User talk:Drmies

Tea house interwiki

Hello Drmies,

the changes from User:Ws227 on the interwiki part on the Article Tea house is not meant to be vandalism. Her change is unfortunate, but with reason. She asked me to explain for her and to search for a solution.

The word Tea house has in Chinese and in Japanese two different meanings. One is a small house in a private garden, this is named in Chinese a zh:茶寮 and in Japanese a ja:茶室. The other is a public venue, a sort of bar where people meet and drink tea. This is named in Chinese a zh:茶馆 and in Japanese ja:茶屋. As you can see, the two things are quite different. Ws227 tried to make a more precise difference in interwiki links. But as I examined the articles from the western language articles, most of them mean both, or describe both. So a interwiki link is difficult.

Now we had found a solution. There is an article in Chinese zh:茶室, which is a Chinese word used for both. So she will now link Tea house and all western languages to this disambig article on Chinese, while for Chinese and Japanese there would be two different, more granualed articles and interwikis between these two sets of articles. Unfortunately there is no disambig articles in Japanese for the private tea house and public tea house, so she will link both articles to the english Tea house.

Ws227 is a long year Chinese admin and she is a very trustworthy Wikipedian.

Sorry for the confusion.--Wing (talk) 16:50, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

• Hello Wing, thanks for your note. I was wondering about their edits--and they made two edits that removed interwiki links (which I reverted) and many where they didn't (I looked at a whole bunch of them, just so you know--I didn't just pull the trigger with Twinkle). I reverted this edit not because of the change in the Chinese link, but because of the removal of the other links (also in Queen regnant, where two apparently OK links were removed). Now, at Tea house, they had been warned twice before, and since there was no edit summary and no explanation on their or anyone else's talk page, I could only assume vandalism of some kind--but note my edit summary at Queen regnant.

  Anyway, thanks for explaining. Whatever you propose for the Chinese and Japanese links is fine with me, but an explanation would be handy. Also, any removal of other wikilinks (and again, I did not see how those were justified) would certainly have to be explained. Does that help? Also, I'll remove my warning, but I will place a "please use edit summary" template there; I hope that's OK with you. Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 17:05, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

  • Hello Drmies, yes I think I should explain this a little. As I said what Ws227 did is not quite right. She tried to devide the two different types of tea houses. Since she don't know every language she tried to orient with images in the articles. So if she see that a language version has images of the private tea houses she linked in to the private type of tea house in Chinese Wikipedia and if she see images in a language version for a venue she linked it to the venue. But in most cases the this is not correct. I explained that to her.--Wing (talk) 10:44, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

German socks

Hi Drmies... yes, I'd noticed a peculiar pattern of editing from several IPs that turned out to be the same person. I'm not sure exactly what he's trying to achieve, but I thought it worthwhile to keep an eye on it given the intermittent disruptive editing. Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 19:04, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

• Hey Jim, please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:76.65.240.91_reported_by_User:Drmies_.28Result:_.29. Drmies (talk) 19:15, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello. You have a new message at Lionelt's talk page.

Would if be canvasing iff I just asked them to take a look at the page without giving an opinion?Flash Bang Man (talk) 22:06, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

• Look at the policy, Flash--it says something to the effect that you may notify involved editors, but a. you can't pick those selectively (so you should have sent Lionelt a message too, for instance) and b. you can't suggest what you want them to do. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 13:25, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

MV Mariam

Hi. Pending the AfD discussion, I've made a WP:DYK nomination for MV Mariam. As a contributor to the article, I've listed you as an author on the nomination. I'm not 100% sure of the etiquette here, but if you would prefer not be be on the nomination, please feel free to remove yourself, or leave a message on my talk page and I would be happy to do so. Haus^Talk 12:39, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

• I appreciate that--I'd love to be on that DYK. Thanks for your efforts! Drmies (talk) 13:25, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I hope that you will help me edit a similar article on the ship Avrazya. It could also be a DKY.AMuseo (talk) 22:00, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

• I looked at it, and added one thing--but that's really about the hijacking, not about the ship. BTW, it may well be that you get more results when you use the S, but the name (with an S) means "Eurasia," so you get a lot of false positives as well. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 02:27, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Tube Bar & Notable Albums

Hi Drmies,

I do apolojize for messing up the article last night, thank you for correcting that. My question is what is a "notable" album? I am confused about that as not every album on wiki are RIAA (major label) or even made the charts as there are Japanese Game Music albums that are not on any charts but are listed.

