User talk:Bishonen/Archive 7

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Scientific studies show that have it on your page will ward off 99% of intruders. Redwolf24 (talk) 01:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Red wolves are wonderful creatures, although endangered by the bigotry of E. NC formers and rainchers. Lone wolves, on the other hand, experience lives that are solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short, and get that way because they fail to achieve a mate. Geogre 02:17, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Food for thought. What about wolf stars? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Madness, of course. "The dog star rages," as the man said. Also, it means that it's August. Hmmm, Paul? Geogre 04:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the wolf will not ward off Geogres. Redwolf24 (talk) 04:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of: folks might want to keep a watch on User talk:Lonecanine while I sleep. (Likely thewolfstar sock, I've blocked, Doesn't seem worth AN/Iing.) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 05:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

That corpse you planted in the garden, has it begun to sprout? Will it bloom this year? Oh keep the dog far hence, that's friend to men, or with his nails he'll dig it up again! No, I for one have stopped ANI'ing the dogstar. Just add any new pup to the category Sockpuppets of Thewolfstar (the sock tag will do that), and we'll have the whole lot of them in a tidy flock. This one I feel should be left and watched for a while. Obviously it's one of the family, tough, and good catch Grapey. Bishonen | talk 06:34, 29 May 2006 (UTC).

Aha, he was with you in the ships at My Lai? Geogre 12:15, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Mon frère! Bishonen | talk 13:58, 29 May 2006 (UTC).

At least a hypocrite lecteur et semblabe. (Ah, it's a lost art, I tells ya'. Kids today don't even know what the thunder said or who's him when he's home or walking Dublin of a June morning with a Baedecker in your hand and Harry Blamires in the other or how Sweeney shifts from ham to ham in the bath while contemplating the darkened eye of Grishkin in the drawing room.) Geogre 14:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Archiving for the first time and messing with the settings, no need to bite my head off for not responding "soon enough". Yes, okay, fine, I concede, have it your way, but I still think it's unnecessarily cruelty to someone who's already hard a hard enough time of it (have you read some of the messages on the talk page like "is there anyone out there please talk to me?" etc? It's pretty sad. --Col. Hauler 22:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

There's a lot of history, you know, in this car. I've been living in this car and its been a big part of my life. But you know its fucked me around quite a bit and sometimes it stalls on you, doesn't work right. You get to need to go somewhere and it's like, no, you're not fucking going anywhere because i'm gonna fuckin' stall on ya and it pisses you off. El_C 10:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Fuck community college, let's get drunk and eat chicken fingers!

And you can teach how to get drunk, get fired from the police force, become a lousy trailer park supervisor that sucks, hangs around with a fucking idiot that doesn't wear a shirt and looks like a dick but thinks he looks good-101! El_C 10:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

If I can't smoke and swear I'm fucked

Thank you, your majesty. My first order of business is to tell the prosecutor to shut the fuck up, and wipe that stupid fucking grin off his face becasue it's distraculating my case. Next, I'd like to announce that Randy and Lahey have been drinking all day and they're wasted out of their fuckin minds, and they're both assholes. And the testimony they just gave is total fuckin bullshit and I can prove it ... Clearly Cory and Trevor accepted money on film, and they admitted they stole gas. And they're sick. I mean, look at them. That's gas sickness. Fucking idiots. I got nothing else to say right now except that the Crown and Lahey can go fuck themselves. The defense rests, everybody can fuck off. Except you, I didn't mean you. But those two guys, and him. Can you guys get the fuck out of the way, please? El_C 10:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

• Stay away from the brown acid. The brown acid is poison, man. Geogre 21:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

• Trinity has Got to quit smoking, like i can't have her smoking anymore, it's ridiculous. El_C 23:06, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Temporary Relief Assistant Trailer Park Supervisor

I guess you didn't hear what I just said.
First thing i said was "It's my walkie now."
Second thing was "you're suspended."
And the Fourth Thing was "FUCK OFF!"
El_C 23:06, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not gay, I love Lucy. Wait a second, maybe I am gay

You know, there's certain accidents where you may be drunk and on drugs, but, it's gona happen anyway whether you are or you're not. Garbage truck, I mean the shocks are different, there's a lot more weight. Next thing I know, we're crashing into stuff, things are catching on fire. Like I said, it was no big deal. I don't know why I got fired over it, which really pissed me off. El_C 11:10, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Jim Lahey Is a fuckin' drunk and he always will be

Breaker, breaker, come in earth. This is rocketship 27, aliens have fucked over the carbonator in engine number four, I'm gonna try to refuckulate it and land on Juniper, hopefuly they got some space weed. Over. How's that, buddy? I don't fuckin' know! NÁSA power rockets are firing all over the place, they got lasers and shooting and, uh... Bubles, I can't fuckin do this, my brain dosen't work with space talk, I hate playing space! El_C 22:27, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

And IRC had better not kick any of my fiancés if they know what's good for them! Bishonen | talk 22:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC).

Trinity, what the hell are you doing driving this car? Did your father tell you to drive...? Trinity, stop the car right now! TRINITY! I'M IMPOUNDING THIS VEHICLE! STOP THE CAR! ... Randy, did you see that? Goddanm shitapple driving the shitmobile. What kind of father let's his daughter do that? Nobody in this goddamn park gives a fuck, why the hell should I? El_C 05:09, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I am the liquor

I just want to say that just because Lucy spent the night in the drunk tank, dosen't mean she's a bad mother, I mean, everyone spends nights at the drunk tank. I've been there about ten times, I'm sure you have and you guys have, it's not a big deal, just happens everyonce in a while. And the problem was that she lives with this girl named Sarah, who smokes a ton of weed, and that's what happens: When Lucy gets drunk, she's fine. She gets drunk and smokes a joint of hash, she's fine. She gets drunk and smokes a joint of weed, she's a different person. And that's why she ended up in the drunk tank, because of Sarah and her little weed joints. But as for the open liquor, I mean, I live in my car. My car is my home. So that should'nt have been open liquor anyway. You guys must have liquor around your house, probably all kinds of liquor; I'm sure you got liquor at your home. Cops pull you over in your house, how is that open liquor? Anyway, the big thing is [augh, just dropped my smoke there]: I'm gonna have a lot of money coming to me in the next couple of days, which, I'm not gonna tell you how I'm making it, but it's gonna be a lot of money. Gonna bail my dad out of jail and I'll buy a trailer. I'll be living there, Lucy will be living there, there's going to be lot's of people watching over Trinity, so this can't ever happen again. And you know, if you just release her, send her back to her mom; her mom is great, good mother. And I'll be looking after her once in a while when she is drinking, but other than that, she'll be always watched, and my dad can watch her when he's not drunk. But tonight I'm getting drunk, because it's my turn. Lucy got drunk yesterday and this is my day, so I'm gonna get her... I'm not gonna drink before she gets home, I'm gonna get her to Lucy, Lucy will be watching her, then I'll have some drinks. So, yeah, I think we're done here, and I'll just pick up my duaghter and take her home to Lucy. Get drunk. El_C 05:09, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

A dope trailer is no place for a kitty

Oh, I get it. Treena, that's a great idea! Julian, books have stuff recorded down all over the years from people, and if we can find a book with someone who had similar problems, just take what they wrote down in the book and [augh, fuck! sorry, Treena] take what they wrote down and make it ours. El_C 07:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

"Attica! Attica!"

... I go off and get drunk in the Caribbean, and come back to find all of you were apparently less connected than I... What psychotomimetic drugs were you all taking? KillerChihuahua^?!? 16:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure who gave El C the overripe rye bread, but all this love of the proletariat is getting out of hand. There's a reason we're trying to free those people. Now they should just hold still and vote socialist, and we'll be helping them along soon. Geogre 16:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I like this "getting out of hand" sentiments that my various Ricky quotations are invoking., although I think he's is more of a [lovable] lumpen. But as for how far voting can free the people, as Chairman Mao said: the bullet, not the ballot. El_C 23:16, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

"The Bible or the ballot/ The bullet or the gun." Yeah, yeah, but any violent overthrow fostered by, designed by, led by, or containing non-proles is just another totalitarianism. Meanwhile, actual socialism of a non-19th-century-economic-theorist variety comes through the ballot, not the bullet, and leaves all alive, not some dancing on graves. I already have a religion and don't need to believe so fervently in one disgruntled Hegelian that I'll pass up social justice that doesn't fit his predictions. Geogre 04:09, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, "yeah yeah," this is no longer the 19th Century, some things change but some fundamentals stay the same. I have no need for a religion, and you'd be critically mistaken to confuse a breadth of vision with faith, or militant rhetoric with crude anarchoangst ... if you actually get down to whichever underlying particulars. I'm uninterested in prediction and prophecies, then, but am confident in the inevitability of certain things becoming explicable in the course of human history. Violence is tragic, but these are violent conditions and tragic times for billions of people. Hunger is violence, as is plunder. I want no violence, in any sense of the word, but I also know that the imperialists will (and have been) wage war over their continued ownership of the planet, and they are able to do it effectively because they are in power right now. At some point in time, the people will prove well-organized, well-led, and progressive enough to be able to defeat them. It may take hundreds of years, hopefuly less. But so long as the imperialists are allowed to exist as such, an existence which is indefinitely guranteed when accepting parliamentary and electoral machinations as a final strategy, there will be no end in sight, no possibility for a stable (not to mention, genuine and holistic) social justice. Obviosuly, I'm not calling for armed struggle in countries that are more suited at the present time to legal forms of struggle, I only emphasize on the revolutionary character that this struggle needs to take. Because I'm realistic about the lengths the imperialists will go to forever stay in power; on what it would take to overthrow them, and the realities that define the nature of their system, this system, the unfathomable toll it takes on humanity. El_C 06:01, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

The one critical mistake there is assuming that "they" won't be "them." In the past, every armed revolution for justice has been led by someone who turns it to private benefit and who always intended to do so. Perhaps the Zapatistas are pure, but they also struggle not for The Revolution but for indigent rights. Imperialists will do anything to remain? Indeed. They'll coopt revolutions, join juntas, and this is when the revolutionaries and juntas don't decide to become ideological imperialists and justify their own economic parasitism by pointing to the bearded Hegelian instead of the periwigged republicans. The reason I applaud the Sandanistas, and few others, is that they were a democratic socialism and willingly stepped down when they lost elections. Only having the people continually controlling will enable anything like a socialist state; otherwise, it's one totalitarianism that becomes imperialistic vs. another. Geogre 12:21, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

If a formerly revolutionary party sells out and becomes social imperialist, as the USSR and the PRC did, they need to be overthrown, too. But put back on track, not replaced with other imperialists. This is one of the lessons that needs to be drawn from the mistakes of the past. It isn't possible to build socialism in countries to the point where these contradictions no longer exist so long as one buys into these liberal-democratic games as the will of the people. Inhabitants of imperialist countries especially have been indoctrinated from a very early age not to intellectually surpass certain limitations which ultimately serve to defend the vital interests of the imperialists. This, then, is expressed even among more progressive tendencies, in romaticized and unscientific notions, ones which distort both the meaning of and relationality between democracy and dictatorship. While I applaud moderate progressive forces such as the Sandinistas and the Zapatistas (even Emiliano Zapata was ultimately a moderate progressive), I support the FARC-EP and others who offer a broader vision, one ultimately not bound by parochial localism. A socialist state is but one key stage of the struggle. It will not be possible to share power and resources in this planet in a natural and noncoersive way by envisioning socialist (or any) states existing indefinitely. But giving up on revolution because it might go wrong and one would need to take a few steps back before taking further steps forward, or even starting it all over, is far too deterministic and historically unhumble for me. The tired claim that the failure of revolutions in this past century are bound to be repeated in that sense for all centuries to come, is the sort of human nature argument that I reject and history has rejected; for ex., the supposed (sub)human nature of women, of different ethnic groups, and so on. Those contradictions once thought of as the final (biblical & otherwise) word, are still with us to the detriment of all but the imperialists and their lackyes. With the contradiction of class gone, they too will become but a fleeting nightmerish memory. But with easily circumvented or suppressed electoralism as a final strategy, all these contradictions will remain a reality. I look beyond them. El_C 21:26, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

So you want to believe in History, because it shows the necessity of a revolution, but you don't want to believe in history that shows that every worker's revolution has been a totalitarian one? You want to relegate any concepts of representation to the dustbin because they were cooked up by gentry, but you want to hang onto concepts of classless societies despite their being concocted by a German gentry? You want the will of the people to be invisibly present in the future society, but you don't want to hear from them in any say on the government? And, if any particular historical example turns out to be corrupt, you want to say that it wasn't genuine. More, though, you say that people can't tell what they want because of their historical conditioning, and yet you can see what they should want in spite of historical conditioning. Finally, while you are against imperialism (presumably as an economic formation), you dismiss any local social justice in favor of those who believe in invading their neighbors to spread the good word of socialism. Sorry, but I'm of my own opinion still. Geogre 04:49, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

In chopped order:
Q1. So you want to believe in History, because it shows the necessity of a revolution, but you don't want to believe in history that shows that every worker's revolution has been a totalitarian one?

A1. I don't believe every worker's revolution has been a totalitarian one, I do believe that inhabitants of imperialists countries have been indoctrinated from a very early age to think that.

Q2. You want to relegate any concepts of representation to the dustbin [of history ?]

A2. Far from relegating every concept of representation, I want ones the imperialists do not control, even indirectly, by virtue of owning the means of communication in that society, and so on.

Q3. Because they were cooked up by gentry [?]

A3. I fail to see where I mentioned the gentry.

Q4. [B]ut you want to hang onto concepts of classless societies despite their being concocted by a German gentry?

A4. I'm not following how that. Yes, the concept of a classless society, eventually. But inhabitants of imperialist countries have been indoctrinated to see such a stage as impossible or the opposite of what it is (i.e. as monolithic, boring uniformity, etc.)

Q5. You want the will of the people to be invisibly present in the future society, but you don't want to hear from them in any say on the government?

A5. I want them to end up having more of a say, I just don't want to be an imperialist-dominated government. The dictatorship would be over the imperialists and the democracy of and by the people, the opposite of how it is now, where the imperialists impose their dictatorship (electoral & otherwise illusions aside) over the people. But eventually, there will be no need of a government as we understand it.

Q6. [I]f any particular historical example turns out to be corrupt, you want to say that it wasn't genuine.

A6. If something (anything) turns out to be corrupt, than either it wasn't genuine to begin with, or at some point it stopped being genuine.

Q7. More, though, you say that people can't tell what they want because of their historical conditioning, and yet you can see what they should want in spite of historical conditioning[?]

A7. Moi? In spite of and because of historical conditioning, with science and a correct scientific theory we can go beyond the abyss. But, no, it is revolutionary conditions that result in more people becoming open to what myself and my comrades are for, or nothing happens.

Q8. [W]hile you are against imperialism (presumably as an economic formation), you dismiss any local social justice in favor of those who believe in invading their neighbors to spread the good word of socialism.

A8. Against imperialism in all its form, of course, though my focus is economic (for a reason). I far from dismissed local social justice, even when it is (what I think you meant to say) of a narrow scope. But I am for acting local and think global. Nor do I think (or anywhere said) that I support invasions or finds these particularly useful or progressive, though in some instances they may well be.

Q9. Sorry, but I'm of my own opinion still.

A9. `You would go into the militia yourself,' was Ernest's retort, `and be sent to Maine, or Florida, or the Philippines, or anywhere else, to drown in blood your own comrades civil-warring for their liberties. While from Kansas, or Wisconsin, or any other state, your own comrades would go into the militia and come here to California to drown in blood your own civil-warring.' `Not when the government suspends civil law. In that day when you speak of rising in your strength, your strength would be turned against yourself. Into the militia you would go, willy-nilly. Habeas corpus, I heard some one mutter just now. Instead of habeas corpus you would get post mortems. If you refused to go into the militia, or to obey after you were in, you would be tried by drumhead court martial and shot down like dogs. It is the law.' El_C 08:23, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

When the Revolution Comes (an original poem

When the revolution occurs, the best that can be imagined will be;

And the student leader will be draped in a sheet, head back,

While a friendly lady shampoos his hair before the stylist goes to work.

The sun's rays will shatter on the erupting glass of the shop door

And the revolutionary, bulging in striped horizontal spandex,

With her burp gun now vomitting its bullets, will take her aims

Out to the street.

The moment, like lightning from east to west across the skies,

Like a bridegroom coming to the hall at night, when the virgins run out of oil,

Will catch the organizer awash, plashing, staring,

While a deluxe massager shower head beats his throbbing neck

As the workers in Guatemala never intended when they put it together.

The small beer men will hardly notice.

The torturer, looking up from the water dancing on the cloth over the stubble

Of a three year old "ticking bomb," will tell himself again that it's worth it.

Some people will get shot, and some will do the shooting, and he can be one or the other.

The revolution will be only as great as we can imagine it.

Geogre 16:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Most dangerous

Most treacherous is not the robbery
of hard earned wages
Most horrible is not the torture by the police.
Most dangerous is not the graft for the treason and greed.

To be caught while asleep is surely bad
surely bad is to be buried in silence
But it is not most dangerous.

To remain dumb and silent in the face of trickery
Even when just, is definitely bad
Surely bad is reading in the light of a firefly
But it is not most dangerous
Most dangerous is
To be filled with dead peace
Not to feel agony and bear it all,
Leaving home for work
And from work return home
Most dangerous is the death of our dreams.

Most dangerous is that watch
Which run on your wrist
But stand still for your eyes.

Most dangerous is that eye
Which sees all but remains frostlike,
The eye that forgets to kiss the world with love,
The eye lost in the blinding mist of the material world.
That sinks the simple meaning of visible things
And is lost in the meaning return of useless games.

Most dangerous is the moon
Which rises in the numb yard
After each murder,
But does not pierce your eyes like hot chills.

Most dangerous is the song
Which climbs the mourning wail
In order to reach your ears
And repeats the cough of an evil man
At the door of the frightened people.

Most dangerous is the night
Falling in the sky of living souls,
Extinguishing them all
In which only owls shriek and jackals growl,
And eternal darkness covers all the windows.

Most heinous is the direction
In which the sun of the soul light
Pierces the east of your body.

Most treacherous is not the
robbery of hard earned wages
Most horrible is not the torture of police
Most dangerous is not graft taken for greed and treason. -- Paash

El_C 20:48, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello! I noticed that you have interacted with user:Staxringold who is currently undergoing an RfA and thought that you might be interested in participating at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Staxringold 2. You have received this message without the endorsement of the candidate involved, and this is not a solicitation of support, it is only an effort to make RfA discussions better (for more information see user:ShortJason/Publicity). Thank you in advance for your participation. ShortJason 19:30, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I've finally seen the query you mentioned. It's nearly impossible to negotiate all those pages associated with the SS case. The drowning often flail, and it's dangerous to get near them. I'm really on edge, myself, as I still don't have the danged book I'm supposed to use for this class. That should change today. Oh, and of course everything happens the moment anything happens, so it's feast or famine on busy-ness. Geogre 12:25, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments concerning DreamGuy. I would ask you to review his edits in detail prior to making further statements on this matter. I note he is already the subject of an RfC for abusive and obnoxious behaviour, and has been accused (by me) of using sockpuppets to subvert the 3RR - there is clear evidence of this within the last 24 hours at Beelzebub. Victrix is his sock. I would also point out that I did not revert his talk page 5 times as you claimed - I reverted it 3 times - as it says clearly in my edit summary - and I then added 2 further comments without re-adding the original comments. --Centauri 22:20, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

These are the reverts I refer to, all within the span of an hour: 1 2 3 4 5

Note also that you edited DG's page twelve times altogether in less than an hour and a half, against repeated and insistent requests to desist. And today you resumed. Seriously, just stop. As for your accusations of sockpuppetry, they are rather serious. You may consider yourself lucky that DreamGuy isn't one to bother with RfCing people, or running to admins to complain. (He hasn't been in contact with me.) I urge you to either try to verify the specific User:Victrix accusation, or retract it as publicly as you've made it. Sockpuppet verification is quite easy: all you have to do is place the evidence you have on the Wikipedia:Requests for CheckUser page, and if it's at all convincing (which I assume it is, since you've been making public accusations based on it), one of the CheckUser admins will perform an IP check. Bishonen | talk 23:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC).

I take your point concerning the reversions - I had overlooked the fact that each time I added a new comment I also restored the old ones, and I apologise for my oversight. However, that does not change the fact that DreamGuy is obviously using at least 1 sockpuppet to openly subvert the 3RR, and I have formally sought verification accordingly, per your advice, so thanks for that. --Centauri 02:21, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what you were going for, but I don't think this edit had the desired effect... Dragons flight 00:44, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Dragon. I was just adding my Oppose vote, that's all. Didn't get an edit conflict or anything. And do you see how a crapload of Oppose votes timestamped much earlier than mine have now appeared, also? Do you see any unclosed HTML tags on the page? Those can have effects like that. Bishonen | talk 01:01, 1 June 2006 (UTC).

I don't know how busy you are, but we may have a WP:LAME in progress at SimCity 4. I don't know the rules well enough to yell at anyone, plus, I'm not an admin. It looks like both sides are being pretty stupid, so you should have fun with this one. RyanGerbil10 21:43, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Er... so I see. "Recognized by hundreds", lol. Sorry, Ryan, no, I think I am too busy, really. I just this moment waded into an edit war at Eton College — I get these crazy impulses. I never yet had one of them over a game article, though. Could you please ask somebody who has actually ever played a computer game? I think it might help. I don't even understand half the edit summarries. Sorry. Bishonen | talk 22:16, 1 June 2006 (UTC).

Throw the book, I mean WP:EL, at them. The linkspam should go. (No, I'm not going to do it either.) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:18, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok. I just figured the ALL CAPS EDIT SUMMARIES and needed some attention. Thanks for your time, though. I'll let you know if it makes WP:LAME. RyanGerbil10 23:03, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Or l'Etranger. So, do we have an article on...ready?...Louise Renée de Penancoët de Kéroualle, duchess of Portsmouth and duchess Aubigny? You know her as the duchess of Portsmouth. Is it worth the bother? I took notes on William Kidd, only to find that we have a fair enough article on him. I had also wanted to get John Gale (theologian) in, and did, but only after finding that John Gale was full of what is now at John Gale (director), and it had about 12 pages that linked to it, as someone had made a full web of B-movies. Changing all those links, then blanking (because John Gale (director) already existed with a one line substub about some dude who directed a play, once) and copying over, and then.... All so I could get in there, because there were four guys with that name with articles, so a disambig was necessary. BTW, found the coolest band in years: Drive By Truckers and particularly the album Pizza Deliverance and particularly the songs "Uncle Frank" and "The President's Penis is Missing" and "Nine Bullets" and "Margo and Harold" and virtually the whole record. Geogre 02:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Louise de Kérouaille, Duchess of Portsmouth, or, as I know her (thanks to my gal Nell), "Squintabella". Speaking of Nell's rivals, it's Barbara Palmer, 1st Duchess of Cleveland that seems to have the most room for improvement -- she was something, I guess. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:46, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Barbara was the "Wycherley, you're a son of a whore" lady, right? The 1911 EB Wycherley article relates that story so coyly as to make it pretty much incomprehensible. Bishonen | talk 16:20, 2 June 2006 (UTC).

Yep, that's her, sleeping her way through the theatre circles on her way down from the king. The word "nymphomaniac" seems to crop up a lot in modern scholarship on her. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:26, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I think the DNB's entry for Portsmouth is exactly the kind of thing our honorifics people are heading toward. Cleveland: check. I'll get her on Monday. (Maybe Giano would like to meet her?) Geogre 17:40, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Ave Maria, gratia plena, Dominus tecum, [1] Salve Maria [2] - it is a miracle she is returned to us. Forgive Oh Holly Mother the foolish one who is going to end up with very burnt fingers [3]. Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, ora pro nobis peccatoribus, nunc, et in hora mortis nostrae. Amen. Giano | talk 07:43, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, we know you're very pious, how about you shut up now? Bishonen | talk 07:53, 2 June 2006 (UTC).

Bless you my child! Giano | talk 07:56, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Did I ever tell you about the Regent's exam I graded? The question was, "If you could meet any person, living or dead, who would it be and why?" Well, I had several people answer "David Bowie." It was strange. While other people might say "Jesus Christ" or "Plato" or "William Shakespeare" or "Franklin Delano Roosevelt" or even "August Strindberg," these younguns kept saying "David Bowie," and one of them put it succinctly: "Because he has been so very attractive to both males and females for so very long." Geogre 11:34, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Just as bishounen are. I got called "pretty boy" yesterday, which would have been kind of interesting if it hadn't been by the biggest bastard and least attractive man on the entire site. (ZOMG NPA!) Bishonen | talk 16:34, 2 June 2006 (UTC).

