User talk:Drmies

That's right y'all.

Novels etc.

Hey Drmies - and thank you for the update. You're right about the complications of North and South, but things start moving fairly quickly when you get to the end. Did I mention that I finally finished my latest reading of it? A lot more people die off, but you won't miss them much (and there's one whom I really didn't miss at all), but it's worth ploughing on. I've got the Mabinogion on my shelf but haven't started yet. I got detoured into the (relatively) new translations of Kafka: The Trial and The Castle, which I'm working through now. I think these are books that seem a lot better in one's twenties and thirties than afterwards; the repetitions and predictability become more obvious.

I promise not to urge Sir Walter Scott on you, though I keep meaning to go back to him. Still, modern Scottish writing can be a lot of fun. Neil M. Gunn ought to be better-known outside Scotland; The Silver Darlings is well worth a read, and The Drinking Well is terrific. Can't the same of the very popular Lewis Grassic Gibbon. And please don't offer me a taste of haggis. Once was enough.

Probably you're deep in the semester, as I am. BTW, I once heard Paul de Man give a lecture (one of the ones that became a famous essay, the one with the pun about "Archie Debunker"). It was a very strange experience, but that's a story for another post. - Macspaunday (talk) 17:18, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

• Quick note cause I'm at a party: I got Scott covered, haha. Thanks. Later! Drmies (talk) 02:42, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
• Alright Macspaunday, that novel moved toward its conclusion very quickly. There should have been a volume 3, with a trip to Spain, a wedding, a honeymoon (no! the honeymoon is the trip to Spain!), a scene or two at a cemetery, a dinner party with Thornton and Margaret and Higgins... So who didn't you miss? Mr. Bell? Haha, speaking of reading then and now, have you ever read Koestler's Darkness at Noon? I found it actually held up pretty good thirty years after... Anyway, thanks for the Gaskell suggestion. I am glad I read those books. I will have forgotten them soon (my memory...), and then I will get to read them again in a few years. Drmies (talk) 14:36, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Split.

• "In December 1944 Koestler travelled to Palestine [...] There he had a clandestine meeting with Menachem Begin, the head of the Irgun terrorist organisation, who was wanted by the British and had a 500-pound bounty on his head." Traveller steps into a railway carriage and discovers a man with a large toad squatting on his head. "Blimey mate! What's that?" "I don't know, it started off as a wart on my bum." Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 16:30, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

• I knew you would be the first to respond; you did not disappoint. Drmies (talk) 17:36, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

• Once upon a time -- rather recently, actually -- I was sure that I completely understood all Europeans! Now I am lost again. MPS1992 (talk) 21:20, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

• Alright Macspaunday--in the meantime I read Spring Came On Forever, which I came up on by chance--I was at a stranger's house, and their book case must have been inherited from a parent, so I asked to borrow a book. As it turns out there was another person at the party who, like me, started top left and had the intention of reading the whole wall; I'll skip the Dean Koontz, though. Anyway, turned out to be a pretty decent novel, a tearjerker in places. Next up is Bruno Schulz, suggested to me by another Wikipedian. And all that so I don't have to continue reading De Man, I'm sad to say. Drmies (talk) 15:37, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Quick question and then some

If I'm in a dispute resolution forum like AE, and I mention someone (not in a flattering way), and accordingly ping that person, is there any reason why that would be inadequate notification? Thanks.Anythingyouwant (talk) 20:39, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Turning off pings is an option which many people use. MPS1992 (talk) 21:17, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

• Well, if you're filing a complaint against them you should notify them properly. Pinging is not generally considered to be a proper notification. Drmies (talk) 22:37, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

All good to know, thank you.Anythingyouwant (talk) 03:22, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

You were talking about that "under the bus" comment by Mr X, I suppose? I saw that in passing when I was reading over the request. I didn't read your entire set of comments, but IIRC you mentioned them but didn't really charge them with anything, so I think that their response was unwarranted. I talk bad about people behind their back all the time--it's much more fun that way. Drmies (talk) 03:41, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

I think it was Alice Roosevelt Longworth who said something like, "If you don't have anything nice to say about someone, don't say anything at all to me --- above a whisper."🍿Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:08, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

You'll consider my response I presume.Anythingyouwant (talk) 03:09, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

• I already did. Sorry, Anything, but I really don't see your point, nor do I understand why you let it get this far. Fighting over "rape" was worth it, as I think I indicated on the talk page as well, but this wasn't. Drmies (talk) 03:14, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

  I edited and lengthened my response at AE, so I'll just repeat it here in case you missed the lengthened version: "I stand by what I said too. It's like putting in the lead of your BLP that you're a convicted criminal because you once committed a slight misdemeanor. Technically correct but grossly and unnecessarily misleading. Got it now? People see 'sexual assault' and very often think 'rape'."Anythingyouwant (talk) 03:31, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

• I saw, and I got it, but I don't believe that. Drmies (talk) 03:34, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

• Believe it.Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:05, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

• The number of sources that say "sexual assault" is overwhelming ([1], [2], [3], [4], etc.) and you're clutching at straws with the argument that "sexual assault" makes people think rape (unjustly) just because it's a broad term. Mind you, some of the things that are being described aren't kissing at all. Drmies (talk) 04:20, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

• The number is overwhelming, and my willingness to put "sexual assault" into the lead is overwhelming as long as we indicate what we mean by it.Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:33, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

