Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dweller (talk | contribs) at 16:58, 12 March 2012 (→Windsor Castle: r). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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.

Guy Fawkes is in V for Vendetta

He is played by Clive Ashborn. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhT4B4-OITs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.168.217 (talk) 05:49, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Don't you think it's curious that he looks nothing like the mask? And that Fawkes didn't die like that? To say nothing of the cowboy noose knot, which was never used in England. You need to explain how V has altered the public perception of Fawkes, or reveals new insights about him. Can you do that? Malleus Fatuorum 06:45, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

You are right in saying that he did not die like that. Fortunately the section I am proposing a change to is the Legacy section. This section is for his portrayal within cultural works. The section already cites two fictional works. His fictionalization in 'Bentley's Miscellany' as "essentially an action hero" also shows him in situations which are not accurate. I am not sure why the masks keep getting brought up. I have not proposed a change which mention masks or anonymous. I will agree with consensus that neither should be mentioned in the article past the link to masks. So you would like me to "explain how V has altered the public perception of Fawkes." Well since I am only allowed to cite reliable sources and not conduct original research, I will refer back to the article I cited. "When parents explained to their offspring about Guy Fawkes and his attempt to blow up Parliament, there always seemed to be an undertone of admiration in their voices, or at least there did in Northampton. While that era's children perhaps didn't see Fawkes as a hero, they certainly didn't see him as the villainous scapegoat he'd originally been intended as." "Catholic revolutionary visage and his incongruously Puritan apparel are perhaps a reminder that unjust institutions may always be haunted by volatile 17th century spectres, even if today's uprisings are fuelled more by social networks than by gunpowder. Some ghosts never go away." He is represented as a martyr and hero who stood up against the unjust and died fighting for his cause. V for Vendetta furthers the perception that he is a hero not a villain. Furthermore, the movie has exposed more people to the character than any other work. If nothing more it made him a household name outside the UK. The fact is, a historical character inspired a story about a masked vigilante, and it is worth mentioning briefly.

If you would prefer the legacy section be split into a separate article, that would be ok. But the fact remains that even in the popular culture article it only talks about his mask. The character itself was portrayed in the movie. http://en.wikipedia.org/Cultural_depictions_of_George_Armstrong_Custer mentions Custer's Revenge which I personally find to be EXTREMELY historically inaccurate.

Or legacy could be split and a new section added titled 'modern view'. http://en.wikipedia.org/Blackbeard#Legacy "Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl" is mentioned in the Blackbeard article. 24.118.168.217 (talk) 07:19, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Why not suggest a sentence or two along those lines that you'd like to see added to the article? Malleus Fatuorum 13:37, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

I did. I wrote, "His legacy and the masks used to celebrate Guy Fawkes Night were partial inspiration for a graphic novel by Alan Moore titled V for Vendetta. It was later turned into a movie by Warner Brothers." It was removed for being "nonsense." I can add a sentence that says, V for Vendetta furthered the cultural transformation which saw Guy Fawkes rise from villain to vigilante hero. The latter sentence does not make sense without first stating that his legend is inspiration for the hero in the novel. The sentiment (but not exact wording) of what I wrote is clear in the source I cite.

If the overall story is Fawkes's transformation from villain to vigilante hero then I could probably be persuaded. I don't agree with your assertion that the first sentence is necessary to make sense of the second though, and overall I think that three sentences puts too much emphasis on a recent film that frankly doesn't depict Fawkes at all, except briefly and inaccurately in its opening. Malleus Fatuorum 02:01, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

How would you form the sentence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.168.217 (talk) 07:52, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

"V for Vendetta furthered the cultural transformation which saw Guy Fawkes rise from villain to vigilante hero" is an extremely dubious claim. Variations on "Guy Fawkes was the last man to enter Parliament with decent intentions" have been in regular use for decades if not centuries. 78.149.152.251 (talk) 14:58, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

And? "Guy Fawkes' status as a potential revolutionary hero." "While that era's children perhaps didn't see Fawkes as a hero, they certainly didn't see him as the villainous scapegoat he'd originally been intended as." "When parents explained to their offspring about Guy Fawkes and his attempt to blow up Parliament, there always seemed to be an undertone of admiration in their voices, or at least there did in Northampton." This is the author of V for Vendetta speaking not me. I am not addressing the last man to enter Parliament line. "Guy Fawkes; or, The Gunpowder Treason, portrays Fawkes in a generally sympathetic light, and transformed him in the public perception into an 'acceptable fictional character'. Fawkes subsequently appeared as 'essentially an action hero' in children's books and penny dreadfuls such as The Boyhood Days of Guy Fawkes; or, The Conspirators of Old London." How did the beginning of V for Vendetta illustrate anything other that his turn to a heroic character?24.118.168.217 (talk) 09:53, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

In which case, you're pretty much admitting that you want to give undue weight to V for Vendetta, since it just happens to (currently) be the most recent of a long tradition of sympathetic depictions of Fawkes and if it's going to be covered, would be better placed as just one entry in a list. Alan Moore's recollections may well be interesting, but are of no relevance other than as a source for his personal motivations and opinions. Misplaced Pages holds rigidly to the principle that anything we mention must be citable to reliable sources, and Moore isn't a cultural or literary historian of any kind. In my opinion there are grounds for a slightly expanded "changing public perceptions" section in the parent article, but one needs to be very careful not to overemphasise V4V just because it happens to be the work with which the Randys in Boise are most familiar. 92.24.48.66 (talk) 10:33, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Never seen it- who's this Fowkes guy anyway? Randy from Boise (talk) 20:57, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

I am by no means asking for "undue weight to V for Vendetta." All I have ever proposed is one mention. "Moore isn't a cultural or literary historian of any kind." That is not true. "Moore published an eight-page article tracing out the history of pornography in which he argued that a society's vibrancy and success are related to its permissiveness in sexual matters, which was described by a reviewer as 'a tremendously witty history lecture – a sort of Horrible Histories for grownups.'" I think it is a very slippery slope if we start discluding certain people from the category of historian. I just have not seen a case made as to why a well published authors version of history is to be discredited, just because a majority of his works are illustrated and fictional. He is still a well researched and intelligent person. Here is an article where the author looks to define "what history is" in Alan Moore's opinion. http://www.english.ufl.edu/imagetext/archives/v2_2/carney/ In my opinion, he is absolutely a historian. 24.118.168.217 (talk) 03:02, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I think a case could potentially be made for the film and perhaps the mask altering the public's perception of Fawkes, but I can't make it and neither can you; it has to be made by reliable secondary sources. Them's the rules. Malleus Fatuorum 03:10, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Old money

Hey Malleus, I was wondering whether you (or a TPS) may be able to help me. I believe there's a template/agreed format for when we aim to covert old money into newer dominations- do you know where I can find it? I couldn't see anything in the MoS. The article in question is North Pier, Blackpool, which currently sports "for the price of 2d (approximately £5 – £10 today)". J Milburn (talk) 22:00, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

{{inflation}} is what you're thinking of. Malleus Fatuorum 22:04, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

I think figures in pence and shillings need to be converted to decimal form for the template to work. Nev1 (talk) 22:09, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

They do indeed, but I rarely use this template now. I prefer to get the figures from Measuring Worth, which gives a value of £4.70 using average earnings, which I think is probably the most appropriate comparison in this case. And then I'd add a note to explain the basis of the calculation. Malleus Fatuorum 22:40, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts- I'll point the article author to this conversation. J Milburn (talk) 23:21, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

After having had to tackle this conversion issue a few times at FAC, this article is a good example of what I usually do now; see notes 5 and 6. Malleus Fatuorum 23:46, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

BTW, I've had a quick look at the article, and it seems to me that it seriously needs the tender attentions of a good copyeditor. Stuff like "The decor inside lead it to be known as the 'Indian Pavilion'" (which I've fixed) isn't good enough for GA in my opinion. Malleus Fatuorum 00:11, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

As the key maintainer of Template:Inflation (ha!), and chief occasional money-over-time reviewer at FAC, I recommend using a real time-money comparator written by real economists like Measuring Worth too. The inflation templates are shitty CPI templates with poor data-sets and at best duplicate Measuring Worth's superior data. At worst, using a CPI inflation is wildly inappropriate. While there are partial alphas for non-CPI inflations (ha) they too suffer from dodgy wikipedia template syndrome. Remember to cite measuring worth! I recommend thinking deeply about "what kind of money was this in the past: consumption, profit, national accounts?" and "what comparison will accurately represent the function of the past money, in a manner appreciable to a modern audience?" Malleus' choice of purchasing power parity is a reasonable one for the time for £3–5000. Personally I strongly recommend treating capital as %GDP. Finally, ask yourself, "Does money function in the same way as it did then?" 300 sesterces are not money as we know it, the function of money in Roman society was so radically different to the function of money today that I would strongly frown on any attempt to convert money. Rather noting the time of labour or cost of slaves in the society would be better then to allow readers to make their own understanding. Fifelfoo (talk) 00:30, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your input Fifelfoo. I must admit I'm terribly nervous about providing conversions for the pre-Industrial Revolution period, but in this case it's 1866, and we're talking about the entrance fee to the pier, so I think average earnings is a reasonable stab. If we were talking about the capital cost of building the pier then I'd agree wholeheartedly with your GDP conversion. Your opposition at one FAC or other had the useful effect of making me think a little more deeply about this issue. Malleus Fatuorum 00:41, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

