The Barnstar of Good Humor
	All rise for the man Mies (at least i will, after i finish writing these lines!), keep those good spirits coming my friend! But i do agree, the situation did merit a good moment of reflection (tackles from behind not as harshly punished as today, that was his untimely sporting demise)... Vasco Amaral (talk) 00:03, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		For this. ;) The Bushranger One ping only 03:50, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks, but the idea was yours. Now kindly turn it into a gem, Bushranger! Drmies (talk) 04:16, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• I see you started doing that already. Thanks, and thanks for the proper title--hadn't thought of that. BTW, Captain Kirk? Who's that? Drmies (talk) 04:18, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't know what the precipitating event was (nor does it matter), but I like the essay. LadyofShalott 04:39, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • An ANI thread. Thanks Lady! BTW, if some editor of good faith and will comes by and throws out every word I wrote and makes it better, I won't mind. The wiki doesn't need me either. It needs you much more than me, Lady. Oh, how about this? Drmies (talk) 04:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • No, it doesn't, but you are kind to say so. As for the WikiMania submission: very cool - I hope it gets accepted! When are you supposed to know? LadyofShalott 04:59, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I don't know, Lady. Their deadline for submissions is still a month away, I think. Drmies (talk) 21:56, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	Inciting a feud
	For deception and misquotation on Kelapstick's talk page, has earned Drmies this Barnstar of Decapitation. Bgwhite (talk) 06:15, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Best...Barnstar...Ever...--kelapstick^(bainuu) 06:29, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

yes, even better than the one you gave the Mandarax.--kelapstick^(bainuu) 06:29, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This one's very nice (well, maybe "nice" isn't precisely the right word), but a reliable source said that the one Drmies gave me was "the best award I've ever seen". BTW, whenever I see a head on a pike, I think of Babylon 5. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 10:16, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice. I appreciate it, Bgwhite. I hope you and Kelapstick will be mortal enemies and will try to snatch each other's Grammies. Mandarax, you're supposed to think of art, not of disposable popular culture. Why not think of Nisus and Euryalus? (BTW, that article is pretty good but lacks a summary of the events in Book 9.) Drmies (talk) 14:40, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you taking this barnstar to heart, and attempting to incite another feud? How dare you imply that something which you haven't seen is not art, and dismiss it as "disposable popular culture"?!? But, yes, maybe I've been talking about Babylon 5 too much lately. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 21:29, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Mandarax. Did I tell you I watched half an episode of Dance Moms the other day? If I sink any lower I might land on Io Station. Drmies (talk) 21:51, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the TDA topic ban discussion to AN and retitled it "Topic ban discussion" -- you are, of course, welcome to revert if you feel strongly about the title. Nobody Ent 13:07, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• No, I don't. Thanks. I haven't looked yet--just got back from dropping the kids off--but I hope someone has tweaked it properly. I was very tired when I typed it up (and I guess I was thinking of Bud Lite, for no good reason) but I wanted to get that out of the way. Thank you Nobody Ent. Drmies (talk) 14:37, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Even on the most narrow reading, this tournament which moved to New York, cannot be solely in the purview of WP Connecticut. Similarly American Elec. Power Co. v. Connecticut actually has relevance to at least nine states, six were defendants, not just Connecticut. This particular SCOTUS case is really more of a US thing than a state thing anyway. Rich Farmbrough, 18:22, 16 February 2012 (UTC).[reply]

• Feel free to apply the proper template, Rich. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 19:17, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know of any tool similar to that used in SPIs which would generate a list of articles on which two named contributors have edited? I need to gather some evidence, if indeed such results reveal any. - Sitush (talk) 18:33, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• HelloAnnyong suggests this one, which they say works better than this one, which I used to use. Good luck! Drmies (talk) 19:18, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Stalker is better. For years now, I've been looking for a different kind of tool, which would be immensely helpful in matching suspected sockpuppets to possible puppet masters. What I need is a tool into which you can put a number of articles, and it would return the names of editors who had worked on all those articles, or a significant subset of them -- this on the theory that socks frequently return to the "scene of the crime" and can't resist editing the articles they edited under previous IDs. The listgenerated would provide some starting points to look for behavioral commonalities. I've never been able to find such a tool -- even asked several people if they could write one, but no takers. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:53, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • That would be a useful tool, yes. Drmies (talk) 21:57, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'd be very glad to learn of such a tool, should it exist. LadyofShalott 02:58, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thanks for the initial responses. Regarding the later points (an alternate tool), well, there I guess that there must be a forum for requesting this sort of thing somewhere. But I am Clueless of Manchester again, so don't look to me for an answer. - Sitush (talk) 21:49, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • I posted a note on Village Pump (technical) a while ago, but nothing came of it. I could try again. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:54, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Okay [1], let's see what happens. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:57, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
              • Is anyone Wikifriends with any of the editors on this list? Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:12, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

...we need a separate noticeboard solely for ARS-related squabbling, so that I can unwatch it. 28bytes (talk) 19:33, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• That's not a bad idea. There'll be three editors on it, at the most. Drmies (talk) 19:41, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I see that you protected the page User:Lost on belmont. Just letting you know that it's probably best to protect Talk:Masturbation and Talk:Non-penetrative sex as well, since that IP keeps coming back and Lost on belmont keeps requesting that each IP the user appears under be blocked. Not to mention...IPs don't stay blocked long unless they are proxies. 107.22.97.105 (talk) 23:54, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Right. I am going to keep my eye on it. I want to hold off protecting those talk pages for a bit, but I did ask an expert about a range block. Thanks for letting me know. Drmies (talk) 00:49, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd also keep an eye on Coitus interruptus and Onan as well. Those are his other two favorites. Lost on Belmont (talk) 02:33, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, that's just great. We got spermophagia under control, now this. I wish these sperm slickers and handjobbers would get a blog, together. Drmies (talk) 02:53, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • (talk page stalker)This above remark deserves a barnstar by itself. ;) Calabe1992 02:59, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Am I correct in reading that Drmies is going to watch masturbation and non-penetrave sex?--kelapstick^(bainuu) 03:27, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Kelapstick, if you look at my log, you'll see that my finger is on the block button. Watch it now. No, you are not correct--I'm watching Fiddler on the Roof, and everyone is fully dressed. "I am the man in the house! I am the head of the family!" Drmies (talk) 03:29, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

←I'll take my chances. By the way, I'm about to start an Australian meat pie, they are addictive.--kelapstick^(bainuu) 03:32, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, what is non-penetrave sex? ;) Calabe1992 03:34, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An example of Muphry's law?--kelapstick^(bainuu) 03:43, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(no idea what indentation to use) On Talk:Onan, an editor actually offers something he watched in a porn film as proof of the possibility. I think he was serious, too. LadyofShalott 03:45, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• K, that looks tasty. I assume you weren't having the one with soy protein. Drmies (talk) 04:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• <rant>Once again, Drmies or Mandarax gets the best headlines on their talk pages. Lady gets to watch a porn film for proof. The latest over/under betting line on when Drmies blocks kelapstick is 30hrs. Drmies is a barnstar whore. I had to snuggle with the wife tonight. Life is not fair.</rant> Bgwhite (talk) 06:06, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• So much excitement on my talk page, but when will I ever make headlines on the Signpost (I get no play there at all) or WR? Bgwhite, I'm glad you at least got to snuggle. My better half was snore asleep (in her soft, plaid jammies) so I had to cuddle up with Austerlitz. Drmies (talk) 15:08, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above quote made my day. LadyofShalott 21:56, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to seem like I'm stalking in any way, but I was checking out the contribs for WITI (TV) to make sure all was good with the article, and noticed a change by 108.94.64.243 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) here that was reversed by another user. Looking at the IP it was blocked two weeks ago as being used as a sock IP by TheREALCableGuy, and then was back in use unnoticed while TRCG served out the one-weeker you gave him with all the signs of his usual edits and ownership of the Charlotte TV station artices. Honestly I was just doing my usual check on Milwaukee TV articles as being in the area and I've made my changes on MPTV (which have not been reversed, so that conflict is ended), but I am concerned he didn't take the username block seriously in any way. Nate • (chatter) 02:56, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks. Things have happened. Drmies (talk) 04:25, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for being a valuable helper with me on that particular issue. I've now understood that If i mention anything about him, I face my account being put at risk at being blocked. Thank you for generosity, and please pass on my thanks to Chris and Floquenbeam. Again, thanks a lot and have a good day. Abhijay (☎ Talk) (✐ Deeds) 05:20, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, that's too much honor, but such conflicts should be nipped in the bud if possible. I hope this is the end of it. But Abhijay, please be mindful of all-too quick reverting/vandalism warning. Thanks, and happy days, Drmies (talk) 15:09, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hello, I want to notify you that there's been a violation of the ANI discussion that we both had: ([2]). Abhijay (☎ Talk) and this ([3]). (✍ Stalk me) 04:57, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	Thank you for being a valuable contributor with a reasonable solution to the problem I've had in the past few days. Take this as a token of appreciation for your hard work to resolve the dispute I've had. Abhijay (☎ Talk) (✐ Deeds) 05:22, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drmies, could you please offer an opinion on whether this is enough for a proper Wikipedia article? I doubt it, but have found no more information on the net. Thanks! Hekerui (talk) 07:45, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I think you did a great job. Thanks. Yeah, it's slim pickens, but it's more than a lot of metal bands have, haha. I'll move it into mainspace, to A. V. Anand. Again, Hekerui, thank you so much! Drmies (talk) 21:06, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Hi Drmies, thank you for moving the article to main space. there are few more information that i have asked from few of the news paper dailies. will upload once i get it with references. Again thank you for your help. SrikanthOnWiki (talk) 08:10, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't specific enough with what I wrote. I've clarified it, hopefully. The welcome messages issued by ChocolateWolf have nothing to do with my concern. Calabe1992 17:25, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Gotcha. I guess this should be left to someone who knows CU better than me. Why do they always blame the Dutchman? Now it's Ruud Koot under indictment--and he doesn't just have great hair, he also has a fantastic name: just two syllables, exemplifying the Dutch penchant for not wasting words (or letters). Drmies (talk) 17:27, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Heh. I've opened an SPI on Shakinglord again. We'll see where this goes. Calabe1992 17:36, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Successful. Calabe1992 17:55, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Holy cow, the initial thread about him that I had been looking for was started by a sock of him. I've merged the ANI thread. What a guy... Calabe1992 18:02, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, that was his thing, wasn't it, starting ANI threads about himself. Drmies (talk) 20:58, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Rapide! And I "approved" their username! Drmies (talk) 21:01, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Shame on you! ;) In all seriousness, though, this is starting to look worthy of a long-term abuse case. Calabe1992 21:10, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

<irony>I was really hoping to have an article citing pornographic material and biblical references at the same time.</irony> But the reason I'm here is Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Suggested_edit_to_template_and_creation_of_tracking_category seems to be an easily resolvable issue for someone who has administrative rights. Oddly enough nobody has decided to give those to me yet, so I was hoping you may be able to do something clever with it. (I'd also suggest having that category as a hidden cat, or return a text based score instead of a number of stars score for decimals other than 0.5, but that bit is more a style issue.)

