User talk:Eric Corbett

There are many aspects of wikipedia's governance that seem to me to be at best ill-considered and at worst corrupt, and little recognition that some things need to change. I appreciate that there are many good, talented, and honest people here, but there are far too many who are none of those things, concerned only with the status they acquire by doing whatever is required to climb up some greasy pole or other. I'm out of step with the way things are run here, and at best grudgingly tolerated by the children who run this site. I see that as a good thing, although I appreciate that there are others who see it as an excuse to look for any reason to block me, as my log amply demonstrates.

WikiProject Greater Manchester Announcements

• Manchester Mark 1 promoted to FA 28 September 2010
• Manchester computers promoted to GA 23 September 2010
• Trafford Park promoted to FA 9 September 2010
• Hyde F.C. failed at GAN 5 September 2010
• Belle Vue Zoological Gardens promoted to FA 7 August 2010
• Manchester United F.C. promoted to FA 27 July 2010
• 1910 London to Manchester air race promoted to FA 1 June 2010
• 1996 Manchester bombing promoted to GA 17 March 2010
• Chadderton promoted to FA 2 February 2010
• Rochdale Town Hall promoted to GA 26 January 2010

A gift

		CopyEditor's BarnStar
		I award you this CopyEditor's BarnStar for insisting on clear, comprehensible, and grammatically correct articles. Probably long overdue. For excellent copyeditor help with Ferdinandea, Loihi Seamount, Mauna Kea, Mount Cleveland (Alaska), and a ton of other lurking-behind-me brilliance, I give thee tis' barnstar. Thank you =)ResMar 16:34, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks ResMar. Malleus Fatuorum 16:53, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Anyway, what do you think there if left to do? Personally I've no clue =) ResMar 16:58, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

I think there's maybe a little bit of reorganisation still needed, but I'll take a closer look after the holidays are over, probably Wednesday. Malleus Fatuorum 18:03, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

CopyeditorStar7.PNG

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		I also noticed your many, many edits. Thank you for making Wikipedia that much better. OrbitOne 20:02, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Copyedit Request

Hey Malleus. I previously sought your help at User talk:Malleus Fatuorum/Archives/2010/April#Article Help. I've exponentially expanded the now-renamed Manoj-Babli honour killing case. I want to bring it to featured article status. You're very adept in that arena, aren't you? I need help with the prose and organization. Codedon (talk) 21:09, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

I've had a little bit of experience with that kind of thing, but I'm no magician. I'll try and take a look over the next few days. Malleus Fatuorum 21:26, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

MF will work his wonders on the prose, which is a bit rocky in some places. One suggestion is that working some of those notes into the prose will improve the aesthetics ... lots of little superscripted numbers that are unnecessarily distracting. Good luck! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:11, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thank you both very much! With respect to the content, is it thorough enough for featured article material? Codedon (talk) 22:20, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

I've had a first look through and I'm sure we can beat this into shape. I'd be inclined to take this to GAN first though, not least because the story doesn't appear to have concluded yet, with the appeals (still to be heard)? One other initial observation, echoing what SandyG said above. In parts the article reads too much like a newspaper report rather than an encyclopedia entry. Most notably when the family members are introduced followed by their age, as in "Babli's mother, Ompati (50)". Malleus Fatuorum 18:31, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

That sounds promising. Yes, it is a problem that the story is not yet over, but I haven't seen any updates about it since May. It's as if the media became disinterested and stopped following it. In that case, what should be done about the "appeal" section? Should I simply say that no more information is available?

I included the ages of the family members to give some context. I think that omitting them would be workable. What do you think? Codedon (talk) 21:56, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

I'd certainly drop the ages; so far as Manoj and Babli's siblings are concerned it would probably be enough to just say whether they were younger or older, i.e., what their relative position in the sibling hierarchy was. You also need to check on the tenses being used. For instance "Manoj owns an electronics repair shop at Kaithal and is the only member of his family receiving income" can't possibly be true. Malleus Fatuorum 18:05, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Sure, that sounds great. I'll get to work on that tomorrow. FYI: I've nominated the article for GA! By the way, have you finished copyediting the article? If not, there's no rush. I understand that you were fucked about earlier today by a particular misbehaving admin and plan to take some action. I sincerely wish you luck with that. Since my block 9 months ago, I've vehemently resented people who abuse their power. Codedon (talk) 06:32, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't give a rat's arse for blocks, or the threat of blocks. I just go my own way, and so should you. I think your nomnation may have been a little premature, but there;s always a long queue at GAN. Let me know when you think you're finished and I'll look at the article again. Malleus Fatuorum 06:49, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I believe I've done everything. Thanks. Codedon (talk) 19:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Looksie?

Hi Malleus. I was just looking over Mount Thielsen and I don't think it's in poor shape. It certainly needs a lot of fine-tuning. Perhaps a bit more information. Would you be willing to read over it and offer some comments? Regards, ceranthor 20:41, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll try and take a look in the next couple of days or so. Malleus Fatuorum 23:30, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I think I've finished expanding it now. It's around 11kb. ceranthor 16:40, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Hogmanay greeting

Thank you very much for working with me in 2010 to make the encyclopedia a better place. Regardless of any disagreements we may have had, I want to wish you all the very best for 2011. I look forward to working with you, and I hope for health and happiness to you and your family in the year to come. I therefore send you this glass of the cratur, so you can celebrate, whether it is Hogmanay or New Year's Day where you are. Warmest regards, --John (talk) 04:58, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Only the date has changed. I found working with you last year to be a nightmare, and neither of us has changed just because the calendar did. Malleus Fatuorum 05:37, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm truly sorry you feel that way and I apologize for any offense I have caused you. If there is anything I can do for you in the future, don't hesitate to ask, even if it is just continuing to keep out of your road as far as possible. I don't share your pessimism about people changing; I have seen people change. Such beliefs can be self-limiting perhaps, though you must continue to call it as you see it, as must we all. Anyway, all the best, and sorry for any disturbance I have caused you with my message. --John (talk) 06:08, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not at all pessimistic about people changing, but not in synchrony with the Gregorian calendar. Malleus Fatuorum 06:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

I hear you. Folks change at their own pace. Let me know if you need anything else; at least it was a proper Scottish measure I sent, and not the tiny ones I remember from my visits to England! Happy New Year (mine comes in about 25 minutes and I am about to drink the glass I photographed). Cheers! Slainthe! --John (talk) 07:43, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Enjoy your drink. A friend gave me a bottle of Jack Daniels for Christmas, which I haven't opened yet. If I suddenly go off the air later after a series of increasingly bad typos that'll be the reason. Malleus Fatuorum 17:21, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

If this was a forum, I'd definitely sig that.--White Shadows ^{We live in a beautiful world} 00:00, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Another FLC planned

Thanks for your help with List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in the English Midlands which achieved FL status with minimal problems. Now for another very similar list, List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in Northern England. Apart from its content, it is virtually the same as the other two FLs in the series. Would you be kind enough, as a New Year present to me, to copyedit as necessary the third paragraph in the lead (the first two are identical to the other lists), and the text in the Notes section of the list. Many greetings. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:05, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes of course, but I probably won't get there until tomorrow. Malleus Fatuorum 17:17, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely no rush.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:20, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Another lovely article Peter, I hardly felt the need to touch it. I've just got one question, which I'll post on your talk page in case you don't see it for all of the noise on here. Malleus Fatuorum 22:39, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, had to climb high to find it! Now nominated. Many thanks once again.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:37, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy, happy

Happy New Year, and all the best to you and yours! (from warm Cuba) Bzuk (talk) 15:09, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Somewhere warm sounds like a very attractive option right now, hope you're having a good time there. Malleus Fatuorum 17:24, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

A dashing thank you (more questions)

Gracias for the en dash fixes.