(I think about the time value of money far far too much. I'm a tragic for the "periods of crisis" analysis of the declining rate of profit. You should hear me when I get going on such stuff as wage, profit, capital, growth). 1866 is solidly industry and the data series that Measuring Worth have are perfectly good data for the UK. Fifelfoo (talk) 01:05, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

"Money today has two storeys"- Solzhenitsyn quoting a popular saying of the Kruschev era. Fifelfoo can probably explain it much better than me (I'm struggling!) Ning-ning (talk) 10:13, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Within capitalism, a relatively stable system, the idea of what consumption is tolerable, how much of the wage that covers, how many hours a wage takes to earn, how many non-employee members of a household and for how long, the average and maximum productivity rates for machinery and labour, the expansion of labour categories (I can provide you religion on a wage now...) these all change. Long run series of monetary values have to emphasise money acting in one way (a wage, consumption bundle, productivity unit, or portion of the national account) instead of acting in others. But at each moment wages become national accounts become consumption bundles become productivity units. The Accountants debate this at the level of theory, and the conclusion an accounting standards system draws matters for the issue of market capitalisation and depreciation of capital stock—ie a lot. It is all fun and games until someone backwards calculates the price of a Play Station 3 in 1812. Fifelfoo (talk) 11:47, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Some British tribe circa 100 BC buried a large number of silver coins, all of the same type. Re-discovered in 2009, they were given a contemporary (i.e. 100BC) value by archaeologists of £1,000,000. Value today, according to completed auctions on eBay for the same kind of coin, £800,000. Don't know what the melt value would be, but I suspect probably about a thousand or two, just enough to stop the tribe receiving income support. Ning-ning (talk) 12:19, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

<--For a different observation on inflation, see Beowulf, ll. 3163-68:

Hī on beorg dydon   bēg ond siglu,
eall swylce hyrsta,   swylce on horde ǣr
nīðhēdige men   genumen hæfdon;
forlēton eorla gestrēon   eorðan healdan,
gold on grēote,   þær hit nū gēn lifað
eldum swā unnyt,   swā hit ǣror wæs.

Francis B. Gummere translates as (my italics):

They placed in the barrow that precious booty,
the rounds and the rings they had reft erewhile,
hardy heroes, from hoard in cave, --
trusting the ground with treasure of earls,
gold in the earth, where ever it lies
useless to men as of yore it was.

Drmies (talk) 15:33, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Basically, it's easier to compare pre-industrial revolution money prices (or wages) from say, 1750 AD, to pre-industrial revolution money prices (or wages) from say, 100 BC, than it is to compare pre-industrial revolution money prices (or wages) from say, 1750 AD, to post-industrial revolution money prices from only a hundred fitty years later, say 1900. That's because of the word "revolution" in "industrial revolution". In fact, one could convincingly argue that it is easier to compare 1750 AD prices to 100 BC prices than it is to compare 1900 AD prices to 2000 AD prices.

Ideally, if one wants to compare the cost of something from before the industrial revolution (say, 1750 AD) to the cost after the industrial revolutoin (say, 1900 AD), it's best to express it in some kind of relative terms (which introduces some unavoidable subjectivity) - for example say that "in 1750 a typical person spent 60% of their monthly budget on food, but in 1900 a person spent only 20%" or better yet, for another example, "in 1750, traveling from London to Manchester would cost a typical worker an equivalent of two days wages, but in 1900, the same trip could be made for the equivalent of two hours of work". This isn't perfect (there really is no perfect way of making such comparisons) - for some comparisons one would get misleading results (hiring a horse drawn carriage would cost more work-hours today than in 1750, it would take an infinite number of work hours in 1750 to obtain an iPod etc.) - and it works best for goods which existed both then and now, and whose quality either has not changed much or changed more or less "linearly" (i.e. a light bulb today is equivalent to about six light bulbs from 1900, etc.). It's a tricky subject with lots of stuff written about it (there's actually a paper out there which tries to convert, however imperfectly, prices obtained from ancient Sumerian clay tablets into some kind of price index).VolunteerMarek 03:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

(beats head on desk) ...

As if having the TFA wasn't stressful enough... Talk:Josce de Dinan/GA1. By someone who hasn't edited since Sept 2010 and has under 100 edits. Never done a GA review before. Why me??? Ealdgyth - Talk 22:03, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Just luck I guess. I haven't looked at the article, but the review is patently ridiculous. Malleus Fatuorum 22:13, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

It is an odd situation, but I don't see a way forward other than renomination. Geometry guy 00:52, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

That is silly but this is even worse. le sigh. I would withdraw from the review then try again for another reviewer. If push comes to shove, I will do it. --Guerillero | My Talk 00:59, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

It's a good job that Ealdgyth is an experienced editor who won't be put off by this. Malleus Fatuorum 01:14, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

"This review welcomes a second opinion" it says. Johnbod (talk) 01:36, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

And? Malleus Fatuorum 01:40, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

"The second opinion is that the first opinion was crap" perhaps? Geometry guy 01:55, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

For info, I've left a courtesy note on the reviewer's talk page. Geometry guy 02:27, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

I've renom'd. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:07, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

If Guerillero doesn't pick this up in the next few days I'll do the review once I'm done with the ship article. Malleus Fatuorum 18:18, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I put Pain up also... next up is a return to ecclesiasticalness - John de Gray] - but he's a "bad boy" bishop (well, sorta). He's at least a councillor of King John - which always gets bonus points in the bad boy department. You feel up to putting John on your list for soon? Ealdgyth - Talk 18:20, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Sure. And I'll put Pain's FAC on my watchlist, just in case any questions come up about the placement of commas. Malleus Fatuorum 18:26, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Sometimes I over-think ...

	Also sorry
	I'm much better at doing the right things I've been shown than determining what is actually right. I will try to remember as well. My76Strat (talk) 23:27, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

What are you and Pesky referring to? Malleus Fatuorum 00:55, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I've been wondering the same thing. My best guess is that it is a response to your weariness at receiving frequent advice, but I could be completely wrong! Geometry guy 01:01, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't really know what motivated Pesky, but I seized the moment as it occurred to me and I saw a chance to reciprocate. Metaphorically acknowledging that we, (Pesky and I) arrived at the same place, (supportive of your efforts) by different paths of reason. That's the skinny on mine. My76Strat (talk) 03:53, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Do I get a pass on that MF? Or fail? Anyway; I wish tranquil wellness for you; going forward. Sincerely - My76Strat (talk) 01:24, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Geometry guy's correct; I apologise for unwanted advice which you're heartily sick of! Unfortunately, having been teacher, parent, grand-parent and parent-substitute for a long time, the dishing-out of advice just becomes a habit. Pesky (talk) 10:47, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Eight solid weeks of being told what an arse you are, and how much better Misplaced Pages would be if you just fucked off can have a rather wearing effect. Malleus Fatuorum 18:27, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Maybe being told that your "contributions at RfA" are a "sad side show" will help you reach closure..., or at least better to understand the fidelity of the committee.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:24, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I find that rather an extraordinary statement for an arbitrator to have made. But then they're all administrators with a vested interest in the sanctity of RfA. Malleus Fatuorum 21:31, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Particularly after the criticisms of the Arbs (Hawkeye and Thumperward) for making remarks liable to interpretation of put-downs of you soon after using their administrative powers.

But the character uniform behavior was revealed by the election, during which my endorsement was accepted, and after which it was spurned, conveniently. (I could not imagine e.g. WTT, whatever our past differences, accepting a bad endorsement.)  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:38, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Malleus, I would never call you an arse, and I can't see how you "just fucking off" could really benefit the 'pedia. Being me, though, I find it really hard not to suggest tweaks here and there! . It never ceases to amaze me, though, how people (some Arbs, some Admins) can fail to see that they are doing the exact same thing, in different clothing, as the thing they're criticising others for. @Kiefer wolfy-wits, I actually think that if WTT had got in, he'd have made a very thoughtful Arb. I think the added responsibility would probably have brought out the very best in him. Regardless of your previous spats and so on, I'm so sure that he has his head basically screwed on right, and his heart in the right place. I've never known him (yet) to have actual ill-intent towards someone; we're all fallible, and I really hope that you and he eventually develop a strong cameraderie. I think the results could be amazing. It would be so good if you could actually meet in Real Life, share a beer and a pie somewhere relaxing, and talk a few things out (while under the relaxing influence of said beer). I have just the pub for you ... Pesky (talk) 10:15, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

It's good that he's clerking. I think that I suggested that in my ArbCom Election guide, at least in draft, before I removed it to "stay on message". One hopes that he will pass on ideas to other clerks and the arbs, rather than just being a gnome. Also, he's been mentioned as a bureaucrat possibility---all good. :)  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 18:09, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Just asking!

