soundbites, and getting stuff worded clearly, concisely, and simply, so that editors who have English as a second language, and younger editors, can understand it just as easily as people from Uni / college / further/higher education backgrounds can. If we can't all understand it, it's next to useless. If you can bear to have another look (lol!) with a view to more concise wording, that would be great. Pesky (talk) 11:30, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

It might as well be left alone as the problem isn't what it says but how it's interpreted. Any self respecting adult is simply not going to wade through either text or bullet points. We all know what is and isn't civil, it's more about what some people get away with and what other others don't. I've got away with things and I've been subject to things. It's really a policy for the easily offended and those who like running to teacher. I can't see how it could possibly be anything else. It should say develop a thick skin or find something else to do. I don't want to go back to school rules thanks. J3Mrs (talk) 11:44, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll briefly poke my head in here to agree with J3Mrs. No normal editor will, or should be expected to, read through and memorize a list of bullet points regarding a topic as marginal to most editors' daily activity as this. Your proposal isn't aimed at typical editors, it's aimed at the half-dozen fruitloops who would actually waste their time commenting on WT:CIV. If I'm reading this correctly, you're seriously suggesting that not only should all editors be expected to memorize the personal prejudices of you and a couple of your friends, they should be subject to sanctions should they have an opinion that differs from your own, or do anything you consider "upsetting". I disagree with J3Mrs in one respect; these proposals would be laughed out of any self-respecting grade school, since teachers understand the concept that "people sometimes disagree". Your proposal is so draconian that in the very unlikely event it ever became policy, even the most hardline Defender Of The Wiki types would ignore it.

Although I haven't been following this (or anything) in any kind of detail, it seems that all your (Pesky's) comments on this topic have a distinct whiff of "cult leader explaining revealed wisdom to the masses" about them; you seem to think your particular prejudices are inalienable truth, whilst anyone who happens to disagree with you is a poor misguided fool who needs to be bombarded with patronizing nonsense until they give up in disgust and leave you to play with yourself. (Since AFAIK my sole previous interaction with you was your taking a very carefully worded post of mine based on years of experience of the interactions between Misplaced Pages's hardcore editing community, Misplaced Pages's casual users, Misplaced Pages's dispute-resolution processes, the WMF, Arbcom wearing its "de facto provisional government when consensus fails" hat, and the external critics of Misplaced Pages—and unilaterally "summarizing" it into sanctimonious, unworkable and objectionable bilge—I'm uninclined to give you much benefit of the doubt here.) – iridescent 15:21, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, I apologise if I offended you; however, I find your comments here to be extremely offensive. Where did WP:AGF go, in all of that? Pesky (talk) 16:04, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Adding: I note you said "If I'm reading this correctly...". I don't think you are. I never suggested, for example, that anyone should be memorising anything. I'm also having real trouble working out what you think is draconian. Pesky (talk) 16:29, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I think the responders here are missing the point; first off, Pesky was curious what Malleus thought, and he has yet to weigh in. Second, the responses I am seeing here are exactly why such a policy should be developed, vicious ad hominem attacks against an editor making a good faith effort are out of line. Third, Pesky is one of the most sincere and straightforward editors I know on wikipedia, and really does not deserve to have her good faith suggestions dismissed as "sanctimonious, unworkable and objectionable bilge." Finally, having spent a LOT of years as a teacher, this sort of thing is PRECISELY what shows up in many schools -- statements by nature general, but applicable to multiple situations, thus taking away the excuse, "gee teacher, I didn't know it was against the rules, there's no rule that says I can't push Suzie into a mud puddle and call her a green zit-face." Civility is also known as acting like an adult, and targeted deliberate incivility should only be applied with common sense to those who lack a clue. Adult behavior is something in quite short supply here. Montanabw 20:36, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I support Iridescent's statement, which is a clear statement of the spirit of existing policy (which is often misapplied).

An unfortunate consequence of the other proposals (and TPC's critics at WP:Civ are worse ) is that they would strengthen the ability of administrators to block editors for incivility that does not reach the level of personal attacks or disruptive editing; such a change in policy would need an RfC to have legitimate weight.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:05, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Like Montanabw, I would have preferred an acknowledgment of Pesky's good faith from Iridescent and perhaps thanks for keeping Iridescent's suggestion "in play", but I am sure that TPC is a robust editor who is secure in her own worth and secure in the knowledge that she has earned our trust, respect, and affection, so nothing more need be said.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:09, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I did weigh in, above, to say that what I want is to see the civility policy abolished; it will never be anything other than a stick to beat other editors with. Malleus Fatuorum 22:52, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

... that's actually one of my main goals in trying to get the damned thing sorted out, to get it fair and reasonable, and equally applied. I'm trying to get something in there which will stop the hypocrisy with which some people use the policy as a weapon. I don't know if you've looked at any of it, but the following was one of my ideas:

Rules of Enforcement

1. Be absolutely, scrupulously fair and impartial at all times

   This means never reporting any editor for something which you have either done yourself, or would tolerate in your best mate! And also never piling-on in support of sanctions when someone else makes a report for something which you have either done yourself, or would tolerate in your best mate!

   Be sure to take into account all the relevant history; never make snap judgments without acquainting yourself with the background to any situation

2. Think very hard of the possible merits of all other avenues of approach before you take action

   Sanctions for civility violations should only happen when nothing else would do

   Remember that sanctions may be more applicable under another heading (disruption, personal attack, tendentious editing, etc.)

3. Civility blocks should be for obvious and uncontentious reasons, because an editor has stepped over the line in a manner nearly all editors can see. In cases where you have reason to suspect this would not be the case - cases where there is reason to believe that taking admin action against someone who was uncivil would not be an uncontentious (or nearly so) prospect, it is expected that discussion will be opened on the matter, via ANI or RFC/U, before any admin action is taken.

That third one was actually Fluffernutter's. EotR is aslo helping to rein in some of my more wacky moments. (And I don't consider either of them to be fruitloops ;P )

@KW; I'm not as "robust" as you seem to think! Sometimes things like what Iridescent said really, really hurt. Stupid, but true. It's not since December that I've felt so comprehensively misunderstood, or face-slapped for trying to make something better. Pesky (talk) 10:04, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm afraid Be absolutely, scrupulously fair and impartial at all times doesn't sit well with me at all. One person's fairness is another's injustice and so on. Our judgement is often clouded by the fact we're human. We get angry, we forget things. Brains just don't work in a way that makes that section possible...I've gotten annoyed over things I've done myself, had an argument about it and the such, only to realise later (sometimes much later) that I was being a rotten hypocrite. That's like asking people to be perfect, or God. Never going to happen. If there's a civility policy, it has to make allowance for the the fact that people are human. No amount of sensible wording is going to make us all act fairly all the time. :P Bunnies! Leave a message :) 10:23, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

By bringing this to the talk page of an editor who has said he is not interested, don't you think you are rather proving Iridescent's point? I took the trouble to read it all and well....... I'd let it drop, it isn't worth it, as nothing will change, well certainly not for the better. J3Mrs (talk) 10:43, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) What OohBunnies said. Your proposal as it stands is to make it sanctionable for anyone to act in a way which could upset anyone, which even the hardline Civilination types would consider unworkably draconian. There are only two ways in which a civility policy could actually function within Misplaced Pages's unique (and uniquely problematic) internal culture; either the 'common law solution', of abolishing the formal policy altogether and approaching each case in terms of impact on the project; or, an intentionally inflexible formal policy with as little wiggle-room as possible. Both would be so vigorously opposed by the half-dozen people who WP:OWN the civility policy (that figure isn't plucked out of thin air), that neither would ever be accepted unless the WMF imposed them from above. As Malleus and OohBunnies both say above, the proposed bullet-list of platitudes is an open invitation to gaming and abuse. (How exactly are you to judge what someone else would or wouldn't "find acceptable if someone said it to their nephew"?) FWIW, I find it vanishingly unlikely that EotR is actually supporting your proposal, given that she has Arbcom experience, and knows full well both how unworkable it would be and just how strongly "perceived incivility" correlates with "personal grudge". (As previously mentioned, when That Case opened at Arbcom I gave Malleus an accurate prediction of the voting numbers based purely on the personal attitudes towards the various parties of the arbs active on the case. What in a friend is a "strongly worded opinion", in an enemy is "gross incivility". It's been mentioned many times before, but the internal politics of Misplaced Pages are generally determined by who can round up the most cronies, and who can avoid upsetting anyone important.) – iridescent 11:01, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

@ Iridescent: Ah, OK, I think I understood that better. (btw, Iridescent, I'm a HFA person, so Isometimes just can't get it unless it's explained differently. I do try, but I often fail.) I now see what you meant by the "draconian" thing; I obviously worded that idea very badly. Something does need to be done to make the thing workable, anc clear, and non-gameable, though. What we currently have is chaotic, and chaotically applied. Can you help with wording, re-wording, brainstorming, whatever is necessary to make this thing right?

@J3Mrs, I'm putting enough trust in Malleus to be aware that I'm really trying to make something better, not be uncivil or annoying to him. When you want a policy as clearly-written and unabiguous as an FA is, there are a few good, sound people whose input is invaluable. Malleus is one of them.