1. (do you think) there is anywhere we need to look for the en dashes manually (places that your script does not put them)? Will the ones from the convert templates be OK?

2. How about nbsp work? What kind of go through do we need to do, to make sure that is all in order?

TCO (talk) 22:42, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

The dashes will be OK now. So far as nbsps are concerned, the main thing to look for is a number at the end of a sentence, separated by a newline from whatever its units are. I tend to stick an nbsp between every number and its units just to be on the safe side, but that's not really necessary. Malleus Fatuorum 23:18, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard

Hello Malleus, I hope you had a good new years. I was thinking of taking the Elegy page to FAC and because you also worked on it during the good article review I thought I would run it past you first and see if you wanted in on the nom. Regards, ^OohBunnies!Not just any bunnies... 00:10, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for asking, but I didn't do enough to warrant being one of the nominators. Good luck with the FAC. Malleus Fatuorum 02:08, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

History of viruses

Hi Malleus,

If you could spare the time, I need a fresh pair of a gifted editor's eyes on this. I hope that you don't find it as dull as the title might suggest. My major theme is the impact viruses have had on human history. I have still to write the sections on polio and measles in the 20th century, but would appreciate your help in improving my brummie prose. Best wishes, and a happy new year. Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 02:51, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

I think I remember seeing the precursor to this at FAC fairly recently. I thought it was quite interesting, so I'll be happy to take a look. Malleus Fatuorum 15:59, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Merry New year and all that stuff...

William Warelwast or Hygeberht. If you decide on Higgie, I need to add to his lead. Sorry they aren't more exiting, it's the post-holiday letdown. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:46, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

We'll do William first then. I've got some stuff to do laying new flooring in our hall for the rest of the afternoon, but I'll pop by later when I'll inevitably be feeling in need of a break. Malleus Fatuorum 16:03, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, fun! Flooring! We did that a month or so ago in a rental property, I do not envy you, although hopefully it's one of the "easy to lay" flooring types. I'm avoiding real work myself here, I should be updating some code... blech! Oh, and thank you so much for the copyediting, I know I don't praise/thank/bless you often enough for it. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:08, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

It's vinyl tiles, which are OK, but my problem is that I've discovered I'm slightly allergic to the dust created when I cut up the hardboard underlay, so after an hour or so I get a sneezing fit and have to take a break. Why is nothing in life easy? Malleus Fatuorum 19:07, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Could be worse, could be me. Not only do I get to update 15 year old code, but now I have a "rush" job dumped on me to deal with too... and this is the "part-time" job too! ARGH! Ealdgyth - Talk 19:19, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

It might be advisable to wear a mask when cutting hardboard- the dust contains wood fibres and glue particles which may pose similar dangers to MDF dust (i.e. your allergic response might be to mechanical contamination of the windpipe rather than a reaction to a chemical vapour.) Ning-ning (talk) 21:21, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Ah right, thanks for that encouraging news. Malleus Fatuorum 21:26, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Oddly enough, as Mrs Pedro will gladly and sarcastically verify, I'm very alergic to almost all forms of DIY, dust content or otherwise. Happy 2011 by the way. Pedro :  Chat  21:30, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

January 2011

(Refactored following notification)

In regard to your remarks about Sven Manguard's statement at Ironholds' RFA, I was polite enough to ask you to consider refactoring your comment, and since you have not done so, I am issuing this warning for a personal attack against the editor Sven Manguard.

Referring to his comments as bigoted implies the editor is a bigot, which is a personal attack and will not be tolerated. Please consider your wording more carefully in the future. BarkingFish 18:41, 2 January 2011 (UTC) (refactored by poster at 19:20, 2 January 2011 (UTC))

Please go away and try annoying someone else. I have absolutely no interest in anything you have to say about anything. Malleus Fatuorum 18:49, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Regardless of whether you do or don't, an Incivil remark is not the way to go about handling it. You've been referred for a wikiquette alert, by myself. I am not trying to annoy you, I am simply making clear a rule which exists about what you do and how you handle it. What you decide to do is your problem, not mine. BarkingFish 19:00, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Knock yourself out, I really couldn't care less. You are quite simply wrong, so you'll just have to live with it. Thanks for the link to the welcome page btw. Have you taken the trouble to read it yourself? Malleus Fatuorum 19:03, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

(ec) Do you realize how rude it is to put a "Welcome to Wikipedia" message on someone who has been here a long time? You've made your point, now why doesn't everyone get back to editing the encyclopedia, hm? Ealdgyth - Talk 19:04, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

When I posted that note, I'd never encountered Malleus, Ealdgyth. I didn't know the user, never seen them, never met them. I followed what I was supposed to do. Speaking of which...

Hello, Eric Corbett. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. BarkingFish 19:07, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Just because you've never encountered the editor doesn't mean a quick glance at their talkpage doesn't make it glaringly obvious that they're an established editor, and a highly active one at that. ^OohBunnies!Not just any bunnies... 19:11, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough, I note that for the future. I am still unhappy about the way I've been spoken to, but now I have been made aware of WP:DTTR - I understand kind of why. I will deal with the warning above and personalise it as a message, although as MF has made it clear he will ignore it anyhow, I don't see what good it will do. BarkingFish 19:20, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey, it's not a good idea to mess with Malleus—he's always right. BarkingFish, take a hike. Shut down your computer, go to the nearest park, and have a relaxing respite from the madness of yourself. You brought this upon yourself. Wahoh (talk) 19:26, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

How would you know, Wahoh? Considering you only seem to have joined Wikipedia 9 minutes before you posted that message? BarkingFish 20:31, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Let's try and put this insignificant little spat behind us now BF, with no hard feelings on either side. Malleus Fatuorum 20:40, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Frankly I think that's the best idea to come out of this all night. I'm too bruised to keep going, and to be fair, I did fuck up. Significantly. I'll leave it be. BarkingFish 20:51, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

We learn some hard lessons here, some good some bad. I realised towards the back end of last year that I was dealing with criticism in the wrong way – the wrong way for me I mean. It reminded me of Parent-Child interactions that I resented, and I reacted badly to it. Arguably I may still react badly to criticism in the eyes of some, but it no longer upsets me. Live long and prosper. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 21:08, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

"Referring to his comments as bigoted implies the editor is a bigot"—no, it does not. Indeed, WP:NPA says "Comment on the content, not on the contributor.", and Malleus did indeed comment on Sven's post (the content) and not on Sven himself (the contributor). Ucucha 19:24, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

We allow ourselves to be offended, BarkingFish. I don't know who you are, so I would lend no credence to any of your critical commentary should we interact. Similarly, giving weight to comments from a user with whom you have never interacted suggests you may get quickly burnt out on Wikipedia. It is often a difficult place to communicate and we personalize many comments we should simply leave alone. We expect administrators to perform actions to protect us when we should rather resolve issues quietly either between ourselves or just personally alone. It infantalizes us and does not force us to grow. --Moni3 (talk) 19:29, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Prince's Theatre, Manchester

Materialscientist (talk) 20:17, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

That's something I never expected to see on the mainpage, so well done to you TP. Malleus Fatuorum 20:22, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Please...