A further aside. I've created a template in my user space that is simply to stop the code of a signature subst'ing onto a page where I've been, and simply allowing it to transclude. This is stolen from Uncyc, where it has been being used for donkey's ages. Is there a reason why this isn't already a template here? Or if it is already, where would I find it? PuppyOnTheRadio talk 06:30, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I hate to confirm my status as a Luddite, but I really don't have a clue what you're talking about: you lost me right after "porn". I'm sure there's a geek on the peanut gallery who can comment on the brilliance of this idea--is there? Drmies (talk) 16:03, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who would you hassle for a coding issue that requires admin authorisation? (I don't know many people here yet.) PuppyOnTheRadio talk 01:45, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Post on Village Pump (technical) Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:57, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks BMK! Drmies (talk) 03:13, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Tra took care of most of it. I might nag him about the remainder. PuppyOnTheRadio talk 08:18, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Black Album/Come On Feel the Dandy Warhols. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. LF (talk) 06:35, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for comments on sandbox article, revised again. World cat is Global catalog & reliable for Refs. Regarding notability of book, it is out of contest because WP is not certifying it & we are not here to judge individual books notability. Long list of books of many writers are there. Also WP is not mentioned anywhere that the list of book should not above 10 or 20 or 30. If somebody refers WP for particular field then he should get comprehensive information about it. Regarding references through internet are not available or workable for all cases. Still published books, articles should be considered for Reference.

  Corrections, edits or additions of matter with genuine references are good for the health of Article but deletion of matter unnecessary is not good. If such practice will continue then people will avoid contributing in WP. Thanks & Best Regards

Bpldxb 09:14, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry, but no. You are confusing existence with notability. That other articles have long lists is not a reason to turn every article into a resume. We are not here to give all possible information, fortunately. Drmies (talk) 15:56, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know about this?--kelapstick^(bainuu) 09:32, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah, what about it? It's generally deemed to be the most useless machine since the nuclear bomb. Did you get one? Drmies (talk) 15:58, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, I heard that a bunch of nuclear bombs could be used to dig a new deeper and wider canal across Central America. Also, somebody came up with this spaceship design. A supply of bombs could accelerate that thing up to near the speed of light. Also, you could toast hot dogs with one. Pretty useful after all. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:49, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Tone - Monotone (its the internet after all, unless I specifically state otherwise)] I wanna know why when I added the following to Power Rangers Samurai which any observer of said program [and reader of the article for that matter who clicks on the links provided for the actors] can see for themselves to be fact but Acalamari and Ryulong claim it to be a personal opinion and blocked me for a period of 24 hours and threatened to make the block permanent if I ever re-added it to Wikipedia, I suspect them to be bullying me but I am not sure. Could you please help clarify the situation, thanks: Strangely enough for a group of samurai, they are all basically gaijin even their sensei/shogun is portrayed by a New Zealander, for none of them are full blooded Japan-born Japanese. D34throse Darklight (talk) 23:47, 18 February 2012 (UTC) D34throse Darklight[reply]

(talk page stalker) The words you've quoted above are original research, which is not allowed. If you repeatedly put them in when others remove them, it is edit-warring, which is also not allowed. LadyofShalott 00:04, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He's spammed this message to 20 other editors.—Ryulong (竜龙) 00:37, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that bodes well for his editing life. LadyofShalott 02:27, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This person is an idiot.. Ryulong, I was going to remove it from your talk page--didn't know I was going to get one too. Drmies (talk) 14:30, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could we please discuss your changes to the Juggling World Records page before you continue? You incorrectly state in one of your edit comments that Wikipedia never uses primary sources. This is incorrect: "While secondary source material is most preferred, primary sources may also be used to report factual material provided the contributing editor states the fact in a manner that does not present an interpretation of the fact (original research) which is not itself explicitly contained in the primary source." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Primary_Secondary_and_Tertiary_Sources This is the justification for using links to publicly available videos for these world records. It has been examined before and was deemed to be a valid use of it. 04:13, 20 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thanar (talk • contribs)

• No. It is impossible to verify any of those records from looking at the video evidence. I have posted a notice on the original research noticeboard, Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard, since I have my doubts about these records in the first place. If you wish to have the community weigh in on the video evidence, you can try to do so at the reliable sources noticeboard, but, in the meantime, I can not let this article be little more than a repository for video links. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 04:20, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at ISTB351's talk page.
Message added 04:37, 20 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.[reply]

ISTB351 (talk) 04:37, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	reviewing eyes
	Thank you for reviewing in the Contributor copyright investigations/PumpkinSky, you did a lot to clarify! Paraphrasing (I hope not too closely): If everybody who read this looked at one more article it could be over today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:22, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

following up: it looked to me as if you had a look at Tuskegee Airmen, right? (Remembering the line you approved for DYK: "The calm already contains the catastrophe"), on my user page, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:47, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct: I meant to go back and have a look but didn't. Please note my ((y}/N there--one of the edits is probably too close for comfort for some. Thanks for following up, Gerda. Drmies (talk) 19:25, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's over, thanks also to you! 719 of 729 articles were found with no problems. Recommended reading: Great Dismal Swamp maroons, I added a quote: "These groups are very inspirational. As details unfold, we are increasingly able to show how people have the ability, as individuals and communities, to take control of their lives, even under oppressive conditions." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:29, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning Talk:Ulrich Kortz. I'm not sure if the information given is personal enough to warrant removal. If it is, could you use your mighty admin powers to remove it. Bgwhite (talk) 10:35, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Honestly, I don't know. Email addresses are often removed but this person put it there as contact information, on purpose. I'm going to let this one slide but perhaps there are talk page stalkers who know better than me. I will have a closer look at the article, though. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 15:00, 20 February 2012 (UC)
  • I agree, Drmies. The new editor is clearly offering the address in an attempt to communicate about and help resolve a copyright issue. I say deal with the issue first and redact the email address later. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:26, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know that the stolen shotgun used to assassinate Kansas City civil rights leader Leon Jordan in 1970 was later purchased by the Kansas City Police Department from a used gun dealer, and was issued as a police service weapon for 33 years? I discovered this pathetic stub at AfD and expanded it dramatically. It still needs work, but I would appreciate your opinion. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:04, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• See, some trivial things aren't trivial at all. I'll have a look, Cullen--this sounds interesting. Drmies (talk) 17:14, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

edit conflict! It was also a copyvio from http://www.cam.org.au/bishops/bishop-timothy-costelloe-sdb.html. Moondyne (talk) 04:02, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Excellent--thanks! Drmies (talk) 04:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• I've rev-deled the contribution and warned the editor. Thanks again! Drmies (talk) 04:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drmies, I'm just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of this page - it's not nonsense, but it appears to be in the Malay language. --Bmusician 04:32, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• It seemed to me to consist of nothing but proper names--but good luck with it. Drmies (talk) 05:14, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drmies,

Per your comments at Bgwhite's page, I made some alterations to this article. If you have a chance, please look it over again and let me know what you think. Also, since you have reviewed the article, should you (or I) remove the "unreviewed" template? Thanks!Braedon Farr (talk) 13:25, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Sure, go ahead--I have to tell you I never pay attention to that tag. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:18, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drmies,

Thanks for your advice in helping me better contribute to Wikipedia. I definitely want to continue contributing, and of course want to stay within the rules and codes of conduct for the site.

I am sorry if the edits I made to The Orchard were not conform to the NPOV. Could you perhaps point out to me the section you had an issue with? I'd be happy to revise them or simply delete them. However, you changed all the edits I made, and I think some of those were actually informative. Many of the bands in the old (well, now current) version are old and not up-to-date. I wanted to add information to help people learn about the new bands and offerings of The Orchard. It's not just a "digital distribution and entertainment services company" - that's actually not accurate. They distribute music as well as video, and not just digitally but physically also, and they help their artists get their music heard on ads and TV shows, so I wanted to give a few examples. As for the rest, I only took information that was already there and reorganized it or condensed it for a better flow.

I would truly appreciate your help in pointing out what might be too promotional or name-dropping so I can edit it to be more neutral, and so you can approve at least some of the changes I made which I think better describe what the company actually is. As someone who had a hard time myself understanding the differences between artist management, distribution, rights collection, etc., I wanted to share some of the knowledge I've learned to others who might have the same question.

Thanks for your help! Looking forward to hearing back from you.

Di tuolomee (talk) 19:47, 21 February 2012 (UTC)di_tuolomee[reply]

• I'm speaking somewhat from recollection here--you named a person "award-winning" or something like that in the lead, and that's considered a non-neutral word. There was a paragraph full of names, which usually isn't encyclopedic content (especially not if unverified by secondary sources), and a paragraph that listed commercials for which they did the music--that also is not usually considered encyclopedic content, unless, again, it is verified by a secondary source in a way that makes it notable. To put it bluntly, if a secondary source doesn't mention something (like that) as notable, it's not notable enough to include. Yes, I reverted the lot since it was dispersed over so many edits that I couldn't go in manually (so to speak) and do them one by one. Finally, the links added to the External links section did not meet our requirements (see WP:ELNO), and I removed a few more that were already in there.