There are loads of ways of failing, but in order to make the damned thing better, how can we make it succeed, , instead of thinking of all the ways it can fail? Please help. Something needs to be done, and it seems as though most people either don't care, or don't dare, to "grab this bull by the horns and rethink the whole civility issue, because all we have right now is anarchy and chaos." Pesky (talk) 11:45, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

No matter what you come up with, until it's applied evenly and fairly (read "all users" as opposed to "editors," as I can see some Admins arguing that since they aren't titled editor the rules don't apply) nothing will really work. And since I've seen no real inclination to apply rules to everyone equally, any policy (no matter how carefully crafted and worded) is doomed to failure or abuse. Sorry, Pesky. I think you're trying to do something really good here, but the existing culture really works against you on a number of very fundamental levels. So long as authority figures (real or perceived, just to avoid claims that admins aren't authority figures) ignore or flaunt rules it encourages others to do the same.Intothatdarkness (talk) 14:06, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

My biggest bugbear with the whole civility thing is the unequal application of it. But then I have this obsession about injustice. In my book, "all editors" means all. Without exception. Rules which are unequally enforced aren't rules; they are the oppressive tools of a tyranny. Pesky (talk) 15:15, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

{{outdent}Unequal application is hard to eliminate completely, any person will tell you that the real life law always works better for some people than others, in real life there are dramatic differences in application between rich and poor and (in the USA anyway) white and non-white, etc. Doesn't mean that we shouldn't have real world law or wikipedia policy, it just means that it's a social contract that is under never-ending modification. I don't think a civility policy can ever be set in stone or applied perfectly, but that doesn't mean one should not be created. The problem, as always, is crafting something that understands the difference between Malleus' now-infamous example of calling a couple of male admins the "c-word" which was used as a trout slap and cluebat against people who probably needed such a slap, versus (just as an example) the editor who called Bishonen a variant on the "b-word" with a clear intent to bully the user and create a hostile environment. A good policy would have a mechanism to tell Malleus that he's being a flaming a--hole when he's crossed the line without banning and blocking him from doing what he does best. Yet, at the same time, the truly disruptive editors who seldom contribute anything useful at all and seem to spend all their time on the drama boards need to be blocked swiftly and efficiently instead of being allowed to feed their egos by running tendentious, endless arguments over a half-dozen policy talk pages. Montanabw 15:50, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

On a point of order, it was only one editor, not two, and I had no idea then or now whether that editor was an admin or not. What started the trouble off was my perfectly innocuous observation that some administrators were dishonest cunts, which I find it hard to believe that anyone could credibly deny. Things just spiralled out of control after that. Malleus Fatuorum 17:17, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

In any statistically significant sample of humans, some of them are going to be dishonest cunts. Ask KW. I suppose the only question remaining (for the purists) is whether that subset of humanity is a statistically significant sample. Pesky (talk) 20:21, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I know I'm pestering, but I'm doing it in a good cause, and because I care

The other reason(s) is / are what you said earlier:

* Better would be to fix the Misplaced Pages concept of civility and apply it consistently to all editors, which is the only possible good outcome I can see from this case. Malleus Fatuorum 17:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

• I would agree to abide by any properly written and consistently enforced civility policy, but right now we have neither. Malleus Fatuorum 21:36, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
  

• Absolutely agree with the observations made by Pesky. Someone needs to be mandated to grab this bull by the horns and rethink the whole civility issue, because all we have right now is anarchy and chaos. Malleus Fatuorum 20:46, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Pretty please? Especially with the "properly written" bit? Pasting across form my talk: I'm absolutely convinced that, in all policy pages, the writing should be as simple, clear, and non-verbose as is humanly possible. Policy pages that read as though some pompous post-grad lecturer with zero charisma has written them are just plain irritating when they should be written in a way that one would describe the policy to (for example) a favourite nephew. (Or someone with ESL, etc.) Pesky (talk) 11:25, 15 March 2012 (UTC) ] Oops, I did it again. I posted this before reading the comments up above :o( . No incivility was meant here, really. I just think you;d be possibly the best person to get the wording absolutely right. Pesky (talk) 11:37, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

How about considering this as a civility policy, Pesky:

• Editors ought to treat each other in the same way as they would like to be treated themselves. No sanctions are applicable for any breach of that.

It's simple, realistic and easy to "enforce". Trust me, it wouldn't produce any worse results than what we have now. --RexxS (talk) 17:31, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Bravo, RexxS! I've been sitting here thinking that "do onto others as you would like others to do onto you" would be a pretty decent civility policy...or at least that's what my parents tried to convince my siblings and me of... :) Dana boomer (talk) 18:23, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Love it! I still like the idea, though, of someone like Jorm coding-up a computer-to-brain interface script which would automatically install BeNice™ software into the human who clicks on the link to the civility policy – it would make life so much simpler! Pesky (talk) 18:29, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Being "nice" doesn't always get the job done. I remain firmly of the conviction that the civility policy ought not to be one of the five pillars, and it ought never to have been one of the five pillars. In fact it sticks out like a sore thumb amongst them as the only one not addressing the product; the only sensible course is to delete it. Of course I know that won't happen, as nothing can be changed here, which I made the grudging comments you alluded to earlier. The bottom line is that so long as administrators such as Georgewilliamherbert are emboldened by any civility policy that gives them the scope to block other editors it will not be enforced across the board. Even Jimbo has himself not infrequently made comments to or about other editors that would likely have resulted in at least a warning had other, non-admin editors made them. Malleus Fatuorum 18:50, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

That's exactly what needs to change. (By being nice, I really being being unhurtful, btw.) So – how do we go about getting the thing forcibly equally enforced? You're right; you must have some good ideas! Anyhoo, I'm off to bed now (got woken up by mother three times between 2am and 6am ... sigh.) And which one in the pic are you? Pesky (talk) 19:35, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm the one sitting in front of the empty Stella Artois glass, in apparently animated conversation with Iridescent. Malleus Fatuorum 20:10, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

• I recently saw this on a T-shirt, and it made me think a bit:

• We are all born with hearts of gold
• But we grow old - and hearts grow cold.

• — Ched :  ?  20:00, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

  That's completely contrary to my own experience and everything I believe in. Older people have a duty to fight to change things, as they have far less to lose than the youngsters, and often the time to do it. Malleus Fatuorum 20:14, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

In theory I would agree, but in practice my experiences have been less encouraging. Sometimes people just get tired, and lack the exuberance of youth to carry on the challenges. Change can be a wonderful thing, yet it often comes with a heavy price tag. Perhaps it's just a matter of getting a second wind, and trying once more. Either way, I'll consider your views as always. (hopefully you got a refill on that empty glass :-)) — Ched :  ?  20:58, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I did, everyone was very generous. Quite took me aback really. Malleus Fatuorum 21:01, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Nice to see you all having fun! :)  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:27, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

There's a disconnect sometimes that leads to many problems here. I'm quite certain for instance, to pick one example out of the blue, I'll think quite differently about Rexxs the next time I meet him online. What I'll remember is a very congenial person with whom I had a discussion about nitrogen toxicity, and who very generously bought me a Stella. How could I possibly fall out with him? Malleus Fatuorum 21:39, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Hm. That photo is timestamped 15:41. I was there at 13:00 and left ca. 19:15. I might try an orange juice next time. But then again, I might not. Anyways, the pic clearly shows civility in action and without a policy in sight. Has anyone else spotted the paper money lying next to the empty glass yet? Try doing that at the other end of the East Lancs Road! And I can assure you that MF is absolutely surrounded by admins there but there are no red cards being shown ;) - Sitush (talk) 21:44, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

For the benefit of those who may not know, Sitush is the handsome tall chap in the white shirt, standing in the background. Malleus Fatuorum 21:48, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

As I said to you Simon, I really was apprehensive about the reception I might receive, but I was frankly gobsmacked. I hope that others such as J3Mrs might be encouraged to come along to the next meet, but without a ready supply of alcohol .... Malleus Fatuorum 21:54, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

The art cafe cannot fit us in. There is a suggestion (gaining support) that we might try the Abercrombie next to Bootle St cop shop. It would be good to have more bodies, and even better if we could increase the female contingent. No-one has to drink alcohol in city centre pubs nowadays: they all do coffee etc. - Sitush (talk) 22:03, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Well that's an improvement. I'm certain that J3Mrs would be amenable to a little bit of persuasion from a smooth talker such as yourself. I've already taxed my powers to the limit. Malleus Fatuorum 22:11, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

"Oi, J3Mrs, get your arse over to the next Manchester WikiMeet - there's pint of mild in it for you". Will that do? Ah, I missed the "smooth" bit: Hi J3Mrs, if you fancy a gab and have the time, you will find yourself among friends and, should I actually get some work in the interval, I'll buy you a glass or cup of whatever it is that takes your fancy. If I do not get some work then I am pretty sure that someone else will do the honours. We're not a bad bunch, you know, and it will give you a chance to humanise what can be a somewhat impersonal environment. If you are bothered about walking into a strange place to meet strangers then I will email you my mobile number and you could let me know when you arrive, which would at least save you from wandering around looking for people carrying copies of a newspaper and wearing A Liverpool FC rosette/flower or whatever. I am very deaf & cannot hear on the phone, but that idea seemed to work for Malleus and Richerman. The ever-evolving details can be found here. - Sitush (talk) 00:24, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Or you could just look for a fat bloke with a midlands accent wearing a Misplaced Pages T-shirt, probably with a beer in his hand. ;) Having a phone conversation with someone who can't hear you doesn't strike as ever so productive! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:36, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Stand at the door and one-bell. I've just noticed that Malleus refers to me as "handsome". I think it was Disraeli who said something like "Flattery will get you everywhere, and when it comes to royalty it should be laid on with a trowel". In this instance, I'd simply advise that a certain person takes a trip to Specsavers. - Sitush (talk) 00:41, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I blame it all on Rexx, he's a bad influence. Malleus Fatuorum 00:59, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