"If you could meet any person, living or dead, who would it be and why?" Anybody who doesn't name somebody dead should just be quietly removed from society for terminal lack of imagination. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:29, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, personally I would like to meet Charlene Tilton from Dallas, she had such amazing attributes. It was very unfair the way the British press called her the "The Poison Dwarf", actually while I think of it I quite liked Victoria Principal too, her portrayal of Pammy was very poignant and sensitive.......Oh those were the days they don't film quality literature like that any more........who was the one who played Sue-Ellen?, she and I would have got on like a house on fire....nothing wrong with my imagination Bunch, who wants to meet one of those dead mopey old women like Jeanne d'Arc running arownd doing goodly works - I wonder if she was a lesbian; allthough I do think Diane de Poitiers had nice attributes too, very firm, and was a bit of a go-er, not a lesbian at all, so perhaps I'd like to meet her too. Of sourse I would like to meet you as well Bishonen, but I know what you look like already - the blond one from Abba - can you sing as well? Giano | talk 17:22, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Can I sing as well? You're kidding me. I can sing much better. (Didn't you hear the toneless droning back there? That was me humming Momus' song in celebration of myself.) Bishonen | talk 18:07, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Another question from that exam: "If you could have any job for one year, what would it be and why?" My favorite answer was "Sales clerk at a department store," because "then I would get a 15% discount on clothes and get to see them before anyone else does." A bold vision, there. Geogre 17:42, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Do they really get 15%? God! I wonder what the mark up is............Giano | talk 19:30, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure they do, but she seemed convinced so. I think the markup is about 50% or a bit more. Geogre 19:32, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

So you are saying if I sent my kids to work in Armani and Gucci, I could make a considerable saving each year? Not to mention the college fees, hypothetically meant to provide them with jobs which will not benefeit me. - Interesting! Giano | talk 19:44, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

My edit (12 faculty) was a misunderstanding and, well, I still don't understand. I'm not a native speaker and would appreciate an explanation very much :) --Missmarple 19:47, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

"Faculty" is used as a plural word meaning teaching staff. Right, Geogre..? American usage, I believe. I thought of changing it to "staff", but I bet that's open to misunderstanding too, so I went with "teachers". Hope I got it right. I'm not a native speaker either. Bishonen | talk 20:30, 2 June 2006 (UTC).

The faculty is a collective noun. There are twelve (spell all numbers below a thousand) faculty is Ok, but better to have "twelve faculty members." Geogre 21:07, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Here it is, I should have linked it. The point is, Geogre, originally it did say "twelve faculty", which Missmarple misunderstood, in spite of clearly being a highly competent English speaker. Therefore, "twelve faculty" is not good; the text shouldn't be throwing up pointless snares for non-Americans. Therefore, I changed it to "teachers". As for spelling seven hundred and eighty-three, you jest, surely. I don't even spell "19th", when I'm talking about the century, and you don't either. Bishonen | talk 22:41, 2 June 2006 (UTC).

"Teachers" is fine, of course, and it's shorter than "faculty members," so it wins. (Didn't you hear that MOS can beat you up? That it is wrong to change from it? That it must be obeyed blindly and in all cases thoroughly? Didn't you hear that people who go around unlinking every year are doing good and that you must not object? Didn't you hear that the MOS says no apostrophe for plural dates, and therefore it doesn't matter what grammar says or national convention or other publications? You need to get with the program. See talk:Patriot Whigs for reeducation.) No, I do 18th century, but it really is a style sheet must to spell out all numbers below a thousand. Geogre 02:26, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks to you both :) --Missmarple 08:29, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

"Teachers" is fine, "staff" would not have been. In American education, "staff" means administrative, janitorial, etc. personnel, and "faculty" means instructional and research personnel. Faculty members, even those in secondary education, find it insulting to be called staff members. Thanks for the help on the article to all of you! RossPatterson 22:36, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. Insulting? Hmmm. We do? Hmm. Staff/faculty is an operative distinction within education, but all faculty and staff are "staffing" outside of education. I don't think I mind being called a member of the staff, but I'm not staff. Even within, though, I wouldn't say that it's insulting to be accidentally referred to as staff. After all, "staff" includes administration, and they're in charge. Geogre 03:15, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

In my experience as the son, brother, and ex-spouse of teachers and having been staff (but not faculty :-) ) at a university, that was the case. But far be it from me to contradict one of y'all. Y'all don't mind "staff", I'm fine with it too :-) RossPatterson 04:16, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

No, well, I have the endowed Mellow Fellowship, so.... (Really, I don't figure the staff is an enemy. They just don't understand is all.) Geogre 13:23, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but I have the ... um, er ... oak leaf clust... um ... ah well, you win :-) We now return you to your regularly scheduled Caribbean ergot fantasy, already in progress. Thanks again for all the help with Stuyvesant High School! RossPatterson 22:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I just noticed this. How positively irksome. ElectricRay 23:26, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't usually encourage people to delete anything at all on my page, but in this case, do feel free to remove your comment in case you come to realize how it makes you look. We all type too fast sometimes. Best wishes, Bishonen | talk 23:38, 2 June 2006 (UTC).

thanks for your magnanimity. But I'll take the consequences like a man. ElectricRay 23:49, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Sucks when those targets you've been aiming at turn out to be strawmen, doesn't it? Geogre 02:23, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

My comments were serious. The comment I posted deserves to be heard. The accusation of trolling is a personal attack on me and is uncivil. If perhaps the header didn't meet with your approval then we could have talked about it.Mccready 06:58, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

All right, I won't remove it again, but I'm sure other people will, if you restore it in the same form. Do you want to sound like you're not trolling? Then you need to avoid using a sneering heading/edit summary, and avoid legalese like "allegedly banned" (you mean "blocked", right?) for a fact that you could so easily have verified (tip: click on Col. Hauler's talkpage, where the block message can be seen). Give your messages a chance to be heard. Bishonen 10:09, 3 June 2006 (UTC).

I removed Mccready's comment. He was recently given a short block for wikistalking SlimVirgin. The block was discussed and supported on AN/I. I see the comment I removed as uncivil and part of a pattern of tendentious editing. He has rigid thinking that shows up on Wikipedia as wikistalking, edit wars, and the inability to engage in consensus editing, and so on... We need to keep gently reminding him of our observations and enforcing Wikipedia policy. This is the only way that he will be transformed in to the very good editor that I know that he can be. Take care, FloNight ^talk 13:39, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Flo was mistaken. See the discussion on my talkpage.Mccready 02:39, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Is there a problem? Do you see my comment as encouraging trolling and harassment? Bishonen | talk 15:53, 4 June 2006 (UTC).

Or course not! The opposite is true. My comment was meant to be a statement of unity with you. I felt Mccready was pressuring you to let him post comments on SV talk page. The constant drip, drip, drip... of tendentious editors takes a toll on its recipients. Sorry I did not express myself more clearly. Take care, FloNight ^talk 16:32, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey Bishonen. You were very very helpful with Hopkins School, and I recently saw you on FAC explaining your vote on Stuy. I was wondering if you could take a quick look at Dog Day Afternoon and possibly vote on the FAC, it currently has a couple of very small, technical opposes, and running up the support count (if you think it's worthy) a little couldn't hurt just numbers-wise. Staxringold _talk^contribs 20:57, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I thought you might want to review this. --Cat out 12:22, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Please use html links to subsections, Kawaii! Those actually work. (Until the page is refactored.) I'll take a look. Bishonen | talk 12:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC).

I took this to arbitration [4]. -Tony Sidaway 01:38, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeah, I saw, good call. Bishonen | talk 01:49, 5 June 2006 (UTC).

Hi. Thought you'd be interested to know that my well-founded suspicions concerning DreamGuy / Victrix sockpuppetry and abuse of the 3RR have been borne out. --Centauri 22:45, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I saw it was deemed "likely", yes. Bishonen | talk 23:29, 4 June 2006 (UTC).

Compounded with the fact that edit summaries are the same, the likely verdict seems even more likely. It would be nice if somebody could advise Centauri what steps can be taken. Englishrose 14:23, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Sure. I'd rather not initiate any action myself — I feel I'm the wrong person to, from several angles — but please tell Centauri he can report the situation on WP:ANI to request review and admin action. In fact, posting on ANI for input from other admins is the first thing I'd do in any case, if I was handling it. If you like, you can check out Wikipedia:Requests for administrator attention to look for alternatives, but I believe ANI is it. Bishonen | talk 15:09, 5 June 2006 (UTC).

Look what I've just found - isn't it fantastic?

/me runs for the hills. Scariest sight I ever saw: Gianozilla smiled at me! Oh, man. :-/ Bishonen | talk 14:15, 6 June 2006 (UTC).

The widget itself is scary, yes... it frightens me whenever I see it on a talk page, but I thought you and Giano were a "virtual item"... isn't that what lovers do, smile at each other a lot? Or when you're zilla-ish is it more a "rending flesh and stomping subway cars together" sort of shared activity thing? ++Lar: t/c 14:30, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I beg your pardon, it's Geogre and I that are a virtual item (hi, hon!). Always excepting the times I'm on honeymoon with El C (hello, dear!). G'como and his gold medallion may have a special place in my heart, but ... Oh! Do I espy the beauteous Freplabella draw nigh, to comprehensively threaten my reign? And what IS that yapping and arfing? Bishonen | talk 14:41, 6 June 2006 (UTC).

You had better believe it, too. Who else sends you chocolate bars from across the Atlantic? Geogre 17:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Gold effect medallion. Just be glad you got a satirical as opposed to sincere {{smile}} spam: I got one a while back and I'm still paralyzed in horror. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:49, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Gold plate effect laquer medallion. :-D Fatsobella | talk 15:12, 6 June 2006 (UTC).

Lovingly nestled in a 15-percent-off department-store-employee-discount chest wig. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:17, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

You can get those at Prada? Gucci? I did not know that! ++Lar: t/c 15:31, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Yapping and arfing? What on earth could you be speaking of? (*innocent look*) KillerChihuahua^?!? 21:55, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

No no dear Bish, you quite misunderstand me if you think I have designs on your demesne. Quiet, my lovelies, some people just don't understaaaaaaaand! La Freplabella 15:28, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

How nice to see you adopting your new name, dear! I thought you'd be big enough not to mind the reference to Squintabella. Speaking of big ... no, I won't go there. Bishonen | talk 15:37, 6 June 2006 (UTC).

Which way IS your bread buttered, Frep? I'm so confused! And where's my tracklist? ++Lar: t/c 15:31, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Whichever way is yummiest! :-) La Bella Freppa 15:50, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Some guy at Valleyfair! on Friday had a shirt that said "I like girls that like girls"... not sure exactly what the connection is there but I did want to mention it because there clearly is one. ++Lar: t/c 17:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

It just means he likes fantasy, like the lipstick lesbians who want slovenly testosterone victims to watch or like Howard Stern's talent. Geogre 17:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I was not aware that Howard Stern HAD talent. What I love about WP is how you learn all sorts of things. Some of them even true. ++Lar: t/c 18:14, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

OK Ok Ok enough wise cracks........something very nasty is going to descend on this page soon, then you'll all be sorry. Throwing my happy smiley back in my face.......just you wait! Giano | talk 18:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Julian: Listen, all you gotta do is keep a low profile, okay? And I'm gonna work on getting you out.

Ray: Low profile, Julian? What, you've been reading books again?

Julian: What's wrong with reading books?

Ray: Nothing's wrong with reading books, but there's only one book that counts, and that's The Bible. It says to help your friends.

Julian: Does it say anything about ripping off insurance companies, pretending you're in a wheel chair, and then getting caught drunk, dancing with hoes making porno flicks? Huh? Anything in your book about that, Ray?

Ray: It's open to interpretation. El_C 21:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

{{linkimage|NonFreeImageRemoved.svg}} Radley. Did you get the e-mail from me...the one where I talk bad about everyone here on this page? (I'm kidding. I only talked about Billy.) Geogre 04:54, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what (or who) a Radley is, so I'll just take that as a request for more Ricky quotations outside of designated areas:

Ricky: Excuse me, I am a Doctor, he's a mental patient and he's on drugs. Just brought him down here for a little nature time. Um. Everything's cool.

Woman: Listen, I want this boy taken to town!

Ricky: No, I'm taking him to the hospital right now, he's a mental patient. I'm a medical Doctor, I am. That's my Doctor Car right there... [Get in the fuckin car, Trever!]

Woman: I'm gonna call the cops!

Ricky: You don't have to call the cops, I'm a Doctor! El_C 08:23, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, as Boo Radley had virtually no dialogue, it would be hard to add quotes from him. KillerChihuahua^?!? 08:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I vaguely remember reading it, like 15 yrs ago and in Hebrew. Dosen't ring a bell. I probably thought it was Bo at the time, anyway. El_C 11:19, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure you don't mean Bo? snicker KillerChihuahua^?!? 11:34, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

YASE! Possibly Boss Hogg, though! El_C 12:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

A better Bo. KillerChihuahua^?!? 12:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

It was better than saying "Arthur" and then "Radley." Boo Radley seems to have changed his name to Major Kilgore and gone on to command a contingent of air cavalry in Vietnam. Geogre 12:51, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Geogre, I'm appalled! We were speaking of the book, a classic piece of literature, not some (admittedly great) actor's debut on the Big Screen. KillerChihuahua^?!? 13:09, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I thought the author of that book was really hot. I loved her in Living In Oblivion, too, where she has a nude scene! I'm not sure, though, why Cousin Percy went on to menace Tom Curse in MI III. I understand that he got tired of being picked on, but he still shouldn't have tried to blow up Tom's wife. Geogre 15:33, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Heja, Bish, did you not get the e-mail, or are you not present? Geogre 15:36, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Hej å hå

I've been out (talking with my American cousin). I was very happy to get the e-mail where you fail to keep a secret. But hey, I thought I was supposed to keep it to myself. Bishonen | talk 15:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC).

Hi, Bish! That was a lovely message you sent to Slim.[5] I've blocked you for two weeks ;-) as a result, having looked at the block log. See here. Feel free to review the length of the block, as you probably know something about the background. I don't. Cheers. AnnH ♫ 08:46, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Ann, I should be ashamed of myself. I reckon I would benefit from a bit more than two weeks and also better information on my userpage--don't know why I didn't put it there earlier. The curse of laziness. Bishonen | talk 09:36, 7 June 2006 (UTC).

Laziness, sheer laziness, that's all it is. Maybe if we'd posted one of those {{subst:smile}}s on her page... Then again, perhaps not. *innocent* KillerChihuahua^?!? 09:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

P. S. The user in question is indefinitely banned for exhausting the community's patience. The background is here. Bishonen | talk 16:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC).

Yah, was aware of that. Bunch and I were comparing insults received and she got herself indef'd before I could catch up. Bunch won. KillerChihuahua^?!? 16:16, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, mama knows, puppy. That info was for Ann. Bishonen | talk 16:20, 7 June 2006 (UTC).

Oh heh, slow today (me). Ann, if you're really interested see this diff and my personal favorite, this one. There is so very much more, just view contribs. KillerChihuahua^?!? 16:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Recently-blocked Metrocat (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) was almost certainly her, by the way. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Metrocat, as in Merecat? Do these people want to be caught? KillerChihuahua^?!? 16:55, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

No, but they want to be *recognized* and it's hard to separate the two. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:59, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I've looked at the links — they're charming! Hmmm, what kind of an admin am I that I missed all that when it was happening? AnnH ♫ 17:07, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

(reduce) I don't know, perhaps you were off editing or some silly thing like that? ;) KillerChihuahua^?!? 17:20, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Can you have a look at 208.65.61.27 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)? Signed Maggie Thewolfstar, but the two IPs don't seem to have any connection. I'm not good at looking up IPs, but it seems that one is in Germany and the other is in Canada. Feel free to legthen, shorten, or undo the block. AnnH ♫ 09:21, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, it seems to me that it doesn't matter who's posting; anybody who signs as TWS has a right to be blocked as if they were TWS. Either they're a community-banned user or they're trying to be taken for one, what's the difference? I think I've even seen a bit of policy somewhere, to the effect that such trolling needs a good hefty block. The only question is whether a week will incur collateral damage, and these things--whether the IP is static or dynamic--are a closed book to me. Could you please ask aboout that on ANI? I'm just going out, sorry. Bishonen | talk 11:43, 10 June 2006 (UTC).

Done. See here. AnnH ♫ 23:05, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know that I have started up Plano's long awaited FAC here. I really appreciate all of the help that you have given me copyediting and proofing the article (and removing my American bias). I hope you will support and help me fight off the objects! — Scm83x ^{hook 'em} 08:54, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I for one would be more than willing to support a community ban, or any other type of ban. Keep me informed and if you decide to go that route, you have my full fledged support. HeyNow10029 16:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I wonder, do you really think it will be necessary to go that far? - It seems to me to be rather like a tyre that's running out of air, one knows it's going to burst just when and where is the question. More interestingly who is that common looking man above Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg no one wears a white bow-tie before during daylight hours and never a signet ring on the right hand little finger - I'm sure it's not Aloan, (where is ALoan these days?) and it cannot be Geogre (he's far to too sophisticated and debonair) so who is it..........BoG stop slinking off - do you have something to tell us? Somehow I always thought you were younger. Giano | talk 20:40, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I think you're dismissing Geogre a little prematurely: he's in the right part of the country —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

No, no Geogre lives in the land of the golden marigold, or some such part, (one really can't keep track of all the provincial districts of that bare continent of yours) - well if you are sure it's not you BoG (and I stll have my suspicions) perhaps that outfit is some form of Swedish national costume - I think we should be told...I think ElC is Swedish Giano | talk 21:02, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Makes sense... Sweden is known for cheese, right? Elsie the cow. Elsie the goatherd? Possibly. KillerChihuahua^?!? 21:15, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Sweden is so not known for cheese :-) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:16, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't confuse me with details, Grapes and Cheese person. We're on a roll here. KillerChihuahua^?!? 21:25, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Hot dog! No wait, that would be a dachshund. FreplySpang 21:27, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Elsie -> El C! Makes sense. As for Boss Hog, everyone remembers that song. I'm in the land of the gentrified corn grits. Interestingly, it's a place that had no southern aristocracy. Now, all the towns nearby, which have those old, distinguished families, have been erased, and this place, which was entirely too grubby back then, is triumphant. Geogre 21:18, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Is there barbecue too? looking for lunch in all the wrong places 21:26, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, they smoke the barbeque. It's how they get that way. Geogre 02:09, 9 June 2006 (UTC) (Missing the bar-b-q and Elvis genes.)

This arbitration case is closed and the final decision is published at the link above.

For the Arbitration Committee. --Tony Sidaway 21:29, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Most species with black and white fur have special traits.

(Whit Gibbons, "Not all answers are Black & White," Econoview, April 29, 2001)

Try to expand this encyclopedic list. There's only one rule, it has to be a black & white, or he can't be called that due to fur. Kitty, you're a... 1897 photo from the Andrée expedition which was retrieved from a glacier in 1930.[?] [Don't "?" me; you'll just have to read the article, won't you?]

1. Panda
2. Penguin
3. Puffin
4. Black-and-white Ruffed Lemur
5. Baird's Tapir
6. Orca
7. Badger
8. Moo-moo cow
9. Black-and-white colobus monkey
10. Black-and-white Warbler
11. Okapi
12. Indri
13. Slow loris
14. Siberian Husky
15. Canadian goose
16. Black-footed Ferret
17. Raccoon
18. Skunk
19. Antilope
20. Zebra
21. Siberian Chipmunk
22. East African Oryx
23. White-eared Bulbul
24. Toco Toucan
25. Dalmatian
26. Abyssinian Guinea Pig
27. Numbat
28. Petaurus
29. Southern Tamandua
30. Spiny rat
31. Brush-tailed porcupine
32. Pale-throated Three-toed Sloth
33. Sugar Glider
El_C 12:43, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

34. Newspaper. Geogre 13:37, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Struck out, a newspaper is not alive! El_C 23:11, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

You said there was only one rule. There seems to be another. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:13, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

34. Asian Longhorned Beetle —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:17, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Fine! 35. Nun Geogre 23:18, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

36. Minute pirate bug. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:19, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

37. Black Rat Snake - KillerChihuahua^?!? 23:20, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Now that's what I'm talking about! If we reach 100, the universe may collapse onto itself. So let's do that! El_C 23:29, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

38. Sclater's Guenon are you sure we can't just stop at 50? This is getting to be a challenge. KillerChihuahua^?!? 23:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
39. Piebald RossPatterson 02:29, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
40. Black-veined White (What's not to love about that name?)
41. Small White
42. Large White
43. Zebra Swallowtail Butterfly —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:38, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

44. Absolute truth.
45. Oreo. (Oreos are the stuff of life.) Geogre 03:41, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
46. Relativity (M. C. Escher) Bishonen | talk 05:47, 10 June 2006 (UTC).
47. A Polar Bear smoking a licorice pipe (Hello, Kitty!) Bishonen | talk 06:01, 10 June 2006 (UTC).

Hello! Kitty 07:09, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

48. Magpie Bishonen | talk 10:54, 10 June 2006 (UTC).

49. Mormon missionary Geogre 11:37, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

50. Referee who makes a mistaken foul call in the Sweden/Trinidad & Tobago match. Geogre 16:50, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
51. Duck tape - light on one side, dark on the other, it holds the universe together. RossPatterson 20:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
52. Tiddlywinks. Geogre 02:01, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
53. Jake
54. Elwood. ++Lar: t/c 12:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Speech

[Test, test] Who in this park, or even who in the whole world, dosen't have problems? Who dosen't have a drink too many times once in a while, and even windes up passing out in their own driveway, pissing themsleves? Heuh? I mean, seriously. Or who dosen't have a little pot from time to time? Or who dosen't have problems with the people they love? Randy. Everybody. Now, I apologize for my neglect of the things that are most important to me. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Because this park, it's the most important thing in my life and it always will be, and so are all of you. Because this is our home; this is our community! I am Jim Lahey, and I am your trailer park supervisor. Thanks, for coming, Randy, everybody. El_C 03:42, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I got the PEPP. See Areopagus (poetry), sole reference for what I mean. Or, since I know you've been wondering since we spoke, you can see Anacoluthon, which Wikipedia had a (bad, inaccurate, novels-only) article on before. Geogre 13:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Of course I have. Cool stub! Any expansion planned? Bishonen | talk 14:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC).

Umm, which one? I could expand the Areopagus by discussing the particular prosodic innovations of the group, but, because it's one of those critical retrospect terms rather than an actual, demonstrable movement, I feel a bit funny doing so. However, I clicked on one of the poet members I'd never heard of before -- complete 1911 dump, of course -- and it was quite sure that there was a 'movement' (but the 1911 was sure of everything). I think PEPP is a bit more cautious. Geogre 15:48, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I found, for example, that the dude Spenser wrote to got really ticked off when Spenser beat him to creating the hexameter. He wanted to be The guy who invented it, and he got all huffy that Spenser got credit. :-) Geogre 15:54, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I was thinking Areopagus (poetry), but I've had a better idea: expand Fourteener to a Featured article. Bishonen | talk 18:26, 9 June 2006 (UTC).

Holy smokes, that's bad. Why would someone write an "article" like that. "A fourteener is a kind of poem." I suppose it's not really that bad, but there is much more to say (Spenser, e.g.). Ok, I'll look into that one. No FA in the future, though, or at least not by my efforts. Geogre 20:10, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

You may incidentally fall down and worship, and the rest of the rabble too, for I am the only person who has the right connections to make an ArbCom case viable. Beware of annoying popular wiki-personality! Gracious acknowledgements to User:KillerChihuahua for drawing Our attention to these accolades. Bishonen | talk 10:57, 10 June 2006 (UTC).

