Note to self: Don't trust Notepad++'s spellchecker.

If you want to rub my ego instead, feel free.

I'm going to assume you're familiar with the Finnish symphonic metal band Nightwish. Do you like them? -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 03:33, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, can't stand em! But I'm just tickled pink to know that at least you know who they are. I'm really more of an Arch Enemy circa Gossow type. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 03:45, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Full disclosure: I am an actual and old-school metal fan, so unless I explicitly state otherwise, it is safe to assume that anything I say about any metal band, good or bad, is insanely hyperbolic and should not be taken at face value. In this case "can't stand them" means "I wouldn't complain one bit if you put them on at high volume in a car in which we were both travelling, but after the first album ended I would insist on listening to a different band." ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 03:48, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Love it! I can't say I've ever been a die hard heavy metal fan, just a sixties rock'n roll guy. Led Zeppelin, Pretty Maids, Metallica, etc. Lars Ulrich is Danish, so he's okay with me. He was young when I first moved there. BTW, what's the story behind the two usernames, MjolnirPants and MPants at work? -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 05:41, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replied via email re usernames. As for music, I'm not exclusively a fan of metal. I've been a musician (piano, guitar, violin, viola, bass guitar, contra bass, sax and a few others) for several decades, so my tastes run wide. But metal was something I discovered entirely on my own, and introduced to my friends when I was younger, so it will always hold a special place in my heart. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 05:53, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, I'm also a multi-instrumentist. In the last decade I mostly specialized on guitar though (although I was playing guitar less virtuosely when younger). But then again I collected a number of guitar styles so variety is present... As for metal, I can appreciate very well produced albums such as Cathedral's Forest of Equilibrium, Alice in Chain's Dirt, etc. I tend to rarely play my own metal compositions these days. As for Led Zeppelin, that's classic rock to me. I like select music from every genre. —PaleoNeonate – 06:33, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Damn good stuff there, though AiC isn't metal, but Grunge. Which I also love because I was a teen when it first appeared. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:17, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nightwish is no longer Nightwish without Tarja. O3000 (talk) 10:13, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Amen! -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 15:33, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the below list is dark. I won't add this to your list, but I get a kick when hard bands switch genre. Here’s a cut where early metal guitarist Lars Johan Yngve Lannerbäck AKA Yngwie J. Malmsteen starts with an acoustic version of Air on the G-string based on Bach (missing notes here and there), and then switches guitars 4.5 minutes in and lets loose. I just enjoy the contrast.[2]. O3000 (talk) 01:36, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I’m going off track here. But, saw your mention of folk in your edit summary. Most Simon and Garfunkel fans (of which I’m one) would be appalled by metal band Disturbed’s version of The Sound of Silence. But, they may have never thought about the darkness hidden under the harmony in so many of their songs: suicide, isolation, purposelessness, war. (Even the sweet sounding Scarborough Fair has the anti-war song Canticle in the background.) Disturbed simply exposed some of the darkness. [3] O3000 (talk) 14:06, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(This is a user talk page, Off track is fine.)

Well, I was referring to traditional folk (sometimes called ethnic or world music), which is generally defined as music that arose within a particular culture in isolation from other cultures, in a pre-modern setting. Meanwhile, S&G is contemporary folk music, which is generally definable as folk music (itself defined by contrast to formal or classical music) from a contemporary time period, or as music that arose from the Folk revival in the 1960's US. It's a much looser definition, even though it has an easily identifiable sound in the modern Western world (John Denver, S&G, etc.). Even with ethnic flair (Israel Kamakawiwoʻole anyone?), it's still part of a single genre. Compare that to traditional folk music, which ranges from Tuvan throat singing to Scottish jigs to Meso-American ballads, and that's just the form of traditional folk that incorporates modern instrumentation and song structure! It could, quite rightly, be divided into a different genre for each ethnicity it draws from, and then additional genres.

So how does any of that relate to metal? Well, I'm glad I asked. Metal is and always has been about defiance. Politically, defiance is often associated with ethnic traditions and even nationalism. As a result, just like with political groups defined by defiance, it frequently looks to the past for inspiration and ways to define itself. Hence you get genres like African Metal, Brazilian Metal, Japanese (Folk) Metal* and perhaps most famously, Viking Metal. These groups are all not only influenced by the same traditions and cultures as the traditional folk musician, but share the same categorical structure; they're all part of an identifiable genre that could rightfully be split upon ethnic lines.

But then, with things like the cover you provided (which was cool; I'd never heard it before), what we have is a reflection of modern society. The influence of western culture is all over it, from the structure and melodies (part of the original song) to the neoclassical/symphonic instrumentation. It's certainly folk (even the neoclassical instrumentation is done in a way that's clearly a folk appropriation of classical instrumentation), and it's by a metal band. But I don't think it's actually metal. It's reflective of modern society, modern musical norms and -like any cover song- it's a sort of virtue signal that Disturbed is a S&G fan. It's a rock song. While Rock and metal are certainly related, they're related in the same way that a Satanist and his Catholic father are; neither one really wants to admit it, though the elder will sometimes try to appropriate some aspects of the younger's style, and the younger will unconsciously embody many traits of the elder.

Still a cool cover though. I never much liked Disturbed, but I have to admit that their cover game is strong. (Compare their version of Land of Confusion to the version by In Flames, normally a far better band. Disturbed wins that one by a fair bit. Contrast that by comparing the cringe-worthy weakness and pretension of Disturbed's big hit single to the similarly-melodic Clouds Connected by In Flames, which is so much better that it almost hurts to compare them.) ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:43, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

^*

I added the designation of folk to this because Japan is one of the places generally associated with non-folk metal, along with the US and Scandinavia.

O3000, I really appreciate your observations about Disturbed's cover. My thoughts exactly. My wife is very conservative, musically speaking: soft rock, classical, etc. When I first presented Disturbed's version for her appraisal, and described how the original is actually a rather dark and dystopian song, she then listened to it and was blown away. She said "It's different, but really better." Bingo! Both versions are good, but Disturbed gets to the soul of the song. -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 03:43, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess you need to know how to view the video. With Simon and Gar, the volume is low. With Disturbed, turn up the volume. With Arianna Grande, mute the volume and just watch. O3000 (talk) 19:31, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That was Anna Kendrick, not Ariana Grande. And since this is the video for it, I'm going to suggest also closing your eyes before watching it. That being said, I could watch Ariana Grande with the sound off all day. Just don't tell my wife. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:16, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Music

For anyone watching this thread (or commenting in it), I'm going to occasionally post a great or interesting metal song, or a song related to metal in an obvious or interesting way. Feel free to add your own.

Metal

• Behemoth - O Father, O Satan, O Sun!
• Yngwie Malmsteen - Black Star (live)
• Mick Gordon - BFG Division
• Lamb of God - Redneck
• In Flames - Crawl Through Knives
• In Flames - Cloud Connected
• Disturbed - Land of Confusion
• Amon Amarth - First Kill
• Sepultura - Roots, Bloody Roots
• Wagakki - Ikusa
• Skinflint - Dipoko
• Kittie - Brackish
• Slipknot - Psychosocial
• Dimmu Borgir - Progenies of the Great Apocalypse
• Behemoth - Conquer All
• Dethklok - Face Fisted
• Dethklok - Murmaider 2 The Water God
• Metallica - The Call of Ktulu
• Pantera - Cowboys From Hell
• Meshuggah - Rational Gaze
• Mushroomhead - We Are the Truth
• Arch Enemy - We Will Rise
• Metallica - One
• Mushroomhead - Sun Doesn't Rise
• Mastodon - Oblivion
• Slayer - Seasons in The Abyss
• Dir En Grey - Obscure (Low quality, but definitely NSFW.)
• Dir En Grey - The IIId Empire
• Fear Factory - Shock
• Infant Annihilator - Decapitation Fornication
• Fleshgod Apocalypse - Epilogue
• Korn - Shoots and Ladders
• Mudvayne - Death Blooms
• Black Kirin - Oh Soldier
• Behemoth - Bartzabel (NSFW: full frontal nudity)
• Devin Townsend - Kingdom

Metal Related

• Heilung - Krigsgaldr (live)
• Raga Bhairav
• Gorillaz - Clint Eastwood
• Queen - Bohemian Rhapsody
• Lordi - Hard Rock Hallelujah - When metal took over Eurovision. See Live version.
• Junkie XL - Brothers In Arms
• Marilyn Manson - SAY10 (This video is NSFW.)
• Katatonia - A Premonition (IMHO one of the best songs ever written by man.)
• Melt Banana - Shield for Your Eyes, a Beast in the Well on Your Hand
• Tenacious D - Tribute

Other cool music

• Miles Davis - Kenny Garret sax solo
• Live under the sky - Four sleepers
• Live under the sky 88
• Smokey Robinson - I Second That Emotion
• Beth Hart - Am I The One
• Beth Hart - L.A. Song (Out of This Town)
• Joe Cocker - With a Little Help From My Friends
• Come - Power failure
• En Vogue - Hold On
• The Pros and Cons of Hitch Hiking (full album)
• Sultaniyegah Saz Semai
• Victor Simon - Tangoriental
• Skrillex & Damian "Jr. Gong" Marley - Make It Bun Dem
• Eminem & Nate Dog - Shake That
• Maroon 5 - This Love
• Childish Gambino - This is America
• DMX - X Gon' Give It To Ya
• Pink - Trouble
• JJ - Still (I Got Summer on My Mind)
• Awolnation - Sail
• Jesus loves the acid
• Die Antwoord - I Fink U Freaky
• Sonic Youth - Schizophrenia
• The Beatles - While My Guitar Gently Weeps
• John Grant - Pale Green Ghosts
• David Bowie - Black Star
• Union Jack - Papillon
• Petra & Co - Just let go
• How about some loud electronica: Aphex Twin - Come to Daddy, Atari Teenage Riot - Speed, Autoclav1.1 - This Is Untitled (Broken by Wast3), Tactical Sekt - Beslan, Crystal Castles - Alice Practice
• Jesse Cook - One night at the metropolis (especially @ 28m)
• Veracocha - Carte Blanche
• Stevie Wonder - Superstition
• Gladys Knight & The Pips - Midnight Train to Georgia
• Fleetwood Mac - The Chain
• KLF - What time is love
• My way - drummer steals the show
• Scotch - Disco band
• Le bain de Cleopatre (remix)
• Raga Bhairav - disco/acid house implementation
• Mediterranean Sundance
• Unknown error - The yearning
• Ed Rush Optical Matrix - Flightpath
• Dave Spoon - At night
• Soundstorm - Iris
• Takis Gritzovalos - Gypsy
• Noisia - The Distance
• Eisenfunk - Pestilenz Note to self: The ability to make music that appeals to my 19-year-old self and the ability to make a music video that isn't unintentionally hilarious are not in any way related. Note to others: This band made several videos and they're all like this. Or worse.
• Chuck Mangione - Feels so good
• Eric Idle - The FCC Song (fuck you very much) (Wikipedia article, new version played live)
• Tim Minchin - Dark side
• Kevin Bloody Wilson - Cunt Of A Day
• Reggie Watts - Fuck Shit Stack
• The Avalanches - Frontier Psychiatry
• Primus - The Antipop
• Chinese Man - I've Got That Tune
• Lorn - Anvil I just discovered this on YouTube and I am positively in love with this video
• Jeff Beck & Tal Wilkenfeld - Cause We've Ended As Lovers
• Am I Ever Gonna See Your Face Again : The Angels Live Melbourne 1988
• David Hasselhoff - True Survivor
• Stan Bush - Fight for love
• Corrupt Souls - Broadcast
• Corrupt Souls - Dropzone
• The Jimi Hendrix Experience - All Along the Watchtower
• Habib Khan Indian Jazz Ensemble - Waterfall
• The Pod dance (The Dark Crystal - Podling's Village)
• Avram Kartal - Lutvu Kartal
• Paul Van Der Valk - Turbo Imploder 4 (intro music of Amiga utility)
• Şirin Pancaroğlu - Nihâvend Peşrev
• Hyper - Spoiler
• Tim Minchin - What if House wrote a love song
• Tim discovers religion, and alternative medicine (long intro)
• Tim Minchen - Confessions Must watch past the double fake ending with a touch of Ayn Rand, followed by a takeoff on a love song made famous by Whitney Houston that was actually written by Dolly Parton about being fired by Porter Wager. Supposed internal conflicts of an SJW.

Further discussion

Both of these were beautiful, and I'd heard neither. Turrentine was one of my favourites, thanks to Taxi (TV series) Roxy, the dog. barcus 08:07, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm adding the festival compilation from which the sleepers were taken, with other memorable performances... —PaleoNeonate – 11:32, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm not a Jazz fan myself (most people who know me IRL are shocked by this, given my love of progressive and experimental genres), but I can certainly appreciate it. And once in a while, I feel the need to put on something different and just soak in it for a while... ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 12:58, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you’re going to add MoTown, try this for rock blues. This was Beth Hart’s heroin period, which she is over. Guitarist borrows from Hendrix. Mr. Hyde peeks out at 1:20 and she switches back and forth between Jekyl and Hyde. Hyde wins in the end. As I said, I like contrasts. [4] O3000 (talk) 19:52, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I had no idea who Beth Hart was when I read your comment. I liked the song a lot, so I looked her up, and found her big hit which I remember my DI in bootcamp really liked (I liked it to). Dude used to listen to it like every night after lights out. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:10, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

She cleaned up her drug problems and performed for Obama at the Kennedy Center Honors, same year Zep was honored. Since Joe Cocker was added, I had to mention an interesting video. This is a live performance at the Apollo of "You are so beautiful" with Cocker singing and the author, Billy Preston, at the piano. The interesting part is when Patti LaBelle appears from stage right and shakes the timbers. I wouldn’t add it. I just like the contrast between Cocker’s bronchitis voice and LaBelle’s soaring vocals. [5] Now, if you want to hear a serious gravelly voice, there’s Tom Waits doing "Tom Traubert's Blues", with apologies to any Aussies watching.[6] O3000 (talk) 01:03, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've added Roger Waters' The Pros and Cons of Hitch Hiking to the list. It's a whole album (42 minutes), and an absolute classic. Kind of a concept album with a story running through it, and if you've never heard it before you're in for a treat. Enjoy! nagualdesign 22:47, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Nagualdesign: one of my shifts on the railway started at 05:01...guess the solo whistled  :) —SerialNumber54129 ^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 23:12, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! I haven't heard this in years. I listened to it for the first time when I was 15 or 16, and the cover caught my eye. Damn good stuff. Damn good. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 23:59, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the album art's quite an eye-popper, especially when you're that age, which is exactly the same age I was when I first heard it too - a quarter of a century ago! Good times. nagualdesign 00:05, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, Roger Waters. Thanks for the link as I'm not familiar with it. I took someone I’d just met in NYC to the wall concert in Berlin after the wall fell. We got there early, hung around and enjoyed the camaraderie. But, we left before it started, took the subway to what was East Berlin, walked down the main Straße (which was papered with porn shop posters – even the opera house), took a taxi to the Moscow Café and watched Waters on TV. O3000 (talk) 00:23, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My favorite Waters/Pink Floyd material is Dogs (Pigs song especially)Animals (Dogs song especially), then Dark Side of The Moon, I think (although all is good, of course). —PaleoNeonate – 01:17, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• There's a lot of music that I absolutely love that I doubt would go down well among metal fans. Frank Zappa's my favourite recording artist of all time. Radiohead are my favourite living band (I expect everyone likes at least a handful of their stuff). I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest something by John Grant... nagualdesign 22:08, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