I do have some ref as I told you to add to some of the Tube Bar Albums but as you said that doesn't make them notable, but I am unable to understand what does make it notable based on all the albums I have seen on here. Please explain.

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyros1972 (talk • contribs) 15:02, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

• Tyros, the issue is this. The policy (which I gave you the link to, WP:NALBUMS) does not require that an album has to chart to be notable, but if it charts, it probably is. An album can be notable in other wasy--by having secondary sources that attest to its notability. Typically, for an album these would be reviews in reliable sources. As far as I have been able to verify (and I think I did my homework), none of the Tube Bar albums have been reviewed or otherwise written about. Now, many articles for albums on Wikipedia do not have evidence of notability included, and a lot of those are possible candidates for deletion (or, as I've been doing, merging and redirecting, see WP:MERGE). If an article is merged, it can be easily recreated (as you did a few times) and references added. But that those articles exist (sadly), is not a reason for others to continue to exist--Wikipedia:Other stuff exists.

  Evidence of a release date, for instance, is not evidence of notability: lots of things that exist, and that we can prove exist (such as the Braun electric toothbrush simply aren't notable (by WP's standards, WP:N). That, in the end, is the problem with these articles. The Bum Bar data can be used to establish when they were released, but they themselves are not independent from their release and thus cannot establish notability. For that, independent sources are necessary, and until those are found, WP guidelines speak against such individual articles.

  Apologies, also on behalf of IP 69 (I imagine), if we sounded a bit harsh, but the "owner" of the Tube Bar prank calls article seems to have a conflict of interest with the subject and has been less than cooperative. Thanks for your note, I appreciate the communication. Take it easy, and please drop me a line if you think I can help--but I'm afraid that these albums are a lost cause...

  PS Yes, this means that you have every right to merge and redirect albums that aren't notable by our standards, or to nominate them for deletion, and let me add that especially albums on Wikipedia suffer from overexposure, so to speak--I wouldn't be surprised if less than half of them are actually notable. But some are: see Live! Go for What You Know, for instance. Drmies (talk) 15:15, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very kindly for the explantion Drmies. Aside from some blogs such as (http://thesplattingnun.blogspot.com/) I am in agreement with you on this. I have not been able to find any reliable sources concerning these albums. Again thank you for the explantion and not much else I can do about it either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyros1972 (talk • contribs) 19:38, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

• Tyros, thanks for your note. You put your finger on the sore spot with those albums--tons of 'em need work. Many of them might be notable enough, though, and sometimes you come across fun things, like I did with that Pat Travers album. Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 19:56, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey Hi Drmies, I found listings for some of the albums at BillBoard (http://www.billboard.com/album/various-artists/tube-bar-red-s-bootleg-tape-remastered/1123323#/album/bum-bar-bastards/tube-bar/494843) can these be used as notable ref?

Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyros1972 (talk • contribs) 17:52, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

• That link was dead, but it seems the same as this one. It seems to me that the link proves that the records exist, but there is no discussion of any kind--so unless your link showed something more informative, I don't think this would help, no. But don't take my word for it--present your query, if you like, for a second opinion. User:Kww is very active in the music stuff, as are User:Cannibaloki and User:Hekerui. You could also post a message here, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums--those talk pages for Projects aren't always very visible, but this one seems to have a decent amount of traffic. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 18:17, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Drmies. Well that link was just for the TUBE BAR album and it had an "AMG Review" but the rest have no reviews so probably won't do much but I'll ask just to see. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyros1972 (talk • contribs) 18:32, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

• Sure thing Tyros. Listen, if you browse around, you will come across funny and interesting things. A while ago I did another one, which turned out to be interesting--Love Devotion Surrender. Have fun! Drmies (talk) 22:46, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Heh that is interesting, didn't know Santana had anything to do with that one...I never even heard of it until now :) Sure I'll browse around and look for those interesting ones :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyros1972 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Mudflap Girl

In your edit/undo of the revisions to the Mudflap Girl entry, you say that new information should be entered in the correct form. I am not nearly as familiar with the edit forms or formatting for wikipedia as you are. The trademark ownership for an image is clearly relevant information to an image. I would say that the legal ownership of a particular image is one of the most important facts to that image's public use or knowlege- which is why I put the information at the top of the article. If you have another suggestion or a more knowlegeable way to format this information, please let me know. Thank you Thomas Hugh (talk) 19:27, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Roni Lynn Deutch

I loved your comment in the AfD, although in my opinion she barely falls short of the requirements of WP:HOTTIE. See Ellen Page. :-) -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 00:57, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

• Oh, my. Whoa. Thanks for the comment and the reference! Still, I gotta stick with Roni, for a couple of reasons--she's more my age group, and I'm more likely to run into her (for tax reasons, of course) than I am to hook up with a Canadian beauty. She's probably more Spaceman Spiff's type...