The bit above about how there is sometimes a 'disconnect' between online and offline personas and personalities is very true. There are Wikipedians I've met at meetups who come across in person very differently to how they come across online. Sometimes you get on with someone both online and offline, sometimes it's only one and not the other. It can work both ways. Sometimes people who are really nice in person go all Jekyll and Hyde when they get back behind a keyboard, interacting with anonymous people on the internet. Sometimes people who are really easy to get along with on Misplaced Pages can find it more awkward to interact in person (though that is more understandable because of the differences in communication methods). To take just one example, it is much easier to block some anonymous screen persona, than to do the same to someone you've met in person (or to argue with, if you want an example that doesn't involve blocks). If you know someone, you are much more likely to warn them, or try and persuade them to do things differently, than to reach for a block button or shout at them. Seeing the other person as human and being willing to talk with them, is something that is usually lacking when civility issues (or any other issues) are raised. It is sort of a combination of AGF and common sense. But this sort of thing can only go so far, as ultimately this is an online medium, and not all the meetups in the world will change the fact that what happens here is done by messages and actions typed out (usually) through a keyboard, and not by talking around a table, so you have to have a way of dealing with the tensions that arise from online interactions. It would be interesting, though, to see if people do change their perspective in some subtle ways after having met other Wikipedians in real life. Carcharoth (talk) 00:56, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, it changed my perspective of Malleus. I've never had a problem with the guy and indeed encouraged him to turn up. However, having met him at a meet I am now aware that should I choose to start bawling him out then he has absolutely no chance of catching me up if ever our paths should cross in the real world and I choose to run. Therefore, I am reasonably safe :) But I guess that just reinforces your point in one way or another. - Sitush (talk) 01:05, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Sitush, I gave up running many years ago, so you can say what you like. Watch out for ambushes though. Malleus Fatuorum 01:18, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll add you to my list of prospective ambushers. That list is becoming quite long, what with death threats for stuff that I have done on the India-related articles etc. On which note, one of the more inventive diatribes aimed at me in that sphere today. Rather than the usual mother- or animal-based sexual insults (or both, in one sentence), this one told me that I would have to give my face back to the zoo because the baboons were missing their backsides. The limits of the human imagination know no bounds! - Sitush (talk) 01:44, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I still have no idea why you invest so much of yourself in the India articles, and it's a shame we only got to discuss that for a minute or two. Malleus Fatuorum 01:58, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Next meet, if you are not mobbed by admirers etc again, and if you catch me before my lipreading goes AWOL. There is no simple explanation, aside from the obvious "someone has got to try to get a grip on them". I dabble elsewhere, as you know. - Sitush (talk) 02:07, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

There are two famous musicians in your presence. Spot Andres Segovia and John Lennon sitting around the table. Is the lady User:Dana boomer? She looks nice! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:30, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

You all look nice. I would love to have been there. Who's everyone else (in both pics)? And when can y'all come down to my part of the world, as I can't get up to your part of the world? I can think of few things more fun than sitting around a pub table with a whole group of philosphical nerds Wikipedians; apart from maybe a WikNic in the gorgeous New Forest with a whole group of .. yes, those. btw, this is me ;P Pesky (talk) 15:13, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

It is probably best not to out people, although HJ Mitchell should be easy to spot if you compare the pics with the one on his user page. I know that it seems daft, given that they attended a public event and were willingly photographed, but they should be allowed to make their own mind up. Are there no Wikimeet arrangements down in your, erm, neck of the woods? There is nothing to stop you proposing such a thing and there are plenty of people who would probably assist with advice. HJM and RexxS may have some useful things to say, since they appear to get around a few of these things. - Sitush (talk) 15:36, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I hope everyone decides to out themselves, heh! I'd like the idea of a Wikimeet really close to me (i.e. not in one of the big towns here ...); WikNic on the Forest combined with local beer at The Rising Sun(also does excellent food at sensibly low prices), would be fun. But I don;t have time / energy to organise anything; someone else would have to do it! And you guys from up there could have a weekend break down here and play on the beach ... Pesky (talk) 15:49, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

The lady is nice, but all I can say is that she isn't Dana boomer. Malleus Fatuorum 15:57, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Must be the lady who does a lot of work with FP candidates then! I wasn't aware you lived as far north as that Malleus, I thought you were somewhere in Oxfordshire or Notthinghamshire or something.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:05, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm "Cheshire born and Cheshire bred, strong in the back and weak in the head" as the old saying goes, now living in Manchester. Not really Cheshire bred though, as my mother is Scottish. Malleus Fatuorum 16:12, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm proud to be a mongrel :o) btw, Malleus, you're pretty much exactly how I imagined you. Pesky (talk) 16:15, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm quite happy to identify myself - I'm the one you can't quite see on the far left of the photo(above) with a green and white striped shirt (or maybe turquoise - don't ask me, I have a red-green colour deficiency). Obviously I was considered far too good looking to be allowed on the team photograph :) You will, of course, Have recognised Malleus and Iridescent already by the finely-chiselled features and well-honed abs. Richerman (talk) 21:47, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I saw you better in this other pic. You look nice, too! Pesky (talk) 23:35, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I hadn't seen that one - there's my cover blown! Richerman (talk) 00:11, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Oops! I thought you must have seen that one! I like Iridescent's smile. Pesky (talk) 00:20, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

John de Gray ... again....

Okay, I whacked again. Let me know if I disturbed any of your comma placements... Ealdgyth - Talk 14:00, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

If you've messed up any of my beautifully positioned commas I'll ... I'll ... I'll just put them back. :-) I'll take a final look through the whole thing this evening. Malleus Fatuorum 15:25, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

It's much more likely that I've strewn commas with willful abandon liberally throughout ... I am American, after all. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:40, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Americans do seem to have a peculiar fascination with commas. But as my English teacher used to say, "If in doubt, leave it out". I hasten to add that he was talking about punctuation in general, and commas in particular, before I get any more post-modernist feminists dragging my sorry arse to AN/I again. Malleus Fatuorum 18:54, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I think studies have shown that it is all related to WWII rationing. In England, commas were desperately needed for the war effort, and Brits learned to make do with few, or even no commas at all, for weeks at a time. Meanwhile, the U.S. has always been blessed with an abundant natural supply of commas, and did not need to ration them, even at the height of the War. Comma rationing was a socially-learned phenomenon; GI's stationed in England for any length of time, and returning to the States from Europe after the War, tended to use 34% fewer commas than those who stayed behind, or those who fought in the Pacific. These trends, once ingrained in the public consciousness, take on a life of their own, and can persist for several generations before they disappear completely. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:16, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

That reminds me of an analogy I used to use when I was teaching object-oriented programming, and trying to explain the difference between instances of some class, or indeed whether more than one instance was ever needed, such as rationing the integer "1", and if it wasn't, then what was the real difference between an instance and its class? Smalltalk has much to answer for. Malleus Fatuorum 20:00, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

An abstract discussion? GFHandel ♬  21:45, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Very good; a discussion that can't be instantiated, but still exists. Malleus Fatuorum 21:58, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm thinking of the book titled "Eats shoots and leaves." Commas matter (grin). Montanabw 00:08, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I always preferred the story about the escapee from the asylum who assaulted a group of women engaged in laundry duty and then made his escape. "Nut screws washers and bolts" --RexxS (talk) 00:29, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh, that's very good. Drmies (talk) 00:58, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

roflmfao! Here's where I want a cute little animated gif ... Pesky (talk) 15:02, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Anyone else remember this old primary school punctuation exercise? "John had had Jane had had had had had was the correct answer". Malleus Fatuorum 15:47, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Heh, yes! Personally, I like commas. Especially the Oxford Comma, with those pretty frilly edges to its wings ... Pesky (talk) 15:56, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

That's the easy version: try "John where Jane had had had had had had had had had had had the teacher's approval". Geometry guy 06:27, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

John, where Jane had had "had", had had "had had"; "had had" had had the teacher's approval. :D Adding: alternatively, "John, where Jane had had "had had", had had "had"; "had had" had had the teacher's approval". Pesky (talk) 06:46, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I've added this time, but I tried REALLY hard to keep the comma usage down... how's it look? Ealdgyth - Talk 11:43, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I think it looks good to go. Malleus Fatuorum 12:49, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

GA for Flixton, Greater Manchester

I gave the article GA. Can you let me know how you think I did with my first review? Everything seemed really straight-forward and simple with this one, but I want to make sure I did it right. INeverCry 01:35, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I think the article is worthy of GA status, but it's not obvious why from your GA review. You need to keep the discussion focused on the review, not on individual editor's talk pages. Malleus Fatuorum 01:49, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Is it possible to copy and paste all of that onto the review page? I'm so used to not wanting to "put someone out there" in regard to problems or issues with their articles, if you know what I mean, but as that's just part of the process, I'll be sure to follow your advice for my next review. INeverCry 02:09, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I'd suggest linking to your various discussions in your GA promotion rationale. But it's best to keep everything together, in the review. Malleus Fatuorum 02:37, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I've put a link to the POD talk page discussion on the GA review page. Btw, I've been cleaning up and adding images to some of Ottava's old articles on the works of Leigh Hunt etc. It looks like there may be quite a few that he never got a chance to polish up, so I'll continue to go through them. I'm thinking there may be some that are potential GA material with a bit of work. INeverCry 02:54, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Don't get me started on Ottava; in my opinion his ban was disgraceful. And the way his appeal was handled way beyond that. Malleus Fatuorum 04:08, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree completely. I figure that such great work deserves to be continued. Since Misplaced Pages is more about the contents than the people behind them (supposedly), continuing and building on his work is something of a resurrection. I'd like at some point to be able to post a new GA based on one of his old articles on his user/talk page. INeverCry 04:47, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages isn't about the contents at all, just ask any of the civility warriors. Malleus Fatuorum 05:33, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Wha? Misplaced Pages is about content? Gee, here from my recent experiences, I apparently thought is was all about ownership and POV-pushing, augmented by repeated trips to the drama boards. Montanabw 17:31, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

What is this content of which you speak? I'm confused.Intothatdarkness (talk) 18:05, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

What we have here are content editors, malcontent editors, no-content editors, bad-content editors, and very few contented editors. Or something like that. Pesky (talk) 18:24, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

At least there don't seem to be many incontinent editors.Intothatdarkness (talk) 18:31, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

? Pesky (talk) 18:36, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Would you take a look?