We also serve who merely read and type. KillerChihuahua^?!? 01:40, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Speak for yourself. I'm more served than serving. Just ask my solicitors. Geogre 02:04, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

It's the usual mix, alright. What is interesting, at least to me, is, of course, me. I note that we are the connected to in such a description. It reminds me of E. M. Forster's epigram to Howard's End: "Only connect." (Yes, there is a darker subtext to the "connections" comment. What's implied, among other things, is what I had alledged, and what you had alledged -- that most of those doing battle with SS were wiki-young who didn't know the rules or methods of the project, that most experienced (read "connected") folks simply ran a long distance from an SS-owned article. There was a sanitary cordon around SS, or, for American college football fans, a 'halo'.) Geogre 11:36, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Similar to the "ring" noticed around Penicillium on a petri dish. KillerChihuahua^?!? 17:46, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

That little "piece of work" was left by an anon. Grimace, Insertions Apparently Need Oversight... I have no idea who it was, though I have my guesses. Gee, I Am Not Obscure. ++t/c 15:06, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Odd that you mention that. The history on my page says that someone named Gino left one on my page. I knew lots of guys named Gino in da Branx, and a few girls named Gina, so I figured it was one of them. Geogre 15:38, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Had I not broken my ankle at a young age it is likely it would be me receiving your applause an admirations Captain of Italia - so please do not mock - you will feel very stupid ultimatly. This evening in Hanover (8.00 pm GMT most radio stations) Italia will score the first glorious victory of its untoppable route to the cup. Giano | talk 08:13, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

PS: Was it 1994 (twelve years ago - or longer?) that Sweden last acheived a possition in the knockout. I forget what that placing exactly was - perhaps you could remind us Lar?. Warmest regards Giano | talk 08:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, a few things, first mea culpa for not actually bothering to check the history to see who left the calling card, er flag, and just assuming it was a regular contributor here, and jumping to the obvious identification. My bad. Second, your bragadaccio is noted, Giano, it's part of your "charm" to be so boastfully overblown. Captain of the waterboys would be more likely, in my view... Third, I have no idea about Sweden's performance in the World Cup, I barely even am aware of how the US, my home country, does (other than to characterise it as generally badly but roughly trending upwards?? I think??), as my primary interest is in witty repartee rather than sports, but someone who cared more could certainly look it up if so desired. Perhaps the relevance of Sweden could be explained, though? Were you jumping to conclusions too? (now THAT would be an interesting olympic sport!) I do wish Italia all the best though. ++Lar: t/c 12:05, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

• Primary interest witty repartèe (note the accent!)? What on earth are you called Lars for if you're not Swedish, let me just tell you Swedes are called Lars, Americans are called Hank, Marvin or Junior or if they are very unfortunate "George W". Does BoG (who is from Idaho) call himself Juan, Alberto or Bederich? - No he does not! So Please resprect your national naming conventions. Giano | talk 13:26, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

• Silly Italian comedian, it's "Lar" not "Lars"... short for Larry, which is a very American name (although I admit my last name of Pieniazek is more Polish than anything else). I KNOW I'm American since I had a cheerleader living with me this school year. Let's see you top THAT bit of misdirection. Oh, and finally I would hasten to point out that well developed muscles are a very useful thing for a woman to have. Not something you'd know though, I guess... ++Lar: t/c 21:18, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

You can't be called just Larry, surely it's Lorenzo Giano | talk 21:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, I WOULD be if I was Italian, or Sicilian (my wife is 3/8 Sicilian and 1/8 non Sicilian Italian) but I'm Polish-German so no, it's just Lawrence. Nice dodge of the other parts of my remarks, by the way... ++Lar: t/c 21:53, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

You know, before I hurt my knee, I was an excellent dancer. I'll bet Giano is just upset that there isn't a Sicily team. (We'll see how the Women's World Cup goes, eh? Taking bets now.) (Even without Mia, we're going to kick tail.) (Lar, we're ugly Americans so much of the time in world sports (how embarassed are you when yahoo crowds begin chanting "USA! USA!" -- I know I cringe? We can certainly afford to be appropriately taunted. On behalf of our nation, we've got it coming.) Geogre 12:15, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Speak for yourself Geogre... I'm not an ugly American, I'm actually rather dashing and suave. Ok, maybe not actually suave, or all that dashing either, but compared to Giano we're not talking a very high bar are we? ++Lar: t/c 21:53, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

• Well...you did invent those fresh faced girls with nice hair, odd outfits (not Armani) and toothpaste advert smiles who wave their poms poms and other bits about while shouting and singing little ditties, which must be enormously encouraging. In the meantime Forza Italia. Giano | talk 13:26, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, we did invent them, and we even convinced young women to compete for the priviledge of becoming cheerleaders! However, we'll see how the Italian women's team measures up against the Americans, eh? Care to lay a little wager? Geogre 15:16, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Glad I didn't take Giano's bait and try to hoot-hoot for the American side. (2-0 Czechs at this point.) Geogre 17:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

• Only a fool ever rises to my bait Geogre! I'm sure the American "Ladies" will do very well indeed. However, we (how can I delicatly put this?) in the cradle of civilization prefer our women less well developed in the muscular department! - all that leaping about waving their thingies shouting "oggie oggie troggie" or whatever it is they shout - develops very nasty thighs! Talking of petite, delicatly formed and feminine women, where is our beauteous hostess? - surely not out on the terraces screaming for Sweden Giano | talk 18:42, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

PS: It starts in 12 minutes, have we all - been to the loo?, got our flags ready? beers in hand, right off we go - Forza Italia (I'll be back with the score later) Giano | talk 18:51, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Me? Er, this is about watching... basketball, was it? Sure, sure, in a minute. Bishonen | talk 19:35, 12 June 2006 (UTC).

Oh just think Bishonen you can hold a world cup party just like the Beckhams did!!! Giano | talk 20:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I know! Giano can maybe add a score ticker to the In The News section of the main page... that should go over well. (snort!) ++Lar: t/c 21:53, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I wish you hadn't unprotected the page, it needs to be permanenty protected from anonymous editors. Hang out for a while, you'll see.George 22:55, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Protection, even semi-protection, is never permanent.--Sean Black 23:07, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Right. Replied on George m's page. Bishonen | talk 23:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC).

I see that now. But, when did you expect me to do my research before commenting? :)--Sean Black 23:15, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Or to hop in your time machine? Check out the timestamps: there was nothing to research. :-) Bishonen | talk 23:17, 10 June 2006 (UTC).

Yes, I was just whining. Sorry if I wasted your time.:p)George 00:01, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

It's so confusing with these people who misspell Geogre. Geogre 02:02, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Any pack of rouge admins worth its salt would block the imposter account. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:56, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Which one? ++Lar: t/c 04:07, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I'll be hornswoggled; we have to block Geogre! George was here a month before him, September 2003 to Geogre's November. Sorry, Geogre, but you understand the rules are the rules. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:14, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I am the original me. Trust me, no one would want to imitate me, and, if I'm imitating anyone else, I'm doing a cruddy job of it. I was an IP editor for months before I had an account (afraid of being spammed). We'll have to see how long the IP contributions go. Geogre 12:22, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

This sort of wikilawyering isn't going to get you out of it! The important moment in time for impersonation purposes is when you created the account, of course, not when you started editing as an IP. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:55, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm an Admin! I am untouchable! I note that the cabal of anti-me editors you have constructed all have "C's" in their account names! Geogre 18:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

George was right; I'm getting tired of rolling back. I won't re-protect yet, but please reconsider. --Spangineer^[es] (háblame) 05:39, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

We should just force Geogre to change his name to Geogre, not George m. What's fair is faire. cccccccccccccccccccccccccc El_C 08:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Possibly un/related: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#User:C-c-c-c. El_C 09:09, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I am a member of the Cabal! I cannot be defrocked!.... Wait. There's a "c" in "Cabal," but there is a "c" in "cannot." That's the third letter. That's March. March 3. We who know, know, you know. Geogre 12:11, 12 June 2006 (UTC) (Classic Geogre)

Thanks for unprotecting it. It was only a day's worth of vandalism, but I think it flew under the radar that it was supposed to get unprotected. joshbuddy^talk 04:22, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Opinions on my unprotecting the article seem to vary quite drastically, above. Having reviewed the recent History, I have to say that the situation we're in with regard to AOL anons — who are basically unblockable — is more than a little absurd. There seems to be a bit of a break right now, but if another spate of hair-raisingly POV AOL edits starts up, I invite any admin to semiprotect again. If I'm around, I'll do it myself. Bishonen | talk 17:51, 11 June 2006 (UTC).

Hello! This diff and this block gave me a good chuckle. I award you (your second) comedy gold prize! You should do stand-up. -- getcrunkjuice^contribs 02:05, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Heh! My favourite kind of award! :-) Thanks, Crunkster! Bishonen | talk 02:19, 13 June 2006 (UTC).

No problem, your majesty! -- getcrunkjuice 23:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

William Duncombe presents an interesting rationale. I've watchlisted the most current controversy, BTW. I also did David Durand today, but it's so slight as to have been hardly worth the bother. The thing about Duncombe, though, is that his son married Susanna Highmore's daughter, and the daughter was a poet like the mother. Unlike the mother, though, she published more than two poems. (Why the DNB had an article on the mother, I don't know. Why I bothered to take notes on it and make an article here, I'm still wondering. "Woman poet 18th century" was about the only thing I could come up with in either case.) Geogre 03:22, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Tried to comment three times now, but various people are blocking the entire AOL range, and getting the refresh to dump the cache is nearly impossible. Geogre 00:00, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Errr...yeah. How do I list the references in different areas but make it so that it doesn't show up as there being 15 references when there are only 4? Kschwerdt514 04:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm... yep. If you simply use the <ref></ref>tags, as you've done, you'll get a new footnote every time. To only list each reference once, copy the way the notes are done in Simon Byrne. Take a look at note 1, and see how the abcde business works when you click between the note numerals in the text and the reference at the bottom. Then open the article in edit mode and see how these notes are coded in the text. You see how the first of them (a) has the complete information, while the others (bcde) only have the "name"? The name for footnote 1 is "Svinth". To use this system, you need to invent a unique name for each of your 4 footnote numbers. (The a's and b's will be added automatically, don't write them anywhere.) Hope this helps. It's the most usual system, so it's the way to do it if you want to join the majority. (It's not the system I like or use myself, as it happens; I prefer to have the footnote numbers nicely ordered in the text and avoid the abcde mess, by making one footnote section plus one separate references section at the bottom, as in S. A. Andree's Arctic balloon expedition of 1897. But I'm in a minority.) Bishonen | talk 05:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC).

But unlike last month, I am virtually unscathed. Too dangerous. Therefore, here is a new picture of kitty. Now you may comfort me. Alively yours, El_C 10:00, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

OMG, it's Ceiling Cat, scary! Take care of yourself and watch the tulips! Bishonen | talk 10:10, 14 June 2006 (UTC).

Tulips, is there anything they can't do? But he's not actually ceilinging (nor was I mustarbating —at that that exact nanosecond in which photons were emitted from the flash!), he's actually looking up towards door knob, whilst in "wanting to got outside" mode. I just flipped the immage for optical special FX illusioninging! El_C 11:25, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Do you know what Image:OpticalIllusion is? El_C 11:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Yeah you're right - I just felt it'd be a good featured article since it was fairly detailed. My bad - NicAgent 17:44, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

It seems that my talk page always opens with you saying "hi". I kind of like it, really. —Theo (Talk) 20:14, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Bish, much like Raul654, sees all. Bishonen | talk 20:30, 14 June 2006 (UTC).

There is simply no more escaping the ceiling cat, is there? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:42, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

You might want to check out the "Contacting ISPS" (sic) header on wp:an/i. One of those "I don't care what our guidelines say, I wanna block a whole ISP" rampages is going on. Geogre 02:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I've just replied to your mail, if you do copy-edit that for me, there is still along way to go, and I'll probably change quite a bit and then condense it down, there is quite a bit or repetition too - what do you think of the fotos? - not bad for some-one who just points the thing and presses the button are they? I found the house looking for BoG's Barton in the Beans (Fuck knows where that is, I couldn't find it!) I think it may be close by, it's the same motorway exit anyway - BoG will have to come over and find it himself! Love Giano | talk 10:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Can't copyedit right now, sorry, I'm just going out myself. Even the photos will have to keep. I can take a look later today if you tell me when. Did you even find the beans themselves? Bishonen | talk 10:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC).

No found Belton and was sidetracked. Giano | talk 12:20, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. My reply is here. - Corbin ^{Be excellent} 05:39, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought twice before rolling back. I missed your comment to Kimchi.sg though... I kinda figured that if Tijuana really wanted to keep them, he'll roll back my edit himself. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 09:14, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to be uncivil, by the way. I didn't want to take ANY chances, because I didn't hear anything directly from Tijuana about keeping the dwarves' vandalism. I admit I probably should've used an edit summary too though. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 14:44, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

's all good. Bishonen | talk 16:57, 16 June 2006 (UTC).

Thanks for pointing out. I did not realize it's archived; someone made an edit today, so when I looked at the page it occured to me to add a thought to my own comment there. Apcbg 09:34, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I've stricken out the relevant comments on ANI. Sorry for the mixup.Timothy Usher 01:35, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Bishonen | talk 01:40, 17 June 2006 (UTC).

Hi, would you please tell me why it is ok for Bonafide.hustla to remove warnings from his talk page [7] but for me it is not ok [8]. If it is ok to remove warnings why is it not a violation of WP:VANDAL?

"Talk page vandalism

Deleting the comments of other users from article Talk pages, or deleting entire sections thereof, is generally considered vandalism. Removing personal attacks is often considered legitimate, and it is considered acceptable to archive an overly long Talk page to a separate file and then remove the text from the main Talk page. The above does not apply to the user's own Talk page, where users generally are permitted to remove and archive comments at their discretion, except in cases of warnings, which they are generally prohibited from removing, especially where the intention of the removal is to mislead other editors."

I hope you can see the contradiction here. Additionally, if the warnings are justified, then what makes them being posted by me any less valid then an Admin posting them? I was personally attacked by a user in an RfA and no Admin took any action. In an effort to prevent additional attacks, I placed the warning template prepared by the Wikipedia Community. Please note the hypocrisy, because if an Admin was attacked and their warning was removed twice, they would have blocked this user. I look forward to all this being cleared up, because they tags are valid, and from as far as I can see on the VANDAL policy page, they should remain because deleting them simply serves to mislead other editors. Do I have this wrong? If I don't I would appreciate if you would put them back because right now this user mistakingly thinks their attack posts to me are just fine. The first time they personally attacked me an Admin removed the warnings despite another Admin saying they were justifiable. Perhaps that is why they attacked me again and again. Thank you. PoolGuy 04:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi, PoolGuy, I understand it's confusing. That text you quote isn't in any of the pages you link to — I'm not sure where it comes from. Is it Wikipedia:Removing warnings? If so, or in any case, please see the top of that page, to see that the whole issue is contested and contradictory. See all those links to policy pages, and especially the comments on them? Also please note that the bit you quote has in the past said "which they are generally discouraged from removing" —discouraged, not prohibited — and right now actually says "discouraged/prohibited"! The page changes rapidly, it's only a proposal: not a policy or guideline. Anyway. The central point for you to be concerned with, I suggest, isn't really whether BH's behavior is proper, but whether yours is. That's the only thing you have control over and for that, I might refer you to Wikipedia:Talk pages#Etiquette (a guideline): "...However, reverting such removals or redirects is not proper and may result in a block for edit warring. If someone removes your comments without answering, consider moving on or dispute resolution. This is especially true for vandalism warnings." In the final analysis, PoolGuy, please just use common sense. Wikipedia is not a system of law. Take a look at the history tab for BH's talkpage. Surely you can see the guy's being harassed, and by whom? Please rethink your role in this. Bishonen | talk 10:26, 20 June 2006 (UTC).

Thank you for trying to clear it up. Perhaps my comments will assist in making this clear for us both. First, the quoted section I used was from the official Wikipedia policy of WP:VANDAL. It is fourth from the bottom of WP:VANDAL#Types_of_vandalism. In this policy the key phrase appears to be "remove and archive comments". The conjunction used stipulates that two actions are generally permitted, the removal 'and' the archiving. It is not the removal 'or' the archiving. In this instance there is removal without any archiving, which on its face appears contrary to the spirit of the section.

Second, "in cases of warnings, which they are generally prohibited from removing" the section is modified with a more stringent criteria. The higher criteria appears because the removal of warnings serves to mislead others, and the removal then constitutes vandalism.

Third, while you have tried to reference the proposed Wikipedia:Removing_warnings, by my read you have even mischaracterized its intent. I understand that reaching concensus is still underway with that proposed policy, however its spirit mirrors what is actual official policy in WP:VANDAL. Please read this quote from the page.

"Removing warnings

Removing warnings for vandalism from one's talk page is also considered vandalism. However, after a reasonable time has elapsed, archiving one's talk page, including the vandal warning, is acceptable. Editors may be subject to a minor block for archiving prematurely so as to hide warnings."

It clearly proposes that removing the warnings is vandalism. It goes on to suggest there are some instances where archival would be acceptable. In this case we are dealing with a user who is simply deleting, not archiving. It goes on to state:

"Furthermore WP:VAND states: Removing warnings, whether for vandalism or other forms of prohibited/discouraged behavior, from one's talk page is also considered vandalism. It is generally acceptable to remove misplaced vandalism tags, as long as the reasoning is solid."

This part of the proposal indicates if the tags are misplaced, then with established reasoning, the tags can be removed.

Bonafide.hustla has not provided solid reasoning, nor have the comments been archived. Based upon the spirit of both WP:VANDAL and Wikipedia:Removing_warnings, this is the action of vandalism.

I am disappointed that you are suggesting that I am edit warring. First and foremost, Bonafide.hustla is the one who found targeted and personally attacked me without me ever talking to him. I am the one who has been pursued, and would sincerely appreciate if an Admin would actually do something to discourage his behavior. Bonafide.hustla personally attacked me [9], I placed an NPA tag on their talk page [10] which was subsequently removed by an Admin [11]. (As an aside, this Admin has been pursuing me and taking baseless administrative action against me since March. They follow me where I post, and try to influence other Admins to work against me. The RfA that they started against me is about to conclude [12] and the ArbCom has resoundingly shown that I truly did not not violate policy warranting their Administrative pursuit. The Admin has continued to pursue me and their actions are the underlying cause for Bonafide.hustla attacking me initially then continuing to attack me.) I attempted to restore the tag [13], however the Admin continued to remove it [14] despite support from another Admin relative to its validity [15]. I would like to state that the action of this Admin has caused this user to think that it is perfectly alright to personally attack me. In fact, after this, they inserted themself into my RfA despite their only interaction with me was to personally attack me. When I refuted their evidence in the RfA they attack me again [16] and again [17] in an RfA, and no Admin assists with warning this user. Considering the lack of Admin support, and even encouragement, I hope you can appreciate why I must tag this user for their violations.

Your implication that I am edit warring would suggest that I have simply been adding tags and not engaging in any dialogue. I have initiated and participated in discussion attempting to get additional support regarding this users attacks on me [18] [19] [20] [21] [22]. In each of these instances where this has advanced the Admin in question has tried to turn other Admins against me, and the result has remained that there has been support for the tags placement. The only thing that is missing is an Admin actually taking action to warn Bonafide.hustla that their comments are not appropriate for Wikipedia.

You suggest that since Bonafide.hustla has obviously read the warnings, that is sufficient. I don't agree. On ANI [23] Bonafide.hustla states that he thinks the tags are not justified. Your action of removing my valid tags [24], even after another Admin warned him about his vandalism [25] will only serve to make Bonafide.hustla think it is ok to continue to attack me and other users. I ask that you appreciate the history of this, read and understand the spirit of WP:VANDAL#Types_of_vandalism and restore the tags and explain to Bonafide.hustla whay he should not attack other users. I must stress that your removal of those tags implies to Bonafide.hustla that they are invalid, and he is free to continue attacking me. Your discussion with me about my action is fine, but removing valid tags completely undermines what Bonafide.hustla should learn.

I understand that you think I should be responsible for myself and I believe that is what I have to do. Absent action from Admins (and even their pursuit of me and facilitation of this user personally attacking me) I must act to enforce Wikipedia policy (without authority to block I can only post). I would really appreciate it if you would do so in your role as an Admin, rather than threatening to block me (to me it seems absurd that as the one who was attacked the only threat of block comes to me). Your assistance would truly help. Thank you. PoolGuy 05:47, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

PoolGuy, the reason I'm giving you a block warning for talkpage harassment is simply the look of BH's page history tab. I hope you took a look at it, as I suggested. I'm sorry if you feel this is unfair, but I stand by it. Look: your warnings aren't vandalism warnings (and thank you for that, as they shouldn't be). They're about civility and personal attacks, a field that is absolutely notorious for being subjective and debatable, so they're by no means automatically "valid warnings" even though you posted them in good faith. Please take a look at the talkpage of WP:VANDAL if you want to see how problematic the whole thing is considered to be. There's a lot of food for thought on that page. If you'd rather insist on the (ever-changing and highly contested) letter of the the law, I think you will still agree that a sentence formulated like this is no iron-clad rule: "The above does not apply to the user's own Talk page, where users generally are permitted to remove and archive comments at their discretion, except in cases of warnings, which they are generally prohibited from removing, especially where the intention of the removal is to mislead other editors." They are generally (=not under all circumstances) prohibited from removing warnings, especially where the intention is to mislead'. "Generally" means "not always", and "especially" again emphasizes "not always". Personally, I find the most natural reading, of the "intention to mislead" bit to be that it applies to anonymous silly-kid vandals removing incontestable and self-evidently true warnings about vandalism--you know, not warnings about being in somebody's (inevitably subjective) opinion incivil, but warnings about inserting "RYAN IS SO GAY LOLZ" on article pages. Anyway, there is nothing ironclad about the rule you quote, it's rather formulated as an encouragement to use common sense, which I would again exhort you to heed. Bishonen | talk 14:16, 21 June 2006 (UTC).

P. S. I have added a comment on your RFAr workshop page. Bishonen | talk 14:30, 21 June 2006 (UTC).

I am extremely disappointed in your statements. In short, a user attacked me, I felt attacked, no Admin took action, I placed tags expressing what I thought was valid and other Admins even agreed with. The user and an Admin removed the tags saying that the warnings are not justified. I was attacked twice more with no Admin action. I try to warn again, with the same response, Admin support, but the user and Admin still claim it is not justified and basically say I can be called a d!ck and told to get a life all they want. Now you come in to threaten blocking me because of your confusion regarding an official wikipedia policy. You don't like how his talk page history looks and you conveniently ignore all of the context surrounding the user's actions. If you ignore it, I ignore it, and another Admin encourages it, this user will do it again... disappointing.

While I am disappointed, I will leave it be, but if I am attacked again, I will not ignore it, and I will post a tag again, and I will await you blocking me because I was attacked. That has no common sense, but I will go along with it since you can block me and I am now told that the policy is not iron-clad but simply a policy developed by concensus that Admins can ignore at will.

Since you have told me warnings can be removed, I will remove the warnings against me. Thanks.

PS, I also think your post to my RfAr was in extremely poor form, because it has absolutely no relevance to what it was about. It looks like you are somehow just trying to smear me like Admin Nlu. Thanks for your help. PoolGuy 03:13, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you all for your kind copy-edits and attacks on my foot-note system, yes it is a pity there are only four ref books (actually realy three, as one was only something unconnected) which will cause some-one to comment on FAC: "not enough references". While I appreciate yoor efforts (Paul - I can't actually see what you have done!) could I just point out the page is nt in fact finished, it has yet to have its section titled "Abdication and the broken heart" This will be a very moving and poignant section in which Lord Brownlow drives the Duchess of Windsor away from Belton and the King to France, with her soft tears echoing in his heart! Namely he has a broken heart because he has just realised he has backed the wrong side and knows he is about to be hacked up by the new Queen, who was at that time not a cuddly old granny, but when thwarted, a very unpleaseant piece of work. So you see there is a lot of murder and mayhem yet to come in this exiting page. Oh, and yes Ok Kinsman! hahahah very funny, you lot should be on TV! Giano | talk 09:38, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Efforts, is it? OK, copyedit it yourself. Bishonen | talk 09:45, 17 June 2006 (UTC).

Well if you are going to be like that!....I shall shortly be going to Japan and never ever ever returning! - so there! Giano | talk 09:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

You think you're Queen Elizabeth or something? Bishonen | talk 09:54, 17 June 2006 (UTC).

No, but I wish could could chop someone's head off - jusyt look at this Wikipedia:Peer review/Neo-Renaissance/archive1 Ghirlandajo and I have been working on it for ages, it is far from finished, but may have been an Fa one day, and suddenly look...........bloody cheek! You wopuld think they could mention it to two obvious primary authors first! Giano | talk 10:11, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

So very nice to see that peer review is now being taken over by a javascript program! It's about time! Human beings are only a hair's breadth from monkeys, you know: would you trust a chimp to give feedback on your writing? No! Give me pure, sterile code any day. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:15, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I thought that was nice, too. People are talking to the script. "Please, ScriptMaster, accept these changes as a token of our esteem." It's absolutely flippin' nuts. (And, with compromise, we find ourselves compromised.) Geogre 17:33, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

• What do you mean javascript? who made those dumb comments? and how do I ind out who put it there, I won't be insulted by a robot, No I wil not. Giano | talk 18:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

• User:AndyZ's comments were generated by User:AndyZ/peerreviewer.js, a pile of code. Cool, huh? I bet you want to give him a big hug, Giano, for helping out so much! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:31, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

• I can't cope with this, my life is in ruins, I go to very expensive bookshops buy out of print book thus depriving my children of food and education. Sit up in bed reading them half the night (thus depriving my wife of tea bags or whatever) then write my beautiful pages - for what?.......A fucking robot to read. No, you lot do not exist you are all figments of my imagination. OK my first dry week-end is about to end, I'm off for a few drinks teabag the wife and beat the kids! Giano | talk 18:58, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

And then little USA tied Italy in soccer, and you guys were trying to win the approval of a robot. Oh, I'm with Bunchofgrapes: there is something incalculably lovely about a javascript robot giving peer review notes. It's exactly where a certain segment of Wikipedia wants to go: potato mashers and sieves and Procrustean beds -- things that can't be argued because they don't need reading because they're just filling out forms in a particular way. Geogre 21:05, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

• Can't we build our own robot? - I've several small tasks in mind for it already! Giano | talk 21:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Giano my edits are invisible and can only be seen using special browser code. They all make fun of Italian football and your manhood. By the way I've sent copies of the code to all your female admirers Bish, Freply, every women in Japan … and several others. Regards Paul August ☎ 15:35, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Are you saying that Giano can't teabag? (I heard the term in a John Waters film, and it referred specifically to doing a particular thing while wearing Y-front briefs. I wonder if I should put a "disputed" tag on the page?) Geogre 17:33, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

• No Giano can't teabag, and Y-front briefs are surely only worn by nerdy Brits whose parents hate them by giving them daft names. As for the code Paul, I'm sure there is a Lady in Japan waiting just for you, would you like me to notify her of your existence? - NO!, I thought not. So you know what you can do with your code - don't you? Is it the fact you are going to loose to us in the footie realy hurts? - You surely don't immagine I would rub it in and mention it at every opportunity for the next four years do you? Giano | talk 18:24, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Geogre, to know what I'm "saying", you will have to see if Bish will loan you the code. And no, there is absolutely no relationship between the size of my edits, or the need for a magnifying glass, and Giano's manhood — none whatsoever. Paul August ☎ 19:51, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I can't even do Sodoku, so I have no hope of spotting the number patterns in a reference section. (The real reason I don't like footnotes: I'm innumerate!) Geogre 03:27, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I think Paul, like poor dear BoG you are becoming exitable, and should calm down, it is only natural that you should need a magnifying glass - self examination is very important in those over 50, I was only reading a very interesting poster in the doctor's waiting room the other day. You Brit's all have an (understandable) obsession with size, it must be very troubling for you all, but apparently it does not matter in the least (if you beleive that you will beleive anything). Now off you go to bed with a nice cup of cocoa. Giano | talk 20:14, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Cup of tea, I think you mean... And as for Italy's um, ... showing against USA. I'm flabbergasted. What went wrong? Perhaps they should have had you on the team after all? I hear you have the balls... ++Lar: t/c 21:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

It was an ugly game all the way around, but the USA did better than I expected. There was a huge difference in the game, in the US, depending upon whether you listened to satellite radio with broadcasters who follow all soccer all the time or the stupid TV people who appeared to think it was a baseball game. To say that they were out of their depth was an understatement. While radio complained about ticky fouls getting called early, they thought the redcard was well deserved (an elbow to the eyesocket of the guy who just scored on you). The TV people thought that there weren't any fouls being called and that all the yellow and red cards were just the refs messing things up. American television: the next best thing to living in a cave with your ears filled with mud. Geogre 03:27, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

The inept ABC announcers liked the eye-gouging red-card (and were impressed that the ref saw it, since it was pretty quick) and they also liked the offsides call on the goal, the one that had the US coach in near-hysterics. They didn't like any of the sliding-tackle red- or yellow- cards. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:37, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm so pleased the poor American people all been given this encouragement by the kindly Italian team, what magnamanitude, I weep with pride. Meantime!.. my beautiful page - what happened overnight? - It's bad enough having to add these distracting little numbers to every verb, bit now the cite police want to fight over their bloody form - it's enough to make a ELC's cat weep. I've half a mind not to finish it properly, but add another 5000 words on the beautiful Duchess and the treacherous Lord instead Giano | talk 08:50, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

No, Giano, you continue to do the writing, and let us little minds follow behind looking for hobgoblins. Those who can do — those who can't (like me), niggle about with citation style. As for the game of footsie, we Yanks have a saying: "a tie is like kissing your sister". Paul August ☎ 14:28, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Paul - Oh dear how can I explain this, you seem a little confused - footie is a game where one kicks a ball about a field with lots of other men, footsie is an altogether different game, played likewise with the feet, but discretly under a dining room table with another man's wife. Perhaps this could be one of the problems Americans have understanding the game of "footie! - More seriously I am almost (but not quite finished now) - I wasn't refering to you as cite police, but whoever the anon was, I am now confused though, am I supposed to be putting (Jones 367) or ^[1] etc. Giano | talk 14:45, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for rolling back the person who "pestered" me on my talk page. :) Extraordinary Machine 22:56, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

My pleasure. A real nogoodnik IP, that — a school, probably. Bishonen | talk 00:23, 18 June 2006 (UTC).

