Archives

2007
April May June July August September October November December
2008
January February March April May June July August September October November December
2009
January February March April May June July August September October November December
2010
January February March April May June July August September October November December
2011
January February March April May June July August September October November December
2012
January February March April May June July August September October November December
2013
January February March April May June July August September October November December
2014
January February March April May June July August September October November
Molon labe!

I received an email from a not-so-friendly admirer recently. I'm sure they thought it was nasty, but I found it rather droll. They did point out I've never written an article before. You probably can guess the source (although I'm certain it was coordinated), but they did make a valid point. I just gave a "Man of Mustard" award to Drmies, and I noticed that there isn't an article on The Ba-Tampte Company. I don't have access to the tools to find sources, or more accurately I don't even know where to find them. Any chance you could give me some help in finding some sources? I know the topic is slight, but there are far dumber articles out there. I've got a lull in my work activities for a few days, so I might as well make hay while the sun is shining. Thanks Two kinds of pork^Makin'_Bacon 06:40, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As an enthusiastic consumer of their products (especially at Passover), I suspect that this company is notable, and worthy of an article. I have written similar articles about food and beverage topics, such as Mezzetta, Marin French Cheese Company, Hagafen Cellars, Israeli breakfast and Whoa Nellie Deli. I have a very long list of redlinks on my user page, namely articles I think we should have, but I haven't yet created. Feel free to take up any of them. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:58, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If I can be of any assistance at all to you in this effort, please let me know. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:08, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Hmmm, chiming in, Ba-Tampte may not be an easy one to start with, but I wholly encourage you to write something. Ba-Tampte doesn't seem to ever have been profiled in the New York Times (as one would expect a NYC-based company like this to have been at some point), it just has received two mentions in November 1976 when someone in Greenwich, CT had trouble finding them and people wrote in to say where to find them in the "De Gustibus" column. (I can send you these, but its not really worth it.) And though the entire archive of the Brooklyn Eagle is now online [1], that ended in 1955 when Ba-Tampte was just starting! An easier option but perhaps less fun is to peruse recent NY Times obituaries, often those folks meet WP:GNG but aren't in some flashy profession and get overlooked for some time. Deaths in 2014 (always one of our most popular articles on a week-to-week basis) always has redlinks on it. E.g., David Garth [2] just died and is generating substantive obits but has no article yet.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 20:49, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • On that mustard note, I just picked up some fine German Thomy Senf. Drmies (talk) 00:10, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015 !!!

Hello Eric Corbett! As we gather to celebrate the changing of years and reflect on the meaning of life, the universe, and everything, I would like to wish you and yours a merry Christmas and a happy New Year. Attached is a small snack which I hope will give you the energy to continue being an amazing person and editor in the coming year. Happy editing,  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:51, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Very kind of you Crisco, and I wish the same to you and yours. Eric Corbett 09:02, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Alright, two birds with one stone. Eric, Chris, merry Christmas to both of you. May your days be merry and bright. I have my mother in law in my house, and the kids are not in school--on the bright side, I got a bottle of Famous Grouse. Cheers, Drmies (talk) 00:06, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		Happy Seamonster Holiday Cheer
		Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys! Hafspajen (talk) 01:52, 23 December 2014 (UTC) [reply]

		Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year
		Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys!Hafspajen (talk) 07:11, 23 December 2014 (UTC) [reply]

		Happy Holiday Cheer
		Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys!Hafspajen (talk) 01:52, 23 December 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Eric (or stalkers), do you have any idea of the correct format for exhibition titles? I've just created Ken Hawley and am unsure whether I should be writing "The Cutting Edge" or The Cutting Edge. - Sitush (talk) 16:54, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ITALICS is your friend. While not explicitly included in the list, I'd say that an exhibition fits the category of a "major work" (and itself is not a part of one), thus I'd say it should be The Cutting Edge. No such user (talk) 17:19, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That will do me, thank you. - Sitush (talk) 11:04, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