...That link (above) is to Pale Green Ghosts, the first JG track I ever heard, and it's also the title track to his second album. The link is the first of a full playlist of the whole album. If you don't want to listen to the whole thing then just try track 3, "GMF" - another one of my favourites. Warning: explicit lyrics. nagualdesign 22:18, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Listening to the link above now. You can really hear the retro influence that's so pervasive today. There's a lot to unpack in it, though, so I can't say much beyond that until I hear more. Good stuff, though. Fun to listen to. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:44, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's kind of '80s style, but with arguably better production values, mixed with '90s dance music and other stuff. It's the Icelandic electro-pop influence, apparently. There's a remix of PGG called "Pale Green Ghosts (NO CEREMONY /// Remix)" that you might like if you've got a kick-ass sound system. nagualdesign 22:55, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I have only one thing to add to this discussion : https://archive.org/details/GratefulDead - their take of "Dancing in the Street" (as heard here) puts all other versions to shame (yes Mr Bowie and Mr Jagger, I'm looking at you....) particularly after the verses at 2:30 when they shift gear into kick ass jamming. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:16, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That was a tour de force. I love a track of epic proportions. Okay, I wasn't going to post any Zappa but as long tracks go, this is one of the best: Yo' Mama. nagualdesign 00:44, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that takes me back to high school. Not that I was in high school in '79, people just used to sing that song to me a lot... ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 03:22, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you should never smoke in pyjamas.^[FBDB] nagualdesign 03:38, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was in primary school in '79, at that point I recall being more interested in The Goodies. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:48, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I turned 2 in '79, so you're both old gits from where I'm standing! nagualdesign 10:57, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was born in '79, so stick that in your pipe and smoke it, geezer! ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:09, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Touché. nagualdesign 13:11, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good Lord. In ’79, I had already been working as a programmer for 12 years. My GF about that time was taught to drive a shift by Jerry Garcia (before he became an ice cream). O3000 (talk) 13:21, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That... Actually makes me feel much better, thanks! ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:30, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My sole purpose in life is to age to allow others to feel better about their age relative to mine. Thus far, I’ve been highly successful at ageing. O3000 (talk) 16:21, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of ageing, and music, it’s interesting to see how some artists change over time. Here’s Mark Knopfler, rather mellow compared to days in Dire Straits. Your DI might like it if he ever indulged in mellowocity. Nice fingerstyle. [7] O3000 (talk) 18:12, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About "Papillon" above, with edit summary "try to guess what the letters mean :)" (not sure if anyone noticed) I'll answer: the sequence of letters is a frequency-sorted list of letters in French. —PaleoNeonate – 16:02, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Those damned French with their stupid baguettes and their silly accent... ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:49, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now I want baguette with cheese and red wine (I know French but am not French, BTW, poutine is more stereotypical). —PaleoNeonate – 17:53, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Came across this thread, saw a few tracks/bands I very much like, and decided to take the invitation above to add a few. Fear Factory in metal, Melt Banana for metal related, and some various loud electronic tracks (when I'm in the mood for something loud over the past decade or so, it's been decreasingly analog). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:56, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That Tactical-Sekt song gave me a flashback to drinking scotch in a goth club in Raleigh, SC at age 21, feeling completely out of place with my shaved head, gub'mint issued mustache and BDUs while hoping like all hell that goth girls like a man in uniform, too. (Looking back, I can say with assurance that they do indeed.) ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:19, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did not know there is (was?) a goth club in Raleigh. When I lived there the only place [that I knew of] playing anything unusual was Kings (unless you venture to the other parts of the Triangle). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:45, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure it was more of a "goth night" than a dedicated goth club. I seem to recall there being a line-dancing thing there one night. If I'm not mistaken, the club was called The Church. Don't ask me where in the city it was though, I never drove to it, just caught rides (which we spent bragging about how many girls we'd take home). If you need any evidence of this, note how I put it in SC instead of NC because yeah, apparently, my sense of geography (and memory) really is that bad. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:59, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, I see you’ve added The Chain. Carried it on my iPod for years. Not as dramatic, but I always liked Landslide. Doesn’t say so in the WP article, but I’ve heard it was written with her father in mind. For some reason, the song seems particularly important to her. Many artists get attached to particular pieces. Like Ainsi soit je to Mylene Farmer. I liked Buckingham’s guitar work a lot. But, there exist better. O3000 (talk) 00:35, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to say that all you kids have ruined this Jazz related thread. Humph. Also, I appear to be at least twenty years older than the oldest of you. -Roxy, the dog. barcus 09:06, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you’re talking about physical age, I’d say that’s highly unlikely. I just need to listen to recent music to stay young at heart. But since I’m here, another piece (definitely not jazz) with a strident woman. The woman stalking the stage is Alison Mosshart. Jack White lays down his guitar and returns to his first love.[8]. O3000 (talk) 11:38, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm standing with O3k on this one. Listening to music from a metal duo young enough to still think pretending to hump each other is the height of physical humor makes me feel like I'm not as old as my joints keep telling me I am. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 12:21, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Age is thing. You have to work on a thing. Or, it controls you instead of vice-versa. I posted this on my own forum on the death of Chester Bennington. [9] O3000 (talk) 00:09, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Really? Psychosocial is your "best" of Slipknot? Their self titled album was my workout music for like two whole years. It got to the point where I could take a PT test and play the record back in my head by memory as I ran. GMG^talk 02:05, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@GreenMeansGo: I love Psychosocial too, but I think MjolnirPants linked the wrong video. Alexis Jazz (talk) 07:54, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well GMG, Alexis is right in that the Nyan cat version is the far superior one, but I meant what I said. There was a bit of a rivalry between Slipknot and Mudvayne back in the day, and I was best friends and bandmates for a while with the guy who used to sell Mudvayne their pot back even further in the day. So I just never really got into Slipknot. By the time they released Psychosocial I'd gotten to the point of apathy with respect to that sort of thing. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 12:38, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• All of you need to watch that Hasselhoff video. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:17, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Just to keep the thread going, non-metal version of Rage Against the Machine’s Ghost of Tom Joad. Tom Morello keeps it raw.[10] O3000 (talk) 15:08, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• New TV commercial came on today and the background music sounded familiar. Drove me crazy trying to figure it out. Few hours later I remembered it was a Portishead tune. I like sounds that cross genre. This is a trip hop/electronica band; only it has elements of jazz, blues, and rock as well. Besides, I like strong female leads. Also, elements of Jekyl and Hyde that I enjoy. [11]. O3000 (talk) 23:51, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oooh, I love Portishead. I first learned of them when I downloaded an MP3 of Teardrops by Massive Attack which was wrongly attributed to them. I loved that song so much I bought a Portishead album. Very different sound, but no regrets. None at all. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:29, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Interesting cover by Garbage and the Screaming Females of the Springsteen/Smith piece that Patti Smith made famous, ‘’Because the Night’’. Marissa Paternoster starts a lengthy guitar solo at 3:34 that suggests one reason they’re called the Screaming Females. Decent break down at the end.[12] O3000 (talk) 01:25, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Objective3000: "Interesting" my ass... That was fucking epic! And the next song in that playlist has been one of my favorite grrl rock songs for a long time. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 01:40, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weirdness

I listened to one of the metal videos here on youtube, and let it continue autoplaying for a while. This was the sequence:

1. Behemoth - O Father, O Satan, O Son!
2. Behemoth - Ora Pro Nobis Lucifer
3. Fatback Band - I Found Lovin'
4. Cheryl Lynn - Encore

I have no idea what is going through YT's "mind", but it's funny as hell and I hope it's doing the same to other metal listeners. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:47, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe there's somebody who really likes both Behemoth and vintage R&B and YT is assuming that duo is... common. I mean with how I ping between folk metal and Gorillaz I'm sure I'm giving YT weird ideas about taste mapping too. Simonm223 (talk) 13:50, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe there's somebody who really likes both Behemoth and vintage R&B Well, to be fair, that's me. But YT usually is smart enough to realize when I'm listening to metal vs when I'm listening to R&B, and I rarely do the latter on YT anyways since I actually own the albums I like. And you're not the only one who bounces between The Gorillaz and folk metal. Most of the folk metal fans I know have said something like "Some pop music is okay. Like The Gorillaz." at some point. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:56, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I know you closed this one, but I just wanted to apologize. I was in a bad mood and, errrm... I shouldn't drink and edit... But from now on, an image of you smiling and handing over a beer is permanently stuck in my head. Just don't hand over too many beers. =) byteflush _Talk 00:39, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I used to fear that people could figure out which of my edits were made while drinking. After much thought, my solution was to never edit sober. O3000 (talk) 01:43, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aaaand, just like that, you gave away my secret, too. =D Cheers! =) byteflush _Talk 02:07, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm perfectly fine with continuing this conversation. Possibly over a beer or two. :D Well, remotely, anyways. I can't afford a globe-trotting pub crawl. Although now that I think of it, the WMF International Pub Crawl would be an Wiki-Event I could get behind. And under... ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 02:16, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• It's a question of moderation ([[13]]). —PaleoNeonate – 07:51, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can personally attest to the truth of the Ballmer peak (which we really need an article on): I once spent two weeks at work trying to get working some geometric code with hooks into system processes that were exposed in the winAPI, but not documented. Then, over the weekend, I had a few drinks and hopped into TFS to work on a personal project a bit, had an epiphany ("how would I expose them?"), followed by another epiphany ("It's easier to do it in two dimensions twice than to do it in three, once.") and banged out a solution in 20 minutes. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:03, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can confirm about WinME's failure, so, something to dose carefully... —PaleoNeonate – 14:26, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I once had to fix a WinME system that would bluescreen every time I opened the cd-rom tray. Turns out, ME couldn't handle the system reporting the tray open; which is what it's supposed to do, though the vast majority of the time the boards don't bother, they just report the drive unavailable (which windows started interpreting as "open" after manufacturers kept doing it that way). So it turns out WinME worked with the common lazy hack, but not the way it was supposed to work.

Oh, and you know how the board reported the tray open? With a WinAPI call. I ended up having to replace the motherboard, though it was a cheap system, so no big loss. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:31, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I’d forgotten xkcd existed, possibly due to my brain processing an SQL injection exploit. [14]. O3000 (talk) 16:26, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

10+ years ago already! Little Bobby Tables must be in college by now. — JFG ^talk 18:29, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And may soon be old enough to edit Wikipedia... —PaleoNeonate – 18:34, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Probably a few years too old to edit commons, I think... ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 18:54, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well played! 👏👏👏 — JFG ^talk 19:26, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I never thanked you for this [15], but I can assure you my username's origins are about as banal as they come.

I've been following the insane discussion over at the Commons, and I'm glad to see some editors, including you, still weighing in. It's kind of Orwellian, the way in which a mistreated editor has been turned into the aggressor and an admin who behaved horribly is now the aggrieved party, owed an apology. Add to that the backwards accusations of racism, the xenophobic response to any input from here, and the overall tone of "this was no big deal," and it's readily apparent to me why people are driven away from contributing. In any case, your last post drives to the heart of the matter (a complete lack of recognition from Yann about why what he did, and has done, is so problematic) while eschewing the temptation to get distracted by all the side drama. It's just really an ugly discussion, so I appreciate seeing some voices of reason continuing to weigh in. Grandpallama (talk) 18:10, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Grandpallama: Thanks! I appreciate the vote of confidence. :) ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 18:16, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I second that emotion. Crazy days indeed. nagualdesign 18:20, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MjolnirPants. 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.Doug Weller talk 19:43, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User_talk:EEng#X-day/week_"embargo"_on_articles_on_breaking-news_topics. I should say that I've primarily thought of this as applying to sources used in notability discussions only, not general content in articles. EEng 15:22, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@EEng: (I love pinging you because I always pronounce your handle as rhyming with "ping" so that I'm "pinginging".) See here for where I'm discussing it with Masem. Please weigh in: your opinions on drama and what to do with it tend to be rather useful, in my experience. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:31, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Follow my link above to find a list of people who wanted to be pinged on this. EEng 15:36, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think a huge debate is a good idea right now, and the more editors involved, the more opinions, the less that gets done. I think bringing you and Masem into the discussion could help, but (and this should not be taken as saying anything about the editing or character of anyone else who's opined on the matter) too many more voices would just muddy the waters. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:04, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: There has been no proposal yet: I want to make one. When there's a solid proposal, I think it would then be time to invite a wider community discussion. Clearly, there's some community support for it. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:10, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I remember that, but per a recent AFD, I only support if it contains a clause frowning heavily on nominating for deletion before a week is up, and those noms better not cotains NOTNEWS as a rationale. ^Thanks, L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 21:06, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

L3X1, I don't know that we'll be able to work such a clause in there, but I'd be happy to gaddeh up da boyz and "pay a visit" to anyone nommin' an article jus' a cuppel days afta makin' it per WP:NOTNEWS, if yannowhaddeyemeen. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:12, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Its hard to put into precise words, more a gut feeling. But as I take it to mean far right means (in essence) fascist nationalism with an emphasis on ethno/reactionaryisn. Now whilst infowars may well represent some of this (they are mildly nationalist) I am not sure that just being anti-immigration or a ranting loon (and here is another reason, I do not believe that Jones actually means or believes half the things he says, it is a scam) Makes you a nationalist (or white supremacist). Nor am I sure that he has displayed any real fascist tendencies. In fact I think Jones (and info wars) pretty much bends over backwards to whistle without saying "Fido". Is he a conservative, yes, with a big C. But I see nothing in his (and lets face it infowars is Jones) in his rhetoric that implies extreme racist or fascist views. Thus whilst he may well (well is) playing up to white supremacists and neo-nazis I do not think he himself is one.Slatersteven (talk) 12:56, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Slatersteven: Thank you for your response. I'm going to think about it for a bit. If you're interested (let me know) I'll post a response to this later, otherwise I'll keep it to myself. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:17, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your talk page.Slatersteven (talk) 13:17, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is it just me, or does TBANning SPAs seem like unnecessary bureaucracy? On ANI today I !voted against such a proposal on an editor who was apparently trolling Talk:God; then I scroll up and find another account was recently TBANned from "Christianity". But that account will almost certainly either never edit again, or immediately violate the ban and be blocked. WP:RESTRICT is too clogged up already (TreCoolGuy (Sanction originally imposed on sock Zzaxx1) -- seriously!? The editor was already blocked 11 months before the TBAN was applied!) without stuff like this. (Might as well courtesy-ping User:Ritchie333 even though obviously I'm not blaming him. It's just a general tendency I've noticed.) Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 13:36, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hijiri88: Is the issue you see one of TBans being used where indefs are more appropriate, or of TBans being given out too liberally? ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:40, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I found your comment at ANI and I can see it is the latter.

I'm not familiar with that case (for some reason, God is not on my watchlist... weird) so I'll not comment on it yet. As for the Ctmv case, it was initially me who reported them at ANI. This was an editor who consistently spammed walls of text to the talk page, attempted to dictate by fiat what the consensus was to more experienced editors, was arguing and editing from a distinct and non-neutral POV, engaged in edit warring, insulted and belittled other editors, misrepresented sources, relied upon decidedly unreliable sources and generally couldn't even put together a coherent argument.

Let me tell you about my friend, Jay (not his real name). Open the collapse to read it all.

If Jay ever registered an account on WP I would request a CIR block or a a series of topic bans on his favorite subjects (martial arts, military, money) before he ever made his first edit. Jay is phenomenally unsuited to this project.

Ctmv reminds me heavily of Jay, to the point that if Ctmv's subject of choice were one of Jay's favorites, I'd have ensured that it wasn't Jay.

I understand that the way sanctions are imposed is not fair, and I'm one of those who insists that they should not be fair. Their purpose is not to reduce disruption, as is often claimed, but to benefit productivity. WP is a cold hard bitch who cares only about increasing data. We are the soulless cubicle-dwellings automatons and cutthroat CEOs who make money (read: content) for our shareholders (read:readers), at the cost of ethics, morality and our own souls. And that is how it should be, because being that way allows WP to do a ton of good in the world (by increasing education, helping to combat fake news and inspiring new generations of scientists, writers and -indeed- every other profession). So at the end, it shouldn't much matter if sanctions are being handed out unfairly. The only thing that should matter is content creation, and those who can't create content (or who can't create the right kind of content) don't belong here. They may deserve our sympathy and understanding, but they don't deserve the privilege of editing. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:13, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

After reading the collapsed portion of your comment, I can honestly say Jay sounds like a more constructive member of the project than a lot of the people I've seen survive numerous ban attempts. he simply accepts the correction and moves on is something I wish with all my heart I could say about a certain SPA who was TBANned and left the site (we'll call him "Noah"), but because Noah also doesn't get angry when proven wrong and is quite likable and a friendly guy, despite his failings, proving to the community that he needed a TBAN was almost impossible. Once he finally got the TBAN, he just left the project, meaning his entry on WP:RESTRICT is just taking up space at this point. I don't know: maybe having a separate page listing editors who were placed under editing restrictions and consequently left the project and haven't edited for more than, say, two years, would solve the problem? Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 23:01, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ehh. I just can't bring myself to get worked up over entries on a list just taking up space. And yes, I've seen editors worse than Jay, as well. But the thing is, even though he accepts correction and moves on, he doesn't internalize any of that. That was my point (and I completely failed to be explicit about it, which is my fault). I can't remember how many times I've told him that a Sergeant First Class outranks a Staff Sergeant and he's responded with something like "Okay, yeah, gotcha." only to assume that a SSG outranks an SFC the next time the subject comes up. He's just like so many of the WP:CIR WP:SPA's I've seen on this site that it's actually a little strange thinking that the world must be full of Jays. Ctmv, if you check Talk:Trinity, had their suggestion shot down a week ago, and seemed to take it in stride. They (apparently) accepted the correction and moved on. But then, a few days later... ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 23:17, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• What a lot of people seem to forget is that the point of dispute resolution is to resolve the dispute. This does not mean "everyone is satisfied". The quickest and most efficient way to resolve a dispute where one party is being disruptive is to ban the disruptive party from the topic. If anything, ENWP gives too many chances and opportunities to editors who had they been banned from particular topics very early on in their editing career, would have saved significant time later on. The approach of 'oh give them another chance, they wont do it this time they promise' is because the basic stance/demeanour of most wikipedia editors is one of good-natured reasonableness. And when confronted by someone who is being unreasonable, tries to bend over backwards to accomodate them. Ultimately this results in tbans for SPA's because people have the slim hope they might move on to something constructive elsewhere. For non-SPA's there is usually already evidence they are constructive elsewhere, which is why blocks are not handed out like candy. Only in death does duty end (talk) 15:29, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That would be my take on it.Slatersteven (talk) 16:00, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I wholly endorse Only's comments, as well. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:04, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Only in death: I agree with everything you said, but the bit at the end about "For non-SPA's" is really the only part that's relevant to what I was talking about: when there's a disruptive SPA, not clogging up the logs at WP:RESTRICT should really be a higher priority than "mercy" for a party that may in theory make non-disruptive edits elsewhere but has not given us any solid reason to believe so. In the other (three-year-old) example I listed above, a TBAN was rushed through and logged appropriately, only for the account to be found a couple of days later to have been a sockpuppet of an already-site-banned user; instead of simply removing the TBAN, which is redundant with the SBAN and was rushed through so clumsily that the account was not even recognized as a sock until immediately after the AN thread closed, someone just modified the TBAN as applying the SBANned main account. Had the disruptive SPA in question simply been blocked, we wouldn't need to worry about community consensus to overrule community bans, even in cases where the community consensus had been clumsy/short-sighted in the first place. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 22:53, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So your concern here is ironing out the system, then? I took your concern to be about justice, but I'm happy to be wrong. FWIW, I agree with you in this comment, but I just can't build up any passion for it. So there's obsolete entries in the sanction list. Doesn't bother me. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 23:17, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) TBC, I didn't mean to imply anything about "justice" whatsoever, since there's no difference justice-wise between placing a narrow TBAN on someone so they leave the project voluntarily and simply blocking them. My only concern is the red tape, and possibly some other stuff resulting from said red tape -- looking into it it seems TreCoolGuy was a serial sock-abuser, and I'm pretty sure I've been confused for a sock of TreCoolGuy, or unfairly associated with him just because he may have shared my policy-based views on a certain type of article, by certain editors who may have been seeing him everywhere they looked; simply blocking disruptive editors rather than implying via TBAN that their disruption was disruptive solely because it took place on a certain "special" class of article would keep that from happening. But I've probably said too much already, so I'll get out of your hair at this point. :P Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 23:29, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well functionally that actually has a point, if the original site-banned user isnt under a topic ban, as topic bans apply to the user, if their master account should be unbanned at any point, the topic ban would still be in place until it was appealed to the community. Only in death does duty end (talk) 23:21, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Only in death: Well, it may have a point functionally, but the TBAN discussion (which was very short -- I've honestly never seen a TBAN enforced with such low participation) assumed that the sockpuppet under discussion was not a sock, and was not already subject to a site-ban; surely assuming the CU-confirmed sockpuppetry and the pre-existing redundant ban invalidate the TBAN discussion would be better, no? Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 23:29, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Personally? Probably not. I tend towards shutting down loopholes and avoiding future problems. An editor while sockimg who picks up a tban, should probably have the tban regardless of any ban/block situation just as a precaution. You don't need to ping me on Mpants talk page for future ref. It's on my watch list. Only in death does duty end (talk) 23:38, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I love your user page! I know how you feel. Really, I do! I "need to go play with my pussy because I'm a bitch who needs some release" (archived page).