  PS, Nice of you to withdraw the AfD, and I gladly agree that the article itself didn't hold much promise. Drmies (talk) 01:24, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Archibald Carey, Jr.

My source is the 1st source in the I have a dream page, how is that a primary source? Hansen, D, D. (2003). The Dream: Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Speech that Inspired a Nation. New York, NY: Harper Collins. p. 108.

Any article on Archibald Carey which does not include some part of his speech is just inaccurate and not a contribution to Wiki. I am not posting his entire speech, just an exerpt. I am not accusing anyone of plagiarism, just stating some have said it. For balance, I will add the statement that others have found the similarity minor and reference the King page. Does that satisfy your issues?24.23.89.145 (talk) 01:31, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Our policy: Primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements that any educated person, with access to the source but without specialist knowledge, will be able to verify are supported by the source.

• The problem is that you're citing a primary text, where you should be citing a secondary source about a primary text--that's the gist of WP:SECONDARY. And that's also why citing the primary text by itself is not a good idea. Drmies (talk) 01:45, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

A Malik Shabazz reverted your move of my post to the I have a dream page. I started a discussion, as is proper, for my revert.

I do not see how I violating any law or spirit of the law. I am listing primary material and making a simple " straightforward, descriptive statements that any educated person, with access to the source but without specialist knowledge, will be able to verify are supported by the source" Some view it as plagiarism. I will add the other link to balance this simple statement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.89.145 (talk) 01:56, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

• After all these messages, your addition still starts with "Here is exerpy from the end of his speech"--which has a typo and a grammatical error, and is very unencyclopedic in tone ("here is" is the introduction to the entire issue). It continues by saying "which some have claimed was plagiarized", weasel words which might be found in the source you give, but that reference is a mile away, both rhetorically and literally, from the weaselish statement. There are many problems here, and one of them is the very term "plagiarism," which is addressed by Keith Miller, who is referenced in Martin Luther King, Jr. authorship issues. Besides, though I'm sure Miller discusses this too, both speeches come out of a long and particular tradition of black oratory, which is permeated with quotations from the Old and the New Testament. Your quotation from a primary text simply negates these many complicating factors, and in fact invites readers to simply look for plagiarism and "make up their own mind"--in the absence of any kind of context for "plagiarism" and orality. But again, I'm staying away from that article; someone with better judgment than mine will come along at some point and expand on Carey's article, and this matter will be part of it. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 02:17, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Henriette d'Angeville

Hello! Your submission of Henriette d'Angeville at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! — Rlevse • Talk • 01:36, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Birkensnake

It looks like Birkensnake was deleted in violation of Wikipedia:SPA. Specifically, the close out violated this:

"The SPA tag may be used to visually highlight that a participant in a multi-user discussion has made few or no other types of contribution. However a user who edits appropriately and makes good points that align with Wikipedia's communal norms, policies and guidelines should have their comment given full weight regardless of any tag."

The second sentence of the close out was this: "I have discared every spa vote."

Additionally, the statement in the close out that "The policy based consensus from experienced editors is that this is not properly sourced so the counsensus is clear" is also not true. The vote was 4-4 (keep-delete) when SPA's are eliminated. The result should have been "no consensus."