==Yo Ho Ho==

Dougweller (talk) 13:29, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	Merry Christmas and best wishes for a happy, healthy and productive 2015!
	Ruhrfisch ><>°° 14:56, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		Happy Holidays
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. - Ealdgyth - Talk 15:02, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To Eric, I wish you peace and happiness at Christmas. Happy Holidays from Fylbecatulous! May the coming year bring you the best of whatever and wherever you wish. -- Fylbecatulous talk 16:35, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have a bright Hawaiian Christmas!--Mark Miller (talk) 16:37, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hawaiian? Is Eric in Hawaii or something?♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:32, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wish! Eric Corbett 12:05, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This Huckleberry Finn article... would need some attention. From a good article editor perhaps? Hafspajen (talk) 03:44, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed Hafspajen, may Eric, yourself and anybody who does good for wikipedia watching this page have a good new year!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:00, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed the reference section at Bolton, over which we laboured for a long time, and it had turned to a sea of red. I did something to get rid of the red.... but probably not the right thing. Anyhow it has made me lose the will to live. If anybody wants to know what discourages editors it is this. I give up. PS I wish you and Mrs Corbett all the very best for 2015. J3Mrs (talk) 14:22, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A rather irritating bug was introduced into the {{citation}} template a couple of months ago, the result of which was all those complaints about the citations having no title if only the |contribution parameter was used. But to compound the matter if you simply change the |contribution parameter to |title then it appears (incorrectly) in italics; I've started labouring through with the most satisfactory fix I'm aware of. Did we once have an etymology section in that article? If we didn't then why is the Mills book listed in the bibliography?

Anyway, a Happy New Year to you and yours and to everyone else who watches this talk page! Eric Corbett 15:45, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We did, it was removed by the editor who decided it needed a review and who "fixed" the History section. I didn't mean for you to fix it, I just thought it looked better minus the red, but thank you, I now know where to look if I come across it again. (I doubt I'll remember why.) The trouble with not looking in much recently is that everything I've looked at has been "improved". J3Mrs (talk) 16:01, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. I can't understand why that Toponymy section was removed, so I've put it back. Eric Corbett 17:08, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I shuffled it in after you removed it again. It looked lost in the history. Thank you for sorting out the refs. :) J3Mrs (talk) 19:35, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine by me, as I didn't notice it where it had been moved to. I see you're having the usual fun on your talk page. Have a drop of plonk and forget about it until tomorrow. I've just opened a bottle of port, and as Ruth doesn't like port I'm going to have to drink it all by myself – I don't believe it keeps once the cork has been removed from the bottle. At least it doesn't in our house! Eric Corbett 19:41, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, except the bottle is already open. Port, like sherry, puts me to sleep. J3Mrs (talk) 19:48, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Best wishes for a productive and dramah-free year's editing in 2015, and health and happiness beyond the encyclopedia. PamD 15:54, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Pam. We'll see what this year brings on WP, another ArbCom case for something or other I expect. Eric Corbett 17:33, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Eric Corbett; Yngvadottir did a really top re-write on Alexander Luria, and suggested you might be able to help the article toward peer review status. Yngvad has put his finger on the main issue which is that there is only one biography about him even thirty years after his death. Luria's research is, however, quoted repeatedly and repeatedly even in current research. Is the current article any closer to inching towards peer review quality? Cheers. FelixRosch (TALK) 17:22, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's really no such thing as "peer review quality", just submit it for a peer review. Having quickly read through the article two things jump out at me though. The first is that some of the prose makes no sense at all to me. For instance, "The 1930s were significant to Luria because his prescient studies of indigenous people opened the field of multiculturalism to his general interests." I have absolutely no idea what that means.