  What I find to be a good way is to start with the secondary sources and see what I can pull out of them, rather than write the content (if I happen to be knowledgeable) and then look for the sources to back that up. I hope that helps. Thanks for your note, Drmies (talk) 20:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Ok, thanks! That's super helpful. I'll try reworking it using your suggestions and resubmit. Can I just do that, and then you'll check it out again, or is there another way where I can run it by you to make sure it's ok? Thanks again! Di tuolomee (talk) 20:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sure, I'll be glad to help. It's not really my topic of expertise, though--there's users like User:Michig and User:TenPoundHammer who are much better versed with articles like that. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 21:54, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • K, I just posted a new update! I included all the references I had initially and removed any qualitative adjectives that weren't objective as well as the social media links at the end. Can you please take a look and make sure it's alright and sounds naturally informative? And if not, would you mind not reverting again, and just letting me know what I should work on to make it right? I'd rather avoid getting a second "strike" on my edits! :) Still learning here. :) Thanks again for your pointers, I really appreciate you taking the time.Di tuolomee (talk) 00:51, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, I think you've done a great job there. The Vimeo link is dead, and whether that would be an acceptable one is not clear to me (but I'm no expert here); that's up to the Reliable Sources Noticeboard, if you want to really make sure. That's not such a big deal, though, given that you've added a number of solid references. Congratulations! Now, a few pointers (I'm an English teacher--it's a professional deformation): put your footnotes outside the punctuation (that is, after the comma, period, etc.), and see if you can't work using citation templates. If you have Twinkle installed (I think that's what I have) there's a button for those templates for easy use; maybe Huggle does it too, I don't know. That will make your citations look great. Well done, Di tuolomee. FWIW: if one is a fan of something, or even an employee of a company, the best way to get the best advertisement on Wikipedia is to (help) write a really good article according to our standards, and this one looks a lot better than it did. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 23:32, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • THANKS SO MUCH! I just edited all the references using the templates and you're right, they look so much better. Thanks for the placement tip too. I'm usually pretty good when it comes to that stuff but I didn't know about the references one. Again, thank you so much for all your help! I'll definitely bring all of this to my future Wikipedia page edits/entries. :) Di tuolomee (talk) 00:43, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	made me smile In ictu oculi (talk) 04:27, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Ah, thanks. I actually feel bad for that person: if you go through the talk page's archive, you'll see him take issue with himself (his socks) to argue to other editors that that former editor (he) was really misguided, but that there was something to his (own) edits after all. It's sad. Drmies (talk) 04:30, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I vaguely gathered that, still didn't prevent a grin despite the latent tragedy... In ictu oculi (talk) 04:52, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I could forgive you don't know Jessica Biel, 7th heaven wasn't that popular of a TV show. But Jennifer Garner??? Shame. Shame on you. You need to immediately go out and buy the entire series of Alias.--v/r - TP 16:28, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I'll get right on it, after I'm done re-watching Twin Peaks, OK? BTW, I'm a happily married man, and someone should respect me for not looking at those women that you young, horny men drool over. Ha! Drmies (talk) 18:15, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not young, but I am married which is why I drool over Jennifer Garner. Isn't "happily married" an oxymoron or does "married man" make the man just a moron? Bgwhite (talk) 19:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm reading The Art of Courtly Love--apparently love between people who are married to each other is not possible. I am married, but I don't drool over any of these supposedly sexy people (I'll make an exception for Brad Pitt, of course, and possibly for Roni Deutch--yeah, this one). Watch Miou-Miou in La Lectrice--now there's a beautiful woman, and a really good reader as well. Drmies (talk) 19:42, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Jennifer Garner is a different kind of sexy. She has the class and elegance with the sexiness. Try a few of her movies, your pick they are all good, and you'll see.--v/r - TP 19:48, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Will you watch La Lectrice? I'm sure it's available on Laserdisc or Betamax. Drmies (talk) 23:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to deal with a new user and could use some advise. The person has been putting Speedies and Prods. They are not using Twinkle. They haven't done a Speedy/Prod in the past day thank goodness. I've gone around apologizing to some of new users who shouldn't have Prods added.

The user does not sign or use summaries. They have been asked multiple times. How would you go about to getting a user to sign and summaries? Bgwhite (talk) 19:34, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, sounds to me like they're being disruptive, and such behavior (speedies and all) is usually done be already blocked repeat offenders... But to answer your question, all you can is ask and ask. Signing is not mandatory. I would focus on the disruptive aspect, if disruptive it is--think "vandalism" and "competence." Drmies (talk) 19:36, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. The three users reported here are socks of the an Olympic sports site owner. Can please block. Sole Soul (talk) 19:45, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait--this is already at AIV? Also, I'm off the clock: nap time. Sorry, Drmies (talk) 19:47, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)...Added This Report over @ ANI seems to be a lot to block, and should probably be done Globally by a steward? --Hu12 (talk) 21:28, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Drmies, I 'spect you've seen my name around, as I've seen yours. I'm puzzled by the Newby* thing; looking back four years or so, that almost looks like a different person. I'm just wondering if he may possibly have some temporary glitch? As someone who's been on various medications over many years, and also been a first-aider and animal paramedic for even longer, I can say categorically that side-effects of one or two medications or injuries can make one's thoughts and so on completely chaotic without one necessarily realising what's happened. I have absolutely no idea if there's any parallel whatsoever here, but something just struck me, on research into past communications, as "out of kilter" for this editor. What do you think? My initial thought was "compromised account", but now I'm not sure at all. Pesky (talk) 19:56, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I have seen your name, Pesky, and I think we've interacted once or twice--I may have called you "commoner". Are you a Sex Pistols or Motorhead ("No Class") fan? I don't have much to offer here. I did not look back in their history, and it's not really up to us to speculate, but you may well be right. That said, I know at least one WP editor who writes like that and they seem to be functioning properly if oddly. If you are right, that's unfortunate--but WP is not really an equal-opportunity employer, and erratic editing can be disruptive, which I think is what happened hear. I suspect a lot of cases of "I didn't hear that" are either like that or a case of being an asshole (pardon my French). I've dealt with a lot of socks, and sometimes you run into such cases, yes. Thanks for your concern, though, for a fellow human being. There isn't much we can do for them via the internet. Drmies (talk) 23:25, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alright Pesky, Drmies is my admin. Go back to Kudpung where you belong. Hmmm, with Chzz no longer editing, are you looking for a secondary admin? Well, you can't have him. He is allll mine. My precious. Bgwhite (talk) 23:54, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hey now, there's more than enough of me to go around, especially since Moonriddengirl stopped loving me. Hey, Chzz is actually gone? I need to look at his page again. That would be a real loss to the project. Drmies (talk) 02:27, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Hehehe! No need to argue; plenty of granny-hugz to go around (I like any excuse for a hug); Bgwhite, you can share me with everyone else. I'm not proud. Drmies, I'm quite literally a "commoner", as in a person who has rights of common to graze livestock on common land. I take your point about the Newby situation; if there's a temporary glitchy thing there, we can't afford to give it free rein; my comment was really on the basis of "possibly unintentionally trollish" (medical terminology might be "altered state"), so maybe a damage-limitation short-termish remedy (maybe even having to be repeated), but tempering justice with mercy in respect of maybe not letting it muddy the long-term scenario too much. I dunno if I can make that clear. I had a combination of medications a few years back which left me not so much "high as a kite" as "roaring off out of the solar system at warp factor nine" for a while! Very trippy indeed! Quite fun in some ways, but disconcerting in others, and not an experience I'd like to repeat, LOL! Just FYI, I'm an HFA and there are a few editors I recognise as kindred spirits; but that's a different kettle of fish, and has solutions. And also advantages! Pesky (talk) 07:50, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That vandal was Tile join. It's best to just WP:RBI with these trolls. Good luck! Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:07, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, but I wanted to know. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 23:12, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there my friend,

i have thoroughly cleanedup this player's article, but require your priceless help in the following: could you provide a 100% accurate TRANS_TITLE in the Dutch reference found in the article? I think i could eventually get it, but it would be shabby to say the least :(

Attentively, thank you very much in advance, keep it up - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 22:04, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Sure thing, Vasco--you're a credit to WP:FOOTY. If they had medals (do they?) I'd give you one. Drmies (talk) 23:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Hey, if I ever make it to Portugal I'm going to look you up, you know that. It won't be this summer, but I hope to get there someday. Drmies (talk) 23:42, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For doing what I was too lazy to do myself. Fences&Windows 23:16, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Haha, you're welcome. I did leave an edit summary for future reference--my first instinct was to prove this was a non-notable book and send it to AfD, but again reality got in the way of my intentions. It's amazing to me that the Independent would have written this guy up but they did, and now we all have to live with it. Since you're such a terribly disruptive, die-hard inclusionist, you might as well read the book and produce a decent summary, and get it to DYK! (I've helped get that done on some weird book that someone picked up on--some American evangelist who wrote about his vision of hell, and it was kind of fun.) BTW, odd that an article prodded in October is still around--good thing you ran into it. Later, Drmies (talk) 23:39, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

☆

For this. And thanks for the essay too. I was toying with a similar idea a couple of years ago, but due to inherent laziness left it to rot. Yours is better worded, mine would have just become an infinite list. pablo 23:50, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I appreciate it--it was actually inspired by The Bushranger. But that's a wonderful little star and I like it very much. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 02:26, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ha, "you are the grandchild of a holocaust survivor". A similar jeremiad took place on this very page not too long ago. Nice list--but odd that the word "MySpace" does not seem to occur on it. Drmies (talk) 02:31, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will forever remember you as the one who gave me my first barnstar =] For An Angel (talk) 00:17, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

why is it that mindless trolls are given so much patience when it comes to religious nuttery? Could you run a test at, say, Talk:American Civil War and ask how they "know" all this stuff and whether they were "actually there"? Don't feed the trolls... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 02:59, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Sure, but I can't call them that--I'm just passing through. If that's really what they are you're better off finding recourse somewhere else: an edit war over a closing isn't going to get you anywhere. I've asked that editor to leave you alone (well, in so many words), and you're probably best off doing the same thing... Take it easy Seb, Drmies (talk) 03:06, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seb az86556: Oh, so now I'm a troll just because my views are different than yours? Zenkai _talk 03:08, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)I thought you understood? Calabe1992 03:11, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, he called me a "troll" and a "religious nut". I will not put up with such nonsense from him. Zenkai _talk 03:17, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should both tone it down. LadyofShalott 03:27, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[ec with the Lady] True. Seb, please don't say such things again. Zenkai, Seb is not calling you a troll because your views are different--I think he's calling you that because of your crusade over one little word. As I just said on the talk page, it would be best if you dropped this. Your comments on the talk page aren't gaining any traction, it appears, and this is getting you nowhere. Editors start losing their patience, edit wars start happening, bad words are flung on my beautiful talk page... Drmies (talk) 03:32, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This change log is funny... The two edits on March 31. Bgwhite (talk) 07:56, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• That is funny. Drmies (talk) 14:39, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

it was entirely valid and i have a freedom of press. so LEAVE ME ALONE — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambition1394 (talk • contribs)