Hi Malleus, I wonder, did you miss this on Pesky's talk and this above? Or, perhaps you're "otherwise engaged", changed your mind, or something…? Either way is fine, obviously– just asking! :o) Nortonius (talk) 11:06, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I hadn't forgotten, but I'd got the idea that Senra was going to do the review? If I got hold of the wrong end of the stick then I'll sign up for it later this evening, but I'm off out now. Malleus Fatuorum 18:29, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

If you did get the wrong end of the stick it was probably my fault (not being completely self-effacing here, "my fault"'s in the diffs!)– ok, maybe ping me here when you get in, then I'll post the GAN…? I'm thinking I'll put {{subst:GAN|subtopic=Transport}} on Talk:Meermin (VOC ship). Speak later then, and I'll ping Senra then too. :o) Nortonius (talk) 18:44, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

OK, start the nomination as soon as you like. Malleus Fatuorum 21:26, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Great, I'll go and do it right now. Nortonius (talk) 21:51, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

…and it's listed! :o) Nortonius (talk) 22:15, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Wow, that was quick Malleus, thank you! :o) Possibly one of the most painless GANs? I can't really say as I've only done one before, but it certainly felt painless! And, I've added the number of crew now, from an existing ref in the right place– even that was painless. I look forward to finding out more about the ship and taking the article further, e.g. with Senra's help when he's available. I'm off to bed now so that's a great way to end the day, thanks again for taking on the review. :o) Nortonius (talk) 02:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

You're very welcome. It's a joy to work with an editor committed to the same thing I am, making our articles better in whatever way we can. I'd be a bit cautious about rushing to FAC with either of them though until they look like a proper pair, if you see what I mean. Malleus Fatuorum 02:46, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Kind words indeed Malleus! :o) Frankly, you made the GAN a joy; that's two out of two GANs thoroughly enjoyed, whatever next! Touch wood… Understood about FAC, I'd like to see a nice pair too. lol Anyway more info is needed, for the ship at least, and I'm hopeful that this will appear in the coming weeks or months. While I'm here, I just thought to ask your opinion on something, if I may. I saw this a while back, where Ruhrfisch expresses confusion in differentiating inline citations from explanatory footnotes. It got me thinking (always a dangerous thing!), and I ended up changing the explanatory footnote group name at Reculver from "nb" to "Fn", so that appearances in the body actually include an abbreviation of "Footnote". Is that a bonkers waste of time, an improvement, or…? Ta. Nortonius (talk) 11:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I tend to use "nb", but "Fn" seems fine to me as well. Ealdgyth tends to use letters "a", "b" and so on, which I have a slight preference for as it's visually more compatible with the numbered citations, but so long as you're consistent I don't think it really matters what style you choose to adopt. Malleus Fatuorum 15:46, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, Ealdgyth pointed that method out to me; my own feeling is that e.g. looks uncomfortably like , whereas e.g. is distinct and (relatively) easily comprehended. Also Template:Efn is a bit limited, since there are only 26 letters in the alphabet; that'd be a problem for Reculver's (current) 53 efns(!), and I'm sure I've seen "aa bb cc etc." somewhere, ugh. But yes, consistency rules. Cheers. Nortonius (talk) 16:51, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Hawkeye and... Margaret

I found this remark striking, even though it is typically MF. I read here some sympathy (and annoyance with process) that Hawkeye is likely to suffer the most from this case.

On an unrelated note, your reminders of joint work drew my attention to the fact that Margaret is now the subject of an individual GA reassessment. I have commented already. Geometry guy 00:47, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I am what I am, and what you see is what you get. I am indeed annoyed at the outcome from Hawkeye7's point of view, and I don't think he deserved that. I hadn't noticed Maggie's GAR, but I guess I'll mosey along there later, or perhaps tomorrow. Malleus Fatuorum 00:56, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I saw a post earlier about printing out the AC decision and how to use that piece of paper. (don't see it at the moment in the form I first read), but it goes to the heart of things as far as consistency. As much as I might cringe at things (usually just the thought of the impending drama), I know that here is a place where I get the same thing .. all the time ..every time. There's no backsliding, no, "but, but, but" mealy mouthed bullshit from Mal. It's always yes .. that's what I said, and I stand by it. How can you not respect that? I disagree with Malleus on a lot of things - but at the end of the day, when I come ask the really important question: "How can I make this article better?" .. I get a straight up answer that's accurate and valuable.

As far as the civility thing goes .. I took a shot at something that seems to have gone a bit awry of what I was thinking, but I did make this comment. Perhaps a bit self-serving, but I wondered if any of you folks had a thought on that. — Ched :  ?  08:00, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

by the way Malleus .. I think you should ... (just kidding) — Ched :  ?  08:04, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

... and I think you should definitely have some granny-hugz. Whether you like them or not ;P Pesky (talk) 10:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Looking for offenses is the role of referees in all American sports, which is why Americans have such difficulty understanding football (association football, or soccer) and usually make terrible referees.

"To go through life prickly towards all things is the wisdom of the hedgehog" sprach Schopenhauer.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 11:28, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Trial by ordeal

tells us that "Trial by ordeal is a judicial practice by which the guilt or innocence of the accused is determined by subjecting them to an unpleasant, usually dangerous experience. In some cases, the accused are considered innocent only if they survive the test or if their injuries heal", so congratulations for coming through yours more or less intact, just missing a finger or two, and your toe-nails. Perhaps, the way things are, you should look on the RFA topic ban in the spirit of a law forbidding the hunting of some species nearing extinction. I hope you will stick around. Johnbod (talk) 02:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

• Hey Malleus, it's over, and they didn't even call you a dick in the final ruling. I don't know if you're happy or not, and I was going to open a beer tonight anyway, but I'll toast you even if you don't care. Oh, I'm almost finished with Austerlitz. The first paragraph ended on page 84, and then I had a dream that the whole was nothing but short paragraphs and I had miscounted. It's a fantastic read. Happy days Malleus, Drmies (talk) 03:26, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

• I'm neither happy nor unhappy just resigned. The topic ban has set a dangerous precedent, but that's not my problem. As for the admonishment, I'll print it out and wipe my arse with that. Malleus Fatuorum 03:44, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

• Boy, am I glad you didn't say "cunt". Cheers. Drmies (talk) 03:50, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

• I don't have one of those. BTW, you remind me. I'll probably be meeting up with Sitush this Saturday, and he's told me, well, I'm sure you know what he's told me. Malleus Fatuorum 04:02, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

• Cheers indeed then. I'm enjoying a delicious Chimay. To your health! And that of the Mrs.! Drmies (talk) 05:20, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement closed

An arbitration case regarding Civility enforcement has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

1. Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) is desysopped for wheel warring and conduct unbecoming of an administrator, in the face of previous admonishments regarding administrative conduct from the Arbitration Committee. Hawkeye7 may re-apply for the administrator permissions at RFA at any time.
2. Thumperward (talk · contribs) is admonished for conduct unbecoming an administrator, and for failing to adequately explain his actions when requested by the community and Arbitration Committee.
3. John (talk · contribs) is admonished for reversing another administrator's actions while said actions were under review through community discussion.
4. Malleus Fatuorum (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic banned from any page whose prefix begins with Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for Adminship. This remedy explicitly does not prevent him from !voting on RFA's; however, should his contributions to a specific request for adminship become disruptive, any uninvolved admin may ban him from further participation in that specific RFA. Further, Malleus Fatuorm is admonished for repeatedly personalizing disputes and engaging in uncivil conduct, personal attacks, and disruptive conduct.
5. Administrators are reminded that blocks should be applied only when no other solution would prove to be effective, or when previous attempts to resolve a situation (such as discussion, warnings, topic bans, or other restrictions) have proven to be ineffective.
6. All users are reminded to engage in discussion in a way that will neither disrupt nor lower the quality of such discourse. Personal attacks, profanity, inappropriate use of humour, and other uncivil conduct that leads to a breakdown in discussion can prevent the formation of a valid consensus. Blocks or other restrictions may be used to address repeated or particularly severe disruption of this nature, in order to foster a collaborative environment within the community as a whole.
7. The imposition of discretionary sanctions, paroles, and related remedies by the community is done on an ad hoc basis in the absence of clear documented standards. The community is strongly encouraged to review and document standing good practice for such discussions. As a related but distinct issue, the community is encouraged to review and document common good practice for administrators imposing editing restrictions as a condition of an unblock and in lieu of blocks.
8. Should any user subject to a restriction or topic ban in this case violate that restriction or ban, that user may be blocked, initially for up to one month, and then with blocks increasing in duration to a maximum of one year, with the topic ban clock restarting at the end of the block. Appeals of blocks may be made to the imposing administrator, and thereafter to the Administrators' noticeboard, or to Arbitration Enforcement, or to the Arbitration Committee. All blocks are to be logged at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement#Log of blocks, bans, and restrictions.

For the Arbitration Committee:
Mlpearc (powwow) 02:26, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Discuss this

That's actually... semi-reasonable. I mean, it's got the usual "if we smack person X some, then we must also smack person Y a bit just to preserve the illusion of even-handedness, regardless of actual circumstances" aspect to it (point #3), which is basically the ArbCom covering their asses (and if there is actually a particular objective that the ArbCom tries to maximize, rather than just flapping in the wind, it's very much "cover our own asses first" (for better or worse)). I've seen worse.