The second thing is that the Scientific influence of Vygotsky section is way off topic, and whatever is specifically relevant to Luria ought to be distributed in the appropriate places in the article. Eric Corbett 17:58, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It was nice of you to visit the article. I have revised/rewritten the sense of the problem sentence you just pointed out. Also, I strongly cut back the text in the Vygotsky section. Having only the one published biography about Alexander Luria seems to be a possible red herring for nominating the article for, I assume, a GA review. If there are any oversights remaining in the article then let me know and I'll try to take care of them before the next steps of nomination. Cheers. FelixRosch (TALK) 19:34, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That there's only one published biography ought not to be a problem for GA. Eric Corbett 19:37, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should just add where Undine caught her husband in the act of adultery, if it's so important. Was it in the bridal bed? The backseat of her jeep? On top of the washing machine? Maybe it does matter. Drmies (talk) 07:54, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• In the castle according to this. Written by Fred of the Fucking Mount Why Mad?. On a very brief scan, it seems that Undine's husband thought she was dead. As for the complainant- if I had blood coming out of my colon, I'd get it checked out. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 09:15, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  But where in the castle? Eric Corbett 13:49, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry, got it wrong- it appears that Huldbrand and Bertalda had "a confidential conversation" in a "waggon" filled with cotton; Hulbrand dies just before he is to be married to Bertalda, when Undine appears to him. H and B are rescued from the wagon by Undine when it turns into foam, courtesy of her father Kuhleborn, who's the driver. So, Undine doesn't actually catch her husband in adultery. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 14:11, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  The adultery bit does appear to be incorrect. Huldbrand's unfaithfulness appears to be his marriage to Bertalda. Eric Corbett 14:26, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  ... actually I'm uncertain which Ondine story is being referred to here, but it certainly isn't Fouqué's. Eric Corbett 16:06, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• As a side note, we went to the woods for Rosie's birthday and played Pooh Sticks. She won. Drmies (talk) 17:05, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• That's Poohsticks, thank you very much. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:32, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Looking through Wikipedia for the White Lady of Avenel I came across Comte de Gabalis (text here, including image of naiad), an article that seems to have escaped the attention of the Shakespeare fascists--by which I mean those who claim erroneously that Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare, a ridiculous proposition of course. And that article identifies the titular "Count of the Cabala" as Roger Bacon (who is Shakespeare) and then as Saint Germain. If you've read Foucault's Pendulum, raise your hand. Drmies (talk) 16:13, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  I've read that, but many years ago now. There's something not right about the way we're telling the story of Ondin's curse that needs to be fixed; Ondine killed her husband with a kiss, not by cursing him, but it may require a consultation with the text of Giradoux's play to figure out where the loss of autonomic functions actually fits in. Eric Corbett 16:23, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I have nothing to offer on that topic yet; I've just been finding tidbits of intertextuality (OK, a lot of them). What I see is a lead that needs expanding. As we've seen before, there is kind of a fundamental problem--do you take term X in a definitional sense, forcing yourself to pin it down to (in this case) one particular author and era, or do you take it (as I typically do) broadly, as an idea, or maybe a trope? In the latter case one runs the risk of slight anachronism, but I think that's partly the result of fetishizing a name. The former runs the risk of undue limitation and a fragmentation of what in history, literature, and myth appears to be a pretty continues state of affairs--of a belief ("belief") in a certain kind of creature with certain kinds of qualities. Drmies (talk) 16:57, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  The description section needs some expansion yet before worrying about the lead. Eric Corbett 17:24, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• • OK, my sworn duty as a Wikipedia editor overrides my desire for comedy. For the full crazy effect, look at this version, longer but essentially the same as the one I just undid. The real shits and giggles lie in the fact that more than a few Wikipedia editors have looked at those versions without, apparently, raising an eyebrow. This includes Sadads--but he is, I believe, a Rosicrucian. Drmies (talk) 16:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • What an article! Can't believe I didn't think it was a start (That was an AWB edit, when I got a little overeager with stub tagging). But Bacon's Shakespearean investigations must have created his greatest legacy I am sure? As a true universalist, you cannot deny the importance of complex esoteric beliefs to true knowledge of the world.... Sadads (talk) 16:36, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm working on it now, and I have become convinced that Ovid was also Bacon. I mean Shakespeare. Drmies (talk) 16:45, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • Bacon and ovid? All-day breakfast at the Swan of Snitterfield? Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 16:58, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Can you read this? I've ordered the book--it has a 42-page appendix on Undine, where she came from and where she goes. Drmies (talk) 17:45, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes I can read that review. Looks as if the book could be very useful in helping to stitch the various threads together. Eric Corbett 17:54, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Eric, what do you think about these edits? - article before. What I think it was odd that this user removed a referenced entry, with an odd comment. Now I noticed he is edtiting her article too, removing big amounts of info. Also this. Looks like NPOV edits too me. Hafspajen (talk) 13:10, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, to take things in order, I've never thought much of categories, so I wouldn't be concerned about altering them. Vanna Bonta is probably famous enough to be included in that list, although I don't think that section should be written as a list anyway. The last edit I don't see as being problematic, just removing some clutter. Eric Corbett 13:48, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, agree about the last one. What worries me the editors edit summary: (removed non-famous owner of a chow-chow) and that he -she goes editing the article removing quite large bits - souced too. Hafspajen (talk) 16:00, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What I meant ...was not the dog article ( might not made myself clear enough) but it was the actual Vanna Bonta article edits, that worries me. LIKE THIS, that was what I wanted to ask you about what do you think about those edits. rather a lot of them. It was only trough the dog article noticed the editor. ^{And actually he was back again to the dod article tagging the entry as better source needed. like this one Is this a good enough source?} Hafspajen (talk) 18:32, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. The material that was removed is a bit overly gushing for me, so I probably agree with its removal. As for IMdb, you can't use that as a reliable source for anything. Eric Corbett 20:21, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK then. Hafspajen (talk) 21:07, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan2 has "commented out" the image you suggested because of WP:NFCC#9. Any suggestions as to how to get around this? Buster Seven Talk 13:56, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You could try this one Eric Corbett 14:58, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. If I get the bio, this Sunday. If not, Sunday following. Buster Seven Talk 15:05, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank You. Buster Seven Talk

