| Revision as of 04:42, 25 February 2013 editHegvald (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,612 edits →Lost images← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:56, 25 February 2013 edit undoKillerChihuahua (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users34,578 edits →My perfect record is ended: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 285: | Line 285: | ||
| :Yes, you're free to remove conversations from your own talkpage. Single posts, too — you're free to remove anything from your talk at any time, with a few rare exceptions which are unlikely to concern you. You can either just blank them out, or create an archive page to put them on, whichever you prefer. What you must not do is ''change'' other people's posts, such as for instance remove only parts of them. But I'm sure that wasn't what you were thinking of doing. ] | ] 01:06, 25 February 2013 (UTC). | :Yes, you're free to remove conversations from your own talkpage. Single posts, too — you're free to remove anything from your talk at any time, with a few rare exceptions which are unlikely to concern you. You can either just blank them out, or create an archive page to put them on, whichever you prefer. What you must not do is ''change'' other people's posts, such as for instance remove only parts of them. But I'm sure that wasn't what you were thinking of doing. ] | ] 01:06, 25 February 2013 (UTC). | ||
| I can happily say that that was not what I was thinking of doing :) And by the way, in your opinion, do you think the ] had something to do with the ]? (] (]) 01:11, 25 February 2013 (UTC)) | I can happily say that that was not what I was thinking of doing :) And by the way, in your opinion, do you think the ] had something to do with the ]? (] (]) 01:11, 25 February 2013 (UTC)) | ||
| == My perfect record is ended == | |||
| I took your advice... the ANI was just getting more toxic and battle-groundy. This is the first RFAR I've ever filed. I was trying to never file one. :-( ]] 06:56, 25 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 06:56, 25 February 2013
Hello, prepossessing reader. There's no need to post "Talkback" or "You've got mail" templates here. I watch my e-mail, and also your talkpage if I've posted on it. (Click here if you want another compliment.)
MOS and ArbCom
I welcome your offer to post a request for arbitration as a neutral editor in the recent AE matter.
I see several advantages to this.
1) New eyes. Long-time participants may able to express the issues more succinctly to someone who has not already formed an opinion on an issue. Indeed, this is the much of the real work of an ArbCom case, providing a forum for the exchange of ideas between parties that is necessary to any resolution.
2) It is simply too dangerous for any involved editor to do so.
—Neotarf (talk) 01:27, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I'm probably treating something important too flippantly, but when I saw the section title "MOS and ArbCom", I thought to myself: That's probably a good working definition of Hell. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:11, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
- LOL. To me, it's " and ArbCom". ;-) -- Ohconfucius 02:21, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
- There are new arbs now, the "new eyes" principle may mean fresh insights from that group as well. —Neotarf (talk) 02:28, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
- LOL. To me, it's " and ArbCom". ;-) -- Ohconfucius 02:21, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
- Glad to hear from you, Neotarf. I was in fact thinking along the lines that I might be able to express myself more succinctly, yeah… and with luck without myself getting caught in the vast sticky webs of MOS. (What was the name of the spider monster in the Lord of the Rings, Floquenbeam?) But Sandstein has responded that he intends "later this week" to post a request for clarification about appellate procedure for people who don't accept discretionary sanctions warnings. I'll wait for that. There may turn out to be a simpler way than RFAR, or rather, the arbs may invent an appellate procedure in response to Sandstein, because I don't think anything like that has come up before. Or they may stonewall again, no doubt. Again, I'm willing to start an RFAR if that's what remains. I'd want to hear what SMcCandlish thinks about it first, though. Bishonen | talk 11:11, 6 February 2013 (UTC).
- Ungoliant or Shelob, depending on if you're a First Age kind of person, or a Third Age kind of person. --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:08, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you. Shelob sounds about right. "Bloated and grown fat with endless brooding on her feasts, weaving webs of shadow; for all living things were her food, and her vomit darkness." If I do request anything related to MOS, I shall have to be fleet of foot. Bishonen | talk 13:50, 6 February 2013 (UTC).
- Thank you. This seems to be the appropriate policy page. But Shelob, ha ha, no, the MOS is not alive, more like DNA. The bots and gnomes use bits of it to polish the 'pedia. And like DNA it is subject to repair and mutation. But fleetness of foot, yes. Even at its best, MOS is not for the faint-hearted. —Neotarf (talk) 17:34, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you. Shelob sounds about right. "Bloated and grown fat with endless brooding on her feasts, weaving webs of shadow; for all living things were her food, and her vomit darkness." If I do request anything related to MOS, I shall have to be fleet of foot. Bishonen | talk 13:50, 6 February 2013 (UTC).
- Sandstein delivers: Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Clarification_request:_Discretionary_sanctions_appeals_procedure — HaugenErik (talk) 00:10, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Right. Thanks. Most of the arb comments so far seem well-reasoned. Bishonen | talk 10:34, 9 February 2013 (UTC).
- I am sorry, but "Even at its best, MOS is not for the faint-hearted" makes no sense whatsoever. All of Misplaced Pages is by necessity equally welcoming of all participants. If the current climate at MOS is not thus, that needs to be changed immediately. Apteva (talk) 18:36, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- Er.. OK, Apteva. If you think you achieve something by replying in this place to a comment from nine days ago, not made by me, be my guest. Bishonen | talk 18:49, 15 February 2013 (UTC).
- I am sorry, but "Even at its best, MOS is not for the faint-hearted" makes no sense whatsoever. All of Misplaced Pages is by necessity equally welcoming of all participants. If the current climate at MOS is not thus, that needs to be changed immediately. Apteva (talk) 18:36, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- Right. Thanks. Most of the arb comments so far seem well-reasoned. Bishonen | talk 10:34, 9 February 2013 (UTC).
- Ungoliant or Shelob, depending on if you're a First Age kind of person, or a Third Age kind of person. --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:08, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Crat LOL
Well played :) -- Avi (talk) 17:05, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
- Hehe, thanks for the attention. And a nice and concise comment, Avi! (See what I did there?) Bishonen | talk 17:14, 7 February 2013 (UTC).
User:Klbog1987
Can you please block him permanently? I saw where you already levied a 24-hour block on him per an ANI discussion. This user repeatedly adds false and/or unverifiable information into articles and templates. Every single time, without fail, another editor has left him messages regarding his behavior he has blanked his talk page without (a) responding, and (b) altered his behavior. His incompetence is staggering. For the good of this online Encyclopedia, please get rid of him. Thanks in advance. Jrcla2 (talk) 17:15, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
- What a coincidence, I was just checking out the user's edits. But I decided not to act, because I have so very, very little understanding of sports-related articles. Pretty much all the editing on them is a deep dark mystery to me. I think your concerns are very probably well-founded, but could you please take them either to a more sports-minded admin, if you know such a one, or to the incidents noticeboard? P.S., in either case, you'd probably like to give a link to the earlier ANI thread. Here it is. Bishonen | talk 17:34, 7 February 2013 (UTC).
- I've asked User:Zagalejo. Jrcla2 (talk) 18:27, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
- <teach>For your diff guide: Try this for a solution that uses whichever http or https server you're on and works with wp:popups.</teach> --RexxS (talk) 23:55, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, Rex. I realise that's simpler for the nerd population, but it's not simple in the sense of "simple diff and link guide". It's more mysterious for us lamers. I'll leave you or darwinfish to put it into the Complete diff and link guide, which is where I think it belongs. Unless it's already there..? I don't remember. Bishonen | talk 11:13, 9 February 2013 (UTC).