Hi, Malleus; if you have a moment I wonder if you'd take a look at Pilgrim at Tinker Creek at FAC. In my view this is a decent article that is dying of neglect in the FAC process. Maybe an astute comment or two would kick-start the review back to life? Brianboulton (talk) 13:31, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll take a look later, after I've done my chores for the day. Malleus Fatuorum 15:41, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks: others have suddenly appeared, so no particular urgency now. Brianboulton (talk) 16:55, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Guess why "they" appeared: because they saw this :) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:21, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Edmund Sharpe at FAC

Dunnit here --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:38, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Good luck. I've got it watchlisted, so you won't be all on your lonesome. Malleus Fatuorum 15:42, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

While I was sleeping there was a recommendation for a further copyedit, and by the time I was awake, you had done it. Wow! Many thanks. The review seems to be going OK, apart from recommendations from Johnbod that are beyond my (very) limited abilities. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:30, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

It does seem to be going pretty well, so I think you can afford to feel quietly confident. Malleus Fatuorum 15:05, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Ottava article

The first article I'm looking at for possible GA of his is The Tragedy of Tragedies. I've added a few details, but your opinion/advice on it would be a big help. Can you take a look? INeverCry 23:04, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I will, but I won't be able to get there before tomorrow evening. Malleus Fatuorum 00:52, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I think that could become a good candidate for a GAN, but it still needs some work. Do you have access to any of the sources cited? Malleus Fatuorum 02:41, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

All I have is the Cambridge Companion to Fielding, which gives 4 pages on The Tragedy of Tragedies. If you can give me suggestions as to what's lacking, I can see what can be got out of the CC. I have 3 other CCs for the period, but they mention everything of Fielding's but Tom Thumb. INeverCry 03:31, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I haven't noticed anything missing as yet, but there often things that need to be clarified during a review. It would be a good idea to enlist Ottava's help if you haven't already done so; you can find him easily at Misplaced Pages Review. Malleus Fatuorum 12:11, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I think there's a bit of explanation needed in a couple of places. For instance, the article makes the point a couple of times that Fielding rewrote Tom Thumb to "unify the type of satire ", but how many types of satire are there anyway? The comment by Pope in the Variorum section – "the Circumstance of Tom Thumb's killing the Ghost" – is capitalised in such a way as to make it look like it might be a direct quotation, but it isn't shown or attributed as such. Another reason for needing access to at least a few of the sources is to check that the wording doesn't follow the original too closely. Malleus Fatuorum 13:39, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I took your name in vain

over here. This guy has just got into a stew over at AN/I; he's a newbie, probably got a ton of good stuff to offer, and I've recommended you as a bloody good teacher for when the dust has settled a bit. He jumped head-first into a civility spat and got a load of people's backs up, but I can see his point and why it ended up like that. Adding: I've emailed him with a bit of damage-limitation advice, and given him an open invitation to my talk as well. Pesky (talk) 06:09, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Many thanks for your detailed, nay, heroic copyedit of Spanish conquest of Guatemala and for all your support and advice during the FA nomination. It was very much appreciated, Simon Burchell (talk) 16:02, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Wet, wet, wet

Good day Malleus - I hope you are well and in good spirits. I wonder if I can ask another favour of you? The Suðreyjar are mostly wet (well except Sundays on Lewis) but their early history has emerged from the depths at Kingdom of the Isles. The article has a complex history, with moves hither and thither, but it seems to have settled down at last. I think the topic is deserving of recognised status, but before I trouble the GAC reviewers I'd value any comments you have on the following issue (or indeed any others you may spot).

History articles of this kind sometimes struggle to avoid paras such as "Harald son of Magus killed Magnus son of Paul, who was then succeeded by Paul son of Harald" etc. Kingdom of the Isles does suffer from this, but the presence of tables here and there does I think mitigate the problem a little. The tables also allow for further detailed comment on some of the intricacies of the succession (see e.g. Kingdom of the Isles#5.3 Kings of the South Isles). On the other hand, embedded tables of this nature add to the length of the article and (arguably) diminish the space available for further detail being added about the "kingdom" rather than its rulers. The paucity of sources mean that information on this topic is weak, but see e.g. Scandinavian Scotland#Religion, culture and economy.

Given the above my question is then - do you think that the encyclopedia is best served by the article remaining in roughly in its present form, or might it be better to split it into an article and a separate list of rulers? Ben MacDui 10:42, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

PS Had to laugh. I came straight here from absurd goings on here and read the "Anyone who uses humour..." comment. Sadly, still relevant.

PPS It must be tedious to keep your GA Reviews list up-to-date. Perhaps you should create your own Wikiproject template and have User:JL-Bot/Project content update it for you?

I don't do many GA reviews these days, so it's no great chore. I've been a bit busy elsewhere today, but I'll try and take a look tomorrow. Malleus Fatuorum 03:26, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - no hurry at all. Ben MacDui 08:33, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

That's a great article, but I'd definitely spin the embedded tables out into a separate "list" article; they really intrude on the narrative. BTW, two of the ISBNs don't seem to be correct: Downham (2004) and Wolf (2007). But you probably knew that anyway. Malleus Fatuorum 01:25, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks for your copy edits and above comments. I fear you are right, but hopefully separating them won't be too complex. All the best. Ben MacDui 19:06, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank God!

For agreeing with me re Olivia. I was more than a little shocked to see her as a possible selection for April Fool's Day. Aside from the fact that I have no intention of seeing the page trashed on April's Fools Day, I simply cannot imagine what's foolish about the page. But then TCO thought it was a joke, so maybe that was a month of my time wasted. Truthkeeper (talk) 00:11, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

As I said, I didn't understand it either. It sounds like just a bit of fun, but believe me, being on the April 1 main page is in reality no fun at all. The number of times I've been accused of misogyny since this article appeared maybe two years ago just beggars belief. And it indirectly led to my recent ArbCom case; stay well clear. Malleus Fatuorum 00:17, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Doesn't sound like the tiniest bit of fun to me - probably in part because of seeing what you've gone through. And honestly with the atmosphere the way it is around here these days, the last thing I'd want is a TFA on a high profile day - and one that's not meant to be a joke. Anyway, thanks for saying something - though Pigeon photography is the clear choice. Still if Olivia is suggested on another year, I'd continue to object. I'm sure they can think of another time to run it. Truthkeeper (talk) 00:25, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm sure you're safe for this April 1, so sweet dreams princess. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 00:35, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

GA review

Hello,

I randomly found your user page and seeing that you have reviewed a large number of articles made me feel it was fine if I asked you to review GA nominate Bloody Thursday (2011). It was nominated last January. Also, do you think it would be better if I improve it further and nominate it for FA? Is using Al-Wasat (Bahraini newspaper) as a major source problematic? Mohamed CJ 17:38, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

It's not a problem per se, but it is for me, as I don't read Arabic and can therefore have no idea whether the sources support what's being said, or whether they've been plagiarised. I'm not suggesting they have of course, but I'd have no way of telling. That so many of the sources are from Al-Wasat (and in Arabic) may well be a problem for other reviewers as well.