You did a great job on the Trump baby balloon and I wanted to ask if you could look at c:File:Mariska Hargitay @ Make Believe On Broadway.jpg. (cropped version is used on her article) Maybe I already got it right (see first revision and current revision) but it looks like her skin is maybe a bit too red. But maybe her skin just was a little reddish that day. I tried to correct it, but without much success. Maybe it's already fine, I could use a fresh pair of eyes to make sure. Alexis Jazz (talk) 16:51, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexis Jazz:Ha! I love the tears of angry trolls. They're like ambrosia. "The conweb is right next to the covfefe, right?"

I gotta tell you, I can't think of anything else to do with that photo. There's a few "glamour shot" type corrections I would make if that photo was brought to me off-wiki (smoothing her skin and softening her tan a bit), but that stuff is decidedly not encyclopedic, and the lightening you did looks pretty darn good. Her teeth look a little blown out, but I wouldn't sweat that, as it doesn't look bad and the precise shape of the glossy highlights on her teeth is unlikely to ever be important to anyone. Besides, I don't think it's possible to correct it in a way that doesn't look bad and obvious. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:19, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may have seen this: [16] O3000 (talk) 18:52, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And this: [17] -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 18:56, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Neither is the posting editor's excuse that it was said to him rather than by him, therefore, it's no big deal and doesn't need to be deleted. How ironic that you would decide to use male pronouns for an editor with a female name in a situation in which others are referring to them as female, all in the service of your attempt to whine about sexism. Hypocrite much? Winkelvi: you are now officially banned from my talk page. Every interaction I've had with you has been defined by your childishness and immaturity, and I'd really prefer not to have to deal with that crap again. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:01, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd almost forget with all this, but thanks for looking at the image. Alexis Jazz (talk) 21:08, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Just for talkpage stalkers, this is why I have this page on watchlist. *popcorn*. Only in death does duty end (talk) 19:23, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I... I want to argue but I really can't. I feel like a Kindergarten teacher half the time I'm here. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:36, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"It's like a little boys' nursery school I've come upon here." Alexis Jazz (talk) 21:08, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The "Gone In 60 Seconds edit" title reminds me of an apparent "gone in 2 minutes edit" (someone I know once pointed me to this rant). —PaleoNeonate – 22:53, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! Those lunatic charlatans couldn't even do enough research to realize that "MPants at work" is just my alt account. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 23:45, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• If anyone cares, I actually liked Law & Order: SVU so much that I named my Barret REC7 "Mariska". Of course, I named my LWRC Six8 "Vera". ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:18, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well I doubt its a Brenda Blethyn reference.. Only in death does duty end (talk) 23:50, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 23:57, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, that was too obvious. Only in death does duty end (talk) 00:01, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not to millennials, who would probably find the actual reference a little too obvious. Well, at least those with good tastes. Should be some gen-Xers recognizing that, too. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 00:04, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Although I probably would have got it if I was a member of a gun-obsessed nation like the US ;) Rather than being in Wales.... I thought the REC7 and LWRC were *cars*. (SVU - SUV geddit?) Only in death does duty end (talk) 00:05, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And by a weird coincidence I used to live until recently in Canton, Cardiff. Only in death does duty end (talk) 00:07, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I knew I had some fans on here... ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 00:09, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• An otherwise unrelated vandal, but I thought you might enjoy this. Alexis Jazz (talk) 23:55, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! That's my usual tact, as well. Se the section "blah blah" below for my response to a vandal who occasionally goes on sprees of registering accounts and posting death threats to my talk page (and to the TPs of several other editors they identify as liberal). ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 00:45, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As a semi-resident of fringe noticeboard, this video may amuse you. Sadly there is no way to insert it into the above article. Only in death does duty end (talk) 10:47, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm convinced that that video is 100% factually accurate. "That actually does sound quite fascinating." "Not the way an old person tells it, it doesn't." Pure truth, right there. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:32, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That was great. Let's put it under External links. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:59, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Ritchie333, EEng, and Tryptofish: as you guys have all done DYK's in the past. What's the process? I have an article in mind that is absolutely begging for a DYK and I want to do it, to learn how. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:53, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It has some potential, though I'm not sure I'm going to find a hook in there that will give our readers a chuckle like I like to. But you've got a problem. Right now I'm seeing 1749 characters of qualifying content (outside blockquotes, refs, etc.). By DYK rules you'll need to expand that 5X i.e. to 8750. That might be a challenge. And by another stupid DYK rule, that has to happen in 7 days from start to finish (or maybe it's 5). Good news, though -- it's perfectly legal to expand the article in your sandbox over any length of time you want, than copy the expanded version to the live article all at once, and that counts as "7 days from start to finish" since from the point of view of the live article it happened instantly. Welcome to the wacky world of DYK. EEng 23:11, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

^ What EEng said. And the full "rules" are written out at WP:DYKRULES. For an example of mine that went smoothly: Template:Did you know nominations/Jack Sumner. And for one where I felt like strangling the reviewer, although I have to admit that it worked out for the better: Template:Did you know nominations/Phase precession. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:37, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wait, I just remembered something. The other path to DYk, besides 5X expansion, is to get it promoted to GA. I think that's gonna be your best bet. EEng 01:12, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would imagine making that a GA would require expansion by at least 3X. I'm perfectly happy to gfo to 5X, provided I can find the sources. I just don't think I could live with myself if I didn't expand this article and get a DYK out of it. Dude was so badass my voiced dropped an octave just reading that stub (pun intended, thank you) out loud.

Thanks for the help, guys. I'm going to get to work on it. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 02:23, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think that your page subject, Jack Sumner, and Ann Boleyn should get together sometime. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:51, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody needs a lesson in how to make effective death threats. I mean, I'm not even nervous, let alone skerd. Well, maybe a little (I have to do some public speaking tomorrow). But just like I'm doing to you, I'll picture them naked and it'll be fine. ;) ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 23:03, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know if you'd like a couple days of semiprotection. I deleted most of those revisions / edit summaries. SQL^{Query me!} 23:20, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Might as well. It doesn't bother me, but I know it freaks some other people out. Thanks for looking out! ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 23:45, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MjolnirPants! I was making my normal patrolling rounds and I realized that your user talk redirect page for your alt account didn't have any protection on it at all. I went ahead and applied indefinite extended confirmed edit and move protection for you. It'll put an end to the disruption going on there, plus it'll just make it so you don't have to worry about it at all ;-). Just figured I'd let you know. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:26, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, Osh. I appreciate it! ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 03:14, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You got it ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:25, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Quantico (season 3). Legobot (talk) 04:31, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message. I read the description of the procedure with great interest. Despite my 77 years (I am one of the older Polish wikipedians - there are a few older than me, and the oldest administrator on pl.wiki) I am happy to learn new things, like the ones you wrote about. The described method is new to me and I will probably use it in the future. The tutorial on colorizing black and white photos also interested me. In my graphics editions I use GIMP and Inkscape. Thank you again and best regards. PawełMM (talk) 15:55, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@PawełMM: My pleasure, and thank you for all your hard work at the graphics lab! ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:57, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The user in question on Infowars has a long history of this behaviour - making unsourced claims on talk, generally trolling people and then claiming he's being harassed when people lash back. Here's some difs for reference:

With regard to the Scotts language

[18] [19]

With regard to the word "villein"

[20]

With regard to the marriage date of Dorothy Vernon

[21]

With regard to Campaign to Protect Rural England

[22]

On an Administrators' noticeboard discussion of the block of the user Clockback

[23]

Just thought you'd want to kmnow what we're dealing with here. Simonm223 (talk) 18:02, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Simonm223: I think the diffs you presented here make a very strong case for a WP:NOTHERE/WP:CIR block of indefinite length. I would advise you to take this to WP:ANI. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:22, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I wasn't fishing for advice when I contacted you about it, but I think you could be right. I've posted a case and notified him.Simonm223 (talk) 19:40, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I know, but I just couldn't not offer you that advice after reading those diffs. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:48, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Man, I don't think I've been to your talkpage since you put up the big red sign. Love it, want one, always get told I'm the "only one who has house rules", which clearly is not the case. If you have a momentt, could you look at Wikipedia:Graphics_Lab/Illustration_workshop#Barbados_Boy_Scouts_Association? Thanks!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 02:11, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think you came by once when I had the previous one (an admin got a bee up his shorts and deleted it while "ordering" me not to recreate it. Fuck that noise.), but I'm not sure. I find having some house rules helps a lot, as anyone who's here for a legit reason either ignores the banner or gets a chuckle out of it, and anyone who gets pissed off by it is generally here to bitch and moan, anyways. Anywho, I've responded at the graphics lab. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 02:16, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your struggle at the Ben Swann article. I've contributed once or twice at the tp, but I will not edit the article. I worked in a television network news division for years, when we had a vice president for ethics, and I really don't want to drain my AGF reservoir on one article (AGF for the subject). For some news workers, their name and journalist shouldn't appear in the same sentence without not.

I intend to do some research on the subject, but I'll just add it to the article tp, without argumentation (as I did with a post about the difference between a local (or regional) Edward R. Murrow award and the Edward R. Murrow award).

I admire the patience and civility you show on the Swann tp. Thank you. — Neonorange (Phil) 00:21, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I could probably stand to be more civil, but I appreciate the sentiment. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 02:04, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Am I the only one who has misgivings about an editor with ~100 mainspace contributions taking on a GA review for Pizzagate? I'm not sure that's an article I would put on a list of low hanging fruit for new GA reviewers. GMG^talk 14:48, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GMG, I hadn't looked into their contribs, but seeing one of the edits to the article is making me question their suitability. I'm not 100% convinced they can't pull it off yet, though. I gotta dig a little deeper into what specifically they're changing before I can form a useful opinion. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:51, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GMG, I had been scrutinizing the wrong editor (Money Emoji), though I started to write this comment to tell you that my concerns were satisfied and that you had mistated their contribs by almost a factor of 10. But I see it was the reviewer you were referring to. Yes, I think that while they seem to have done alright on this one, they are probably not experienced enough to continue to do GA reviews. You might want to have a gentle word with them (something I think you would be better suited for than my crotchety self). ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 18:57, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They do seem to be punching above their weight. May be a clean start. I don't look for 100 mainspace edits to get you to the point where you're throwing out references to MOS:FNNR. May be block evasion. Would have to be a prolific sock master to have accounts lying around from 2014. Although their first edit was to unredlink their talk page, so they pass the Ritchie test. GMG^talk 19:09, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A clean sock doesn't bother me one bit, it's only when they start to stink that they need bleach. So I'm disinclined to go to SPI on the grounds of "this good new editor seems a little too competent, ifyaknowwhatimean". I think a nice word with them might not be a bad idea, but then, I can see the potential downside to that, as well. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:22, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	The Civility Barnstar
	For reliably making sure to AGF and comment on content and not contributors, for encouraging others to do the same, and for treating new users fairly at ANI, I award you the Civility Barnstar! Tornado chaser (talk) 17:30, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, —PaleoNeonate – 22:29, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They've been indeffed with an account creation block. Simonm223 (talk) 02:15, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Always be very careful when dealing with this individual. The only way to get anywhere is to be very deferential and massage his ego. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 14:18, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Boris, if that's true, then said individual needs to find a new hobby. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:29, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He has WP:INVOLVED himself at that page, so tools are out of the question there, but I endorse Boris' comment. Look at my block log. -Roxy, the dog. barcus 14:35, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be able to work up some righteous indignation if needed to fill out an unblock request. But the comments at the talk page are highly immature and not at all reflective of how an admin should comport themselves. It's more what I would expect from some newer editor with ~500 edits and no history of conflict. I just don't have it in me to not say something to that sort of noise. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:42, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Troublemaker. PackMecEng (talk) 14:53, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I resemble that remark... ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:03, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"world's first bodybuilding porn star astronaut rockstar!" So hows the bodybuilding rockstar part going? I figured you had the other two down already. PackMecEng (talk) 15:11, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm too lazy to pursue those or the astronaut one. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:39, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well let me know when your next video is out, it's been a while. PackMecEng (talk) 15:47, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"To be fair, my goth days back in the 90's" - Really? I had you down as Don Johnson.... Wouldnt goth be a bit hot in your locale? Only in death does duty end (talk) 14:56, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah. Quite hot. Hence many of the problems with tight pants (and our love of fishnet)... Don't even think about wearing tight leather pants: they'll have to bury you in them.

And yeah; I had a Crockett phase, too. To be honest, my "style" throughout most of my young years depending highly on the preferred style of whatever hot girl I was currently pursuing. Most of them were goth, tho. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:03, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have read though the first ani thread, the Jimbo thread, and now the new ani thread. Perhaps its some history that predates me but damn man. I get that the first consensus said no to the delete, but it was not exactly open that long. Is there something that is going over my head? I am rather short... PackMecEng (talk) 20:30, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@PackMecEng: Here's the cliffnotes version: A while back, MH almost got desysopped when he flipped his lip at me and went forum shopping to get me blocked. He couldn't, even when he started lying about what I said and did, so he just got more and more childish about it.

Eventually, he convinced a few admins to drag him to ArbCom for a desypopping. He would have been desysopped if the ArbCom at the time weren't (quite obviously to almost everyone involved) trying to blame literally everyone but MH for his outburst. Seriously: one guy was asked by an Arb to give evidence, then that Arb later voted to put that editor on probation for "contributing to the drama" by presenting said evidence. It was a total shitshow that pissed off a number of people and made half of Wikipediocracy cream their pants.

Quite a few editors whom MH had previously pissed off crawled out of the woodwork during those proceedings, and quite a few "questionable" (read: batshit stupid) judgements of his from the past came to light. So he built himself a camp of "enemies" by the time it was all said and done.

Then, he popped back onto the radar to make hysterical WP:CRYBLP complaints about some comments on a 2-year-old AfD a few days ago. He got shut down hard at ANI, and responded by hurling abuse at everyone disagreeing with him (some of the disagreement was somewhat rude, but the rudeness itself was inspired by MH's own prior interactions with those people and others) and whining about it on a few admins' talk pages. When nobody was willing to sanction a half dozen editors for rightfully pointing out that MH keeps digging his own ditches to trip into, he just kept attacking them until the lovely Bish came along and stuffed a gag into his mouth with a short block.

So the long and the short of it is, IMHO: A bunch of people really strongly dislike MH and want to deny him any courtesy for that reason. The fact that they all have really good reasons to dislike him means that nobody's willing to come down too hard on them for their own behavior (which hasn't been anywhere near as bad as MH's, but is still not ideal). ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:49, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my goodness, I think I will just step out of that mess then. Thanks for the summary, I think I have a good idea of what is about to happen then. On a related note, I have been spending a lot more time patrolling pending changes and random articles. It is a lot more fun and less stressful than most of the areas I would work in. The pay isn't nearly as good though. PackMecEng (talk) 21:48, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I resemble that remark. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 21:49, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I know, right? There's nothing quite so much fun as approving an edit from some random IP with no editing history that correctly uses complex wikimarkup syntax, cites sources and makes a significant improvement to an article. And there's something schadenfreude-ishly (if markedly less) satisfying about reverting some obvious vandalism with an edit summary of "No." ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:54, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah some of them are quite odd... Like huh you are pretty good at editing and adding to complex tables and infoboxes for someone that has never edited... I try not to think about that though, I get enough drama and hunting down who done it at work. Ever try to herd a group of really smart engineers that do not like being told they are wrong? 60 hours a week is enough for me on that front these days. PackMecEng (talk) 22:03, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I worked as a draftsman for about ten years. A draftsman's job description is "teaching engineers how to do engineering." But at least they were civil engineers. If they were software engineers, I'd skip all the foreplay and just bring a club to work.

"YOU." <smack> "WILL." <smack> "NEVER." <smack> "INSIST." <smack> "ON." <smack> "USING." <smack> "REGULAR." <smack> "EXPRESSIONS." <smack> "AGAIN." <smack> "Are we clear?" <tapping club against my free hand, ready to dish out a few more>

Three guesses what I do, these day. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:15, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Therapy. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 22:16, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm too stubborn for therapy. Besides, I'm sure I could just sort myself out with the judicious use of some regular expressions... ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:21, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds not to different than myself then. I spent about 6 years as a draftsman while getting my degree. I miss it sometimes, whenever I get the chance to draw myself it is just zen for me. At least when it is clean sheet that is, I get filled with dread looking at the way some of my guys format sketches. No foresight. PackMecEng (talk) 22:26, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My very first job out of high school was in a print shop, using an old pen plotter to plot drawings out of AutoCAD. Being an artist, I got really into technical drawing, and quickly landed a job doing old-fashioned hand drafting, with the flexible curves, templates and rapidograph set. Being a computer geek, I also learned AutoCAD and got into doing freelance drafting while I was going through the process of enlisting. (Dealing with the recruiter and MEPS can take several months.) When I got back out, it just seemed natural to go back to what I'd been doing before.

I will say that the field is not what it used to be. Even in the late 90's, when I started, a draftsman was expected to know AutoCAD inside and out, know all the industry standard symbology and terminology, and know how to do it all by hand, just in case. By the time I ended my last real drafting gig, everything was just button-pushing and typing, with nobody other than me knowing how to draft anything but the assembly-line drawings we cranked out.

It's one of the reasons I changed careers. Well, that and the pay. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:39, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's the same with my chums in the civil engineering trade. Road signs are supposed to conform to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions to the letter (because if you don't, somebody can have a really stupid accident and get let off by claiming the sign wasn't legal), and only about 1-2 old hands actually know how to design things to spec in their head. PS: I quite like regular expressions in moderation Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:51, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, I use them quite frequently, especially lately as I've been doing a lot of work with strings. But years after my first use, I still need a cheat sheet because I'm constantly confusing them with SQL wildcards, CMD wildcards and Scheme wildcards, and because there's still 3-4 different regex implementations that are just different enough that you can never use one in a system meant for the others. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 01:39, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I started with board drafting and then moved to AutoCAD V10 when it was new. The place I was at still had (I think) the original Catia huge terminals for the aerospace, they didn't let me play with those. They started going away from the terminals in the mid 80's. I got out of the defense stuff early 90's and these days I am on Autodesk Inventor. Back then the engineers never really drew stuffs on their own, needed people like you and me . Some would argue they still cannot draw, the group I have now are all engineers that never had that drafting part of their career. These days they are expected to do both, and rarely do either well! Perhaps I am become an old curmudgeon. PackMecEng (talk) 00:46, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The company I work for recently hired two engineers: a manufacturing engineer and a mining engineer (we do fiber optic WANs) and set them both to work drafting. I asked the boss about it at one point and he told me "they gotta know what the hell to do before I ever let them do it." So basically, he's training them on engineering by making them draft. lol It works, though. That's kind of how it goes. We have a sort-of drafting department (it's really a GIS/Asset Management/Surveying/Engineering department that also does IT work), but the way it usually works at our office, there's no distinction between an engineer and a draftsman. They both do design work and they both draw construction documents. (the latter do both better, naturally).