- <teach>For your diff guide: Try this for a solution that uses whichever http or https server you're on and works with wp:popups.</teach> --RexxS (talk) 23:55, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
- I've asked User:Zagalejo. Jrcla2 (talk) 18:27, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
re: "spam ban"
hmmmm ... I guess I coulda linked that to WP:SPAM, but meh. Yea, I should know that anything "understated", "overstated", "humorous", "dry", or "sarcastic" simply doesn't play out well in the written genre. Your point is taken, and I stand corrected. I humbly appear here to accept my well deserved "trout". As we are approaching the Easter season, and it's Friday - I may as well make a meal of it though, so any "chips" or "fries" with that would be welcomed too. :-) — Ched : ? 12:21, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry, Ched. It's just that the people who reckon up the results of ANI polls tend to go extremely formal about it (in self-defence, no doubt) — 'What exactly did that person support?' — and hence understated and overstated can both be risky. Here's your trout. Bishonen | talk 13:09, 15 February 2013 (UTC).
- Perhaps subconsciously in a je ne sais quoi fashion I felt there was an attractive lilt to the term "spam ban" .. :-D — Ched : ? 22:05, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- Red wine with fish? Really? Risker (talk) 03:04, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- A classic in Norway, and I could easily fancy it myself. But this trout was uploaded by a Britisher so it does seem culturally incorrect. I presume we all remember the Bond scene, on a train, wasn't it? Anyway, the scene where the red wine with fish was such a help to him. Bishonen | talk 11:15, 16 February 2013 (UTC).
- LOL <literally. And now my dog thinks I'm nuts>. Hey - I haz cooth; I just grabbed the wrong box. — Ched : ? 13:36, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Another atrocity
I have just been smartening up my beloved aunt to bring her more into line with how other editors want an eminent page to look and noticed some clot has, without warning, deleted two of the images - I believe one of them was uploaded by you, perhaps you could retrieve them. I really think this needs to happen quite quickly before she and the staff return from their yachting cruise in the Med and notice the defilement of the page. Giano 13:29, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- What a magnificent infobox! I can't seem to do anything about the redlinked images, but help should be on its way, please see Bishonen | talk 15:40, 15 February 2013 (UTC).
- also why can't I get the info box to display her neighbours ad cousins, all the other essential details of an informative info-box? Sometimes, I do really miss Jack!13:39, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- How do you mean? If you just edit the page as a whole, the editable infobox will be right at the top. Bishonen | talk 15:47, 15 February 2013 (UTC).
- also why can't I get the info box to display her neighbours ad cousins, all the other essential details of an informative info-box? Sometimes, I do really miss Jack!13:39, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- I'm just headed off, so can't really help too much... but Miss Bish, try this link Worm(talk) 15:44, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- Very nice fixes Worm; thank you. However, you have shrunk my magnificent info-box. I do think the size of the info-box should reflect the status of the subject. That way, some gnat with no attention span, won't even have to read the info-box, he will just know he's looking at an important person. Giano 15:51, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- My apologies! I hope my recent change goes some way to restoring your dear aunt's self worth. Worm(talk) 15:56, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- Very nice fixes Worm; thank you. However, you have shrunk my magnificent info-box. I do think the size of the info-box should reflect the status of the subject. That way, some gnat with no attention span, won't even have to read the info-box, he will just know he's looking at an important person. Giano 15:51, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- Perhaps some other clever tps can do something about the two redlinked images. I just don't understand how to get to look at the images themselves (yes, Writ Keeper, I know you have demonstrated it but I didn't get it that time either, sorry. :-() I can't see what the delete reason was either. The probably adorable baby picture File:CdeB4.jpg in the same
articlepage has the same problem also. (The fixes were mainly by Bishapod, Giano.) Bishonen | talk 16:03, 15 February 2013 (UTC).- Hmmm. Well, it looks like CdeB4.jpg is a derivative of File:Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-1989-0322-506,_Adolf_Hitler,_Kinderbild.jpg. To see the image (as an admin), you just need to go to the undelete link and scroll to the bottom where it has the file history rather than the page history. If it's not been sorted by the next time I log on, I'll get them done :) If someone could find the original of the wedding party, I'd appreciate it though. Worm(talk) 16:09, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- That's much better Worm. Now, next. we must please the info-box crowd, so how can I add her neighbours, dearest and closest friends, hobbies, shoe size, vital statistics and medical history. I tried, but they won't display. Giano 16:13, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- The problem with that is the template the infobox uses; it doesn't have fields for things like neighbors, so they won't show up. Your best bet is probably to subst the template into the article and then add the fields by hand; you could also make a copy of the template and add the new fields in there, which would abstract the wikicode a bit. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:37, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- That's much better Worm. Now, next. we must please the info-box crowd, so how can I add her neighbours, dearest and closest friends, hobbies, shoe size, vital statistics and medical history. I tried, but they won't display. Giano 16:13, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- well it won't be much of an info-box, if people are expected to actual read the article - people have busy lives and somc ecan't even read. Giano 16:44, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- Also, I've restored the baby picture, I can't for the life of me figure out why it was deleted. It says there's no source information, but the source was clearly stated on the information page. Oh well. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:46, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you. I'm always having these problems - I think they have difficulties getting decent admins these days. Giano 16:58, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- Awww, cute, thanks. As for sourced images getting deleted, in my experience that's just business as usual on Commons. Bishonen | talk 17:00, 15 February 2013 (UTC).
- How terribly serendipitous, this popped up on my watchlist just above the Massacre of Glencoe so I had to have a look. Her ladyship's first great work brings to mind the Laird's distant adventures.... dave souza, talk 17:19, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, I think I had indeed already enjoyed the swashbuckling "Scrøtum where åre my bøøts" adventure. :-) Bishonen | talk 18:31, 15 February 2013 (UTC).
- I have returned from my sailing expedition and am gravely displeased! Who, precisely, is on charge of Info-Boxes on this encyclopaedia? You can all stop cowering Mrs Bishonen,put those trembling Bishopods back in their kennel . Just give me his name. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 20:20, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- In charge of infoboxes? Hmm. Err. …Floquenbeam ! That's it! Floquenbeam is almost certainly in charge of infoboxes! Bishonen | talk 21:10, 15 February 2013 (UTC).
- I have it on good authority that a certain James Wales (no relation to Wills or Harry) is ultimately in charge of Infooboxen. --RexxS (talk) 21:21, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- That's right, I am almost certainly in charge. In the near future, I plan on rolling out a new infobox that's the full width of the page, for use on all architectural articles. This "Cathy" person does not frighten me in the slightest, as I have complete inerrancy on my side. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:40, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- I have it on good authority that a certain James Wales (no relation to Wills or Harry) is ultimately in charge of Infooboxen. --RexxS (talk) 21:21, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- In charge of infoboxes? Hmm. Err. …Floquenbeam ! That's it! Floquenbeam is almost certainly in charge of infoboxes! Bishonen | talk 21:10, 15 February 2013 (UTC).
- I have returned from my sailing expedition and am gravely displeased! Who, precisely, is on charge of Info-Boxes on this encyclopaedia? You can all stop cowering Mrs Bishonen,put those trembling Bishopods back in their kennel . Just give me his name. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 20:20, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, I think I had indeed already enjoyed the swashbuckling "Scrøtum where åre my bøøts" adventure. :-) Bishonen | talk 18:31, 15 February 2013 (UTC).