...do try not to provoke other editors. If somebody asks you disengage from their talk page, telling them their previous comment was a personal attack (even if it was) isn't the most helpful thing to do. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:08, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Malleus Fatuorum 01:10, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Although it was preceded by an attack, GTB did say "Now leave my talk page". I'm just commenting (not in an admin capacity), that continuing to post there wasn't the most helpful (though not the least) thing you could have done. Although I can understand why you didn't, it might have been better if you'd just let it go or thought about how you would have handled it had it not been for your past experiences with admins blocking you for personal attacks. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

My thoughts are that the admins who have blocked me for "personal attacks" ought not to be left unattended. Like most other administrators in fact. Malleus Fatuorum 01:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Dude, you...are complaining that someone is making turkey noises at you? --Moni3 (talk) 01:24, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I finished the year without a "repermaban"!  :)

Whew! Not even a minor ban. Maybe I should have one of those signs like at a factory that says number of days without a time lost accident? But, they'll strap me to the chair on the next offense, I'm sure. TCO (talk) 01:19, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Anyhoo, Happy New Year, old man! TCO (talk) 01:19, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Old, young, it's in your head. All you can do is to live your life, wherever it takes you and whatever the consequences. Malleus Fatuorum 01:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Que serat, serat...TCO (talk) 01:33, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Enough

Ok, that's enough. GTB has asked you twice to stay off his talk page, yet you keep baiting him. That's enough. Dreadstar ☥ 04:52, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Fuck off Dreadstar. Malleus Fatuorum 04:56, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Defiance of a warning for your harassment? I think that the boomerang has already hit you in my eyes. [|Retro00064|☎talk|✍contribs|] 05:06, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. Malleus Fatuorum 05:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I mean that your response to Dreadstar's warning sounds like defiance to me. [|Retro00064|☎talk|✍contribs|] 05:11, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I mean I think that you're talking shit. Go do it somewhere else. Malleus Fatuorum 05:14, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

OMG, defiance. Retro you are an idiot, and this is farce. Ceoil 20:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, Malleus, have you ever encountered GTB before this incident? ^OohBunnies!Not just any bunnies... 20:28, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, he has. He yelled at me, with the stated intention of "setting my hat on straight", after I suggested that "fuck off, troll" was something he would have been wiser not to say. I also pointed out that he knew damn well that he was starting a fire when he said it, and that really got under his skin. It was memorable.

We've also been parties in the same AfD/RM/whatever discussions, and had no problems there. It's only when I challenge his peculiar notion of conflict management that he bares his fangs. Abusing others is always stupid (yes, even when I do it, roughly once every 18 months), and he hates to be told that. -GTBacchus^(talk) 20:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Seems to me as though you're now trying to make the situation worse, not better. Parrot of Doom 21:43, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry for stepping in on an argument that I am not party to. That out of the way, I am going to butt in. Maybe the best solution to this problem is to tell the two parties to:

1. Take their fight off wiki and find another forum to flame each other on.
2. Write essays as punishment on civility, rhetoric on Wikipedia and on Wiki Don'ts.
3. Say sorry to each other if they want any cake.

Both are experienced editors and their argument should be treated with some respect, but they both should respect Wikipedia enough not to have their fight here. --OrbitOne 21:39, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I think we need to distance ourselves from the punishment response in this case and focus rather on two intelligent adults who probably agree on more than they want to admit right now, and who could possibly work toward a common goal to address what makes them both unhappy about what occurred. Give me the cake instead. --Moni3 (talk) 21:44, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, then I see only two options. They realize that Wikipedia is a place where contrasting ideas can be debated, formally, or do what they did in Newton's era; Give them pistols and tell them to take ten paces. --OO(talk)(useless text here) 22:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I doubt either needs to be told what Wikipedia is. They are both experienced editors. As for the other option, there are rarely two, and Newton was, at least later in life, quite a peaceful guy. People generally want to be shown that they are understood and heard in conflicts, OrbitOne. Handing them pistols does not do that. --Moni3 (talk) 22:21, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, the pistols were a reference and an attempt to distract them to how gentlemen settled academic disputes in his era. Yes, they dueled when reason did not lead to a conclusion. Kinda puts a new light on the merits of calculus; Newton shot first. Anyways, even the best can forget where they are at times. Maybe we should remind them? --OO(talk)(useless text here) 22:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I guess you're trying to be helpful, but I'm perfectly well aware of what wikipedia is and don't need to be reminded. What I'm also aware of is that this is not the first time that GTBacchus has lapsed into abuse when he gets pissed off, and that that's unacceptable for an administrator, or ought to be. Malleus Fatuorum 22:44, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Did someone say cake? Count me in! A belated Happy New Year to Malleus and all commenting here. Live and let live in 2011! (2012 is another matter.) Geometry guy 22:20, 3 January 2011 (UTC) On Moni3's talk page. --OO(talk)(useless text here) 22:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Just sayin'

Don't shoot the messenger, but someone who watched the whole thing unfold on wiki (I didn't) contacted me to say that it looked like you were baited, and the whole thing was cooked up on IRC-- not about GTBacchus, but why that fish got involved to begin with. MF, don't take the bait when the kiddies are after 'ya! It reminds me of what they did to The Fat Man; it makes them feel powerful to take down someone of stature. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that GTB did anything other than wander in where angels ought to have feared to tread. I had a pretty good idea that the whole thing had been cooked up somewhere; too many kiddies peddling the same distorted version of the truth. Malleus Fatuorum 22:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

SandyGeorgia, do you mean to say that BarkingFish warned Malleus because of a plot thought up on the wiki IRC? ^OohBunnies!Not just any bunnies... 04:39, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

No really - enough now

Malleus, I respect you and don't respect you in variously equal measures based on the contribs of yours that I see. I'll try to expand on that later if you wish. For now though, please stop posting on GTBacchus' talk page. It's not productive and it's looking pretty disruptive at this point. If you could make one cohesive post outlining your issue, maybe, but this badgering needs to stop. Drop it for three days and revisit then. Bear-poking is great sport on Wikipedia, but this is going nowhere so please stop now. Yes, you can take that as a warning. Franamax (talk) 23:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Franamax, I think you might have missed a step here-- they had a long talk on my talk page, and it doesn't look to me like MF's recent post after that to GTB was poking ... ??? He just said he was asking? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:32, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Nevertheless, this holiday-season wiki-insanity is tiresome as it happens year after year. I'll review, but Malleus was asked to stop posting at GTB's talk and I haven't seen a re-invitation (though I will search for it). The latest post does not seem to me to especially further a meeting of minds, it looks like continuance of previous behaviour. Franamax (talk) 23:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