• Venting about websites should be done elsewhere, and Wikipedia is not a "press". Drmies (talk) 19:02, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have spent a long time just explaining the work of artist Marc Quinn and I have no idea why yo have just deleted it all saying that i have a conflict of interests - the pictures and text i added just helped to undertand the ideas behind the work and in no way did anything else - they were an objective analysis of marc Quinns work - in no way bias as you said. Please explain what i have done wrong. Can you please put the text and pictures back up? thankyou — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janewilson3142 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• No, they were no objective analysis, and even if they were, they were unverified. No, I won't put it back up: the text was not-neutral, even promotional, and the plethora of images only aided in making the article look like a, well, unencyclopedic article. That you are connected to the subject makes that even worse. Drmies (talk) 22:07, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • After seeing this edit to my talk page, I added the template ((connected contributor)) to the article's talk page. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:43, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I gave you the impression I felt you had done something wrong. I most certainly do not think that, and I did say 'I don't care either way'. I'm a big believer in self-determination, and if the user wanted it to be a sandbox I'd just like them to be the one to say it. I had considered myself moving their page to a sandbox, or asking them, when I first saw the page created. I already assumed you were acting in good faith, so please don't ascribe bad intentions to my own actions thanks. Syrthiss (talk) 17:41, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Sure, thanks. It's just this: we're obviously dealing with someone who doesn't have much of a clue. If I run into these things (easily called fake articles, often correctly) I simply move them to a sandbox, which is an easy solution. Sorry if I got pissed, but this is the first time I hear something about conflicting duties. Drmies (talk) 17:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Its no problem. I try and be very careful myself as to admin to editor boundaries, probably too much so. I brought it to mfd specifically because I wanted to get opinions on the faked references. Every time I've seen that before its been pretty easy to find that the editor just grabbed the article on an existing person and tinkered a bit, and then I could say 'Hey, I saw you copied Beyonce and changed some stuff in your sandbox and here's why that isn't so good...' but since I couldn't find the source its a bit more problematic. I'd say that we could just go with your route and close the mfd, but now we have two delete comments. Syrthiss (talk) 18:05, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If the references are faked, then deletion is fine, and in that sense I can see how my closing the MfD was very premature--my apologies. I don't really want to weigh in on the contents anyway, but if it can be proven that there's a real FAKE in the FAKE article, then deletion should be the answer. I just wish TPH hadn't made an ANI thread out of it--it sets my anti-BITE instincts in motion. Drmies (talk) 19:39, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:Drmies. Some time ago I made a suggestion for this project.[4] A formal proposal has been made at the project council proposal page. If you are interested you may add your name at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Occupy movement.--Amadscientist (talk) 00:27, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the invite; seems like a good idea. But my input would probably be limited to attempting to limit the number of articles on the individual cities, and I'd be typing WP:NOTNEWS all the time... Drmies (talk) 02:18, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and not for the first time...nor for the last, I imagine. Very best, 99.136.255.180 (talk) 02:39, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Always a pleasure doing business with you. Has it stopped? I had to go and do something so I couldn't check the copyvio (what was the URL? just the Facebook account?) and then I forgot to get back to it. Drmies (talk) 03:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The whole resume section was lifted, I think, from the subject's website: http://www.deyan-nedelchev.com/my-career.html. Looks like that account has been posting copyright violations for some time. 99.136.255.180 (talk) 03:21, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see no need to do anything about Eschoir's post on ANI. I explained it to John Carter, and ironically the Big Bang story 2 hours before that we had both been involved in invalidates the assumptions of Eschoir. I think all projects get posts and in time they will all get buttons which facilitate them, to get people with domain knowledge. Anyway, I think this will end up being a storm in a tea cup. Cheers. History2007 (talk) 06:58, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Oh, I don't even think it's a storm. I don't know this Eschoir and I think I aim to keep it that way. I have run into you and John so I thought I'd leave you all the note. Besides, I thought it was funny to redact the names but then link to the discussion while not (out of courtesy?) notifying the involved parties. Later, Drmies (talk) 15:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The way I think of these things is that those who edit Wikipedia come from a sampling of the general population. Within the general population, there are diverse psychological makeups. So it should come as no surprise that some interesting and "unusual" characters would show up once in a while. So we should just expect them, but just as there people who can not be allowed to drive, some people should not be allowed to edit. And I think he is that category, but that is another story... History2007 (talk) 23:48, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent Final Jeopardy! answer, in the category "Literary Biographies", was "Quoting a famous line of his, a 2011 biography was titled And So It Goes of this man". Shockingly, none of the three contestants (and this was the Teachers Tournament!) knew the correct question. It reminded me about your email; that was three months ago and I still haven't gone out and gotten the biography yet, but that's okay, as I still haven't even read all of Vonnegut's books! (Besides, Slaughterhouse-Five was almost an autobiography.) Oh, and no, I don't have any Amazon credit. The last thing I got from them (for Burning Man, of course) was a battery-based AC power source (which turned out to be a big, expensive piece of garbage). Answer: I don't know. Question: Why have I suddenly started Wikicommenting on all of the easy Final Jeopardy! answers that nobody gets? MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 08:21, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is an easy answer. The question is, Who is Billy Joel? Bgwhite (talk) 08:29, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you posted another one (on your talk page maybe) the other day, I guess about some artist, and I didn't know it. Well, kunst is een konijn dat kut zegt. I would have gotten this one, of course. Billy Joel--I don't know why I just typed those letters; it's a waste of time and electrons. I do have Amazon credit, which means I spend too much there. (I just got three Sebald books.) Mandarax, did you know that Alex Trebeck is mortal? Drmies (talk) 15:32, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't posted the full answer: THIS FRENCH PAINTER WROTE, "I AM GOOD FOR NOTHING EXCEPT PAINTING AND GARDENING. Sorry about the caps; it was copied from the Jeopardy! site (which also provides the correct question). You'd better be careful, or that "kunst" saying may catch on. As for Billy Joel, on my talk page I've just gone into some of the movies I don't like; I don't think anyone wants me to start in on the musicians I don't like. But just knowing that we both like Jimi makes me think that our musical tastes may be similar. Now, about Alex Trebek.... Please refrain from making such unsourced statements about living people. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:41, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Billy Joel has a song named, And So It Went. It was #4 returned by Google for me when I looked for information. I wouldn't have known the answer if you didn't mention Slaughterhouse. I'm dyslexic. I enjoy reading, but it wasn't easy and I read slooow. My horrendous spelling and writing is the most obvious symptom. Bgwhite (talk) 00:08, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was Walter Cronkite who said "And so it goes?" Or was that "And that's the way it goes"? Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:55, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As a matter of fact, one of the Jeopardy! contestants guessed Cronkite. According to the Walter Cronkite article, his catchphrase was "And that's the way it is". (Another contestant said Mark Twain, and the third one crossed out Oscar Wilde and ended up with Charles Dickens.) Bg, I think you mean "And So It Goes", although I wouldn't put it past Joel to make a sequel to that song. And, like you, I'm a very slow reader; however, my spelling's pretty good. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 03:56, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That it's from Vonnegut is easy enough....but there was a news anchor who used the phrase, and it wasn't Cronkite. T'was her. And hi again, Mandarax! 99.136.255.180 (talk) 05:18, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ellerbeee used it in hommage to Vonnegut when she was on that short-lived late-night NBC news program "Overnight", which she co-anchored with Lloyd Dobbins. She probably used it later as well, but I lost track of her after that. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:52, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, 99! Good memory! I found a clip of the final Overnight broadcast. Like the Jeopardy! contestant, Ellerbee mentions Mark Twain, and then she does her "and so it goes" about a minute and half in. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 06:43, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since the ban discussions at WP:AN for User:NYyankees51 have closed, it's probably time to reimpose the block you lifted. Strangely, he never did make an appearance in his defense. Thanks, Mojoworker (talk) 18:49, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• He was topic-banned from editing LGBT articles, not indef-blocked or site-banned. But yes, strange that he never showed up. Perhaps he's given up altogether. We'll see. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 19:12, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's just the new sanction. It was my understanding that to allow NYyankees51 to "edit to argue their case at WP:AN" you temporarily removed the indef block that HJ Mitchell had reinstated. A little background (see block log): 11 January 2011 HJ Mitchell removed NYyankees51 indef socking block after coming to an agreement not to sock and to edit constructively. On 21 February 2012 HJ Mitchell reinstated the indefinite ‎block on NYyankees51 for "persistent problematic edits moving from abortion to LGBT issues when banned from the former; reinstatement of original indefinite block" – from the block summary and also see[5]. I think this diff makes it clear that HJ is still considering the terms for a new unblock agreement. Thanks. Mojoworker (talk) 00:42, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're my best mate you are, I love you. Hic! Malleus Fatuorum 20:19, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Haha! I trust you had a good time--although I felt a little cheap, and I don't even know what a beer costs in the UK. Hey, is Sitush in real life as grumpy and wrinkled as he sounds on these pages? Drmies (talk) 15:13, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Not at all cheap, very generous, and more than enough to cover a couple of beers. As for Sitush, no, he doesn't seem at all grumpy, very friendly in fact. Malleus Fatuorum 15:47, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oi! ;) You can see my fizzog on User:Sitush - does that look like a grumpy and wrinkly person to you? I didn't actually get to speak much with Malleus as a clucking of admins descended upon him pretty sharpish. But we shall meet again, I hope. - Sitush (talk) 15:59, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's a great likeness! It was a really good day, and I was very happy to meet a couple of much-admired Wikipedians for the first time - Malleus and Iridescent. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:36, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's a nice batch of people gathered in one place. I wish I could have been there. Who knows--Wikimania? I'm hoping to hear positive news about the scholarship soon; keep your fingers crossed. Drmies (talk) 19:18, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here. Malleus was the subject of an individual portrait photo also, which probably will not be released because it might find a use on dartboards belonging to various detractors. - Sitush (talk) 20:15, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sitush, I'll give you a case of beer for Malleus' photo. I need a good likeness for the voodoo doll. Bgwhite (talk) 20:46, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Back of the group photo, standing, white shirt. Feel free to stick pins in - I think MF is unlikely to be bothered if you do. - Sitush (talk) 20:56, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

<--Man, you all are old! Can someone put little balloons on the photo with IDs? Sitush, I really wish I could have been there. I'm glad ten bucks bought you something, and I am toasting you all right now: cheers! With a vodka/grapefruit juice. Drmies (talk) 00:10, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