If Birkensnake is something important to you, I think it could be more notable after Birkensnake 3 is published. Maybe then you and Flash could find that "one more reliable source" that would win over the crowd. Best of luck with all your edits. HeartSWild (talk) 18:27, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks for your message. Personally, I am disgusted by the number of SPAs in that AfD, and I really wonder where they came from. I myself am not convinced by, for instance, Lionelt's arguments, but AfD is like that--you win some, you lose some, and reasonable people can disagree, and obviously the closer disagreed (I haven't yet looked at it). I wish that the closer had valued my arguments more than anyone else's, but that's only human, I reckon. If you disagree, you are free to seek to overturn the decision; obviously, you are so well aware of policy that I don't need to tell you where to find that. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 20:49, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

You've been mentioned...

in BigTimePeace's statement at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment. (It's not really about you, but as evidence to support that FSN may in fact be CoM.) Just FYI... LadyofShalott 02:15, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

• Aiaiai I had hoped to stay out of that. Drmies (talk) 02:17, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I just thought you should know. I've been refraining from comment myself, just watching. LadyofShalott 02:18, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. The Johnnycakes...they are tasty, though--the girls like 'em too. I think I invited CoM over for some Southern food many years ago, but he never took me up on it. Maybe all that love of bacon was fake too? Drmies (talk) 02:35, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

3RR

Be careful not to violate 3RR on Monsignor Scanlan High School. Stifle (talk) 08:51, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks Stifle. Drmies (talk) 15:02, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Cray Template Revision

   My sole intention in changing the image was to clarify the template (so that it would be immediately apparent to readers that the entity being referred to was Cray). I did not realise that my edit would make the Cray template look like an advertisement. As advised, I shall be careful in future not to make edits which may appear to be advertising, and refrain from editing templates until I am much better acquainted with the consensus regarding what can be construed as advertising. Thank you. Rocketshiporion 06:31, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks, and sorry if I sounded a bit harsh. I saw that the template actually had an image in it already, and to your credit, yours was much prettier. But I looked around at other templates and found none with an image, hence my note. Take care, and thanks for your note and your edits, Drmies (talk) 15:50, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Henriette d'Angeville

— Rlevse • Talk • 18:04, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Right Wing Extremism

Hello, I think you have a misunderstanding of the Ku Klux Klan. They were started to terrorize blacks, Republicans and abolitionists who won the Civil War and opposed slavery. Modern Klan members are all over the political spectrum, but most of them are left wingers, polls even found that the majority of Klan leaders supported Obama for his more collectivist policy stances during the 2008 elections.

Sorry you were unaware of that, but you should not be enabling those who wish to rewrite history for the sake of political activism. Thank you for your concern, I will correct the issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.243.27.13 (talk) 02:10, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

IP, you should read the article before editing it. The Klan mentioned was the Second Klan, active in the 1920s. It was not founded by "pro-slavery democrats" and Byrd was too young to be a member. In fact the Klan operated largely within the Republican Party and supported their presidential candidates. TFD (talk) 16:35, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The whole "KKK supported Obama" thing is from an article published on a satire site called The Daily Squib. It's not true. Millahnna (talk) 16:45, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I can't believe the bullshit that people still believe. I had a student a long, long time ago, and I think he had both "Nathan" and "Forrest" in his name, who told me honestly that the KKK was founded to protect white women. Hey IP, why would the KKK support a foreign-born Muslim Marxist? Drmies (talk) 19:16, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Good grief. I can't decide whether to headdesk or facepalm that one. If I tried both at once, I wonder if I'd hurt myself? Millahnna (talk) 19:29, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Whoa, Millahna--my grammar students had a hard time today with figuring out the past tense of "garbage bowl," when Rachael Ray makes that perfectly clear. And now I have to tell them that "headdesk" is a verb too? But please don't hurt yourself; Wikilife is already painful enough sometimes. Drmies (talk) 19:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

re: Vrijdag

Nope, don't see what you're refering to at the foot of the link - sorry! Lugnuts (talk) 19:15, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I see it now! Sorry, I was looking at the very foot of the link. Lugnuts (talk) 19:20, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

improving wiki article - Kingsley Ng

Dear Drmies, Thank you very much for the note "this article may contain wording that merely promotes the subject without imparting verifiable information" on the "Kingsley Ng" Wikipedia page.