What's tiresome is petty tyrants marching around issuing orders without the faintest idea of what they're doing. Malleus Fatuorum 23:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) GTBacchus on his talk page called me a dishonest liar (and a load of other things as well) and said that he would provide the evidence to anyone who asked. I'm asking. Malleus Fatuorum 23:33, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Have you (Franamax) issued a warning to GTBacchus about his continuing personal attacks? No? I wonder why not. Instead you come here and try throwing your weight around. Well, it just doesn't cut any ice with me. Malleus Fatuorum 23:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Franamax, if they're trying to resolve the dispute, it's not fair to ask MF to refrain from talking to GTB-- it really looked only like talking to me, in the realm of DR. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Malleus, one of the reasons I respect you is that you're generally willing to stand up and throw and receive punches and not go into wounded-bird-flopping-on-the-lawn mode. I saw you calling Gwen Gale a liar just a few days ago. I've seen you using "you're either lying or deluded or both" at WT:RFA in times past. You shouldn't be getting all huffed at accusation-slinging. GTB seems aware they crossed a line, but right now they've got their back up over it. Just let it sit for now. Sandy, yes if there is a real discussion happening, I'm OK with it. I just don't want to see more of this back-and-forth, which seems to have gained absolutely zero yardage so far. Franamax (talk) 23:43, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Franamax, please review the discussion on my talk; I think MF's post was in the spirit of dispute resolution, and I thought it was going well. Let's not complicate matters, huh? Let them sort it out. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:44, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not in the slightest huffed, I'm simply determined that the differential treatment of administrators and non-administrators when it comes to dealing with civility issues needs to be addressed. Whether or not GTBacchus is the appropriate test case for that I've not yet fully decided, but some administrator will be. Malleus Fatuorum 23:50, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Sandy, I've read that thread and other than your and Moni's great attempts at conciliation, I see two editors talking past each other. Malleus, I'm aware of your "whole corrupt mess" thesis on adminship and I just don't buy it. If anything, I'm more scared about what I say on this wiki having the bit. I do though recognize when people briefly lose it from time to time and try to forgive those lapses. This is not a rogue admin gone nuts and I don't think your approach is going to yield any benefits. Do you really think you're going to "fix" the problem you perceive? You and GTB are not communicating in anyway productively just now, you're just trading barbs. (And Sandy, yes I think Nyttend was wrong, but you were a little pointy in that situation too, so it's not totally clear-cut) Franamax (talk) 00:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't care what you're buying or selling, my mind is made up. Now are you going to sort out GTBacchus or not? Malleus Fatuorum 00:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Franamax, your intentions are good, but your timing is off; they had just finally started talking when you intervened, and now it's cranked up again, to another level. Let it go. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Franamax, I suggest that you instruct your colleague not to address me on a page where I am not allowed to respond.[1] Malleus Fatuorum 00:04, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Here are 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 times that you posted to my talk page, after I asked you to go away. After that, you sit here and claim to feel some compunction about posting where you're "not allowed to respond"? That's awesome. -198.83.152.5 (talk) 20:01, 6 January 2011 (UTC)(GTBacchus, on a weird hotel computer that won't keep me logged in from screen to screen.)

You're allowed to respond on my talk page, anytime you want. Since you didn't leave when I asked you to, but only after a few more rounds of sniping, I supposed you were entirely discounting my instruction to leave. Well, now it's revoked; you're welcome on my page. There seems to be something.... less than quite... what's the word? There's something funny about ignoring an order for hours, and then claiming to be under it's authority. It seems pretty fucking dishonest to me. You either feel constrained by my instruction to leave, or you don't. You didn't yesterday, and now you do? Weird, dude. You are welcome on my talk page. -GTBacchus^(talk) 01:10, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

K, I struck a word there. If I had to guess, I'd say you were both men editors, looking to slug it out. Franamax (talk) 00:17, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

So let 'em slug it out on my talk, and Moni and I will beat down anyone who interferes. Too many cooks. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:19, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not looking to slug out anything with anybody as it happens. But neither am I going to turn the other cheek. Malleus Fatuorum 00:27, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure Sandy, I'm not going to get involved in how you manage your talk page. That's a neutral forum and you know what you're doing. I'm pretty skeptical that anything positive will come forth today, but more power to you for trying. I'll repeat my advice that everyone should step back and, as I believe you said, think about it for awhile. Franamax (talk) 00:35, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm pretty sceptical too, as GTBacchus shows no signs of remorse as yet. Malleus Fatuorum

Malleus, how often does insisting that you're entirely right and that the other chap should "feel remorse" work? Is it effective, in this universe? If not, what's the point? Don't "rational people" do things that are likely to be effective? Is this likely to be effective? Really?

I fucked up yesterday, and I've admitted as much more than once, but I'm refraining from apologizing because I think the community will be served by your promised RFC/U. I hope it happens soon. -GTBacchus^(talk) 01:10, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not asking you for an apology, and I don't expect one. Probably best if we avoid each other for a few days though, don't you think? Malleus Fatuorum 01:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

That's not a problem. You truly are a fascinating character, Malleus, asking for apologies, and then not asking for them. Funny one, you. :) I'll see you next week. -GTBacchus^(talk) 00:39, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

When have I asked you or anyone else for an apology? Indeed I hardly ever accept them anyway even if they're offered, as I prefer to go by how people behave, not what they say. Malleus Fatuorum 16:18, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

"I will give you seven days to either to either support your assertion or to apologise for it before taking it to ArbCom." Was that an honest statement, about what you'd do in 7 days? Honesty means (among other things) not speaking untruths. I truly and sincerely hope that what you said is the truth, because I have neither supported my assertion nor apologized. If you don't do it, I won't be surprised, but don't go around saying you never ask for apologies, nor that your threats have any substance to them.

I'm only posting here, by the way, because you asked me a question immediately above. -198.83.152.5 (talk) 20:01, 6 January 2011 (UTC)(GTBacchus, on a weird hotel computer that won't keep me logged in from screen to screen.)

