| Revision as of 19:09, 30 January 2012 editKa of Catherine de Burgh (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers334 edits →File source problem with File:William Congreve.png: removing unarchived very dull section← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:11, 30 January 2012 edit undoKa of Catherine de Burgh (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers334 edits →Desysop request: I suppose that I must archive thisNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| ] | ] | ||
| == Desysop request == | |||
| Hey Bish, done that, added some of the other bits back (rollback, edit patrol etc), but just wanted to let you know you're no longer an admin and you didn't leave under a cloud. At least, not a Wiki-cloud. Hope all is well with you, happy new year, take care. ] (]) 20:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :*Happy New Year! ] ] 20:47, 4 January 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::*Is everything OK, Bish? If you need a break from adminship, no worries, of course, but wanted to check on you. ] ] 01:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::*Mrs Bishonen is quite well, but (like myself) tired of some of the antics taking place here lately. In her (hopefully short) absence, I have been placed in charge of this page - I think it a pity she chose to throw her admin tools away rather than hand them over to someone wise who would have made good use of them - I can think of several people I would block if she had given them to me, but there you are - too late now. During her absence, I have been asked to remove all bots, stupid comments and posts from people I dislike. Good evening to you all. ] (]) 09:43, 5 January 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Perhaps if you would have given her , she would have let you have the tools? Maybe she thought that you wouldn't give those back either.<br/><span style="text-shadow:#294 0.1em 0.1em 0.3em; class=texhtml">]</span> 14:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Thank you for the news, Your Ladyship. Herr Läufer shall wait for Frau Bishonen's return. ] ] 05:27, 6 January 2012 (UTC) | |||
| {{od|4}}Why throw them away if you are just taking a break?—] (])(]) 14:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Bish can ask for the bit back whenever. ] (]) 14:17, 5 January 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Bear in mind that Bish will still be recovering from the serious health problem she had before Christmas. These things take longer than you think they will (like builders really) and it can get you quite down if you're *still* not 100%. I'm sure a break will be good, and she'll be back before Lady Catherine has auctioned the furniture. ] (]) 14:37, 5 January 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == until spring == | == until spring == | ||
Revision as of 19:11, 30 January 2012
until spring
Bishonen, the flowers are hibernating, too, awaiting your return. Nobody Ent 03:57, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
darwinbish portrait
Hi Bishonen! One of your evil menagerie recently thanked me for fixing their pic. I hope this means Bishzilla won't try to eat me some time in the near future. That task is best left to my parents' elderly corgi.--Shirt58 (talk) 11:03, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Best Wishes
Hope all is well and wishing you a Happy and Prosperous New Year (Prospero Año Nuevo as we sometime-Spanish say). Get Well Soon/Speedy Recovery is offered also as applicable. ML (Much Love as we sometime-Scientologists say). Your friend --Lyncs (talk) 18:32, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages talk:User pages#RfC: Should "new messages" banner hoaxes be prohibited?
Hi Bishonen. You participated in the discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:User pages#Simulating the MediaWiki interface (joke banners redux). I have started an RfC about the issue: Misplaced Pages talk:User pages#RfC: Should "new messages" banner hoaxes be prohibited?. Cunard (talk) 05:12, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
.png)
- I would always have resisted the proposal to outlaw joke banners, but the reason I've been so invested in it for years is that I have most often — no, only, really — come across the practice of aggressively removing those banners in a particular context: the sadistic piling on on a vulnerable user whenever he's been in hot water and thus an object of attention — a user whose last shred of wikipride the banner represents. (Don't ask me why it does, but it seems to be a fact, and empathy-challenged people who like attacking safe targets seem to be prepared to escalate the issue indefinitely and triumphantly.) See the user's recent talkpage history, and here's another example from 2007, when the user was called Certified.Gangsta. Compare Skomorokh's eloquent oppose. But I'll pass on your RFC, thank you. I'm tired of trying to argue on the level of "it's not funny", "it's irritating" etc. I admit it's in a way tempting to use the RFC to personally attack, bite, and eat a few users so full of themselves as to want joke message banners verboten on the principle that they waste valuable time which could otherwise have been spent improving the encyclopedia. On a slow connection, clicking on one of these banners and having the (apparently) peculiarly insulting experience of being misdirected to Practical joke could easily take up to eight or nine seconds, couldn't it! Just think of the encyclopedic improvements people could have been making in that time! And so many users have these fake banners on their pages (don't they?) that our editing will inevitably be continually disrupted as we're helplessly washed up, again and again, at Practical joke. I mean, how many usertalk pages are the bnners on? 60%, is it? 70%? It must be something like that, or surely nobody would care, or would they?
- Where was I… oh. Yes, I was briefly tempted to weigh in. But I've depressed myself too much over the years reading these interminable "debates" on the subject, stretching back to the Big Bang, and I have shed my illusions that my input could make any difference. Another depressing factor is the hilariously non-neutral way you've introduced the RFC. Posting a selection of old comments in favour of banning these jokes, but nothing whatever of this nature? "Summarising" the arguments of people like me in the way you do? Seriously? Have you even looked at the instructions for talkpage RFCs?
- Might those ever-renewed debates about the subject possibly waste any time which could have been spent improving the encyclopedia ? Could Bulwersator have a point about the bike shed? Or could all this activity in removing banners, which you, Cunard, so oddly list as an argument for your case (the existence of such activity is an argument for encouraging more such activity? How come?) take up any valuable potential editing time? These conundrums are left as an exercise to my page watchers. I'll be returning to the cave now. Bishonen | talk 23:40, 28 January 2012 (UTC).