My suggestion is for you to take this as a vindication of both your presence and approach to Misplaced Pages editing and run with it. I mean that seriously. However much they are afraid to say it out loud, it does seem like at least the ArbCom folks do appreciate you being here - insert required pandering to the mob kind of exceptions here - as do a lot of us. In other words, go back to doing what you were doing before this whole mess came up. Call people cunts if need be and help out with the stuff that really matters.VolunteerMarek 07:31, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

This is an unprincipled and outrageous misuse of process. Now, every dimwitted, lazy, and ignorant administrator can more easily stop discussion or dissent by labeling it "disruptive"---since ArbCom has set the dimwitted, lazy, and ignorant precedent.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 11:20, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Now, every dimwitted, lazy, and ignorant administrator can more easily stop discussion or dissent by labeling it "disruptive" - yeah, but they already do do that.VolunteerMarek 16:43, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but I had been retaining some natural hope that some nearly extinguished conscience glowed among the ashes.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 14:15, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure on that one; it's possible that this may have the opposite effect of making admins that bit more careful of piling-on sanctions without better community backing for them. We shall see. Pesky (talk) 15:09, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I am at least glad to see the scope widened to "all users" as opposed to just editors.Intothatdarkness (talk) 15:29, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't like the wording of the RfA permissions ban, but overall I agree with VM... I think ArbCOM acted in a manner that essentially said, "Let's not be the committee that runs MF off the project." I expected something a little harsher for you (not that I wanted it), but I did expect something stronger.)---Balloonman 15:41, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

• I hear more knives being sharpened. Parrot of Doom 18:02, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

• So do I. And anyone who thinks I'll be taking part in an RFC/U after this is living in la-la land. Malleus Fatuorum 18:04, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

• I wouldn't have wanted to be an Arb on this case. But then I wouldn;t want to be an Arb, full stop. Though I might actually make a halfway good one, IMHO. I'm feeling lazy, so I'll just paste here what I've said on KW's talk: Things could have gone so much better, yes – but they could even more easily have gone so much worse. I think, with the strength (and sheer number) of views / feelings in this, the Arbs were not so much between a rock and a hard place as between a poison-eel-and-shark-infested reef, a vast amount of noisy and thunderous surf, and a shoreline on which they could already see cannibals wielding spears and cooking utensils. And a ship behind them which was infested with lice and infected with typhus. Pesky (talk) 19:43, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

  I've just commented on this at John's talk page. Basically the outcome was obvious to everyone with any nouse pretty much from day one; the rest was just ritual, which is why I referred to it as a show trial. ArbCom needs a bloody good shake up ... in fact it needs someone like me, and someone like you to rein me in when I go for the throat. :-) Malleus Fatuorum

  Malleus, there's more chance of us both simultaneously winning the lottery two weeks running than there is of either of us ever getting an Arb hat! Particularly as neither of us is likely ever to apply for one ... Pesky (talk) 19:56, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

  Giano put himself forward the election before last, and did creditably well, so don't be too sure. The major impediment in his case was his refusal to identify himself to the WMF, IIRC. So never say never. Malleus Fatuorum 20:04, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

  Malleus, if you became an admin first, you're right, you might have a good shot at being an arb. --Elonka 20:09, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

  Now that will never happen, despite what I just said above. Malleus Fatuorum 20:12, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

  He has a much better chance of passing ArbCOM elections than he would an RFA... the voting community is different and expects different things. It would make for an interesting campaign.---Balloonman 20:21, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

  I agree, which is quite simply a bizarre state of affairs really. Malleus Fatuorum 20:50, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I expected less than this. I figured there would be more general principles and less specific punishment. I'm not disappointed with the rulings overall, but I don't like the topic ban. I thought the evidence was that the majority of your participation there was fine. It seems an admonishment for certain behavior there with the threat of a topic ban should such behavior continue would have been more beneficial to the project. That said, I think it's probably better for your blood pressure that you not hang around that page. I doubt it's changed much if any over the past few years, and I recall it being one of the deepest cesspools on the project. Time better spent elsewhere and all that. Glad you're not the one that got hanged in this mess. Lara 20:46, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

WT:RFA is the reason I watchlisted User:X!/Tally rather than WP:RFA. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:08, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, all the best fights happen outside the ring don't they? Welcome back MF. It's as if you'd never been away. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:28, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I think that by now everyone must know what my chosen outcome would have been; while the civility policy is in such a poor state, with so much room for multiple interpretations and no boundaries, amnesty for everyone involved in this case. The whole thing rests on people interpreting the civility policy differently, and applying sanctions unequally – the damned thing's just crying out to be abused. That, combined with an instruction that it has to be comprehensively re-thunk and re-worded, by people who know the spirit behind it, and can write clearly. So much of our policy is atrociously written. I really do feel, sometimes, that people go out of their way to word stuff in "formalese", and it comes out being pompous and barely comprehensible. And people admire their own professor-level wording so much that they totally fail to observe the glaring error hidden in it! There is nothing wrong with putting things into language that kids can comprehend; it's not as if it stops more mature people from understanding it, too!

P.S. There's some embryonic tinkering going on in Ched's workshop, for anyone who feels they could help produce a new baby. Pesky (talk) 06:10, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Ooo topic banned, how severe. And this took eight weeks of lugubrious "discussion"? I was thinking Malleus. If you have a toxic personality do you keep mutated sea bass with frickin laser beams in a lurid toxic pea green tank like myself?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

As you noted, the discussion on Talk:Arbitration is remarkable for the performances of the Arbs Hersfold and AGK, who exceeded even Sandstein on the usual salient measures.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 14:37, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

They make Sandstein seem rational, which is something I never thought I'd see myself write. Malleus Fatuorum 15:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

FYI. I saw mention somewhere that Bishonen is steamed about the arbs lack of civility, but I missed the location of this Hersfold and AGK issue referenced above. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:12, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Never mind-- I've found it now, right above the post I saw from Bish (I didn't read the whole thread, only saw Bish's diff). Oh my. This place really is a mess. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm so pleased you have survived this torture. While I can't be bothered to write I have tortured myself by reading bits of the soap opera it descended into. What I have learned is just how "slippery" some editors are, especially ones whose names I've seen on your page and imagined were friendly. Actually, in my way, I am far less civil than you, I'm surprised I'm still here. Some people just don't get it until they're told straight, and don't get it even then, and that's the problem here. J3Mrs (talk) 16:01, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

At least Sandstein does serious work blocking vandals, for which he deserves serious respect. Somebody who contributes a lot to WP can be forgiven human fallibility, of course.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:41, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Possibly the second-most important thing to remember, sometimes, is that compared to geniuses, most people really are stupid. And the most important thing is that they can't help it, and telling them they're stupid, or yelling, or cussing them out for it, will no more change that than it will change the colour of their eyes. Sometimes people just can't see things. Pesky (talk) 17:43, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I actually find that truly stupid people are hard to find/keep their stupidity hidden quite well. For example, I can speak to and be friends with or work with someone for months and think they're of normal intelligence if a little odd, then suddenly during some dispute their true thoughts and opinions will come to light and it hits you like a brick in the face. "This person I'm dealing with is amazingly stupid." It's upsetting. Do you have any tips on dealing with stupid people, O Wise Pesky? :P Bunnies! Leave a message :) 18:06, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Speaking as an intermittently-stupid person myself (I have the genius/stupidity thing down pat), patience, patience and more patience. Imagine they're a dog which you're attempting to teach its times tables. Or something. Plain stupidity, though frustrating, is literally something people can't grow out of. On an actual serious note, having taught people who are quite literally in the "stupid" category (IQ below 75), they have been some of the sweetest, gentlest people I know, and most animals tend to love them. Pesky (talk) 19:00, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Might we be confusing stupid with stubborn or inflexible? I've known some technically intelligent people (bordering on genius) who were simply unable to acknowledge that any position other than theirs might be correct. Or their intelligence might be so narrowly focused as to be useless in normal conversation. Personally, I find the terminally stubborn much harder to deal with than someone who's 'stupid.'Intothatdarkness (talk) 20:03, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

You could so easily be describing me there! But I will forgive anyone who thought you were, because I can be nice like that ;P Pesky (talk) 20:21, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I remember when the answers seemed so clear ...

... but now it's only shades of grey. I didn't know what this song even meant when I first fell in love with it. Yup, back in 1967. Heh! I'm getting old! Pesky (talk) 13:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I wonder what would have happened ...

... if you had said the things that were said here. My own thoughts are at the end of that very long thread. Pesky (talk) 20:10, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I expect that there would have been a lot of badgering at ANI and ArbCom along the lines of "Look! Look! Look at what he's done now!" But curiously that's the kind of thing I'd be very unlikely ever to say. Malleus Fatuorum 20:35, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I was gobsmacked, really. How can anyone there not see that frothing vitriol as "attacking"? Pesky (talk) 20:45, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I thought this encyclopaedia was finished?

I had occasion to walk around a bit of Manchester today, and some work going on around the Cathedral piqued my interest. It's apparently to link Salford and Manchester, so I walked over Victoria Bridge to check it out. All very nice I'm sure, but I was struck by the bridge's dilapidated condition, so checked out its history on Wiki. Except there's no article on one of Manchester's more venerable bridges. That'll be rectified by tomorrow, but what I thought I'd mention is that one dubious website claims that a cheeky Times typesetter used an "i" instead of "a" when he fixed the line "Her Majesty passed over the bridge and declared it open." I can't wait to find out if that's true or not.