Please stop this GTB. You're making yourself look even more childish and silly than you already do. Malleus Fatuorum 20:11, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Well I disagree to an extent, they've pretty much openly said there are situations and editors where their fuse can be well and truly lit. As it happens, you were one of the two editors on that list. You're not pure as the driven snow here Malleus, from what I've seen you give pretty much as good as you get. We're really just talking different points of privilege here, admin vs. article-writer amd what leeway is granted to each. I'll try to expand on that tomorrow (I know, you haven't asked me to, but I feel a compulsion to do so). Since I see my role as an admin as being solely to let the article-writers get on with business (which I for some reason thought was writing articles), the whole affair is rather baffling. I can pick out transgressions from the whole lot of you. Franamax (talk) 01:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

The issue isn't transgressions, it's how those trangressions are dealt with differently depending on whether or not you're an administrator. I trust you'll address that issue as well. Malleus Fatuorum 01:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

(outdent) Sorry to interfere in a matter that should have been closed some time ago. It is not as clear an issue as "administrator v. article-writer". I must point out to Franamax that, although Malleus is not an administrator, he is much, much, more than a "mere" article-writer. He is in addition an adviser, a reviewer, a wise counsellor, a copyeditor, and much more. But, I guess, more to the point, he does not tolerate fools. I must say that some administrators, like the rest of us, although they may not be fools, they do some foolish things (and even eventually admit it and apologise). Wikipedians should act as a team; we need all sorts of skills: article-writers, administrators, etc. to build what is a rather exciting project. The process is damaged by all this pettiness. Let's get on with the work! --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 21:09, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm very much afraid that this spat in which GTBacchus unwisely inserted himself looks unlikely to end well, for either him or for me. I had thought that a cooling off period before further action might have led to some acceptable conclusion, but I see from GTB's posting above that it has not, nor seems likely to. Right now I can see no alternative to escalating this issue via an RFC in due course, in the full knowledge that the best I can hope for is that GTB is desysopped at the expense of me being banned. But if that's the way it has to be, then that's the way it has to be. Malleus Fatuorum 21:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

This is a preposterous scenario you and GTB are storming up, Malleus. It is not "the way it has to be". GTB is giving himself a bad time, trying to provoke you with frenzied gestures from his place of entrenchment. Splendidly obstinate, but there is not much point in you mirroring him. GTB seems to me more like the sort of admin we need; he just occasionally has bad days. There are real battles that need to be fought against genuinely destructive admins if some balance is to be restored for article writers. This is not one of those battles; let it go (we need you to fight another day). --Epipelagic (talk) 23:17, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

GTB seems to have determined on his course, let it take him where it will. That he may not be the worst of administrators hardly seems relevant; a start has to be made somewhere, pour encourager les autres. Malleus Fatuorum 23:24, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Mall-man: Please let it go. There has to be a more important time to make a stand on what concerns you or a more thoughtless moderator to escalate things over. I won't think your willie is any shorter for not rising to the fight (here, this time). Obviously both of you are probably more intelligent and capable of reflection and self-knowledge than the average provoked battlers at this site, anyhow. (And both capable of being a bit salty and rough and flippant, nothing wrong with that btw.) If there's a more clear example of persecution, I will back you up in the future. But this sure ain't sounding like it. Just put the guy on your ignore list (this "forum" has that option, right?) and move on for a while. Let him talk to the hand and just give this thing some time and then come back and think about who was right or wrong, to what extent, with some distance. Let's kick ass on some articles.

It's not about "persecution", it's about administrators blocking and threatening to block for behaviour that they themselves and their colleagues are just as guilty of but rarely even get warned for. A stand needs to be made some time, why not here and now? GTB seems to be up for it. Malleus Fatuorum 02:16, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

OK. No sweat. Hope you are happy and tranquil. I find I let things stir me up at times internally. Good luck on how it goes down. TCO (talk) 04:14, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I got rid of my wiki-dragon icon

Figured it made sense, after "crawling" to get back into editing. (Be good, man. In all the multiple ways that can be construed, experiential versus active, moral versus qualitative, etc.)  :)  :)

TCO (talk) 23:48, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Is that a painted turtle by any chance? Good luck at FAC. Malleus Fatuorum 23:51, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

That which does not kill us, makes us stronger! I don't mind losing, if I learn. But I intend to win...TCO (talk) 23:58, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Who were you before? What's the story? Is it a secret? Malleus Fatuorum 00:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Speculation drives the market, as I told the lady who wanted to know if I was (were?) a virgin. I'm nobody, Mall. Just a dude on the Intertubes. Seriously, be good in all manners. One team, one fight. Semper fi, trooper.TCO (talk) 00:14, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Henry Wood

I am hugely grateful for your edits. I worry a little about the bill, if you charge by the hour, but it will be worth it. Bless you! Tim riley (talk) 00:18, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry about the bill, we'll sort something out. It's always a good sign when SandyG starts complaining about MoS stuff, so chin up. Malleus Fatuorum 00:23, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Apology

I know you didn't ask for one, but you're getting an apology. I assumed incorrectly when I saw your comment here that you meant that you'd told me to f*** off, which I know you didn't - I got my wires crossed, and I apologise for the inference and possible offence you would have taken from the comments. BarkingFish 02:50, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

No worries, I'm not some china doll that gets upset about stuff like that. Now go write an article. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 02:55, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

crowdsourcing research

Hi, I'm a graduate student at Pratt in NYC, doing my thesis on crowdsourcing. I was given your contact info by another Wikipedia contributor in the hopes that you may be able to answer questions about your experience with this site. I can email you the questionnaire if you have a few minutes to help me out in my research! many thanks, rimahsinno@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.108.163.67 (talk) 15:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I'll email you my email address later this afternoon. Malleus Fatuorum 15:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

The Land of Green Plums

Hi Malleus--I'm getting pretty sick of reading and re-reading my own writing in this article. I'm not entirely done with it, got a few more articles to read for the Themes section, but if you have a moment, one of these days, to have a quick look with your eagle eye and with your sharpest quill in hand, I'd sure appreciate it. It's under GA review (and possibly FA review, if I understood the reviewer's words correctly); I think the content's there, but it just doesn't look very good to me. You were offered money above for your editing skills--but with Sinterklaas and Christmas in the recent past and two birthdays this week, money is tight. I can bake, though... Seriously, thanks in advance. Drmies (talk) 17:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

You may not have come to the right person, as I've only ever written one literature FA and that about a relatively little-known book that I felt passionately about and had actually read, unlike the Green Plums. I also had a fair bit of help from experts like Awadewit. Nevertheless if you want me to look over the prose then of course I will. Malleus Fatuorum 16:31, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

That is exactly why I came to you, looking for a critic of prose--in a way, it's better if you know less about the topic. There's no rush, I don't think, and I am not asking you to go over every detail in every section. I just re/wrote the Themes section, and I think that's the worst writing in the entire article. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 16:53, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

OK. I'm looking at viruses right now, which is a fascinating story, so maybe tomorrow or Friday. Malleus Fatuorum 17:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Like these? Great birthday gifts for former lovers! Drmies (talk) 18:37, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Somerset Levels

If you have some time (which I see from the above you might not) would you be willing to cast a critical eye over Somerset Levels? It got to GA in 2007 and I've been meaning to bring it to FAC ever since! I've recently fixed all the broken & dab links etc & now put it up for peer review. I think the content, pics, references etc are all appropriate however you know what my prose is like and I wouldn't want it to fail because of my language skills.— Rod ^talk 19:18, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I think I remember looking at that when it was at GAN? Anyway, if you're not in a rush I'll try and get to it towards the end of the week. Malleus Fatuorum 16:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I can't see you in the edit history, but I may have asked you then. No rush I've got plenty of other things I should be doing.— Rod ^talk 19:30, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