Given the length of the article I'd probably be inclined to skip GAN and head straight for FAC. Before then though I'd definitely see if I could find alternative sources in English for at least some of the material, and I'd take a long hard look at sections such as Executive and Other. Bulleted lists tend to be frowned on somewhat at FAC, and those two stick out like a sore thumb, sandwiching as they do the Legislative section, which is written as prose. You also ought to try and find a copyeditor; sentences like "Mahmoud Makki Abutaki was a 22-years old Bahraini male ..." won't cut the mustard. It should of course be "22-year-old Bahraini male". And why is his name italicised? Once you've tidied the article up I'd suggest stopping off at peer review before tackling FAC. Right now, I'm very confident the article wouldn't pass, but there's no reason why it couldn't after a little bit of elbow grease. Malleus Fatuorum 19:49, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I've now looked at this article in greater detail and made a few copyedits, but it still needs a great deal of work before it meets the GA criteria, so much in fact that if I were to undertake the review I'd fail it straight away. I'd suggest that you withdraw the GA nomination and try to enlist the help of a copyeditor whose native language is English, perhaps via the GOCE. Once it's been cleaned up I'd suggest a peer review before trying GAN again. Without wishing to sound discouraging, there's no way this is even close to reaching the FA standard at present. Sorry. Malleus Fatuorum 22:20, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I was asking if the source was considered a WP:RS. Verifying can be done with Google translator, but I agree that it's better to use other references where possible. What changes do you recommend for bulleted lists and the prose in Executive and Legislative sections? You don't have to be sorry, this is my first attempt and I know it should contain a lot of mistakes; that's how people learn. Your help is well appreciated ;) Mohamed CJ 08:10, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm sure Al-Wasat would be considered a reliable source, and indeed perhaps the only source for some of this material. The BBC had quite a bit of coverage on the events in Bahrain, so there may be something useful on their web site. As for the bulleted lists, I suggest converting them to prose. Malleus Fatuorum 14:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

BTW, you've got several quotes in the lead; the rule is that direct quotes must be cited wherever they appear, even in the lead. Malleus Fatuorum 15:18, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, it's much appreciated. I hope it's fine if I come back to you after I'm done with improving the article. Mohamed CJ 09:59, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Jim Hawkins/PoTW

If you, or any other editor believes that there is a case to be made against PoTW's editing in respect of the Jim Hawkins (or any other) article, there are appropriate places to raise the issue. I agree that notable subjects should not get to dictate whether or not they have an article on Misplaced Pages. However, the WP:CONSENSUS in this particular case is that the notability is borderline. Whilst I see notability as a black/white issue, others see it in varying shades of grey. There are times when one has to accept that one's opionion is in the minority and bow to consensus. This is one of them.

If you would withdraw your !keep vote and allow a WP:SNOW closure, then the article can be salted, which is something I would be prepared to do myself. FWIW, I'd support a topic ban for PoTW on the subject of JH should that be requested. Mjroots (talk) 07:34, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I will not withdraw my vote, as I think what's going on is quite improper. Deal with the problem, which is clearly PoTW. Malleus Fatuorum 07:38, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Mjroots, the rest of the AfD makes it clear that MF's was not a minority view. I note also that your comment here comes twenty minutes after Pigsonthewing's unacceptable remark about MF's "monstrous ego" (not reliably sourced--an NPA as well as a BLP violation), and I wish you had said something about that as well. MF, please let me apply some balm to a wound that must undoubtedly hurt you: your ego is just the right size. I can't say that for everyone--and Mjroots, I'm not referring to you; you know I usually agree with you on just about everything, especially windmills. Drmies (talk) 16:38, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

That was a different Andy. 28bytes (talk) 16:49, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I stand corrected--so let me rephrase: "Mj, I wish that et cetera." BTW, I find it interesting that besides John no one else saw fit to comment on Andy's talk page. Drmies (talk) 17:01, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Wot, don't I get partial credit? 28bytes (talk) 17:23, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

You get half a point for "crap", certainly, but I was thinking of warnings on the user's page--like a real warning. Thanks 28. Drmies (talk) 18:45, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

However it resolves, that AfD is a textbook case for the need to be very careful with SNOW closures. --Dweller (talk) 16:54, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, good point there Dweller. It looks like the debate will just have to run its full course. MF, no offence taken re you not withdrawing, I accept your right to argue you position over this issue. PoTW is being dealt with by uninvolved editors over at WP:AN. Mjroots (talk) 19:54, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Why on Earth did you imagine I might think that my refusal to withdraw my vote would be offensive to you? And if you truly accepted my right to argue my position then why did you come here in the first place with your improper request? If anyone should be offended it's me, not you. Clearly, as subsequent events have shown, my position is by no means a minority one. Malleus Fatuorum 19:59, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

The debate has moved on a long way since I posted here and at AN this morning. At the time, you were the only !keep following my change. As others have backed you up, and I also agree that the subject shouln't be able to dictate to Misplaced Pages over the existence or otherwise of the artice, it now seems that the best course of action is to allow the debate to run its course. My request above was not intended to offend you, although I don't think that such a request was improper. You were free to act on the request or ignore it, whichever you felt fit. Had my request been acceded to, then fine, but it was no big deal if you decided not to withdraw. Mjroots (talk) 20:07, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

The other way to think about it is that I might have been the only one who was right, not as you did, the only one who was wrong. Malleus Fatuorum 20:30, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Notability might indeed be black & white, but even if it's demonstrated, it doesn't force us to have an article. We can always delete notable topics, if we consider that it's not helpful to the project to have them. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:06, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

On what grounds? Malleus Fatuorum 20:31, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Just for you ;P

	Wolfly hugz for you
	Just for putting up with me so good-temperedly, so consistently, despite how pestersome I can be, and how much I poke you! I really do appreciate your patience with me. Take a trip down to the Forest and I'll buy you probably the nicest real ale in the world :o) Pesky (talk) 11:12, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I hope that wolf used a tongue cleaner before it licked the guy's nose. Ning-ning (talk) 21:46, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Unlikely. It's a well-known fact that dogs and cats spend almost half their waking lives licking their genitals because they know that, sooner or later, they're going to get a chance to lick your face. --RexxS (talk) 01:31, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Nah, they just do that because they can ;P

Interesting fing, though ... humans get coated, furry tongues. We may be the only animal which does. Canines, felines, equines, caprines, ovines, bovines, and every other species of animal whose tongue I've looked at all have quite remarkably clean and healthy looking tongues, pink from tip to root. (Except my boa, who has a black tongue.) Pesky (talk) 05:04, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Poppy Meadow

The FA was a shame, but thank you very much for your points. I got 2 supports (minus yours), better than the first one! — M. Mario (T/C) 10:10, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I was too quick to support, didn't check the sources carefully enough, but we could do the work that's needed and make it third time lucky. Malleus Fatuorum 14:48, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

These are the kind of changes that need to be made. Are you up for it? Malleus Fatuorum 21:08, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I think this looks very good now. I went over some of what I had noted as problem areas in the past and they are resolved. It should be ready for prime-time, so to speak. --Laser brain (talk) 23:03, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much for that, I considered it my penance. I've suggested to MayhemMario that he might reasonably consider a renomination once the mandatory two weeks are up ... and I'm still wondering how the Hell I got involved with this in the first place. I've also suggested to him that as I've never watched even a single episode of Eastenders – and God-willing I'll never have to – that he might like to check that I haven't butchered the Storylines section beyond all recognition. Malleus Fatuorum 23:18, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Chalk it up to altruism? --Laser brain (talk) 23:23, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I really can't remember, but it's at least as likely to be sheer bloody mindedness. ;) Malleus Fatuorum 23:27, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Ship canal

I thought you might enjoy watching this Parrot of Doom 11:52, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Great, apart from the smarmy Stuart Hall's commentary. Malleus Fatuorum 14:49, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, Stuart Hall. "Smarmy" is a polite word for it. How the heck did/do people like him get on? In certain circles it is neither what you know nor who you know, but is rather what you know about who you know. But surely that cannot be the case for someone with the journalistic incapabilities of SH? My dog has been puking today, courtesy of some fast food discarded by a **** last night, but having seen a mention of SH, well, I might join in. - Sitush (talk) 01:02, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

I just hate Stuart Hall's false accent. Malleus Fatuorum 01:15, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Fake tan? Medallion? Belief that he is actually any good at his job? Honestly, it is a multiple choice situation, and I can never make my mind up. Plus, he completely screwed up something about me. Perhaps I bear a grudge, but in fact his screwing up was favourable rather than otherwise, so it merely confirmed that which I had suspected from around the age of ten or eleven. - Sitush (talk) 01:21, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

I didn't realise that you were sufficiently notable to be commented on by Stuart Hall, but anyone who listens to his Radio Five Live football commentaries ought to worry about his sanity. Malleus Fatuorum 01:53, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Stuart Hall will comment on a discarded fag end if it suits his purpose. IMO. The notability requirements of TV journalism are often wildly different from those that we find here. I am neither notable here nor in the real world, as indeed is the case with most of us. Indeed, journos often make the story rather than report it, especially when local news is involved. I've never heard him on radio (which, as yet, they have not managed to subtitle) but please do add faked joviality to my list, as per It's A Knockout. - Sitush (talk) 02:05, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Depsite coming from a family which included far more than the normal share of journos, I couldn't agree more with you, Sitush! The liberties that modern journos take with distorting the truth beyond belief, in order to sell more papers and amuse the great unwashed, is disgusting. And if they were just "making mistakes", then they don't deserve to be paid for writing them up! </endrant> Pesky (talk) 08:20, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

ANI

I thought you might remove my comment calling your buddy out on his shaky attempts to justify his incivility. I was making that comment without realising the discussion was being closed. Feel free to remove this comment too, whilst courageously telling me to fuck off in your edit summary, from the safety of your keyboard. Such a lame, indeed puerile action is to be expected, I suppose. Bretonbanquet (talk) 00:56, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Go take a long walk off a short pier. Malleus Fatuorum 00:59, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

That's just a terrifying response. Aren't you even slightly ashamed of the way you talk to people on here? I'm willing to bet you conduct yourself differently in public, or maybe you swear at people in supermarkets and suchlike. Bretonbanquet (talk) 01:05, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Not in the slightest. So be a good boy now and fuck off. Malleus Fatuorum 01:09, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