You're either misunderstanding, Drmies, or incorrect for some other reason. "While sexual assault is usually seen as rape, state statutes generally include any unwanted sexual contact...." ‪Paludi, Michele. Campus Action Against Sexual Assault, p. 56 (‬ABC-CLIO, 2016) (actually a chapter by others in that book). No one here has offered any evidence suggesting that "sexual assault" is not usually seen as rape. And even if it were not usually seen as rape, it is always seen as possibly rape. I expected more of you, doctor.Anythingyouwant (talk) 15:08, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Anything, WP is not like real-life lawyering, in which you may feel that you have a duty to your client to try out even the most far-fetched and illogical theories just in case they advance the client's cause. Even if you, personally, were confused about the difference between assault and rape, and despite the fact that any of us could dig up some tenuous interpretation of statutory language to confuse the issue, you know that WP must reflect how the topic is discussed in Reliable Sources -- sources, btw, that fully understand the legal issues and the importance of clear language in their reporting. SPECIFICO talk 15:25, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

As you know, virtually all the reliable sources that discuss these things as "sexual assault" allegations specify what kind of sexual assault allegations. You (and unfortunately Drmies) have supported excluding the latter information from the lead, which is really not just cherry-picking, but fraudulent and slanderous and partisan cherry-picking that distorts what the reliable sources say, in my opinion. You might as well write anything whatsoever in a BLP, and then claim that every letter you used was also used in a reliable source about the same person.Anythingyouwant (talk) 16:03, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

As you know, the article text makes clear exactly what Trump is alleged to have done, so I think whitewashing the lede is kind of pointless to begin with. I forget for the moment whether the article relates in detail Trump's boast about pussy-grabbing and non-consesual kissing, but at any rate the article text does relate clearly what RS say and mean wrt assault (per my remark above). Now, unlike in a court of law -- where it's often possible for attorneys or witnesses to get away with lies, and where it's sometimes possible to confuse tired, distracted, or ignorant jurors, WP is inhabited by the best and the brightest! Here we have editors skilled in applying policy and insisting on Verification. SPECIFICO talk 16:36, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

You ought to know very well that I am not trying to whitewash anything. And you also know very well that WP:LEAD says "The lead is the first part of the article that most people will read. For many, it may be the only section that they read....The lead should stand on its own as a concise overview of the article's topic."[5]. SPECIFICO, I don't find it useful to speak with you further about this, because I don't think you know how to listen.Anythingyouwant (talk) 16:46, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

• Anythingyouwant, please don't make me a party in your edit war, and please don't speak condescendingly. Perhaps you expected more of me--well, I suppose those who agreed with me at the AE request expected more from you, a seasoned editor. As for the semantics, well, "it is always seen as possibly rape": on the other hand, "rape" doesn't always mean what you suggest it means. Just ask the lock. Drmies (talk) 16:57, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

• Your opposition to sanctions for explicitly and also suggestively writing that Trump is accused of rape has absolutely nothing to do with the extremely remote possibility that any reader will understand the word "rape" to mean a seizure having nothing to do with sexual intercourse. Right? (And I haughtily deny any condescension!)Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:11, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

• I didn't oppose any "suggestive" writing, as far as I know. Sorry, but the point has been argued to death now. I understand you don't want to accept it. Drmies (talk) 17:14, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

• You oppose sanctions for suggesting allegations of rape in the lead, and instead you support sanctions for removing that suggestion from the lead. And you cite some trivial obsolete definition of the word "rape". No, I don't accept blatant politically-motivated propaganda in Wikipedia articles. Good day (and week and year).Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:25, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

• I'm scratching my head, wondering what you are trying to achieve here. Are you pestering those who agreed with me also? Or am I that special to you? Do you think your continued commenting (and that is a euphemism) will make me change my mind? Maybe being even more condescending might be even more effective? Do you do this every time you're on the losing end of an argument? Does it ever work? Drmies (talk) 19:43, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Maybe she thinks you can be persuaded to address some major concerns meaningfully, as admin conditions require, namely:

• Most sources list the primary definition of of "sexual assault" as rape, i.e. penetrative, which is not the case here
• None of the cited sources use "sexual assault" without qualifying it, whereas the text she removed from the article did
• The filer of the complaint violated an arbitration remedy to insert the removed text, which you refuse to address despite specific and repeated requests

It gives the impression you're more interested in editors' political leanings than their actions, which one hopes you'd be eager to correct. James J. Lambden (talk) 20:19, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

And your attempt is even worse. Drmies (talk) 20:27, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

What Lambden said. Plus:

• Are you pestering those who agreed with me also?
  • No.
• Or am I that special to you?
  • Yes, I have had high regard for you. Plus you're leading the way in this thing. Plus you once told me it's fine to bug decision-makers at their user talk pages.
• Do you think your continued commenting (and that is a euphemism) will make me change my mind?
  • At first I did. Now I don't.
• Maybe being even more condescending might be even more effective?
  • I already haughtily denied that.
• Do you do this every time you're on the losing end of an argument?
  • Nope.
• Does it ever work?
  • Yes, it gives me the satisfaction of making sure I did everything possible to be as clear as possible. Just like it gives me satisfaction to say that the bird of paradise should fly up your nose.  :-)Anythingyouwant (talk) 20:35, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

@Anything and James J. Lambden. You are wasting time here. This is very simple. (1) Please do not violate revert rules on any pages. Period. (2) If you want to refer to a policy, such as WP:BLP, you should really read and understand that policy. (3) Do not bring unjustified complaints about other users to WP:AE only to withdraw them. (4) Do not do WP:Forum shopping. (5) WP:Dead horse. My very best wishes (talk) 02:49, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