Not that it matters, of course. Parrot of Doom 20:56, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I worked on one bridge, the Hanging Bridge, but I see that was three years ago now. And yeah, I too find the claims that the encyclopedia is finished to be quite incredible. There isn't even an article for everyone in the ODNB, never mind Manchester's bridges. Malleus Fatuorum 21:12, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I walked past that today, amazing that it's still down there. You can only see a little bit of it. Maybe we should do something to improve coverage of Manchester's bridges, after all, all the London bridges have articles. Did you know that Blackfriar's Bridge in Manchester was once lined with decorative pillars, until someone decided that the sight of turds, bleach and dead fish (or similar) was too much - and filled in the gaps between the pillars? If you look at the bridge from the banks, you can clearly see where they did it. Parrot of Doom 21:22, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Maybe we should; Iridescent did wonders for London's bridges. Malleus Fatuorum 21:27, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Well it'll give me something to do. I've been holding back on editing what with all the palaver above (I'm glad that they at least did something partially right) and truth be told I haven't read much of interest lately. A few bridges though should be fairly easy to sort out. Parrot of Doom 22:52, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I started a series on Manchester theatres a little while ago, after seeing a mention of the Hulme Hippodrome somewhere. I didn't get very far with it though, ran out of steam. Malleus Fatuorum 23:04, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

And while you're here, as you're a bit of a canal buff I have a question for you: we have an article on the Ashton Canal, but isn't its official name the Ashton-under-Lyne Canal? Malleus Fatuorum 23:50, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

No longer, it used to be called the Manchester and Ashton under Lyne Canal (and also may have had Oldham and Stockport in the title), but is now just the Ashton. It's a nice canal to cycle up if you're that way inclined, I've been as far as the old tunnel (which you have to leg boats through) and back. Parrot of Doom 00:07, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Tameside MBC's Ashton Canal history

I remember them pulling the plug (literally) in the 70s when we had a community effort to clean it and the Dukinfield part of the Peak Forest Canal out. I helped at a small part of the Portland Basin clean-up and used to walk along them from Marple Locks and Stockport to Ashton (bus out, walk back). Chaosdruid (talk) 00:35, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

That's pretty convincing from the local council, so I'll add the original name to the article, with a redirect if necessary. Thanks. Malleus Fatuorum 00:40, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

OK. I'll create a redirect then, as the book I'm currently reading (coauthored by GM's county archaeologist) most definitely calls it the Ashton-under-Lyne Canal. Malleus Fatuorum 00:37, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

With many canals there's no "correct" name. I think every variation exists for the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal's name in the older sources I've investigated. This is the man you want to read. Parrot of Doom 00:45, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

I read quite a bit of Owen's stuff while we were working on the ship canal, and it was all good. But I've decided that what I have to do now is to focus on the vital and important high page-view stuff like this. Malleus Fatuorum 00:49, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Good stuff, although with regard to the archaeological dig, I have to question the chronology... Parrot of Doom 00:54, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh yeah, what a dumb mistake! Malleus Fatuorum 01:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, I am not sure about Ashton-under-Lyne article itself, as it seems to vary alternately from "Ashton" to "Ashton-under-Lyne" throughout the body of the article - to not mention the Assheton-sub-lima and Ashton-sub-lima not being mentioned in there (Butterworth, 1823, p. 11)

As for the canal, I am just looking through the old OS and other docs and books to see when the name might have changed. Chaosdruid (talk) 00:55, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Ashton's in my mind because I've been to the Ikea there three times in the last week or so. What a palaver! Malleus Fatuorum 01:03, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Gah, that's an impossible place to reach without satnav. Much easier to go to the one near Warrington. For the best original name for the canal, look for the Act of Parliament that enabled its construction. Parrot of Doom 01:09, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) That's what I keep telling my wife, but she's got it in her head that the Ikea in Ashton is closer. Even with satnav though, because of all the roadworks it's virtually impossible to find the way in to the car park. Ours tell us to turn right just at the last minute when actually you have to turn left. Gah is about right. Malleus Fatuorum 01:16, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

One 1829 map has it as "Ashton Canal"

I agree, but it has changed so much since they filled in Ashton Moss for the lovely new shopping centres (you did detect my sarcasm right?) I shudder to think how much it will have changed in the last 5 years since I was back there. Chaosdruid (talk) 01:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

(P.S.) The 1848 OS map has it as "Manchester and Ashton-under-Lyne Canal"

I have just discovered this little snippet listing the acts Chaosdruid (talk) 14:19, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

SatNav pro-tip: bookmark the actual place where you've just turned in to the car park, and save that in your "favourites" wossname. Pesky (talk) 10:31, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The problem is extensive and long-term road works in around the town centre, so the road layout may look different when we go there again. It's quite irritating really, because it's a massive building you can see from some distance away; it's just the last few hundred yards that are the killer. Malleus Fatuorum 00:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Standard SatNav input had similar problems with the Ikea in Southampton. But, despite the annoyance, I can tell you that there are few more enjoyable things than going into Ikea with a virtual blank cheque of someone else's money :D Pesky (talk) 05:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

A Community of Witches

No worries, Malleus! All the best. (Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:33, 23 February 2012 (UTC))

Copyedit request

Hi Malleus, I was wondering if you could give Chrisye a good copyedit. I know we've had our differences, but I'm hoping we can set them aside to improve content. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:31, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't remember any difficulties between us, but then I have rather a short memory for such things. Malleus Fatuorum 16:24, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

• Glad to hear that. Thanks for taking a thorough look at the article. My last FAC failed on prose. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:45, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

• Hi Malleus, the article is at FAC now. I'm hoping it can get the star before the five year anniversary of Chrisye's death. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:39, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

  Good luck with that. I've watchlisted the FAC, so if any further prose issues come up I'll try to help out. Malleus Fatuorum 23:53, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks a lot! Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:53, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

  Would I be correct in assuming that your first/native language isn't English? Don't worry about not replying if you feel the question is too intrusive. Malleus Fatuorum 02:12, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

• Actually, English is my native language. I've just been living in Indonesia so long that the finer points have begun escaping me. When you speak a foreign tongue 24/7, it affects your thought patterns. That's actually why I became more active here... to make sure I didn't forget my native tongue. Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:45, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Meetup

Hi Malleus, it was a pleasure meeting you yesterday. Hope you had a safe journey home. The next Manchester meetup is being planned for late April, hope you can make it and your thoughts on venue would be welcome. the wub "?!" 11:18, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

It was nice to put so many faces to so many names. For me the venue was really convenient, just a very short walk from the tram station. Malleus Fatuorum 13:06, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm certainly not fond of the Art Cafe idea though. Malleus Fatuorum 16:25, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Say so. I much prefer the alleged depressive aspects of beer to the nerve-jangling effects of caffeine. I am unsure why the change has been proposed. - Sitush (talk) 16:29, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Hear hear. Why retire to the pub after the meetup when you can have the meetup in the pub? And I'll second The wub—it was great to have a beer with you. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:30, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

And you. I was really, really surprised at how friendly everyone was; I thought I'd made so many enemies here! :-) Malleus Fatuorum 17:35, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Someone here confirm my suspicion that Malleus and Iridescent look like they stepped out of 300 with pecs so hard they could hammer nails and abs that could cut glass. And finely chiseled facial features that make one think of the Brawny Man, but not so finely chiseled or lantern-jawed they travel into Tom of Finland territory. Because we have a vision of manliness that is very confined. --Moni3 (talk) 16:57, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Actually that's pretty much spot on Moni, in my dreams anyway. Malleus Fatuorum 17:24, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Yep, that's pretty much how they looked when I left - mind you I couldn't see straight by then. I think I'll avoid the Abbot Ale at 5% ABV next time, delicious though it was. Richerman (talk) 17:29, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I, too, had some visual problems: I attended optimistically and left misty optically. Not sure whether it was the Abbot, the Wainwright, the Ilkley Black or one of the other five. - Sitush (talk) 17:35, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

As I'm always telling my wife - you don't go in a pub to get sober. Still I did manage to get on the the right bus home and wake up before my stop. If only I hadn't lost my balance when I got up to leave the pub I would have got away with my reputation intact. Richerman (talk) 17:43, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

We caught you before you hit the floor, didn't we? You know you're in good hands with the Manchester Cabal (disclaimer: there is no cabal). --RexxS (talk) 19:43, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Yep, only my pride was hurt. And it's true, there is no cabal - but there is claque I believe. Richerman (talk) 20:00, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

But you dealt with that little mishap with such aplomb. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 23:59, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

It comes from years of practice - plenty of aplomb, just not very plumb :) Richerman (talk) 06:46, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Malleus! Nice that others are thanking you for giving them . You are a mensch!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 07:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Pecs? Abs? hur, hur, hur .... or was it just the Batman body-suit you had on underneath? Wotever, I'd really like to meet you, some time. Maybe you and the Mrs. should come down this-a-way for a holiday :D But not during the tourist season, you might get shot ... Pesky (talk) 14:05, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Might get shot?? Sounds pretty much like being an editor on wikipedia. Richerman (talk) 14:56, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Some of our locals think the tourist season should be like the pheasant season, the grouse season, and the salmon season! Pesky (talk) 16:24, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

We in Montana also have that feeling at times, frequently immortalized on a bumper sticker. Montanabw 18:00, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Some of the smarter ponies have it sussed; they operate a one-way tourist-valve at the entrance to the supermarket. Tourists are allowed in, no problem, but treats have to be provided to get back out again ... and as it's not permitted to feed the ponies (because they rapidly learn that tourists can be terrorised into offering food in self-defence), this can present something of a dilemma to tourists. However, there's often a local somewhere handy, who will walk up to the shop, say something along the lines of "Gaaaaarhhh! Gid arrdavit!" and, as if by magic, the ponies will heave a sigh, pull an evil face, and stalk off, mortally offended ... Pesky (talk) 18:06, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

We've had a similar problem here, only with bears... Montanabw 19:43, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Wow, your locals are tough! "Grrr, get out of here" does not sound like the ideal response to a bear on a mission, so what do you say?