I knew we'd get there! This is great, it's like going to the zoo. Anyway, I'd better fuck off before I violate a guideline or something. Feel free to put me in your risible flattery box. Till the next time, Bretonbanquet (talk) 01:12, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh come on; you came to this talk page to pick a fight and Malleus gave as good as he got. You don't get to feign offence and indignation when he tells you to fuck off! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:15, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

+ 1 - Sitush (talk) 01:17, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

If people behave in a reliably amusing fashion, I reserve the right to seek amusement and be amused. Misplaced Pages isn't all work :) Bretonbanquet (talk) 01:23, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

+Alarbus (talk) 04:18, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

I've found it much easier to remember "toa" (the Swedish slang for "toilet") after reading comments like "banning Malleus for a week" (sic.), etc.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 07:02, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Bretonbanquet, you quite literally asked for that one! The first two sentences were just fine, but the rest ... reeeeeelly! Never mind, though. Pesky (talk) 08:23, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Adding: Malleus, maybe you could just become all God-like and use the lyrical language of the King James version: "Go forth and multiply." ;P Pesky (talk) 08:31, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

I never could resist a freak show, especially if one comes knocking on my door. Such a display of internet bravery needed to be fully protracted, complete with sideshows. Bretonbanquet (talk) 08:33, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Fing is, though, fing is ... that it's called "baiting". I'm sure what God really said was "Now fuck off out of here", but of course people wrote the Bible in their own words ... Pesky (talk) 08:36, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Guilty, m'lud. There's a way to avoid it though :) Bretonbanquet (talk) 08:41, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

If you're permitted to be you, and amuse yourself with bear-baiting, then Malleus is permitted to be himself, and respond as per your request. You'd probably find lots of a musing stuff on my talk page (it's quite fun over there). F'rinstance, I fell into the garden pond just yesterday ... hehe! Crazy Granny over-reached through sheer bloody-minded stubbornness! Pesky (talk) 08:45, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Check my talk for amusement also, such as the educational translations of "uneinsichtig, unbelehrbar und beratungsresistent", never to be used, of course, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:02, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Of course ;) Bretonbanquet (talk) 09:12, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Sure there's a way to avoid it. Still, to abuse your supermarket analogy above, Bretonbanquet, if someone swears at you at the supermarket, do you follow him to the parking lot inquiring whether he feels shame, questioning his courage, inviting him to curse at you again with the addendum that such a puerile action was to be expected, or do you just get on with life? ---Sluzzelin talk 08:52, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Pesky, of course, that was the desired effect. But such bears ought to be set free to roam as they please - it's unkind to expect them to fit in with civilised society. I'll be sure to keep an eye on your talk page :) Sluzzelin, yes, I might do that. I also expect him to be banned from the supermarket, particularly if he's been thrown out a dozen times already. Bretonbanquet (talk) 08:59, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

I could have sworn I read above that Malleus told you to fuck off. Fuck off in this instance meaning "go away". So why are you still here? Parrot of Doom 09:05, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Others were addressing me. In any case, someone telling me to fuck off isn't actually going to have that effect, obviously. This is the internet, where people find the intrepidity that they can only dream of in the real world, as you probably know. Bretonbanquet (talk) 09:12, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

@Pesky: no such phrase in the KGV KJV. Genesis 1:28: "And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." --Shirt58 (talk) 09:18, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

It must have been one of the other versions; but I still love the phrase! Bretonbanquet: Malleus is kindness itself to me, despite me being a HFA and pestersome (Pesky?) soul. MF has a great heart, but (as I've said on my talk page) reminds me a bit of an old horse I once knew, who used to flatten his ears, curl his nostrils, grind his teeth, and stamp his feet at people who were twats around him ... but on whose back you could put any toddler with absolute and certain knowledge that he would look after them! Twats wanting to show off their courage used to bait old Major, too. It only showed their immaturity and want of intelligence and decency; it never demonstrated courage.

Adding: and, in response to your comment about civilised society, in most civilised societies such "sports" as badger-baiting and bear-baiting have been deemed illegal, in light of their barbaric and inhumane nature. Pesky (talk) 09:40, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

I can only respectfully disagree with you. Toning down the way you talk to people is easy, and refusing to do so shows a lack of respect, self-awareness and decency. A horse has an excuse; there are no excuses for us. Comparing this discussion with bear-baiting is a little distasteful, both to Misplaced Pages and to actual bears. I am not merely having fun here, and certainly not pretending to display courage (merely highlighting a lack of it in others) - I am making a serious point, one which I feel has been made now. Bretonbanquet (talk) 11:03, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Reminder about policy under Other uncivil behaviours: "taunting or baiting: deliberately pushing others to the point of breaching civility even if not seeming to commit such a breach themselves." Jus' sayin'. Pesky (talk) 13:15, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Run along, little Bretonbanquet. Nobody cares about your blather.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 14:18, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

ygm

Yes, YGM. And destroy immediately after reading because it will not self-destruct ;) - Sitush (talk) 00:58, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Re: Village Pump discussion

I do not not threats and reading your talk page, you seem to agree that Civility is important. I do not know what you were so angy at me when I clearly said the discussion was not personal to any person. But your remarks to me:

You're the one who's concerned about the speed deletion template Mugginsx, not me, so why don't you re-do it?" Malleus Fatuorum 18:57, 27 March 2012 (UTC) I did, it was just above a few lines. You just weren't listening. Stop making this personal.Mugginsx (talk) 21:10, 27 March 2012 (UTC) Don't start down that road Mugginsx, as I can promise that you won't like the destination. You very clearly addressed this comment to me: "Then re-do the Speedy Deletion template so it does not look so harsh!" Malleus Fatuorum 21:21, 27 March 2012 (UTC) These remarks were uncalled for. I made a point to state that the remarks were not personal. Mugginsx (talk) 22:16, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand what you're saying. Anyone reading my talk page would surely know that I consider civility as defined by Misplaced Pages to be at best childish. Malleus Fatuorum 22:19, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I also don't understand why you think I'm angry with you, and I assure you I am not. But disagreement is something that very many Misplaced Pages editors find difficult to deal with, not just you. Malleus Fatuorum 22:23, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

That's fine. I just wanted to mention it because I was trying to talk to the problem with new editors and did not mean anything directed to you personally, though it may have sounded it. Enough said. Mugginsx (talk) 23:03, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Let it go.

Can you do me a favor and let the list go? I was told it was wrong and requested in good faith that it be deleted. Please STOP with this. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 23:23, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Listening when you were told (that your list was wrong) is a start. Declaring "I was wrong to compile an enemies' list" would be better for all.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 23:31, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Once you let this go then so will I Hghyux, but while you continue with your antics then I will not. Your choice. Malleus Fatuorum 23:34, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

"the fault is very clearly on one side, the side that simply won't let go of the bone". At the moment you're both holding onto the bone as if your life depends on it. It might be simpler if you just challenged each other to a duel. Nev1 (talk) 23:38, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I'd be up for that. Malleus Fatuorum 23:39, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Come on I asked nicely! Why are you guys so unforgiving? Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 23:43, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

This is surreal. Parrot of Doom 23:44, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Why are you so unrepentant? Malleus Fatuorum 23:46, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Your asking me this? I just want a resolution and you seem to have it in your head that you don't want to find one. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 23:49, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

The resolution is very clear; you admit that you fucked up, you agree never again to create hate pages, and you slow down with CSD tagging. Simple really. Malleus Fatuorum 23:57, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Haven't I already done this? Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 00:38, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

No. You're still blustering. Malleus Fatuorum 00:41, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Real smooth guys, I'm proud of you. Nev1 (talk) 00:45, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't want to fall out with you over this Nev1 but I think you're wrong, and I'll fall out with you if I have to; I'm more than a little fed up with the kids like Hghyux. Especially when they pretend to be Harvard graduates. Malleus Fatuorum 00:52, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

The enemies list

Was there anything amusing or shocking?  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 00:09, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

No, just a list of those who would be reported to some unspecified authority if they ever posted on his talk page. Malleus Fatuorum 00:19, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Now that's not a bad thought! ;) I could use one of those myself! ;D  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 00:29, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

The very fons et origo of religion! A prayer to an omni-impotent deity, a list of infidels, a casting-out of devils… Randy from Boise (talk) 07:10, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Nietzsche didn't know the half of it! We under-men are always tempted by vengeful thoughts. ;) Luckily, as John Calvin suggested, the institutions of government are present to repress our damnable natures.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 08:07, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

'scuse the post-op grogginess and brain-fuzz, guys ... can you hold fire on this one a little bit? I'm seeing some magic and passion and fire in this kid, and I think the stuff that's been causing him/ her to foul things up can be redirected into something potentially excellent. Sure, he's made some really gross mistakes, but I think it's lack of nouse and training, and not bad-heartedness. Let me see if we can work something good out, here (at the moment it's a smacked puppy hiding in the shed and feeling snarly, but I think it could be a good 'un if we can find the key.) Pesky (talk) 09:42, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Pesky,

I was confessing my sins---the log in my eye and the lust (for revenge) in my heart---to my brethren, just as I had urged your acolyte to do previously. A rare case of practicing what I preach. Sincerely,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:52, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