I am a new contributor to the Wiki project, and would like to see how else I can improve on the referred article. Is there a particular paragraph, or a particular word in which you would suggest to delete or modify? I have tried to remove words like "notable"

Best Regards, iwc —Preceding unsigned comment added by Imagesforwikicommons (talk • contribs) 06:26, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

• Images, thanks for your note. I think it's a more general thing in that article, not necessary individual phrases. Many of the projects are accompanied by lengthy description including descriptions by the artist of the work and its influences. One of the issues that strikes me is the number of quotations from and references to texts that are not secondary, reliable sources per WP:RS, including the artist's website and those of the organizations involved. Couple that with the long, long list of works and group exhibitions (unverified by secondary sources) and the list of awards (ditto) and you have something that looks like an artist's resume more than an encyclopedic article. I've written (brief) articles on artists (see Alois Plum, and only include "notable" works, that is, works written about in secondary sources. You have to remember that WP:V is the cornerstone of the project, and that in many cases (except for basic facts maybe like birth or high school education) an artist's website cannot count as a reliable source. Thanks, and good luck, Drmies (talk) 12:11, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Assuck

Sorry to bother you again, but I appear to be having some trouble over at Assuck. There's a WP:SPA randomly adding original research and a metric fuckton of pointless images, engaging in personal attacks and refusing to read any policy guidelines. They also refuse to engage on either their talk page, or that of the article. I'm not going to get into an edit war (they've already ignored at least three editors)... suggestions? Blackmetalbaz (talk) 18:20, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

• You're interrupting my important work for some Assucking? Baz, we have to stop meeting like this...and just after I got done with Lori Douglas! Drmies (talk) 18:22, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

WWMX

And what about the station's daily program schedule? Is that also supposed to dis-allowed in the article? ---- Theaveng (talk) 04:41, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

• That is my reading of WP:NOTDIR, yes, and I think there is consensus for that. Mind you, I personally don't think I would have asked for a block, but both of you got a little overheated. Homer has retracted his call for a block and admits he jumped the gun; I hope that's the end of it. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:58, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately I have had to renew my call for a block after finding his block log has an agreement for not violating 1RR. I have posted on the ANI thread and will here that I recommend, since everything has subsided that it be let slide, but a strong warning given as well. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:01, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
    • Whoopsee--thanks for the note. No one ever accused you of not doing your homework, I'm sure. Drmies (talk) 05:02, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
      • Couple times :) Oh, how should we deal with this? This is the same information, with essentially a newsblog (DCRTV.com) and Facebook as references, in the same format. I can't revert being at 3RR myself, but he is over 3RR now, this is 4RR. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:07, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

In the mood for some Canadians, eh?

Want to take a look at Ranj Dhaliwal, an English language writer like yourself; and also Angela Fong, given your genuine interest in women's wrestling, I figured you might be interested in looking at that one too. I'd deleted it as G4 a while back, so it popped up on my watchlist. It's not the same so ineligible for G4, but I don't see much in terms of notability. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 21:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

World Scout Youth Forum

Hi Drmies,

The event itself is already very notable. I am buliding the topic and please do not redirect it too soon. Maybe you are not a scout that actively particpate in the international scouting so you might not realise the importance of the topic. Please give me some time to make it. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Warrant holder (talk • contribs) 04:19, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

• Warrant holder, "notability" is established by having references to reliable sources that say the event is notable. That it's notable for the organization is probably true, but beside the point: it needs to be notable according to our policy in WP:N. Whether I am an active scout has little bearing on the matter. Generally it is a good idea to write an article first in a sandbox and include those references before you go live, and I'll make you one with your version of the article in it, to edit to your heart's content--then go live. Here it is: User:Warrant holder/sandbox. (I made a few small edits according to our Manual of Style--you'll also need to rewrite some parts for neutral tone and a more general audience.) Good luck, Drmies (talk) 04:27, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Antarctic Plate

hello, do not know who i am supposed to contact but i figured you would be someone i could or you would know who to contact. some of the information in the Antarctic Plate article is wrong. the sentence "The Antarctic Plate does not travel in any particular direction like the other continental plates, instead it merely spins in place." is incorrect and contradicts the sentence above it (which is correct), furthermore, the citation given for the incorrect sentence is a diagram of Antarctic air currents, not continental drift. the bottom paragraph is also a fabricated lie (made by the same person). there is no such thing as the "2009 Conference for Plate Tectonics" and this imaginary event did not happen in Helsinki, Finland.

thanks for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.92.246.82 (talk) 02:45, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

• I see now which IP you are; please don't forget to sign your name. What you did here, for instance, is simply not productive--you remove content that seems to be sourced at least partially, and replace it with "nope", inside article space. That's always going to be tagged as vandalism. The very first thing you need to consider is explaining yourself in edit summaries. The second thing is, if you can, add text with references to reliable sources that prove your point. Generally, we don't look kindly on unexplained deletion, but an explained replacement, that's an entirely different matter. Good luck. Drmies (talk) 02:50, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Paul Butcher, Jr.