I know what you're wondering, bear: "is this supermarket trolley heavy enough to roll over me or crush me into the nearest tree?" Well, to tell you the truth, in all the excitement of shopping, I kinda lost track myself. But being as I normally buy 24 packs of beer, large quantities of sugar and doughnuts, and juice by the gallon, you've got to ask yourself one question: "Do I feel lucky?" Well, do you, bear?

Geometry guy 23:35, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Coincidentally I watched Dirty Harry on TV again last night. Malleus Fatuorum 23:50, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

*'Ranger Smith: "Bears are supposed to avoid people, not run around stealing their food."

• Yogi Bear: "I agree, sir. That's why Boo-Boo and I would never disturb family pic-a-nics." Richerman (talk) 23:48, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I wonder how different bears really are from ponies ... It doesn't matter to our local ponies whether they've actually met you or not, but they can always tell when trying it on might be a bad idea. I've had instances where an apprehensive tourist has been swinging a carrier bag towards a pony in what one would think might really be a frightening way, and the pony takes no real notice whatsoever (apart from pulling faces); yet if a pony-savvy person (preferably a semi-feral-pony-savvy person, as the SF's are a bit different in outlook to the fully domesticateds) scowls and says "Oi!" in a sufficiently authoritative tone, said pony will back off. Pesky (talk) 18:55, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I've been thinking about this for a couple of days before posting it, but the effect seems to have outlasted the beer so here goes. I'd developed a kind of paranoia here, thinking that almost every hand was against me, not helped of course by the recent ArbCom case. But what the meetup showed is that although some editors, perhaps even a substantial number, believe me to be a shit of the first order, there are many others who don't. The (from my point of view) unexpected result is that I feel much more relaxed with other editors whether they agree with me or not. Strange. It'll be interesting to see if the effect survives a gritty FAC review, or a contentious GAR. I think it might. Malleus Fatuorum 00:25, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I'd like to refer you back to a tradition that where we agree, that is (or should be, according to us!) a considerable consensus, and where we disagree, well, there are probably substantial issues to be discussed and understood. Geometry guy 00:46, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I hadn't forgotten that. There are some here like yourself who consistently speak with reason, and there are others like me who occasionally explode like a supernova with reason, but are otherwise pretty resistant to argument: 'cos we're right, or at least we think we are. Malleus Fatuorum 01:20, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I still recall an encouraging comment you made on my talk page a year ago about an edit to Maggie. In the spirit that kind/generous words (such as your comment here) should not pass by without notice, thank you again. Geometry guy 23:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

So I grab the opportunity to thank you for what you just added to an AN thread: "Every editor is a human being, and we need to consider regularly whether our view/approach to an issue brings out the best of humanity or not." - Ready to frame it, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:44, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I framed it (on my user), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:16, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Huh, you went to the pub and didn't invite me. I'm only 200 miles away as well! Seriously speaking, do you think you could hve a wee look at that GAR you alerted me to a few days ago? I don't think there are serious grounds for concern, and in fact the one editor who seems to have a problem with the article has made some useful and valid points, once you get past the chip on their shoulder. I think it would beneit from your input if you feel like it. --John (talk) 10:39, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Most people are actually quite nice, once you get to know them a bit. And the more beer you both drink, the nicer you both seem to get ... Pesky (talk) 18:55, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

link??? ... ok, apologies for some really bad "American" humor (as well as some less than classical music). I am glad all you guys got to meet up and have a good time though. — Ched :  ?  19:02, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I think the delisting was a disgraceful and politically motivated act, so it's better that I take no part in the reassessment. I trust that sanity will prevail. Malleus Fatuorum 18:09, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

WMF's "rate this page"

I opened a discussion of the WMF's "rate this page" initiative to recruit editors from readers. Such recruitment "surveys" are prohibited by the ethical code of public-opinion researchers.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:56, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The WMF will do as they please, no matter what anyone says. Malleus Fatuorum 23:58, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

My experience with nonprofits in the USA suggests otherwise. The reputation is all important, and scandals are feared.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 00:01, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

As I have no such experience with US nonprofits then I must bow to your superior knowledge. Malleus Fatuorum 00:04, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

As well you should. Not only superior knowledge but fabulous riches have been my due desert. ;p  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 00:06, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Black Act

Today's DYK has an expanded article on the Black Act, which may interest you and Parrot of Doom.

I added the references (for further reading) to E. P. Thompson's books, my copies of which I sold for a song when I moved to Europe. (The loss of my library is a wound that does not heal.)

 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:18, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

GAN policy advice

Hi Malleus, I'll skip most of the introduction as you don't know me anyway. I consider reviewing the God GAN. There is likely nobody entirely without an opinion on this topic; I want to do the review as unbiased as possible, but from a scientific viewpoint. I understand that you have extensive experience with audited content, and that you are not shy to offer an opinion. That's why I ask here instead of at the usual places:

1. Should BLP be considered for this article? Existence or not, I would say no because I cannot remember anyone actually ascribing a metabolism to God. That's perhaps an overly simplistic view; the pragmatic position might be that S/He's not likely to sue the WMF.
2. Should INUNIVERSE be enforced? I guess if I bring up the word "fiction" I'll not make many friends, but personally I find phrases like "God states that" problematic.
3. Can the Bible or the Quran be reliable sources (for instance, for how God is like)? I would say that both did not develop a reputation for accuracy, but such opinion might hurt religious feelings. OTOH, when just talking about an idea, not an actual being, those should be the primary sources, and accuracy should be irrelevant? Are there any precedents on WP on how to handle this?

Thanks for reading this (This is a serious request for advice), Pgallert (talk) 21:58, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

1. No, BLP doesn't apply.
2. I'd be cautious about explicitly applying the fictional in-universe metaphor, as that's likely to offend. But clearly God didn't say anything, so any "God states that ..." needs to be replaced by who says that God said that, for example along the lines of "according to the Gospel of St John ...".
3. The Bible or the Quran can only be considered reliable sources for what they contain, much like the plot summary in a work of fiction. Anything else such as interpretation of the contents needs reliable secondary opinions. I'm afraid I'm not aware of general guidelines to help you with what I fear may become a difficult review, but perhaps another editor may be able to suggest something. Personally, I'd be inclined to consider God much as I'd consider a soap character, and deal with the article accordingly. Malleus Fatuorum 22:12, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

The caption for the map certainly needs reviewing- the assertion made that certain countries polled highest because they're "x" religion glosses over the different levels of belief displayed between countries in the same religious bloc, e.g. Portugal and Spain. Ning-ning (talk) 22:42, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh, <place the name of your preferred deity here>! That GAN is most likely a poisoned chalice (which is probably a statement that also carries religious connotations but, well, I know nowt). Go(o)d luck with it. - Sitush (talk) 23:53, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I frankly wouldn't touch it, but I admire Pgallert's resolve. I've just noticed BTW that my next edit will be my 125,000th, so I'm looking for someone to tear a strip off now. ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 23:59, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Feel free. I am available! - Sitush (talk) 00:01, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

On reflection I thought it should be something representative of what I seem to spend most of my time doing here, moving a few commas around. Malleus Fatuorum 00:42, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Mature? You are but a spring chicken. I am rapidly losing my rag here, the examples given being only the tip of one iceberg that threatens to sink The Misplaced Pages. Give me a chance to check my commas, p's, q's, etc. - Sitush (talk) 01:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Commiserations. Given your interest in Indian topics I'd assumed that you or your family might have originated from that part of the world yourselves, but I was evidently wrong. How did you get started on that massive topic? Malleus Fatuorum 01:08, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

It is a long story, but right now the situation seems akin to shooting the world's largest mammals in a barrel. As you may recall, I drift elsewhere in order to retain some sense of rationality. I quite enjoyed doing John Horsefield and would like to do a few more of those, as well as the pugilists etc. I've just managed to finagle my first FA (James Tod) but that will always be a pain to maintain because it is India-related. On the other hand, if you or any stalkers can assist with the science/photography/astronomy etc of Thomas Thorp (scientific instrument manufacturer) then it would be much appreciated - I am getting out of my depth on that one. - Sitush (talk) 01:21, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick and helpful response. I'm aware that this is not going to be the easiest review but I didn't find anything else interesting on the GAN page. Oh, and congrats to your 125,000th edit, Malleus. At my rate of editing I'll never achieve that. --Pgallert (talk) 07:08, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