File:Roy Lichtenstein House I.jpg

Er, Jobjörn? Did you click on my links on WP:ANI? Here's a couple more. Many similar threads have been archived. Bishonen | talk 23:56, 17 June 2006 (UTC).

Heh, no, I didn't, actually. I was (for some now lost reason) in a hurry and just thought I should comment on it. Thank you for clarifying :) Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 00:06, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Your talk page is crazy by the way. Kittens and italian flags everywhere. wooah. overwhelming. Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 00:08, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[Proudly] I have gotten prizes for Craziest Talkpage! But the credit goes entirely to my... friends. Bishonen | talk 00:14, 18 June 2006 (UTC).

It deserves them. I'm almost willing to say it's worthy of an inclusion in the article on Surrealism... however, something tells me that wouldn't be appreciated. Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 00:21, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Right, no self-references. Bishonen | talk 00:31, 18 June 2006 (UTC).

Exactly. Now I must be off to find an obscure image to add to your nonsensical talk page, accompanying our conversation appropriately. Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 01:09, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Scary image added. My work here is done. Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 01:11, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

It's the Lone Ranger's house on Tonto! Geogre 03:28, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, that didn't work. According to Wikipedia, a hill in Stockholm is a Japanese dagger. Geogre 03:30, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

The photo does not do this sculpture justice - it follows you around the sculture park. I recommend lunch sitting beside the large central circular fountain. One of my favourite places in D.C. -- ALoan (Talk) 14:18, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I hate it when sculptures follow me around. I always end up looking even more physically ugly when a Rodin is standing behind me, looking thoughtful or engaging in public displays of affection. I was tremendously fond of the small pond around 80th St. E. in Central Park. From there, you could see the two redtail hawks perching and pooping on rich people's apartments. Geogre 14:33, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

It's time you start taking your job as an admin seriously, "Pretty boy."

[TM talk]

Peterklutz

<sigh> Someone's mantra appears to be a series of enraged expletives. You'll never reach enlightenment through POV forks or edit warring, I'm sure. Geogre 11:47, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I just wrote Genius (literature), and I like what I done (which no one will know), because I synthesized a large amount of obscure stuff. My reference said one thing (one approach to the subject, and a good 'un), and I synthesized with what I know, and no one will know how rare that was. Anyway, it's good, but I'm afraid that it's about 55 miles above anyone's head but yours. Geogre 14:00, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

And, since it had been red, I did afflatus. I was a flautist in 4th grade, but I haven't had afflatus since I started taking charcoal pills. Geogre 03:15, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I see that you blocked RhinoRick as a sock of Israel shamir. This was probably unfair, since RhinoRick is most likely a different person named Richard Wilcox. See here. --Denis Diderot 15:45, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

1. Tanto, Stockholm that isn't a knife. (I made Tanto a dab.)
2. Swedo-Finnish Modernists ("A group of significant poets in Finland writing in Sweding during and shortly after World War I....")

Geogre 12:15, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Edith Södergran has a long article on sv (and as far as I can judge from a quick look a good one with actual references). It may be worth translating. Tanto or Tantolunden is a park on Södermalm. It's named after a person, Hans Tanto or Danto, who owned a plot there in the 17th century. It is also mentioned a couple of times in songs by Bellman. (A webpage on Tanto) up+land 12:37, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, you want more, eh? Fine: among the Swedo-Finnish Modernists listed in the Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics are:

1. Edith Södergran
2. Hagar Olsson
3. Elmer Diktonius
4. Gunnar Björling
5. Rabbe Enckell
6. Henry Parland,

and these people published in Ultra and Quosego. Their influence "can be seen in Sweden, particularly in the leading poetic modernist Gunnar Ekelöf, and in the fyrtiotalisterna (q.v.)." I don't think I'll vide at this time. Geogre 12:58, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. It is almost finished it just needs a hard prune, and re-write of the lead, It'll be a waste of time to copy-edit properly before then, as you know how I change things about, I've already hived a huge section off into a page of its own. I'm not happy with it at the moment, it's lacking an architectural essence to bring it together (don't worry, I know what I mean). Love Giano | talk 20:26, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I can't think there is much more to say about such a small house, but let me sleep on the new lead! What d'you think? Truth! Giano | talk 21:39, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Too long! Sort of... I don't know, a tad heavy? Not sunkissed? Bishonen | talk 22:32, 19 June 2006 (UTC).

Mmmmmm I'm not happy with it either, I probably would vote for it on FAC, but only because I wrote it! Problem is people don't like sunkissed, I've shortened it by shunting the beautiful Duchess and the strong limbed aristo off to a "royal watcher's" delight of their own (even the wretched man's name makes me wince, his parents must have loathed him on sight), I'll have another drastic prune. Then of course we have the cite v footnote fiasco (sorry I know you hate that word) I think the (Smith, 245) method is distracting, but the little numbers method tempt people to click away in exited anticipation, they should be reserved for thrilling and gossipy peices of information that are a little off subject, but will entertain or enlighten the reader - I jave a couple of those, but should they be muddled up with all the fact citing - poor dear Agatha Christe never had these problems with writing her exiting books. I can see the page's problems just not quite get my mind arownd them. Anyhow I must do some proper work. Adieu. Giano | talk 13:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Idiot, that was my opinion of the lead section. I thought that was what we were talking about! Bishonen | talk 13:26, 20 June 2006

(UTC).

• No I know what you are talking about, I'm talking about what I am talking about. I am thinking! Giano | talk 13:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

File:Careymusic.jpg

]

Still as cute and lithe as ever, and a little more wise. Happy birthday! (And Jonathan Swift used to read from Job 50 on his birthdays.) Have a butterfly! Geogre 02:40, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Chortle. Thank you, dear Geogre. Everyone's lithe on the Internet! Bishonen | talk 13:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC).

Aw, Puppy, how did you know I always wanted one! Bishonen | talk 10:20, 20 June 2006 (UTC).

Happy birthday. You must be pleased to finally be old enough to drink! (KIDDING, I expect our fair Bishie is a LITTLE older than that, but a gentleman never asks... ahem... and neither do I!)++Lar: t/c 13:38, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I don't know about old enough to drink, Lar. "Highschooler" and "immature" are the favorite epithets that infuriated tro... eh, unhappy users, throw at me. I'm not even sure I'm old enough to ride in a bus that psychedelic. And for your other question: ARN. Bishonen | talk 13:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC).

[[:Image:Gertjonnys-large.jpg|thumb|300px|Swedish musical superstars Gert Jonnys have turned up to celebrate your birthday. up+land 15:32, 20 June 2006 (UTC).....Que???..C'mon they are a spoof aren't they?.. they are aren't they? Giano. Studying the article... apparently, they have an internet cult following. "The members also have day jobs." :-) Bishonen....Probably a good idea Giano]]

They're all bozos on that bus!. Geogre 13:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Random Firesign Theater references are ALWAYS a good thing... so I guess I'll respond with Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right... ++Lar: t/c 14:33, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Jesus Just Left Chicago and I'm Waitin' on the Bus. (Yeah, a ZZTop reference, but a really old one.) Wasn't there a bus with a troll on it in the last episode of The Prisoner? Geogre 19:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

File:Sushi4.jpg

Happy B1FFday Bish'! How about a celebratory talk page archive? It's huge. --GraemeL ^(talk) 15:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

What can I tell you, my friends are verbose. I'll try, but archiving seems to encourage them! Bishonen | talk 15:37, 20 June 2006 (UTC).

A barren page just seems to call out for scribbles, doesn't it? And further, it is better to have verbose friends than none at all. (My talk page seems to suffer the same problem as yours, my friends are always on about how it needs archiving) ++Lar: t/c 18:51, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Happy Birthday! Raul654 15:23, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh no.. you must take Camilla with you, Your Majesty! -- getcrunk ? 18:51, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Looks crowded enough already, so I'll just give a *hug* in place of another image. Happy birthday!!! - Corbin ^{Be excellent} 19:45, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Tsk tsk, Bishie, you're aiding and abetting mopery and dopery, delinquency of the spaceways, etc... Image:Gertjonnys-large.jpg is copyright (If I looked the way they do I wouldn't want my picture widely circulated, I must say, is that a chest wig I spot on one???) , thus fair use applies, thus not eligible for talk pages, but your enormous and rabid fan club won't let niceties like that stop them! ++Lar: t/c 20:30, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Enormous and rabid???? I am neither, and I resent the personal insunuation. 1) I had my shots and 2) I'm not enormous! I'm little! So I can't fit into the jeans I wore when I was 17, that's not the same as enormous!. And don't even try to pretend this wasn't aimed at me. SFAIK, I'm the only dog posting here in the salon. Hrmph. KillerChihuahua^?!? 21:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Settle down your yappiness. It's the size of the club, not the sizes of the individual fans, for which enormous is the correct appelation. Most of us can't fit in the jeans we wore when we were seventeen (assuming we're at least 18), foam covered or no, but that's besides the point... And for the record any mammal can be rabid. ++Lar: t/c 23:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah but um, Bunch is a cluster of ... let me rephrase. We're not all mammals here. KillerChihuahua^?!? 23:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

It takes a mighty dose of rabies to make a Ge-ogre. I am a figure of great gravity, these days, as the earth seems to love me more and more and attract me ever more powerfully. Geogre 03:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Another cake from me. Enough for everbody I think. Happy Birthday. Paul August ☎ 21:22, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Mmmmmmmmmmmmm, BIG CAKE! Bishonen | talk 22:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC).

I hope it's for sharing. Happy birthday! Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 22:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh! Dearest Sam! If the ArbCom wasn't already in my pocket, you could have the WHOLE DELICIOUS THING! Bishonen | talk 23:11, 20 June 2006 (UTC).

Season's greetings, from me! El_C 09:53, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Bishonen, would you consider counseling User:His excellency to remove the remaining personal attacks from his talk page, or removing them yourself? I don't mind him quoting me (though diffs are always helpful), but his section title is personalized, inflammatory, unsupported by the material contained in this section, and, most germanely to this discussion false. Other false claims, such as the allegation of homosexuality, also remain. I removed one section, but he reverted it. Block or no block, Wikipedia should not provide a platform for false and malicious claims.Timothy Usher 00:08, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Since you're OK with the section itself — as you say, it's almost wholly made up of quotes from you — you mean will I counsel His Excellency to remove the heading "My charge that Timothy Usher is in fact a bigot", right? (Or remove it myself.) I'm afraid I won't. Sorry. You speak of that heading as if it said "Timothy Usher is in fact a bigot"; it doesn't, and I think the distinction matters. His E is discussing Tom Harrison's block reason — stating his case against it, defending himself against it, arguing that he shouldn't have been blocked for it. That's what blocked users do, at least very often they do, and I would be cautious in hamstringing anybody's self-defense; I think it's a context where latitude is necessary. I understand that you don't like the section title, I even sympathise, but I think there's a logic to it, as a description of his self-defense. I have blocked him for calling you a bigot, you know. When you speak of other false claims on His E's page, I'd like to look further before I reply to your request to have them removed. Please tell me what and where they are, especially the homosexuality allegation. I don't see them on a quick read-through, and the page is rather long. I presume you're not talking about the section you removed yourself, since that is the section with the heading "My charge..." etc, and you specify these as being other false claims. Bishonen | talk 17:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC).

I removed his "butt buddy" comment as well. Think Google, Bishonen. If you think it acceptable that my name pops up with a screaming headline calling me a bigot, preceded by "My Charge that" or not...well, think again. Anyhow, he's already thought the better of it and changed it.Timothy Usher 19:35, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

We're not responsible for Google, though, and Bishonen's right: it's his talk page, and he labelled it according to what he wanted to do. We can't take responsibility for what some postulated person might understand from a search. Those of us jealous of our real life identities use assumed names on Wikipedia, and those who use real names are, more or less, accepting that this online world is going to be irresponsible with that name. Geogre 19:41, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

It's conceivable that the office might disagree.Timothy Usher 19:48, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Feel free, by all means, to contact the Foundation. Geogre 20:42, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I am sending this message to serious contributors who may be interested in articles related to U.S. politics. I believe I am receiving an unreasonable response-- and at times insulting and rude-- from the editors of Norm Coleman article, who refuse to remove a section that may offer some interesting trivia for Wikipeidia users, but is irrelevant to people interested in reading an encyclopedia article on a member of U.S. Senate. If you have time, please take a look at the article. Regards. 172 | Talk 03:19, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Does the article (based on an obit) do him justice? Who is his aunt, Ture Rangström? -- ALoan (Talk) 13:05, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

ALoan I can't beleive you don't know who Ture Rangström, I even had you marked as a radio 3 person, now I must re-assess you. Poor old Mrs Rangström. Giano | talk 16:36, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Radio 4, particularly TMS on longwave, I am afraid. -- ALoan (Talk) 17:01, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I've just knocked off a little stub from memory, I often hum one of his catchy little numbers in the bath Giano | talk 17:02, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey, Gyllensten died? Wow, that's sad, but...on the other hand, Ture Rangström his aunt (snicker)? One thinks irresistibly of Charley's Aunt. A nationally well-known composer, yes. Well done Giano! Gyllensten needs a fuller article IMO. I'll look into it (though I fully expect Tups to get there first). Bishonen | talk 17:36, 21 June 2006 (UTC).

Yes, thanks for the stub on the aunt, Big G. (I think a machine mistranslated/misparsed "whose sister was"/"sister of"... Have you seen who wrote Charley's Aunt? ;)

There is not much more on Lars at sv:Lars Gyllensten, unfortunately. -- ALoan (Talk) 18:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. To be absolutely frank, the phrasing of the Swedish article sounds a goodish deal like it thinks Gyllensten was the sister of Ture Rangström, lol. Bishonen | talk 18:43, 21 June 2006 (UTC).

• Oh dear, how can people be so culturally ignorant, one despairs - had there been no Rangström there would have been no Abba - then where would you be on a Saturday night ALoan? Giano | talk 18:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Ignorant? Pah. Did you see my Pellegrini on the Main Page? -- ALoan (Talk) 19:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I added a link to the English version of Gyllensten's official SA bio. Now we are waiting for someone to write an article on Östen Sjöstrand. I added him to the deaths in May page). up+land 13:19, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Persuade a UK broadsheet to do an obit and I'll write him up. But sv:Östen Sjöstrand exists, although it is pretty stubby: why not translate? -- ALoan (Talk) 13:24, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

His official biopage is still up: English version. (I hope the Academy will move these to some archive rather than just deleting them from the website after the chairs have new sitters.) up+land 13:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I just finished my last exam today, so I am now back! Thank you very much for looking after my user page and also posting the relevant stuff on my arbitration; I am indebted - if there is anything you need or want doing, then just ask. :) I'll try my best, if it's not too much effort :P -- infinity0 15:06, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Noted. I'll hold you to it. ;P Bishonen | talk 19:32, 21 June 2006 (UTC).

I've just written a nice little e-mail to my disciples explaining the critical history of "genius" before the era my article discusses. I'll share it with you later, as the question is whether or not I ought to change genius (literature) to incorporate it or if that would be repeating, essentially, stuff from the articles on poetry, Plato, and Pentecost. Geogre 17:27, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

You have disciples? Acolytes too? Is tonsure required? ++Lar: t/c 21:28, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Not tonsure but tenure, not heaven but purgatory unending. We make a heaven of hell and a hell of working 4 hours a day. Geogre 22:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

No one told me it was your birthday. Many Wishes and regards. As a birthday present, go ahead and make yourself a copy of my toolbox/Wiki-links located on my User page. Martial Law 21:03, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Bishonen | talk 21:07, 21 June 2006 (UTC).

It is Belvedere (structure), the army are hiding in the trees because they were based in the park during the wars, take them out if you like, I just thought ir was nice to give them a plug! I'm like that kind, caring and thoughtful. I won't edit in case you are in there. Giano | talk 12:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I just was, but right now I'm going out for at least an hour. The Lead is fantastic now! :-) Bishonen | talk 12:55, 22 June 2006 (UTC).

What a gyp! I looked at that article, and I didn't see anything there about the owner of the place, Mr. Belvedere. He needed lots of security guards. Geogre 12:56, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Well I'm going out now too, to kick some ass - may return in a good mood about 6, on the other hand I could return in foul mood. Lead looks great! Thanks Giano | talk 13:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Would it look out of place in my pleasure gardens? -- ALoan (Talk) 13:14, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

You know, Ranelagh and the various Augustan gardens are amazingly involved subjects. One neat thing, though, is that they kind of evolved from the established habit of the mall. St. James, in particular, had become something like a pleasure garden, when it had begun just as an open space. As fashionable folks did the promenade, other people (mercantile people) showed up to entertain and furnish them. Therefore, when there were developed public spaces, they sort of settled on classical models that would match reality. Geogre 13:24, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe if you want Mr. Belvedere linked in there is a vandal that would be HAPPY to oblige you there. Some luser admin blocked him though, I think. Oh, and Giano kick ass??? I thought he's like, all gentle and stuff? Giano: does the chest wig slip off while you are asskicking? ++Lar: t/c 13:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm unlinking it. Since I am adjudged an AOLuser because of my ISP, I don't want people to think I'm a vandal and get the entire ISP blocked indefinitely. Geogre 13:20, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

No it goes on my head! Giano | talk 13:19, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

• anything for you sweetheart, love Giano | talk 17:55, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I noted that you have already warned 159.218.41.27 for repeated vandalism. They're still at it. I'd like to request that the vandal be blocked. Cheers, Kasreyn 15:05, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

OK. I've given 'em a week this time. Here's hoping there's no collateral damage, keep your fingers crossed. And thank you! Bishonen | talk 15:23, 22 June 2006 (UTC).

Yet another essay wending your way via e-mail. This is my statement of political principles. I come out firmly as a Tory. Geogre 17:58, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

In that case I'm sure you will be big fan of the seated Great Jonny who looks just like Mrs Thatcher when younger. Giano | talk 18:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Not that kind of Tory. Besides, I think they'd already started calling themselves conservatives, which is a good thing, as it separates them from their better past. I think Thatcher was the reincarnation of Walpole. In the 1720's, if you were an anti-Walpolean, you were a Tory. Geogre 20:01, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Into the breach I go, armed with nothing to say and 4 hr to say it in. Time to speak slowly and digress often. Geogre 21:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure you said it superbly. ;P. But I'm a little conflicted about your Tory essay. Bishonen | talk 06:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC).

Have nominated, thank you for all your help. I'm off to bed now, if you are staying up late, look after it for me. Giano | talk 23:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Well it looks to be going OK...so far! Good work last night. Have to pick the tools up now for a couple of hours, see you later. Giano | talk 08:51, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

so far so good, you like English lit, what do you know about pride and prejudice? Giano | talk 12:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

What was the nom? I need to go look at it and then rashly speak out against for it... As for " pride and prejudice", Giano... I'm not prejudiced against your pride! Hope that helps. PS, Italy's valiant sacrifice on behalf of USA was much appreciated but unfortunately was not enough, USA has been eliminated. Oh well. ++Lar: t/c 12:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Quibble is what I meant, but I think 'quabble' sounds so much lovelier... anyway I just attacked the ice cream truck and I'm too tired to use 'real' words. Has anyone ever raised the issue of discrimination against made-up words on Wikipedia at WikiProject:Countering Systemic Bias? RyanGerbil10 (Drop on in!) 01:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

What you got yourself there is a Neoplorgismanteau. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:39, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

quabble (n.) - a minor complaint (or quibble (q.v.)) that is half way through escalation into a major argument (or squabble (q.v.)) -- ALoan (Talk) 10:11, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you with another EE related issue. (I know you're probably just as tired of hearing it's name as everyone else is) But you're the only admin on Wikipedia I know. I'll try to make it short. (S)He "happened" upon an image I uploaded to the site and removed it along with another image claiming they didn't have fair use rationale[26]. It's obvious this is all being done to atagonize me, but his/her sthick is tired and I'm done feeding the troll, playing his/her little games to keep him/her entertained. So if you could just look at the fair use rationale, see if it passes muster and if not, suggest what I should add to it to reinclude it in the image. Thanks again!

P.S. Happy belated birthday, I'm the 21st of June, close enough. HeyNow10029 02:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi, almost-birthday twin. I wonder if we could construct a wiki birthday chain that runs a whole year round? Raul654 is June 19, so there's a three-day core already. :-) Speaking of belatedness, I'm sorry I haven't replied sooner. I would kind of prefer e-mail on this subject, rather than give Eternal Equinox any excuse to resume his/her Eternal Entertainment of jumping into my conversations with other people on this page. Have you considered fixing up your wiki mail so people can contact you that way? Bishonen | talk 18:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC).

That's actually a really neat idea! As for the other thing, e-mail would be a better way to communicate. I'll send you a basic e-mail so you'll know it's me. HeyNow10029 19:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

dear me, I missed this before. Mine is Jul 7, and I will be oldoldoldoldold darnit. KillerChihuahua^?!? 10:59, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

You have written to me four times now, and the first three included threats to block me.

Your first post to me started with the gentle "Desist immediately if you don't want to be blocked. And, yes, I have clicked on your links in the exchange immediiately above, and see nothing which justifies this kind of harassment. It doesn't make any difference if your warnings are justified"

I did try to dialogue with you and explain the situation and my understanding of the official policy as a victim of an unwarranted attack. What I got from you was threat, threat, threat. Please forgive me if I don't view block threats as speaking as one grown-up to another, appealing to a better side, or treating me with respect. They are just a standard bullying technique that appear to me to be regularly employed by some Admins.

I am a very reasonable person and very willing to dialogue, however after my treatment from other Admins, I am increasingly disenchanted with them, their disregard for the communities' policies, and frequent attempts to make up policy violations to justify their need to take administrative action. I apologize if you don't behave like this, but if you read my RfAr you can see why I am disenchanted.

What really got me with your post is that you stated that civility and personal attacks are absolutely notorious for being subjective and debatable. Your statements make it seem like you don't consider them worthy to warn other users about. Of course you threatened to block me over harassment, which is a form of a personal attack. You made a subjective call, which the user didn't even allege. To me that is quite hypocritical.

Of course the worst part is I took time to demonstrate that I felt as if I was the victim of a personal attack. That must have some validity. Yet your comments and actions make it look like the situation is somehow my fault. If the user didn't attack me three times, with the encouragement of another Admin, I would not have had to post a tag on their talk page. Given all the attention it has received, and the comments from other Admins that I was justified, why didn't someone else warn the user. He clearly does not veiw my post as legitimate, so someone should help me. By removing my post from his talk page, you helped him, not me, and I was the one he repeatedly attacked.

I hope this is clear. PoolGuy 04:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey dude,

thanks for your concern r.e. the abu saga (or as I like to call it the abu graib saga!). Basically, I just overheated a little when he systematically went through all of my edits/images to see if they were 'fair use' or not. I mean God, what a sad existence the guy must have! Jesus Christ, what a loser! I'm surprised he didn't answer my questions though, and felt the need to come crawling to 'the feds' - there was me thinking he wanted to be a cop - guess he's not cut out for it! Still I'll follow your advice and stay civil - you never know when Henry Kissinger's going to drop in do you? Twat.