PLU Workhouses

Hi, don't know if you are feeling like being pestered at the mo, but I just wondered what you thought about titles for articles about individual workhouses. I've been scraping some info together about Leigh Workhouse, is that the best title or maybe Leigh Poor Law Union Workhouse, Leigh Poor Law Union or just Leigh Union Workhouse or something else I haven't thought of? I thought if we sort of standardised it now, it would be easy to link them to say a list of Lancashire PLUs which I have also started in here. PS Elizabeth Tyldesley was kept, so I started an article about the convent.--J3Mrs (talk) 20:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Despite any indications to the contrary on this talk page I'm feeling very chilled out, so pester away. :-) I've just checked with Higginbotham's excellent book – if you haven't got a copy you really must try and get one – and he calls it "Leigh Union workhouse". He's even got a picture of it on page 55. In general I think that most of these places will have "official" names, like Huddersfield's Crossland Moor workhouse for instance, so if we ever wrote an article on that I'd call it "Crossland Moor workhouse", with a small "w" and no Huddersfield. That seems to be consistent as well with articles like Andover workhouse scandal, which really ought to be expanded into an Andover workhouse article IMO. Quite a few workhouses will predate the setting up of PLUs in 1834 anyway. I'm glad you've started on that list, you're shaming me into getting my nose back to my grindstone. Malleus Fatuorum 21:00, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, glad you're ok. There you go, one I hadn't thought of! I'm going to mention the pre 1834 workhouses in the article. I'll look for the book. The Lancashire PLU list is a just a start, it could take forever at the rate I operate. I am coal mining at the moment. I can't visit my relatives now without wondering what workings might lie beneath the ground. I had a most productive day yesterday and started several articles and a totally unproductive day today meeting school friends.:-)--J3Mrs (talk) 21:14, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

You've made me think that I might start a similar list for Cheshire if Peter I. Vardy doesn't beat me to it. (Yes, rich Cheshire had workhouses too Peter. :-) ) Malleus Fatuorum 19:28, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh no, I'll feel compelled to do something about it if you do that and I really wanted to try and find out why I can't make my Coal mines (seams) link like they can from this list which is my current reason for procrastinating.--J3Mrs (talk) 20:59, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

What is it that's not linking? Malleus Fatuorum 21:11, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

With the Yorkshire list Barnsley Seam links, with my list, (copying the whatever it's called) Worsley Four Foot mine doesn't :-( --J3Mrs (talk) 21:15, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

It does now; you just forgot to create the redirection page. Malleus Fatuorum 22:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

No I didn't forget, I had no idea:-( I've told you before I have no idea how this thing works, I just copy what I think is ok and hope for the best but sometimes I have to be rescued. I will now try to discover what the redirection page is. Thank you for your help. I have several more to link, I might be back.:-)--J3Mrs (talk) 22:38, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

If you click on Worsley Four Foot mine and scroll to the top of the page right under the artucle title you'll see this: "(Redirected from Worsley Four Foot mine)". Click on that link and it'll take you to the redirection page, where you'll see how the trick is done. Malleus Fatuorum 22:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Did it, amazing and I've drunk a large glass of red!--J3Mrs (talk) 23:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Just the one? Pehaps that's your problem; take my advice, never edit sober. ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 23:06, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

PS. The names have to match exactly. Is it "Brassey Mine" or "Brassey mine" for instance? Malleus Fatuorum 23:16, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Just the one, large, I don't really drink much, and chocolate, done more, fixed Brassey mine, I learn something every day, mostly not useful.:-)--J3Mrs (talk) 23:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Copyeditors' block

Okay, this sentence (bolded bit):

However, no church from this age in the Slavic-populated parts of the Balkans was up-to-date with contemporary Byzantine architecture.

I am sure there is another way of saying this but my mind has gone completely blank on this one - the article in question, Round Church, Preslav, is currently at FAC and I am giving the prose a bit of a massage. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:21, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I'd merge it with the previous sentence, which would have the additional advantage of getting rid of that "however". Something like "The Round Church differs markedly in appearance from the architecture of contemporary Byzantine churches, as does every chuch from this age in the Slavic-populated parts of the Balkans". Malleus Fatuorum 00:39, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Malleus Fatuorum, just wanted to thank you for the comprehensive copyedit of Round Church, Preslav. Much appreciated! Best, — Toдor Boжinov — 18:19, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

It was hardly comprehensive but you're welcome anyway. It's a nice article, I hope you're successful at FAC. Malleus Fatuorum 19:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Commodore Pet

This was the first computer I ever messed around on. My dad bought one in 1979, when I was 7 years old. I used to programme games on it, play space invaders, etc. He passed away recently (hence not much activity here) and I've been going down memory lane, he hoarded everything but unfortunately not this. With your interest in computers, I don't suppose you know anyone or anywhere I might be able to buy one from? I still have the odd game tape for it. I don't mind what it costs. Parrot of Doom 19:29, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear about your Dad, little wonder you've had other things on your mind recently than to mess about here. I used to know someone who specialised in old computers but I'm not sure what he's doing now. I'll check. Malleus Fatuorum 19:35, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

BTW, from personal bitter experience of tapes from that era I very much doubt that the ones you have will still be readable unfortunately. Even on mainframes we had to regularly refresh the mag tapes by copying them periodically. Malleus Fatuorum 19:37, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

It's possible to get hold of a working PET or similar era microcomputer if you're determined (The National Museum of Computing have working models of lots of things from the late 70s, as well as earlier decades of course, but I find they are usually more keen to swap stories and request hardware than to part with any of their prized exhibits). However, it's much easier to get hold of the far more numerous (and usually smaller and less delicate) microcomputers from a few years later, for example the Commodore 64, ZX Spectrum, BBC Micro and so on. As for the tapes, some survive but many don't. Thus many retro enthusiasts opt for emulation. VICE is probably the market leader for that as far as the PET is concerned, a possibly more encouraging screenshot here. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:15, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Inappropriate TPS comment: Parrot, I'm sorry to hear that too. My father died last year; fortunately for me, he did leave me what I consider his prize possession, in red. Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 20:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Well if the tapes don't work I can always programme new ones in, line by line :) A US PET went on Ebay recently for a few hundred quid, postage is the killer (steel case) so I'd prefer one from the UK. There's no rush, they're not easily disposed of. Parrot of Doom 23:37, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

There was one at Newark Antiques Fair back in September or October at some silly price- next fair is in February. It was a TRS 80.Ning-ning (talk) 00:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

We had a TRS-80, I seem to recall it interfering with every electronic device in the house. I used to play a moon lander game on it. The computer timeline in my house was Pet>TRS-80>VIC-20>C64>A500>IBM PCs Parrot of Doom 17:11, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I had one too, and I also remember the lunar lander game, much fun though not as good as the (primitive!!) arcade version. Newark Antique Fair can be a wonderland, or it can be filled with junk, I've been six or seven times on visits to the UK over the years and bought a few things in my time. I think the best was a despatch box belonging to an obscure Gladstonian cabinet minister (Sir Arthur Dyke Acland, 13th Baronet). Not in very good shape at all, but it is still a little bit of history.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:36, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

load "*",8 --Andy Walsh (talk) 04:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

(od)For real junk, visit the Nottingham Cattle Market, where the stallholders sell the stuff that's been dumped after the house clearance boys have been. I think the absolute nadir was when a stallholder had on his pile a wooden box holding the cremated remains of some poor old man, and his collection of "magazines". Ning-ning (talk) 09:14, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Because I know you don't do barnstars...