/Hugz! Humans are vengeful creatures! It's what animal behaviourists call "species-normal". We all have that thing, to one extent or another, and it's often very wild and out-of-control during our younger phases, when we're beginning to feel our hormones and want to go on crusades to fix the world .. hehe! I remember it well! My brain is still very out of kilter; the op was much more major than we were expecting it to be (not just a bit of drilling-out and re-boring, but the total removal of the defunct remains of two totally fucked-up discs, combined with fusing and plating the three vertebrae involved). So, I now have a four-inch long wound in the front of my neck, complete with something like 20 staples (looking very much like a zip for future use!"), and very swollen soft tissues around the oesophagus and larynx. Imagine you;d been both severely strangled and had your neck sliced open from side to side a couple of days ago, and you'll get the idea! Still – I now have more feeling and motor function in my left arm and shoulder than I;ve had for months, so it was all well worth it. I'm not allowed even to hold a horse's lead rein for the next three months, and have to remember not to push things, pull things, or lift things ... terribly hard for someone who's naturally physically active! Pesky (talk) 10:58, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I came across similar discussions of teenagers' problems when I just Googled one of ScottyWong's bon mots, written as SnottyWong.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 11:13, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I remember, so clearly, being a teenager! I really wish I could go back to those years, knowing what I know now! Teenage years are dreadful, and anyone who tries to tell you that school years are the best of your life must have had a bloody crappy life! Pesky (talk) 11:55, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

There were some good things about being a teenager, but the acne definitely wasn't one of them. And as for school, the day I left was one of the most enjoyable of my life. I hated it. Malleus Fatuorum 18:28, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

After I had my arm pinned back together I remember asking my doctor how much I should use it, if at all. "Be guided by the pain" was the only advice he would give. Malleus Fatuorum 18:30, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

My school years were almost unmitigated hell. As far as I recall, the only really good times were when I was working at stables at weekends. Music stuff was on the better side of things, too. Instinct is, on the whole, a pretty good guide to what you can risk doing, with stuff like fractures; trouble is, I tend to ignore my instincts and push things a bit too fast. I will have to be very careful about that, with this one, as instinct doesn't know how to cope with solid structures where there used to be joints, and the temptation just to get right back into it is quite amazing. I was itching to do some digging in the garden today, and had to restrain myself to starting off seedlings and potting-on a few of last year's ones. And I have a farm auction to go to tomorrow, at which I must remember not to keep bending down and turning over piles of timber and gates ... hehe! I love buying stuff at auctions. It's addictive. Pesky (talk) 19:56, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Script list cleanup project

You're receiving this message because somehow I determined that you have some interest in Misplaced Pages's user scripts :)

Misplaced Pages's current list of user scripts is in bad shape, in that it is disorganized and contains many non-working or obsolete entries. It is therefore set to be deprecated, and a new draft list has been created to replace it. Perhaps you regularly use certain scripts, or have authored some yourself, that you know to be currently working and relevant. If so, you are invited to add them to the draft. Thanks! Equazcion 01:15, 28 Mar 2012 (UTC)

A case of mistaken identity? Malleus Fatuorum 03:02, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

No, I've been stalking the vector/common.js files of whoever I come across, and if they have at least a couple scripts there I spam their asses :) I think a reliable scripts list would be pretty valuable and the current one is almost worthless. Consider adding the ones you use and know to work (especially with Vector) to the new list. Equazcion 03:46, 28 Mar 2012 (UTC)

Polecats in Salford?

Hi Malleus, With your interest in ferrets I thought you may be interested to know that my son was walking his dogs near the Irwell in Broughton last night and saw a small animal running about. As it didn't seem too bothered by him or his dogs he took a photo and a short video which he sent to me, and the photo very clearly shows it to be a polecat - or possibly a polecat ferret. I don't think polecats have ever been seen in this area before and I suspect that, with its lack fear of humans, it's probably an escaped pet that's gone native. I've emailed the Salford Rangers to ask if it's been spotted before. Richerman (talk) 13:52, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I was wondering why I hadn't heard about any mauled sheep or dead cows but then I googled Polecat. Parrot of Doom 16:37, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

No, not quite the Beast of Bodmin I'm afraid. Richerman (talk) 18:53, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Maybe if there's relevant information/news, we could include the photograph in River Irwell? Parrot of Doom 21:59, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

If it didn't run away from your son it's almost certainly a pet ferret that's escaped or got lost. You'd be surprised how many polecats there are up here, there's even a polecat release site somewhere in Salford. It's almost impossible to tell a ferret from a polecat without genetic testing, but in general polecats tend to be very much darker than ferrets, almost black. In fact I know of at least one guy in Manchester who breeds polecats and sells them as "dark ferrets". A wild polecat isn't exactly the Beast of Bodmin, but you sure wouldn't want to tangle with one without a very strong pair of gloves, not if you value your fingers. Malleus Fatuorum 22:24, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Polecat release site - what's that? Richerman (talk) 22:35, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Believe it or not, it's a site where polecats are released back into the wild, along with other mustelids like stoats and weasels. Maybe a mother's been killed and someone's hand-reared her babies, or a farmer's found one living in his barn and wants it removed, or one's been found injured and been nursed back to health; when they're fit and well and able to look after themselves they're put back into the wild. Malleus Fatuorum 22:46, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, I didn't know that! According to this discussion there are mink there as well. Actually, about 20 years ago we lived in Sedgely Park near Singleton Brook and one morning I saw a black mustelid dragging off one of my chickens. I thought it looked like a mink but convinced myself it must be a ferret. Maybe it was a mink after all. Richerman (talk) 22:52, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Almost certainly a mink. There are lots of them around as well, as when mink-farming was made illegal some of the more unscrupulous breeders simply set their stock free. Mink tend to prefer more watery habitats than polecats - there are loads along the banks of the Mersey for instance. But it's against the law to release a mink into the wild, so if one is caught it either has to be kept in captivity or killed. Malleus Fatuorum 23:01, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Some of the animal rights activists 'liberated ' mink too, which was one of the reasons for the disasterous decline in the population of water voles. Richerman (talk) 23:11, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

That seems to be something of an urban myth; "A widespread modern misconception is that the UK’s wild population of American mink originated from mass releases of mink from fur farms by animal rights activists in the 1990s". These are of course American mink, which are bigger and stronger than the European mink, and have had a devastating effect on small mammals such as water voles, as you say. Malleus Fatuorum 23:13, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I think we should have a large national park up in the north somewhere. And fill it with wolves. No public entry without a guide and a gun, that sort of thing. Parrot of Doom 23:14, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Haven't wolves been released back into the wild somewhere in Scotland? Malleus Fatuorum 23:22, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh and I'd also support the elimination of the Grey Squirrel in the UK. All of them, dead. Parrot of Doom 23:14, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Couldn't go along with. We have two living in our back garden, and every winter we put food out for them. I think it's another one of those urban myths that grey squirrels displaced red squirrels; the large-scale planting of conifers by the Forestry Commission had more to do with it I think. Malleus Fatuorum 23:22, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm of the opinion that eliminating them would facilitate the return of the red squirrel. I know there's been a lot in the news today about pasties, just imagine a squirrel pasty. Delicious! Parrot of Doom 23:52, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

"Four dead in Ohio": Kent, Ohio was ground zero for a Viking raid on the Americas, in which Black (Canadian) squirrels were introduced in the 1961. These mutant-ninja rats are displacing the tamer variants, many of which are polite Midwesterners. All squirrels are just photograph-friendly rats, of course. But a town full of ratatoskrs is terrible. Misplaced Pages is annoying with just one!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 08:49, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Grey squirrels dig up my plants, they are cute to look at but a damn nuisance. When they got into a neighbour's roof they did so much damage. I'm with PoD, vermin with bushy tails. J3Mrs (talk) 08:54, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

There are definitely more wild / re-released polecats about than there used to be, and some of them (the re-released ones) are quite fearless of humans, and easily mistaken for polecat-ferrets. Quite a few mink about too (and a bloody nuisance they are too, if you keep ducks or chickens, particularly!) I have to say I have a soft spot for squirrels, even the grey ones, having befriended them, as a kid). I've noticed that our grey squirrels locally are coming out with much more reddish coats then they were a few decades ago; probably pressure from the UK environment giving the redder-coated grey squirrels a bit of an advantage in camouflage over the really grey ones. Yes, bushy-tailed and photogenic rats, but hey, we all have our place, and I don't mind rats that much, either ... and I can;t see any way in which we could eliminate the greys, now. There are still strongholds in the islands where it's all reds and no greys, fortunately. Pesky (talk) 10:01, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Yep, I've noticed a lot of reddish grey squirrels up int' north. It seems we have black squirrels in Merrie England too. Richerman (talk) 19:20, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

It might be interesting to watch and see whether the black squirrel leaves more or less room for the red than the grey does! They look rather cute. It's almost impossible to tell, at the beginning, how a non-native species will impact on our environment. The numbers of green parrakeets in and around south west London are huge now – roosts running into the thousands. Pesky (talk) 19:48, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Busted

"Harsh and cynical" you are Malleus. I hope indeed that not too many editors emulate your stance. This commaless message brought to you by Drmies (talk).

