"It was reading the ultimate paragraph of this post: [1] that finally convinced me it was time to go, yes, Hans is quite right, I am stuck in a vicious circle and there was no likelihood of things improving."

— Extract from Giano's retirement statement

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

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

I saw the GA section on your userpage and I am wondering if I should nominate one of the following for GA. (1) Compton-Belkovich Thorium Anomaly - (2) Jacobus Deketh. Thanks! --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 21:30, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that they're not quite sufficiently developed yet, although obviously informative. Malleus Fatuorum 21:32, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Which has the biggestbigger chance at succeeding? --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 21:44, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bigger, not biggest ;P Pesky (talk) 22:00, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Heh - thanks. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 22:04, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On balance I'd say that Jacobus Deketh did. Malleus Fatuorum 22:22, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Compton-Belkovich Thorium Anomaly is now an FA candidate!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:05, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's probably a mistake. Malleus Fatuorum 19:05, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that's what I said, thankfully he took the advice, I didn't want to see him get white washed. I did look in google books though and didn't see much on it and nothing in Highbeam either but its not FA material... William Burges KJP and I and a few others are nurturing, I intend to make some final edits over the next few days and will nom when KJP returns. If you could give it a spick and span when you have a mo I'd be grateful. Tim riley already thinks its good enough, me I want a bit more research on it.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:47, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit surprised actually, as I'm not convinced the Compton-Belkovich Thorium Anomaly article even meets the GA criteria. Malleus Fatuorum 20:38, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the criteria one by one, it actually meets it. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 20:49, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In your opinion perhaps, but not in mine. Malleus Fatuorum 20:55, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A bit more research maybe..♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:04, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Both articles were passed. Having recently encountered this editor, I'm looking at some of his work, and I'm surprised to see that you, Malleus, thought Jacobus Deketh might pass. As I said, it has been passed, but I think there's a lack of coverage. Is there something you see that I am missing? LadyofShalott 22:47, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What leads you to believe that I that thought either article I was asked about in this section would pass, when I made it very clear that I thought neither would? Malleus Fatuorum 12:23, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've done everything required by The Reviewer From Hell for New Forest pony ;P Let me know if it needs anything else for GA; please also let me know what it needs to go to FAC. And could you take a look at History of the horse in Britain for me, to let me know how far off going to FAC is for that one, too? MegaHugz'n'stuff. I've thoroughly enjoyed working with you on the NF pony one. You're good! Pesky (talk) 02:32, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think of myself rather as The Reviewer From Heaven, because sure as Hell an article that goes though my hands is closer to FA at the end of the process than it was at the start. Malleus Fatuorum 03:40, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are wonderful to work with – it's been a real privilege. And anyway it was you who self-identified as The Reviewer From Hell ;P Hugz. Pesky (talk) 03:52, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're right it was, and I'm sure that's how many see me. I'm off to bed now, so I'll take a final look through the ponies tomorrow. Malleus Fatuorum 03:57, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just one final thing to address and then we can pop that green blob on the article. Malleus Fatuorum 21:14, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I love you! Pesky (talk) 04:20, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You did well. My advice is always not to jump too quickly to FAC, take some breathing space, but I think the article would stand a pretty good chance. Malleus Fatuorum 04:36, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't the waiting time for a review count as a breathing space? ;P How about History of the horse in Britain? I'd love to get that one there, as it would mean I could get one of those dinky four-award wossnames for it :D It got over 9000 hits as a DYK, which was cool Pesky (talk) 04:38, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, awards. We may have to part company there. That four thing is a waste of reviewer's time, and I'll have nothing to do with it. I've promised to look at a constellation article, so I'll look at the horse article when I've done that. There are also articles I want to look at myself, such Prospero; so much to do, so little time. Malleus Fatuorum 04:49, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not actually that motivated by the award itself, though it's quite pretty. I just like the idea of one of my "babies" going from scratch to FA. Pesky (talk) 04:56, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then just take it to FA without the intermediate steps. It's not so hard. Malleus Fatuorum 05:12, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Considering I'm struggling to make all the changes to Aaron Rodgers that were suggested in the last GA review, I can't imagine how tough FA would be. --SKATER ^{Is Back} 05:15, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you make sure the article meets the FA criteria then it's a walk in the park really, but if you don't ... Malleus Fatuorum 05:22, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, well I nommed NF pony anyways ... part of the masochists' creed being "Why put off 'til tomorrow the angst you could suffer today?" Not that I'm generally a masochist. The True Story™ is that I find stuff like that a refreshing and soothing break from Real Life. Pesky (talk) 09:41, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck with that; I think you should be OK. Malleus Fatuorum 19:39, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :o) The FAC process-wossname is a first for me; it will be interesting to see how it works. Pesky (talk) 20:50, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I saw you've commented at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Murasaki Shikibu/archive1. Now I found the lead image was inappropriate, but Truthkeeper does not agree with me. It would be grateful if you could post your comment at Talk:Murasaki Shikibu#Wrong picture. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 09:25, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I can't get very excited about the style of a kimono. Malleus Fatuorum 14:17, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I was told this was canvassing. I posted RFC at WT:FAC#RFC on Murasaki Shikibu. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 16:17, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody ought to take that damn "Canvass" guideline and nuke it from orbit. Well, now that I've started - somebody ought to take 99% of the so called "policies" and "guidelines" and burn them with fire. There should be 1 rule. "Act like an adult." Everything else is superfluous essay material. Don't get me wrong - I love the AGF, FOC, and all the kumbaya stuff; but the bureaucratic BS that had good intentions in the beginning is now being used by children and vindictive twits to choke out honest hard working people trying to add content to the project. OK .. I'm done. How ya doin' Mal? — Ched :  ?  21:21, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did you misspell "twits", shouldn't that be "twats"? I entirely agree with you about the canvassing bullshit, which could basically be summarised as "everything should be discussed in private". Malleus Fatuorum 22:40, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since I was the person to tell Oda Mari she was canvassing - I didn't mean in regards to the FAC reviewers, but I do think that selectively choosing to post on one wikiproject and ignoring four others is wrong fwiw. And trying to get people to overturn a FAC decision after the fact is also wrong. But I've never been involved in something like this, so I'm sure I said something wrong myself to have Ched react like that. Oh well, as I'm finding out, I don't seem to be making many friends or pleasing many people these days. Truthkeeper (talk) 23:24, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure Ched was making a general point. Malleus Fatuorum 23:47, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And in general there's nothing to prevent you from contacting the other projects, so why the fuss? Malleus Fatuorum 00:00, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Truthkeeper - I am sorry if you took my comments to have anything to do with any of your posts. To be honest, I had no idea that you had made a comment to Oda. I think the world of your work ... you do absolutely wonderful work. My post was simply my view that the "canvass" idea is total bullshit. If I see an issue on the quality of a featured article .. then I am going to ask Malleus for his opinion. If I see an issue on the formats of citations, then I'll ask Sandy for her opinion. I think it's wrong to find fault with people because they to talk to other people. To be totally honest, I have to admit that I'm a bit fed up and disgusted with Wikipedia right now. There are children who have gotten the "zOMG adminz" status and play little games blocking adults. Totally unacceptable in my opinion. Now - Beyond that ... the culture here is now many years old. There are people who have butted heads, and developed a "I don't like you" mentality. ... There are folks playing some sort of underlying "power" game, and they are using "friends" to manipulate others. Personally? .. I don't much care for that. I would much rather deal with Malleus telling me to "pull my head out of my ass" than some snide edit summary of "are all your friends here now" type of thing. Short version: .. I was not finding fault with any "canvass" comment you made personally. — Ched :  ?  03:22, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ched,