- How terribly serendipitous, this popped up on my watchlist just above the Massacre of Glencoe so I had to have a look. Her ladyship's first great work brings to mind the Laird's distant adventures.... dave souza, talk 17:19, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- Also, I've restored the baby picture, I can't for the life of me figure out why it was deleted. It says there's no source information, but the source was clearly stated on the information page. Oh well. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:46, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Wait. Someone is actually in charge of something around here? My my, I am most certainly very behind the times then. One question. Has anyone told the children yet? — Ched : ? 21:46, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- Firstly, I am in charge here. Secondly, Mr Floquenbeam is now 'persona non grata' we shall not discuss him further. Now, regarding info-boxes - we don't want them do we? Despite this clever Giano and Signor Pondevaro have devised a solution that some twitter is now trying to underhandedly sink - so you all need to go an opine here. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 17:44, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi
As I wish not to interact with the IP from yesterday I would be happy if you could inform the IP that comments like this one at my talk page and this at the talk page of the Killing of Travis Alexander article is not appropriate. Especially since we were both told to let it go less then 24 hours ago. I dont know why the IP wants to keep on the personal conflict and some sort of smear campaign as I have had no interaction with the IP since yesterday. The IP is reacting to me asking for move-protection of the article in question after the latest move that I changed back today, something I think both you and me could agree is needed IF the name changes to the article continues to be done. I am tired of being attacked by this IP now especially since I have not interacted with it for some time. Thanks. --BabbaQ (talk) 18:11, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- I really don't want to go down this road again...
- "Especially since we were both told to let it go less then 24 hours ago."
- And I have let it go; and haven't edited the article since or EVER moved the name. However, you have been involved in an edit war with ANOTHER user and then cited this as a reason to fully-protect the article. That is all I have issue with, and I stand by my remarks. Please just let it go and stop trying to ensure every aspect of the article is to your POV. Thanks again. 87.232.1.48 (talk) 18:39, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- Firstly there are no edit war as I simply reverted back the name change to the consensus name change of Killing of made by user MaxxFordham. Secondly I can edit the article and so can you, I will never stop edit articles just because you tell me to or dont want me to 87.232.1.48. Dont add personal attacks at my talk page and at the talk page of the article in question again. This is my only response to you and I will not respond further to your attempts at smearing my name. Lastly I ask you again to let your personal vendetta against me that you have for whatever reason go. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- I am in absolute shock here. I don't want to stop you editing the article; You want to stop everyone editing it, that's my point! You say: "I can edit the article and so can you, I will never stop edit articles just because you tell me to or dont want me to"... but it is you that want to get the article full-protection and stop everyone from editing it, that's what I'm saying. You cite problems that you're mainly responsible for, it's mind blowing... Anyway, very rich claiming I'm doing personal attacks when you have constantly accused me of POV-pushing and have a personal vendetta. Come on. 87.232.1.48 (talk) 18:58, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- Here's a thought - both of you go find something completely unrelated to edit for a bit, stay off each others talk pages, have a cup of tea - and stop bickering for a while. Then, a few days/weeks down the road - consider assuming the best of the other editor, and see if you can calmly, quietly, and maturely reach some sort of compromise and/or consensus on whatever seems to be the issue. — Ched : ? 19:32, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- I agree fully with your suggestion. And yes, I had already moved on and not interacted with the editor when it contacted me again in a combative tone. And also left an insulting message at the Killing of Travis Alexander articles talk page. Me reverting the name change back to the consensus of Killing of.. was needed and Bishonen agrees with that I do hope. Anyway, if the IP is willing to let his vendetta go against me, and that he removes the insulting message at the talk page of the article, and promise not to attack me at my talk page anymore I will have nothing to respond too and thereby problem solved. It is really simple, dont contact me at my talk page and I will not contact you and dont write about me personally/insulting at any articles talk pages. Hope that is agreeable.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:51, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- I hope this cooled down while I was away; thanks for timely post, Ched. BabbaQ, I just declined your protection request on WP:RFP, and nobody else is likely to be prepared to protect the article at this point either, since I only recently unprotected it and nothing much has gone down since. As I said on article talk, I will indeed move-protect if it's moved again. (Admin talkpage stalkers, please do that for me if there's a post about it here while I'm asleep!) But I believe in minimalism where protection is concerned. If/when there's consensus for a new title, people shouldn't have to request unprotection, especially considering that the unfolding events may make that happen pretty soon. But yes, you certainly did right to revert the name back to "Killing of..", BabbaQ; I'm sorry if it sounded like I was complaining on article talk of your action there, because that wasn't what I meant at all. Bishonen | talk 21:29, 18 February 2013 (UTC).
- That's fine Bishonen you are completely right and I trust that you will moveprotect the article if necessary. And I hope you do understand my frustration with these two comments , directed towards me by the editor IP. My only wish now is for the IP to let go of his evidently strong and steamingly angry feelings towards me so that we can go on with other edits and don't bother each other. I feel bad to drag you into this again, I do apologize but the user continues to want to have contact with me and seem to be in a combative mood towards me for whatever reason. Thank you for your good work and nice way to handle this Bishonen.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:36, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- What I mean is that the IPs reaction was a major overreaction and not appropriate in tone. And I think that the insulting comment to my talk page was unecessary to say the least. But now that you have taken care of it I guess no further actions are needed. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:40, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks Bishonen, glad it's all resolved now. Maybe my reaction was a bit over the top; but I would not have reacted like this had it been a once off. It is just constant protection seeking from BabbaQ for stuff he initiates and I feel it would be damaging to wiki to block articles where there is no risk of vandalism, which seems to be his intent time and time again. I hope this is the end of it all, and what to apologise for wasting your time. It frustrates me when BabbaQ accuses me of personal attacks and that I "continues to want to have contact with.." him as that is utter rubbish, and it is his seemingly strong agenda to get the article blocked that I am against (particularly as he contributes dramatically to conflicts with numerous editors, and then cites these as reasons!) Regards, 87.232.1.48 (talk) 22:39, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- Please let me know how I "initiated it".. as user MaxxFordham was the one who once again changed the article name against consensus and left a message at the articles talk page calling me "dumb", and may I say you seemed to really like and encourage that statement. Also that I requested protection was perhaps not the best as I should have contacted Bishonen, but that still does not give you the right to instantly go on the attack mode against me both at my talk page and the articles talk page. If you had contacted me with a polite tone it would have been resolved and no egos would have been hurt. Even better you should have contacted Bishonen and asked him in a polite tone to look at the request, instead you contacted me in a comabtive tone and you obviously wanted me to react by confronting you which I have decided not to do. Learn from your mistake and I will learn from mine. I will not respond any further to this discussion as it is over and dealt with properly by Bishonen. And once again IP let go of your heated emotions that you evidently holds towards me. I also dont appreciate your total lie and slander concerning your ludicrous comment (particularly as he contributes dramatically to conflicts with numerous editors, and then cites these as reasons!) towards me, if you have problems with me atleast dont make up lies. Just let go of the hate and the wanting to contact me constantly. And don't bite me again. Hope you will be able to move on now because I will not take lightly on being attacked by you again at my talk page.Anyway, I will not respond any further to this discussion as it is over and dealt with properly by Bishonen.That's all Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:01, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- "no egos would have been hurt..." I see why you've been so hostile to even the slightest criticism now, and I apologies for hurting your ego. Dear God. 87.232.1.48 (talk) 23:15, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- I was actually refering to you by that comment. IP ... if you give hostility you get hostility. Learn from your mistakes. Now move on and please stop contacting me even though I know you probably want to. Goodbye hopefully forever my friend :)--BabbaQ (talk) 23:18, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- Please let me know how I "initiated it".. as user MaxxFordham was the one who once again changed the article name against consensus and left a message at the articles talk page calling me "dumb", and may I say you seemed to really like and encourage that statement. Also that I requested protection was perhaps not the best as I should