Oh btw I'm being sarcastic. Megawattbulbman 15:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I know you are in on this already, but you and Geogre are the literature people, I want to do a page on a comletely fictitious building so this "User:Giano/Rosings Park" is a bit of fun and conjecture probably breaking all the rules too, do you have an opinion, Chatsworth claims it is Pemberly how do you see Rosings - Geogre I know you will see this here so I'm not spamming your page, or yours Aloan (turn that dreadful classic FM down for a moment - and listen) your'e English you must have an opinion. I think we should bear in mind if Rosings is stil standing it is probably a very badly run Prep School, my stomach and buttocks are churning at the very mention of the word - I wonder why - that is a red link - one for you ALoan Giano | talk 17:28, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

:o)

I should remember to look on the bright side of AN/I more dab (ᛏ) 21:08, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Never let the Dark Side take over. ^_^ Bishonen | talk 21:17, 23 June 2006 (UTC).

Hi Bishonen, you might not remember me well, we met a while ago. Much has changed, I am an admin now, and it is almost summer, at least in Seattle. Here is a squirt gun, a late birthday present, to be used for fun in the thaw since S. A. Andrée's Arctic balloon expedition of 1897, or for zapping vandals. Hope there are warmer climes in your next FA. DVD+ R/W 01:03, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

File:Super soaker.jpg

Thank you. I was thinking of primping up the Great Fire of London, so the gun should come in handy! Bishonen | talk 14:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC).

Wow, an inferno, timely reading and writing. Up to you it could be wikipedia's summer blockbuster. If I had access to a better library right now, I'd offer to help write about the architectural losses, and the reconstrucion. However, I am not close enough to one, and have to make do with purchases on Amazon, with a meagre budget. I could use a monograph on Christopher Wren though. Anyway, hope all is well. DVD+ R/W 19:12, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

The text has been copied. Thank you.

Cool. Bishonen | talk 14:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC).

This is last time I am telling you to leave my talk page alone with your reverts or edits. If not, I am reporting vandalism and harassment on both you and CFIF to the administrators. It is my page and if I want to leave it blank that is my permission and not yours to make. Leonard23 9:04, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

No, your talkpage is not "yours", it's a wikipedia page and subject to certain rules. This one for instance: don't remove valid vandalism warnings. Perhaps you think Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Leonard23 is yours, too? Bishonen | talk 14:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC).

By the way, you're being discussed on the adminstrators' noticeboard. You can put your side of things here if you like. Bishonen | talk 14:44, 25 June 2006 (UTC).

I think this is a WP:BITE violation. Apparently, Erwin Schwab, the user Erwinschwab (talk · contribs), is an astronomer working at the Starkenburg Observatory, and all the asteroids added by him to Wikipedia and removed as copyright violations by CambridgeBayWeather (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) were discovered by him and his colleagues at that observatory. The correct way to go about here would, I think, have been to actually {{welcome}} the user and explain that he needs to prove that he has permission to post these articles on Wikipedia or change the wording a bit. But calling it "disruption" is just extremely rude. I pointed this out to CBW (his reply). I don't want to be one of the rättshaverists complaining about rouge admins on ANI. What should one do? up+land 20:07, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

A very new user. :-( I'll be frank, Tups. I don't think you made it quite clear to CBW what your focus was, i.e. the newbie-biting, the lack of talking with the user and lack of a friendly voice explaining what the problem was. I thought you indirect. CBW seems to have taken your post as complaining that it shouldn't have been a speedy; only that, no more nor less. Yet that wasn't your point. If I were you, I would write to CBW more explicitly. Incidentally, this worried me a little. Bishonen | talk 21:00, 25 June 2006 (UTC).

I was actually hoping that CBW would realize the problem himself once I have made it clear that this was not just some teenager copying pieces of text on space thingies from a random website, but a professional astronomer posting text from a website where he is quite possibly one of the authors. With the risk of perhaps seeming aggressive, I have been more explicit about this now. up+land 03:13, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Wow, you sure do go from one extreme to the other. I hope it all works out for the best. Bishonen | talk 03:19, 26 June 2006 (UTC).

Maybe I was too blunt now, but I really don't know how to be more subtle about it. I hope he can take it without feeling bitten himself. Maybe it is all for naught anyway, as the newbie is already bitten and possibly gone for good. up+land 03:49, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

CBW took my criticism very well and has posted an apology to the user. up+land 10:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw, that worked great! :-) Bishonen | talk 11:24, 26 June 2006 (UTC).

Haha yeah, it is well put plus I'm still learning on how to talk like a wikipedians and the situation feels right. Unfortunately, it was removed by Andrew Norman. Anyway, I feel for you so I'm not gonna use it again. By the way, happy belated b-day. Peace out.--Bonafide.hustla 21:50, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Bishonen | talk 22:13, 25 June 2006 (UTC).

User:RevolverOcelotX has been repeatedly harassing me on my talkpage and often involves himself in POV edits and edit warring. Please check out his talpage and carry out sanctions if necessary. Thanks a lot.--Bonafide.hustla 01:08, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Bonafide.hustla made 3 reverts on List of Chinese Americans and Anti-Secession Law of the People's Republic of China. Furthermore, Bonafide.hustla has BROKEN the 3RR by repeatedly removing warnings from his talk page. See here for more details. --RevolverOcelotX 01:16, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

He placed the tag on my talkpage when i only made 1 edit on the article. Sorry to involve you in this. Don't worry it, I'm gonna file it to the admin noticeboard.--Bonafide.hustla 01:20, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually if you look at List of Chinese Americans and Anti-Secession Law of the People's Republic of China articles, you would see Bonafide.hustla made 3 reverts in the past 24 hours. He has also BROKEN the 3RR on his user talk page after the final warning. --RevolverOcelotX 01:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

ROX, I don't know about the articles you mention (this is my bedtime, I'm not checking anything more today), but please stop harassing BH by reverting his talkpage. The 3RR doesn't apply to him reverting his own page. If anybody's violating the 3RR on it, it's you. Please compare my warning of Poolguy (now blocked for bootless wikilawyeriing) and following dialogue with him. It's a mystery to me why people want to get dug into this kind of trench warfare over another person's talkpage; you realize, of course, that he has read your warnings, so what's your point? Do you want them kept there as a form of public humiliation? That's not what Wikipedia is about. Please use common sense. Good night all. Bishonen | talk 01:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC).

I'm not trying to harass BH by reverting his talk page. He is deleting valid warnings from his talk page which constitutes vandalism according to the policy. Currently BH is very close to breaking the 3RR on the articles mentioned above and some other articles, he has been POV pushing on many Taiwan-related articles, even an admin reverted his POV pushing here. The policy clearly states that the offender have to be warned about it before someone can report him for 3RR and that the offender is not allow to hide warnings by deleting them. --RevolverOcelotX 01:57, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

(Butting in here) Use Common Sense!!!! You have warned him. He can be blocked for 3RR on an article whether or not the warning stays on his page. Don't worry so much about what he does with his own talk page. Fighting over that is just antagonistic. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Bunch, my sentiments exactly. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Bishonen | talk 02:04, 26 June 2006 (UTC).

Ok, I'm not going to fight over his talk page and re-add the warnings to his user talk page anymore, but I thought that removing warnings on one's own user talk page is considered vandalism.

The policy from Wikipedia:Vandalism states that:

"The above does not apply to the user's own Talk page, where users generally are permitted to remove and archive comments at their discretion, except in cases of warnings, which they are generally prohibited from removing, especially where the intention of the removal is to mislead other editors." --RevolverOcelotX 02:11, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Look, I went through all that with PoolGuy, who gave me the very same quotes, probably with the same triumphant bolding. I asked you in my first post above to please review my dialogue with him, and linked to the first post. It doesn't look like you have. Bishonen | talk 03:28, 26 June 2006 (UTC).

Hey Bishonen, How's it going? Anyway, I logged in today on wiki and noticed I was blocked for 24 hrs for the issue discussed above. I hope you can look into this situation and possibly wipe clean my record since I saw no violation myself. I also has a list of finding of facts on my own talkpage. Thanks a lot. :)--Bonafide.hustla 23:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I saw the block notice on your page and meant to look into it, but a 3RR is kind of hopeless if you don't know what page it's about. I've asked the blocking admin about it now. I'm assuming it wasn't your talkpage. Bishonen | talk 00:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC).

Thanks sooo much--Bonafide.hustla 04:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

But I did think your third entry in the race might be the winner, yeah. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:31, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Jag måste be om ursäkt för det sjukt dåliga klimatet på svenska Wikipedia. Det finns vissa som tror att Wikin är till för reglerna och inte tvärtom och kan inte förstå, hur många gånger jag än upprepar det, att man måste använda sin känsla för vad som är bäst för Wikipedia och inte blint följa reglerna. Ett bra exempel är ju att man ska vara vänlig och förstående mot andra användare. Jag ber återigen om ursäkt. /Grön ^sv 09:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! You've restored my faith in (Swedish) humanity. :-) Remarkable how fast the "I-don't-make-the-rules" "rule" disappeared when I asked for a link to it, I thought. Best, Bishonen | talk 09:26, 26 June 2006 (UTC).

Yes, altough the Swedish Wikipedia is quite big we haven't grown away from our infantile disorders. Stubdesises going wild and that we let people who behave badly continue to far and let them spreed this bad mood over the Wiki, and since we stil are so few, this bad influences in many cases dominates. /Grön ^sv 09:44, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

It was the same way when I registered there two years ago. I wonder if the Swedish Wikipedia will ever outgrow its problems, especially as they seem to be self-perpetuating. I concluded some time ago that Sweden is just too small and that the Swedish Wikipedia will probably never get the critical mass needed to create an encyclopedia according to this model. up+land 10:12, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Have you seen this article: "Can History be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past", by Roy Rosenzweig (no, still a red link), Professor of History and New Media at George Mason University. Quite interesting, especially the point he makes about the "factualist" approach to history common in Wikipedia. up+land 10:12, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, and I agree that it is inappropriate to continue a content dispute on an RFA page, which is why I'll refrain from replying to him there again. The one thing I'm worried about is that I might cause this situation to "explode", as I'm aware of the history behind these Ashlee Simpson articles and I don't want the situation to escalate like it did before. Thanks again. Extraordinary Machine 13:22, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Dearest Bishonen (and hangers-on) - I should be most gratified if you would accompany me to afternoon tea in my boudoir.

(Which is to say, I am sure that someone hereabouts must be able to expand my most recent execrable stub. But I am also rather fond of another effort of today, Anthony Marreco, who sounds like he had much more interesting time than most of the people whose biographies I have written up from their obituaries recently.) -- ALoan (Talk) 21:22, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

/me tries to look up "Boudoir" in the OED, am utterly distracted by learning that the OED now has "featured additions". Latest FA is "yada yada". :-) Bishonen | talk 22:17, 26 June 2006 (UTC).

Wait a minute, pout ? It comes from the French word for "pout"? WTF? (The very thought of boudoirs makes me go aristocratically outspoken and say fuck on public pages.) Bishonen | talk 22:21, 26 June 2006 (UTC).

Hnnnh. Do you have a source for the Anna Russell story? Other than the Anna Russell article, itself unsourced? Bishonen | talk 00:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC).

Perhaps they cribbed it from this highly scholarly page. I'm seeing ok sources say Anna Russell is traditionally credited with "inventing" the afternoon or low tea-time, but nothing good connecting it to any particular room, blue or not, boudoir or not. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:11, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, you academics and your sources. As you correctly surmised, pinched the anecdote from Anna Russell, Duchess of Bedford. How about this "source"? -- ALoan (Talk) 10:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

• "....Duchess anna Maria is credited with the invention of this meal (afternoon tea). She had foind the time between luncheon and dinner too long, so a small repast was served mid afternoon" cite. Page 23. Woburn Abbey. Researched Lavinia Wellicome. Privatly Published. Copyright 1983: Woburn Abbey and jarold Colour Publications. Norwich 783. This same story is repeated in the book of the same name this time by Wobun Abbey and Jarrold Publishing 1995. No ISBN number. Pleae don't hesitate to ask if you wish me to research in my extensive library on the subject again. Giano | talk 11:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Furthermore the Blue Drawing Room is indeed the room in which the book states she was supposed to have guzzled her tea, but as it is a vast room one of a sequence of state appartments, it is doubtful it would have been her private apartments, as the family traditionally lived in the South wing. part of which is now demolished. The Blue Drawing Room is in the West Wing Giano | talk 11:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, damn. There goes a good anecdote. No doubt boudoir will be AFD'd again now. (On the other hand, perhaps that just displays drift in the use of the term from a quite private chamber to a less private one: I seem to recall that there are quite large "boudoir"s at Russian palaces, for example.) -- ALoan (Talk) 11:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, note that boudoir does not say that the Duchess of Bedford invented the meal - merely that the English custom of afternoon tea was developed in her boudoir (emphasis added). The link I provided above says that she is "credited with introducing afternoon tea to England in around 1830" (introducing, note) and it goes on "The habit was also happening in France, as it crops up in the work of Madame de Sévigné" (over 100 years earlier). Madame de Sévigné is strangely silent on this contribution to world culture, though. And given that we have a triumph on the main page, perhaps Behn's portrait painter, Mary Beale, deserves some attention. (It mentions the redlinked poet and divine Samuel Woodford, for example.) -- ALoan (Talk) 11:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Both books are very specific that she took tea in the Blue Drawing Room, and English Ladies of that era had "sitting rooms" they did not have Boudoirs (which would have smacked of tarts -No! - not the edible afternoon kind). I have amended the article on her accordingly as these things are very important Giano | talk 11:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Sweet, sweet fame has finally smiled her toothy smile my way! The Signpost pointed me to this interview in a local rag, in which Chuck Klosterman (never heard of him) says:

[Wikipedia is] something I'm kind of obsessed with at the moment. The thing that I want to find out is who's doing the entry for butter. There's an entry for butter! What would motivate someone to do that? ... But how bored do you have to be to say, "I want to write a Wikipedia entry on balsa wood?"

I'm half-tempted to go to his book signing tomorrow and discuss my motivations. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:54, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. You know, a sentence like "He went on to receive critical acclaim in Februrary of 2006" really ought to be sourced. Preferably killed with a stick, but if not, then sourced. Bishonen | talk 23:40, 26 June 2006 (UTC).

You may rest easy. Doubtless this edit will be taken to be payback of some sort. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I notice, though, that the butter knife article is still underdeveloped. In a severe case of systemic bias, it lacks any information on Swedish-style wooden butter knives (usually bought at IKEA or produced by kids in woodwork classes at school and presented as Christmas gifts to parents and grandparents). up+land 10:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

But good work removing the strong bias from the article! We have to keep those whacky anti-butter knife POV pushers at bay! up+land 11:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I spent some time during butter's PR actually trying to research butter knives. I didn't have what it takes, it seems. About the only thing I learned is that the larger, dull, rounded knives we Americans usually call butter knives are properly called "table knives", and a butter knife is a smaller thing, often with a sabre-shaped blade. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:41, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

"The difference between a person who is a gentleman, and one who is not is that a gentleman always uses a butter knife even when he has tea on his own" Introduction to The English Gentleman., Douglas Sutherland. Debretts Peerage Ltd. 1978. Giano | talk 14:53, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, see, in Idaho we don't even know to drink tea with a butterknife at all. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

You need an Eton education to know how to do that. up+land 16:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

• Well, I'm horrified all this talk of butter knives and afternoon tea has made me look about the etiquette sections here - I'm afraid to say it all very lower middle class, so I'm going to do something about it. See Table setting, can you beleive they have a picture with, you won't believe this, or ever guess it - so I'll tell you - coloured wine glasses! - and talks of something called "culture service" sounds like something unpleasant growing in a laboratory. I can hear the horrified and shocked silence, it will be coloured napkins or even paper serviettes next, time to nip it in the bud. I have mad a few minor edits at List of faux pas , time for us all to motivate ourselves and improve standards. Geogre will take Georgia, BoG Idaho, and Bishonen Scandanavia, the Balkans and Russia (I expect it's all very similar). We need someone for Australia - where has that nice Freppie gone? I can sense she is very tasteful and would be an improving presence. ALoan will take the British Empire (or whatever they are currently calling it) I of course will be supervising. Forza Italia Giano | talk 18:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

PS: all that transcedental business below - waste of money - I did a course once, you sit there going um um um for twenty minutes, they told me they could fly, I thought this would save me a fortune in air fares, but it turned out all flights were strictly local, I never once even became air born, then they claimed they could rematerialise in other rooms without opening the door like Doctor Who, or that man in Star trek, that failed too, would they give me my money back - Oh No! Giano | talk 18:34, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the butter knife article: I never heard anyone born after 1920 refer to a table knife as a case knife, and then only if they were "country", and I was born in Atlanta and my grandparents were from Tennessee. The two knives pictured are master butter knives, and the caption correctly notes they are to remain with the butter dish and not be used for spreading. However, the caption refers to them simply as "butter knives" and goes on to state that a side knife is used for the actual spreading, while in the US we would use the individual, or personal, butter knife. Are they the same thing, and it is an English/American terminology difference? I never heard of a side knife, and if someone were to use the term I would think table knife not butter knife. KillerChihuahua^?!? 11:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

The side knife, is the smallest knife laid on the table, sometimes laid on the side plate, or on more formal occasions placed on the extreme outer of the right hand side, as it is picked up first to put butter on the piece of roll you have pulled of with your fingers, it then remians on the small side plate on the left of the place setting, and sometimes used agian for cheese (in Europe) before the sweet course, (in England) the penultimate course before the fruit and nuts (desert).—The preceding unsigned excited rhapsody was added by Giano (talk • contribs) .

Which would make the side knife what we call the individual butter knife, which means that should be in the Butter knife article. KillerChihuahua^?!? 12:50, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

When I search for side knife all I find is knives worn at the side, for hunting or fighting. Who uses side knife to refer to the butter knife? KillerChihuahua^?!? 12:54, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Awww. This is so sweet I can't see it without tearing up. I've dreamt of Giano finding a kindred spirit to discuss tableware with! Bishonen | talk 13:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC).

This puppy has salt spoons, Giano will be running for the hills soon. I have four different kinds of butter knives in my pattern, and the spousal unit is going to be taking a picture tonight for upload. KillerChihuahua^?!? 13:25, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Whew. What a relief. <hides the fast-food wrappers underneath a sofa cushion> Go puppy go! :-) FreplySpang 13:30, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

In your p-... pattern..? I think they're starting to be tears of fear. Born a century before 1920 | talk 13:39, 30 June 2006 (UTC).

Note to self: Bish is afraid of flatware patterns. Odd phobia to have... KillerChihuahua^?!? 13:52, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

YOUR LACK OF SOURCING ON THE BUTTER KNIFE ARTICLE IS VERY TROUBLING. It will cause the RUIN of Wikipedia. --FloNight ^talk 14:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, we appreciate your prevention of the total collapse of WP. Will you fix table setting now? No sources there either. And inaccuracies!!!! The article stated that for a formal dinner, serving dishes are placed on the table. Please! At best, that's semi-formal, and really, that's informal or family style (which was called, oddly enough, "culture" style.) KillerChihuahua^?!? 14:16, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

What is troubling me is if people are placing (shudder) "serving dishes" (which in itself is a very "middle class" word) on the table, what on earth are their footmen doing while all this is going on. I'm sorry I don't see anything cultured about behaving in such a fashion - these are the sort of people who leave the ketchup sauce in the bottle instead of placing it daintily in a refined plastic tomatoe. Giano | talk 14:57, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

OMG, I laughed so hard I thought I'd hurt myself... refined plastic tomatoe....—Preceding unsigned comment added by KillerChihuahua (talk • contribs)

</me hides the family wooden spoon under FreplySpang's cushions and sinks gratefully on to the floor of the kåta after a hard day's nomadising> What are "cushions"? Bishonen | talk 16:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC).

• Good thing we know you are joking - I can see you now presiding over the samovar as the guests in the salon are tinkling on the bone china teacups, ALoan drifting dreamily towards the white grand piano to entertain you, Geogre propping up the marble chimney piece gun in one hand Royal Worcester in the other, Puppy nibbling delicately on a cucumber sandwich, head tilted gently to one side, as she listens to ALoan's soft crooning as the crystal chandelier reflects a soft warm glow over the assembled intellects with their sparkling conversation, reposing on the gilded XVIIIth siecle furniture their elegant reflections mirrored in the pier glasses between the tall swagged and pelmeted windows........ Giano | talk 16:18, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I thought the divan was Empire. Silly me. KillerChihuahua^?!? 16:26, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Good evening Pretty Girl,

Is there any chance wikipedia can lock the MMY article as it now looks? The controversy seems to be gone - but I fear the moment the Christian Fundamentalists turn their attention to it and once again tears it apart..

Thank you

Peterklutz 00:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

No chance, sorry. The protection policy is very conservative: protection is to be used as little as possible, for as short periods as possible, and never preemptively, only to stop ongoing and acute vandalism or edit warring. And not on a particular, selected version, either. I'll add the article to my watchlist, and please get in touch again if you see an acute problem. P.S. You really shouldn't ask people what the purpose of their existence is, you know. Please be nice. Bishonen | talk 00:40, 27 June 2006 (UTC).

If I see an aucte problem..? It's a war going on :-)

Why won't Quapeds admit that MMY was a disciple of Brahmananda Saraswati (BS)? Because BS is above critiscism and don't want to admit that MMY had this relationsship with him. It's the same with Maharishi's name, some of the die-hards won't even call Maharishi for Maharishi, since the word i sanskrit means great seer - which they don't like to call Maharsihi. The rationale is the same when these people dig up forty-fifty year old allegations of inappropriate conduct (like eating chicken) and plaster them all over the articles - they just want to destroy the guy and his work.

I understand this can be a bit confusing for outsiders, it sure is to me.

Peterklutz 01:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I restored the disciple bit, I don't see why not, either. And removed some "his holiness" embroidery that had, oddly, been left in there. But my start for a copyedit and NPOV version got reverted back to your pro-TM (and, may I mention, hair-raisingly POV) version by an IP. You, was it? You know, I think I'll just semiprotect the article, so people have to at least have an identity to edit it. Bishonen | talk 01:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC).

moving this convo to Talk:Maharishi Mahesh Yogi -- quadpus 20:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I did wonder why you started to speak to Peter on my page (assuming you weren't telling me my edits were "overwhelmingly evangelical in nature"--I found it hard to be sure). I will now delete the part that's not addressed to me. Bishonen | talk 20:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC).

Yowza! You scared me with that header, I thought someone had filed a RFArb against me!! Heh. In any case, that arbitration looks quite complex and I really didn't know EE enough to lend any kind of a hand. I just liked her work on that particular single of Carey's. Staxringold _talk^contribs 03:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, I'll admit it: that was the effect I was going for. The wikilife is only as interesting as we make it!

Bishonen | talk 03:31, 27 June 2006 (UTC).

Now I've got fishes running amok all over my user page. A thousand dwarves upon you! Smugface the Tijuanan Dwarf 05:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

What happens if Andrew doesn't (constructivelly) engage in the dispute resolution initiated by myself?

Will the article remain frozen? For how long?

Is he and his kind going to beat the system/your attempt to find resolution by now staying away - simply to return when the article's protection level is lowered again (at which time their editorial crippling and threats to fellow editors will come back in full swing)?

Peterklutz 18:31, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I plan on keeping that sucker fully protected until a consensus version is agreed on the talkpage. Perhaps I should put up a note saying so. If any regular editor should stay away during that process, consensus simply won't include them. But it seems very early to start worrying about people staying away, I have to say. Bishonen | talk 23:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC).

Peterklutz, the last thing you need to worry about is my going away. The very last thing. TMers have been hopping on their butts and praying that I go away now for 15 years. You need to understand that I'm a dedicated TM cult watcher -- for life. That's what happens when any group brings a SLAPP suit against me to stop me from investigating and exposing their misconduct. They acquire a devoted follower for life.

Good journalists need to be like elephants: they should have a thick skin and a long memory. (God knows, we already work for peanuts.) Askolnick 13:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

So, Andrew, do you consider yourself unbiased on these issues? Sparaig 01:37, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I have answered on User_talk:Bonafide.hustla#Your_block abakharev 01:31, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Alex. It seems to me very dubious to block him for reverting his talkpage. If I'd known it was about that page, I would have encouraged you to post the block on ANI for review. Bishonen | talk 01:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC).

Unfortunately the block is because of my talkpage anyway Just a little update after my wikibreak. If I was blocked, I find RevolverOcelotX had even more reasons to be blocked. The point is, I did not do anything wrong, not a single thing against the wikipedia regulation. Damages on my rep. had already been done by this unjustified block, so anyway all I'm asking is can u ask the blocking admin to post on my talkpage saying the block was a mistake? Thanks a lot. holla back--Bonafide.hustla 23:07, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Sure, one week is fine - I'm just being very careful because I'm a newbie admin. ;) Cheers, Tangotango 12:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll remove both blocks and reinstate mine, then. (That's the method, just in case you've never done this; if the blocks are left as they are, shortest block rules; and if only the shortest is removed, all other blocks mysteriously disappear with it anyway.) Best, Bishonen | talk 12:14, 28 June 2006 (UTC).