I'll look into it, though belatedly... sorry. Been quite busy in the real world. Just last month spent some time filming my scenes in the upcoming Tim and Eric Awesome Show, Great Job, Crimbus Special (watch for me as "Winterman" and be prepared to laugh your socks off) and just a few days ago I had the unique pleasure of working with Johnny Knoxville, Steve-O, Chris Pontius, Jason Acuña (Wee-Man), and Dave England in shooting a promo spot for the upcoming Jackass 3-D film. You may recongnize me in some scenes... but with my hair up on top of my head like a Sumo. I can personally share that the group are exceedingly courteous and professional... and that they save their pranks for each other. Nice guys all. I was specially impressed with Knoxville after speaking with him for a while. So, how was your week? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:56, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

• Hey MQS, thanks for the note. Those are exciting events. You're still in your sandbox? Maybe you get to move out soon. I don't know these programs you are referring to--after all, I am the father of two and if I watch TV, it's princesses or CGI animals. I miss Charlie and Lola; it seems to have disappeared. Besides that, school started and it's been busy like crazy. If these dumb kids wouldn't get up every morning at 5:30 it would be better. But I put a proposal in the mail for a book, so keep your fingers crossed for me.

  Hey, congrats on those real-world things, and have a great weekend! Drmies (talk) 16:17, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for MV Mariam

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:04, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Heroic Age (journal)

The article The Heroic Age (journal) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I am not able to find reliable third-party sources on this topic.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Moorsmur (talk) 04:28, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey doc

This is my 20,000th edit. Figured I'd make it on your talk page. Good barbeque over the weekend? —SpacemanSpiff 17:59, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

• Wooohooo Spiffster! Thanks--I am honored! Still, I have to say, you're still a bit of a whipper-snapper, haha. No, no BBQ yet, though tonight I'm grilling flank steak for fajitas--Alton Brown style, on the coals. I hope you enjoyed the holiday. All the best, and may edit 20,001 be as friendly as this one was. Drmies (talk) 18:01, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Ha ha, 20001 wasn't fun, just a revert of a misplaced warning on my talk page, let's leave it at that. BTW, there are a couple of articles that could use your eagle eye, I protected them today because I couldn't make head or tail of the daily revert war going on changing the caste of some dynasties and stuff (Paramara and Chauhan). —SpacemanSpiff 18:05, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
    • As luck would have it, I was just reading the new edition of Frederick Klaeber's Beowulf, realizing I seriously need bi-focals... But I'll be glad to help. Drmies (talk) 18:08, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict)And thanks for the jewelry, I shall wear it on special occasions! —SpacemanSpiff 18:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
    • Good thing I didn't give you an LGBT barnstar, I guess, though I was tempted. Need one? Drmies (talk) 18:33, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
      • That gesture, combined with this post would probably make the few women editors on WP feel comfortable around me. Thanks for your work on one of the above pages, can't say I understand much of it even now, but there's at least a little less of it, and it reads a lot better. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 19:54, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
        • (talk page stalker) Makes me want to seek out a pic of you, Spiff... 69.181.249.92 (talk) 20:23, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
          • ha ha. But 69, I'm not going to ask you to create an account (again), but can you do the courtesy note bit for A7 tags? Those editors could be helped you know... cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 20:33, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
            • My reasons are rooted in not wanting to become a mentor to clueless newbies (which I admit is somewhat at odds with my haunting of Special:Contributions/newbies). Been there, done that, been burned on more than one occasion by socks. (Imagine a little dance here with my feet on fire.) OVER IT. At least for now... 69.181.249.92 (talk) 20:45, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

?

Haha...good one! :) Though to be fair, I'm not really a fan of his. It was just a suitable moniker given my satisfaction with having an intelligent -- or at least reasonably so -- president...and a non-white president, which was sort of a symbolic social victory for this country. Also, I'm not really coming to Bush's aid (I haven't provided him any legal advice); just trying to keep the article sound for the sake of public interest. Thanks for the humor....I needed it today! Obamafan70 (talk) 18:05, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

• Careful with them truths there, son! They might be perceived as partisan! Thanks for your note, and happy editing. Drmies (talk) 18:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Hahaha....did you really put the POV tag for this?? You crack me up. I love it....By the way, I like the blue-footed boobies on your user page. Obamafan70 (talk) 18:24, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, if I ever want to run for administrator I need to make sure I'm on the level. ;) Those boobies, there was a story there, a long time ago, and it involved User:Bongomatic, who added the second (and whose user name is fantastic). Now enough with the humor. There are 25,000 articles in Category:Unreferenced BLPs (a joke in its own right), so let's get to it! Besides, you have more peer-reviewed articles to write. Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 18:30, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: Sup?