have contacted Bishonen, but that still does not give you the right to instantly go on the attack mode against me both at my talk page and the articles talk page. If you had contacted me with a polite tone it would have been resolved and no egos would have been hurt. Even better you should have contacted Bishonen and asked him in a polite tone to look at the request, instead you contacted me in a comabtive tone and you obviously wanted me to react by confronting you which I have decided not to do. Learn from your mistake and I will learn from mine. I will not respond any further to this discussion as it is over and dealt with properly by Bishonen. And once again IP let go of your heated emotions that you evidently holds towards me. I also dont appreciate your total lie and slander concerning your ludicrous comment (particularly as he contributes dramatically to conflicts with numerous editors, and then cites these as reasons!) towards me, if you have problems with me atleast dont make up lies. Just let go of the hate and the wanting to contact me constantly. And don't bite me again. Hope you will be able to move on now because I will not take lightly on being attacked by you again at my talk page.Anyway, I will not respond any further to this discussion as it is over and dealt with properly by Bishonen.That's all Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:01, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks Bishonen, glad it's all resolved now. Maybe my reaction was a bit over the top; but I would not have reacted like this had it been a once off. It is just constant protection seeking from BabbaQ for stuff he initiates and I feel it would be damaging to wiki to block articles where there is no risk of vandalism, which seems to be his intent time and time again. I hope this is the end of it all, and what to apologise for wasting your time. It frustrates me when BabbaQ accuses me of personal attacks and that I "continues to want to have contact with.." him as that is utter rubbish, and it is his seemingly strong agenda to get the article blocked that I am against (particularly as he contributes dramatically to conflicts with numerous editors, and then cites these as reasons!) Regards, 87.232.1.48 (talk) 22:39, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- What I mean is that the IPs reaction was a major overreaction and not appropriate in tone. And I think that the insulting comment to my talk page was unecessary to say the least. But now that you have taken care of it I guess no further actions are needed. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:40, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- That's fine Bishonen you are completely right and I trust that you will moveprotect the article if necessary. And I hope you do understand my frustration with these two comments , directed towards me by the editor IP. My only wish now is for the IP to let go of his evidently strong and steamingly angry feelings towards me so that we can go on with other edits and don't bother each other. I feel bad to drag you into this again, I do apologize but the user continues to want to have contact with me and seem to be in a combative mood towards me for whatever reason. Thank you for your good work and nice way to handle this Bishonen.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:36, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- I hope this cooled down while I was away; thanks for timely post, Ched. BabbaQ, I just declined your protection request on WP:RFP, and nobody else is likely to be prepared to protect the article at this point either, since I only recently unprotected it and nothing much has gone down since. As I said on article talk, I will indeed move-protect if it's moved again. (Admin talkpage stalkers, please do that for me if there's a post about it here while I'm asleep!) But I believe in minimalism where protection is concerned. If/when there's consensus for a new title, people shouldn't have to request unprotection, especially considering that the unfolding events may make that happen pretty soon. But yes, you certainly did right to revert the name back to "Killing of..", BabbaQ; I'm sorry if it sounded like I was complaining on article talk of your action there, because that wasn't what I meant at all. Bishonen | talk 21:29, 18 February 2013 (UTC).
Update: more moves
The article has been moved again, indeed several times, by the same user (not one of the people posting above). But since all the disruption is coming from a single user, I have resisted the temptation to protect and instead simply warned that person strongly on their talkpage. Bishonen | talk 09:48, 19 February 2013 (UTC).
Yes, one single user: babbaq.
MaxxFordham (talk) 10:13, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
To Bishonen
To distance this comment from the discssion I would only like to thank you for showing patience with this situation. I will stand firm that I had no intention to have further contact with the IP and I hope this will be the end of our interaction. Hope you are not totally drained from this ;) thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:20, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- Haha, no, but please disengage right now both of you. No more posts to or about each other on this page, please, or on each other's usertalk for that matter. Keep discussion of the article on article talk — completely without personal remarks, please. Bishonen | talk 23:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC).
- Haha, I have every intention to do so. Hopefully the IP does so too.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:28, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Your Comments on My Talk Page About the Above Article We're Talking About
Well, "Maxx Fordham" is just my user name. So if you're going to call me that, or just the first part of it, that's fine, all right. But just be aware that that's not my real name (as most of these aren't) even if it sounds like a real name. (I used 2 xs to try to make it look fake on purpose.) My real first name is Mike.
I have some questions for you about all this:
Why are you supposedly an administrator here? How do the Misplaced Pages executives decide who supposedly deserve that "badge of honor"?
The points you tried to make in my page have some problems:
1. No, I don't *watch* the talk page over there; I only have visited there recently a few times, enough to have noticed a few things being said on it.
2. No, not all of what you're calling "disruptiveness" is coming from me. (Well, not really any disruptiveness from me, even though you might be calling what I was doing from me.) Don't you remember a user named babbaq who was causing disruption there?
3. Hmm... "consensus," huh? Well tell me something there, Joe: Define "consensus." Since when has there already supposedly been a "consensus" there if it doesn't include me and my points?
4. Why is there such a big deal against naming the article with "Homicide"? babbaq Didn't just like "death," and it seemed that s/he didn't like anything except "murder." How was just "killing" satisfactory then? And if neither "killing" nor "death" are murder, but s/he sort of accepts "killing of" now, then why not "homicide," even though that has even more meaning of "one human being killed by another" (closer to murder, but still not quite) than just "killing of..." does (because industrial accidents and animals also kill people, and that's not homicide)? And why wouldn't that satisfy the other Wikians arguing about it too, since it still doesn't mean what murder means (add "...for an unjust reason")?
MaxxFordham (talk) 10:31, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- 1. You seem to have had plenty of opportunity to notice the article talkpage discussions, including my link to ANI. You corrected (mistakenly) a supposed spelling error here within minutes of performing the move! And the IP put a link to the discussion here on my page on your talk. When I saw that, I was seriously tempted to take it in lieu of a warning and block you on the spot.
- 2. No, I don't see BabbaQ doing that.
- 3. Please see WP:CONSENSUS. It's used in a bit of a special sense on Misplaced Pages. It doesn't mean everybody agrees; if it did, every article would be locked in eternal disagreement. Not many people were involved here, but the others did come to an agreement suitable to the present situation with the court case. You seem to have stopped discussing when they started to resolve it. Most significantly, you didn't even comment on Darkness Shines' move to "Killing of..".
- 4. It may not be a big deal. I don't personally care what you call it.
- You're really on borrowed time. If I had seen it sooner, you would have been in big trouble over the rudeness of this post. For the process for becoming an admin, see WP:RFA. For me being an admin, see the admin list here. And don't call me Joe, Shirley. Bishonen | talk 11:19, 19 February 2013 (UTC).
- I would just like to inform Bishonen that user Maxx has made changes to your latest post at his talk page. Again with the article name.BabbaQ (talk) 12:54, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Changing another user's post? Really? A very poor idea. Thank you, BabbaQ. Bishonen | talk 19:19, 19 February 2013 (UTC).
- Yes, you're welcome. I have to admire your patience with this user, had it been me and I had to choose I would have blocked the user already. I do hope the user take this last chance and become productive instead of ridiculous and disruptive. --BabbaQ (talk) 20:47, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- I hope you understand my quite blunt and honest reply as I have a much lower tolerance level to what I consider just disruptive behaviour from other user's then you:). Good that you took action against the user's changing of your post that is not acceptable just as unacceptable as him calling me "dumb", good work. --BabbaQ (talk) 23:21, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you, but the user hasn't edited in a while, and there's no need to talk about blocking at this time. I understand you resented their rudeness towards you, but please oblige me and don't mention or address the user any more in any forum now, unless they should cause problems when they return. I don't want them to feel unwelcome here (on the site or on my page). Bishonen | talk 00:00, 20 February 2013 (UTC).
- Yes, lets hope for the best!BabbaQ (talk) 00:04, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you, but the user hasn't edited in a while, and there's no need to talk about blocking at this time. I understand you resented their rudeness towards you, but please oblige me and don't mention or address the user any more in any forum now, unless they should cause problems when they return. I don't want them to feel unwelcome here (on the site or on my page). Bishonen | talk 00:00, 20 February 2013 (UTC).