...entering the conversation late That's a good combination, Drmies. Remind me to buy y'all a drink at Wikimania if we all get to go. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:07, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drmies, please can you provide me the deleted Pollyanna Woodward, thanks in advance, Widefox (talk) 22:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Done. It's at User:Widefox/Woodward. Drmies (talk) 19:16, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Someone needs to clean up around here occasionally. ^Bongo_matic 08:37, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Bongo. I meant to do that, haha. Now, if you can clean my desk, that would be great. Drmies (talk) 14:55, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ror Is King (talk • contribs) 08:31, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks! Drmies (talk) 14:54, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi Drmies, I don't know if you remember giving the article Chrisye a copyedit, but it is now at FAC if you'd like to provide feedback. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:40, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Someone playing nonsense, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:08, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Blocked for a little while. I apologize for the silly actions of my fellow man. Drmies (talk) 14:38, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On 28 February 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ray Butts EchoSonic, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Ray Butts EchoSonic gave live slapback to Chet Atkins, Scotty Moore, and Carl Perkins? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ray Butts EchoSonic.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks Victuallers (talk) 17:52, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((You've got mail)) or ((ygm)) template.— PTtrans (talk) 21:25, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I read your message--thanks. I don't know if I can do much in the next few days since I'm on the road, but I will get to it. Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 14:55, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• I appreciate your information policy. It's nice to know one is not left standing in the rain. Thanks. PTtrans (talk) 06:49, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update: I'm on the road with the flu, so don't expect much of me. Drmies (talk) 15:11, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oh no - feel better, Drmies! LadyofShalott 16:22, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • This flu ruined a perfectly good four days in New Orleans, Lady. Grrr. Drmies (talk) 04:04, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'm sorry to hear that. Are you feeling any better? LadyofShalott 04:16, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • A little, thanks; the girls were sick too. Drmies (talk) 04:26, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • I hope you and the kids are all all better. At least you apparently were in New Orleans after the big Mardi Gras celebrations. The only thing worse than being sick for four days in New Orleans would be if you were sick while there for Mardi Gras. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:48, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• PTtrans, you'll see what I did with the article. I'll leave a note with an explanation on the talk page. Drmies (talk) 04:26, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Thanks! You wrote a month ago that the article needs to be improved by adding further, reliable citations. Which parts of the article did you mean? I note that other articles use their own authors when decribing their articles of faith. PTtrans (talk) 06:47, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think I was the only one who said it--I think it got tagged during the AfD. At any rate, external references are always better, and many other articles do that; if they don't, they should be improved rather than taken as a standard. I looked at that briefly yesterday but didn't have the time or the energy to do a decent study; I'll get back on it when I can. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:10, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Editor's Barnstar
		Thank you for all your great work over the years. Span (talk) 00:37, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks--that's really nice! Drmies (talk) 14:57, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drmies! Just a note to say that Pilgrim at Tinker Creek, which you were kind enough to review for GAC, is now up at FAC here. The article has much improved since you last looked at it, so if you have the time I'd love to hear what you think. If not, no worries. :) Take care, María (yllosubmarine) 13:37, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Honorsteem again. Thank you. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:05, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like you to take a look at User:MichaelQSchmidt/Take This Lollipop and tell me if you think it's ready for mainspace. To be Frank, once I began the thing practically wrote itself. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:25, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Wow. That's real impressive, MQS. And scary to boot. Drmies (talk) 04:32, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies - Could you please mediate a conflict between Bgwhite and me. It concerns the article Carmen Balcells. We are discussing this at talk in the section "your recent change to the Carmen Balcells article". We agree to abide by your decision. Thanks. --GroveGuy (talk) 22:54, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Whoa. Who put me in charge? I'll have a look, but I can't promise I want to do it. Then again, it might be more fun than laundry. Drmies (talk) 00:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm reading up on policy. In the meantime, perhaps both of you can have a look at this collection of words of wisdom, and each of you can pretend to be the pterodactyl. Drmies (talk) 00:18, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's not a conflict. Just a difference of opinion on the lead paragraph. GroveGuy didn't agree with my suggestion, but was going to do what I requested. I suggested you take another look. You know I'm not right all the time. I was drunk and high I knew you were a writing scholar and fair.
  • Hmmm, for a conflict, we need some name calling and insults. Sorry, I can't insult GroveGuy, they have been nothing but nice, so... Drmies is a hoerejong slet who can kus mijn kont. Bgwhite (talk) 00:33, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• OK, here's what I think. Any stalkers can correct me with the appropriate acronym thrown in. "The most celebrated literary agent in the world of Spanish-language literature" should not be in the lead in the way in which it was found in this edit. Direct quote or not, it is not a neutral presentation given that a. it is the first sentence and b. it is a quote and not just a fact. The peacock tag there was appropriate. Now, as far as I'm concerned, such a phrase may be placed in the lead (I don't see where WP:BLPSTYLE forbids it), but only if it is properly attributed and verified, and if the phrase comes from a notable/reliable source (see the last sentence of Ray Butts EchoSonic, which I think is acceptable).

  I have a few issues with the article and think that it shouldn't have gone to the front page without major cleanup: the writing is choppy and the names are organized in such a way that it seems like just namedropping. Those footnotes look unattractive and are incorrect: there is no entry "Prince of Girona Foundation"; the footnote should have read "Mrs. Carmen Balcells Segala". I wish the references had been templated. And I wish that the lead had been written in a way that actually says what she did and what her influence was, without the half dozen names of authors in it--and yes, with a quote like the one found in the Clarín article to indicate the extent of her influence. I wish SilverSeren had helped out with those aspects of the article.

  GroveGuy--this is really your mother? And Bg, what's the matter with you? Drmies (talk) 03:13, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GroveGuy put the article up for his mother. The article isn't about his mother. Bgwhite (talk) 03:48, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You mentioned a COI. Oh, "slet" is only used for women. Drmies (talk) 03:53, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I originally thought he meant the article was his Mom. I was trying to be funny above, looks like I fell on my face. Bgwhite (talk) 04:26, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. Let's move on. Drmies (talk) 04:37, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, now I understand where you were coming from. I was trying to insult you to create some "conflict" because I didn't see any conflict between Me and GroveGuy. I guess you thought I was directing it towards GroveGuy's mother. I apologize for creating the misunderstanding. Bgwhite (talk) 05:15, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, Bg. I saw a conflict about a tag, that's all, and a nice cartoon about a pterodactyl. BTW, I still wish that article had gone through the wringer more before DYK. Drmies (talk) 15:17, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User has been out of control for days, and nobody's slowing them down [6]. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Cheers, JNW (talk) 04:04, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• That case is not aided by Dennis Brown--I think Ravenswing's note is valid. The AfD is now closed. Does that help for now? I think the ANI thread isn't going to produce much (the longer they get, the less likely admin action is), but I assume you'll keep an eye on the editor. If disruption persists, or if a clear-cut COI case can be made, let's revisit. Sorry, but that's about all I can say right now. Back to retirement, you, and enjoy it. BTW, those remarks were totally stupid, but stupidity isn't yet blockable. Drmies (talk) 05:33, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're great. Thanks and cheers, JNW (talk) 05:43, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I was stupid for engaging there at length. I think it's a quacking COI, defending turf by impugning the motives of other accounts. JNW (talk) 15:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not a big deal, but if you have a minute would you look at the editing of User:Imveracious on this article, the only article he edits. He has a habit of changing the wording of what's written without changing the source cited, which is OK when the change is cosmetic, but not OK when it changes the meaning -- as in the most recent example where he changed that muddy water "could" indicate a leak in the dam, to that it "would" indicate a leak, which, of course, don't mean the same thing. Per his talk page, his reponse is, in essence "I know this to be true," and "You don't know what you're talking about." He probably does know much much more about dams than I, but he still needs to provide a new source if he's going to change what the article says.

On the other hand,I may be making a mountain out of a molehill. I'm out of town, I'm dead tired, and my judgment could well be skewed. I'd appreciate your looking into it, if you can, when you can. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:55, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• What's the source for would/could? I agree that their editing is not productive, and their talk page bears that out as well. I'm going to guess that they have, or claim to have, some primary sources laying around, besides a drawer full of truthiness. I can't get to the ProQuest article. Drmies (talk) 05:27, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I might be able to get you something from ProQuest. What do you need? LadyofShalott 06:00, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, I don't think I need anything, but I was wondering if the conflict (over would/could) was answered in this reference. BMK says the editor is changing the wording of the source, but the article is so confusingly referenced (or unreferenced) that I am not sure what's verified by what. Drmies (talk) 15:20, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, and I can't be as helpful as I thought. I can get you the abstract and full citation, but that's it. I bet you can get that much anyway. LadyofShalott 23:27, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Or you can just block that other editor... Hey, "your" Newt isn't doing very well. I was kind of looking forward to a war with Iran and then Saudi-Arabia. Drmies (talk) 02:33, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Please, do not use that pronoun and his name in conjunction. He ain't my anything. LadyofShalott 16:21, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Ha, he was in Montgomery last night--while Mrs. Drmies and I were doing things he'd probably want to ban. Pleasure is forbidden! And health! Drmies (talk) 16:17, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On 6 March 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Charleston Female Seminary, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the 19th-century American female seminary movement, which aimed to give women educational opportunities, lent its name to a pair of similarly named institutions in Charleston, South Carolina, and Charlestown, Massachusetts? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Charleston Female Seminary.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On 6 March 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Charlestown Female Seminary, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the 19th-century American female seminary movement, which aimed to give women educational opportunities, lent its name to a pair of similarly named institutions in Charleston, South Carolina, and Charlestown, Massachusetts? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On 6 March 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Female seminary, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the 19th-century American female seminary movement, which aimed to give women educational opportunities, lent its name to a pair of similarly named institutions in Charleston, South Carolina, and Charlestown, Massachusetts? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:04, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your intervention at my talk page, I didn't know if reporting him to AIN would be an acceptable thing or not so did not know how to deal with him. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:26, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, you told them to stop posting there, and then I told them again, so that would be a case for WP:AIV, for starters. Next time, though, make it clear on your own talk page with a note, not just in the edit summary, that you don't want their messages. In this case, their edits at that AfD were disruptive enough. Drmies (talk) 22:27, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apocryphal reports of a new particle being discovered, the "Mittrick Newtron". Off to bed before I am tempted to create that hoax! - Sitush (talk) 02:22, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, scrap the Newtron part after tonight, haha. Hey, Trick is telling me I don't have a right to healthcare, and that this healthcare system is the end of freedom. Next thing you know he's going to tell me who I can and cannot have sex with. As a true anti-government person, he'd never do that, though. Drmies (talk) 02:28, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know, Kimmoz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you told about MOS violations, didn't seem to stop it. I've left a note about what exactly must be done to reach MOS for this user's edits, but just keep an eye on them.Jasper Deng (talk) 03:43, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for letting me know. I've upped the ante a bit. Drmies (talk) 03:53, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • On a minor note, would the clock please be removed from the template (since it's indef) and the length changed to "indefinitely"? I'm not doing it myself because I shouldn't edit others' comments.Jasper Deng (talk) 03:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yeah, I didn't fill out that part of the template. I'm leaving the clock, to remind us all, WMF employees, US senators, and peons, of our mortality. Drmies (talk) 04:02, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are so good (read that as I am too lazy/busy/unmotivated) at putting togeather DYKs, how would you like to have a go at this little gem I whipped up this arvo. Unfortunately we just missed the anniversary of the end of the First Gulf War, that would have been a nice day to put it up eh? I am sure there is a beauty of a hook in there, the article is quite anicdotal and (unfortunately) laced with quotes. Whatcha think mate? I've done the hard part haven't I? (plus about 1/3 times I press save it erases my changes and opens edit on the entire page...which is getting quite annoying). I would have asked CoM, he would have loved this one (especially the picture of GHWB), but...what can you do I guess.--kelapstick^(bainuu) 09:21, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also while you are at it can you delete User:Kelapstick/DSTC? Much love, --kelapstick^(bainuu) 09:23, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am also glad that your friendly talk page stalkers come by to fix my shoddy work!--kelapstick^(bainuu) 09:33, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