Sigh, fair enough. The guy was treading the line for a couple reasons, I suppose I could have picked a better one to warn him about than personal attacks. --InShaneee 15:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I posted it on AN/I. The posts I blocked him for are for the last few days. I didn't even look at the posts that Tim made on PAIN. I work overnight and I saw all of this just before I went to bed. So I hadn't had a chance to really go through the guy's contribs of the last few days until the last few hours. Btw, the idea that only extreme personal attacks are blockable isn't always true. Persistant personal attacks, no matter how extreme they are, are also generally blockable. --Woohookitty^(meow) 04:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

The rationale is that after several weeks of work, it now appears acceptable to all editors - regardless of what might be said on various talk pages.

Kind regards,

Peterklutz 10:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

See, that's not acceptable as a protection reason, I'm sorry I didn't make it clear last time you asked for article protection. It's 180° the wrong way around. Articles get protected for being battlegrounds, not for being stable. Bishonen | talk 18:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC).

I would request complete unprotection, on the same rationale.--quadpus 18:37, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Complete? The article is semi-protected right now. This means all accounts more than 96 hours old can edit it, but younger accounts and IPs can't. I semiprotected in order to somewhat calm the edit war by at least preventing people from evading the WP:3RR by IP-hopping. Preventing IPs from editing is in general a Bad Thing, and semiprotection isn't a state I like the article to be in, but with highly contested articles it can be helpful. You want me to unprotect completely? Or did you just mean you don't want it fully protected, i. e. locked, the way Transcendental Meditation is? I don't have any plans for that at present, and I hope it won't become necessary. Bishonen | talk 19:54, 29 June 2006 (UTC).

It seems like Peterklutz was only using IPs because had a habit of not logging in before editing, it doesn't quite seem like anyone was using IPs to evade 3RR on that article. So, unprotect or not, whatever it takes to make things run smoothly around here is fine by me.--quadpus 00:35, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

What is the name of that "thing" where you can check out people's edits? - I can't find it, I want to check some one out, I hate these prim, school mistressy edit summaries [27], her name is ringing a bell, I can't think why - do we know her? - I must be thinking of Miss Ellie from Dallas; or didn't that peanut man, who became president have a mother called Miss some-on-or-other. Odd really you would have thought a president's mother would have been a Mrs - very Avant-garde! I know you will know the answer dearest Bishonen Giano | talk 17:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Apple sauce, dear Giano. (You can't mean...? There seems to be a lot of interest in... help... categories!) Unless you mean know her more recently? Sure, from some egregious nominations at WP:FARC, if you're that absent-minded. So you want to get the entire breakdown of a person's edits? I think that "thing" is broken and you have to use magic math and wave a dead chicken—let me check.
Yep. :-( You have to either use this tool, which is simple but not up to date, or this tool, which involves sacrificing a goat, or, best, ask Bunchofgrapes. He has the magic math and the goats. Love, Bishonen | talk 18:32, 29 June 2006 (UTC).

No no no, there used to be a marvelous thing where you typed in someone's name and out came everything including their last bank statement, I was always typing myself in to see how amazing I was, typical the moment you realy want something it's not about - just like BoG. Giano | talk 20:14, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd just agree with Bish's links, I'm afraid. Interiot's tool can give nice breakdowns by namespace, but, is, alas, next-to useless for anything in the last several months, due to them moving the databases and replication being screwed up. I've never even tried to use the javascript-based tools like Flcelloguy's -- slow and cranky and evil. I haven't seen this bank-statement tool I'm afraid. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:23, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

• Oh I can't be doing with all those graphs and things, I always see rude and sugestive things in those shapes - (a bit like that rude bandage foto of yours BoG) - and then get distracted. Oh well if she cant be cured she must be endured I suppose - some men (I'm told) find that sort of bossy dominatrix sort of thing exciting - I don't. Probably wears black fishnet tights and a mortarboard.....on the other hand perhaps.....No! forget it. Thank goodness for Bishonen. Giano | talk 20:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks :). Also, I think I do know how history merges are done (I've tagged some articles whose histories needed merging in the past), but I'll probably have to do some "tests" in my userspace first.

On an unrelated note, I hope you don't mind that I didn't file a statement at E.E.'s RFAr. It's not because I think the RFAr is inappropriate (quite the opposite, in fact), it's just that I'm a little burned from this entire fiasco and would rather see the back of it. I might comment on the associated talk pages and maybe contribute some evidence, but I won't be participating in it a great deal. Again, I hope you don't mind, and I apologise. Extraordinary Machine 23:56, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, no, not at all! That's entirely optional. Utterly. Bishonen | talk 00:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC).

Okay, Bishonen, here is you defending his supposed right to defame me, which even he thought the better of. Is there anything else I can clarify for you?Timothy Usher 00:24, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, please. Try finding an edit that you wouldn't need a time machine to be referring to on June 20. Bishonen | talk 01:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC).

Let's go through this step by step. I wrote on George's page, "while the abusive user Bishonen defends insists upon maintaining an attack section on his user talk page":

• "the abusive user Bishonen defends" can, according to Standard English usage ("defends" is the predicate of the relative clause, else "defends insists" would be ungrammatical), only be His excellency. Prior to the time of this post, you'd been defending His excellency on ANI against his first indef block. Do you deny that?
• And at the time of this post, His excellency maintained an attack section on his user talk page. Do you deny that?Timothy Usher 01:27, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

No, quite, I do see that the sentence can be read that way. But weren't you trying to post some basis (="Evidence") for your claim that I was "defending" HE's "supposed right to defame" you? You say the claim you made on June 20th was based on my edit of June 21st...? If it's possible for you to ever simply reply to something, as opposed to changing the subject and doing a two-step, try doing it now. Bishonen | talk 01:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC).

His indef block, against which you defended him, was for defaming me on another talk page, was it not? And you shortened this blocked on 17:10, 19 June 2006, correct? The diff to which your time machine comment was aimed illustrates you explicitly defending his right to engage in this behavior - a position which was already implicit in your posts to ANI, and in your shortening of his block with a friendly message without counsel to refrain from further attacks; indeed, he continued them - as you're the one who'd shortened his block, I asked you to do something about it, which you refused to do, as shown. You'd referred ANI readers back to the FairNBalanced report, insisting that H.E.'s behavior be viewed in this context (what context, I wonder?) and delayed this report from archiving. The most straightforward construal is that you believed HE's vicious and calculated attacks on Christians, Jews, Anglos and other editors to be somehow understandable in light of FNB's image upload, and the conversation that followed. And now, lo, you've returned to ANI on the occasion of his second indef block to lend him another helping hand against what was otherwise a consensus.Timothy Usher 02:38, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I guess it wasn't possible. But I do understand that the conjunction "abusive user Bishonen" was a grammatical accident, thank you for clearing up that part. Incidentally, did you see that without me it would have been a consensus for exactly one minute longer, until Geogre weighed in? If you choose to discount Aminz' protest, that is. But that's not a point I want to argue, as I think it no shame to be reckoned she who objected to an indefinite block without process. Your far-fetched "construals" are your own affair. Bishonen | talk 06:18, 30 June 2006 (UTC).

Might you explain, then, why you saw it fit to link the H.E. report to the FairNBalanced report - in which, for that matter, did you not argue for precisely such an indefinite block (this for a user who'd never been blocked or even so much as warned)?Timothy Usher 06:28, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't believe for a minute that FNB was a genuinely new user. I'm sorry, I know I addressed you first, but you'll have to take this as notice that any further arguing on this page really will be your own affair. Bishonen | talk 06:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC).

You've changed the subject yet again, but that's alright. He wasn't a new user, actually, he'd had a reasonable number of contributions under FNB, but, I'm curious: who are you saying was he before? H.E. also alleged this, but I've honestly no idea who he or you had in mind. If you're willing to be specific, I can look it over, and possibly agree with you. Still, it'd be nice were you to answer my questions.Timothy Usher 07:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

can anyone play? KillerChihuahua^?!? 22:22, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, of course. Bishonen | talk 23:50, 30 June 2006 (UTC).

Glad to be of service. Give my regards to all the cool dudes in the prefects' common room, won't you, Bishmeister. ElectricRay 00:08, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

DarwinFish is a spoof on the ixthys symbol of Christianity, is it not? Why do you mock people's religious convictions from your user space?Timothy Usher 06:07, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations on finding another Bishonen complaint. Please add it to today's "look what Bishonen did" file and don't bother me again. Don't leave me any more messages. Bishonen | talk 09:01, 1 July 2006 (UTC).

User:Timothy Usher, take it do dispute resolution. Any further inflamatory comments on this page will be subject to sanctions. Thanks. El_C 20:59, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I think he has ceased. The complaint above makes no sense, though. It's a parody of the Darwinfish, it says. Therefore, it is making fun of making fun of religious beliefs, and arguably he would be asking why she was making fun of the "religious" belief in evolution, which doesn't make a lot of sense, and this ignores the fact that it has nothing whatever to do with either Darwin, fish, or the ichthus and is, instead, about "bishzilla." He might as well be asking why she's making fun of Toho studio executives. Geogre 21:19, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eternal Equinox. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eternal Equinox/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eternal Equinox/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 11:20, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Got an article that you can't quite get to FA? Just send it over to the new WikiProject Featured articles, where in mere hours they can bring it up to spec, like they did for Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Durian! (/Bunchofgrapes tears out all his hair.) Maybe you should have them work on Shakespeare's reputation. I'm sure they could find some good stuff in the first page of a google search. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:26, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I had no idea you used to have hair! Bishonen | talk 18:29, 1 July 2006 (UTC).

I miss it already. A grape without hair is like a Darwinbish without hundreds of razor-sharp, flesh-rending teeth. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:52, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps someone around here can loan you a wig of sorts? FreplySpang 22:16, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

If it's been where I think it's been, I'm not touching it! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 00:21, 2 July 2006(UTC)

As a matter of fact BoG it is freshly shampood curled and blow dried and casually tousled every morning. Some of the worlds'd most beautiful women have run their hands through it - also my chest wig has the same treatment. So please do not be so rude! Giano | talk 14:17, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Need to have a skeleton for the page, sort of made a start on one, have a look and alter it about to suit, I think we need to keep social, politice and architecture together but quite separate, so they sort of interelate and refer to each other, but don't become a blurred mess, not quite sure how ee can acheive this, sort of three subs under each big header - I shall think on....Giano | talk 21:10, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

• Yes Dear I am getting your emails - all of them, fret not - but for some reason I can't send emails, the goat in the treadmill at the power station has probably been shagging again. I've ben mulling over you idea about covering just the aftermath of the fire, its effects and impact etc., that would certainly be more FA-able, and is a subject yet to be covered anywhere really. We would have to go though quite deeply into restoration politics, social history and architecture before the fire to give an explanation to what came after. I've an old dissertation that was published years ago roughly on the subject - does that count as original re-search though - I think though we could be stumped for refs in the direction you suggest? If we are doing this - lets go deep. I'm back on Tuesday think on it. Giano | talk 21:40, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, you should keep those goats in order, how many times do I have to tell you. Referring to your own published work is fine, theoretically—it's not OR—I always try to avoid it, though, for privacy reasons. The most interesting side to me is the plight of the common people, the unrecorded lives—but if they're really unrecorded they're right out, obviously. I'll see what I can dig up. There's a colleague at the anthropology department here who may be helpful. Anyway, bank up your fires and mull it over some more, and meanwhile I'm reading! Bishonen | talk 22:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC).

I couldn't agree more, I love common people too, all that joyful singing and dancing, (one hardly likes to ask why they don't concentrate their efforts on getting a job) - anyway rest assure I have the goats harnessed for treadmill work, the common people too, and once I'm back in the civilized world you will see the results of my efforts. In the meantime - I shall be watching you all, to make sure the butter knife remains in its correct place, and Killer and Flo are not eating their fish off the back of the sugar tongs. Giano | talk 20:09, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Dear Bishonen, a highschool student, User:Harro5, has just deleted my Erich Heller article from user subpage. Please restore it. --Prof02 09:47, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

As far as I can see from the deletion log, it seems that Harro5 just deleted the redirect in article space left (automatically) after the article was moved to userspace. That doesn't affect the page in userspace and you will still be able to move the article back to article space when you feel that it is ready for that. up+land 10:28, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

That redirect from the article space still exists at Erich Heller. As you and I both know, CSD R2 leave no doubt about what needs to be done. I wonder why the article needs to be in someone's userspace this long; from the talk page, it would seem the move was made on May 19! If I didn't know someone as reliable on Wikipedia as yourself was involved, I'd say this screamed of ownership. Please help me come to a correct solution here. Thanks. Harro5 00:38, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'll be... the helpless newbie recreated the redirect! Sorry Harro, I had to laugh. I've deleted and protected it, just temporarily. There are some special circumstances. I'll e-mail you tomorrow, as it's 3 in the morning here, you antipodean. This is Uppland's baby, really. (He's very reliable too.) Bishonen | talk 01:07, 3 July 2006 (UTC).

Bish, I come to you in abject supplication. When you are mentioned on the mailing list, you are described as having ArbCom in the palm of your scaly, clawed hand. When I am mentioned, I am presented as being full of excrement. How can I climb the ladder of power from the cesspool to the pinnacle? I await your wisdom and guidance. KillerChihuahua^?!? 21:31, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, I think you're probably too nice, that's all. BoG had a useful tip a while back: Object Strongly on people's RfAs, and you shall receive awards and birthday presents. (Hello Corbin!) Start gently. Your assignment for next time is to use four-letter words in public at least once a day and to forget you ever knew any warning template except {{blatantvandal}}. Bishonen | talk 22:07, 2 July 2006 (UTC).

Be... meaner? But, I'm already a vicious attack puppy! Remember? A Killer Robotic Dog run Amok! And...{{blatantvandal}}? but what about WP:BITE? I don't think I can do that. KillerChihuahua^?!? 22:22, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh but I do use four letter words! Bark, bark! KillerChihuahua^?!? 22:23, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

What about WP:BITE, indeed? [Laughs heartily.] Go count the teeth of the darwinbish, you viciouos attack plush toy! Bishonen | talk 22:29, 2 July 2006 (UTC).

I just know I'm missing something here. I have a good idea of who linked me here, but I'm not really seeing the reason for it. Anyway, Bishi is right. Be opinionated and skeptical on Requests for Adminship and you will receive praise for your insight and participation. Fight vandals relentlessly and stop assuming good faith from IP editors, for it will portray you as a brave defender of the Wikipedia, a valiant warrior whose selfless vandal-bashing promotes the encyclopedia's integrity. Whenever people group together to consider a community-issued ban, always support it and cite some random edit which that person made, and everybody will applaud your participation in the bureaucratic process. (Note my sarcasm. In all honesty, if you follow the above, you WILL become popular, even if you lose a bit of your soul in the process. Instead, I advocate editing simply, staying away from controversial articles, assuming good faith, and attempting to be excellent in all endeavors.) The choice is yours. (Fun fact: The "New Messages" bar came up when I visited Truthiness. Crazy, huh?) - Corbin ^{Be excellent} 14:34, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

This was more in the nature of a joke than an actual request for advice, that's all. I have a good idea of who linked you here too, and oddly enough, I'm going to take their advice to you rather than Bish's jesting advice - I will be true to myself, which involves editing controversial subjects, stating my own opinion on Rfas and community bans, assuming good faith where I feel there is any hope at all, and blocking according to policy not agenda. KillerChihuahua^?!? 14:53, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

User:203.234.156.4 has requested unblock on his talk page. Informing you, as the blocking admin. His block has expired, and he is leaving odd posts on my talk page. KillerChihuahua^?!? 10:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Mhmh... eh? I blocked him (him? you really think so?) for 31 hours. That was eight hours ago or so, and nobody has unblocked, see log, so I don't reckon it has expired. The odd posts on you were made before the block, they were part of the reason for it. Oh, well, I think I'll unblock now. I suppose there is a 1 % of doubt at to whose sock this is. Not in my mind, but, well. Bishonen | talk 12:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC).

As English does not have a non-gender-specific third person singular, I chose at random. Pre-coffee I apparantly cannot read time stamps, apologies for any confusion. KillerChihuahua^?!? 12:18, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I was just hinting, woofster. I think it's a she, a badass distant relative of yours. Bishonen | talk 12:21, 3 July 2006 (UTC).

I am not related to any massive, compact body of plasma in outer space of which I am aware. KillerChihuahua^?!? 12:43, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Your EE evidence looks very well-put-together... nice job. One question though -- did Bcrowell really leave because of EE, like you say? User:Bcrowell2 doesn't seem to say that... —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:32, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Ditto on the "good job, sista". this diff is hilariously outrageous; "You've really done it Bishonen. You are a huge fucking idiot and your blockings of all of the accounts without ANY EVIDENCE, REFERENCES, SOURCES, CITATIONS OR WHATEVER have led me to file a lawsuit against Wikipedia and even possibly yourself. I hope you get permanently blocked from this website because your behaviour, like your pathetic inexcusable behaviour is aboslute bullshit! This legal lawsuit will be commencing very soon, and I hope you pay with your account, you immense asshole. TwoDown 00:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)". I have to remember "immense asshole" for future use!! Oh, and your first external link is the same as the "RFC on me" link in the November-January section. — getcrunk what?! 20:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

He he. You guys did good, too. I was trying for the Queen Elizabeth tone with just a dash of Mary Poppins. How's my block gonna get Featured if I don't CITE MY SOURCES, indeed? Bcrowell speaks a bit vaguely, I can't be sure, but I thought it was the direct reason, the last drop—obviously not the whole reason, he'd met, uh, ... troubled users before. But EE made him mess up his password and tear out all his hair. Anyway, with the link right there, everybody can interpret the thing for themselves, so it's not a big deal. You're supposed to click on User:Bcrowell too, and his post on Raul's page, they're somewhere in there as well. I tried to get in touch with Bcrowell back in March, but it seems he never came back. :-( Hey, are you saying there are only TWO links to my RFC? [/me runs to put in six more.] Don't want anybody missing that! Bishonen | talk 21:13, 3 July 2006 (UTC).

Copy-edit and reference your block or the legal lawsuit will be commencing very soon because your behaviour, like your pathetic inexcusable behaviour is aboslute bullshit. — getcrunk what?! 01:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

This is my very last word on the subject and stop talking about me or I'll get even with you and stop making jokes about me I know how you make jokes about me and this is my last word on the subject ever. I'll be back tomorrow from a new address in Outer Pottsylvania] to see goodbye! Really the last word ever

This has to stop.

Peterklutz 23:39, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

You have been blocked. Bishonen | talk 00:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC).

Yet Andrew Skolnick isn't? Please. Sparaig 01:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, a notice was put up on AN/I about Peter and his misbehavior. I'll take a look at the situation and see whether a longer block is warranted. At the very least, his talk page should be protected if he continues to use the page to attack you. --Woohookitty^(meow) 13:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I saw, thanks. Since it's a blocked user's only outlet, and he may possibly decide to try to communicate constructively on it, I'm reluctant to protect a blocked user's talkpage except in the case of mere trolls. Bishonen | talk 14:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC).

Yep. Well I gave him a warning that if he continues to attack, the block will be extended. You had mentioned that he continued editing after the block. With what IP? I can't find it in Transcendental Meditation and MMY. --Woohookitty^(meow) 14:13, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

On the talkpage.[28]. I've blocked the IP for 24 hours. Bishonen | talk 14:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC).

Ah ha! Yeah he signed it so I assumed it was with his username. My bad. --Woohookitty^(meow) 14:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I extended his block to 96 hours for blanking his talk page. I know that you do alot of what I do, i.e. help out in disputes and all of that stuff. In all of that time, I've had exactly one user take his/her block without alot of guff. I can see requesting an unblock, but beyond that, I don't know why they do what they do once they get blocked. It does them no good. --Woohookitty^(meow) 00:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Considering your block was a day after the 72-hour block, you just blocked someone two days for blanking their talk page. I don't understand that. What is so inflammatory about blanking one's own talk page? Who does it hurt? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:03, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Blanking one's talk page is a method that many use to erase warnings and such. It is a common tactic of people such as Peter as well as vandals. --Woohookitty^(meow) 10:30, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

(Edit conflict.) Being blocked is a nasty experience and a bit of a shock, no doubt. It's human to lash out when blocked—at least, apparently it is, since nearly everyone does it. I generally look the other way. Bishonen | talk 01:07, 5 July 2006 (UTC).

I think you are being too tolerant, but I'll let the block stand. --Woohookitty^(meow) 10:28, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Ah-Hah! Caught in the act! I now have clear evidence that you are too tolerant. Vicious attack plush toy^?!?14:40, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

POV! No references! Bishonen | talk 21:32, 5 July 2006 (UTC).

OR is allowable on Talk pages. :P KillerChihuahua^?!? 21:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Sigh. Peterklutz did not waste a moment to resume his editing war -- deleting information wholesale from the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi article he doesn't like. I think this time, we better break out the tar and feathers. I've got the rail. Askolnick 12:41, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

In no time at all, Klutz has shown absolutely no regard to your patient reprimands, your warnings, or your block. He just violated Wiki's 3RR despite my own warning to him not to ignore the 3RR. Askolnick 13:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar For sorting out my History when others didn't seem to want to! BlueValour 20:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Heh, cute star! Thank you! Bishonen | talk 20:27, 4 July 2006 (UTC).

The thought has just occurred to me, I can't think why if he [29] is the sock of anyone who edits here...............I don't think it is very funny!!! Giano | talk 20:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. I dunno. He acts like a newbie all right—see how he posted at the top of your page? (Look in the history.) Anybody could pretend, I suppose... but that seems a bit elaborate, also pointless. Anyway, what's it any skin off your nose? Bishonen | talk 21:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC).

I wasn't accusing anyone of vandalism, i was pointing out their vandalism and their (and I assume yours too) technique of using more than one person so as to bypass the three reverts rule..... Owwmykneecap 16:11, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

LOL. Please stay away from this page, it's got an assininity allergy. Bishonen | talk 17:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC).

you call him a sock puppet, wheres your proof?...He certainly isnt me if that is what you are saying...which i very much suspect you are Owwmykneecap 16:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

• I suspect that User:Owwmykneecap, User:Jayteecork, User:Clongowes and User:Dmolloy36 are known to each other but not the same person. Consider this edit: "Marketing Director David Molloy" (needless to say, Google returns no results for "david molloy tuborg") vs. the username User:Dmolloy36. Seems like a bunch of students playing pranks to me... Demiurge 16:43, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Nice catch! Sockpuppets or meatpuppets makes no difference, they're equally unacceptable. Bishonen | talk 17:34, 5 July 2006 (UTC).

Hi Bish! Can you please deal with (block) this vandal sockpuppet? Kittykash (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log) Thanks. — getcrunk what?! 17:58, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, no. It hasn't even been warned yet. Or hadn't until I did. And how do you know it's a sock? Bishonen | talk 20:28, 5 July 2006 (UTC).

Whoops, I forgot to point you to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Oprah_Winfrey_sockpuppets. One account has been blocked; the second incarnation was at its final warning. — getcrunk what?! 20:35, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll await the CheckUser result, then. Bishonen | talk 20:41, 5 July 2006 (UTC).

Okay. thanks for your time, Queen E! =P — getcrunk what?! 20:51, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

You may further address Us when Master CheckUser hath pronouncèd.

Master CheckUser hath pronouncèd; inconclusive, sadly. — getcrunk what?! 13:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Is that Essjay getting ready to probe the proxies? Bishonen | talk 13:16, 6 July 2006 (UTC).

I don't know. The case has been moved to "complete". — getcrunk what?! 15:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Any time, dear Bish :) I've had your page in my watchlist since January, so stalking you must serve some purpose! ;) Btw, thank you so much for your offer of shielding my Talk page against Wolves, Stars, and the mixture of both (you might have seen who's been visiting me lately), but I'd rather not have poor newbies and anonymous users who may come seeking for help pay for the deeds of just a few misguided kids. Don't worry about me ;) Big hugs! Phædriel ♥ tell me - 22:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

You aren't an admin, Phaedriel? I am scandalized! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:45, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

No admin-harassing people on my page, Grappa! The poor woman already spends most of her wikilife fending off would-be nominators. Bishonen | talk 22:49, 5 July 2006 (UTC).

Well I would never think of nominating anyone! So base, that. I was merely taken by surprise. Phaedriel is perfectly welcome to continue not experiencing the... joys... of... uh, threatening people and... uh... taking lots of crap :-) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

You cleary state thaT while is a pronoun........ Infact you say:defends" is the predicate of the relative clause, else "defends insists" would be ungrammatical), only be His excellency. Prior to the time of this post, you'd been defending His

[Soothingly] Yes, yes, of course I do. Don't worry, the paramedics will be here real soon. Just click on this and see who says what. Bishonen | talk 00:58, 6 July 2006 (UTC).

in conclusio there is no relative subordinate. Because him is only the object of defends not a relative pronoun...

You'll feel better if you breathe into this paper bag for a little while! Bishonen | talk 01:07, 6 July 2006 (UTC).

I'm totally confused by this. Who claimed "while" to be a pronoun? The quoted text is but one clause excerpted from a longer sentence. "While" means roughly, "at the same time as." There's no problem here.Timothy Usher 01:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

sORRY I MEAN THAT SORRY FIOR CAPS if you say while you can't say that defends him is a relative clause because whis is not a relative pronoun --82.59.59.7 01:13, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

TU, I've told him that, please see this post. Now that we've established that the difference of opinion is nothing to do with me, please either take it to the talkpage of one of yourselves or just wait for the ambulance. Unless you want me to take the line that him is a relative pronoun! Yes, that's right, it is! Bishonen | talk 01:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC).