D+H article deletion

Hi! I will start by disclaiming that I'm an intern (paid) working for D+H's PR firm, Kaiser Lachance Communications. They recently tried to update their Wikipedia page, but failed to meet community standards and were nominated for deletion, which you completed (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/D%2BH). I've been working with them to identify ways to improve the article, remove biased or promotional language and add more information on the company's notability, including more news sources rather than press releases. Would you be willing to discuss reopening the article or reviewing the new one I have drafted to see if it meets Wikipedia's standards? Thanks! M.stanoeva (talk) 21:41, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

• Paid? Benefits too? I hope so! Well, the idea is that an AfD discussion doesn't just look at the article in the current state, but at the topic. "Delete" supposedly means that in this case the firm isn't notable, not that the article wasn't good enough. That's the theory at least. But you know what, CorporateM owes me a small favor since I just did him a good turn (well, he suggested I do Wikipedia a good turn), and he knows COI editing better than most people, being on the other side; perhaps he has some good advice for you. Drmies (talk) 22:40, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Their website says the company has 5,500 employees, $1.5 billion in annual revenues, and 150 years in business. As Drmies implies, often editors say something is "not notable" because it is the only criteria for deleting articles technically, but really the reason is that there is almost nothing in the article worth keeping for an encyclopedia. Because the article has been deleted previously, there is a strong presumption against you. I would start out at the position that AfC really should start at, which is determining if the company qualifies for an article at all. As a rule of thumb, you need two national sources (books, national press, etc.), where the company is the subject of the article and covered in-depth. These shouldn't be short blurbs, mentions, quotes, etc. but biographical profiles that talk about what the company is famous for, their history, and so on. In most cases, no such sources exist at all and companies spin a lot of cycles trying to create an article that meets Wikipedia's standards, whereas in reality the topic itself is forbidden from the site. CorporateM (Talk) 12:31, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

PR firms really should have a Wikipedia manual thrown at them first before they even contemplate entering the fray here. On second thought, they should just stick to Talk pages. Karst (talk) 13:07, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Benefits? I wish. Thanks for the info Drmies and CorporateM. Will let the client know and see if they can meet those criteria. M.stanoeva (talk) 13:17, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

• Here are two articles about D+H that appeared in two of Canada's national newspapers: http://business.financialpost.com/news/fp-street/investors-buy-into-davis-hendersons-transformational-deal http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/investment-ideas/cheque-please-a-canadian-play-on-the-us-recovery/article16420184/, as well as an article from Bloomberg: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-30/dh-to-buy-financial-software-maker-fundtech-for-1-25-billion. Would these demonstrate notability? M.stanoeva (talk) 21:17, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

• @M.stanoeva: in my opinion, that looks very promising, especially the first one you link. User:CorporateM may be able to give a more experienced evaluation. MPS1992 (talk) 17:07, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

• @Drmies: Sorry to bother again, Drmies. Just wondering what you would advise based on the articles I posted above. M.stanoeva (talk) 19:25, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

• M.stanoeva, I think you got three solid sources there, much more than trivial mentions. Well done. I hope you fare well in your internship. Drmies (talk) 02:59, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

• Drmies Great, thanks for the feedback. Would you suggest I start building a new page based on that in drafts and have an editor look it over, or should I try to get the old one up again and update that? M.stanoeva (talk) 13:18, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Well

It seems some blue-footed booby dropped off a major social media site. LadyofShalott 04:57, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Is this a cryptic crossword? Because I'm not very good at them. How many letters? And what's the first letter? Softlavender (talk) 06:09, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Yeah. Longish story. The little titmouse only tweets privately now. Drmies (talk) 14:20, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

OK. Sorry (as I can only imagine something unpleasant led to it). LadyofShalott 06:01, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Help

How would you suggest a helpful way of getting that image down? The user who uploaded it has been blocked and banned not long after they uploaded it, for editing and vandalizing. That image was not taken here and I don't see how it can stay without a reliable source. I'm clueless about the whole wikipedia thing TBH, so sorry if I am doing this wrong. Undetermined21 (talk) 15:09, 18 October 2016 (UTC) undetermined21

• OK, this is a start. Thanks.

  First of all, the image (File:Mississippi White Knights in Poplarville.jpg) is still with "us", on Wikipedia--it was flagged to be moved to Commons and that would complicate everything. I removed that suggestion so we can keep it local, for now. Second, you (plural--also Anonymous79261 and that editor with two different IPv6 addresses--I sure hope y'all are not the same person) need to clearly indicate what the problem is. That it's "not representative" may well be true but it's not an argument for deletion. I have the feeling that y'all are concerned with Poplarville's public image, or perhaps with the public image of someone in the photo (the white dude without the mask?), but that in itself is also not a valid reason for deletion--at least not for us. Yes, I know that user is blocked (talk page watchers, we're talking about User:God Save the South, a sock of User:Confederate till Death--you can't make this shit up), but that also doesn't mean the image is somehow invalid.

  Now, if you're suggesting that somehow this was not in the place in which the uploader said it was, that's a different thing--but I don't see how we would have a reason to not believe it was where they said it was. So you really need to formulate a good reason for deletion. But this is also where my knowledge has run its course, and I'll call in an expert: Crisco 1492, what do you make of this? Drmies (talk) 16:01, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

@Undetermined21: I did some searching and I'm afraid that statue in the background, with the historic marker next to it, looks an awful lot like the Pearl River County Courthouse. But it does seem unfair that that's the first Google image result I get when I search for Poplarville, Mississippi, and that they are using it in their faked-up infobox. The solution I would suggest is, get out in the streets in Poplarville, take a bunch of nice photos of the place, upload them to Commons, and create a category there for Poplarville. Then make an external link in the article to that category, and insert a representative photo—maybe of the courthouse, I don't know the place so I can't really make a suggestion—in the infobox of the article, above the locator map. That should cause Google eventually to use that image in their box. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:42, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Y--that's exciting. Road trip! Drmies (talk) 16:44, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