I still like to take a job from time to time and crank it out in 1/10th the time they would do it, all while loudly bitching that using Microstation is sooooo slow compared to AutoCAD (to be fair; it really is). Keeps 'em humble. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 01:39, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Never had a chance to really look at MicroStation, what is it like? Whenever we are doing layouts to put our machines in a customer's plant we still use AutoCAD since they all send files in DWG format. I always find it funny when a company like Tyson or Pilgrim's is still using R14. Then again chicken plants are so ass-backwards, you should see inside of one sometime... It's safe and all that, but it does not look it if you are in one. Also my goodness the number of chickens that go though those places a day. A small plant with just two lines can go though almost 60k birds per day running two shifts productions and one for cleanup and they run 6 days a week. PackMecEng (talk) 02:24, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Never had a chance to really look at MicroStation, what is it like? Now you've done it. You've opened a can of worms, and do you know why? Because I'm going to answer you with my review of MS that I'd been thinking about writing for some time now. MUAH HA HA HA !!!! (See the subsection below). ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 03:53, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thunder Britches' review of Microstation

I've been using it, developing for it, and integrating it into larger digital systems for just over two years now, with a little bit of drafting experience with it here and there before that. Meanwhile, I have 20+ years of experience using AutoCAD. So that imbalance of experience my influence my views somewhat, but the deep dive I took into MS the last two years has left me with almost as deep a knowledge of it as of Acad, I believe.

The Pros

• Some of the drawing tools are quite useful. Like, when drawing complex chains (the MS version of polylines), when you draw an arc, it shows you a circle whose size is based on the distance between your mouse and the last vertex. This is incredibly useful when vectorizing a raster background, as you can line your arc up almost perfectly just by eye without having to leave the command. You jsut click to set the center of the circle, then move your mouse to describe the arc along that circle you want to draw.
• Their version of paperspace is done using the built-in "models" system, allowing you to designate each model as either design or paper. This is great when you need to make multiple drawing sets from one design file.
• The DGN file format is extremely capable when it comes to storing diverse data. You can fit everything you need into a single file, if you are so inclined. It's also quite versatile in the coordinate system, making reprojections quite simple, and giving you plenty of "canvass" even when you're working with very large units (you can set your primary units to be parsecs or light years, if you like). It also allows for custom master and sub units, so you can, for example, work in cubits if you want to draw a really authentic pyramid plan set.
• It separates attachments from raster attachments and gives you a complete dialog with each.
• It allows you to open two application windows (the second one is just for docking dialogs), which is very useful for multi-monitor set ups.
• It supports virtually every data type you could ever use.
• It has excellent interoperability with the other Bentley products, such as Comms (a setup that lets you store your data in an Oracle database, instead of a DGN file).
• The modules for Comms are very focused on each of the three fields it's designed to work in (ethernet networks, coaxial networks and fiber optic networks).

The Cons

• The tools are almost entirely button based, meaning you have to drag your mouse out of the drawing pane to access any tool you haven't mapped to a function key. There are keyboard shortcuts, but they're hierarchical (meaning you have to hit the top-level key, then the next-level key, allowing time for the program to respond in between) and very counter-intuitive. The W key, for example, opens a handful of line and line-string related tools, then you have to choose one with the number keys.
• Key-ins (their version of the command line) needs to be given focus (by clicking on it) before a key-in can be entered. The vast majority of commands have no keyin.
• The right-click function is locked to a couple of options, the most useful one being the escape key. There's no option to set the right-click to be a zero zero point, or the Enter key, or anything really useful, like a context menu.
• The tools usually lock you into one single way of drawing geometry. For example, when drawing complex chains, you can only use the center-of-a-circle method to draw arcs. You can't enter the radius, length, chord or anything.
• Coordinate-based drawing (by punching in the exact coordinates of each vertex) takes fucking forever because you can't key it in, you have to use the X and Y dialogs (assuming you haven't accidentally closed them and forgot where in the labyrinthine menus they are), which are individual boxes to enter the coordinates, and even then, you have to be sure you're in absolute mode, which you will never be when you first click on them because they default to relative mode and you can't change that behavior.
• The programability is shit. Just complete shit. You have VBA, to which about 2/3 of the internal architecture is exposed (meaning there are some things you just can't do), and if you want to do anything more complex, you need to purchase an SDK from them, ride herd on them for six months until they finally get around to giving you access to their developer site, then proceed to write .DLLs using C++, with virtually no documentation whatsoever because fuck your business needs, pay us.
• The Comms backend (the Oracle database) ISN'T EVEN FUCKING FIRST NORMAL FORM AND THEIR OWN DEVELOPERS DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Seriously. I'm not being hyperbolic. I mean that literally. For comparison (in case you're not a software guy), the industry minimum standard for enterprise databases is third normal form.
• There are too many ways to do everything, with each way impacting the end result, and being unalterable through the other methods. For example, to set the text height of dimension text, you can alter it through the dimension style, through the text style that dimension style references, in the dimension itself (through annotation scaling or regular scaling), though the text styles of your seed file, through the dimension styles of your seed file or through the internal text editor used when you create the dimension. If you leave the style blank in all of those, you can change it in any one. But if you've set the text height through more than one of those methods, you will not be able to predict which height it will choose (and it will choose different heights for different individual objects).
• The object system (they call them "elements") is far too hierarchical and obscure. For example, a note with a leader is actually a cell (their version of a block) with certain special properties (that you can't access through VBA) that allows the text to be moved and the leader's tail to follow it. That cell contains a text object, a line object (the leader's tail) and a dimension object (the leader). A dimension object is, itself, a cell containing lines, shapes and possibly text with some special properties you can't access. There is no way to edit any of those component objects without destroying the overall note object. There is, furthermore, no exposed interface for editing anything but the text of the note. So if you need to change arrowheads, scales or even which level (read: layer) it's on, you must erase it and start again.
• A lot of tools are way too specific. For example, you use different "drop" commands (their version of "explode") to drop cells, line strings, complex chains and association links. Choosing the wrong one does nothing.
• Most inputs are confirmed with a data point. You have to actually click in the drawing to confirm changes or tool input, which freaks out everyone and has them double checking everything before committing, because if you haven't done it right and you click in the wrong spot, you may find yourself having to go through the entire command again from scratch.
• The licensing requires validation every time you start by connecting to a Bentley server. Bentley has shit servers that are frequently down.
• Even though they have a remote license verification system, you also need DRM software on your machine because they're apparently terrified of people stealing or buying old licenses and re-using them. Meanwhile, while Autodesk is known to be litigious, they also don't give a shit about much older versions. Their tech support once gave me a "master" CD key for R14 just because I asked them how to get another license for that version. Free, unlimited licenses because the company paid for one ten years earlier and their sales staff smelled an opportunity to smell a big upgrade sale in the not-too-distant future. Though to be fair, I'm quite sure that company still uses R14.
• There are 6 different ways to control the scale of objects of a fixed size, and you must set up all 6 of them properly to import objects (including placing cells) properly. You can only access 3 of them through VBA, and an additional 2 through the SDK.
• Some user preferences are still saved in the application settings, including button assignment, rather than the user workspaces.
• Their VBA documentation is of questionable accuracy, at best.
• You're stuck using VBA6.
• Creating a complex linetype (such as one containing shapes or letters) is a 40-50-step process that still requires you to manually scale said linetype for each object you place (there is a default you can set).
• The software is less stable than AutoCAD or IntelliCAD.
• The software is buggier, with plenty of unpredictable side effects occurring even when not CTDing.
• It uses an autosave feature that triggers on certain actions while you're working. It will not trigger after being idle for a while, so if you tweaked a thousand minor things and then walk away, your changes may be lost if it crashes before you return.
• The save button doesn't seem to do anything. I've hit save after making changes I knew would not trigger the autosave and closed the software. When I opened that design file again, those changes were gone.
• There is an addition "save settings" feature that must be triggered else you will lose much of your prep work. It also takes over the Ctrl+F shortcut, so you must use the mouse menus to access the "Find Text" dialog.

There's probably more to say, both pro and con, but it's late and that's all I could think of without the software right in front of me. The best summary I can give is one I stole from an old-school draftsman/programmer on the Bentley forums. "AutoCAD is a drafting tool, whereas Microstation is a design platform." I absolutely do not recommend microstation for anything except large, simple GIS mapping and as the graphical base of a Building management system. The powerful features of the dgn filetype lend themselves to use for those purposes. To be fair, the DGN filetype would be great for a number of other uses, but the failings of Microstation as a drafting tool make it impractical for anything that's not limited to very simple graphical features with complex data structures attached to them. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 03:53, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dang lol tell me how you really feel! But some of those seem like major issues that I do not understand why they would not be solved. Especially stuff like the save issue you mention, saving is kind of important. That licensing would sketch me out to, I never liked having to validate to outside servers. We have an internal license server here that renews every few days with the mothership. I have never been much of a programming chick either, I can work my way through VBA and easy stuff like that but never got into C or C++ or any of the fancy stuff. Though I have someone gotten myself into being head of IT here. I do not know how or when that happened but now I take care of all the servers here, backups, and updates. Also a lot of those seem like pretty basic quality of life issues that given the age of the software is kind of unacceptable. Though it could be something like AutoCAD where there is so much legacy they cannot change it. Or as is becoming more standard for Autodesk, buy modules others have made for their program and slap them on, while not really understanding what that module did. That's what they did with Vault (sounds like their Comms but uses SQL), their gear/spline tools, and half of AutoCAD electrical. Which leads to an inconsistent user experience since the user layouts for those tools are pretty different than Autodesk's set. AutoCAD used to always be my go to, and for plant layout and schematics it still is, but more and more Autodesk Inventor is slowly taking over. Even for cable layouts in large machines. I find it is easier for the shop to look at 3D models and figure out how stuff should be routed verses just the schematics. PackMecEng (talk) 14:19, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of the problems are legacy issues, as you say: they can't change it because it would break everything else. Some are legacy issues with the user base: they don't dare change it or those users who've been using it for 20 years will be up in arms. Other stuff is like Comms: they initially purchased that software from an independent developer and adapted it to their own use. Then they added a couple features, fixed a little problem, tweaked a little something. Then they added something else. Then they tweaked something else. Then they fixed something else. Ad nauseum. By the time my company is using it today, it's a hot mess that no single person really groks, even at Bentley. Their reps keep telling us that they're working on recreating the database from scratch, and redesigning comms to integrate better (right now, all the comms tools are in drop-down menus).

As for inventor: It's soo much easier to do 3D in inventor than in older versions of AutoCAD (the newer versions have "stolen" much of Inventor's toolset, from what I hear; I'm still using 2015 myself). I've done 3D dwgs before and it can be a pain, though it's really not all that bad. In some ways, it's better than dedicated 3D modelling software. But Inventor was, IMHO a masterpiece when it comes to 3D technical drawing. Not that it was all that groundbreaking: just taking the usual 3D drawing tools and adding the AutoCAD command line functions and syntax. But that was an amazing step forward. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:39, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I started using it back in 2003 with v5.3, their first "stable" release. It has gotten a lot better since then, we don't even worry about upgrades anymore we just install them. But these days Solidworks has pretty much caught up, and the new licensing plan from Autodesk is unpleasant. They are going to a rent model vs you own the license, from what I remember you can still just buy Solidworks. We got grandfathered in up until now and we are going to have to look at if we want to keep upgrading to new versions or just keep our current 2019 and drop service. From what I read a substantial number of businesses are dropping it because of that. They claim it helps businesses that hire a bunch of people for a project then fire them when they are done and since you can grow and shrink the number of licenses easily with renting it and it makes sense for them. Well we do not do that, we are always developing and have pretty consistent engineering staff levels. But I still think for industrial machinery Inventor is still a solid choice. But that could be my years of bias. PackMecEng (talk) 15:09, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Autodesk's move to a subscription service is exactly why I still use 2015. It was the last version I could buy outright (or at least buy an upgrade to from 2013 outright). Same reason I still use Photoshop CS6, although I think Adobe handles the pricing much better. $21/month vs $195/month. Even with AutoCAD being the more expensive software by far, that's too much money for me as an independent contractor. I could save up money for a $5k license every ten years or so. I can't shell out that same amount every 2 years. Plus with things like the push to the ribbon, I'm leery of being forced into an upgrade every time one comes out. I don't want to fire it up one day just to find out my 20 year old workflow can't be used anymore because they thought they'd make some UI improvements and they couldn't preserve the old UI as an option. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:24, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah not a fan. Especially when I have to do a write up on okay why are we spending all this money again? Like I said we have been grandfathered in since we had maintenance and all that, but this is the last year for that. Also our machine shop uses FeatureCAM, that was recently bought by Autodesk. The nice part is it works better with the native inventor files now but they are going to the same model soon. I really do not want to have to go though the trouble of switching to Solidworks, and with my luck they will start that same model soon as well. Though I suspect they will wait a little bit since they are picking up old Autodesk business from people that have jumped ship. I hear DaveCAD is good though. PackMecEng (talk) 16:41, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have been developing some CAD software on my own time in C#, using Visual Studio. The solution name for it is FuckYourCAD.sln because I started writing it to compete directly with Bentley Comms. I still haven't though up a serious name for it, and I'm not 100% sure I ever will.

Of course, this is in my "copious" free time, between taking care of my kids, watching the small number of tv shows I enjoy, playing video games on my computer and working on my programming languages (YALL: Yet Another LISP Language and Y'ALL: the same thing but which uses southern-slang-inspired keywords). ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:03, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See that kind of fancy Pants kind of stuff is beyond me. I made some stuff on my graphing calculator and that is about the end of it. PackMecEng (talk) 18:49, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, I'll probably never finish any of those (except taking care of my kids, but even then, prolly not till they're 30). I have a habit of not finishing my larger projects. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:00, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I had an old Mazda that can attest to that. PackMecEng (talk) 19:31, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, lord. Rotary engines? No thanks. I'm too scared I'd break something while trying to change the oil. I'll stick with my 1992 Camaro with the L03 turned into a 334 Stroker, a Borg-Warner T-56 transmission and a 315" positraction rear pumpkin. She's a frankenstein to be sure, but she's my bolt-necked chariot. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:54, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The thing was a treat. Even did the 3-rotor 20B conversion. But never really finished the project the way I wanted. Then me and the man decided to get a house together and it was one of the things to go. Recently got my first motorcycle though, one of those things I always wanted since I was a little one.

I always liked the boxy camaro's, glad you got rid of the 6 banger! Those make me cry on the inside. PackMecEng (talk) 20:07, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a fun setup to tool around in. I didn't get rid of a V6; the L03 was available in all the third-gen Camaros. But a lot of people say that there were no V8s available, because the V6s were so common. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:33, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake, I thought 334 stroker and my head went right to V8 because of the 305. PackMecEng (talk) 20:39, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is a V8: The L03 motor is a 305cu, TBFI V8 engine. The 334 stroker is a common modification of 305cu engines. So common you can even buy kits, though most guys do it by parting out the pieces individually. Basically, you put a couple thousandths bore on the cylinders (and replace the pistons) and swap out the crank from a 454 big block (and the pushrods, of course). ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:39, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I was confused but I got ya now. I'm a Ford person though I cannot deny the greatness that is LS. PackMecEng (talk) 21:49, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm an atheist who was a baptist as a kid, and yet I still cross myself whenever someone mentions the LS or LT. ;) ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:02, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ohhh I have not had a chance to play with the new LT yet. Plenty with the LS1 and LS3 though, helped a friend put one in a NA Miata back in the day. But I hear they are sexy. PackMecEng (talk) 00:52, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No good deed goes unpunished, you are right of course. I stopped myself several times from getting involved over there. Sorry to see what happened. PackMecEng (talk) 14:52, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Drama is bad for everyone. Every once in a while, it takes a little bit of drama to get rid of a lot of drama. The problem is that too many people think that's a far more common occurrence than it really is. I'm just gonna wait for a bit. If it's gonna continue, it's gonna continue. But I'm not gonna be the one to breathe life back into it. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:06, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like they someone nipped it in the butt and closed it. It's disappointing to see generally smart people do stupid stuff. PackMecEng (talk) 15:59, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, there's another drama thread going on where demonstrably smart people are doing incredibly stupid things. Every time I edit this site I ask myself "Am I being an unjustified ass?" and "Am I being an unjustified idiot?" and if the answer to either is "yes", I change or abandon my edit. (It can be a little depressingly enlightening to reflect upon how many times I do answer "yes", though. It's hard to escape the conclusion that I'm a dumbass of the highest caliber.) ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:07, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eh everyone is a dumbass, just some more than others. As the saying goes, half of being smart is knowing what you are dumb about. PackMecEng (talk) 18:07, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with (this is possibly apocryphal) Einstein: "Only two things are infinite. The universe, and human stupidy. And I'm not sure about the former." ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 18:37, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source for that? Humanengr (talk) 01:11, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Humanengr (are you an engineer, by chance?) I'm afraid that was all me. I even started to type it backwards before I realized what I was saying. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 01:22, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Engineer by training, working on the human part. Your aphorism prompts some further exploration, still mulling. Humanengr (talk) 01:41, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was just something I thought up at the moment to succinctly describe the difference between the two. I don't think it merits much deep thought.

I think we're all still working on the human part. From what I've seen, it seems to take exactly 1 lifetime to achieve for the majority of us. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 01:47, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Poodle. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

sent apologies to JzG for inclusion in the prior version. Apologies to you as well for that distraction. Humanengr (talk) 07:37, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Firehosing...I don't want this to exist...but maybe this should exist. I mean, this is a thing. GMG^talk 22:33, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It'd probably need a different name, or need to be a subsection at Propaganda. I'm not finding sources defining the term that way, although it's clear that the Vox video does. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:49, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, this isn't new. See the Gish gallup. I've found that the best response to being Gish galluped is to ignore the individual lies and turn the tables: force them to try to defend their own credibility and do not let up until the end of it all.