It could be worse. If you want to read the future of Wikipedia, consider the halfwits who are whining on IRC....

 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 05:47, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What is happening to Wikipedia

Beware of editors with stalks growing out of their heads!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:20, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

By a strange coincidence I was watching a documentary on animal survivors last week that had some footage of this fungus shooting out the head of an ant after having persuaded it to climb up a tree. Malleus Fatuorum 19:30, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Was your wife watching with you? Did she ask you if you thought Wikipedia might be a tree favored by another fungus?  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:40, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Heh! I used to know a horse called Gus. Real name: Fun Gus. Nickname: "Mouldy". Pesky (talk) 05:15, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Malleus, I've finished my changes to the Aaron Rodgers Article, and was wondering if you could be the one to put me through hell and review it for GA? Or if that's not possible, if you could at least peer review it if you're not to busy. Thanks. I'll wait for your response before I renom it got GA.--SKATER ^{Is Back} 03:55, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I tweaked a few bits and pieces in the prose, but I wouldn't say I'd gone through it with a fine-toothed comb. Pesky (talk) 09:19, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that American football is right up there with professional wrestling in terms of those articles I don't review, particularly as the game is an almost complete mystery to me. But I'll take a look through the article later this evening and let you know what I think in terms of a GA nomination. Malleus Fatuorum 19:36, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, do you think it'd be good to put it up for peer review to? Or just a GA NOM?