I didn't find anything on Flickr that had the proper license, but I don't know Flickr that well. Drmies (talk) 16:48, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

I've done the steps that I can do from here: I've created the category on Commons, populated it with the two pictures Commons has, and put the courthouse one in the article infobox. Over to the locals now. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:55, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. It will be a while before I go to MS again. Drmies (talk) 16:56, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank y'all. It definitely has everything to do with the image of Poplarville, so any help appreciated. Drmies I edited once without an ID then made an ID last night, so anonymous wasn't me, my IP showed up on the first one. Is there anyway making an edit stating Poplarville isn't affiliated with the KKK, they can hold rallies anywhere, legally. This town is so small you know when someone flushes the toilet, not joking. As for the guy without the mask don't know him, we know everyone. I'm going to do my best with what is suggested for adding pics, learn as I go. Poplarville has Pearl River Community College, Blueberry Jubilee pics, and street pics already on google if anyone can help me with those. I can verify them. If any of y'all decide to make a road trip to Poplarville it is a nice town and everyone is friendly, not too much to do but eat,and local school sports, have some festivals here and there the big one is the blueberry jubilee in June, lol. FYI I may have done this twice, don't see my first one. sorry. Undetermined21 (talk) 17:46, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi All. Just got word of this from Drmies . I teach Writing with Wikipedia at the University of Mississippi. I will ask my students and colleagues to see if we can get some more representative images of Poplarville in to the Commons. Bob Cummings (talk) 19:12, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

• Hmm, Undetermined, that Klan rally in 2007 was a pretty big deal, apparently--according to the papers/internet ([6]). We can't wish that away anymore than we can wish racism out of the south in the first place; I'm sure Bob Cummings knows about this too, and he has probably read as many freshman papers as I have involving the Klan and the Rebel Flag. Noteworthy how "Latin immigration" was one of the focal points of that rally; it goes to show that the Klan doesn't discriminate in discriminating. On the bright side, that crowd was pretty well behaved when these masked clowns got their moment in the spotlight--despite the N-word provocations. Haha, black folk in the audience are just ridiculing the guy. Out of evil good will come forth, maybe. Drmies (talk) 19:39, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

• Perhaps Poplarville could become a tourism destination for anti-racist clowns. With a yearly clownfest organized in co-operation with the blueberry jubilee? MPS1992 (talk) 19:47, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

That video 100% without a doubt was NOT poplarville. The Klan can host a Rally ANYWHERE, doesn't mean the residents condone it. No wonder it is so hard to get a reliable source anywhere these days. Undetermined21 (talk) 20:01, 18 October 2016 (UTC) Look at the arch door.

Oh, you're sure about that? I didn't look so carefully for that--I was more interested in how the crowd responded. With remarkable calm! I really enjoyed seeing that, esp. since I know a bit about Mississippi, having married into it. Drmies (talk) 03:23, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Frankly, if we don't foresee using this image in an actual encyclopedia article, we should delete it. What potential article does anyone see using this for? WP:UNDUE would argue against having it in the Poplarville, Mississippi article, and the Klan article has enough photos that I can't see adding this one. This was a typical klan rally, it's not like this rally is going to get an article. We aren't Commons; if there's no potential encyclopedic use, we shouldn't host it. However, this would require a deletion discussion which seems like a lot of work.

But lucky us: Doesn't WP:CSD#G5 apply? He created the file while indef blocked. Easy-peasy.

If nobody buys that argument (which I think is the best way to handle it), at the very least, we could rename it from File:Mississippi White Knights in Poplarville.jpg to File:Mississippi White Knights rally.jpg, which might help with the Google "infobox" problem.

Normally, I'd say problems like this are Google problems not Wikipedia problems. But since it's Google's "infobox" image because it's on Wikipedia, and we're hosting an image that some troll uploaded that is frankly never going to be used in an encyclopedia article, I'd say it's a Wikipedia problem too. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:09, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

• Floq, I hadn't even thought about that--I was probably stuck in the Commons way of thinking, where "possible encyclopedic use" is NEVER a concern. But that's how it is proposed for deletion now, I believe. Sure, renaming it is valid, and of course putting it in the Poplarville article would be a ridiculous act--but as a Klan photo I can see its use. (I don't know how much of those there are; I haven't looked for them and I aim to keep it that way.) Now, the deletion discussion is going on and I certainly don't mind applying IAR here if it doesn't get deleted. One more thing, though: if it's moved to Commons, would it still show up in the same way in that Google box? I just don't know those things. Thanks for weighing in, Drmies (talk) 03:23, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

• Funny photo! Mr Gumby, Norman Bates, and two boneheads wearing niqabs and burqas. The rest of them look like some weird Rainbow Nation. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 06:14, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

• Sorry, I've only logged on. That looks like a heck of a pickle. I am not sure "unencyclopedic" would apply to this, especially if 1) the location is correctly identified, and 2) the rally had coverage. Yes, it could perhaps be anywhere, but that's not much of an argument. The fact that this image shows up in the Google "infobox" is concerning. I do hope replacing it reduces the image's prominence. I agree that it would be better for us to get many more representative images of Poplarville.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 06:32, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

It's not appearing in the Google infobox any more, though it does still come up first for me in image search. I'm afraid I've put it to use elsewhere in the encyclopedia; I think that other than getting us other photos of Poplarville, what's needed now is to rename it. Undetermined21 has left a nice thankyou note on their user talk, indicating that many of the folks there joined in to try to fix this; I think that's great and I hope we get to keep them all as editors. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Dutch