K, this is interesting. I think we can find and add a little bit more. I have just added some content (Colin Powell's quote can give us a hook), a note of criticism, and an interesting remark on the economics of it (it's always about money: athletes weren't so profitable anymore in the early 90s). Drmies (talk) 15:48, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome Doc, I love the way you were able to work the Beastie Boys into it as well. I'm going through an FAR...not sure if I am going to like it... --kelapstick^(bainuu) 22:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• 108.94.64.243 (talk · contribs)
• TheREALCableGuy (talk · contribs)

Back on February 16, you blocked 108.94.64.243 for "Block evasion: IP used by TheREALCableGuy". Yesterday, March 6, the IP was again blocked, this time for "Vandalism: Block evasion (User:TheREALCableGuy)". The "block evasion" part was corrected to just "vandalism" a moment later. Since you are the admin who linked the IP account (108.94.64.243) and the main account (TheREALCableGuy) together, I am coming to you for advice. Since the IP is vandalizing accounts and TheREALCableGuy admitted that the IP is his and those were his edits, would requesting a block for the main account for vandalism be out of line? If not, I think TheREALCableGuy should be blocked for one month, exactly how long 108.94.64.243 is blocked for.

For the record, User:Rjd0060 was the blocking admin this time around and an SPI was opened (but not by me) regarding the two accounts (which User:Deskana declined about 15 minutes before this writing). - Neutralhomer • Talk • 10:31, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I read the SPI. The CU is right: it is a puzzling request because the CableGuy was not blocked, so there can be no block evasion, so there can be no sock puppetry. Now, the IP is blocked for vandalism and, as you suggest, it stands to reason that the "real" account should be blocked for the same length of time, so that's what I'll do. Thanks Homer, Drmies (talk) 14:50, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okie Dokie, thanks. :) Hopefully he doesn't try and IP hop. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:43, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Drmies; you seem to have granted an unblock request made by the user, but didn't actually unblock their account. --Bmusician 06:54, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks--I appreciate it. I set it straight; let's see if I have to reblock soon. Again, I appreciate the oversight--I guess I get plenty of that. Drmies (talk) 16:02, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. --Bmusician 09:01, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. We'll see how it goes, but I am unlikely to be around much this weekend & so don't be surprised if come Monday I do a big rollback/restore! On a different matter, how about this for a pointless India-related list? - Sitush (talk) 10:31, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, I could say something, but I don't know anything about those castes/affiliations/convictions/tribes/supergroups... Enjoy yourself this weekend. Drmies (talk) 17:01, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Speed reading your reply, I saw "supergroups" ... and though to myself "eh? I've never contributed to Rick Wakeman, Freddie Mercury" etc. Thankfully, I usually read things through at least twice (except my own contributions - meh). To my surprise, at least two Old fogies (see also, here) sort of accepted the viability of punk as an acceptable alternative cut-off point for articles concerning popular culture.I can't hear much, but raw guitar sometimes gets through on (literally) the vibes, whereas twiddlers, even of the Hendrix/Clapton etc variety, do not.

  Keep away from that AfD - it is in any event a no-brainer. Boing has used that great word, "nebulous". Says it all. - Sitush (talk) 01:25, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your patronising comments. Am I now to believe that facts such as award citations are now copyright. Wikipedia will have to shut up shop. Plucas58 (talk) 10:58, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• No it won't, and I have no clue what you're talking about--unless you meant my warning that said "stop committing copyright violations". As for my rewriting of the text you simply copied off the internet, a rewrite by which I saved your article from deletion, you're very welcome! Drmies (talk) 16:13, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please help me with what I need to change on the Skin Industries page to make it comply with the G11 rule. I rewrote the company history to cutout all forms of what was thought of as advertising. Your guidance would be greatly appreciated of what needs to change. Thanks Seanmrivers (talk) 16:57, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I think maybe you should submit it through the Article for Creation process, at WP:AFC. I looked at Google News, but there's not much that appears to count as neutral coverage by reliable sources. Thanks, and good luck. Drmies (talk) 16:59, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since you were the user that deleted my contributions to this new page, maybe you could help me to build a page that will be retained? First, is there a way that I can get back what I had put there? Second, is there a means to temporarily save the content while it is being composed (perhaps this is the sandbox?) Third, what specifically will keep the page from being removed again with code A7?

Dave3ld (talk) 14:56, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• A7 means no credible claim of importance was made. A mere description of the organization is not sufficient to warrant inclusion. The general guidelines for notability are given in WP:GNG; to avoid speedy deletion (in this case, with the A7 criterion) a credible claim must be made that the organization is important--not just that it exists. That an organization fulfills a lofty moral objective, for instance, does not equate to importance. You may work on the content at User:Dave3ld/sandbox, in your own user space--you may also consider submitting it through WP:AFC. Thank you, and good luck. Drmies (talk) 15:20, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Part of my reasoning for creating the entry was that CLAIHR is referenced in at least four existing Wikipedia articles. I don't know if that qualifies as notability, but I think it is a good foundation. I suppose that being a credible reference and being notable are two different things - but I would hope that they are related. Is it best practice to alter footnotes and references from other articles to point to the wiki page, or leave them as is. I notice some of the references refer to an outdated (i.e. dead) URL for the organization (claihr.org versus claihr.ca). Thanks Dave3ld (talk) 15:41, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, that the organization is mentioned (I assume that's what you mean with "referenced") somewhere doesn't mean it's notable in its own right--see WP:GNG for the general guideline. Sure, that's a start, and it's better than nothing, but doesn't mean notability yet. For that you'll need references to reliable sources (not to Wiki articles). Outdated URLs should be updated, if you know what the proper links are. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:47, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drmies, it is not a problem but it is the matter of the WP:Policies and guidelines.I am not an editor to create problems.I need your help,please take a look at this and here. Am I wrong? If this would be ignored, it means this kind of contributors are being encouraged with their practices. What do you suggest about that?.Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 18:23, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Justice, it seems to me that Nolelover has a point: there is nothing happening on the talk page. The other editor claims you followed them around; let them claim that. Nolelover seems to not put any stock in that, which means for right now that nothing will come of it. Besides that, you two are fighting over minor edits in a minor article (on a beautiful woman, by the way), and I just don't see the point in it. That copyvio, that's incredibly minor as well ("firsthand"--that's it?). As an admin, I don't see a need to do anything about their accusations (yet), though I will leave a note on your talk page. It's probably best to leave them alone (by which I'm not saying you're wrong). Lots of other fish in the sea. Drmies (talk) 18:36, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Ok all right, and thanks.Justice007 (talk) 19:04, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • BTW, keep me posted. If he starts dropping final warnings on your talk page again, I'd like to know. Drmies (talk) 19:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		100000 Edits
		Congratulations on reaching 100000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that only 154 editors have been able to accomplish. Keep up the good work!

• Now I feel real old, Bg. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 22:22, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• • Congratulations on 100k+ edits! That really is quite an accomplishment. Thank you for all the hard work you pour into this venture. LadyofShalott 00:11, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I hope you met that milestone in health, all vestiges of flu vanquished. LadyofShalott 04:54, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hmm, yes, well. I still feel it in the mornings. But the girls are healthy and that's what counts. Did you know I have spring break already? There's still penguins in the pool, and I have a week off. How are you doing, Lady? Did you see I jumped in on Sue Gardner's chick lit-writing? Drmies (talk) 05:05, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ugh, I know how those things can linger; I'm glad the girls are well, and you'll soon be so also. I'm doing well, thinking about going back to school. The university here is on spring break already as well - this seems ridiculously early to me, but I hope you have a fun week! Are Sippi and Mrsmies also off this same week, or did the powers that be not manage to coordinate that? I saw on her page your comment about a DYK nom, but haven't looked at it much yet. I'll go do that. LadyofShalott 16:56, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Back to school, yea! You're referring to the school with the ugly dog? No, Mrs. Drmies just pretends to be on spring break, until she gets her real one. Drmies (talk) 02:40, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Not that one... one with a bird. LadyofShalott 03:26, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Eh, you're leaving the South? Don't go! Drmies (talk) 03:32, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
              • Nah. They have a mostly online program with a Georgia cohort. For the bits that aren't online, I only have to go as far as Atlanta. LadyofShalott 03:40, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                • Feel free to come over and use my pool Doc (and family, which of course includes LoS), still summer here, and we are in a heat wave, although it is going to cool down to 33 °C (91 °F) this weekend, is that too cold for you?--kelapstick^(bainuu) 03:56, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at Toddst1's talk page.
Message added 22:03, 9 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.[reply]