I haven't looked at it yet, but there's no harm in asking for a peer review. Malleus Fatuorum 04:34, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:CITEVAR, as an uninvolved administrator I would like to ask you to avoid changing citations that do not use citation templates into ones that do, as you did recently on the article Sean Combs. — Carl (CBM · talk) 22:18, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can ask anything you like, just as I can ignore it. Malleus Fatuorum 22:41, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Malleus! have you been tenditiously improving articles again? Don't you know that when you find a complete mess you should "wait for consensus to emerge" before clearing it up? Richerman (talk) 23:19, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As my mother is fond of saying, "life's too short to bugger about". You could grow very old waiting for consensus to emerge on anything much here. Malleus Fatuorum 23:32, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Amen to that. Whatever happened to Be bold? Richerman (talk) 23:37, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no avoiding it... he's next at FAC. (gulps). Ealdgyth - Talk 12:38, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you're going to get quite a bit of help copyediting that one. Malleus Fatuorum 13:01, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but you are the master ... I always rest easier knowing you've removed my commas... Ealdgyth - Talk 13:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll wait until Dweller's finished her work. Malleus Fatuorum 14:32, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going offwiki imminently. Sadly. So the field is clear for you, MF, if you like. Hope to get back to it tomorrow. Please don't anybody wait for me though. Incidentally, I'm a bit heavy in the trouser area for a "her", but I'll take it as an enormous compliment. --Dweller (talk) 14:38, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I detect bragging here.... "bit heavy" (snorts). Ealdgyth - Talk 14:41, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah... 1 may not be as much as 100, but it's infinitely larger than 0. --Dweller (talk) 14:43, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. I think I confused you with Risker – I'm dreadful with names. Malleus Fatuorum 15:08, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. I'm often mistaken for someone. --Dweller (talk) 14:33, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "A further indignity occurred when the corpse was lowered into the tomb and the tomb burst and spread a disgusting odor throughout the church." I thought it was William's body that burst, not the tomb? Malleus Fatuorum 16:29, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Both, actually, on my understanding. Corpse was rotting and it kinda did a lot of damage to the tomb. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:02, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  So can we not say that his corpse burst, as if it hadn't there's no reason why the tomb would have done so? Malleus Fatuorum 00:05, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Let me double check some sources after I finish eating and watering the garden... Ealdgyth - Talk 00:17, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  I watched a TV programme on William recently, and I've just checked his ODNB entry (which says nothing about his tomb/corpse bursting) and it seems to me that maybe there's an important aspect of William's legacy that's missing. To quote from the ODNB, "The Conqueror's death was followed by the collapse of order in Normandy and, within months, by the outbreak of a war of succession between his sons. Both were directly related to William's excessively authoritarian rule within the duchy and his inability to resolve problems within his family." Malleus Fatuorum 00:27, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Yeah, that's probably a case of "medievalist myopia" ... *I* know that so well that I forget that others ... well... won't. This is why I get folks to read the articles... it's so easy to overlook stuff on these big topic articles ... (still struggling to get out to water...) Ealdgyth - Talk 00:38, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  There .. added something .. because what that article needed was more words, right? (grins). It's still about 2000 words less than Middle Ages... which is still expanding, of course. Gotta have words for all those commas I love! As a heads up, I'll be in Chicago for the next two days ... probably won't check wikipedia while I'm gone. Will check in the morning before leaving but... Ealdgyth - Talk 01:30, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Enjoy your trip. I should have finished with William by the time you get back. Malleus Fatuorum 11:56, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  I'll be getting out of Chicago RIGHT before all the NATO protesters arrive... Ealdgyth - Talk 12:18, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wigan IS the Beverly Hills Of The North West. Ask anyone who lives there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.146.68 (talk) 13:38, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be hard pressed to think of anywhere less like Beverly Hills than Wigan. Ask anyone who lives in Beverly Hills. Malleus Fatuorum 14:28, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I saw a girl the other day wearing a hoody with large, bold letters reading "I ♥ WIGAN". She didn't look like someone who would belong in Beverly Hills. J Milburn (talk) 16:10, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Beverley Hills is sited on a hill just east of a grim derelict post-industrial wasteland; has notoriously awful public transport; has grossly inflated property prices; and is filled with people who think they're far more attractive and interesting than they actually are. Saddleworth is clearly the Beverley Hills of the North West. Black Sheep (talk) 16:50, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But....but...but EVERYONE wants to live there! Ravenholme (talk) 13:03, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Malleus, thank you so much for fixing the mess of references. I can't express how much I appreciate it. Are there any outstanding issues I still need to take care of before an FAC? Thank you again. :) Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 19:12, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You've still got a couple of citations with missing page numbers, #28 and #57. Malleus Fatuorum 19:47, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I added them to the Ridpath citation, but ended up removing the Brown citation because it's duplicated in Olcott (Olcott cites him) and I can't get the page numbers off Google Books. I've also added another citation for the Babylonian stuff from Olcott. Hope that helps. Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 20:02, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's looking good now I think. Best of luck at FAC. Malleus Fatuorum 21:56, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! Besides not blocking you, is there anything I can do to repay you? Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 00:39, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just get your article through FAC, that'll be thanks enough. Malleus Fatuorum 00:45, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aww, thanks! I'll do you proud, then. :) Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 00:53, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Malleus. This is a courtesy notification that I have mentioned your name in a discussion at WP:AN. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive235#Query about a serial sockpuppeter. It's related to the work you are doing at Sean Combs. Regards, -- Ninja Dianna (Talk) 21:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Malleus Fatuorum 22:20, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Malleus, while you're on a roll with astronomical articles is there any chance of you copy editing a little article I have going in my sandbox here? The reason I've created it is that there will be a Transit of Venus on 5/6 June this year (the last one for the 121 years) and I wanted to mark it by 1/ asking Raul to consider putting the Transit of Venus article on the main page - which I've done - and 2/ marking the amazing achievement of these two local lads with a DYK (sorry to swear) on that day as well. The article is to be called "Transit of Venus, 1639". If you could look over the article before it goes to DYK I would be most grateful. I know there is a massive chunk of quoted text in there but I think it's warranted as it is of great historical importance to astronomy. Richerman (talk) 08:29, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be happy to take a look once I've been through William the Conqueror for Ealdgyth. Malleus Fatuorum 11:40, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thanks. Richerman (talk) 11:53, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, The Guardian has two related articles today:

1. Feel Free to Insult Me
2. How to insult without causing offence

Warden (talk) 12:55, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"the sorts of people who are likely to come in for insults that they feel really insulted by are exactly the sort of people who are likely to insult people. Could be describing the Wikipedia administrator elite. Malleus Fatuorum 15:09, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd take that as an insult, only I'm not very elite. --Dweller (talk) 15:24, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My feeling is that far too many people are far too willing to take offence. I don't like Nanny State politics; it almost invariably goes too far. Just not being deliberately hurtful is enough. "First do no harm", kinda thing. Often the response to some minor alleged-offence is far, far more hurtful, damaging, and offensive than the original alleged-offence. And people using laws and rules like that with malice aforethought, as a weapon, should be @$%&*^@$%% on sight. Pesky (talk) 08:44, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It seems it was actually 3: robert first, then a pair by henry, with the second one being the clincher. I'm going to sleep; may work on Wm. tomorrow. – Ling.Nut3 (talk) 16:40, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't like the phrasing "pair of invasions" anyway. Malleus Fatuorum 16:54, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

... or at least another pony? I'm working this one up at the moment so I can slap it in for a FAN once New Forest pony is finished with. Any thoughts on it would be much appreciated. Pesky (talk) 08:41, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know when you've finished and I'll take a look. My first impression is that the rather intimidating wall of text that's the History section could usefully do with two or three subsections. Malleus Fatuorum 13:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's something I was seriously considering. I'll see where it's most sensible to split that up. All the genetics stuff, though it takes up quite a lot of the article, is actually really important; there's a very widespread mythconception about Exmoors being purebred since the last Ice Age, and being "the original prehistoric British pony", and unless that's really comprehensively addressed in the article we'll get people going in and adding incorrect information about it all the time! Pesky (talk) 03:53, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've split that up a bit in what seems to me (at about 5am) to be a rational way! I'm not far off finished with it (probably looking at about 90% - 95% finished); just chasing around for obscure bits of research (which aren't actually vital to the article, but would be nice and could always be added at a later date if they surface and have anything useful in them). Pesky (talk) 04:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