Hi. You're Dutch? Debresser (talk) 15:50, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

• Used to be. If it ain't Dutch, it ain't much. Drmies (talk) 15:52, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Hahah - dank u JarrahTree 16:06, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

The Netherlands has strict rules on its nationality. Which reminds me, I have to renew my passport next year. Karst (talk) 16:31, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Oeps--thanks for the reminder. Drmies (talk) 16:56, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Ow goodie. November this year. Time to travel to the other side of the country... The Banner talk 08:26, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Ah yes. A trip down to Merrion Road. Enjoy!. Karst (talk) 14:32, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Well, nice to meet you then. Debresser (talk) 00:13, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

You might want to put {{User Dutch}} on your userpage. Debresser (talk) 00:17, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

• “if you believe you are a citizen of the world, you are a citizen of nowhere." A dog-whistle quote from Theresa May, eejit-in-chief of the shrinking island of Perfidious Albion. As we have gender-neutral, maybe we should have ethnicity-neutral. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 04:01, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Why in the world would a person want to belie their gender, ethnicity, faith or whatever? It is part of what makes us who we are. Debresser (talk) 04:14, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

• Erhard Milch. Crimean Karaites. etc. etc. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:04, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

I understand there is also Jews in Nazi Germany, but regularly, I mean. Debresser (talk) 12:50, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Especially after reading Peter Brown's The Myth of Nations I'm kind of done with nationhood and citizenship. Sure, it makes us--in part--what we are, but there is so much more. I have edited Danilo Kiš, for instance, with the express purpose of leaving out "nationhood" or citizenship because a. it's really quite complicated in his case and b. what was more important for his biography is the language that was his home. For me, English is my home more than Dutch is; I don't like it, necessarily, but it's the way it is. Drmies (talk) 15:34, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

• My ethnic group has the words "whilst" and "amongst" in its lexicon Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 16:12, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

  Yeah we still haven't beaten that out of y'all, have we. Drmies (talk) 16:40, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

I've been half of one kind and half of another kind all my life, in both language and nationality, and still don't really know what I am... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 16:50, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

I read and write in English more than I do in Dutch too, and I left Holland more than half a lifetime ago. But it still is a defining part of me. Debresser (talk) 17:10, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

On identity politics and this wonderful kaleidoscopic world, I'll just put this link here: "I wanted to be bigger than Bill Gates — but I fell in love with the blues". And note that our coverage of the Bay Area blues scene is woeful. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:43, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

muddiness and clarity

Certainly not up to summary level of justice, or even capital offence case construction, more of a a suspicion of widespread misuse -[7] I hope it might go to the core of the issues, massive parent/child cat combination creating a system of complicated category issues - by no means the main culprit on wp en, but lets not go down that road JarrahTree 03:37, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

I was quite dissappointed my favourite category/sort whizzes seem to be absent for some time - I am sure if they had been active they would have some interesting things to say. I do hope you are able to understand the issue now, as I do value your opinion, and the problem with so many eds they seem to have no appreciation of how confused category work can stuff things up, the Indonesian project has the legacy of something similar - we might never get rid of the problem once it has been created. JarrahTree 03:50, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

wow that was a quick draw, I didnt even have my holster in the same room... cheers JarrahTree 03:18, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of EuroMayDay

The article EuroMayDay has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article fails WP:N and has zero references (WP:V). Based on some research, it looks like a defunct holiday that was never really notable in distinction from May day. I can't find any evidence that this has been celebrated since 2014.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

User:Drmies, I recognized your name in the edit history of this page and thought you might like to provide some input on the PROD. AlexEng^(TALK) 03:35, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

• Haha, thanks for checking. I really only have one comment: "PROD2". Drmies (talk) 17:18, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

tiny, quotidian triumphs

De Avonden, English translation to be published November 3. The translator wasn't credited in the article, so it's probably Google or Bing. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 18:59, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

• It deserves its place in the canon. Het proza van Reve, dat is leven. Drmies (talk) 20:04, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Publisher gives the name: Sam Garrett. Hmm. [8], [9], [10], [11]. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:36, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Glenn Rhee

Hello good Dr, any chance you can lock this article? Thanks and best regards from 99, 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:47, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

• I figured it was you had that little run-in with that 11-year old. I'm sorry it took all of six minutes to block that XXX. Drmies (talk) 02:49, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

• Quite alright. Much appreciated. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:53, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

• Yeah, that awful show started again, didn't it. I saw someone in a trailer and some other guy with an axe, and there was a head that was still jawing. And then there were humans killing other humans. Forgive me--I went back to watching the football game. My old friend tedder is a huge Seahawks fan, I'm sure. Anyway, those articles, where no one seems to understand the difference between "article on a character" and "blank slate to list every little plot detail", should all be brought to within 10k. Drmies (talk) 02:55, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

• Amen on all counts. Tonight I watched some British serials on PBS with Mrs. 99; not very good, but age appropriate, I suppose. I hardly even care about football anymore. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:00, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

• Oh, like that show about that guy who has no food and goes hunting and tries to shoot a rabbit and then falls down the hill? Yeah, I don't like comedy... This football game isn't terrible. But stewed rabbit is better, no doubt. Please tell Mrs. 99 I said hi, and that I wish her the best. Drmies (talk) 03:15, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

• Yes, that's what we were watching. I wasn't terribly taken with the plot, but I'd watch almost anything to be next to Mrs. 99. Consider your sentiments forwarded. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:19, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

For the record, not a Seahawks fan. See also. :) tedder (talk) 17:40, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

• So noted. That turned out to be a strange, strange game, didn't it. Drmies (talk) 18:15, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
• Oh tedder, that is pretty good. I like the note about sacrifice and ritual. Drmies (talk) 18:23, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

ANI and AE

Hi Drmies,

Seeing that there are two reports filed against me, one at AE, and one at ANI, I'm a bit confused on how to proceed from here.