"Cynical" is right, but I wouldn't agree with "harsh". Perhaps "uncompromising" ... I really don't understand Americans at all. Malleus Fatuorum 03:29, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Lack of understanding has led to tragedy historically. Equazcion 04:10, 29 Mar 2012 (UTC)

I don't either. Just make sure you're not wearing a hoodie when you come to visit. Hey I thought about applying for a job at Bath Spa University but decided against it after perusing their website: too much puffery. Drmies (talk) 04:20, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Named after a railway station; has to puff itself up to remain visible. I see the University of Budleigh Salterton is opening a new Media Studies Centre at its Mutters Moor campus. --Ning-ning (talk) 05:08, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I admire the Orwellian aspects of English life, the gardening, the civilian clothes when soldiers are on leave, etc., and I share your abhorrence of California self-esteem--obsessions. But tell me true, Malleus: How do you pronounce "schedule"?  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:46, 29 March 2012 (UTC) (updated)

I pronounce it "itinerary". ;P Pesky (talk) 12:13, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I pronounce it man and strife. Ning-ning (talk) 14:00, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

The proper way. How do you pronounce "buoy"? Malleus Fatuorum 18:07, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Just like "boei" I suppose. Or this way. Drmies (talk) 18:14, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Nice. In "Proper English" it's pronounced "boy". I used to do a lot of sailing, and I remember being rather puzzled on one training course by the instructor's continual reference to "booees"; he'd just come back from America, where he'd obviously picked up some bad habits. Malleus Fatuorum 18:22, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah I didn't know that--I thought that the Am. pronunciation was the only one. Lots of Dutch words in the sailing vocabulary of course; I wonder if Melville got a kick out of "poop". Drmies (talk) 18:26, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Scatological innuendo from Drmies? Well, I never. I think that Melville's primary interest was the huge Bretonbanquet, per his title. PS: don't forget that Cambridge University, which is a proper one, is marking the demise of Dutch this (western hemisphere) summer. Get over here and save the language, Drmies! - Sitush (talk) 02:13, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Dumb Gurlz

John Crofton; he was knighted, and I have never paid attention to how to handle that in naming, titles, etc? Is he supposed to have some initials after his name or some such thing? We don't learn those things out my way :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:36, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

You'll see it done both ways, but I'd never include titles and letters after the name in an article title. Take a look at Arthur Conan Doyle for instance, who is almost universally referred to as "Sir Arthur Conan Doyle". Malleus Fatuorum 17:47, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

We do usually put Sir before the name in the lead though, which I've done. "Sir John Crofton, Kt" as opposed to "Sir John Crofton, Bt" is super-extra-formal & never done here. We do rightly have Lord Byron & some others, including some knights I'm sure, but that goes by commonname, and oh yes, Sir John Donne to avoid confusion. Are you following the god-king in taking an interest in our island nobility? You might do a redirect from "Sir ..." anyway. Johnbod (talk) 21:57, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

We do, yes. I should have said that as well. Malleus Fatuorum 22:09, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Johnbod. Found MOS:BIO and Misplaced Pages:Naming_conventions (people)#Titles and styles. Am a wee bit less stupid today, but I'm sure I'll make up for that somewhere somehow. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:32, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Something over at ANI sounds familiar...

...wouldn't you agree? 208.57.254.62 (talk) 17:56, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Familiar in what way? Seems like a normal AN/I bun fight to me, nothing special. Malleus Fatuorum 18:05, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

It reminded me of this. Just replace YRC with Malleus, "queer" with "cunt", and "homophobic" with "sexist". 208.57.254.62 (talk) 18:21, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I see, but YRC/Off2riorob and I have rather little in common. Malleus Fatuorum 18:24, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I disagree entirely. Malleus's "cunts" comment was not directed at any specific user, nor could it be construed as attacking any group of people unless you use a rather impressive amount of imagination (which, unfortunately, someone did). The "queer agenda" is a term usually used by anti-LGBT folks referring to LGBT people trying to fight discrimination and trying to gain acceptance in society etc etc. Totally, totally different kettles of fish. Bunnies! Leave a message :) 20:08, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Gotta agree with that; very different things. Pesky (talk) 20:12, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm amazed that some remain convinced that I've got some kind of misogynistic agenda. If I really had, I doubt there would be so many female editors posting here. Malleus Fatuorum 20:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I think the fact that you're so obviously not misogynistic is abundantly clear to anyone of even moderate intelligence. Provided that they can be bothered to stop and think, of course. Pesky (talk) 20:29, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

The accusation, and the WMF's escalating attempts to drive me away, seem to have started with the wife selling article, which I thought at the time, and still do, was nothing more than an interesting historical backwater. Malleus Fatuorum 20:34, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Clear difference between that ANI and Malleus. Malleus pisses off everyone, he's an equal opportunity pisser-offer! (LOL) Montanabw 21:28, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

You got that right. My target isn't gender, religion, race ... whatever. It's quite simply stupidity. And so far as I'm aware that's not gender, religion, race, related. Malleus Fatuorum 21:42, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I consider myself pretty sharp on USA politically correct lingo, but once caused a minor internal fuss at a place I worked when I explained that assholes are not a protected class. They aren't. I'm quite sure of it. They think they are, though. Sad, as often they don't realize they are assholes, they just think they're special. Montanabw 23:59, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

So let's have a count here. I make it three female editors out of the four who've commented. Given that the received wisdom is that only about 13% of editors are female I must be some kind of babe magnet. (I know, in my dreams, but let me dream.) Malleus Fatuorum 00:44, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

You are Misplaced Pages's rock star and we are your groupies. Or something. I like your assumption that we are all babes. We are, of course. :) Bunnies! Leave a message :) 00:55, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Of course you're all babes, don't do yourselves down. And in my experience the higher up the quality tree you go the more females you find. Go figure. And I'm just about as far from being a misogynist as a human being could possibly be. In fact I ... no, no, that's probably enough. Malleus Fatuorum 01:56, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

You are ... just yourself! When faced with anatomy-related-descriptor people, or willful stupidity, you can be a grouchy old thing, but I feel a tremendous, generous-hearted warmth from you, and a straightness and openness that I have a profound respect for. Besides, you just called me a babe! Pesky (talk) 03:19, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

You are a babe, and I'm what I am. I'll try and help anyone with anything, but I have absolutely no patience for stupidity or dishonesty. None. Incompetence I can help with, we've all been there. Malleus Fatuorum 04:00, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Here's an interesting thing though. I'd be very cautious about calling Moni3 a babe, even though I'm sure she is, and I've not infrequently made reference to SandyG's bum, which I've never seen. But I've never meant any of that in anything other than fun. Malleus Fatuorum 04:12, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I can cope with what I think of as "panic-dishonesty" in youngsters; I think most of us have resorted to that kind of stuff, as kids. It's good to snap them out of it sooner rather than later, but I still cringe at some of the crazy stuff I did as a teenager (hadn't been diagnosed with either EDS or Autism at that point, so got called a lot of bad things, which only made matters worse, of course!) I'm chuffed to bits that you think I'm a babe! I'm just a crazy British Eccentric Granny (who still likes to climb trees, lol!) I would so like to meet you – you'll have to find a good excuse to come down this way some time. We have a wonderful local brewery ... Pesky (talk) 07:28, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Be scared....

Be very very scared... this has been my latest project. Wanna check it over for GA ommisions? I did it for the Misplaced Pages:The Core Contest, but in all honesty, it badly needed it. I could tell some Hungarian nationalist had been at it, since it had a LOT of undue weight on Hungary ... I like to kid myself that it's a lot more balanced now. It's no where near FA status, but it's close to GA, I'm thinking. Ealdgyth - Talk 03:14, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Blimey, that's a mega-article! Malleus Fatuorum 04:22, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Exactly. Having a core contest actually motivates some of us to slog our guts out just that bit more and produce whopping articles. We should really introduce it every month in my opinion and it would get some of our important articles up to scratch quicker. I proposed this ages ao. It seems Sue Gardner is showing an interest as a judge but is the new one Casibler says about funded by the foundation? It needs to be a monthly competition financed by the foundation I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:16, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

The text on the image of Richard of Wallingford says he is "making (I changed that from doing) measurements with a pair of compasses". I don't know about then, but now you measure with dividers not a compass (I don't think a "pair of compasses" is right either) and they do look more like dividers to me. Richerman (talk) 11:49, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I can only go with the description of the image on Commons - it says compasses. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:33, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

If in doubt, just leave it at "making measurements"? Nev1 (talk) 12:37, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Good point. At this point, I am sooooo sick of the article ... I need a day or two off from it. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:40, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Can anyone help?

I just received an email from someone on Wikimedia, but I can't even tell what language it's written in. Here's the header:

"വിക്കിപീഡിയ സംരംഭത്തിലെ ഉപയോക്താവിന്റെ സംവാദം"

Malleus Fatuorum 13:23, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

It's Malayalam. Part of it means Laugh Out Loud, not sure the rest yet. Equazcion 13:31, 30 Mar 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I got one too. It's from ml.wiki; you must have visited there whilst logged in (SUL says some time in Feb 2009) and it auto created an account. Some bot is going round posting messages - and that is a "You have a message" mail in Malayalam. No idea what the notice is... --Errant 13:33, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

It might be advertising Wiki Conference India, two of those words are in this page title: Equazcion 13:36, 30 Mar 2012 (UTC)

Jim Hawkins

At the request of the subject, I read over the deletion debate on his article. I found several of your comments there to be unnecessary and unkind. I just now went through the current article word by word and found it now to be 100% true, and I agree that he passes notability. He continues to complain that it is inaccurate, but refuses to tell me just what is wrong with it. So while I can understand how you might be frustrated, I wanted to suggest that in the future, you try not to say things that will upset someone who is already complaining of feeling hurt. Thanks!--Jimbo Wales (talk) 15:10, 30 March 2012 (UTC)