Or shoot them in the face. More and more, I wonder if I'm going to end up back in battle rattle again before I retire, fighting in another civil war. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:52, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I was just wondering whether you have finished working on this image of the Princess of Wales or not. Since then, somebody has created a JPEG version of the file but I still don't find it suitable for infobox use, and other users will probably reject it too. You did a great job on the image of the Duchess of Cambridge though, that is why I'm personally asking you to do this favor and work on this image as well. I'll be glad if you notify me when you're done with colorizing it. Thanks a lot. Keivan.f^Talk 00:12, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Keivan.f: I remember that. I actually did some of the work on it at my job, then lost the file during a backup at work. I understand what you mean about the colorized jpeg version: I had actually tried to fix it today, but I wasn't able to improve it very much at all. I'll see what I can do. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 01:01, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Thank you so much. To be honest, the current infobox image is not good at all, and this new JPEG looks terrible. Keivan.f^Talk 01:15, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Keivan.f: Take a look at this one. I'm not completely happy with it, but I need another set of eyes. Tell me what looks off to you. It's difficult as the original photo was subject to significant post-processing and some digital editing. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:19, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes, those eyes look creepy as fuck - the first thing I thought was, "if I looked away from that for about 3 seconds I'd come back and find Pennywise the Dancing Clown staring at me shouting kiss me, fat boy!" (To which my response would be, "Operation Yewtree is thataway, mate". Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:14, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

100% agreement here. But check out the original. I'm able to lighten the shadows around the eyes a bit. I was initially hesitant to do so because that's changing the nature of the original image, whereas colorizing is just "restoring" the color that was there in the original scene, but the more I look at it, the more I think that the eyes in the black and white have been editing to darken them and that me restoring them to their normal color wouldn't be original. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:22, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I went ahead and slightly lightened the eyes. I can't entirely fix is, because part of it is her expression. That is definitely an "I'm so fucking sick of smiling, for fuck's sake just take the fucking photo already." smile. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:30, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • It looks fine to me. I'm actually glad that you lightened the eyes because it looks more normal right now. And to be honest, I also think that she is giving the photographers a fake smile here, that's why something is off about her face. But it's still better than the one that is currently being used on the article as she looks terribly sad in that one. Keivan.f^Talk 20:25, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not happy with it. It looks almost cartoonish in how bright the colors are, but when I lower the saturation, it then looks "obviously colorized". I'm probably going to continue to fiddle with it. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:44, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	The Photographer's Barnstar
	Thank you for your help! Much appreciated. Tom (LT) (talk) 10:47, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am reporting you at arbitration enforcement. --Godotskimp (talk) 16:48, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Godotskimp is a meat puppet/sock of the white supremacist Emil Kirkegaard. 89.163.221.47 (talk) 17:40, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

IP, I don't necessarily disagree. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:01, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would there be any point or benefit to having other editors sign your anti-racism essay in support? I for one agree 100% with what is written there and would be happy to endorse. Simonm223 (talk) 17:57, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see how it would hurt. Do me a favor and add your sig to the talk page in a new section. I'll see about getting the word out. I mostly wanted admin endorsement, because I intended it to be an explanatory text for admins who are blocking editors for displaying racist imagery, reciting racist slogans or POV pushing racist views. But if enough regular editors agree... ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 18:36, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

but need to be absolutely it might help if I was clear on where you stand: Do you consider me someone who "previously believed that, for example, 9/11 was an inside job or the Bildeberg group secretly controls all the world's governments"? If no answer is at hand, s'ok. Thx, Humanengr (talk) 01:01, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The question remains, is it dolphins or mice that control the Earth? The answer is 42. O3000 (talk) 01:28, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

:). Very whys. Humanengr (talk) 01:54, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Humanengr I don't know. I'm not going to say one way or the other because you're the only one who knows what you believe. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 02:57, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"doesn't state that conspiracy theories are wrong by definition" but this language: "A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes a conspiracy … without credible evidence" will be taken the same way by readers.

I came on this page not because I'm 'into' conspiracy theories or any particular one in any way. That's not my concern. (In looking back at my browser history, I see I came upon this page because of a mention of 'conspiracy theory" on Talk:Covert United States foreign regime change actions, which happens to be on my watchlist.)

I was immediately struck by the slant, opposite to my technical training, of the 'definition' of a term built on the word 'theory' to indicate 'unwarranted'. That's not my understanding of 'theory'. So I looked it up in Wikt: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/conspiracy_theory:

1. A hypothesis alleging that the members of a coordinated group are, and/or were, secretly working together to commit illegal or wrongful actions including attempting to hide the existence of the group and its activities. In notable cases the hypothesis contradicts the mainstream explanation for historical or current events.

I haven't looked at that in a while but now see it also includes "contradicts the mainstream explanation".

I'm not a WP insider and so went looking around for what's supposed to govern definitions in WP — I can't find my notes on that in the moment (maybe you know where that is talked about), but I don't think we're supposed to run totally counter to the dictionary definition. Humanengr (talk) 22:33, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter. This is not a hill worth dying on, and if you continue to push this against the rather obvious consensus there, you could be blocked for being disruptive. I understand that you have a point; but it's not gonna happen, so let it go. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 23:01, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I should have started the above with "I actually do think your version is an improvement and I thank you for that." I also take some solace that my prompting this discussion mitigated the harm of "unwarranted". So, again, thanks. Humanengr (talk) 15:50, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be so kind as to go to this essay and either indicate your agreement by signing in the Endorsers section, or posting right here in this section an explanation of what you would like to see changed before you would endorse it? ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:24, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the page focuses on 'white' racism. Should it be generalized? Or clarify the focus? Not sure how to approach it. Humanengr (talk) 16:33, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's intentional. There's a note explaining it at the end of the lede that defines the specific usage. Basically; non-white racism is such a minor problem in the English-speaking world that it's generally not worth having an essay addressing it. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:37, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I made a couple super minor capitalization edits, and feel as if the last sentence/paragraph of "Blocking racists" seems unrelated or not fully refined - Tacked on, at the very least.

Otherwise I fully endorse the message as is. --Cheers! Elfabet (talk) 15:44, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's a bit long. Quite some words, but it feels a bit repetitive. I've added a nutshell and frankly, if you've read that, I don't know if most readers would still need to read the actual essay. The article list is useful though. A couple of details on actual content:

"That the Holocaust never happened, or resulted in far fewer deaths than believed by objective historians.", if I'm not mistaken there are also some respected historians who doubt the actual number. And as we may continue to find new evidence and better ways to estimate the number, I don't think they should automatically be discredited "because racism". But in such cases you are talking about 4-5 million instead of 6 and some deaths may simply be attributed to related but different things^{see below}. It doesn't change how evil Hitler was, just like Hitler liking dogs or being a vegetarian doesn't make him any less evil. What I actually suggest is to change "or resulted in far fewer deaths than believed by objective historians." into "or resulted in only a fraction of the deaths when comparing to the consensus of most historians.". After all, what's objective is relative.. (what a lame pun that was)

The swastika is not a racist symbol: "In the Western world it was a symbol of auspiciousness and good luck until the 1930s, when it became a feature of Nazi symbolism as an emblem of Aryan race identity and, as a result, was stigmatized by association with ideas of racism and antisemitism.". Just like the toothbrush moustache, Hitler just ruined it for everybody. Alexis Jazz (talk) 19:01, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Before People start guessing, I would like to clarify that I am a Hitler hater and Nazi Hater, with that clarified. Alexis Jazz Just wanted to state that It wasn't ruined for everybody, may be for most of the western world. [24] Come to the East and We still revere what we have been doing for thousands of years. Cheers and regards. --DBigXrayᗙ 21:51, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

if I'm not mistaken there are also some respected historians who doubt the actual number. Historians differ, but there's a difference between two historians arguing whether it was 5 or 6 million, and the nazi typing on the internet that it was "a few thousand at most".

The swastika is not a racist symbol Indeed, it is, at least in the West. This is a common mistake many people make, but symbols (including words and common idioms) of all sorts do not have concrete meanings; they have usages. If they had meanings, then humanity - and indeed all intelligent life- would speak a single language and be able to recognize those meanings in symbols universally. The swastika is used most often in the West as a racist symbol, therefore it is a racist symbol in the West. That it also has a very different meaning outside the West or among minorities in the West or even that it had a different meaning first is immaterial: In English, the letter "A" is a letter of the alphabet, which can be used to produce certain sounds (such as in "Hat" or "hay"), but it can also be an indefinite participle that is usually pronounced like a short "U". That former fact does not invalidate the latter, just as the swastika's original use does not invalidate the claim that it's a racist symbol. Besides, the nazi swastika is recognizably different from the majority of non-nazi swastikas, and this has been intention since the 1940's. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:56, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MP are you sure when you say the nazi swastika is recognizably different from the majority of non-nazi swastikas, and this has been intention since the 1940's, cuz this was made in the 2nd Century and it looks pretty similar to me. --DBigXrayᗙ 22:02, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of Majority by Merriam-Webster ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:09, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you I am aware of the meaning. I am not sure The total population of Non nazi swastika users. But I do know that from among the Non-Nazi Swastika users, Hindus, Buddhists and Jains Who make up more than 2 Billion humans consider this particular version sacred and do use it. There are for sure other versions as well, but this included. (2/2.5) does look like majority to me. So I will be a bit careful while using the words such as "majority dont use" without any clarification. regards. --DBigXrayᗙ 22:19, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MP, I see your point, but the symbol is more than just a racist symbol. If a Wikipedian has this symbol on their user page because they are Hindu or Jain, they shouldn't be reported. This Jainism userbox isn't illegal, is it? Also, and again I have no clear answer to this question myself: is Pepe the Frog a racist symbol as well? Alexis Jazz (talk) 23:33, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To me that is like a Christian cross, indeed very different. —PaleoNeonate – 00:58, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Anyone commenting here who thinks that an unqualified statement that something is a racist symbol is the same thing as insisting that every single usage of that symbol is a sign of racism without exception should stop, LOOK AT MY SIGNATURE and then carefully consider whether you think it's more likely that I hold that position, or that you have been misunderstanding what I have written. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 01:50, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For clarity: Would say, Norman Finkelstein or Ron Unz, be characterized as racists with respect to their Holocaust positions? If yes, on what specific grounds? Humanengr (talk) 02:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Finkelsteins position on the holocaust is pretty much the same as almost everyone else. His position on how *people* have exploited the holocaust since however could only lead to a characterization as a racist if you accept saying nasty but true things about Israel is racism. A situation many Israel apologists regularly attempt, but has no basis in reality. Only in death does duty end (talk) 11:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would it count towards the six million?

(bitchfit removed) North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:16, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am disappoint. PackMecEng (talk) 16:23, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Northamerica1000: Fuck your bullshit and your templates. Seriously; fuck off and don't post to my page again. This is where adults are welcome, not pedants with nothing better to do than wander around bitching up a storm. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:29, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm not rich enough to bet $100, but I'm fine with $5 if you are (it's supposed to be modeled on a friendly bar bet). And, of course, there would not be any kind of fiddling with the sample of Wikipedia editors asked. We can hammer out the details over email if you like. Kingsindian ♝ ♚ 04:20, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said, knock yourself out. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 04:25, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Interpreted by my doggy brain in an early morning session today, as Malcom-in-the-Middle. Not a bad guess, as it turns out. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 09:14, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's whatever I say it is. You're not the boss of me, now. And you're not so big. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 12:56, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bite me. -Roxy, in the middle. wooF 13:07, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You had asked at AN "I'm still waiting for someone to explain how the RfC is non-neutrally worded. Is the descriptive "partisan sites with a poor reputation for factual accuracy" inaccurate?" I don't feel that AN is an appropriate forum for directly discussing content like that, but I would be happy to do it here.

That it is a "partisan site" is agreed by everyone, there is no one that disputes that and I have no problem with that in the RfC question. But the question if it has a reputation for factual accuracy is the primary question in if it is a reliable source or not. To push in the question that it does not have such a reputation is to answer the very question being asked. Even if it is true, that it doesn't have such a reputation, then that should be the result of the discussion not a premise. The neutrality of an RfC is neutral between the options (pro or con). Every person who starts an RfC thinks that their opinion is right as to what should be done. But even if they are correct, pushing others to join the discussion with advocacy in favor of their side of the discussion is inappropriate.

Additionally the opening states "the site admits to pushing fake news". This is a highly disputed factual claim. The very first opposer Icewhiz says "The site does not admit to promoting fake news". Another WP editor says the claim of admitting to pushing fake news "took a single informal comment by a single BB editor out of context." WP editor TParis says "that Breitbart 'admits' it's fake news is as fake as he claims they are."

As suggested by Kingsindian, a totally neutral question would be "Should Breitbart be deprecated as a source in the same way as WP:DAILYMAIL?" And then the reasons, for doing that could be debated in the debate section. -Obsidi (talk) 13:09, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not even going to respond to the meat of your statement because there's nothing really there to respond to. I'm just going to point out that it took you 320 words to respond to something that only needed 8-22 words. So "It's not a fact that Breitbart is partisan or publishes fake news" would have been the sort of response that would have made sense (until you consider that it's bullshit), or "Yes, but X Y and Z are also true, and they explain/justify Breitbart's partisanship and lies." And the bit about whether Breitbart admits anything is pretty much the definition of weak sauce. Seriously, no-one in their right mind reading that headline expects the editor of Breitbart to just shrug and say "Yeah, we make stuff up."

The fact that you have to go into this kind of detail to make your case shows just how weak it is. As I've said twice before now: Unless you can show that the statements are false, misleading, or subjective, which you cannot do, you can't argue that the statement is biasing or canvassing. You've been shot down hard on this already. It's time to drop the stick and leave the poor horse alone. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:22, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say hey! You invited those interested in keeping things on Wp humorous here--so here I am! So... what are your interests? Do you watch tv and if so, what are your faves? Movies? Books? I am obviously totally fascinated by your manic nature--so clue me in! Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:13, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

lol Check out the userboxes on my user page for that. I should probably add a Walking Dead, Stranger Things and Game of Thrones user box, too. But feel free to read through the above, and check out the talk pages of the regulars here; they're usually full of huxters. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:53, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gonna make me work for it myself huh?  :-) Those shows are all great--but I admit to leaving the Dead when Negan killed my favorite character. I have not been back since. It was just too awful for me to consider it entertainment anymore. Will George R.R. Martin ever get off his duff? He loves leaving things unfinished doesn't he? Still waiting for the next book. Anyway--nice to meet you! Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:17, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've been waiting for the next book since '02. One time, I actually got it, but it wasn't the last book. So I started waiting again. Nowadays, I content myself with knowing I'll watch the final episode approximately 18 years before I read the final book. And the 'Dead has become a bit of an addiction, so even though I wanted to (at least three times now), I haven't been able to stop. I read the comics a while back and every time I recognize something, I get excited again. Just wait till the whisperers show up. That's gonna be creepy as hell unless the showrunners screw it all up... ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:00, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't respond to your "All conspiracy theories contain some element of truth. The Bilderberg Group really exists, 9/11 really happened, Autism is actually diagnosed after the administration of common vaccines. All of those are true statements, and all are central to conspiracy theories." because I couldn't make sense of your setup. But since you relied on that in your follow-up, I just wanted to try to clear up what seems to me a confusion.

It’s not whether Y is the case (that “the Bilderberg Group really exists, 9/11 really happened, Autism is actually diagnosed after the administration of common vaccines”), it’s whether conspiracy X caused Y. In terms of what is 'central': It’s not the Y statements that “are central to conspiracy theories”, the Y is simply the 'effect'; it’s the 'there was a conspiracy X' and ‘conspiracy X caused Y’ statements that are central. Humanengr (talk) 02:45, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You quoted someone saying that conspiracy theories sometimes have an element of truth to support the claim that conspiracy theories sometimes have evidence supporting them. I was illustrating the claim in the sort so that you could implicitly contrast it with your claim. They are very different. My subsequent comment should have made this clear. But the part you should read is the last paragraph of my last comment. Continuing to argue this is growing disruptive, and I'm considering telling you not to post to my talk page again, as your comments here seem always to serve the purpose of attempting to draw me back into a discussion which I consider to be over and done. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 12:45, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I only ask because you commented earlier here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_common_misconceptions

I'm having a bit of a hard time gathering consensus, but it seems a warranted addition. The other editor seems bound and determined to block any additions to the page across all topics. Curious if you had any insight. Squatch347 (talk) 20:25, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Squatch347: I'm taking my son to swim practice now but I'll be happy to jump in later tonight. FWIW, I've been poking my nose in from time to time and have an idea of what's going on. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:42, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Have a good time at swim practice, I was a swimmer myself, and I remember taking my son to practice at 0500 in the freaking morning. Hopefully it isn't that early for you. Squatch347 (talk) 20:45, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

At this point I think he is just refusing to allow any new changes. If you look back through the history you'll see that he has reverted every substantive edit to this page in the last three months. He also is essentially acting as a roadblock to anything new on the page based on his own particular reading of the rule. Thoughts on how to pursue this?