1. Do I need to respond to both, or could they just be merged into one (AE)? AE would make sense since even at ANI the filing party is referring to ARBMAC.
2. I need a few days to respond (not later than Friday). Would that be OK?

Best. DevilWearsBrioni (talk) 10:18, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

@DevilWearsBrioni: Dear DevilWearsBrioni, I have requested now the closure of the ANI discussion since it is pointless to have the same discussion on two different boards. You should just reply on the AE where the discussion has been moved. -- SILENTRESIDENT 17:35, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Inter-Collegiate Business Competition

Hi Drmies and talk page stalkers, I come across articles like this and roll my eyes, and not just metaphorically. Anyone want to take a crack at further clean-up? Makes a claim to notability, but for all the labor intensive content, nothing is sourced. Cheers, 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:19, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

• One thought I have is whether this is indeed notable enough for a stand alone, or would be better redirected to Stephen J.R. Smith School of Business. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:40, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Thank you. I'm usually hesitant to redirect an article that's been around for that long, which is why I ask for other opinions. Cheers, 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 22:17, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
    • You're welcome. I understand the sentiment--but if something is thus crufty, and this unverified... Drmies (talk) 23:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
      • Yes. Also the redirect option didn't occur to me until after the back-and-forth had occurred. Given the COI history of the article, I wouldn't be surprised if it's restored. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 00:47, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Hans John Hansen

Looking at the history of Hans John Hansen one of the editors was that person-so it is probably a SPA there and the same person. Wgolf (talk) 02:51, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

• Yes, one of the edit summaries said so. Mind you, not in a funny way, though they claimed they were a comedian. Drmies (talk) 02:52, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Another headscratcher

Herman Basudde, which I came across in surveying the edit history of its creator. Shall I just remove everything, or is an AfD appropriate? I'm hesitant out of respect for the subject, but this is a memorial. Talk page stalkers welcome. Cheers from 99, 2601:188:1:AEA0:54FE:11E3:7566:4F1F (talk) 21:22, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

• I think you should make a real article out of it. [12], [13], [14]. What also needs rewriting is his former companion, Paulo Kafeero. Drmies (talk) 22:27, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks. I think those references help establish notability, but as passing mentions they're small help for fleshing out a biography. 2601:188:1:AEA0:54FE:11E3:7566:4F1F (talk) 23:56, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
    • Yeah I know. There's more in Google News, but very little from the Western media. I wonder if this is the kind of music Westerners care for. Drmies (talk) 00:36, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
      • Care for or not, adding non-Western subjects is problematic if there's lack of coverage in this hemisphere, a situation that's complicated by the gentleman's having lived some time ago. And then there's the additional obstacle of the article's creator. Take deletion off the table, and it's still a bit in limbo. 2601:188:1:AEA0:54FE:11E3:7566:4F1F (talk) 02:41, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
      • I just saw--nice pruning. Thanks, 2601:188:1:AEA0:54FE:11E3:7566:4F1F (talk) 02:42, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

• Jambo jambo mzungus! "kind of music Westerners care for"- Frank Gossner, WOMAD etc. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 09:00, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 27 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. My evil eyeball has automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Darren Espanto page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Stop looking at cats, check this page and fix the errors highlighted immediately. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:15, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

• Fixed. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 10:14, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

• Xanthomelanoussprog, thank you so much. Drmies (talk) 17:37, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Could you maybe help out?

Hey I'm having some trouble with another user on Shinee's page, apparently the opinion of an unbiased reporter who is reviewing the group is less relevant than the opinion of their own label. I don't want to start an edit war so a second opinion who can clarify this argument would be helpful.--Thebestwinter (talk) 00:25, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

• Oh, is management now openly editing the article? Thanks--I'll have a look. Drmies (talk) 00:32, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Thank you very much I just saw it. I appreciate the help although it's a shame I thought it was a trustworthy user.--Thebestwinter (talk) 00:57, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
    • It's worse than that, Thebestwinter--where do you think I've been the last 45 minutes? Answer: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Requiem II. Drmies (talk) 01:16, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

See AE comment in my own section

Hey Drmies. Regarding your request here. I've already modified the user's ban, as noted in my own section. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:08, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

• Ed, thank you so much, and my apologies for the oversight. I'll go ahead and close it. Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 17:35, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

A football puzzle for the brains trust here

Our article on West Brook High School doesn't mention that they won the state 5A football championship in their first year of existence, or make any use of this tremendous source. After I got through picking my jaw off the floor, and tracked it down on GoogleBooks because Texas Monthly's archive is a bait and switch ([15]), I decided I had to write up Hebert High School. In the course of doing that, I discovered that our article on Hebert's, then West Brook's, football coach is a chimera: see Talk:Alexander Durley#Composite. The article wasn't even mentioned in the discussion at the inconclusive mass AfD, and doesn't do either Durley justice. So the question I put before y'all here is: are a math prof and SWAC hall of fame college football coach whose birth and death dates appear irrecoverable and a twice state-winning high school football coach who got an obituary article in the papers (and bearing in mind the importance of the high-school game in Texas) equally notable, in which case I'll split both articles and reference them as best I am able, or should it be AfD time for the current sad mix-up that has the man starting as a head coach at TSU at the age of 12? (Of course I ask partly in the hope that someone can find a reference or two that I couldn't.) Yngvadottir (talk) 18:21, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Something a bit related