- I hope you understand my quite blunt and honest reply as I have a much lower tolerance level to what I consider just disruptive behaviour from other user's then you:). Good that you took action against the user's changing of your post that is not acceptable just as unacceptable as him calling me "dumb", good work. --BabbaQ (talk) 23:21, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, you're welcome. I have to admire your patience with this user, had it been me and I had to choose I would have blocked the user already. I do hope the user take this last chance and become productive instead of ridiculous and disruptive. --BabbaQ (talk) 20:47, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Changing another user's post? Really? A very poor idea. Thank you, BabbaQ. Bishonen | talk 19:19, 19 February 2013 (UTC).
- I would just like to inform Bishonen that user Maxx has made changes to your latest post at his talk page. Again with the article name.BabbaQ (talk) 12:54, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
(Okay, resetting the indentations. I don't want to try to keep up with them.)
All right, Bis, thanks for delaying a blocking with just a warning. That's the equitable thing to do, unlike what someone else, who is right amongst us here, might have wrongfully done. Well, we have a long list of things to go back over here, but please don't block me with this, okay? I'm just continuing because I still have some rebuttal questions for your last response to me. So here we go:
I have to commend you for your patience with babbaq, because of all that extra arguing and article name-changing he was doing before I noticed and got on the scene.
babbaq, Of course I realize you guys are talking about me. For one thing, it's right under the heading that I started, and it's right along with all this stuff I've been talking about. But I WASN'T being "ridiculous and disruptive." Maybe you were, though, with all that extra argument you were doing in that talk page that was ruffling feathers a lot.
Okay, just to explain a bit: I simply called you dumb because I was just really frustrated with all of your overreaching arguments that were making some people get flabbergasted, and it seemed like you were taking it on as if you had some kind of vendetta against anyone who wanted not to prematurely call the situation a murder yet. All right, well I think we can let that one go now. Right?
Oh, but it wasn't actually "good work" that he took action against my having adjusted something there on my talk page a little bit.
Now, obviously you're likely following my talk page, which is probably why you knew about what happened to Bish's response there. But WHY? Since when is it supposedly "your business" what's getting written on my talk page (at least where it's not about you)?
But I've gotta say, Bis, it's funny to see you say that I haven't edited that article for a while. It's been only barely about a day now. :)
Anyway... well now let me ask you this: How was my correction of "defence" into "defense" supposedly "mistaken"? What are you saying: all this time they've taught us that in school, suddenly now it's "wrong," even despite what the dictionary tells us?
(But by the way, if I were to somehow make a spelling, word-usage, punctuation, or other grammar error at some point, I *do* want you to correct it for me, so as to help me avoid the embarrassment of its continuation to exist!)
Now here's the itemized list you and I were going over:
1. Yeah, I noticed the talk page over there, but I hadn't read through all of the responses. There's just so much of it! So I missed any talk there about anything being on the ANI. I hadn't even given the ANI the slightest thought over this until now. Well I guess I'll have to go check it out now, huh?
2. How can you say that you "hadn't seen" babbaq doing any of those disruptive name changes, when in fact he was apparently doing it (from "death" back to "murder"), and getting complained to about it, even before I came on the scene?
3. No, I didn't have a problem with "death of...," but when I went to correct it back from babbaq's errant "murder of...," I couldn't do it. So I found a word that was also correct, but even more descriptive, "homicide," and changed it to that. And it's even better anyway. So why couldn't you and the other people have consented to that one?
I hadn't noticed that there was already some sort of supposed "consensus" already forming by the time I had gotten there and inserted my parts of the discussion. But apparently you're saying there was. So does that mean that I was just somehow "too late too the party to join" and have my angle considered as part of that supposed consensus?
4. Well, I wasn't just asking about why you thought it was a big deal. I was talking about everyone who had supposedly already formed that consensus you keep talking about. Okay, so you "don't really care what we call it," huh? Well, I imagine you still wouldn't want it to be called "murder" before that's been determined. Right? Also, if you don't care, then why are you part of the consensus group? Also, if you don't care, then why should any of the others have an issue with the word "homicide" either?
Oh, and why are we doing this all on your page now, instead of sending stuff back and forth to each other's pages, like where you started it on mine and then I came over here? Yeah, I wondered why, event though I saw my adjustment change back, you didn't also put your response there. Well, we can do it this way, I guess, then. But I'm still curious: How did you decide whose page to stick with?
I already knew that you are an admin.; I was just asking why you were one. You're not the only one I wonder about when wondering how the admin. thing works. I haven't read WP:RFA yet, but I guess I'll have to now if I'm going to understand how and why you got chosen as an admin. But I can say this: your respect for warnings before action is what makes you a better candidate than... aghehm... someone else here close to us in this conversation. ;-)
MaxxFordham (talk) 03:21, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
- "Defense" is American spelling, "defence" is British, both are correct. Don't change somebody else's variant of English. See WP:ENGVAR.
- See 4.
- And before I came on the scene too. It's over, it's been resolved, stop beating a dead horse.
- You don't remember it right. See the history. You moved it from "Killing of..", which Darkness Shines had moved it to, per the end of , and, when that had been reverted, again from "Killing.." to something else. What for? Why stir it up all over again when both BabbaQ and the IP were happy with the new name "Killing of", which you never commented on? That was the place to get your "angle considered", not via move edit warring. If you think it's too boring to read right through a talkpage thread called "Naming of article", then please don't jump in and repeatedly change the name of the article, you know?
- I'm not part of any "consensus group". I'm adminning this, for my sins. No, I'm not going to block anybody for being argumentative. But it's very boring. Yes, indeed, why are we doing all this on my page? You could have replied on your own instead of taking it here, which might have been better, in hindsight; but it's hard to know at the start how these things will develop. I'm tempted to tell both BabbaQ and you to get off my page and take the quarrel to one or both of your own pages. But instead I tell you this: stop it both of you with describing each other's behaviour (oh, is that a spelling mistake?) in lurid, or any, terms. Cold. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Give my talkpage, the article talkpage, and all talkpages a rest until you have something to say that's about how to edit the article from now on. And once you do, that goes on article talk. If you must respond here, do; but I'm tired of it, and it's odds on I won't reply again. Bishonen | talk 10:05, 20 February 2013 (UTC).
- To be fair Bishonen you kind of asked for a reply with this comment. Anyway, I have nothing further do add about anything concerning this subject so for me it is over and done with. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:27, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm gaining on you
You may have ArbCom "in your pocket" but I have my very own MeatPuppet, a former ArbCom clerk, no less: Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/KillerChihuahua (now unfortunately RevDel'd for no reason that I can see.) Next, I will get an Arb MeatPuppet, and then I too, shall slowly draw in each and every Arb until they are all in MY pocket! Mwah-hah-hah! (cue scary music) KillerChihuahua 16:56, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Dogs don't get to have pockets for good reason and I should know. --Rexx the Wonder Dog (wuf) 18:08, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Drat, foiled again! It's always the little things, innit? KillerChihuahua 20:25, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- It's RevDel'd now? I read it before it was, haha, because I was alerted by ANI to your recent disgrace. Now who was it that reported Geogre and I were the same person... hmm... Hollow Wilerding, probably, in the early fourteenth century. That was a very elaborate report, with a lot of suspicious coincidences in time, oddly enough, as Geogre and I are in quite different timezones. That report on you wasn't nearly as impressive! Mere meatpuppetry! And if you're thinking of attempting to turn little Newyorkbrad from Bishzilla's Voice on ArbCom to yours (going yap! yap! I presume?), I can only advise you to "be bold, be bold, and everywhere be bold" except in Bishzilla's pocket. Bishonen | talk 19:17, 19 February 2013 (UTC).