Diffs of him blocking content:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_common_misconceptions&diff=prev&oldid=860053787&diffmode=source

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_common_misconceptions&diff=prev&oldid=860051132&diffmode=source

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_common_misconceptions&diff=prev&oldid=858416016&diffmode=source

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_common_misconceptions&diff=prev&oldid=859501927&diffmode=source

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_common_misconceptions&diff=prev&oldid=856414461&diffmode=source

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_common_misconceptions&diff=prev&oldid=856263596&diffmode=source

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_common_misconceptions&diff=prev&oldid=855924257&diffmode=source

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_common_misconceptions&diff=prev&oldid=853729087&diffmode=source

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_common_misconceptions&diff=prev&oldid=852737101&diffmode=source

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_common_misconceptions&diff=prev&oldid=861185000&diffmode=source

Squatch347 (talk) 19:49, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't disagree. I would take it to ANI with an accusation of ownership and ask an admin to have a chat with them. The links you have here look pretty damning, though you should also grab diffs of the first couple to show that they were blocking new content, not simply removing old content. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:01, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~~~

(talk page gnome) Since it's a page that's on my watchlist, my impression is that a number of reverts may be substanciated. I can't say that I reviewed the above (I'm not even done watchlist patrolling for today so I may not have the time until tomorrow). —PaleoNeonate – 03:00, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've been following the discussion. The editor who keeps reverting has some pretty crappy arguments; claiming that a source which says something is a common misconception is actually claiming it's a disagreement between scholars, and when that failed, claiming that one of the list criteria needs to be met by the editors on this page before they can add it. They're outnumbered and grasping at straws to keep out anything they don't like. And this is from a guy who was part of the last big purge that page experienced. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 03:04, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes although I didn't read it all, the discussion about that last topic was definitely tedious... —PaleoNeonate – 05:19, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think it took me until now to get involved? ;) ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 12:33, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note about Request: Edmund Hillary -if you have time. Vysotsky (talk) 19:23, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

I've closed it as stale, but this was ill-advised. As you can see, I've had Nihlus sound off on my talk page, but I just left it and either rebuked it factually or let talk page stalkers handling it. Reverting it with "rv trolling" would be akin to pouring gasoline on a burning building. I'm really just coming back to this again. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:14, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Editor at Commons, Reply to yours from earlier today. Yes, if you can come up with a better version based on the below original, that would be appreciated. I did remove the street name since only a few people live on that street, and downsize it just a spec. Jim Percy (talk) 23:14, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Girl_Scouts_Competition_Letter.jpg

https://vgy.me/5JV0ih.jpg

@JimPercy: Take a look at this. (I plan to take the color out once I'm done getting a nice, high-contrast version with sharp lines and all the elements intact.) I'm reluctant to erase the timestamp in the corner any more because I'd have to paint in what's behind it by hand, and that will look bad. If I trimmed it, that would just take off part of the word "division". What I'm tempted to do is erase every bit of the letterhead, but that runs into WP:OR. Do you think you could find another copy of that same letterhead? If I had a clean version, I could use that to restore this one. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 01:22, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MPants at work: The key part of the letter is the last paragraph. It fairly well proves that illustrator Paul Martin himself, made the hand-salute change to his contest-winning Girl Scout poster, so that it could be used as the official Girl Scouts' poster. And it was for several years! This minor detail would be lost to history without this upload, defects and all (which are unavoidable in this case as mentioned in an email). I thought it best to just deleted the letterhead on the right side to the point where the yellow date shows up (or somehow alter that yellow color to a tannish or whatever mixes in.) I figured the letterhead is not the most important part, but rather the text anyway, and especially the date of Feb. 9, 1931 and last paragraph. I did look at the copy as requested. I noticed that you straightened it great, saving right side of letterhead. I'd think that all of that portion including the yellow stamp would need to be extracted. I suppose that the missing of the very end of the word "Division" is not the worse. I would just state under "Other information" that no text was affected except for the ending of that single word. I have already explained under "Other information" about the sub-par condition of original copy. Jim Percy (talk) 13:10, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for re-posting this. My reply was (I believe; I'm too lazy to open my email;) ) that I'd go ahead and crop and finish it. It should be in place now. I hope this helps. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:23, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MPants at work: For clarity, the defect in question was the bright yellow camera date. Now,. to the present. The new version looks great. It saves most of the letterhead. Well, 83% is better than 33% (rough figures). I'd think it would look better with a boarder around it or a slightly off-white paper, so it doesn't blend in with the computer screen. If that's done the blemish dot next to the L in Girl Scouts (atop) can be removed too. But, I'm just being picky, so ignore all that. I'm not any expert. Thanks for your efforts in preserving this for reason previously stated. Jim Percy (talk) 13:41, 27 September 2018 (UTC) PS. Oh, I didn't realize the email link was mostly meant for personal or private details. Jim Percy (talk) 13:41, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind lowering the contrast a bit. I'll put back in just a hint of the original color, too. Yeah, email is usually for stuff you don't want others to see. I don't mind using it for routine stuff personally, but I also like to make a point of being transparent when it comes to image editing, because it's a very fuzzy area that often touches on OR and copyright law. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:45, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is no discussion to be found for this, nor is there information on the page where we request protection. Cognissonance (talk) 02:56, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Cognissonance: I don't know what led to pending changes protection, though it's not surprising for that article. I am a pending changes reviewer, and I reverted the changes I saw, because they spoke in the past tense about something that will happen tomorrow. Tomorrow, you may revert me and I will accept that change so that it appears live in the article. Sound good? ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 03:38, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No problem (though in Europe it is already out). Cognissonance (talk) 04:14, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Cognissonance:Okay then, I'll self-revert. Usually the times/dates given are North American, but I wouldn't be too surprised if it dropped in Europe already. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 04:16, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The logs for the page show that it was semi-protected on August 3, 2018. At the time, there was quite a bit of vandalism, so the natural thing to do was to protect it. -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 05:10, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, MjolnirPants, and welcome to Women in Red. If you are interested in writing or improving women's biographies, you might find it useful to look through our Ten Simple Rules. Please let me know if you run into any difficulties or need any help. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 07:06, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018 at Women in Red

		Please join us... We have four new topics for Women in Red's worldwide online editathons in October! New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/94|Clubs]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/95|Science fiction + fantasy]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/96|STEM]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/97|The Mediterranean]] Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Ipigott (talk) 07:06, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Mohammad bin Salman. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You listed List of common misconceptions for deletion? Gee fizz. Bold move. Yeah, it should probably be deleted as inherently OR by way of inclusion criteria, but I'm surprised you're not cynical enough to think that it almost certainly wont. Anyway, try not to screw with folks so badly that they go back to instagram. You know, it wouldn't hurt you to get a little soft around the edges.

BTW, apparently I have the official wife approval to go to Columbus in a couple weeks. If you have the time to drive up, we can probably carpool from the Kentucky-Tennessee border, but it's turning into a family trip, so you'll have to sit in the back with my daughter. Be prepared to have a strong opinion about Mickey Mouse and Elmo. GMG^talk 01:21, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, you know what was really stupid? I got a total of 7 emails from experienced editors and admins warning me about the capacity to spew bullshit of no less than 4 of the most vocal participants there, and I ignored them all. Well, not anymore. I've seen enough immaturity at that talk page and AfD to qualify me as an expert on child psychology. I'm done with that mess and someone else can clean it up or let it just sit there and rot. Not my monkey, not my circus.

I'm afraid I'm not going to be making Columbus this year. I've taken a lot of time off work recently (went well past my vacation time and into unpaid time off), and I need to replenish my bank account before Christmas. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 01:38, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's kindof the calculation we were making too. My wife has a bit less time off than I do, but we figured we're paying for a hotel anyway. So we may as well make the best of it. Hate to hear that you had to take unpaid time off. I can only assume that was FMLA related. But if you ever need someone to vent to feel free to send me an email. If you ever need a place to stay in Appalachia, I've got a newly renovated guest bedroom. It's literally nicer than my own bedroom right now.

I'm not trying to be critical. Just trying to shoot the shit. It's been a while since we've done some in-the-trenches in-the-sources work on an article. It's refreshing. GMG^talk 02:10, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can only assume that was FMLA related. Nope, lol. Legoland Florida on a fifth birthday related, visiting my dad related, and a trip to the emergency room (word to the wise: never stop doing PT. I did and I've been kicking myself over it for years, struggling to get back into it for months and paying for it with hospital bills). I love my job, but they don't give me many vacation days, and I took some in advance last year so I could bring the whole family, including both grampas to a cabin in the Great Smokeys, up by Bryson City. See File:Smokey Mountains overlooking Bryson City, NC.jpg for the view from the balcony.

I'm not trying to be critical. Just trying to shoot the shit. Didn't bother me none. I really should have gone at the whole thing differently, but I thought I saw a chance to get everyone to talk about the same thing and took it. I should have heeded the emails and ignored and avoided the drama queens. That was my own stupid pride telling me I knew better than folks who'd tried it before. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 02:28, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) look me up in Columbus, GMG. Sorry you won't be able to join, MP. Never been to Columbus myself. Hasn't exactly been on my list of dream destinations, but while I'm there I'm planning to take an extra day to explore. Either of you familiar with it/know of any destinations beyond the conference? — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 04:35, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not really familiar, I can't say. Last time I was there it was for a school with the military. So we didn't get to do a lot of sight seeing. We can trade numbers via email. Probably get there late on Thursday, and show up on Friday for the fun stuff.

In other news, as someone who absolutely hates theme parks, Legoland sounds like the kind of place where the kid is just an excuse to go have fun and not be out of place as an adult. GMG^talk 10:40, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, that would have been the old Cypress Gardens, which was 100% for adults, but had just enough stuff to keep the kids happy. Legoland is the kind of place that has air-conditioned playrooms and outdoor jungle gyms scattered around with well-appointed diaper-changing stations in every bathroom. It's the kind of place that hasn't forgotten that kids have younger siblings and parents who lack their boundless energy (I'm looking at you, Disney World), but is nonetheless aimed squarely at 8-12 year olds.

Me and the missus uses to go to Cypress Gardens before it closed. I have some very fond memories of the place. Our first New Years Eve was spent on one of their riverboat cruises, celebrating the event with a half dozen other couples of all ages. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:20, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't plan to ask for a boomerang unless he escalates-- arguably he could use one, but it's still overkill now -- but I do want it on the record and archived. Yeah, if he'd taken your advice immediately, sure, but doubling down? Not exactly the Streisand Effect, but he opened that door. --Calton | Talk 13:33, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, it's your call, really. I'm not gonna edit war over it. Not that I'm complaining, but in the future, you can always respond to any user talk comment of mine on your page: I'll always either watch your page or just periodically check it for the next few hours when I leave you a message. :) ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:53, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What is the difference between viewing “mobile web” vs “mobile app”?? I’m thinking that if you view WP on your iPad or smart phone, you use a browser and that is “mobile web”. If you view Facebook via the mobile Facebook app, that would be “mobile app”. Am I close? I also noticed we have an option on WP to view pages via desktop view, or mobile view regardless of the device used. It’s a bit confusing to me. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 13:32, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it would be the wikipedia android and ios app? PackMecEng (talk) 13:44, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Mobile app means someone downloaded and is using the {mostly useless for editing} Wikipedia app from the app store. Mobile web means someone is using Chrome/Opera/etc on a mobile device using the condensed mobile view. If you are using a mobile device with a web browser, but are viewing in desktop mode, the software treats the edit the same as if it were coming from a PC. GMG^talk 13:59, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, Wow! Thx PME - had no idea those apps existed. Thanks GMG - you answered my next question. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 14:01, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Actually, PME and GMG are both wrong. Not in their answers, but by giving concise answers before I could show up to bloviate about it in a ten-paragraph essay. Shame on you two. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:42, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If it helps, I would like to see a ten paragraph essay on the miserable editing experience on both mobile view and mobile apps! PackMecEng (talk) 14:46, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to use mobile app to edit once, and it set my house on fire and killed my dog. GMG^talk 14:48, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can attest to a similar experience with the app. Madison was a good dog. PackMecEng (talk) 14:51, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I also tried it once and it went out and found me a dog to kill because I didn't own one already. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:52, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just suggested my pit bull-owning neighbor use it. O3000 (talk) 14:54, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! The best dog I ever owned was a red-nosed pit bull. I'd trust her with my kids (both in the sense of her being gentle with them and in the sense of holy-shit-I-pity-the-asshole-who-tries-to-hurt-them-while-she-is-around) sooner than I'd trust most humans, if she were still alive. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:07, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll add that to the pit bull article for balance. O3000 (talk) 15:20, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see myself out. GMG^talk 15:12, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Net before I put this on my user page... ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:19, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pageview stats right here appear to support the reviews. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 16:43, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you delete this fine. But as I warned the IP I feel I must warn you, article talk pages are not for commenting on other eds competence (not matter how incompetent they may be.Slatersteven (talk) 15:22, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Slatersteven:, you really need to learn to stop reacting and start reading better. Go back and read my comments in the context in which they were written and stop fucking looking for drama for once in your goddamn life. My comments gave solid advice to the IP, were limited to the comments they were making and the subjects of discussion. It's not a fucking insult or even uncivil to point out that someone doesn't know what they're talking about when it's completely fucking obvious that they haven't got a clue what they're talking about. Your idea of civility is one that gets rejected almost every time you haul someone to ANI. One would think you'd have figured out by now that you should put more thought into this shit, but nope. Here we are again. You know what's uncivil? Your high-handed condescension every fucking time you think you see something uncivil. So fuck off. If you ever post any such warning to my talk page again I will drag you to ANI over it, because I've made it clear time and time again that I don't have the patience for this teenage drama bullshit you and others like you take so much pleasure in constantly stirring up here. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:31, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to follow up and be clear (since I have a lot of respect for you) that I wasn't suggesting men's rights positions have any standing. I was concerned about the earlier sweeping declaration that anyone who espoused anything in that vein was inherently misogynistic and should be auto-TBANned, and that anyone arguing in favor of men's rights was engaging in hate speech, which seemed extreme to me. I'm lucky enough to live in a fairly liberal enclave on the east coast (liberal elites!), but I grew up in the midwest, and whenever I visit my family, there's always that cognitive dissonance of remembering what I grew up in and what everyone there accepts as the norm. There are guys who believe husbands/boyfriends/spermshooters should have a say in abortion decisions, old classmates who think #MeToo is a plot to strip men of due process, neighbors and old friends who are convinced that some of the natural erosion of long-standing male privilege is an assault on their rights, etc. There's no merit to any of that, and I'm fully aware that those positions can be and are used as a pretext for misogyny and ugliness, but a lot of those men (and women, frankly, in rural Indiana) are more resistant to change and to the idea that our social norms should come from something other than a holy book; those are fairly typical positions of moderate conservatives. Some of them have slipped into what I would consider hate speech, but most of them just think that defending those men's "rights" is also defending an appropriate way of life. They would call themselves advocates of men's rights, but I would be hard-pressed to classify the things they say as hate speech, nor would I say most of the people I see casually saying that stuff are members of the MRM in the more official way we think of it. And I know that WP already has to defend itself from constant allegations of being some sort of leftist hotbed of indoctrination and liberal fake news, so seeing that statement was alarming to me. Obviously we shouldn't have that garbage in mainspace, but it seemed to me that the implication was that anyone who even suggested their viewpoints fell into that general area on a talkpage was no different than a Spencer apologist, and that rubbed me the wrong way. It seems like there must be a balance somewhere between allowing people who make us roll our eyes with their bullshit and safeguarding the site against those who just want to spread poison. Grandpallama (talk) 20:52, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I also sort of thought the person to whom I was responding was so frustrated with the specific situation they brought to ANI that they were overreacting in their exasperation, which is usually a sign you need to take a break and get some sleep. Grandpallama (talk) 20:54, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I came here expecting to blank this section and go add a "<grabs the popcorn>" comment to some pointless ANI drama aimed at me. I had completely forgotten about my comment in... Well, whatever thread that was. lol

The problem with MRMs isn't that it isn't possible for an editor who holds those views to edit productively. In theory, at least, a rabidly misogynistic editor could set their beliefs aside, follow consensus and confine themselves to summarizing reliable sources. In principle, autobanning any group is a bad idea. Well, almost any group. There are some groups where simply being known to be a member can be disruptive. The MRM could be argued to be one of these, but let's ignore that for now.

No, the problem lies in the practice. An MRM is going to have very different views about what sources are reliable. Even where there's a consensus already, they're going to prefer more right-wing sources. So Fox News, Vice, etc. And they're going to avoid more left-wing sources, like CNN or HuffPo. An MRM is going to see certain facts in a different light. They'll see that only 5% of reported rapes result in a conviction and conclude that 95% of rapes are false allegations, for example. Now, sure, we'll have sources to contradict that. But he'll have sources saying something like "only 23% of rape trials result in a conviction, so 77% of prosecuted rapes are false allegations". We might have a source that contradicts that. But then again, we might not (I'm making all of this up, by the way. My numbers are estimates based on what I vaguely remember reading and should not be taken seriously).

So, this isn't going to be a problem when that person is editing video game articles. But it's an almost insurmountable obstacle when he strays into a gamergate-related article. Such people literally can't understand that they're doing anything wrong because to anyone who shares their views, they're simply doing what a WPian is supposed to be doing; summarizing reliable sources. And that earnestness will reflect in their talkpage discussions, ANI discussions and so on. It will be obvious to many unaligned editors that they are not editing in bad faith, and that alone will lend more credence to their arguments. Meanwhile, the people opposing them will seem shrill and melodramatic -one might say they were even "overreacting in their exasperation"- and that will undermine their arguments in the eyes of disinterested parties. This will make the whole thing seem more like a pushing match between positions of equal validity than the lopsided ethical debate that it really is.

So in principle, it's fine to have such people here, so long as they're not editing in the topic they most want to edit in. In practice, the vast majority of MRMs are either going to cause a disruption or get indeffed before they have a chance to. So to many people, it may look like a really good idea to just indef them as we spot them, and from that perspective, that's not an unreasonable suggestion.

Finally, I want to respond to the bit about your family and old friends; I have friends who are outlaw bikers, and I have family serving life sentences for hate crimes. I feel you, man. I really do. That's not all of my circle of friends and family, but they're in there.

There are people I love to death who have some truly abhorrent views. And that's not a problem as long as those views don't come up, which is 90% of their life. And when they do, it's hard to forget how close we are and just tear into them like I might do a stranger saying the same thing. Because they're not bad people just for having some seriously fucked up views. I know a guy (not a friend, I just know him) who, on two different occasions, raped a woman to teach her a lesson and took a knife to the chest to protect a different woman. People are complex, and it sometimes seems like learning to deal with that takes at least one who lifetime. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:11, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, I'm not interested in bringing silly drama to anyone's talkpage, so I'm glad you didn't popcorn me, but I also didn't want to continue on at ANI, because my comments were becoming tangential to the real crux of that conversation, which was what to do about that specific problem person. And I miss getting to have real conversations about this sort of stuff; even though I work with a bunch of intellectuals, it's not the sort of thing you can safely chew about with colleagues.

I completely agree with your very well-made points about how these editors can and will, with all good intentions, blindly stumble into causing problems because they feel that they're editing within guidelines and that the correction of their POV-pushing is, itself, some sort of POV-pushing. We see that every day. And frankly, someone showing up in order to "fix" an article is going to fall into the great wrongs group, anyway, and find themselves ending up on the wrong end of even the most neutral, unaligned editors. I am not really trying to suggest we should tolerate them, or that WP should end up in some sort of Sisphyean cycle (which is what generally happens, anyway). But I do think we have to be mindful of the difference between pointed editors who are showing up to push an ideology (deliberately/consciously or not), and those editors who are pretty generally casual but have a conservative mindset and see declarations like the one that bothered me. This has been on my mind because I've been talking to a friend of mine who was reading one of the many news pieces about the Donna Strickland article having been previously deleted. She never edits WP, and she was asking some questions about how it works (which gave me a chance to correct some of the misconceptions those news pieces provided while confirming some of the other ugly ones), and she surprised me by having commented she'd read a bunch of stuff on ANI, which she got to through some vagary of Google. And had seen some proclamations that, outside of the context of knowing Wikipedia and its byzantine policy structures, shocked her and had sort of convinced her that it's nothing but partisan bullshit and bad faith editing. So I guess I'm making a dual point, both about my conviction (which I get you don't share) that some of these people can edit if they receive the right guidance, but also that those sorts of declarations, whether they come out of "reasonable" exasperation or not, can have some negative unintended consequences for the project.