You have got to be kidding me... hello? Can this be dropped already? Netscott 02:45, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

So i'm right? I understood nothing of what have been said above...... --82.59.59.183 13:59, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

"Right"? You shouted in triumph at finding an administrator (no, it wasn't) making a grammatical mistake (no, he didn't). Your face is covered in jam. Your pants are round your ankles. Go away. Bishonen | talk 14:13, 6 July 2006 (UTC).

[Hysterically] And Netscott, you're a relative pronoun too! I maintain it! I stand by it! Anybody reading this is a relative pronoun, especially Smugface the unamiable dwarf!Bishonen | talk 04:53, 6 July 2006 (UTC).

I wanna be a gerund! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Bunchingofgrapes (talk)...done.Timothy Usher 07:20, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I want to be a verb. No, an active mood verb! Maybe an imperative! Geogre 12:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

OK...hmm.. tricky. Hard to use an imperative without being guilty of vote-stacking. Like "C'mon people, Geogre over to AfD and Geogre 'em hip and thigh!" Bishonen | talk 12:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC).

Hmmm, it seems time to Darwinbish this discussion. :-) (→Netscott) 04:20, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Bishonen, your user page creates approximately 0.42 inches of excess white space between my browser's scroll bar and the text box. Please correct this at once, thanks. Tijuana Brass^¡Épa! 01:08, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. Lemme see... ok, I think I've got it, how's this: "You do it, smugface!" Bishonen | talk 01:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC).

OMG Godot is coming TOMORROW!!! — getcrunk what?! 13:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Yup, he is. I have the fine old version of that box, it's been edited a little since. Bishonen | talk 14:15, 6 July 2006 (UTC).

Hi there, I don't think I understand why the {{TestTemplatesNotice}} would need to be subst'ed on {{Spam4}} ([30]); would you mind explaining? Cheers, JYolkowski // talk 02:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I figured it deserved subst:ing for being a template about the importance of subst:ing, you know? I mean, why do we subst warning templates? It's so the person will feel more personally addressed, isn't it? I mean, I've never believed it's because the user might otherwise put inappropriate content into them or something. If they're going to do that, they can just as easily delete the whole template, or whatever. So, and this is my point, why not allow the user who gets the TestTemplaters on his/her page to also feel that there is a human at the other end? Bishonen | talk 03:05, 7 July 2006 (UTC).

All true (although another reason why we subst warrning templates is to reduce server load). However, the {{TestTemplatesNotice}} is in a <noinclude>, so the users aren't going to see that. JYolkowski // talk 21:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

LOL, I probably oughtn't to comment on things that are above my head, because I sure didn't understand any of that, especially not how the users aren't going to see it when I saw it. But thanks for trying! :-) Bishonen | talk 21:49, 7 July 2006 (UTC).

My opinion of that user has lowered significantly over time, so I have no interest in defending him or her, although I still don't absolve you of responsibility for pushing things to the edge. Everyking 03:42, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm very glad to hear your opinion was spot on at each particular moment in time. It was the user who changed, no doubt (probably as a result of my bullying). Bishonen | talk 11:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC).

That's a very cynical interpretation of what I actually said. Everyking 11:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Is it really. You mean what you said was your idea of acknowledging fault? Bishonen | talk 13:13, 7 July 2006 (UTC).

Good call indef blocking the abusive user usurping the name of that perfectly nice city in Western Sweden. I have asked for a new RFCU here. up+land 07:48, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Right, that's where I saw it, on the CheckUser page. Bishonen | talk 17:24, 7 July 2006 (UTC).

CU confirmed the suspicion. up+land 14:45, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Woof, woof, pretty boy.

Oohh, I'm scared! Bishonen | talk 11:09, 7 July 2006 (UTC).

First of all, thanks for assuming good faith and asking me what was meant by the RfC comment I posted. I don't intend to start an RfC on the users who vote against me -- obviously that's their perogative and I welcome whatever contributions they would like to add to this open source wiki. However, the opposition to my RFA has revealed some interesting problems with how a large number of wikipedians view the "Administrator" role here at Wikipedia. In particular, I was taken aback by what seems to be implicit an idea that administrators are somehow only worthy of support if they show a particular brand of Wikiculture and accept a view of that administrator status is something of a badge-of-honor. In a project where ignore all rules is a feature, it seems peculiar that the community would see fit to guard a set of tools so closely even when it is clear that the person who wants to use them has the experience to understand their benefits and drawbacks. I've seen enough of my fair share of dispute resolutions and have posted on the administrator message board enough to know what the tools are good for and I would use them for exactly the purposes I outlined in my request.

If you read on the instructions page for the RFA, there is no indication that someone needs to write a grandiloquent statement supporting their nomination, nor is their any indication of what a "good response" versus a "bad response" to questions are. I just responded accurately and precisely as to what I want the admin tools for. I know the potentials for abuse that are associated with them, having been at the wrong end of admin fury once or twice myself. As far as I'm concerned, the only reason I want to be an administrator is because I know that the tools would be very useful in areas that I have previously found cumbersome. Adminship is a convenience for the seasoned editor, it's a set of tools. I really don't think it's supposed to be an FAship for users. Amazingly, it seems to me that many of the comments on this RFA seem to be indicating that people view an RFA in this way. In short, I think the community should have a discussion about what an "Admin" is. In the external media, much is made about the "power" that admins have. My RFA seems to indicated to me that a number of editors are actively buying into this idea that adminship="POWERFUL MEMBER OF WIKIPEDIA". An RfC would be an appropriate venue to discuss this problem. I'm going to start one regardless of whether I get the tools or not because this is a discussion that needs to occur.

--ScienceApologist 22:32, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Er... you respond rather as if I'd been objecting to your nomination. No, I was fine with it, and as I said, I particularly approve of selfnoms. The subject you outline may need discussing, but, as I just wrote on your RFA, "for the refining of ideas, an RFC has to be the world's worst place, bar none." I would really advise you to choose a different kind of venue. You might consider opening a discussion-slash-poll or something. The venue matters. The trouble with the RFC format for your purpose is two-fold: a) the format is pre-filled with adrenalin, and b) people wouldn't find it, as neither of the two kinds of RFCs, article or user conduct, is intended for such discussions. Finally, the subject is ongoingly, everlastingly discussed at Wikipedia talk: Requests for adminship; what's wrong with that? (Maybe in any case you'd be interested in reading a few of its archives.) It's entirely up to you, but this is my advice. Bishonen | talk 22:58, 7 July 2006 (UTC).

Good advice it all. I've actually had different levels of success with RfCs than you have. I think initially it was supposed to be a "Request for comment" -- nothing more. Now it acts more like a grand-jury for RfArb (at least in terms of User-RfCs which is not what I was intending). I've been involved in more than a few RfCs that have arrived at novel and satisfactory resolutions. Yes, discussion at Wikipedia talk: Requests for adminship might be a good idea, but we'll get all the usual suspects in and won't move foreward. I'd like to let people who don't hang out at RfA a chance to weigh in as this whole process is really in need of some outside review, methinks. I'll read some more of the archives of RfA, but from what I've already read I think that this particular issue hasn't really been addressed yet. Cheers,

--ScienceApologist 23:09, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

FWIW, I'd have to concur with Bishonen almost entirely. It would be surprising if the opening of an RfC wasn't perceived by many as a hostile, petulant act, just because of what (non-article) RfCs have come to be. It's my impression as well that the issues you are talking about have indeed been discussed many times on the RfA talk page (often with references to Jimbo's "No big deal" quote). Me, I think that the problem in general and in your case in particular isn't the big-deal / no-big-deal thing, but that there's a whole culture of people who are frequent RfC voters. These folks make a lot of votes on people they haven't come across and the heuristics they use are... insipid at best. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I'll forego the RfC since apparently these things are now viewed as "hostile". Perhaps that new sense of RfC should be stated on the RfC page in some fashion? After all "request for comment" doesn't sound to the non-Wiki user to be a "hostile" act. --ScienceApologist 20:55, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

There are plenty of implications of hostility on the page IMO. "... It is part of the dispute-resolution process, and its purpose is to help you resolve the conflict at this stage if possible...RfCs which are brought solely to harass or subdue an adversary are highly frowned upon by the community. Repetitive, burdensome and unwarranted filing of meritless RfCs is an abuse of the Wikipedia dispute resolution process. RfC is not a venue for personal attack. Filing an RfC over a matter that other users regard as trivial or inappropriate may diminish their opinion of you, or may cause them to file an RfC against you.... Note that the RfC you file may itself turn into an RfC against you, if most of those voting and commenting are critical of you. It may also be the first step in dispute resolution leading to arbitration. Filing an RfC is therefore not a step to be taken lightly or in haste." Bishonen | talk 21:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC).

A new user, user:Crowbait, has just shown up, and I don't know how to do the welcomes. It would be cool if you did. He got here and instantly found himself part of collateral AOL blocking damage. How pleasant. Geogre 22:34, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

But, Geogre, since you know about the AOL blocks, wouldn't it be cooler if you signed it, so he'll turn to you with questions about that? All you have to do is plant a {{welcome}} followed by your sig on his talk. Bishonen | talk 22:54, 7 July 2006 (UTC).

I'm afraid that you may not understand. Perhaps I'll go ask Fruti di Mare. <wink> He's a brand new user, and I'm already helping him out. Geogre 02:25, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

3:00? Geogre 17:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Right. I thought you were supposed to be above that kind of thing? Perhaps you should apologize to Frutti. Bishonen | talk 17:10, 8 July 2006 (UTC).

I am above it. I'm also in the slough of despond and had to do something. There weren't any albatrosses flying overhead, so I picked on a crow. I'm not sure what the crows will do -- nothing yet, as they can't, as he tells me he has not been able to make a single edit, even to his own user page due to AOL blocks (not a single edit), but what he'll do after he switches ISP is still up in the air. Geogre 18:07, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

You're one of the "FAC regulars", as it is often said, and you once said that you would thought it would be a good idea to come help us review articles at WP:V0.5, so mind helping us? :) Titoxd^(?!?) 01:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I remember. I said that when I realized The Giver had been nominated for version 1. And I tried to go review it for 0,5, but didn't understand the process. I still don't understand it, sorry. Why does The Giver appear on this page, but not on this one? In fact, why does the first page have a category "Literature", while on the second page, literary articles instead go in the Language & Communication section (but The Giver still doesn't appear anywhere?) Man, I feel stupid today. If you can explain these mysteries very, very simply, I'll try again. More importantly, why haven't you asked Geogre, who's a more frequent, I think, and definitely a more high-powered commenter on FAC than me? (GEOGRE ARE YOU THERE NUDGE? They need ARTICLE REVIEWERS GEOGRE.) Bishonen | talk 01:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC).

Oh, I'm hardly ever at FAC these days, but I like to think I still have some powder in my barrel. I just don't fire it as often as I formerly did. Geogre 02:27, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, but does powder make any difference? See me wasting some of my best here, and getting this damp squib back? Who needs logic, eh? I'm tired of the level of argument in this place. I'll just go to bed. Bishonen | talk 02:48, 8 July 2006 (UTC).

I posted in that discussion. I know. You can defend yourself. :) But it always irks me when people read "bias" into the decisions we make. --Woohookitty^(meow) 14:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Woohookitty, I appreciate your considered input on ANI more than I can say, thank you very much. I don't think any of us are really good at defending ourselves without any support. I know I'm not--at least it certainly takes a psychological toll. I was beginning to feel as if the entire community with the one exception of El C was giving consent by silence (and sometimes indeed by cheering him on) to Timothy Usher's stalkerish anti-Bishonen campaign. Thank you. :-) Bishonen | talk 14:43, 8 July 2006 (UTC).

Hey, no problem. :) Well in a way, we're alike. We both seem to deal with alot of disputes. And I know that that tends to be one people are eager to point fingers. I mean I know how it is. You have no more stake in the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi article or the articles that His excellency edits than I did in the History of Gibraltar article or Price-Anderson Act or any of the other articles where I've been told that I'm "biased". I was once told that I was against the entire colony of Gibraltar! I'm from Wisconsin for crying out loud. :) So I know how it is. You are just doing your job. And I don't know how you got involved in either case, but I bet it was through PAIN or AN/I or whatever. Basically stumbled into it. Shows that you are a good admin. Not biased. --Woohookitty^(meow) 20:25, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. See TU posting actual lies on ANI now? I apparently undid His Excellency's second indefinite block, too. (As you probably remember, I didn't, you did.) I really don't know why I let someone like that get to me. I told Peterklutz quite truthfully that I enjoy his sallies, but I'm finding it hard to enjoy TU. Bishonen | talk 00:24, 9 July 2006 (UTC).

Ah, you miss nice simple folk like Beckjord, don't you? I responded to TU there already, sigh; in better news, I think, Merzbow has opened an RfArb. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 00:33, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I saw. "It's time for a lynching!" I figured that getting between the mob and its victim wasn't going to be profitable. It's the same bullcrap as before, only with more bulls. I feel like a Jewish ACLU lawyer defending the Nazi marchers in Skogie, Illinois, but the impulse to screw process and block forever is getting out of control. And then this is coupled with my darkest prophecies about the "no personal attacks" nonsense. "It's policy, block 'em forever!!!!!" You can't expect sound argument from people who can't read. Geogre 04:30, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

• Heh, I see quite a long discussion has started here! (What happens when you forget to watch a page...) Well, the WP:V0.5N page is where all the candidates are listed, and from there and from there, there are three possible outcomes: the article is passed, which means it is removed from the nominations page and goes into WP:V0.5; it is failed on quality, and it is sent to an archive; or it is "held", which means the article is too narrow in scope but ok in quality, so it is stored for a future release, perhaps 1.0. Note that this is a bit controversial, and there was a huge kerfuffle on the talk page about this, so if you start reviewing, try not to do those for a bit... As for the categories... well, to be honest, I don't know what is going on there. Originally, I had set up the 0.5 listing with ten categories, similar to those at the nominations page, but then Silence changed it, as several categories overlapped, and the change kind of stuck, so I don't know what is going on there. So yes, we really do need all the help we can get there, so poke Geogre there too. Titoxd^(?!?) 23:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Mostly, since it is a test-release (and holding articles that are featured put us in a bit of trouble with some users), we're not excessively concerned about having an article that shouldn't be there on basis of importance; however, if the basis is quality, poke the WP:0.5N talk page and we'll discuss it. As for the example, which one would you like? Titoxd^(?!?) 00:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

What are your thoughts on full protecting the page? Peter has returned and we're right back to a revert war. I thought I'd ask you since you know more about the situation than I do. --Woohookitty^(meow) 13:18, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I just blocked Peter for 24 hours for 3RR vio. Apparently, he knows the rule and yet violated it anyway. *sigh* Posted the 5th revert after my warning. If you feel like it should be extended, go ahead. But. It's his first 3RR vio, so I decided to go easier on him. --Woohookitty^(meow) 13:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Woohoo. I won't extend the 3RR block, I have a whole different kind of block in mind, as soon as I have a moment. This has to be one of the least educable users I've come across where our policies are concerned; he's been warned again and again, blocked with progressively lengthening blocks, linked untold times to the relevant policies, and still most of his edits blithely violate all of the five pillars. It's time for something more drastic, and now that you've put him temporarily out of action, I've got time to consider. Thank you, and please leave it to me, as I want to write him a full explanation of what I have in mind. Bishonen | talk 14:26, 8 July 2006 (UTC).

No problem. :) Yeah when they intentionally violate 3RR, something is amiss. --Woohookitty^(meow) 20:15, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

As you recommended, I removed Klutz' latest posting in violation of your block on him. His IP this time was 61.77.241.33. Askolnick 18:58, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, well done. Bishonen | talk 19:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC).

The pleasure was all mine. Askolnick 01:06, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Latest Klutz Attack (LKA): Quadpus removed a huge amount of new offensive ranting from Peterklutz, using IP 210.105.133.91 Should I continue passing these IP addresses on to you? Askolnick 01:50, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

If you would, that would be great. I'll range block them as they come in. (Learned a new trick today! :-)) Hopefully, that'll mean we'll be done soon. Next 8 hours I'll be out of action, though (asleep). Don't feel you have to stand guard or anything, but if it actually is a pleasure ;-), please post in this thread on WP:ANI, or try User:Bunchofgrapes (hello, Grapes, you don't mind, do you?). Bishonen | talk 02:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC).

No, I don't mind. Not that I've ever actually executed a range block. But I believe I know how. And not that you've ever actually gone to sleep when you say you are :-) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

As I said, it will be my pleasure to pass on those that I come across. I'll post them here and on Bunchofgrapes' talk page. I am happy to recruit you both into my vast, world-wide, fanatical Christian-Jewish Fundamentalist evil empire. Today Wikipedia, tomorrow, the world! :-D Pleasant dreams, Bishonen.Askolnick 02:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Bishonen | talk 02:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC).

Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#His_excellency_.28talk_.E2.80.A2_contribs.29 I'm not really sure how these things work. Past blocks are being used as evidence against me, and since you've seen alot of them and reviewed them, your input might be useful. I would really appreciate your participation, although I would also understand, in light of what's gone on since, if you chose not to participate. His Excellency... 01:51, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi. ArbCom cases are two-tiered: the statements at this stage are merely about whether the ArbCom will accept the case--whether they actually will arbitrate it or not. If you take a look at for instance the Eternal Equinox case, that I've been involved in, you'll see how it works. The initial statements have been refactored to here, and when the case was accepted and "opened", this evidence page was created and the action moved to it. I don't see much percentaqe in me adding a statement to Merzbow's request at WP:RFAR, unless something turns up from somebody else that I think I can really usefully comment on; I'll save it--what there is of it--not a lot--for the upcoming evidence page. Assuming that the case is accepted, the evidence page will be the meat of it, it'll be what the arbs base their decisions on. You might want to save your own best ammo for that not-yet-created page, too. Bishonen | talk 02:30, 9 July 2006 (UTC).

Btw, we also have this, where he clearly doesn't want your help. I protected his talk page. I know. You don't care for that always. But I figure that doing it for a few hours won't hurt. Apparently he's really angry and hepped up at the moment. I don't think a little time to cool off will hurt anything. I'll unprotect it in 6-7 hours, if that. --Woohookitty^(meow) 10:19, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, bishonen. I noticed your mood was down, so I figured I'd just say hi and wish you well with overcoming whatever problems you have encountered. Please tell me if there's anything I can do to help. Deco 06:13, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I see your wikimood is down! Whats wrong? If you need help with anything, let me know! Take it easy!--Steve-o 06:17, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks both. It's nothing, just a harassment campaign over my proper and valid admin actions. You see it below. Bishonen | talk 11:01, 9 July 2006 (UTC).

All you can do is continue to act according to the rules. Sometimes people think you're trying to help a user or trying to hurt a user, when what you're doing is trying to help Wikipedia follow its rules. I endorsed a 24 hr block on some dude to try to prevent the usual "block forever!" cries, and his response was to send me a nastygram. I figured, "Meh." I wasn't trying to help him. 24 hr was the proper block. So, if HE is cursing you for "helping him," meh. If Usher can't tell the difference between asking people to obey the actual rules of the place and "taking sides," meh. Can't do anything about either one of those people. At least that's my view. (And I'm getting told off by conservative Roman Catholics and Satanists right now.) Geogre 12:34, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Sure, thanks. You've got it wrong about HE cursing me, I don't know where that comes from. It's the kind of thing people like to repeat, so please don't spread it further. Click on Woohookitty's link above. Bishonen | talk 12:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC).

It was in hypotheticals, but I'll strike through. I did read, and he was very nice there. Of course the lost his sh*t entirely at the RFAR. So it goes, I guess. Geogre 13:18, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

People like to repeat such things stripped of niceties like hypotheticals. They like to write about his "admitted sock", as if he tried to conceal his name change but was then forced to admit it. I don't know if that's just linguistic clumsiness or deliberate misdirection (I know what I think, but I don't know). I won't ask you to look at ANI. Bishonen | talk 13:24, 9 July 2006 (UTC).

I was just there, but I didn't go up far enough to see this mess. I am staying a little aloof from this particular one, given the last round, but I'm sticking my big flat nose into other things. (I wonder if I can get the conservative Catholics to argue with the Satanists and leave me alone altogether?) Geogre 13:35, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

(Message by Timothy Usher removed by Mark 11:31, 9 July 2006 (UTC) per request above of Bishonen not to be contacted on this talk page by this user any more)

Timothy Usher, have you forgotten that you don't get to post on this page? I regret my charity in overlooking it once, like a soft fool, when you wanted to defend yourself against the heinous charge of having made an error of grammar. I felt that not getting to rebut that would mortify you severely. Please don't encroach on my tolerance on that occasion. Don't post on this page. You should be aware that once a request for arbitration is opened, the ArbCom will take an interest in the conduct of all the parties involved. Bishonen | talk 11:01, 9 July 2006 (UTC).

I don't get it. Why is this person not understanding the difference between thinking that an administrative action is unjustified and thinking that a person is justified? Pretty moroon, if you ax me. Crowbait 13:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Saw your email and responded to it. --Woohookitty^(meow) 13:48, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, got it. Bishonen | talk 14:24, 9 July 2006 (UTC).

Indeed, I posted the note towards helping others avoid the need to track such information down. I understand why User:His excellency has been unblocked... and his concerns should be heard and addressed as necessary. It appears that he has decided to go on Wikibreak... so not sure where that's going to go. I must tell you that your concerns re: User:Timothy Usher are very valid and it is a bit disconcerting to see his personalization of your actions as well as his false accusations. Such demonstrations may need to be curtailed in a somewhat more agressive fashion. (→Netscott) 18:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

You've got mail. (→Netscott) 19:01, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Now you have. Bishonen | talk 19:36, 9 July 2006 (UTC).

Bishonen:

Hi, I am hahahihihoho. And I will put a source in the Bosnia and Herzegovina article where it says that 250 000 died. I will not delete the part where it says that 100 000 died. Is it a deal?

Hi again!

I have changed now and you can change so that it will be like the number 5 in my evidence cause I dont know how to do. Anyway, I found evidence that 250 000 died and I have tousand more evidence if you want.

Hi,

I am having problems with user:Hahahihihoho for about 2 weeks i.e. since his first post. As I see it, he is not standard vandal, he is more like unable to get the point, due to some kind of mental disorder or being under 10 years old. Whatever, arguments doesn't work with him, so I tried to explain him by example, at first in english, and later in croatian (Bosnian, whatever...).

Text in croatian basicaly says the same as text in english, but I replaced "Deutsche Presse-Agentur, November. 21, 2005" with "Mate Matic" (the same as John Doe), to make it easier to him, but he replied that he dont want to listen to my fu**ing Mate Mitic. This is no reply of sane preson.

Anyway, to make a long story short - this guy is an idiot (this was a diagnose, not an insult). I don't know what is wikipedia policy for plain idiots. --Ante Perkovic

P.S.

Just like I said, he is an idiot. After 2 weeks, he still didn't learn to sign his posts and now he attacked me for something I didn't do (explained here), that proves that he still doesn't understand what "history" link serves for. I'm sorry that at least 5 people lost their wiki-time on this idiot. I think we should try to find some way to minimise the loss of time. Should we go for WP:RFC/USER? --Ante Perkovic 18:31, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

(It's funny how my threat helped him get the point...) I saw you posting on WP:ANI about this some time ago, didn't I? That was why I blocked H. for 12 hours a while back. Anyway, there's obviously a language problem, and also unfamiliarity with how the site works. (Yes, I saw he thinks you reverted him, I've written about that on his page.)

(Edit conflict) Oh, hey, I see you writing *very* impatiently to him above, and on your page ... please don't call names! And please consider that this time he actually did collaborate! Bishonen | talk 19:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC).

Ante: Why do you hate?

I thought that Jesus say that you must love your enemy?

Btw, the ONLY thing I changed in the BiH article is the evidence that 250 000 people died. I DID NOT delete YOUR PART were it said that 100 000 people died. I just layed evidence that 250 000 people died.

So, my question is:

Why did you delete that part? // Hahahihihoho

Bishone: Is that allowed to say that somebody is mentaly insane in Wikipedia? Cause Ante call me that and i HAVE NEVER said something like that before. // Hahahihihoho

Hahah, I've replied on your page about your source and the figures 100,000 and 250,000. No, it's not allowed! Ante shouldn't have said those things. But you must consider that he has been *very* patient with you before, and it hasn't done any good--it wasn't until I talked about blocking you that you listened. Please consider how frustrating that must have been for Ante, and forgive him. And it must also be stressful for him that you keep saying that he reverted you, which he didn't do. Bishonen | talk 19:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC).

Bishonen:

I will never forgive him.

Or, does it say in the rules of Wikipedia that you MUST forgive?

No. But it says in all the religions that you should forgive if you want to be forgiven for the bad stuff you did. Think about it. Bishonen | talk 19:23, 10 July 2006 (UTC).

Bishonen:

I will write again the source of 250 000 cause it is up to the people to decide which source is more availaible and I will write the source again. I am not breaking any rules when I write down source cause I will do it again after 12 hours.

// Hahahihihoho

It's up to the editors, yes. (One of them already reverted you.) But it's not about which source is more available, it's about which is more reliable, c'mon. Bishonen | talk 19:23, 10 July 2006 (UTC).

Seriously dude... I didnt mean available cause I wrote wrong. It was meant as reliable. And I will write down the source cause there are 2 sides and the people must now so that they can see the 2 sources and decide for themselves which is more reliable.

Because of that I will write down the source so that people dont think that 100 000 people died when there are obvious evidence that 250 000 died during the Serbian aggression on Bosnia.