Hello, Drmies. You have new messages at Neutralhomer's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/$30 Film School

As I was involved in rescuing this at its original AFD a couple years ago, I wonder why the nominator did not show his noination as number two and link back to number one, and wonder why he did not notify me as a major contributor to the article. Harumph. Heck... I found this only when a surprising redlink appeared here Did you yourself look at the history of the article when at AFD#2? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:33, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

• Hey Michael, I don't know. Maybe they didn't know--they are relatively new, so they may not have known to look for earlier nominations or to notify the important contributors. Have you asked for userfication? If you can't make it work, no one can. I don't remember looking (or not looking) at the history, but I usually do, and if I had seen your name I would have dropped you a line. So, either I didn't look or I didn't see you... Sorry, and thanks for your note, Drmies (talk) 21:58, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

New editor? Yup... very new.[1] Always a concern when a newb makes deleting articles their first order of business, rather than trying to address concerns. One month after account creation... and with less that 1000 edits... and his talk page history shows an interesting attitude... but no doubt others have him on Watch. I asked for userfication before swinging by here.[2] So far, all I have is a space waiting.[3] if User:Tone does not do it, I can ask userfication from others. I have the patience. And there is an exceedingly interesting discussion going on HERE that will encourage me to write another essay. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 22:10, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Another anti-IP editor

There's currently a thread on my talkpage in which another editor is attempting to claim that IPs are not allowed to participate in AFDs. Would you care to chime in and set this clueless one straight? 69.181.249.92 (talk) 02:18, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

• Ha! What if I agree? Drmies (talk) 02:56, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Then you'd be wrong. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 05:53, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

• • Boy, you're strict. Drmies (talk) 15:54, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Also known as right? 69.181.249.92 (talk) 19:50, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Sex-positive feminism article

Thanks for your message. You need to have a look at the previous edit by the same user. I may have misinterpreted it, but it looked like someone inserting a tasteless comment into the lead, unsupported by a reference, which pretty much amounted to mis-information vandalism. I treated their following edit the same way based on that. But if you have any cites that say differently I'm happy to stand corrected. Thanks --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 11:23, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

• I did see that, and no, that is not a tasteless comment at all--that is an actual (somewhat) notable term, notable enough to be mentioned, which is why I left a message for you and for the other editor who called it vandalism. Sure it was unsupported (like the other alternate terms, BTW) and unexplained, but these were a new user's first (and practically last) edits. As for cites, a Google search supports at least a measure of notability. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 15:53, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Are we talking about the same thing? Thanks for providing the cite, it puts an end to any doubt on 'fun feminism'. But I'm talking about the addition of "rape-positive feminism", which looks like a dubious definition to me and was added in the same edit. Is it perhaps a definition used by opponents? If so, that needs to be stated clearly. Listing alternative names coined by those who wish to disparage a concept, without explanation, is not being neutral. It should also be considered if either definition belongs in the lead, they both appear more like opinionated adjectives tagged on to the front of 'feminism'. Leads should concentrate on summarising facts, rather than attempting to balance opinions. That's best left to the rest of the article. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:30, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Good point--I note that they did not include that word the second time, and it does not appear to be a notable term. If I had to guess I'd say they retracted that because of Dude's edit summary. It does seem to me, after reading the article by Braithwaite, a cite for which I just added to the article, and after reading a few other articles involving Madonna and the Spice Girls (!) that these terms are not just coined by detractors--though I admit I did not look for "rape-positive" (thanks for pointing that out). So, I'd say that there is no balancing opinions here, that the terms in the current version are valid synonyms (or at least close enough). Thanks, Drmies (talk) 16:45, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

US Bellows Article

Hi - You marked my article for deletion - I have added a couple more reliable sources. Any chance my article could stick around? —Preceding unsigned comment added by SylvIba (talk • contribs) 20:07, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