- Well, I'm semi-bold. I didn't know about the ANI thing 'til you mentioned it here and I went to look. I've got to stop taking weekends off. I miss all the crazy stuff. KillerChihuahua 20:25, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Of course there's always that very elite group (of 1?) who exists in such exclusive air as to having Godkings renounce their use of blocking tools. Now that's a tough feat to match. — Ched : ? 13:14, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
- You would bring that up. I know I'm never going to match that mark of distinction... if for no other reason than because of the shitstorm when it happened last time. Even Godkings can learn, apparently. KillerChihuahua 13:24, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yea, that one certainly did rock our little wiki-world. You know, to be honest, there really is a lot about Jimbo that I like and perhaps even admire. What he and Larry did here was absolutely amazing. I guess it was like finding out about Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. The whole "Pride goeth before..." thing of refusing to offer a simple apology was almost sad to me. But it was long ago, and perhaps in a galaxy far away. Long live the puppy cabal and all 'Zillas great and small. :-) — Ched : ? 13:57, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
- Well, we had an email exchange about it, I'd say half a dozen emails. It was one of the worst cases of IDHT I've ever seen. OTH, he was reasonably decent about my stalker. Feet of clay, though, like all us mortals. KillerChihuahua 14:07, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yea, that one certainly did rock our little wiki-world. You know, to be honest, there really is a lot about Jimbo that I like and perhaps even admire. What he and Larry did here was absolutely amazing. I guess it was like finding out about Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. The whole "Pride goeth before..." thing of refusing to offer a simple apology was almost sad to me. But it was long ago, and perhaps in a galaxy far away. Long live the puppy cabal and all 'Zillas great and small. :-) — Ched : ? 13:57, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
- You would bring that up. I know I'm never going to match that mark of distinction... if for no other reason than because of the shitstorm when it happened last time. Even Godkings can learn, apparently. KillerChihuahua 13:24, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
J. R. R. Tolkien
Since you've put semi on this article, can I remove the Pending Changes? So long as semi is active, there will be no edits that require approval. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 03:14, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry, Ed, please do. I did realize PC wasn't needed any more, and puzzled about how to remove it — I've never protected a PC page before — but it wasn't obvious to me how to do that, so I decided it would go away automagically. It's my nature to be optimistic like that. :-) Bishonen | talk 04:06, 21 February 2013 (UTC).
- And it worked! Ed automagically appeared to fix it! How cool is that? KillerChihuahua 12:28, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
No such word...
I fully agree with this edit, and indeed I had been thinking of doing much the same myself, but on searching I found to my surprise that there actually is such a word: see, for example, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/educationist. That doesn't matter in the least, because there are several other reasons why your revert was right, but I just thought you might be interested to know. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:28, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
- I am, but you astound me. But then language is a bit like Misplaced Pages. Nobody's in charge, anybody can edit/add new words. (Edit stupidly/add stupid new words.) Bishonen | talk 20:39, 21 February 2013 (UTC). P.S. "Chiefly British"! Adding insult to injury! Bishonen | talk 20:43, 21 February 2013 (UTC).
Educationist
For the record, while it's a strange word and I have no reason to believe Colin Lamont is one, "educationist" is a real word: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/educationist . We even have a category for it, which surprised the hell out of me: Category:Educationists.—Kww(talk) 21:42, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you. See the section above. But OMG I didn't know about the category. Bishonen | talk 21:49, 21 February 2013 (UTC).
omg I am so tempted to add the category to Bishonen's page. KillerChihuahua 12:45, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, do, if you want to experience getting reverted real quick. We are strictly humourless about article categories on userpages. I don't really blame us, but Bishzilla was quite grieved when she wasn't allowed in Category:Prehistoric reptiles. :-( And not in WikiProject Dinosaurs either! The last was me putting my foot down; I knew she'd be in trouble. Poor old girl, though. Do you see her melancholy userbox? Bishonen | talk 13:39, 22 February 2013 (UTC).
- I had missed that! That is teh awesomeness. Fer reals. KillerChihuahua 05:23, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
Re: Colonisation
Hi Bishonen, I state in your recent edit in Culture of Italy and error, because the correct word is Colonization for the article. It is true that in many english-speaking areas, there are differences, such as "center and centre" and different words that signify the same thing, but in this case it does not, because colonization is in both the "British" and "American" spelling, while colonisation is only in the "British english" and the word "colonization" is of more use than "colonisation", and "colonization" is the most used word every time such topic is mentioned, and "colonisation" doesn't even show up in my thesaurus. Words like "colonialism" and "colonist" is an example of proper use of the "s", while other words like the one we are discussing right now the "s" is of little use. I will fix that part again in the article Culture of Italy, and please, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Much regards, Slurpy ;) (Slurpy121 (talk) 21:13, 22 February 2013 (UTC))
- Both Johnbod and I referred to the guideline WP:ENGVAR in the edit summaries where we reverted this persistent but mistaken correction. Please click on the link and read the guideline. P.S., Google finds "colonisation" 9 million times and "colonization" 16 million times: a very natural difference, considering there are more Americans than Brits, and hardly one that suggests the s is "of little use". I've reverted again. Regards, Bishonen | talk 21:28, 22 February 2013 (UTC).
- I see the theme. I did read the guidelines, and in fact, "Colonization" is not an american word, It is pure "English" vocabulary. I will make more deep investigations and bring more User experts to the topic. And even if "Colonization" was an american word, it comes to show that most of the readers in the English Misplaced Pages are either people more familiar with the word "Colonization", and it is best to use the most used "(and correct)" word that implies and suits better to the article. I will restore the word again and since the word is more popular among the people, I will bring experts to the situation. I only want to make the best of using in that article the best of good word. And the "s" is of little use in that word as you can see in most websites, books and Misplaced Pages articles. I will also post this in the talk page of the article. Regards.(Slurpy121 (talk) 21:54, 22 February 2013 (UTC))
- You call it a "topic" and a "situation"? That seems rather grand for the "z" versus "s", uh... issue, especially in an article that has so many more serious problems. I hope you get some feedback on the article talkpage and are able to have an interesting conversation about it, but I don't think I'll be part of that conversation. I feel I've already spent enough time on it. Good luck, Slurpy, happy editing. Bishonen | talk 22:14, 22 February 2013 (UTC).
- I see the theme. I did read the guidelines, and in fact, "Colonization" is not an american word, It is pure "English" vocabulary. I will make more deep investigations and bring more User experts to the topic. And even if "Colonization" was an american word, it comes to show that most of the readers in the English Misplaced Pages are either people more familiar with the word "Colonization", and it is best to use the most used "(and correct)" word that implies and suits better to the article. I will restore the word again and since the word is more popular among the people, I will bring experts to the situation. I only want to make the best of using in that article the best of good word. And the "s" is of little use in that word as you can see in most websites, books and Misplaced Pages articles. I will also post this in the talk page of the article. Regards.(Slurpy121 (talk) 21:54, 22 February 2013 (UTC))
- I didn't want you to take it that way, but if you insist. By the way, The article is fine, except for some minor errors. Good Luck. (Slurpy121 (talk) 22:20, 22 February 2013 (UTC))
- I like how "...and please, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong" actually means "...and please, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I will of course revert you immediately". --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:24, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
- The user is new and means well, I think, but s/he may not be aware of the policies against edit warring. I've put a warning on their page. Bishonen | talk 22:30, 22 February 2013 (UTC).
- Thank you for your note Bishonen. I saw your note in my talk page. I will be more cautious on that, but the word just doesn't seem to fit the article. I do not want to edit war, but the word just doesn't seem right. Anyways, Thank you for listening. (Slurpy121 (talk) 22:35, 22 February 2013 (UTC))
- The user is new and means well, I think, but s/he may not be aware of the policies against edit warring. I've put a warning on their page. Bishonen | talk 22:30, 22 February 2013 (UTC).