Toddst1 (talk) 22:03, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, I'll see if I can help, please do nominate it at T:TDYK! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 01:24, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• That'd be great. I wish I could actually write something for it, rather than just trim what I found elsewhere... Hey, is there an anglicized spelling? Drmies (talk) 02:10, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmmm, I am a bit confused. Write something for what? And a spelling of what? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 04:25, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Write something for the article. As I mentioned, I can't find any English sources. Spelling--is there an alternate spelling for his name? Drmies (talk) 04:48, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments were left at Talk:KTUU-TV following your recent edits. So you don't take it personally, the content which remains amounts to confusing notability with celebrity. There's been a years-long problem with Alaska-related articles being edited to either gratuitously mention Sarah Palin, or to include only mention of Sarah Palin, rather than individuals more applicable/notable to the context though not as "famous." So, all that's left is mention of Palin, plus a directory of current news staff. Like I really need Wikipedia for that.RadioKAOS (talk) 04:19, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry, but I don't understand your point. I removed unencyclopedic and unverified content. I see now that I also removed Palin, who was listed under her maiden name with her married name in parentheses--I didn't know what to think of it. As for your other commentary, I don't get it. Yes, the list of current staff amounts to no more than a directory; I agree, but this is long-standing convention. If you have exciting tidbits to add, please do so, but include proper references. Happy days, Drmies (talk) 04:26, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am sorry about my attitude regarding the issue and I am also aware of the 3RR rule. I am merely protecting the article from vandalism. If you will investigate carefully, the version [to mine] does not conform with the standard and tone of Wikipedia so I revised it. This user is also adding [that are doubtful] and obviously biased so accusing me of disrupting the article is very hurtful. I will tolerate edits as long as it merit and conforms the standard supported by reliable sources and with a neutral point-of-view. -Hollyckuhno -(message) 13:07, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please look at Gerry Gogna‎,I have tagged for speedy deletion?.Justice007 (talk) 15:05, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Alexf already took care of it. Drmies (talk) 02:36, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any ideas on where to get decent sources about a magazine? A long time ago, COM suggested I create an article on Romantic Times, and it is redlinked in several places. I feel fairly certain it must meet our notability standards, but the easy searches don't seem to confirm that - lots of RT's own stuff, publishers using RT's reviews/award nominations to promote their books, and mentions in blogs, but not the kind of stuff we can use. Suggestions??? This seems like a good month to plug that redlink hole - if appropriate sourcing can be found. LadyofShalott 17:14, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Good question. You can always just make it and see where it goes--unless Guillaume finds out and nominates it for a speedy. I don't have big ideas here, but have you tried looking in Google Books? That's often where I go for magazines, journals, and newspapers (but usually older ones, I think). Drmies (talk) 02:35, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks. I know I looked at Google Web and Google Scholar. I might have looked at GBooks at sometime in the past for this topic, but don't remember for certain. I'll try it. LadyofShalott 02:42, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Is this helpful? Oh my goodness, the hits just keep on coming. Sexytime! Drmies (talk) 02:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • May I? Or do you need to beef up your article creation stats? Drmies (talk) 02:46, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I got tired of waiting. Law and Order is a repeat tonight anyway. I think there might be a DYK in it for you... Drmies (talk) 03:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • (ec)I see you've gone ahead and started it. Cool beans! LadyofShalott 03:55, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • After the edit conflict, it wouldn't save for ages, which is why an edit 11 minutes later is marked "ec". LadyofShalott 03:58, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Desert Storm trading cards at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with ((db-g7)), or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 06:12, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. For future reference, should I just delete similar notices if I take care of 'em? (Not that it'll ever happen again....) MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 06:50, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agh, I forgot it again. I'm glad that I seemed to have remembered it for one other nomination. Thank you Mandarax. No, don't remove them: I deserve to be chastised for ongoing crimes against procedure. These notices also serve as a reminder that I'm allzumenschlich and a victim of Alzheimer, it seems. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 13:37, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You got that right. You should be chastised (I will come up with a reason later). Mandarax, once again, you da man. kelapstick^(bainuu) 13:40, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, I try. I noticed that the hook was approved just three hours after I transcluded it. (Unlike my recent hook that sat on the nomination page for two weeks before anyone even looked at it.) MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 21:30, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Never underestimate the drawing power of a trading card with George H. W. Bush on it. Or is it, walk softly and cary an F-117? --kelapstick^(bainuu) 21:55, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, certain nominations attract more editors, for better or for worse. Mandarax's are usually easy to review, though, since they're always clean. Drmies (talk) 22:38, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! And, of course, the same applies to yours. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 08:36, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think 31 sources are sufficient are sufficeint for a claim of international media attention?--kelapstick^(bainuu) 04:11, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement is now a featured article. Thanks for your help on the ANI thread about the article a while back, it all worked out well in the end. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:43, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Mark, that is an enormously impressive piece of work. Congratulations and thank you for the reminder. Drmies (talk) 13:39, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to see what basis there might be for these charges against Dennis Brown and I happened to notice that there's a non-ANI WP:HOUND charge against you as well on Catpowerzzz's talk page. From what I can tell of the policy, you didn't cross the line. And from glancing at most of your other edits on Chris Innis, it seems you mostly deleted puffery and peacockery. But first impressions matter: the very first cut you made[7] looks sloppy, at best. Yes, the link in the cite was (sort of) dead. But a mere two clicks from the 404 point verified that Chris Innis was in fact an ACE member, and must have gone through an election process to become one. I've restored the material, cited more accurately, and with live links, though in an unsatisfactory style, I admit.[8] As for your impression that ACE isn't much of a distinction, well, millions of people have dabbled in film editing, tens of thousands of people have been paid, at one time or another, to do it; but perhaps only as few as 700 (looks like) ever make ACE. In any case, leaving out the ACE credit for a professional (and laureated) film editor makes little sense.

I understand that you must be very busy as an administrator, but isn't it in the spirit (and perhaps according to the letter) of WP:PRESERVE to first try to see if you can revive a dead link (e.g., via archive.org, or by considering that an internal link has gone dead only because the site has been reorganized)? Between the search box and the sidebar navigation at the ACE site, I was able to verify the claim you deleted in about 20 seconds. You can throw out a broken clock for being right only twice a day. But what about throwing out good information with the bad, just because its timestamp was taken from that clock? Maybe Catpowerzzz would have flown into this weird rage no matter what. But few of us ever get back on a good footing after starting off on the wrong foot. Dennis is in my doghouse now, for just that reason. I don't see much of a case of keeping Catpowerzzz around. But (in this connection, at least) I'm seeing a case that both you and Dennis should take a little more care. (In Dennis' case, maybe a lot more.) Yakushima (talk) 07:47, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• If, between the lines, you are accusing me of having goaded Catpower into action by a bad editorial decision, thanks. I stand by my edit summary: it doesn't appear to me as a very worthwhile distinction. There is nothing sloppy about that (and feel free to take that back): it is my opinion, as an editor, that this is not notable enough (even if verified) to warrant a mention. I am not too busy as an administrator to have editorial opinions. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 13:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AGF, as I understand it, requires that you not look "between the lines", but rather directly at the words I wrote. There is a world of difference between "goading" and "carelessness in possibly the worst place, under the circumstances." I've made a good enough case, I believe, for the latter. I said nothing at all like the former. You respond by crossing that world of difference to openly (and sarcastically) speculate that I'm addressing you in bad faith. "Goading"? You said it. I didn't. Not in any form. Except possibly in your imagination ("between the lines"). What does that say about you?

As far as I know, in every screen credit for a film editor in ACE, the letters "ACE" appear after the name. And it's not after every editor's name, in screen credits. If it's not actually an important distinction in the film industry, can you tell me why the industry itself bothers making it?

Retraction? No, I stand by my claim: you didn't check whether the website had content actually supporting the claim cited, even when it was easy to check, and the verification easily found. That's sloppy enough in itself -- never mind failing to understand the significance of ACE (which is not what Catpowerzzz arch phrasing makes it out to be, but not negligible either.)

WP:PRESERVE policy seems very clear on this sort of edit: if there's any reasonable doubt, removal should be followed by copying the information to the Talk page and raising it as an issue. You're tens of thousands of edits beyond my level of experience, and a seasoned admin. If anyone could tell me why that wasn't actually the right course of action in this case, or whether I'm misconstruing WP:PRESERVE, it seems it would be someone like you. What do I get instead? A dismissive AGF vio right off the bat. At best, I thought you were being sloppy. Now I'm wondering if the problem actually is worse: ignorance of that particular policy. Yakushima (talk) 16:37, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my goodness. Yakushima, there isn't time enough left in my life to read all of this, and not enough electrons available to power your continued lengthy missives on my talk page. In other words, feel free to stay away; I'm not interested in your evaluation of my editing. Drmies (talk) 17:03, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A good faith effort at communication is spurned with "tl;dr" and sarcastic hyperbole. OK. Noted. Yakushima (talk) 04:26, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pfff. Now stay away. For real. Drmies (talk) 01:06, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a ref for the death of R.I. Page? I can't find anything on the internet yet, and although I trust you I don't like the idea of reporting someone's death without a source. BabelStone (talk) 14:01, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I wish. It will probably be in the papers Monday or Tuesday, but the source has never been wrong about such things: Bill Schipper, via the ANSAX list. If you think I jumped the gun, feel free to revert me. You know, Page is the kind of guy that's just irreplacable, and given the complete lack of interest in literature, language, and history from all levels (deans, administrations, students) it seems to me we have lost yet another field. Runology will be handled from now on by a couple of websites where you can throw virtual bones. Drmies (talk) 14:09, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you're sure of the source I'll leave it, and keep an eye open next week for mentions in the press. Hopefully we will be able to improve the article when his obits are published. And I know all too well what you mean about the state of modern academia. BabelStone (talk) 14:23, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One thing I never got around to was plumbing the news archives for some basic data on his life and career. I wrote him up quickly, with a reference or two, to make sure that we would have at least something. Another thing that should be done is adding a couple of reviews of his work for these many important books of his. Then again, much of the recognition is found not so much in blogs and newspapers articles, but in the footnotes of scholarly work. The study of Cynewulf's runic signatures, for instance, depends on Page. BTW, additional messages on the listserv don't question the information, but I'll try and confirm. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:31, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did revert it, and came here to ask you what on earth your source was - there were also repeated attempts a couple of days ago to add a death date for Ursula Dronke and I had to tell them no, not without a source, but I'm starting to wonder if we've lost the tradition whereby if The Times didn't note the death of a notable academic or other luminary, someone would jolly well write an obit for them a few days later. Maybe now that The Times is a badly edited tabloid, some other news outlet is doing the honours, but I haven't found anything at the BBC ... so I'd be grateful for either a source or a debunking on both. (Especially the latter.) And a pointer to which source to bookmark. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Read the above, Yngvadottir. I have nothing to offer on Dronke (don't know why you're asking me about that). Drmies (talk) 16:01, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did; if a newspaper covers Page's death, chances are they will also cover Dronke's. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:07, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You asked me "what on earth" my source was--it is described above. Drmies (talk) 16:08, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, we have a semantic problem, possibly because I have a fever and should be in bed. I apologize. I had come here to ask, but of course I saw the answer above. I still let you know because I felt I owed it to you and also because you write that you expect it to be in the papers; I'm asking you to keep an eye out for Dronke in the same papers, because apparently I'm searching the wrong ones. Same university, similar level of academic distinction, purported deaths a couple of days apart; for Dronke an editor claims to have known her (as did I, as a student, but that was a world ago). Of course, as I say, better yet, both are actually still kicking. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:18, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I hope so too. (And thanks for explaining.) Here's a good excuse to go to the Zoo: meet the giants while we can. But those aren't favorable circumstances for nice conversation--any place in England is preferable over the Western Michigan campus and its environs. Do you subscribe to ANSAX-L? Drmies (talk) 16:43, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