from the current contributors to ANI. Lucky you! Is there any chance that you could take a quick look at a content dispute with respect to what's an appropriate image (e.g. must we have breasts?) on the SuicideGirls talk page?
Thanks,
Aaron Brenneman (talk) 12:58, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you'll be disagreeing with me again then, because I've got no time for anyone who swoons at the thought of a pair of tits on display in an article about a soft pornography web site. Malleus Fatuorum 13:27, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to comment on that article's talk page. I have no idea why you felt the need to be so rude, but "swoon" and "puritan" make it appear that, rather than take the time to actually examine the content issue, you've gone with the knee-jerk "ZOMG! Censorship is bad" response. I'm disappointed not in the direction of your response, but in its shallowness. - Aaron Brenneman (talk) 20:14, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that was rude then you need to get out more. You're the one who's being rude matety, now piss off. Malleus Fatuorum 21:11, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	There is only one real barnstar ;) You've done a huge amount of good work for this project, and have great insight into the realities of the place. Good on ya; let's work together. (jAck). Br'er Rabbit (talk) 09:37, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Lucan. Pretty poor article so I've just ordered a few books on the subject. I've been busy with work the last few months and to be honest, the whole "ban Malleus" thing didn't do wonders for my thoughts about the usefulness of this site. Parrot of Doom 21:12, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To tell the truth I wasn't too impressed with the "ban Malleus" stuff myself. I've decided to do some work on children's literature, getting back to my childhood I suppose, starting with The Coral Island. Malleus Fatuorum 21:17, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

C S Lewis's Narnia stories were the catalyst for my interest in books, maybe I should take a look one day... Parrot of Doom 21:20, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My ambition before I'm ejected from Wikipedia is to get every one of the Watch with Mother series up to GA: Monday was Picture Book, Tuesday was Andy Pandy, Wednesday was Bill and Ben, Thursday was Rag, Tag and Bobtail, and Friday was The Woodentops, an everyday story about ArbCom. Malleus Fatuorum 21:43, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was more of a Bod and Mr Benn man myself :) Parrot of Doom 21:51, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I remember all those, bet you don't remember Billy Bean and his funny machine? I can still sing the theme tune but no one else seems to remember it. The machine even had a VDU - and that was in the 1950s. Richerman (talk) 22:15, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Never heard of it, you're quite right. I continue to find it depressing that pretty much every article you look at is crap, and more and more crap articles are being added every day. Yet nobody seems to care, because there are more articles today than there were yesterday. Malleus Fatuorum 22:29, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Malleus, you may enjoy reading Michael Moorcock's "Epic Pooh", which condemns infantilizing literature for children. Two authors who write books to prepare children for adulthood are J. K. Rowling and Philip Pullman. Give me Mrs. Weasley ãnd her "Get away from her, you bitch!" over a random WMF employee any day!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:55, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mrs Weasley would of course be hauled over the coals for an NPA violation. Unless she happened to be an administrator of course. Malleus Fatuorum 23:29, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doubt Miss Lestrange would be complaining. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:37, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone ever see Scouse Bod? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:42, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Scouse Bod was meh-okay, but not a patch on the sweary Postman Pat. However, in the sidebar of Scouse Bod I found a real gem - Scouse Weather Forecast. Pissed myself laughing when he pointed out the Danes and Swedes shooting arrows. GwenChan 21:24, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, just wanted to thank you for the help on Aaron Rodgers, It's waiting for a GA review now, hopefully it'll be my first!--SKATER ^{Is Back} 18:50, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I helped at all did I? Malleus Fatuorum 18:57, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Answered a sourcing question or two, but really i wouldnt of attempted a GA had it not been for you in the first place--SKATER ^{Is Back} 19:34, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wish you luck with it. GA is harder than some think, when it's done properly at least. As I said, I know squit about American football, but I'll take a look through the prose so far as I'm able to understand it. Malleus Fatuorum 21:30, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Personal attack review. Thank you. -Scottywong| comment _ 19:49, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have fun. Malleus Fatuorum 20:28, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Goodness gracious, that was not the worst discussion on ANI today.

Maybe there's something to the zombie-ant-mold theory, after all.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:02, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the first time you have made personal attacks - stop. Hipocrite (talk) 21:05, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can we give this a rest, please?  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:09, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MF will hopefully see where it's coming from and take it as intended. Hipocrite (talk) 21:14, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hipocrite. Be very, very careful about what you post here next if it's not an apology. Malleus Fatuorum 21:28, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are always right, well, almost always! This Link will lead you to many Happy hours. PumpkinSky talk 01:44, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, to be truthful, I always think I'm right, but I'd never turn down the offer of a beer. Malleus Fatuorum 01:48, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

-;) Best wishes to you Mal, don't let the wiki get to you. You can always stop by my neck of the woods for a brewski.PumpkinSky talk 01:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To be serious just for a moment, my attitude to Wikipedia and its administrators changed quite dramatically a few months ago, after I reluctantly agreed to attend a local meetup. I expected the usual sanctimonious bullshit, but instead I found a bunch of apparently reasonable and friendly people. I haven't really come to terms with that yet. Malleus Fatuorum 02:02, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand that. It's because when you meet people in person, they are no longer an anonymous dog on the Internet.PumpkinSky talk 02:06, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]