Seeing you are following the anime/manga chat, I wanted to bring up Zentradi. Kronnang Dunn has uploaded multiple non free images for that article, and has undone my edits in the past despite my attempts to explain our copyright policy. Any advice? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:47, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) directed at... whoever thinks they know the answer... On a somewhat related topic, I was recently going through a bunch of stuff I had in storage and came across some old action figures from the Robotech/ExoSquad crossover series, including some of the Zentradi mechs. (I collected this stuff for a while in the early 90's) I was surprised to find no images of any of these figures, and indeed only five images of any action figures of any kind on Commons. I would have thought that with all the other geeks on wp there would be tons of such images. Is there some trademark/copyright issue that prohibits uploading images of action figures? Beeblebrox (talk) 21:37, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

You can't upload a photo of a copyright action figure, any more than you can upload a photograph of a page from a copyrighted book. See Commons:Derivative works for chapter-and-verse. ‑ Iridescent 21:42, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

(add) In fact, this specific situation is explained at COM:TOYS. ‑ Iridescent 21:46, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

• I'll be happy to look closer at this after I'm done with a few things that need doing, but can I just say that my boy is dressed as Luigi for Halloween, who apparently has something to do with SuperMario, and he looks as cute as can be? Drmies (talk) 21:47, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

We'll have to take your word for it, as we wouldn't want you to get sued by Nintendo... Beeblebrox (talk) 04:01, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Ha, well, he looked great. And while trick-or-treating he ran into Mario! There's a photo to prove it, which I won't publish. To the parents: I am sure I don't have to tell you how gross it is to clean up the after-trick-or-treating puke, mostly chocolate. Yay for holidays. Drmies (talk) 02:53, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

I feel bullied

Hello, as childish as this might seem, but I really feel bullied from a former accident. Back then, I was talked to as if Im in a Syrian secret service agency! ("Do not post any more material about the case I closed, either at ANI, my Talk page, or anywhere else on Wikipedia")

Now, I opened a new case and it was closed within half an hour by the same admin. I do not ask you to re-open it, nor to annul his "verdict". But the way he handled it is so bad. Before presenting the new case, I asked for advice at the talk page and I was told that the evidence isnt based only on IPs but also on behavior. I brought an evidence in the new case but the admin just looked at the IP! and considered that there is no convincing proof for meat puppetry although the evidence presented is anything but unconvincing.

I will remove the pages from my watch-list and congrats, a one purpose account with strong ideology will take control over the articles. Im tired of the constant IPs and accounts emerging suddenly to support his edits and nothing can be done about them. This is so bad. Please, I am not asking for any action and I do not wish for any action. I just needed to let it out cause I feel really weak now. Cheers and you can delete this message (not that you need a permission) if you think it is not suitable.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 16:17, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

• Hmm. Well, as you know I looked at that the first time around, and I just refreshed my memory. Bbb was strict in his word choice, but you've been here a while, and so I assume he assumed that you knew about outing. Now, I see that Bbb has responded at the SPI, so I assume this isn't over yet--but I tell you, if the SPI "investigator" doesn't think there is enough behavioral evidence, then that's it. Laying a guilt trip on Bbb or me about what will happen to the articles is kind of a low blow: the better way is to make a better case. BTW, Bbb said "odd case and odd presentation of evidence" or words to that effect--I agree. What those two blocked socks are doing in there is not clear to me (please don't explain it here), and your evidence/presentation only related to the IP, as far as I can tell. So I understand the comments by Bbb. Also, please understand that things that may be crystal clear to you aren't always crystal clear to outsiders, and that's part of the difficult. You are asking us to make huge decisions--blocking--based on things that we may not know as well as you do, or see in a different light. That's why explanations are always so important. Take care, Drmies (talk) 17:42, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

No guilt was laid on you really and I dont wanna guilt anyone. You were nice the last time so I felt like I could let it out to you cause sometimes, Wikipedia feels like a dictatorship. Thanks for understanding and sorry for bothering you. Cheers.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 17:49, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Well, it was: look at the sentence that contains the word "congrats". If nothing else happens at the SPI and there continue to be problems, you could consider different options--ANI or maybe arbitration. I looked into the situation a bit but not being all too familiar with the material I couldn't easily see whether there was POV editing etc. Drmies (talk) 02:50, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

I understand, but the congrats was aimed at the way Wikipedia in general handles those organized groups pushing their ideas in articles, not at you or a particular admin. As for my options, I took the easy way and removed the pages from my watch list. Let them edit as they wish, no point of stopping them cause even when you block one of them, another will come and you need to have a headache for another 2 months and so and so (1A2Z is only the last incarnation of a series of editors who all have the same style, edit from germany, and who came to that article for a year now. Im done).--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 13:38, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Are you ready

for this year's edition of the friendliest rivalry in the SEC? Lizard (talk) 00:56, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

• I don't think anyone is ever ready for that, or they're lying. Strange to go to Death Valley and not find Les Miles there--passing strange. I heard some of those Cajuns were talking smack about Alabama; I have no doubt that Tide rolls's Twitter is on fire. And I think Tide rolls still remembers that old joke about why the LSU players are still in New Orleans after the 2012 BCS National Championship Game. Drmies (talk) 03:05, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
• I just looked at that Game of the Century article again. That was one scary game, but it's always nice to get a rematch. I think one of the last times I was back in Tuscaloosa LSU beat us in overtime with a TD pass--maybe 2006 or 2007. On the bright side, LSU fans were always the BEST. I loved them--they were polite and friendly even when completely hammered, and even after a loss. But we always played some two-step and zydeco for them in our bar on the Strip. Drmies (talk) 03:09, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