(od) The article states that Thorp manufactured optical glass- if he did melt his own glass that is pretty notable. It may be that Thorp ground bought-in blanks (like Cooke Optics does- imported from Malaysia) to make lenses and reflectors. Ning-ning (talk) 07:19, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

The glass melt/grind issue is one of many aspects that I need to clarify when I can find a source that does so. However, the guy is notable regardless of that: the gas meter mechanisms & the diffraction gratings would make the mark, and it would not surprise me if he also had a hand in the design of quite a few churches (tantalising glimpses, so far). It seems likely that I am going to have to spend a lot of time in a library if I am to make more of that particular article. Anyway, thanks to both of you for nipping in there and fixing some howlers etc. - Sitush (talk) 10:13, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Ah right- I meant "notable" in a non-wikipedia sense :) The Photographic Collectors Club of Great Britain (or International- not sure what their name is now) may have an expert on Thorp amongst their members. I sold a Thomas Grubb lens a couple of years ago and an expert on Grubb got in touch to give me the background, so they're pretty helpful. It's a shame some of their knowledge doesn't make its way into Misplaced Pages (there's Camerapedia, but it's not quite the same, really…) Ning-ning (talk) 10:58, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Lack of nonspecific TFA nominations

Raul654 has started a poll as to the lack of nonspecific TFA nominations. Any thoughts?Smallman12q (talk) 22:53, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Discipline Global Mobile and French eroticism

As I suspected, you are a CrimHead. Having the usual developed literary intelligence of a CrimHead, you are fully qualified to vet the DYK nomination for Discipline Global Mobile.

(Do remember to note my solicitation, if you do a DYK.)

P.S. "Rhymes with Mank" department

Larks' Tongues in Aspic was used in Emmanuelle. Finally gives me a reason to see it! ;)

I wonder whether the settlement from Emmanuelle or from Kanye West's 21st Century Schizoid Man sampling was more satisfying?

 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:37, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Did you know

• ... that the music company Discipline Global Mobile (DGM) insists that its artists own all copyrights, so that even its "knotwork" corporate logo (pictured) is owned by its designer?

• ... that the music company Discipline Global Mobile (DGM) derives half of its profits from 10% of its sales? Ning-ning (talk) 14:19, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Dude, don't leave me hanging with the vagueries of a variant Pareto-principle. Do you have a source?  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 14:54, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

source. Mail-order business to Japan- I don't know if that counts as a variant Pareto-principle or an unbalanced business model. Apologies for the late reply- was scrubbing the cooker. --Ning-ning (talk) 16:16, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

That was helpful!

Nelson's page seems more compliant with WMF's and Misplaced Pages's copyright-schmopyright position and opposition to SOPA than with mine, but it is much more readable than my cited source, Google. (It seems that Billboard's archives don't go back so far or require payment.) It seems to be the main secondary source for information about the business of DMG, which I suppose is the major gap in the article, preventing it from being GA.

The DMG site's "About us" records some dark days around 2005, but DMG continues, happily for us.

Cheers,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 20:20, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

I incorporated your DYK-worthy hook about Japanese sales and profits in the article. Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:23, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

• ... that the music company Discipline Global Mobile (DGM), whose artists retain their copyrights, doesn't even own the copyright for its own corporate logo (pictured)?

Geometry guy 22:00, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Geometry guy!

Good suggestion, which should be delivered like Iditarod vaccine, hastily to DYK! (I incorporated Ning-ning's suggestion in the article, but it also is DYK worthy.) I do like that you used the artwork, which was generously donated this week to WP by the artist (CC 3.0 BY SA).

However, the "whose artists retain their copyrights" is a big pill to swallow, mid-sentence.... Hmmm....

Also, your account doesn't explain why they don't keep the copyrights: Is it a court order ...?

I'd prefer a hook emphasizing that DGM has atypical "aims" and aytypical ways, the source of DGM's notability. Let the muses aid us!

Thanks!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:46, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Ageism

No making fun of the oldsters now:

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nU615FaODCg
• http://music.yahoo.com/blogs/list-of-the-day/the-top-25-teen-idols-of-all-time.html

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:04, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

• Applause*  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:24, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. A moment of silence all around. Montanabw 22:37, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Peter Tork: "Adios, to the Manchester Cowboy." Doc talk 22:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

I hadn't known about his passing. *Moment of silence for an artist who delighted tens of millions*  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:23, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Nor me. I adored him when I was young. Pesky (talk) 14:28, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

	Have a local brew
	Thanks a lot for all the help with Chrisye and the article's FAC. Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:15, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll save that until you've manoeuvred Chrisye past FAC's sometimes rocky shores. Malleus Fatuorum 03:18, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not infrequently reminded of an ambiguous reply to a request for a reference sent to a headmaster for one of his former pupils: "if you can persuade him to work for you then you will indeed be fortunate". In fact my own headmaster wrote a rather similar reference to the polytechnic I applied to for my undergraduate course. Fortunately they were rather more switched on than he was, and simply opted that year to pick students on the basis on their IQ test results (it was a psychology course). Unfortunately for me the IQ test was after a rather liquid lunch in the students union bar, so I only just scraped through. There's a moral in that story somewhere. Malleus Fatuorum 03:31, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

• Don't drink alcohol, drink cendol? Interesting anecdote. Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:39, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

  I was at the time a member of Mensa, and I thought I had plenty of spare firepower. And as it turned out I did. Malleus Fatuorum 03:42, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

  And cendol is exactly the kind of article that really deserves some TLC. Malleus Fatuorum 04:03, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

• There's many under WikiProject Indonesia's purview that are need of TLC. Copyvios, poor grammar... Too many Indonesians who contribute don't care a bit about referencing and whatnot. Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:53, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

• I am not sure why you are limiting that comment to Indonesians, Crisco. It seems often to be the de facto position across the entire project. I am in the opposite situation right now: it seems that I may to have to create an article just so that I can use a source. I am quite keen to get the author mentioned in this thread listed in the refs section of something or another! - Sitush (talk) 01:13, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

• As evidenced by the articles I've created, I mainly work with Indonesia related articles. Of course, much of the encyclopedia is in the same sorry state... but at least American or British topics don't link to foreign language wikis to avoid red links! If you want a headache, see Trans TV or 2011 Southeast Asian Games... a big headache. I went there to link a name and found out... argh. Twaddle... hehe hope he married a Twiddle. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:31, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception

Hi again Malleus, GreatOrangePumpkin took a stab at adding a "present day" section to the article on the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception (Moscow) as you suggested at the article's FAC. Does the changed version satisfy your concerns here? Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:42, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Yep, that'll do for me. Malleus Fatuorum 01:16, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Excellent, glad to hear it. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:48, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Article restructuring at the Beatles

There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 23:32, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Your input would be really appreciated

... over at the Civility, clear, plain and simple sandbox. Pesky (talk) 09:11, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

The only good civility policy is a deleted civility policy. Malleus Fatuorum 17:01, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

. And there I was, thinking that you might help word something acceptable ... (>**)> Hugz, anyway. Pesky (talk) 19:11, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

The deeper problem is when people are actually unkind on purpose, harassing, baiting and otherwise being deliberately mean to others with actual malice or at least bad intent. A second problem is how to apply a cluebat with a proportionate level of force to those who are inadvertently quite unkind and say harmful things to others, but absent actual malice or bad intent. Then, of course, the "dialing back Malleus when he accidentally crosses the line from entertaining curmudgeon to just a jerk" (said with a grin and noogies) would be a guideline that would take a life's work... Montanabw 19:44, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Detecting intent on the internet is a very shifty thing. IF there's going to be a policy, it needs to be VERY clear and contain detailed examples of what's NOT acceptable. Civility isn't really the issue, IMO. It's conduct (good and bad). The more I think about it, the more I become convinced (or concerned) that a loose policy that can be wielded like a club by agenda-monkeys is worse than no policy at all. Any conduct policy should be applicable to all, and worded so that said agenda-monkeys can't hide behind it and wrap themselves in the cloak of moral rectitude.Intothatdarkness (talk) 16:18, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

... and I'd just ignore it anyway. Malleus Fatuorum 20:36, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Drowning in ad-lib beer or snufflecation-by-cleavage as the ultimate in forcibly-hugging, perhaps? "Thou shalt not snarl until thou hast drunk this gallon of Real Ale ..." Either of those could be hard to ignore ;P Pesky (talk) 22:19, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Anyhoo, even if you don't want to contribute, I'd really appreciate a bit of feedback from you (as it seems to be something like 90% "Pesky's civility thoughts" at the moment!) Pesky (talk) 07:18, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

You've already had 100% of my thoughts on the civility policy, it ought to be scrapped. However it's worded it'll continue to be a stick (some) administrators will use to beat editors they've taken a dislike to. Malleus Fatuorum 23:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Sadly, I think you may be right. So long as any policy is not extended evenly to those who have enforcement capability it will be abused by some who do have that capability.Intothatdarkness (talk) 15:07, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Would something like this, right up at the top, change the way you thought about this? Pesky (talk) 12:34, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Edmund Sharpe again