You're right that the majority of MRM types who show up won't be able to edit productively--I acknowledge that. But some with that mindset, who show up just to edit and not necessarily to push corrections to sociopolitical articles...some of those can be educated. Because some of them will show up with open minds. I say this because I lived it (although admittedly not through WP). Twenty-five years ago I was about as conservative as they come, happy to explain to people how homosexuality was a sin, certain of the literal truth of the Bible, disgusted by bleeding-heart liberals, and ready to see Bill Clinton crucified. But time, and exposure to well-articulated and reasoned thoughts, had a profound influence on me. I know I might be the exception rather than the rule, but there's a bit of the Blackstone philosophy embedded in me on these sorts of things: It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer. I understand the sentiment that was expressed, and there are days when I just want to kick jackasses to the curb. And the majority of the people in the camp we're talking about aren't worth the time, because they aren't listening, or are listening without really hearing, digesting, reflecting. But some of them, man...some of them will listen.

So thanks for letting me rant about it. I was starting to freak out a little bit, because I set out to just say "Hey, let's cool our jets," and then the offhand comment about me defending misogyny, after making me pissed, made me paranoid people would seriously think that's what I was up to. :) Grandpallama (talk) 23:10, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree with the Blackstone philosophy, I just don't apply it to WP because I see WP in terms of "encyclopedia first, editors second". I'm happy to be used as needed and discarded when no longer useful with no consideration of my own feelings or intentions, and I tend to expect other editors to feel the same, or at least to accept that fact. As for your conversion, as you might imagine I experienced a similar one around the same time, though I was out of the country for the latter part of it.

As to how your comments are perceived: don't sweat that too much. Appearances matter a lot less than people think on WP, where the full context of something that looks bad (or good) is just a few clicks away. Also, people are going to think whatever they want of you, regardless of what you say. I can't count the number of people who -after I explain what I meant by some comment of mine- will insist that I actually meant the exact opposite. Hell, look at the section above and then go to Talk:Conspiracy_theory#Robert_Blaskiewicz and also check that talk page history for a prime example of an experienced editor who just refuses to see anything in any light except the one they choose to shine on it.

I can tell you this: I certainly wasn't presuming you to be advocating for more MRM editors or defending MRM arguments. I was just chiming in with a point that seemed germane to the back-and-forth there. I know that, especially on ANI threads, editors will frequently find themselves defending positions or making arguments that make implications about them which are the opposite of true. It's the nature of the beast: when you're dealing with that kind of drama, sometimes a point that is immaterial when made by an ethically inferior group becomes important. It's how it goes, and those of us familiar enough with the site know enough not to put too much stock into it. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 12:43, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to be used as needed and discarded when no longer useful with no consideration of my own feelings or intentions, and I tend to expect other editors to feel the same, or at least to accept that fact. Ha! Love that! I am mostly similar about myself, although I tend to have a more fatalistic spin on it, telling people WP--or some version of it--will be around long after I'm gone, and certainly long after I decide I've lost interest in it. It's why I don't get some (okay, a lot) of the edit warring that goes on around certain topics. And why I decided to stop dipping my toes in the political articles, beyond some light copyediting. Grandpallama (talk) 12:55, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... A great and wise thing, that was here before us (before we joined up) and will be here long after we are gone, which cares nothing at all about us, and indeed barely even notices us. That sounds awfully familiar...

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Wikipedia R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!! ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:01, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Iä! Iä! Wikipedia fhtagn! Grandpallama (talk) 13:18, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is to let you know that I noticed you wrote in an edit summary removing my sourced content addition, “rm lunatic charlatan research.” I am not going to revert, but I wanted to point out that I am put off by the insulting tone of the edit summary. Did you mean to suggest that I am a “lunatic charlatan”? Sakaimover (talk) 21:10, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It clearly ascribes the title to the authors of the research, but feel free to get butthurt about it, anyways. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:13, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it wasn’t clear. I’m not “butthurt,” but I am making note of the belittling tone. Sakaimover (talk) 21:18, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That will show 'em! PackMecEng (talk) 21:30, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yeah. Of course it's belittling. The edit I finished reverting was extraordinarily poorly researched, and was even of the sort that might be less-than-charitably described as "fringe woo POV pushing". If you confine yourself to making good edits in the future, you will find that other editors here become markedly less belittling. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:12, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Sakaimover, it may be worth mentioning that "lunatic charlatan" is a quote of a popular (on Wikipedia, anyways) bon mot by Jimbo Wales. See Wikipedia:Lunatic charlatans. Bishonen | talk 22:41, 6 October 2018 (UTC).[reply]

I had thought of adding one of Tim Minchin's songs to the music section of this page. Not metal, just hilariously insightful. O3000 (talk) 11:23, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do. My favorite is "Dark Side," but by all means, surprise me. ;) ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:33, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, Dark Side was what I was thinking of. Shades of Beatles, Harry Chapin, Voltaire, Austin Powers, Eddy Vedder and grunge in general, as well as a few notes by Rimsky-Korsakov. There was a great version of Rock n Roll Nerd with the Heritage Orchestra that is better than the one currently on YT. But, it was pulled. O3000 (talk) 16:59, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about you but I do not see any chance of something productive coming from that MFD. That's why I bowed out of that hot mess. What do you think, any chance? PackMecEng (talk) 03:34, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)I agree with you. But probably for different reasons. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 04:09, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No: It's the sort of shitstorm that has good editors saying incredibly stupid things. I'm considering changing my !vote just for the practicality of it, but the truth is right there in my last top-level comment: anyone claiming it's an "anyone who disagrees with me sucks" essay is missing the blatantly obvious meaning of it, and I pity the project if deleting this becomes a precedent. It's truth in the sense that anyone whom that essay describes absolutely does get indeffed, and usually after less than a hundred edits. I can't think of a single active editor who fits that criteria, and my consideration includes the PITA POV pushers in racism and conspiracy theory articles. The only editors who seemed to fit that description are all banned or indef blocked. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 04:34, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is what every discussion that has any hint of Trump or controversy seems to have become these days. A time sink over a largely nothing burger. People on both sides huff and puff and all get themselves blocked or topic banned. The crazy ones are the easy targets, they get shot down quick as you mention. The problem are the civil long term POV pushers. Once they make it past that initial noobiness they are pretty set a long as they do not do something overly stupid. PackMecEng (talk) 12:50, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just the CRUSH editors: GMG and Tornado are both good editors (and GMG also seems like a great guy) who just put on a dunce cap over this and refuse to read a sentence that's just obviously allegorical in any way except literal (actually, it's a sentence fragment now: Guy added a clarification that they're both refusing to acknowledge or claiming to be an entirely different statement). And of course, Guy's not changing it to a literal version either because he knows in the right, and so he's dug in his heels, or because he just can't grok how someone could not understand his meaning, and so doesn't know what the hell to change it to. Honestly, I can't either. But I know what allegory is, and I know how English comp works. And I don't really find anything wrong with it the way it was originally written, but fuck if it didn't twist up half the panties on this site. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:58, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That is kind of what I was getting at originally. Everyone is starting their dig in. Most (I say most as a courtesy) involved there are pretty smart and competition over all, more importantly productive to the project. Stuff like that just push peoples buttons and gets them riled up. To be honest I do not care that much on the subject, it just reminds me of a past incident with a similar essay that caused a shit show. I also have no doubt that at best that MFD will most likely close as no consensus(default keep), as it probably should given the discussions there. Meh maybe I just feel like bitching, it's been a long couple of months here and wiki is nice to take my mind off things. PackMecEng (talk) 16:29, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, feel free to vent here. As long as it's not pushing drama (and this drama is only going to leave that MfD if people start talking shit about each other, which isn't happening here), it's welcome at my talk page.

I feel you, too. Lots of people (99% of them are POV pushers, but the occasional well-meaning editor, too) see a lot of my aggressiveness as emotionally based. But they don't realize that it's actually apathy. WP is my hobby. It's how I relax. If I'm "up in someone's face" about their POV pushing edits, it's because I don't care if they like me or not. The only thing here that ever riles me up is people pushing pointless drama ass if it were the most important thing in the world, and even then, I'm gonna start laughing and muttering "first world problems..." to myself after a while. Real life is way more stressful than WP, and that's even after I've gotten to about the most stable point of my life so far. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:39, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You had !voted at an RfC. I withdrew and restated it. See RfC on the intersection of WP:BLPSPS and WP:PSCI restated Jytdog (talk) 15:40, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Three new topics for WiR's online editathons in November, two of them supporting other initiatives New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/98|Religion]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/99|Deceased politicians]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/96|Asia]] Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]
		Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!): WikiProject AfroCine launches (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

You are involved in a recently-filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Clarification request: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Paranormal and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.

Thanks, --Guy Macon (talk) 03:58, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Far from being offended, I highly value you disagreeing with me, and always give your arguments careful confederation. (Of course I never actually change my mind -- This is the Internet after all.) :)

BTW, for me the big red STOP!!! notice has the bottom cut off. Interestingly, the "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable" language looks like someone took a shotgun to it. Perhaps adding {{clear}} to the very bottom of User talk:MjolnirPants/Editnotice might fix that. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:52, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First things first; likewise. ;)

That might be a good idea, thanks. I gave the notice a maximum height to avoid making it a PITA for people with smaller monitors to edit. I'm thinking of just dropping the font size on everything but the top line, though. I usually edit with my window docked to one half of my screen, so I see that shotgun effect all the time, too. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:07, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Funnily enough, the clear template didn't do squat, so I finally just broke down and removed the height parameter from the div style. It might move the edit box way down, but at least it'll look nice, and I don't have to settle for small text. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:09, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I did notice the red background, which of course signifies your great respect for Our Fearless Leader and your undying support of red-state republicanism.... --Guy Macon (talk) 19:53, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's exactly right. But don't tell anyone. I'm undercover as a degenerate lib'ral. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:03, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since you're a participant, this is to notify you I've moved the discussion to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed topic ban for StreetSign (moved from AN).—Mythdon (talk • contribs) 04:53, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently I "cry like a little bitch to ban people from trying get rid of obvious POV pushing, lies, and rhetoric. Fuck off you imbecile." I don't think that beats "weaselly little half educated coward" or "giddily cream my pants every time I call a Jew a white supremacist" though. Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:32, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that, then they went right to the article they were t-banned from and the predictable happened. Waiting for the hammer to drop. PackMecEng (talk) 17:39, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Galobtter: OOoooOoOooOh, that's a good one. You should stuff and mount it.

I'm often tempted, when dealing with people who insist upon aggressively denigrating the intelligence of others (rather than, for example, simply ensuring that the course of discussion is designed to maximize the other party's displays of idiocy) to go to their talk page after their inevitable banning and point out that the parties they insist are so stupid just managed to wrangle them into getting themselves blocked from editing, and encourage them to ask themselves who was the real idiot.

Of course, I would never do such a thing. Gravedancing is pretty pointless, after all. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:59, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, not so much as me "wrangling them" into getting blocked as him not respecting the Law of Holes Galobtter (pingó mió) 04:49, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cry like a little bitch? Fuck off you imbecile? Weaselly little half educated coward? Amateurs. Here is a real flame:

You swine. You vulgar little maggot. You worthless bag of filth. As we say in Texas, you couldn't pour water out of a boot with instructions printed on the heel. You are a canker, an open wound. I would rather kiss a lawyer than be seen with you. You took your last vacation in the Islets of Langerhans.

You're a putrescent mass, a walking vomit. You are a spineless little worm deserving nothing but the profoundest contempt. You are a jerk, a cad, and a weasel. I take that back; you are a festering pustule on a weasel's rump. Your life is a monument to stupidity. You are a stench, a revulsion, a big suck on a sour lemon.

I will never get over the embarrassment of belonging to the same species as you. You are a monster, an ogre, a malformity. I barf at the very thought of you. You have all the appeal of a paper cut. Lepers avoid you. You are vile, worthless, less than nothing. You are a weed, a fungus, the dregs of this earth. You are a technicolor yawn. And did I mention that you smell?

You are a squeaking rat, a mistake of nature and a heavy-metal bagpipe player. You were not born. You were hatched into an unwilling world that rejects the likes of you. You didn't crawl out of a normal egg, either, but rather a mutant maggot egg rejected by an evil scientist as being below his low standards. Your alleged parents abandoned you at birth and then died of shame in recognition of what they had done to an unsuspecting world. They were a bit late.

Try to edit your responses of unnecessary material before attempting to impress us with your insight. The evidence that you are a nincompoop will still be available to readers, but they will be able to access it ever so much more rapidly. If cluelessness were crude oil, your scalp would be crawling with caribou.

You are a thick-headed trog. I have seen skeet with more sense than you have. You are a few bricks short of a full load, a few cards short of a full deck, a few bytes short of a full core dump, and a few chromosomes short of a full human. Worse than that, you top-post. God created houseflies, cockroaches, maggots, mosquitos, fleas, ticks, slugs, leeches, and intestinal parasites, then he lowered his standards and made you. I take it back; God didn't make you. You are Satan's spawn. You are Evil beyond comprehension, half-living in the slough of despair. You are the entropy which will claim us all. You are a green-nostriled, crossed eyed, hairy-livered, goisher kopf, inbred trout-defiler. You make Ebola look good.

You are weary, stale, flat and unprofitable. You are grimy, squalid, nasty and profane. You are foul and disgusting. You're a fool, an ignoramus. Monkeys look down on you. Even sheep won't have sex with you. You are unreservedly pathetic, starved for attention, and lost in a land that reality forgot. You are not ANSI compliant and your markup doesn't validate. You have a couple of address lines shorted together. You should be promoted to Engineering Manager.

Do you really expect your delusional and incoherent ramblings to be read? Everyone plonked you long ago. Do you fantasize that your tantrums and conniption fits could possibly be worth the $0.000000001 worth of electricity used to send them? Your life is one big W.O.M.B.A.T., and your future doesn't look promising either. We need to trace your bloodline and terminate all siblings and cousins in order to cleanse humanity of your polluted genes. The good news is that no normal human would ever mate with you, so we won't have to go into the sewers in search of your git.

You are a waste of flesh. You have no rhythm. You are ridiculous and obnoxious. You are the moral equivalent of a leech. You are a living emptiness, a meaningless void. You are sour and senile. You are a loathsome disease, a drooling inbred cross-eyed toesucker. You make Quakers shout and strike Pentecostals silent. You have a version 1.0 mind in a version 6.13 world. Your mother had to tie a pork chop around your neck just to get your dog to play with you. You think that www.GuyMacon.com/flame.html is the name of a rock band. You believe that P.D.Q. Bach is the greatest composer who ever lived. You prefer L. Ron Hubbard to Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle. Hee-Haw is too deep for you. You would watch test patterns all day if the other inmates would let you.

On a good day you're a half-wit. You remind me of drool. You are deficient in all that lends character. You have the personality of wallpaper. You are dank and filthy. You are asinine and benighted. Spammers look down on you. Phone sex operators hang up on you. Telemarketers refuse to be seen in public with you. You are the source of all unpleasantness. You spread misery and sorrow wherever you go. May you choke on your own foolish opinions. You are a Pusillanimous galactophage and you wear your sister's training bra. Don't bother opening the door when you leave - you should be able to slime your way out underneath. I hope that when you get home your mother runs out from under the porch and bites you.

You smarmy lagerlout git. You bloody woofter sod. Bugger off, pillock. You grotty wanking oik artless base-court apple-john. You clouted boggish foot-licking half-twit. You dankish clack-dish plonker. You gormless crook-pated tosser. You bloody churlish boil-brained clotpole ponce. You craven dewberry pisshead cockup pratting naff. You cockered bum-bailey poofter. You gob-kissing gleeking flap-mouthed coxcomb. You dread-bolted fobbing beef-witted clapper-clawed flirt-gill. You jetere steatopygous pilgarlick hircine whigmaleerious rhadamanthine lintlicker. I refer you to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram.

You are so clueless that if you dressed in a clue skin, doused yourself in clue musk, and did the clue dance in the middle of a field of horny clues at the height of clue mating season, you still would not have a clue. If you were a movie you would be a double feature; _Battlefield_Earth_ and _Moron_Movies_II_. You would be out of focus.

You are a fiend and a sniveling coward, and you have bad breath. You are the unholy spawn of a bandy-legged hobo and a syphilitic camel. You wear strangely mismatched clothing with oddly placed stains. You are degenerate, noxious and depraved. I feel debased just knowing that you exist. I despise everything about you, and I wish you would go away. You are jetsam who dreams of becoming flotsam. You won't make it. I beg for sweet death to come and remove me from a world which became unbearable when the bioterrorists designed you.

It is hard to believe how incredibly stupid you are. Stupid as a stone that the other stones make fun of. So stupid that you have traveled far beyond stupid as we know it and into a new dimension of stupid. Meta-stupid. Stupid cubed. Trans-stupid stupid. Stupid collapsed to a singularity where even the stupons have collapsed into stuponium. Stupid so dense that no intelligence can escape. Singularity stupid. Blazing hot summer day on Mercury stupid. You emit more stupid in one minute than our entire galaxy emits in a year. Quasar stupid. It cannot be possible that anything in our universe can really be this stupid. This is a primordial fragment from the original big stupid bang. A pure extract of stupid with absolute stupid purity. Stupid beyond the laws of nature. I must apologize. I can't go on. This is my epiphany of stupid. After this experience, you may not hear from me for a while. I don't think that I can summon the strength left to mock your moronic opinions and malformed comments about boring trivia or your other drivel. Duh.

The only thing worse than your logic is your manners. I have snipped away most of your of what you wrote, because, well ... it didn't really say anything. Your attempt at constructing a creative flame was pitiful. I mean, really, stringing together a bunch of insults among a load of babbling was hardly effective... Maybe later in life, after you have learned to read, write, spell, and count, you will have more success. True, these are rudimentary skills that many of us "normal" people take for granted that everyone has an easy time of mastering. But we sometimes forget that there are "challenged" persons in this world who find these things to be difficult. If I had known that this was true in your case then I would have never have exposed myself to what you wrote. It just wouldn't have been "right." Sort of like parking in a handicap space. I wish you the best of luck in the emotional, and social struggles that seem to be placing such a demand on you.