I offer you this example of what you could have to deal with from me, since my handwriting is fully as ... creative as this poor manuscript, and often my desk does horrid things to papers also - although it's never yet burned one. THank you so much for all your copyediting, it's very much appreciated. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:27, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

For Cheshire

While the church list is marinating at FLC, I thought I ought to do a bit for the Cheshire project. Do you think Tabley House is worthy of nomination as a GAN? Have you any advice for its improvement? If it's worthy, would you perform your usual magic on the text, please. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:44, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I think Tabley House would stand a very good chance at GAN. There's always quite a queue there as you know, so I'd nominate it now and I'll read through it properly later. Malleus Fatuorum 14:53, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Done. Yes, I hadn't appreciated how many articles are waiting. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 15:11, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

best way to keep all the tools and links organized?

What's the best way to give ready access to different guidelines, templates, etc. that help with editing? I have been using a folder in my IE "favorites". I see some people who have very organized user pages with a lot of that clickable. Should I develop that for myself? Also, I sorta see some people who actually get someone else to build their page for them. (Anyone you recommend and how does one appeal to them to get that service?) Thoughts?TCO (talk) 15:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Some editors put them on their userpages, I've got a collapsible box on my talk page. I think there are editors who offer to build user pages, White Shadows may know of some. Malleus Fatuorum 16:17, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

A statement of policy concerning the wikicup

I get asked to copyedit a lot of articles and I'm almost always happy to help where I can, but not when my work (and it is work) is taken advantage of to build up a high score at the wikicup, which is what I suspect has happened with this article, which verges on the unintelligible in places. I ought therefore to make it clear that I will not copyedit any article where I know the editor to be a member of the wikicup, and neither will I review such articles either at FAC or at GAN.

I do not seek some kind of reward for what I do here, and very obviously will get none other than further opprobrium, so I will not assist those who do. Discuss. Malleus Fatuorum 02:13, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

No, that's fine. I think the Wikicup almost inevitably causes writers to cut corners. It isn't worth having. We can find other virual toys to give out.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:20, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

And to claim the work of others as their own, which is my real beef here. I'm by no means averse to giving editors a leg up, and by coincidence with the help of Diannaa last night we managed to save Linda Ravenscroft from being salted after its third creation in something like an hour after having been speedy deleted twice. There's obviously nothing in that for me, and there may possibly be for her (Ravenscroft I mean), but that's quite different from the wikicup ethos. Malleus Fatuorum 02:40, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey. I know we've discussed this before, but what precisely is your objection to the WikiCup? Is it the competative aspect? You say that the concern is people "claiming the work of others as their own", but how do you feel the WikiCup does this any moreso than, say, the fact I list featured articles written primarily by me on my userpage? I'm honestly interested in working the WikiCup towards something that can be respected/enjoyed by all, and so I value your thoughts on any problems with the current model. J Milburn (talk) 02:48, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

This is the article that triggered my comment, but it's by no means an isolated incident. Why should I be expected to spend hours of my time fixing up a crock like that just so that some other editor can be lauded as a hero of the wikicup? I have never refused to help an editor working on an article that they clearly care about, and especially if they are not native English speakers, but the wikicup makes that collaboration a competitive one, which is anathema to me. "I need your help to get another 50 points in the wikicup". Malleus Fatuorum 02:58, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

That makes perfect sense to me- would I be right in saying that the problem is editors who don't care about the articles themselves, and the WikiCup can serve to make this worse? J Milburn (talk) 03:04, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not saying that the editors don't care about the articles, perhaps they do, but I'm suggesting that they care more about their wikicup points. Malleus Fatuorum 03:10, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, those who care more about competition than about achievement. Unhappily, there are quite a few such, and some are talented though misguided.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:10, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

The good news for the wikicup though is that now that I've expressed my unequivocal opposition to it there will be seething masses of editors supporting it, all very willing to do what I refuse to do. I'm quite used to that here. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 03:17, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I understand Malleus and I won't ask for such favors. Would it still be acceptable for you to assist me in copyediting (or translating to British English) articles that cannot be counted in the Wikicup (such as ones that were nominated before the competition began and thus are ineligible to claim points from? Or ones such as ACRs that don't get points in the Cup?) When I get eliminated, may I ask for your assistance in working on articles again? I've recently been trying really hard to improve the quality of my work, (which to be honest, needed improvement looking back at some of the articles that I wrote last year) and sometimes, I do need your help on things, whether they be pointers or having you do some copyediting. I hope that you are OK with this....if not, just say so and I'll stop asking ;) All the best and happy belated New Year,--White Shadows ^{We live in a beautiful world} 03:32, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Of course. It's not to do with editors but with motivations; I can think of no good reason why I should spend an hour or more – it can easily take that long to look at an article properly, one I probably don't even have any interest in – just to give someone an extra few points in a competition I don't care about. I'm conscious of what may appear to be a slight inconsistency in my position though, which I'd like to try and clarify. I've copyedited a great many FAs and GAs, far more than I've been credited with or ever will be credited with, but I'm happy to do that because the nominators are working on stuff they care about, not trying to gain points. Ealdgyth in particular embarrasses me with the generosity of her co-nominations after I've shuffled a few commas about in her articles, very few of which I think I deserve. Malleus Fatuorum 03:50, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

As an aside White Shadows, and I hope this doesn't sound patronising (it certainly isn't meant to be), I'd have to say that the quality of your writing has improved immeasurably over the last year or so. If you keep it up then I'll soon be asking you for help, not the other way around. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 03:59, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the flattering comment Malleus. (I'll try not to let it go to my head) That means a lot from me, coming from a writer like yourself. I remember once that the PoD said something about "when you [Me] get your first FA or even TFA" and my response was admiting that I'd never get there....everything is funny to some extend with hindsight. However, I doubt that I could help you with your work here, that is, unless you suddenly have a keen interest for the Austro-Hungarian Navy and other battleships of minor navies!--White Shadows ^{We live in a beautiful world} 04:06, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Unlikely I think; there are too many witches and other weird stuff to write about. Which reminds me of the story of the two children who arrived in 12-century England as the result of a matter-transporter malfunction on their home planet. And looking at that word "weird" reminds me of something else. Have any of your teachers ever told you that it's "'i' before 'e' except after 'c'"? Complete rubbish. Malleus Fatuorum 04:16, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Don't let Malleus fool you, did you see he wrote on a medieval rebel the other day? He's going to be corrupted to medieval bishops yet... and when we (i.e. all three of us in the world that care!) accomplish that, we'll get him writing about .. medieval manuscripts next! (Speaking of... Liber Eliensis is probably ready for a Peer Review then a run at FAC..., you have been warned...) Ealdgyth - Talk 14:52, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