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I understand from a mutual friend that you seconded my nomination for "Editor of the Week", that was very kind of you. I feel rather guilty as I have wound back contributing quite a lot recently. I do like the Bongs' miners. J3Mrs (talk) 16:02, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I hoped you might. Eric Corbett 20:15, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You, me, and your nominator Sagaciousphil are little more than occasional visitors here now. so no need for you feel guilty. We are after all only easily replaceable units of work. Eric Corbett 00:49, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A comment at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Scheduled Monuments in North Somerset/archive1 has asked about capitalisation of "scheduled monument" (and by implication Ancient monument). They are defined by the law Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 does this make them "proper nouns" or not? Any advice or contributions to the discussion appreciated.— Rod ^talk 17:57, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it does, and in fact the text of the Act refers to "scheduled monument" and "ancient monument", which I think is the clincher. Eric Corbett 18:20, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's very kind of you. Eric Corbett 13:01, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Happy birthday, seek delight! (I know, not exactly your topic, but written/expanded on my mom's birthday thinking of that, - my poodle) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:17, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gerda. I used to think of poodles as toys, girl's dogs, but I've come to realise that they can be really big bruisers as well. Eric Corbett 13:24, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Especially the Pink Vegetarian Male ones... Hafspajen (talk) 15:21, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many happy returns :) J3Mrs (talk) 15:33, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. As I've got older I've usually tried to avoid birthdays, but the Internet has made that virtually impossible today. Eric Corbett 15:46, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So do I but I'd be mortified if I wasn't taken out for a meal. I'm about, but busy, dogsitting today, not sure who's in charge but a long walk has worn him out and he's chewing a huge marrowbone. Otherwise I'm plodding on with little enthusiasm. J3Mrs (talk) 16:13, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The meal has been organised, no worries on that score. Eric Corbett 16:19, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(←) 

Did you got any Chocolate cake to your meal in real life? Hafspajen (talk) 22:24, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No chocolate cake, but I did get my favourite ice cream, Neapolitan. Tomorrow I may push the boat out and go for a banana split, but I'll have to starve myself first. Eric Corbett 21:27, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Happy birthday! --John (talk) 21:47, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks John. Eric Corbett 21:57, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Don't let JW play you, Eric. You know what he's up to — just back off and let other people take care of it. Don't be a moth to his open flame... Carrite (talk) 22:41, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Simpler: don't edit on Monday ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:46, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gerda, just because it's Monday doesn't make it open season on me. Eric Corbett 22:48, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I had successfully not looked at that page for weeks, but Floq's statement made me curious. Arb sorrows pending again, did you know? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:58, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't take much interest in what happens in arbitration cases, even in my own. Eric Corbett 23:37, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy Wales is no flame and I'm no moth, but he does have serious questions to answer nevertheless. Eric Corbett 22:48, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[3]

He knows very well the regard, or more accurately the lack of it, that I hold him in, but the difference between us that I don't keep trying to provoke him into some kind of sanctionable offence. What would be the point anyway, as he's unsanctionable? Eric Corbett 00:37, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite. Notice will be served. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:19, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Let it go, Eric. There is no good outcome for you, politically speaking, going toe to toe with The Co-Founder. He chips at you, he looks petty, you look like a good guy for staying away, and slowly the dynamic changes... Carrite (talk) 01:58, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is no good outcome for him in going toe to toe with me, so why does he persist in doing it? Eric Corbett 02:25, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]