P.S.: You are hypocritical, greedy, violent, malevolent, vengeful, cowardly, deadly, mendacious, meretricious, loathsome, despicable, belligerent, opportunistic, barratrous, contemptible, criminal, fascistic, bigoted, racist, sexist, avaricious, tasteless, idiotic, brain-damaged, imbecilic, insane, arrogant, deceitful, demented, lame, self-righteous, byzantine, conspiratorial, satanic, fraudulent, libelous, bilious, splenetic, spastic, ignorant, clueless, EDLINoid, illegitimate, harmful, destructive, dumb, evasive, double-talking, devious, revisionist, narrow, manipulative, paternalistic, fundamentalist, dogmatic, idolatrous, unethical, cultic, diseased, suppressive, controlling, restrictive, malignant, deceptive, dim, crazy, weird, dyspeptic, stifling, uncaring, plantigrade, grim, unsympathetic, jargon-spouting, censorious, secretive, aggressive, mind-numbing, arassive, poisonous, flagrant, self-destructive, abusive, socially-retarded, puerile, pinguid, and Generally Not Good.

I hope this helps...

Source and CCO license: http://www.guymacon.com/flame.html

--Guy Macon (talk) 23:36, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There’s a rumor that Lenny Bruce is still alive and trolling WP. OK, I admit I started the rumor. O3000 (talk) 00:03, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But it's a good rumor, nonetheless. I say we spread it far and wide. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 01:08, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You were not born. Your alleged parents abandoned you at birth Hmmmm. Lol. Galobtter (pingó mió) 04:52, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• In other news, on a few fronts today, I wonder if it's not worth writing up a draft for WP:WHOOSH, AKA, the sound a fast moving object makes when its going over your head. GMG^talk 18:48, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you see, the thing is that those fast moving objects tend to go over certain heads because those heads are buried in the sand, where essays generally don't tend to help, much. So I'm not really sure if it would be helpful or not. But it'd probably be fun to write. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 18:55, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Something something User:EEng. GMG^talk 18:59, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It does seem like we should have a WHOOSH essay, though what exactly it would be isn't gelling just now. Maybe it could be combined with something about boomerangs. Remind me sometime in the future, or get something gping and I'll join in. EEng 23:47, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A clarification request in which you were involved has been archived at Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Paranormal#Clarification request: Paranormal (October 2018). For the Arbitration Committee, Miniapolis 19:38, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Obsidi (talk) 15:00, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because that would be a nice solution. Simonm223 (talk) 15:05, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, MPants, two things. First, an apology. I was trying to be fair and impartial and AGF and all that jazz in the ANI thread, but that might've meant I landed too far on the other side. I've kinda been cursorily aware of the user in question's behavior for a while, but it wasn't until this edit they made that I recognized their play, right out of the alt-right handbook, and that's the moment I realized that my look may have been mistook. So, I'm sorry if I was too critical of your attempts to keep POV pushers out of articles.

Second, as far as confirmation dialogs on rollback, I actually made a script years back that does that (just for rollback links on the watchlist), if you're interested. It's at User:Writ_Keeper/Scripts/rollbackConfirm.js. Thanks! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:22, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Writ Keeper: Hey, for one thing, you were absolutely right about the rollback thing. In all honestly, I really should have re-rollbacked myself, then done a regular undo, because that way I could have said something in the edit summary. For another thing, Obsidi's behavior and situation was such as to obfuscate the problems with his editing. I literally went looking to dig up dirt (mostly to see who I was dealing with when he recently came after me, guns blazing at an ANI thread that didn't concern him at all) before I realized what was going on with him. It took a concerted effort to see the problems.

So there's no need to apologize there. I probably would have done the same thing. The fact that you changed your mind when you saw the evidence is really all anyone can ask of you on this site, and even then, it's pretty rare, so it certainly won't go unnoticed by me.

Finally, thank you so much for that script. Nominally, I've got the script-fu to write something like that, but I'm neck-deep at work in a proprietary API and I just don't have the energy to learn another one, so I appreciate someone taking the effort to get hooks in for me. I've already installed it and plan to test it on this edit (so apologies if you get pinged twice).

P.S. I'm an outspoken critic of Anita Sarkeesian's work (in an I-disagree-with-her-interpretation-of-many-elements-of-video-games-but-we-are-both-feminists-so-I-will-not-be-an-ass-about-it kind of way, not in an I-Hate-Wimmin-go-make-me-a-sammich kind of way), but I recognize that it is still professional, academic quality work. I also recognize her situation in that video's intro example and absolutely love it, because it's 100% on the nose. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:40, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please continue assuming ownership of Wikipedia. Behaviour such as this is regarded as necessary, and is a entirely in the spirit of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be vehemently supported when editing Wikipedia. GirthSummit _(blether) 22:13, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Drill Seargent! ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:15, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't template the regulars. Unless you feel like it. O3000 (talk) 22:16, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I only do it irregularly. GirthSummit _(blether) 22:20, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not so much the "getting templated" bit that bothers me, it's the "getting templated for stupid reasons". Unless they're funny. This was funny. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:37, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But don't you realise that you get points when you template someone? And when you get enough points you win? Don't be offended - just template them back! The more templates we dish out, the more productive we all are. Honestly, some people just don't understand... GirthSummit _(blether) 22:54, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now they're side-by-side on the screen, I've just noticed how embarrassingly similar the colours of my username are to yours. Are yours trademarked? I can honestly say that I didn't copy you - I totally ripped off PaleoNeonate's username as a template, and just changed the font and the RBG values a bit. What do you reckon - the sincerest form of flattery, or worrying fanboy behaviour? GirthSummit _(blether) 23:02, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well that figures because I'm pretty sure PaleoNeonate ripped off my sig colors. lol Actually, I picked my sig format to make it really easy for me to spot my sig. At the time, nobody was using a dark green, bold font with a shadow. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 23:23, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I ditched the shadow - purely for the sake of transparency. (Ba-doom-tish) GirthSummit _(blether) 23:40, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As a dad, I approve of that joke. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 23:47, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Irony is writing "How about, I edit where I want to edit and you edit where you want to edit, ok?" and then being blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Hmmm. Maybe the above wasn't witty enough. Better add a joke:

Why don't ants ever get sick?

 .
 .
 .
 .
 .
 .
 .
 .
 .

Because of the antibodies. --Guy Macon (talk) 23:14, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This made me literally laugh out loud. Not the ant joke, I heard that one in middle school. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 23:24, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another definition of irony: Pushing a website that allows 'geniuses' to brag about their elevated status and then, well, not being that smart about it. GirthSummit _(blether) 23:49, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dinner interrupted my attempt to say the same on your TP. But then, intelligence and "smartness" are not synonymous. Isn't irony ironic? O3000 (talk) 00:01, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

...I found the perfect meme for you. 😂 ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 00:04, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ROFLMAO That's perfect. I mean, like, per-fucking-fect. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 01:20, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That initial report was garbage, and finally (and rightly) seen as such, but this follow-up is like somebody doused the garbage pile and put a match to it. Maybe you need to tone down your language, but seeing, well, garbage-pushers being the ones who think you should be "brought to account" is something the whole community should be wiser to than they are. None of that is being spurred by good-faith concerns, and it makes me seethe. Grandpallama (talk) 14:24, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus. Nope. Fuck it. I'm not reading those several walls of text. I'd assumed this was over with. GMG^talk 14:29, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not going to go anywhere. The problem is that ANI sees two types of editors: the kind who read and research stuff and then form an opinion, and the kind who just knee-jerk and say whatever pops into their head. The worst part is that different individual editors belong to different kinds at different times. The former usually carry the day, while the latter generally only ever carry a grudge (not all of them, just the ones who are habitually in that group).

I mean, this isn't the first time I've been brought up at ANI. It won't be the last time. I work in a highly controversial area, and I can get pretty rude when confronted with idiocy. None of this really bothers me all that much, because it's all going to pass.

My only regret is that I can't use these drama fests as an excuse to call for more editors at controversial pages, to make my editing there a bit less stressful, because that's going to be seen (not entirely inaccurately) as me shifting the blame. But the topics I edit: Fringe groups, pseudoscience, conspiracy theories and related issues, really do need more editors. Almost all of the "usual suspects" who get dragged to ANI repeatedly without anything ever being done edit in those topics, and for most of those editors, it gets old quick, so they stop editing those topics. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:42, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's going to pass, but there should be consequences for people whose primary pastime here is creating drama rather than actually editing. That's the part that makes me seethe: the pretense of taking seriously the outcries of people who are clearly not worth the time. And the closing and re-opening and closing and unclosing...Jesus Christ. Grandpallama (talk) 14:47, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Pudeo gets butthurt by the thought of anyone having a liberal POV and lashes out at them every chance he gets. Give it time, eventually they'll get theirs. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:53, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be unsurprised if I come to regret this, and as far as I am aware I'm still on the "fuck off" list. However, it might be an idea to grab the attention of a trusted admin when things start to get out of hand, rather than continue to engage to the point where you are unable to respond with anything other than invective. That might save you some stress and anger. I have no further opinions regarding that thread. Mr rnddude (talk) 17:11, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, Mr rnddude, you're not on the "fuck off" list. The thing a lot of people don't get is that all it takes is one intelligent comment to get off my "fuck off" list, and you just did that right now. (For another example: Lourdes put themselves on my "fuck off" list when they first threatened to indef me, then took themselves back off when they followed that up by issuing me a warning and closing the thread.)

That's some good advice you give. I've generally been reluctant to ask for admin intervention, because, being a red-blooded American Male whom you'd never suspect of harboring a single liberal thought until you ask me about some social issue, I both strongly prefer to handle things myself, and have a strong distaste for editors who run to the admins at the first sign of trouble.

But that's not to suggest in any way that you're wrong. You're almost certainly right, and I'll almost certainly be taking your advice. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 18:17, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I just hope the thread is now permanently closed and everyone can get back to editing. I was working on an article and periodically keeping an eye on my watchlist. That thread kept coming to the top of it. I felt that you were getting the short end of the stick. I don't typically deal with Nazis, because they aren't typically editing ancient history articles, but my usual response when they crop up is simply to suggest getting rid of them (by blocking, not by firing squad). In real life, I don't like asking for help either. Here on Wikipedia, I just can't be fucked to deal with the bullshit, you know? Happy editing, Mr rnddude (talk) 19:09, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I thought about posting the diffs of some of the edits I was responding to, along with some context. But at the end of the day, if people want to talk about my behavior, I'll talk about my behavior. I'm not gonna engage in whataboutisms, even though I think I can make a pretty good case that way. That doesn't always work to my advantage, but it's a point of principles, not of practicality. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:28, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to get almost as much nonsense from editing China articles as I do from the nazi patrol route. But at least the China stuff is a mixed bag of various stripes of nationalist, anti-communists, and (strangely) people really torn up over the Ming-Qing succession. Simonm223 (talk) 19:31, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. I remember when I used to edit American Politics, it was easier to ignore the bullshit when it was right-wing, left-wing, and libertarian POV pushing. It got harder when the libertarians settled into right-wing or left-wing camps, and harder still when the right-wing stopped POV pushing for a bit, and just the left-wingers were left to engage in bullshit. That's about when I left, though I have no doubt the lack of right-wing shenanigans at the time was just a temporary lull. Hell, the CT articles I watch have seen their right-wing bullshit levels rising in the past few months. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:34, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've been doing a bit of reading about rollback today. You probably already know this, but just in case it's useful - in relation to this, there's this, this and this. GirthSummit _(blether) 16:10, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Writ Keeper gave me a script that adds a confirm box already. I appreciate the looking out, though. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:19, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(Talk Page Stalker) Aww, yiss. Delicious. T'anks mate. Elfabet (talk) 17:45, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thank you for your revert on the page for the Kalanga people. I got this page protected because of this guy offering POV. He keeps coming back. Criticalthinker (talk) 17:03, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Criticalthinker: Thanks. Yeah, it's a pretty clear red flag when an editor replaces the definition of a people's language with an argument about their language, in an article about the people. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:07, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

e/c ::Please don't change anything. On a popular Talk page such as this it is handy to be able to go to the most recent thread at once, instead of scrolling madly for ages. -Roxy, in the middle. wooF 19:06, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

'Xactly. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:15, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps 270 degrees? Then you could see all the topics and still pick the bottom! PackMecEng (talk) 20:10, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If I did that, I would have to restore every topic from every archive back to my talk page, just on principles. It'd be almost as long as EEngs, and considerably wider. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:22, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just figured out what this thread was about. Really? A complaint about your contents list being disruptive, from someone who has a swastika on their userpage? Man, that trumps anything on the irony thread. GirthSummit _(blether) 20:43, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, that's a perfectly fine use of a swastika. You want to see that editor's real problem? Go bring up their contributions, then go to the bottom and click "edit count". Then look at their edits on the drama boards ((ANI, AE, etc) and notice that 1) they're always attacking another editor and 2) that other editor is always one who recently took a liberal position on some political argument, or was just obviously politically liberal. Every. Single. Edit. Not once have they ever called for some deescalation in a heated thread, opined on a point of discussion, corrected a mistake, defended someone or the million other non-attacking things editors typically do at the drama boards.

This is a actually a good editor most of the time, right up until they hit the drama boards. Then it's all beetled brows and fisticuffs. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:04, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I know that there are contexts where the swastika is used uncontroversially - I was once in a taxi in Mumbai, stuck in traffic behind an elephant with a swastika painted on its arse, alongside all sorts of shiny frippery - but that's not the case everywhere. It's not banned or anything, and I'm not about to go to their talkpage and tell them to change their shit, but you have to think about how you present yourself to the world: am I the kind of person who finds a reason to put a swastika on their user page, or am I not. Each to their own, I guess.

Your point about the drama board is, of course, more substantial and well thought-through. GirthSummit _(blether) 21:17, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

tbh, I wonder too if that caption is a reason to have it up or an excuse. I'm not gonna hazard a guess, but if it's an excuse, it's a good enough one that it's not obviously an excuse. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:35, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like I'm wasting my time here, but in the BLPN discussion for Murder of Seth Rich you posted that you had no problem with a proposed change in wording, changing the !vote tally from 4-1 to 5-0. And yet when I actually implement this change, you immediately revert it. This raises a number of questions.

• What made you change your mind?
• If you didn't change your mind, how is my edit any different from the one you approved of?
• How is it softening?

Note that when I change "this false and unsubstantiated conspiracy theory is an unfounded fabrication and an example of fake news written by liars" to something with less repetition, this is simply to make the sentence more coherent. Connor Behan (talk) 16:49, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your editing in between then and now has given me reason to doubt your intentions. Specifically, your claims about the issue that led to Obsidi being blocked (you grossly mischaracterized that discussion and completely ignored the fact that it's not the issue that led to Obsidi being blocked) and your edit to the Milo Yiannopolous article, which was pretty much identical to the WP:CRYBLP edi/argument Obsidi made. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:59, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well you're in luck because consensus is clearly against me at the Milo article. As for Obsidi's block, it's possible that the dispute I mentioned is really just "the last straw" in a long list of incidents but it's the only straw on which I can comment until I read many pages of drama. Happy editing. Connor Behan (talk) 17:08, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments here :D If I had seen it earlier, I would have started an RfC on myself than on fuck off. Anyone with verbosity like that should have the license to use whatever words they wish :) a license that Eeng already has. See you around, Lourdes 01:15, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I need help: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Revision deletion for File:Doria Ragland.png.

Please give me strength to not tell him to "Buy glasses, learn photoshop and quit whining". Because that probably won't help when he escalates this to ANI. Thanks in advance God, big fan - Alexis Jazz 20:07, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Saw the title of this section and thought it was about XTC's song, Dear God. O3000 (talk) 12:08, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting clip. Btw, my prayers have been answered. I rate this deity 5/5 stars! - Alexis Jazz 13:00, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Let's go get a beer first", as they say... ——SerialNumber54129 15:10, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nevertheless, I'm having a beer. I shall have another with the same toast in three months. -Roxy, in the middle. wooF 17:22, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

...remembering this chat too...and certain album covers  :) ——SerialNumber54129 17:34, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mjölnir, I would also like to register my disappointment. I've always enjoyed your colorful commentary, and I hope you reconsider when the block expires. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:17, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't understand, when I read this nobody was blocked yet. Now I see it's about this self-requested block. Can somebody fill me in on why my favorite deity requested a self-block? - Alexis Jazz 15:04, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Pants, you and I have never interacted but I've seen the good work you've done for the 'pedia. Best wishes to you and I hope to see you here again someday. Cheers, Jip Orlando (talk) 15:06, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to see you blocked. Do I still have to whine about it at ANI and / or put my big boy pants on and suck it up? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:23, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Too late hes gone. Wish I had seen this before however. Now theres a discussion about the monopoly board colours which is right up his alley... Only in death does duty end (talk) 23:05, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I had no idea this happened! I hope the time away refreshes you, and we see you again in three months. Your insights and wit, sharp though they may be at times, will be missed. Grandpallama (talk) 13:23, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed this. I'm sorry to see you go. I wish you the best in your real life. That's what's most important. ~Awilley (talk) 02:36, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oooooh, break out the beer. Roxy, the dog. wooF 14:16, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

+1. I'm watching here, now that the three months are over, and I hope to see you back soon, assuming that you want to. All the best. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:16, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm never coming back. That's uh... An imposter posting as me. Yeah, an imposter. They're hacking my account, spoofing my IP address and perfectly imitating my writing style. I'm not addicted to WP. Not even a little bit. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:22, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	It takes steel balls to cut the addiction cold-turkey style. Congrats, and enjoy your life! — JFG talk 07:45, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your email earlier (sorry for not responding -- I'm still really busy, and probably would follow your lead if I wasn't too addicted) and suspected the worst, but didn't check in until just now, for a completely unrelated reason. I'm sorry to see you go. Hopefully one day the project will be less dramah-filled and you'll be able to come back and continue making the encyclopedia a friendlier, less fringe-y place. I'll try to keep your seat warm, anyway. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 11:56, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wait ... only three months? I'm not sure the project will be much better by then, but at least ... none of the people I hoped would run for ArbCom actually did, and three or four I think probably shouldn't (two of whom are great editors/admins, but I'm in the minority who don't think they should be on the committee), so things ... might get better? Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 12:00, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He clearly wants to stop his interaction with Wikipedia, at least for a while. He asked for a voluntary block because he found himself to be tempted to edit after deciding to stop. Would it not be a polite thing to stop posting to his talk page, thus tempting him to read it and stay emotionally involved in the project? ? I miss him too and am tempted to write a heartfelt "we all miss you" post, but I am also strongly inclined to respect his decision and urge everyone to let his talk page go silent. --Guy Macon (talk) 15:17, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed the break and block. I would just like to say that I was glad meeting you here, and to thank you for your contributions, which included patrolling and debating at difficult articles. Merry holiday and WP break, —PaleoNeonate – 21:27, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]