Following your advice, I submitted this for PR and the result is here. I've tried to deal with most of the points raised, but am still not satisfied with the prose. Would you be willing to give it a thorough copyedit? Thanks in hope and anticipation. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 15:40, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes of course, I should be able to read through it this evening with any luck. You were fortunate that Brian did the peer review. Malleus Fatuorum 17:00, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for all that detailed work; you are a real Wikipal! I have implemented (most of, if not all) your advice/suggestions. As a matter of interest, I have received a mailing today from John Hughes with many corrections, improvements, etc., some of which agree with yours. I am in the position of trying to please everyone all the time (rather like FAC). Having tried to do that, I will leave things to simmer for a while, and then go for it. If you want to have another look at how it now is feel free; but I guess you've done enough for the present. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:21, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

I had a look at your edits earlier, and they broadly seem fine to me. The only one that stuck out was that you restored "both" in the phrase "both England and France", but obviously "and" implies "both". That's a small thing though. You're very fortunate to be in contact with John Hughes, but of course it'll be you and not him (and not me either) who has to defend the article at FAC. Malleus Fatuorum 18:29, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

PS. I meant "defend" in the sense of defending an academic thesis of course, nothing more. Malleus Fatuorum 23:39, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Josce de Dinan/GA2

ready for my input or did you plan on more? Sorry I dropped the ball on this one .. I've been fighting the crud/whatever still as well as dealing with the hubby's new work schedule... it has him up at 1am to get to work at 2am .. it is the suck. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:10, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

That was it I think. Is it done now? Malleus Fatuorum 14:24, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Nope, I'll get on those in a few. Was catching up with Pain and de Gray... and now must needs get mother up. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:38, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Got them all. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:02, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

North Pier, Blackpool

Just to let you know that I eventually passed the article. It's not as long as it could be, probably because it's mostly restricted to freely-accessible web sources at the moment, but it's not looking bad. J Milburn (talk) 09:23, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Did you mean to post that to the nominator, User:Worm That Turned? Malleus Fatuorum 14:56, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Nah, he knows- I was just letting you know as you gave some advice and did a little copyediting. J Milburn (talk) 15:43, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, I'm glad that my advice seems to have been helpful in this case. Malleus Fatuorum 16:23, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Witches, Shamans and Hallucinogens ?

Dear Malleus. I've recently put forward the article at Dreamtime (Duerr book) for peer review. It's an anthropological and philosophical book dealing with witches, shamans and hallucinogens, and knowing of your interest in the first of these three subjects I thought that you might be interested. If you have time, it'd be great if you could help peer review this one. All the best. (Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:42, 6 March 2012 (UTC))

I'm interested in the third of them as well. ;-) I'll try and get to the peer review later this evening, or tomorrow at the latest. Malleus Fatuorum 17:46, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Come visit the Forest, we has Liberty Caps growing in their millions at the correct time of year. Also Fly Agaric, and a number of other little fun guys ... ;P Pesky (talk) 21:32, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I have an image in my mind of you working in your home pharmacy surrounded by all sorts of herbs and roots and fungi, rather like Brother Cadfael. Malleus Fatuorum 21:54, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I've just been reminded Midnightblueowl of when our paths first crossed, when you tagged Pendle witches as being out of date, so expect no mercy from me. ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 06:29, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Hehe! to the Cadfael comparison! Fing is, though, fing is, that many of the home-brewed remedies are extremely good. The Stachys woundwort family, for example ... Pesky (talk) 08:50, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for doing this one for me Malleus! Hope you enjoyed reading about the wacky world of Hans Duerr! (Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:46, 10 March 2012 (UTC))

John de Gray

I think I got your concerns on my talk page... feel free to start dealing with my crappy prose again... I THINK I'm back for a bit. I swear adjusting my sleep schedule is sucky sucky sucky... Ealdgyth - Talk 22:58, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I on the other hand find that sunlight is best avoided; brings out such terrible blisters and burning. But now you're back in harness I'll finish off looking at John. Malleus Fatuorum 23:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I have garden plans for this year - tomatoes, peppers, beans, cucumbers, and lots of other fresh veggies from my garden, so I'll be seeing a bit more sun than usual. And I'll be quite happy to NOT be paying through the nose at the grocery store for my veggies too! Ealdgyth - Talk 23:07, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I just learned that in the UK if six people get together and ask their local authority for some land to grow vegetables on, the local authority is obliged to make some available. I wouldn't be growing cucumbers though, I hate the damn things. Or parsnips, or swedes, or broccoli, or turnips, or brussel sprouts .... Malleus Fatuorum 21:50, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

But I wonder. Can you see this? Malleus Fatuorum 05:17, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Wot, no parsnips? But parsnips roasted in goose fat, all crispy and golden on the outside, and soft and succulent on the inside, are just lush :o) Pesky (talk) 11:40, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Pedantry: egoism v. egotism

I see that in your FAC review of Roza Shanina you requested a change from "egoism" to "egotism". I have never been entirely sure of the precise difference between the two words, but my general understanding is that "egoism" is self-centeredness and "egotism" implies excessive self-importance. If that is the case, then in the context of its use in the Shanina article, "egoism" may have been correct—though I think I'd have avoided using either word. Brianboulton (talk) 01:08, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

You may be right, but that's the least of my issues with the article. If you think I'm being too hard on the article then just say so at the review. Who knows, you may even persuade me that I am. Doubt it though. :D Malleus Fatuorum 02:30, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you; I was more concerned with educating myself than with rescuing the article which, as you say, has a great deal more wrong with it at the moment. Brianboulton (talk) 12:50, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

(Sticks oar in) Although reference 3 Out of nowhere is a pretty interesting read it may not be an RS- the author in one case appears to have been spun a line by someone claiming to have shot a number of IRA members in an ambush. Ning-ning (talk) 13:07, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

or maybe ergotism....? Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:14, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

tee-hee, yes. Far more common than is realized, and accounts for a lot of the behaviour we see. Johnbod (talk) 14:09, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Feeling misanthropic?

Hi Malleus, if you (or any of your wonderful talk page stalkers) find yourself feeling misanthropic anytime soon, you might want to review the Human Extinction Movement. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:09, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Don't tempt me! Ha! Montanabw 06:18, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

How are you?

I realize I've been gone for a lot longer than it seems, and that I've missed a lot. Anyway, how are you? Written anything lately? I could use a good read. ceranthor 21:57, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

You could always read this. Malleus Fatuorum 22:11, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

In cheery news, I almost got booted out of a venue today for not showing the appropriate degree of respect to some tin-pot hitler. And I didn't even swear or shout, I just raised my hands and told her to do whatever she had to. Roll on the Olympics, when her contempt feels the full force of a host broadcaster and the money behind them. Parrot of Doom 22:51, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I was almost refused entry to a flight to the Isle of Man when I was contracting there. I turned up at Speke early one Monday morning with my bag and laptop in a separate bag as I'd done every week for ages, only to be told at checkin that I could only take one bag onto the flight. Naturally I objected, and they relented. But when I got to the boarding area I was surrounded by a melee of Manx Air staff, all prodding and poking me (metaphorically of course) into saying something that would give them an excuse to ban me from the flight. Does that remind you of anywhere? I used to enjoy flying, but my fervent hope now is that I'll never have to get on another plane. Malleus Fatuorum 03:19, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

This was pretty funny and may appeal to you: Arcadia (The X-Files).  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:31, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Malleus. I read this. I did not understand much. Lol. I am very happy to see you around more often. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 05:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Nice eh, ahem...♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:13, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Anyway, sorry to hear. :/ ceranthor 23:24, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Happy International Women's Day

	Award for a great woman
	On the internet no one knows if you're a dog, but I am going to call you an honorary woman. Against kitchen slavery, and for women's writing: this award presented to a deserving human being. Drmies (talk) 16:26, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

1. Dammit. Thanks. I'm going to make a numbered list here, just because I can. Drmies (talk) 04:50, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I've been accused of all sorts of gender abuse here on Misplaced Pages, but never in real life, because it just isn't true. I bet if you counted up the contributors to this talk page you'd find there are are just as many women as men, perhaps even more. I love women, I'm even married to one! Malleus Fatuorum 21:49, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Here's my price list

• GA review £5
• Peer review £7.50
• FA review between £10 and £25, depending on the number of commas that need to be moved around.

Malleus Fatuorum 02:08, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Answering your question

A volunteer, screened and approved by WMF, to be a public face of WP on the campus hosting the Peirce Edition project.

His edit rate has really increased at last check, perhaps meeting the rate suggested at RfA, which I had thought was sarcasm but now I can only wish that it were sarcasm. I fear that with additional Red-Bull afterburners, the Twinklers will destroy the space-time continuum, unless Dr. Who or Captain Jack Harkness appear.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 01:31, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Or Kirk or Picard? Pesky (talk) 09:05, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

You may have some interest in this

Ihde, Erin. "'So gross a violation of decency': a note on wife sales in colonial Australia." Journal of the Royal Australian Historical Society, v.84, no.1, June 1998: (26)-37. ISSN: 0035-8762. Fifelfoo (talk) 04:21, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Comments, please?

On this :D Pesky (talk) 09:55, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

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)

1. Moore, Alan. "Viewpoint: V for Vendetta and the rise of Anonymous". BBC News. Retrieved 11 February 2012.