- (e/c) Perhaps that's all it is, Bish; you're usually more gracious and forgiving than I am. But when I'm new to a situation, I usually listen when someone who's been around a while tells me I'm wrong. I see elsewhere he's
accusing Johnbod of being a vandalsorry, he's more discrete than that; he "just wants to be on the safe side that the user is not vandalizing the page. And of course, the all time favorite, "I do not want to edit war", while simultaneously edit warring. Classic. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:41, 22 February 2013 (UTC)- Ah, those spellings favoured by wild colonial boys. Despited being designed in the U.S., my computer takes umbrage at colonization and keeps trying to convert it to the more conventional colonisation. However, it is my understanding that Oxford, not content with educating the current bunch of toffs running the government, encourages these odd spellings which are little used in the more civilised parts of the country. . dave souza, talk 22:44, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
- Hehe, nice one, Dave. Flöckenbeem, don't tell me you care about spelling wårs? Bishonen | talk 22:47, 22 February 2013 (UTC).
- Ah, those spellings favoured by wild colonial boys. Despited being designed in the U.S., my computer takes umbrage at colonization and keeps trying to convert it to the more conventional colonisation. However, it is my understanding that Oxford, not content with educating the current bunch of toffs running the government, encourages these odd spellings which are little used in the more civilised parts of the country. . dave souza, talk 22:44, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
- (e/c) Perhaps that's all it is, Bish; you're usually more gracious and forgiving than I am. But when I'm new to a situation, I usually listen when someone who's been around a while tells me I'm wrong. I see elsewhere he's
- I saw your note in David Levy's talk page, much regards. And thank you Floquenbeam but I'm not a hypocrite, and if what dave souza says is true, I will revert my edit to "Colonisation". I just don't understand, If "Colonization" is the right word and the most used one, then how is "Colonisation" not considered correct? and believe me, I've been to Britain and know their use of words. (Slurpy121 (talk) 22:57, 22 February 2013 (UTC))
- Hi Bishonen, are you sure that "Colonisation is the correct word? so I can change it back if you want(Slurpy121 (talk) 03:19, 23 February 2013 (UTC))
- Colonisation is a correct word and so is colonization. Neither of them is the correct word. Colonisation is the primary correct spelling in British English. I was going by Johnbod, a very experienced editor, in changing back to his British version. However, doing a search through the article for the endings -ise and -ize just now, I see that both are there, but -ize is by far more common. See my last couple of edits. I don't believe in standardising an article on British English just because the subject is European (but I know there are people who do), so I reverted myself. Leave your spelling, bring it up on Talk, and see what Johnbod says. I definitely think you should be guided by him, he knows much more about Misplaced Pages than you do yet. I won't chip in on Talk, but feel free to link to this post of mine if you like. This is how to link to it: . If you copypaste that, it'll show up as a small clickable link in your post. Bishonen | talk. 11:20, 23 February 2013 (UTC).
- Inevitably, there's an article on Oxford spelling which explainz the uzage of such spellingz in the UK. Basically, British English has diverged away from "-ize" even though in academic terms both spellings are sometimes ok, but not always: see analyse. Hence the habits of my computer spellchecker. For furthur details see Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Spelling/Words ending with "-ise" or "-ize". . dave souza, talk 12:51, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Oczford, huh? Thanks, Dave. Bishonen | talk 13:54, 23 February 2013 (UTC).
- With all the English one sees and hears, it is a bit difficult to be consistent unless one has been speaking the language since childhood, but I usually use Oxford spelling, as it is what I find in the dictionaries I happen to own. The Concise Oxford Dictionary and the Swedish-English dictionaries I usually consult all use it. And someone has to stand up for poor, oppressed and near-extinct spelling variations. --Hegvald (talk) 22:16, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, UK English is that traditionally taught in Swedish schools. Though I admit I'm bi-spellual or Mid-Atlantic myself, from a constitutional inability to take much of an interest in ortography. I do try to write color to an American and colour to a limey, as a delicate attention — tala med bönder på bönders vis, och med lärde män på latin — but I only fitfully aspire to consistency. (Anybody who posts a reply containing the word "hobgoblin" at this point will be banned from my page.) Bäst regards to you, Hegvåld. Bischånen, 00:59, 24 February 2013 (UTC).
- I too fupport the ufe of opprefsed and near-extinct fpelling variations. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:02, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Flåckenbim, you remind me of the "bugger all thif for a lark" bible in… in what work of fiction? Good Omens, was it? Believe it or not, Google doesn't know, so who should I ask but the high fantasy character on the block. Bischånen, 00:59, 24 February 2013 (UTC).
- You mean "Buggre Alle this for a Larke I amme sick to mye Hart of typefettinge"? Yep, Good Omens. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:15, 24 February 2013 (UTC) (*Idly wonders whether to admit using Google and Wikiquote to look intelligent, or whether to try to fake it. Decides to go all in and fake it*)
- Flåckenbim, you remind me of the "bugger all thif for a lark" bible in… in what work of fiction? Good Omens, was it? Believe it or not, Google doesn't know, so who should I ask but the high fantasy character on the block. Bischånen, 00:59, 24 February 2013 (UTC).
- With all the English one sees and hears, it is a bit difficult to be consistent unless one has been speaking the language since childhood, but I usually use Oxford spelling, as it is what I find in the dictionaries I happen to own. The Concise Oxford Dictionary and the Swedish-English dictionaries I usually consult all use it. And someone has to stand up for poor, oppressed and near-extinct spelling variations. --Hegvald (talk) 22:16, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Oczford, huh? Thanks, Dave. Bishonen | talk 13:54, 23 February 2013 (UTC).
- Inevitably, there's an article on Oxford spelling which explainz the uzage of such spellingz in the UK. Basically, British English has diverged away from "-ize" even though in academic terms both spellings are sometimes ok, but not always: see analyse. Hence the habits of my computer spellchecker. For furthur details see Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Spelling/Words ending with "-ise" or "-ize". . dave souza, talk 12:51, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Colonisation is a correct word and so is colonization. Neither of them is the correct word. Colonisation is the primary correct spelling in British English. I was going by Johnbod, a very experienced editor, in changing back to his British version. However, doing a search through the article for the endings -ise and -ize just now, I see that both are there, but -ize is by far more common. See my last couple of edits. I don't believe in standardising an article on British English just because the subject is European (but I know there are people who do), so I reverted myself. Leave your spelling, bring it up on Talk, and see what Johnbod says. I definitely think you should be guided by him, he knows much more about Misplaced Pages than you do yet. I won't chip in on Talk, but feel free to link to this post of mine if you like. This is how to link to it: . If you copypaste that, it'll show up as a small clickable link in your post. Bishonen | talk. 11:20, 23 February 2013 (UTC).
- Hi Bishonen, are you sure that "Colonisation is the correct word? so I can change it back if you want(Slurpy121 (talk) 03:19, 23 February 2013 (UTC))
- I'll swear on a stack of genuine and rare Bugger-all-thif bibles that it was "thif"! (Corrupted from the long s.) I'll admit the typefetting rings true. Perpetrated by a typesetter who lost his mind from the boredom of the job. Bishonen | talk 01:29, 24 February 2013 (UTC).
- Thank you Bishonen and dave souza :) (Slurpy121 (talk) 19:31, 23 February 2013 (UTC))
Lost images
Before my long holiday I uploaded a series of 3D plans of Mentmore Towers all in glorious techniclour (the one there now is one my earlier and more naive efforts); now I can't find them. How do I find out if am image has been deleted if I don't now it's name? You or somebody here will know how to find them because I can't, and i want to finish the page off, I can't stand looking at it any more - it's a mess and need a vast re-write and improvement. They were all on my old computer and then went crunch ages ago. Please help. Giano 09:34, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Try scrolling through your file contributions - I can't think of any other way. KillerChihuahua 09:45, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- But the one in the article ("more naive effort") isn't on that list, because it was uploaded by Giano II! He did lots of uploads. So did this guy and that's where they are. My god, I didn't even know I was this brilliant! Bishonen | talk 10:47, 23 February 2013 (UTC).