• Twitter? WTF is that? Remember, I'm old. Tiderolls 13:34, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

• So, over the last bunch of elections, apparently if Bama wins, so do the Democrats; if LSU, then the Republicans. Drmies (talk) 22:06, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

• Go, Tide. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 00:15, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

fractional reserve banking

Hi,

I saw that you made edits to fractional reserve banking recently. I wonder if you would like to vote or pass comment on this rather important proposed change to the page => Time to change which theory gets prominence? - BTW, yes I know that this has been discussed before, but I think that there are good reasons why this issue should periodically be reviewed. Cheers Reissgo (talk) 08:16, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

• Sorry, but my edits there were hardly content related, and "fractional" only reminds me of the relationship between my salary and my debt. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 17:12, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

not vandalism, but drip drip drip

Hi Dr, this small item may be the last I drop on you for awhile. This is an IP that mostly adds unsourced birth dates to BLPs [16]. I reported to AIV and this wasn't found actionable; instead I was counseled to try to engage the account. I appreciate the letter of the law, but am disappointed by the lack of spirit. This is, for me, one of the ways in which the standards are degraded. Maybe I'm off, but the laxness I've observed in stopping this sort of editing--which unchecked tends to drag on until dozens and hundreds of such edits accumulate across the site from just one account--is discouraging. That said, thanks for listening. I'm determined to take a long vacation, but always appreciate your presence here. Very best, 99. 2601:188:1:AEA0:254F:3247:6BA4:7C70 (talk) 15:11, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

• My hero Ponyo already blocked, with a reason I agree with: "persistent addition of unsourced content". I can't find your report or the response to it. Drmies (talk) 17:19, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

I didn't look through the AIV history to try to find the decline, however the addition of unsupported full dates of birth (often based on the very unreliable IMDb) is a huge pain in the ass for our BLP subjects. It came up repeatedly when I was active at OTRS and it was embarrassing that I couldn't explain why we allow editors to add dates without reliable verification. WP:DOB is policy for a good reason. The IP was warned, continued, and was blocked as a result.<steps off soapbox>.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:57, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the replies. Here's my last correspondence on the matter at AIV, which followed the reply to my report: [17]. It's pretty much done me in, which is okay. Need to spend time in other pursuits. Cheers, 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 18:08, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

The initial report: [18]. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 18:32, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

And here, hours later, was the administrative reply [19]. There it sat, until it was deleted many more hours later. In the intervening time no other administrator saw a problem. So I'm just through with it. Cheers, 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 18:43, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Hmm. Well, Jayron32 totally outranks me, so I can't go up against him--but I agree with Ponyo's verdict. Don't be through with it--that luxury is reserved for young people. Thanks for all your good work keeping the place clean. Drmies (talk) 19:17, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

That's okay. One thing I don't intend is to start brush fires between administrators; I'm oblivious to rankings anyway. Much appreciated. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 19:24, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Ha, I don't mind a fight. Jayron32, you ready to rumble? Seriously, I think the IP had a good case here. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 19:29, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 19

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 19, September–October 2016
by Nikkimaria, Sadads and UY Scuti

• New and expanded donations - Foreign Affairs, Open Edition, and many more
• New Library Card Platform and Conference news
• Spotlight: Fixing one million broken links

Read the full newsletter

19:07, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Harassment

You seem to be around. Care blocking ‎2600:1000:b073:fb39:562d:2fe5:1c53:f02a (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) and consider a few hours of semi for User:331dot's userspace? TimothyJosephWood 19:29, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Looking at the history of User talk:331dot, it's obvious that this is the blocked User:Portlandpie just editing, which is probably an account used by the Ref Desk Antisemitic Troll, editing logged out. Unfortunately they seem to have considerably more than a /64 range at their disposal, so I've merely semi'd 331dot's talk (Floq has blocked the IPs). Bishonen | talk 19:41, 1 November 2016 (UTC).

Thank you very much. :) 331dot (talk) 19:47, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

• Sorry I missed all this excitement. Antisemitic troll, that's quite a moniker. Drmies (talk) 22:05, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

PLEASE Review my Article

i greatly appreciate Your Numerous Contribution to the Wikipedia community , i Doff my hat for you . and i look up to great Wikipedians like you for guidance . please with due respect , i humbly wish to seek for your help in reviewing and article by name Olagist, which has You marked for speedy deletion . please kindly review or possible help remove the Deletion Tag . which i believe the Article is wikipedia worthy due to its Contribution to the Nigerian Education Sector . thanks in Anticipation — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikebilz (talk • contribs) 19:21, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

• Mikebilz, you came to the right place, and I appreciate the recognition. Oh, Olagist--the website! Yes, I did mark that, sorry, because the article didn't make any kind of claim to importance, nor did it offer references to reliable sources to verify any claims of importance. I think it would be a good idea if you were to try WP:FIRST for your next article. Now, I hope you don't mind, but I removed those pleas for help you made--the article is gone now, so they don't really serve a purpose anymore. Best to start from scratch. Thanks again for your note, Drmies (talk) 00:16, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Please i want to ask if it will be proper to channel any proposed article to you for review and publication to forestall future speedy deletion ? Mikebilz (talk) 06:41, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

THANK YOU!!!

Thank you for taking the time to close that... Whatever "that" was. Much appreciated. If after reading it you have any feedback for me I am all ears. Thanks! --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 01:38, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

• If I have feedback after reading that entire thread, you'll be the first to know, I promise. Drmies (talk) 01:41, 3 November 2016 (UTC)