You may well be proved right sooner than you think Ealdgyth. I've been toying with the idea of doing something with Thomas de Cantilupe since I did that medieval Welsh rebel. I really want to get my workhouse finished before I contemplate anything like that though. Malleus Fatuorum 17:10, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I just copied some stuff on TdC, but I've got Mike cracking the whip over at Bede wanting me to actually work on the old Venerable guy. And I'm supposed to take the child to Vietnamese this afternoon - must support the one local eatery that serves a decent cuisine! Ealdgyth - Talk 17:35, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think I've ever had Vietnamese food, not that I can remember anyway; my favourite is probably Korean. I don't know whether Bede is considered to be one of those "vital" articles or not, but it certainly seems like an important topic to me, so good luck to you and Mike with it. Malleus Fatuorum 17:45, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Been watching QI perchance Malleus? --John (talk) 04:19, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

That's what jogged my memory, yes. Malleus Fatuorum 04:22, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

That was the standout part of the standout TV show over the holidays for me. Can't watch them here on regular TV and have to go to extraordinary lengths to download decent TV (read British TV). Count your blessings. --John (talk) 04:26, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I've been to California, and I've seen Californian TV, so you have my deepest sympathy. All I remember of it is the earthquake forecasts. Malleus Fatuorum 04:31, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

... but for what must be the worst TV in the world you have visit Saudi Arabia. I've never been there myself, but I've watched it in Pakistan. Hour after hour of people wandering around some big black slab and interviews so deferential they want to make you vomit. Malleus Fatuorum 04:54, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

That sounds awful. Personally I prefer Abba to Kaaba any day. Seeing Miami Vice in Afrikaans doesn't count as it was so weird it was funny. Far better than the original. Think it was titled Misdaad en Miami IIRC. --John (talk) 05:15, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Sadly I live in America, home to an ever-so-deteriorating educational system (much thanks to the No Child Left Behind Act) But, yes, I did know that the rule existed....however I always thought that "Weird" was just an exception to the rule. This makes me wonder, why do British people use "u"s so often? Colour, Armour, Humour...the list goes on (Though I personally perfer "Colour" to "Color") Another thing (sorry if I'm going off on a tangent here), why do Americans pronunce Aluminum different than Brits?--White Shadows ^{We live in a beautiful world} 04:27, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Aluminium#Etymology and WP:ALUM. --John (talk) 04:53, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

It's a pity you can't get QI in the States, but in fact words like "weird" are very common, not the exception at all. One obvious example is "their", which we probably all see every single day. Weird. Malleus Fatuorum 04:36, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, the earthquakes are certainly better than the TV here. Had a 4 a couple of hours ago in fact. Like a very heavy lorry going past. I always teach that other than a forensic knowledge of linguistics and etymology, the only way to learn Eng spelling is lots and lots of practice. None of these "rules" is really any good. --John (talk) 04:53, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I just wanted to make it clear that I could care less about the WikiCup, and if I didn't have tough skin, I'd be insulted that you associated trying to improve one of my old articles with trying to get points for some contest, Malleus. Thank you for your comments thus far, and frankly, I'll seek help elsewhere from now on. ceranthor 05:11, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

It's a good job we both have tough skins then, else we'd both be insulted. Malleus Fatuorum 05:14, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I missed quite a discussion on pronunciation and TV shows. It's past midnight here and I'm going to "hit the hay". Goodnight guys.--White Shadows ^{We live in a beautiful world} 05:21, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

An interesting question about why we British use so many "U"s. British English is full of odd spellings because it's a mish-mash of lots of other languages due to the fact that Britain was invaded or influenced by various people at different times. During the middle ages (by which time we'd been invaded by Angles, Romans, Vikings and Normans amongst others) educated people needed to speak Middle English for everyday use, Latin for ecclesiastical purposes and French for administrative purposes. The words that end in 'ough' such as through and plough (plow in American) tend to come from Norse (the Vikings) and words that end in 'our' such as colour, harbour and arbour tend to come from French (the Normans). There were various spellings used (including plow and color) but they became standardised towards the end of the 18th century. For a short period American and British English were pretty much the same but when the US gained independence Noah Webster decided that Americans needed their own standard English and from then the two languages diverged. Of course all language constantly evolves and no-one knows what the influence of the internet will be. It looks as if neither American or British English will dominate as there are many other hybrid forms emerging that are spoken by millions of people across the world. The arguments about spelling on wikipedia will only get worse :) Interestingly, there are some words that are no longer used in British English that are commonly used in American. The word 'gotten' which is used a lot in the US is described as 'archaic' in the Oxford English Dictionary and is generally only used in everyday English in the term "ill-gotten gains" I have, however, seen 'gotten' used recently on wikipedia talk pages by British contributors. Another US term that seems to be creeping in to British English is 'it will likely be...'. Until recently, everyone in Britain would have said 'it will most likely be...' As the Dowager Countess of Grantham said in Downton Abbey when she sat unexpectedly in one of those new-fangled swivel chairs designed by Thomas Jefferson - 'Why must I be fighting with an American every day?' Richerman (talk) 18:21, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Please help NYM rewrite the picta portrait

I have some sort of weird neuro condition and can't read or write normally. Please help him get that thing to conform to normal wiki practices. I respect any changes you make including major ones. Just pitch in and help him with the star please. My ability to interact will be really low.TCO (talk) 06:03, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I can't read or write normally either, so I guess we must both have some sort of weird neuro condition. ;-) I saw earlier that you'd removed your name from the nomination, which seems a shame after all of the work you put in. Think about it again. Sasata made some good points, but there's nothing there that would take very long to fix. I can help with the presentation aspects, and I already made a start there anyway. In my experience getting through FAC is at least as much about perspiration as it is about inspiration. Malleus Fatuorum 17:26, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the likely edit conflicts. I done on this article til about 9pm. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 18:21, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

No worries, no harm done. I'm just happy to see someone else working on it. Malleus Fatuorum 18:27, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Good stuff on the changes I see you making. About 98% (maybe even 100%!) are things like removing the extra "increases" that I see and am sooo "right on" with. So it's a joy to have you brush it up. I just honestly don't get the overall feeling from most reviewers here that I would for reviewers of a print journal or true-life magazine editors or the like. And then I see this tendancy in wiki to do thinks like overlink (e.g. geographic names). Things that you can even find advice here on wiki describing why not to do it (or why especially not to do in the lead). And dealing with that sort of thing is just a drag. Take care of young Dominick and be of good cheer. I don't mean to be dramatic and the medical thing is really coming at an akward time.* Make the thing sing as best you can. And if you have to turn it into biologist lumpenprose (a study of readability showed that they were the most needlessly wordy of any discipline) avec overuse of nominalizations, then do so.

It's just a total confounding factor. I'm used to a lot more rough play than on the wiki. Places where the banter is much more vigorous. It's just some medical thing in my body. Got back from the ER and there is no (big) tumor or stroke. But am reduced in function (fortunately I have reserves, but I still can tell the difference and it's weird not to be able to concentrate to read, when I am such a surf the net type of guy). Anyhow, not going to die soon according to the ER doc although was sick at stomach last night. See a specialist Monday and they will probably do an MRI to look fer a widdle tumor.  ;) I hope it is, instead, just some bug that is in my brain that my white blood cells will kill soon.TCO (talk) 18:58, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Hopefully it's just an infection and it'll soon be ckeared up. Do me a favour, put your name back as a nominator and I'll do what I can to help out while you're hors de combat. Malleus Fatuorum 19:12, 8 January 2011 (UTC)