- Oh you are clever: here it is File:Mentmore from Southwest.jpg; now all I have to fo is find the others. Giano 11:16, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yes! I am prodigiously clever! But most of the credit goes to Puppy, because it never would have occurred to me to look only in the relevant namespace. That option has merely stared me in the face the ten million times I've clicked on somebody's contributions, so naturally I never noticed it. Bishonen | talk 13:50, 23 February 2013 (UTC).
- Thanks! Glad I could be of some little help; insomnia is not always bad. :-) KillerChihuahua 05:22, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yes! I am prodigiously clever! But most of the credit goes to Puppy, because it never would have occurred to me to look only in the relevant namespace. That option has merely stared me in the face the ten million times I've clicked on somebody's contributions, so naturally I never noticed it. Bishonen | talk 13:50, 23 February 2013 (UTC).
- Oh you are clever: here it is File:Mentmore from Southwest.jpg; now all I have to fo is find the others. Giano 11:16, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- I have found all the images now - not sure if I like them, but they'll have to do as I can't be arsed to re-draw them all again - and they're better than what's there already. Just doing another re-write at the moment - what do you think of a house that's described as "As resembling a huge bulk, newly arrived from another planet" how cool is that? If any fool dares to try an info box on it; I shall insist its extraterrestrial properties are listed. Giano 16:49, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Who or when was Jackson-Stopps, and what makes you think that the planet wasn't astrological? It's in your starz, . . dave souza, talk 17:03, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- I really can't believe you've asked that question Dave; everyone knows who Gervase Jackson-Stops is. He was a great friend and confidante of my esteemed and noble aunt - in fact, she was the great passion of his life - the only woman he ever looked at. Giano 17:11, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Absolutely right. Only her and Bishzilla. darwinbish 18:42, 23 February 2013 (UTC).
- Oh that explains it; I hadn't realised that he had met Bishzilla - I often wondered what had changed him and caused him to emerge from the closet. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 18:47, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Ah, hadn't heard of him but the link is informative. Chap was rather after my time of tootling around National Trust statelie homes, and the poor fellow didn't last terribly long, despite qualifying after me. Obviously Jackson-Stopps, p.118 needs some clarification, trust that's in hand. . . dave souza, talk 19:15, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Which reminds me of my tutor on the topic, Colin McWilliam, did milady Catherine ever meet him? . . dave souza, talk 19:26, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Absolutely right. Only her and Bishzilla. darwinbish 18:42, 23 February 2013 (UTC).
- I really can't believe you've asked that question Dave; everyone knows who Gervase Jackson-Stops is. He was a great friend and confidante of my esteemed and noble aunt - in fact, she was the great passion of his life - the only woman he ever looked at. Giano 17:11, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Who or when was Jackson-Stopps, and what makes you think that the planet wasn't astrological? It's in your starz, . . dave souza, talk 17:03, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- But the one in the article ("more naive effort") isn't on that list, because it was uploaded by Giano II! He did lots of uploads. So did this guy and that's where they are. My god, I didn't even know I was this brilliant! Bishonen | talk 10:47, 23 February 2013 (UTC).
- Oh how remarkable; you must be even older than poor Mrs Bishonen, and not many people can say that. No, I have never met Mr McWilliam, gillies aside, one tends not to meet Scots - apart from a most interesting man (who had lost in his kilt) who I met in a Trafalgar Square fountain on New years's Eve 1929. What a lion he was. Putting him aside, I no longer care for the Scots, all this wanting independence from the UK - cast them adrift I say, and rebuild Hadrian's wall to keep them in. Then, no doubt we would have that interfering Hilary Clinton (extraordinary hairstyle) telling us to be nicer to them because half of America claims to be related to one or other of them - total poppycock! If Americans were related to Irish and Scots, they wouldn't all be called Randy, Rusty and Charlene and have Germanic, Jewish and African surnames. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Kennedys were not really called Winkelmuller and just changed it as a political ploy. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 21:50, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Dear Lady Catherine, you're some 63% wrong on the basis of an amusing poll in Sir George Gilbert Scott's splendid edifice: so nice to see riveted steel beams and cast iron columns in a Gothic building. Of course Hadrian's Wall as a border would include those Scots who're generally thought of as Geordies and Cumbrians. As for the SNP, they're in rather a fankle as they worship separatism but still want to keep our dear sovereign (dear as in costly) and so if they get their wicked way we'd still be part of the UK. Unless, of course, Her Majesty chooses to disunite them and banish them to the Commonwealth: where will it end? . . dave souza, talk 22:57, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Fankle? Bishonen | talk 01:03, 24 February 2013 (UTC).
- Scottish English#Lexical, perhaps not much used outwith Scotland.. dave souza, talk 16:32, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
- It's in Wiktionary, which considers the verb to be "English" but the noun Scottish. Anyway, good new word to learn! Bishonen | talk 16:44, 24 February 2013 (UTC).
- I wasn't aware that Scottish English was distinct from Scots, which is counted as its own language insofar as it has has its very own Misplaced Pages (despite Scots's lack, at this particular point in time, of an army and navy of its own). And apparently it is a matter opinion whether it is or not. Perhaps I should have written Thomas Erskine, 9th Earl of Kellie in Scottish English, as a more ethnically appropriate variety of the language. But alas, I have no idea how to do that. Will someone else give it a go? --Hegvald (talk) 04:42, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
- It's in Wiktionary, which considers the verb to be "English" but the noun Scottish. Anyway, good new word to learn! Bishonen | talk 16:44, 24 February 2013 (UTC).
- Scottish English#Lexical, perhaps not much used outwith Scotland.. dave souza, talk 16:32, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
About my cryptic WP:AN/I comment
Bish, "respect my authoritah!" was an early internet meme back when South Park was still only a few seasons old. Eric Cartman peddled his tricycle around and yelled out "respect my authoritah!" in one episode. I can't remember the details. And I've spent most of my on-wiki time last night and this night (in upside-down land time) trying to find the mysterious "Camponotus sp.6", an ant species found only on the largest island of the Senkaku Islands. And the only person I like poking fun at more than myself is... everyone else in the world. Peter aka --Shirt58 (talk) 14:23, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
- It's linked in my edit notice ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:32, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yes? I was aware of the meme, since I frequent this place where it's often used (plus you even linked to it). That wasn't what I wondered about. Your comment certainly read like sarcasm directed at the people who wanted to get the user to sign their posts. I don't understand why you'd want to post such sarcasm, and now I don't understand how the rest of the world comes into it either. But it's hardly worth any more pixels. Bishonen | talk 16:31, 24 February 2013 (UTC).
User: Talk page content removals??
Can you remove conversations or hide them from your talk page? I'm asking this to make sure to follow orders. Thank you :) (Slurpy121 (talk) 00:05, 25 February 2013 (UTC))
- Yes, you're free to remove conversations from your own talkpage. Single posts, too — you're free to remove anything from your talk at any time, with a few rare exceptions which are unlikely to concern you. You can either just blank them out, or create an archive page to put them on, whichever you prefer. What you must not do is change other people's posts, such as for instance remove only parts of them. But I'm sure that wasn't what you were thinking of doing. Bishonen | talk 01:06, 25 February 2013 (UTC).
I can happily say that that was not what I was thinking of doing :) And by the way, in your opinion, do you think the Renaissance had something to do with the Reformation? (Slurpy121 (talk) 01:11, 25 February 2013 (UTC))
My perfect record is ended
I took your advice... the ANI was just getting more toxic and battle-groundy. This is the first RFAR I've ever filed. I was trying to never file one. :-( KillerChihuahua 06:56, 25 February 2013 (UTC)