--And thanks for the barnstar :-D I went to Kalamazoo one year when I was at MSU, but there was too much History of Catholicism for my taste. Never been on ANSAX, though friends were for a while. I should maybe sub up as a lurker. Yngvadottir (talk) 14:58, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is another editor who has taken exception with me at this my ANI [9] , and since you have been involved since the beginning, your further input might be constructive. Dennis Brown (talk) 16:36, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I wouldn't worry about that. That editor also commented here (above), by the way. Drmies (talk) 16:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Ah, I hadn't been following his contribs. The "Dennis is in my doghouse now" explains a lot. Unlike with Cat, I've basically ignored Yak., until forced at the ANI, where my name in the header. Your above comment about me had gone unnoticed, as I wasn't informed, which I assume was accidental. I had already replied to Ravenwing on his talk page that he was absolutely correct, and I needed to be less verbose, something I have kept in mind during the current ANI. I still don't like the formal false accusations by Yak., and like with Cat., I expect them to come back, if left without comment. Thanks. Dennis Brown (talk) 17:41, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 March 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ladies Memorial Association, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that after the American Civil War ended, Ladies' Memorial Associations sprang up all over the South to bury Johnny Reb, build monuments (example pictured) in honor of Confederate soldiers, and propagate the Lost Cause? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ladies Memorial Association.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 21:10, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

• Wow--I think we've reached an all-time low. No one cares about Johnny Reb anymore. Drmies (talk) 21:45, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Too bad - it's a nice little article. LadyofShalott 23:53, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's what I thought... Drmies (talk) 16:18, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I see we both commented in this ANI discussion but it has since been archived without being resolved. As an admin, can you please advise on the standard procedure here for continuing unresolved archived ANI discussions? Thank you. ClaretAsh 01:47, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry, but I don't know how to do that. I know you can unarchive things, and things are done with the timestamp, but I don't know how to--and I don't think it requires admin powers to do that. Any of the friendly talk page stalkers? If you figure out how to do it, you have my blessing: I am still hoping that there will be a bit more commentary on that editor's unacceptable behavior. Drmies (talk) 01:51, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for replying. I've taken the blindingly obvious course of action and asked at ANI. Don't know why I didn't think of it earlier. ClaretAsh 02:08, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I saw. I hope something comes out of it. Drmies (talk) 02:10, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That was fun :-) Sue Gardner (talk) 02:02, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes it was! And amazing that we didn't actually conflict (at least I didn't). Our timing is perfect, Sue. Drmies (talk) 02:05, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm back in NYC and I have a request of you, if you're willing. I just wrote the stubby article above, but I noticed when I started that an article with that name had been deleted by an admin a couple of weeks ago, as not showing notability. I think I have that covered, but I'd like to take a look at the deleted version of the article to see if there's anything in it I can use. Unfortunately, I forgot to note the name of the admin who deleted it, or I would ask them to do it -- do you think you could userfy the deleted version for me? I'll mark it for deletion after I skim out whatever is usable. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:06, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... if you're actually going to use material from it, it would be better (in terms of GFDL) to restore the previously deleted version. LadyofShalott 04:16, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done and I hope neither of you mind my jumping in. LadyofShalott 04:21, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not me, most certainly -- and thanks! Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:44, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to both. Welcome back to 1212, BMK. You toured the Midwest, off-off-off-Broadway? Drmies (talk) 14:17, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, just a week in Philly with a small show. Much nicer town than I remember it being (I was last there in 1995, I believe). Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:48, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think you would like Fat: An Appreciation of a Misunderstood Ingredient, with Recipes...aside from the awesomeness that it sounds like, it is a cook book with an exceptionally long name.--kelapstick^(bainuu) 00:03, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also could I trouble you to keep an eye on its DYK nomination? I will likely be active over the next 6 days, I don't think anything will come up, but if it does, can you have a look? I'll by you a beer at the Perth meetup on Saturday, you are coming, aren't you?.--kelapstick^(bainuu) 06:31, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to see you there. No doubt we'll triple the population overnight. Drmies (talk) 15:14, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm withdrawing from watching this article, as Imveracious doesn't seem to get that he needs to support his interpretation of events with a specific source rather than a general text, since it concerns the state of mind of the dam keeper in calling Mulholland to the dam, and not the general state of knowledge about dams today. (See my last comment on his talk page.) He ignores my requests for citations from WP:RSs and simply reverts me. This is a situation that can only lead to edit-warring, and I've gone much too far in that direction already, so I don't see that I have any other choice but to back off and leave the article. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:45, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I saw you there yesterday or so, but he hadn't edited in a couple of days. I'll see if there's anything I can do, though I doubt it. Drmies (talk) 00:57, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Probably not, but, still, what he's doing is essentially OR, since he's intrepreting the state of mind and actions of a historical character without supporting it with a source, relying instead on his own knowledge and general citations about dam engineering. The guy really doesn't get it at all. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:28, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, you can always consider a note at WP:ORN, or you can drop a line to User:AndyTheGrump, who's active at that board and is known as a certified hard-ass. More eyes on such articles is always a good thing, lest we're wrong or are perceived as owning the article. Drmies (talk) 15:06, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks, good idea, which I'll mull over. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:43, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((You've got mail)) or ((ygm)) template.

Doc2234 (talk) 01:04, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi you blocked this account as a sock of B.vikram.b (talk · contribs) (I suppose, correct me if I am wrong). Does he deserve talk page access? — Abhishek  ^Talk 18:29, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Sure--he deserves an unblock request, yes. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 18:35, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm sure he deserves an unblock request, but he seems to be removing the block notices which aren't supposed to be right? — Abhishek  ^Talk 18:38, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks--good point. Drmies (talk) 18:42, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think Thomas Jouannet has to be the most gaudiest page I've ever seen. I'm about to clean it up, but I have a feeling this won't be easy. Bgwhite (talk) 19:38, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Geez! Mind you, it would take no more than 10 minutes to tidy. Or is that just because I've had so much practice with Indian stuff? - Sitush (talk) 19:40, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I can do that in 2. I've practiced on Indian stuff, heavy metal bands, architectural firms, and biographies of CEOs. Nice find, Bg. Drmies (talk) 19:42, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Bg, see Template:Thomas Jouannet. Drmies (talk) 19:52, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wow. I've never seen anything quite like that on here... lots of junk, but not quite like that. LadyofShalott 20:23, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I almost spewed my water all over my LCD upon viewing that. Wheeeeee! That's worse than the flashiest userpage I've ever seen! Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:28, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• My goodness, "gaudy" hardly covers it! Good work on the cleanup. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:34, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, it was bad enough, but couldn't someone get a better photo? Calabe1992 21:25, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, which vandal removed the gif, which is easily the coolest image we've ever had here? Drmies (talk) 21:39, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Still, better than all this would have been if someone added a cleanup tag and wrote that it was because the article was ugly. Calabe1992 21:43, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, tagging should never be considered a better option than fixing. Tagging just leaves the real work for someone else to do. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:47, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Drmies, since you're such a fan of the gif, you'll like the creator's demo page much better. Regarding the above comment regarding the cleanup tag, I was clearly joking. Don't go beans on me now. Calabe1992 21:49, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I guess I'm sensitive about editors who appear to think that slapping tags on articles is a substitute for actually improving them. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:04, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had to laugh about the comments of the Indian stuff and biographies of CEO's... it is so true. It would take me longer than 2 minutes, so Drmies would beat me. It takes me over two minutes just to decipher what was written. Bgwhite (talk) 22:03, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That user page needs to be nominated for deletion. Drmies (talk) 22:51, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On 13 March 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Desert Storm trading cards, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a set of trading cards with themes and people from Operation Desert Storm was criticized for commercializing and trivializing the war? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Desert Storm trading cards.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 22:43, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Aside from "run-on", do you know of a specific name of the phenomenon where, when speaking, one runs two sentences together, with the end of one becoming the beginning of the other? Example: "You want to look for J Keene, would be the call number." J Keene ends the first thought and starts the second, related thought. LadyofShalott 23:23, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• No. I've been perusing List of linguistic example sentences and am looking at Garden path sentence, but that's not exactly it. Maybe kwami knows? Or Ottava Rima, whose PO Box is on Wikipedia Review? Drmies (talk) 00:10, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's sort of like a portmanteau, but expanded. That list of linguistic example sentences is interesting though. LadyofShalott 00:57, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

...your work cleaning the stables is nothing short of inspiring. You always say what I'm thinking, often more colourfully, tactfully, and succinctly than I could possibly hope to do myself. Kudos (and a tip of my glass) to you! --Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 00:33, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Oh, well, thank you! I'm taking some advice from a couple of weeks ago to heart, that we turn down the drama a bit by closing things that shouldn't be there, for instance. I'm not the only one doing it, fortunately. I have to say though, ANI is getting really boring. Anyway, it's nice to hear this--thanks! Drmies (talk) 01:55, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think I was the one who requested it to be semiprotected again because the vandalism never seems to let up when it's not protected. I can't believe what you said about Maddie. :( Even if you have a point that's still a harsh thing to say. I think Nia came really close to getting a spot on that trio but Holly had to go and make a poor decision that cost her daughter dearly. If Nia didn't miss a day and a half of rehearsals I don't think she would have froze on stage. When Holly said, "I'm never stepping foot inside this studio again" I actually thought that was going to be the last time we saw them. For An Angel (talk) 04:22, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry if I offended you or Maddie. I was mad. Keep in mind, it's not Maddie who put a pound of make-up on her face. I would have figured that Nia wouldn't have been affected in her solo performance--I still find it odd. After all, she's in show business. Really, a mom yelling at a kid, "Don't psych yourself out"--that's the acme of silliness evil. Drmies (talk) 13:58, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

reviewing eyes
Thank you for reviewing in the Contributor copyright investigations/PumpkinSky, you did a lot to clarify! Paraphrasing (I hope not too closely): If everybody who reads this looked at one more article it could be over today. - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (18 August 2010)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:21, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were the 32nd recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style. Thank you for supporting the missed photographer again. I put "Letting go of the past" on top of my talk ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:41, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]