• Hey SylvIba, thanks for your note. Listen, you have the right to remove the PROD yourself, the deletion template--see WP:PROD. I had a quick look and I am not entirely convinced yet, and I want you to know that I looked for sources (and see WP:RS for what 'counts') but couldn't find any. I might come back to the article again, but in the meantime, you did exactly what you need to do, so good work. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 23:24, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Re:Manners

I'm sorry if I reverted edits that may have appeared as vandalism in My Eyes, but were actually helpful to the site. Now about the edits on the page Eisler, I have no clue why those edits are considered mine because I don't even know who Riane Eisler is (Seriously, Who the Hell is Riane Eisler?). I also told Amonienie I was sorry, but that you nor nobody else pushed me into it. - Some Dude You've Never Known (talk) 21:17, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

• Well Dude, thanks. If you had looked a little harder you would have seen it wasn't vandalism--and the message you left on their talk page was ridiculous. We have standard templates for that which are appropriate and courteous. The Eisler edit, you reverted Amonienie's removal of clear vandalism, probably as a reaction to what you saw on the feminism page. Just cool down; don't react from the gut. Drmies (talk) 23:05, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Dude, I've never even heard of Riane Eisler and hadn't even been on that page until I heard you mention it. - Some Dude You've Never Known (talk) 01:45, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Who made this edit then? Your brother? Drmies (talk) 01:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

How I should know? I don't know hardly anything about computers or the internet and all that fancy stuff. But, I never even heard of Riane Eisler and I stay away from politics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Some Dude You've Never Known (talk • contribs) 01:53, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

If you don't know what edits you made to what article, when the record shows you made a bad edit to Riane Eisler, then maybe this isn't the place for you. Sorry, Drmies (talk) 01:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Ngensolutions =

I feel that public has a right to know who owns our networks and stations. see this example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pappas_Telecasting_Companies — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trueblood786 (talk • contribs)

• I don't know anything about rights, sorry. Feel free to contribute to the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ngensolutions LLC. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:11, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

uw-unsourced4

Hi. I've made a temporary fix to the uw-unsourced4 template, so it works ok again now - and have commented further at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 September 4#Template:Uw-unsourced4 -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:09, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks Boing. Drmies (talk) 14:03, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

What would you rather be doing?

He Doc, can you check this for DYK? I don't have Word and the DYK Check thing doesn't seem to work. Cheers. --kelapstick (talk) 17:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

• Hey K, it's 1599 characters according to the java tool, hyperlinked at WP:DYK. Drmies (talk) 17:10, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Thanks, trying to get a picture, lots on Flikr, but I have to get a licence changed. Shouldn't be too hard. Cheers. --kelapstick (talk) 17:22, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
    • You're better at that than I'll ever be! Hope you don't mind a few little tweaks. Drmies (talk) 17:25, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
      • Thanks for the tweaks, any thoughts on a hook?--kelapstick (talk) 01:38, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
        • Did you know that...Canadian politician Lori MacLeod took the sexist comment that she'd rather be baking cookies than attend a meeting literally and made it the title of a cookbook? Drmies (talk) 01:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

World Association of Ugly People

I have restored this list of members to this club. These people were honoured members. It isn't right to take that from them. Here is the link to the original discussion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:World_Association_of_Ugly_People#Notable_Members Clerks. (talk) 14:26, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks for the link. I do note, however, that there wasn't much discussion there, and no consensus. I also note that the redlinked people are not notable by Wiki's usual standards: since you monitor the article so closely, perhaps you could write articles, at least stubs, on them. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:57, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
• This link is an "about us" section, is that really reliable enough for saying that people are members of the "Ugly Club"? I would prefer something moer independent saying that a former Prime Minister of Italy was a member. But that's just me.--kelapstick (talk) 19:43, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

50,000

Just noticed the Milestone. Congrats.--intelati^(Call) 04:36, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

• Thank you! I'm somewhat surprised. The last 20,000 went by fast, though. Cheers, Drmies (talk) 04:39, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Rodrigo

I responded on my talk page, to a query you made some time back. Slyforeman (talk) 19:51, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

• Thank you. As you saw, the AfD reached a keep decision pretty easily. Drmies (talk) 20:04, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Watch your step

Please don't go starting rumours you can't follow up. I have done my user page and I am Serbian, and my edits are not all on Albania subjects like the people blocked in the sock group from Sinbad Barron. You have no evidence so please don't impede on my rights as an editor and I will gladly respect your editting. Goodbye. Chetnik Serb (talk) 22:41, 16 September 2010 (UTC)