Yes, you are breaking rules even if you don't revert more than 3 times a day. Please read and understand this part of the WP:3RR. I have already explained to you that one of the sources is better. People are supposed to be able to read Wikipedia and know that we have only good sources, they're not supposed to have to decide that for themselves. Children read this encyclopedia too, and we need to give them only well-sourced information, not a phony choice which they don't know how to make. It was good that you looked out a source, but it can't be kept because the source for 100,000 dead is much better. Don't put your source back. And please click on WP:SIG, like Ante has told you, and learn how to sign edits on talkpages properly, the way I do, so that the signature contains a link and a timestamp. C'mon, please. It's not hard. Bishonen | talk 20:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC).

I will learn that soon, i Promise!!!

But I know that 250 000 died in the war, its because of that I cant accept that it is written that 100 000 died when it was 250 000!!

And I will put my source back, otherwise I will delete the source were it says that 100 000 died. And I will find a better source if you want, I promise!!!

But One thing is for sure:

IT WONT BE WRITTEN THAT 100 000 DIED CAUSE I WILL FIND SOURCE AND I WILL ALLWAYS WRITE THAT 250 000 DIED. Why? Because that is the truth!!!

Okej, here is more evidence:

http://www.scielosp.org/scielo.php?pid=S0042-96862002000100015&script=sci_arttext

Is this enough evidence for you or not?

That's a lot better, congratulations! A document from the World Health Organization is a good source all right. Would you like me to input the 250,000 figure and the source for you, to make a footnote and also to explain that 100,000 is according to the news agency and 250,000 according to WHO? (and that 250,000 includes missing as well as dead people). I know you wanted help with the footnote, and also, the last time you didn't make it very clear about the two figures. If you write it I worry that you could be reverted again just because it's not clear, or because people assume that you're doing what you did before. I would put in the edit summary that I'm writing it for you, so you'd still get the credit. :-) Deal? (But don't expect it soon. I'd do it today or tomorrow, but I'm busy right now.) Bishonen | talk 21:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC).

Okey. But put my source in the article.

OK, I'll change what I said. User:Zoe|^(talk) 00:04, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Cool. Bishonen | talk 00:07, 11 July 2006 (UTC).

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/His excellency. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/His excellency/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/His excellency/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 08:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I think I've figured out a use. I can edit from work this way, and then edit from home differently. Nah. Well, it was an idea. I think I'm going to work on something minor and liturgical. So far, I haven't made any good edits (or bad ones, either), thanks to the AOL morass. Crowbait 14:23, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

So he decided to do FAC instead. Sheesh. Someone is trying to avoid his work, I'd say. Geogre 14:39, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I have aDSL now, although I haven't had the mental calm and spiritual strength for installing it, yet. Tonight, perhaps. Then I can go around shouting, "Block teh AOLamers!" Geogre 20:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

The temptation to talk to him is overwhelming. Someone needs to talk to him. My FAC votes were perfectly cromulent, and, unlike Geogre, I'm not on AOL! Crowbait 21:31, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I clickéd on a very high definition image, and it... get this... it popped right up! That's right! It just appeared! No waiting! Geogre 23:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

And, and I can leave IRC going all the time, and I can use Skype. SOW, want to give that another try? Geogre 00:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I show up at IRC 3 minutes, they tell me, after you quit for the first time ever. Geogre 19:01, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Bishonen: Its Hahahihihoho, I have written a thing in the Bosnian article and I find it very clear that it should be like that. Btw, I have answered you on my talk page... You can answer there if you want...

[Please learn to sign posts and make headings for them before I become as impatient with you as Ante.] I've reverted your edit to Bosnian War because encyclopedias aren't supposed to be written like that. Read this policy about it: WP:NPOV. Bishonen | talk 19:11, 11 July 2006 (UTC).

Look at my talk page cause I have anwered.

And stop defending the genocid made by serbs. Have you ever read about Srebrenica massacre?

I will allways edit cause I am going to write the truth! Because the truth is that 250 000 died and not 100 000.

Hahahihihoho 11:39, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Oi. I posted on Merzbow's talk page. I have a feeling he doesn't quite understand the evidence page and how it's not really for asking someone why they did something. --Woohookitty^(meow) 23:20, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I can't figure out where to insert the spoon to prise apart the bricks enough to make a statement, since my statement would be about the crazy talk TU has been fond of. Even there, he goes back to "Why this, when not this other case?" and is unable to address just the one thing, just the one case. If you did nothing wrong, then...then what's all that about? It's inexplicable. Geogre 23:49, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

(Edit conflict: hiya, Geogre, did you see it's not about TU, though?)[Shrug] Thanks, Mike. I'm sure the ArbCom doesn't expect everybody to be an expert in the intricacies of RFAr:s, they won't mind, or think the less of him. Though they may have more of a problem with what looks from here like a pretty grievous violation of the exhortations to pith and brevity on the evidence page. How about advising Merzbow to move some of the text to the talkpage you just created?

Oh no, vey ist mir, I just saw you advised him to come here and ask me... Well, then I might as well declare that no matter where that question is asked, I'm not going to be drawn into any argument about it. You already answered it on the RFAr talkpage, on about the right scale, anyway. (I appreciate it.) And I'm busy. This thing is taking too much time as it is. In short, the RFAr talkpage is better, because then other people may chime in and clarify stuff. I'm going to first write some evidence--it's such a slow business--and then I have some plans for an article, here. For the encyclopedia, if anybody remembers such a thing? Anyway, thanks, Mike, you've been a big help. Bishonen | talk 00:09, 12 July 2006 (UTC).

I did see, and now I'm glad that the thing that had bothered me has been lessened. Suddenly we have an IP editor rolling along and writing on all the talk pages. I wonder who it could be? <sigh> Doesn't matter, really. Geogre 08:42, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your support at WP:AN/I. Sometimes I start to wonder if my actions are reasonable. He has some useful contributions to make but is a little obsessed at times. Petaholmes suggested I take it to Arbcom. I have to take a wikibreak - be good for me and the anon :-) and then I will see. It is a shame he can't behave. I have no problem with an anon IP. I have no preoblem with many of his contributions, epecially when referenced. But every now and then he breaks out, bit like the stoats and weasels in The Wind in the Willows - can't help himself I guess.--A Y Arktos\^talk 23:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to get my headphones and microphone, plus download the software today or tomorrow morning. Let's see if we can skyp through the ether on Sunday. I've got a better feeling about this than I did when I was on dialup, and if it works like I think it will, I'll probably give them some money, too. Geogre 13:50, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Remind me never, ever to run. Thanks. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:12, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

• Do you think I could have a future there? - I'm feeling an urge to be responsible coming on? Giano | talk 20:22, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[/Bishzilla takes the little arbcom out of her pocket, shakes them gently, puts them to her ear.] Ouch! Funny squeaks! [/stuffs them hastily back.] There! Bishonen | talk 22:06, 14 July 2006 (UTC).

I agree that dissident isn't too strong a word to use, but I feel "propagandists" definitely strayed into PA territory. By itself perhaps that even wouldn't be too bad, however in light of his other past comments I do feel they represent a personal attack against the editors that are disagreeing with his insertions. For example, from his current talk page:

"Gary Will and his friends are public employees involved in Regional Government in Ontario Canada. Regional Government in Ontario are a networked gangsterlike organization pilfering hundreds of millions of dollars per year from the taxpayer's in everyway possible. They control and manipulate civil justice systems and are a more corrupt form of government than anything existing anywhere in the world that are generaly regarded as ANTI-DEMOCRATIC."

Though mostly a comment about the government, Garywill is not a politician, he is a user here (User:Garywill). Also see a previous comment he made on that user's page: [31]. Though perhaps the 2 examples I posted to WP:PAIN themselves may not technically violate WP:NPA if evaluated separately, I believe he is violating the spirit of NPA.

Regarding NPOV, the message that I left on WikiRoo's talk page was worded based on his recent edit history. You see, he has been adding his own personal commentaries across many related articles. It seems he has a bone to pick with the current state of government in the Region of Peel Ontario, and instead of adding factual, cited information he has been almost exclusively adding his take on the matter. In many cases he is adding the same POV-laden essay to as many tangent articles he can apparently find. I wrote what I wrote in order to try to help him understand the spirit of NPOV as a whole; that articles need to either be written neutrally or be balanced. What I meant wasn't so much that he personally has to find something good to say about each topic, but that negativity in an article should be counter-balanced in order to meet NPOV.

I think perhaps my comment may have been read out of context. If an editor added one thing that I felt conflicted with NPOV, I would have written something different, and certainly wouldn't have discouraged the editor from editing the article. What I wrote was based on his ongoing attempts to try to ram through his POV. I was trying to suggest he should try to approach the article from a neutral frame of mind, as if he had no emotional ties to the subject, and try to improve the article by adding factual information.

Regarding the discouragement from editing the article, it seems common-sensical to me that if an editor has an obvious emotional attachment to the topic of an article and repeatedly inserts inappropriate material, then perhaps that person should refrain from editing on that topic and re-direct their efforts to another article. I didn't suggest he should leave Wikipedia. Again, if this were the first time he added something inappropriate I wouldn't have left the message. However this editor seems dead-set on adding his viewpoints, which thus far have the overwhelming consensus of being inappropriate.

If you haven't seen it yet, here is a RFC on WikiRoo: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/WikiRoo. The RFC on WikiRoo pretty much sums up most of the issues the other editors of these articles have been experiencing lately. We have tried many approaches to get WikiRoo to come around and add factual or at least properly cited content. The other editors and myself have made many comments to him in the past about NPOV, but they haven't had much of an effect. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 13:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

WikiRoo/WikiDoo has violated WP:NPA as well as WP:AGF and other policies. The user has posted that people who revert his POV-ridden edits are government employees conspiring against him to distrubute propaganda. There have been comparisons of editors' behaviour to Maoist China and Nazi Germany. "Bullies and on-line thugs" is another way he has described editors he disagrees with. His edits have been reverted over 100 times in less than three weeks by about a dozen editors, which he takes as a sign of conspiracy. There's no sign that anything is going to change. --Gary Will 14:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for laying it out so fully, guys. When it's this big of a quarrel, I have to swear off, I don't have the time. Dan, feel free to put back your WP:PAIN posting which I removed, or, better, post a new one with more information in it (still try to keep it short, though!); then only admins who can spare the time for it will take it on. Admittedly, that could mean nobody takes it on, but it's still better to be clear about what's involved. I did review the RFC, but nobody had commented, so it was basically one side (=not much help). I will add, also, that I still don't like your message to WikiRoo, Dan. Maybe you didn't mean for it to state that it's the individual responsibility of the editor who adds criticism to also add something else to "make the article balanced"; but that is what it does state. There's not only no support for that in WP:NPOV, but it's also not common sense. Bishonen | talk 14:53, 15 July 2006 (UTC).

Considering you've left a comment on his talk page regarding the "propogandists" comment, I don't think it's necessary to push it any further (as long as he doesn't cross the line again). My interest is not in having him "punished", but in having him step way back from the line. If your warning will have this effect, so much the better!

I can see your point about how I may have personalized policy a bit too much in my comment and put too much of the onus on him. I'm going to post a follow-up on his talk page shortly to try to clarify. Cheers --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 15:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I just wanted to say that I hope everything between us is neutral now. I really am sorry if I ever got in your way or bothered you endlessly. Anyway, since I'm sure your friends will be on my tail like Foot Guards, I should just tell you that I'm back to editing some articles anonymously until July 19 (because I have some days off schooling). As you can see, I did keep my vow not to return (but then I got lucky with some free days; interpret it however you want). Whether you read this or not or whether it is reverted blatantly within the next few minutes, I seriously wish you the best (but I hope you read this)! Take care as an administrator and please consider accepting this as my honesty. I'd be really happy if all our drama was put to rest. Well thanks for keeping me on my toes! If I return later this year I'll make sure to take your "wikiwisdom" and apply it the best I can. See you! 64.231.77.2 23:45, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and I did mess with an archive again. Sorry about that! I was still mad at the time, but I really did not mean it. I will go ahead and fix the edit immediately. As I said before, I hope you well! 64.231.77.2 23:49, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

You'll fix it, will you? You didn't happen to notice me reverting you? Where my previous edit summary says "Don't mess with an archive again" and where the edit summary of my new revert says "You're messing with an archive again. That's it, I'm asking for an injunction. Btw, we have fine new software for blocking IP ranges"? Extraordinary Machine seems unhappy with another of your edits, too. You know, if you didn't edit disruptively, people would, even now, let you get on with it. But that can't happen, it seems. Bishonen | talk 23:57, 15 July 2006 (UTC).

I'm a mess. You know it and I know it. It's because of my temper, which I've had my whole life, where if I don't like something, I become a monster, and Wikipedia really isn't the best way to avoid the situation. Here, I want to try and arrange something with you that will allow us to both get along without having to constantly trample one another. You can decline this offer as quickly as you want, which I would understand because of my behaviour (and it has been poor), but if you're willing to hear me out in a paragraph or two (or three), could I contact you by e-mail? I promise that I'm not trying to do anything funny. 64.231.66.47 01:42, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Additionally, I have been thinking about this for a while now. Not the whole thing, but the part where you indicate that I hate you. It made me think about the civility policy, and honestly, I don't hate you. I can't think of a good enough reason to hate you. Sometimes you may be rough and other times you may be pleasant, but aren't we all like that? I just wanted to bring this to your attention because it had been bothering me for a while now. I don't hate you, and I actually respect what you do. For the time being, I hope you're sleeping well (it is the middle of the night there, right?) and I'll be awaiting your response. 64.231.66.47 01:47, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I see that you've edited since this last message. I suppose you've declined. Okay. Fine with me. 64.231.66.47 02:15, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Chatting? Um, okay. 64.231.66.47 02:16, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

You may e-mail me, certainly. I make no commitment about replying. You don't own my time. Bishonen | talk 02:19, 16 July 2006 (UTC).

That's fine with me. My message would definitely favour a response, but if you feel that you don't need to, then don't worry. I understand that I'm not at the top of your priority list. And sorry if this is becoming too personal, but I'm somewhat curious as to know what intrigued you to edit Wikipedia at 4:30 am? 64.231.66.47 02:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

? I always do edit Wikipedia at 4:30 AM. Bishonen | talk 02:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC).

I see, I haven't really been paying attention to that. Interesting time to do so, I would assume you have your reasons. Anyway, I'm turning the computer off for now; I'll email you soon. Bye! 64.231.66.47 02:45, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Wait. 4:30 AM in Japan? 4:30 AM in Canada? 4:30 AM in Berlin? I don't get it. It's always happy hour somewhere. Crowbait 12:52, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Aw geez, Bish, that was gonna be my frst barnstar. Oh well. Thanks for keeping my page clean from dwarf droppings. Tijuana Brass^¡Épa! 07:09, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

"Dark queen" and superlatives, too! TB, you'll always have the spider in history, and he's there as long as we all remember him. Geogre 11:21, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

¡! Bishonen | talk 11:32, 16 July 2006 (UTC).

(Bish, you should check out the last edit to Wise Blood. See, that article desperately needs grammar help because an anon tagged it, and anyone removing that tag is vandalizing. This is why templates are so wonderful...almost as wonderful as infoboxes. The edits aren't bad (except in one case, where the editor is actually introducing interpretation by saying that it "is" a novel of redemption), but look at the summary: the "grammar" was improved!) Geogre 11:36, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Vandalizing? Nonsense. Remove erroneous tags per WP:DUH! and see also this. It's about userpages, but the principle is the same. I'll take a look with my red pencil later (just going out), if you'll tell me what the daughter is properly called, Lily or Sabbath. (There's confusion between those?) Bishonen | talk 13:58, 16 July 2006 (UTC).

She's Sabbath Lily. Calling her Lily is a bit familiar. Calling her Sabbath is, too. Geogre 18:04, 16 July 2006 (UTC) (Bishonen and I are both a little miffed by "grammar" being cited every time anyone makes a change, when "grammar" is something neither one of us gets wrong very often. It happens, but rarely.) Geogre 18:06, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

If it weren't so pathetic: User talk:Spicynugget#Need I say more?. KillerChihuahua^?!? 20:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha! I guess I find it amusing and pathetic. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:49, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Queen Bess has requested me to inform you that you're both in error. She is amused . Bishonen | talk 21:06, 16 July 2006 (UTC).

I think it's terrible that KillerChichuahaua moved his comments off into an obscure archive or something! How is she allowed to do these things after being blacklisted? (Speaking of rouge, y'all have got to see the loverly Red Man. Bishonen needs to see what the Swedish government owns here in America. See how clever that segue was? And speaking of fishing for compliments, Bishonen should see how the product offers a free fishing lure with each 6 pack of pouches. And speaking of fishy edits, Rapala is a company that probably needs an article too, and it can be another in my list of Redneck Red Links.) A commercial link in prayer? Prayer is free. Geogre 00:58, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Nice stream of consciousness, Geogre... at least, I think its consciousness. KillerChihuahua^?!? 01:19, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of prayer, I think it will take more than that to fix Stream of consciousness, that's horrible!!! Worse then the murdering bigots Bunch made me help with! KillerChihuahua^?!? 01:21, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

My stream of inchoateness immediately associates to the terse instructions at the top of RFAr evidence pages: "Long, rambling, or stream-of-conciousness rants are not helpful." :-) All you need to know, really. Raul654 at his finest. Geogre, the cavalry showed up, you will shortly be able to enjoy the gentle voice of Bishzilla at full blast. Turns out you were actually hearing me through the built-in mike of the laptop, which was lying closed some ways away. :-) Bishonen | talk 01:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC).

Stream of consciousness is one of our really venerable messes. It is not just a disgrace, but it's an ancient mess that has gone unimproved for months at a time. There are certain gems that I like to keep to myself, just in case I meet an eventualist, so I can point to it and say, "Oh, all articles improve over time, eh? Just wait, and they'll get fixed, will they? Well, look at <pulls back curtain dramatically> this!" Murdering bigots? That reminds me: we need to make sure our Ralph Reed article doesn't get swamped, now that he's running for Lt. Governor in Georgia. Geogre 02:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Venerable and unsourced. I was slightly tempted to add something from There is no stream of consciousness by Susan Blackmore but the difficulty of trying to organize that article in order to make a logical habitat for any summation of her paper defeats me at the present. It might be fun to keep in mind, though. The position that there is no SoC appears to be bourne out well by some of our articles. KillerChihuahua^?!? 11:41, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I need to read that. There is a feminist attack on SoC, too. The unsourced part of SoC is one hurtful bit, although truthfully 6 months ago we'd expect non-sourced and demand sources only if what was written seemed incorrect, but the thing that gets me is how clumsy the definitions are, as they return to the subject three times to change the definition slightly (wiki-itis), and then the really, really bad "history of" bit. Thing is, we need to recognize that no one here should be describing the "real" first but only talking about this as a streak of Modernism. I.e. treat it as a critical concept and not as an objective reality. When did it arise as a bit of lit crit? Why? What is the historical concept of its emergence at that time? All of these are very fruitful subjects. Geogre 12:00, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

My magic crystal ball informs me that my name has been invoked :) Raul654 06:39, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Talking/Chewing

Bish, you still haven't seen the majesty of Red Man? I'm glad to hear that the microphone wasn't an issue. If you really could hear me well, then we can try this again tomorrow afternoon here (or 4:30 AM in Japan). Geogre 02:32, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I didn't mean quite that shortly. :-( The settings have been corrected, but the next layer of crap is that the mike port (? hole?) on the computer is perhaps fubar. I'm going to get a headset that connects through the USB port. Need a new headset anyway, the way bits of perished foam keep dropping off this one is quite charmless. My ears and shirt were full of black crumbs after we talked. Current state of snags: couldn't find a headset I liked the look and the specs of anywhere except the Skype store, and I can't get their interface to work right. Unbefuckinglieavable. Encouraging part: I think we have isolated the fact that there's no problem with any of your paraphernalia. P.S. I knew tractor pulling had to be involved! Bishonen | talk 10:07, 17 July 2006 (UTC).

Oh, no! Now you have to find one that pleases you aesthetically! <wail> We'll never get it going! </wail> Tractor pulls is fun. Monster trucks is funner. (I wonder if we disambiguate between Big Foot the mythical critter and Big Foot the very real truck? Maybe Beckjfjorjd was really talking about the truck all that time.) We're going to be in good shape soon. (I assume you mean that the plug is all FUBAR and not the jack? It would be pretty dreadful to have a new laptop with a rotten jack...unless someone did something to it.) USB is fast as lightning now, so it'll be cool to go that way. Geogre 11:54, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Aesthetically, definitely. It's not so much a headset I'm after, as a tiara. The jack is under suspicion, as two out of two mikes tried wouldn't work. I dunno. Bishonen | talk 12:18, 17 July 2006 (UTC).

"My tiara is a fully functional IRC chat headset," said the queen of the Internet. (Sample sentence for my class. Identify all the pronouns, prepositions, helping verbs, adjectives, adverbs, as well as the subject and main verb.)

Red Män chewing tobacco is obviously as genuinely Swedish as the band Rednex or the Frölunda Indians hockey team. Mönster trück shows are, according to Wikipedia (which is always right), the "second biggest form of touring family entertainment shows" in Stöckhölm, among other places, "behind Disney's touring ice shows". up+land 12:06, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

You will always be Tüps to me from now on! Bishonen | talk 12:20, 17 July 2006 (UTC).

Adding random dots to any word makes it look much möre heavy metal, doesn't it? Headbanging Tüpsharru 07:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Rednex! They rocked. I remember them from a Beavis and Butt-head episode. I don't think the boys cared for them. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:58, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Red Män sounds like a Jamaican brand. I can't figure out why Swedish Match would want to buy Pinkerton Tobacco, except that I think it's highly profitable and, unlike other tobacco products, stable. Monster Trucks are in Sweden? Oh, no! (I imagine Volvo-designed monster trucks with added safety features -- a symphony of exploding airbags.) Geogre 12:25, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

(Pedantic intrusion.) Swedish Match did no such thing. Svenska Tobaks AB bought Pinkerton, then seven years later its parent company bought Swedish Match (which was a "lighter and match business") and decided to rename its business operations division to the name of the acquired company. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:54, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Any connection between the tobacco company and the Pinkerton National Detective Agency? up+land 07:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm wondering the same thing. Pinkerton the dude is worth investigation, as he was notorious in his own day for a bit of brutality and a bit of for-hire goonery. The Pinkerton Agency was known to have political leanings, and they were called in to attack unions, later, and specifically the unionizing in Kentucky and Virginia coal. I'm going to venture to guess that a history of "the Pinkertons" would be plenty salacious and interesting. Geogre 11:20, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

And now I've read the Pinkerton and Allan Pinkerton articles. Wiki-itis strikes again. We have a good, but unsouced article at Pinkerton, but then...then...want to guess? Yep: "Pinkertons in popular culture!" That then gets loaded and larded with every comic book, tv show, unwatched movie, etc., and in no particular order. They miss, in fact, one of the best illustrations of what the Pinkertons were known for. In the movie Matewan, Pinkertons are called in to break a strike, leading to a bloodbath. It has a great line, as David Straitharn says, "I've met Mr. Pinkerton. I wouldn't piss on him if his heart was on fire." The article on Allan Pinkerton suggests that he's quite revolutionary and interesting in his field, and it simply doesn't mention whatever political leanings he might have had. Also, people not quite up to understanding things mention that the Pinkertons are mentioned often in the current HBO show Deadwood. The idea there is that the Pinkertons will come up to the conclusion their employers want. Geogre 12:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC) Whoops, it was Baldwin-Felts in Matewan. Geogre 12:25, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Bishonen, thanks for your comments. I was a little puzzled at the reverts and the accusations levelled at me of "POV pushing" but I see from Bonafide.hustla's talkpage that I'm not alone in this. Thanks also for the note about the email - I've now re-enabled it. -- Taffy U|T|E 01:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Wuddup Bishonen??? First off, I gotta thank you for contacting alex about my previous block. And about the revert, wow I didn't know I got so much attention (from you lol). Actually it was a mistake on my part. I couldn't really tell the difference (just tiny difference in wording) between the previous version (made by admin Nlu) and Taiwantaffy's version so I didn't get why he made the edit and I didn't think his edit made the article better. Anyway the case's solved now. Oh yeah by the way, how do you feel about me running for adminship?? Do you think my contributions and stuff are good enough?? Anyway just give me some feedbacks on that. holla at me--Bonafide.hustla 05:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Ha, you better be afraid, because my goons may drop in on you at any time! About the adminship, I'll level with you. You do good stuff, and this kind of thing is nice, but I don't think you're ready. It's no fun to run for adminship and get negative comments, like if people take issue with this. Which I think they would, as you revert a good version to a POV version, you know... and accuse the good version of pov-pushing. And you accuse the guy of vandalism here, yikes! "Unexplained changes are considered vandalism"...? No they're not. People will definitely appreciate that you gave way gracefully a little later, that shows real maturity, but it's very important that an admin doesn't accuse people of vandalism loosely. That user absolutely didn't vandalize anything. I'm just giving one example here, you understand. Don't be discouraged, but WP:RFA is a tough place, and basically, you need to do everything right for two or three months before you apply, and especially always act according to NPOV. I can tell you're working on it, but you're not there yet. Bishonen | talk 11:00, 17 July 2006 (UTC).

Hmm...seems like others got similar questions [32]. But well yeah, you're definitely right 'cause I got quite a lot of "ugly" records (ex. my favorite quote "vexatious litigant and a pest" [33] lol just joking) comparing to current admins also act in an un-admin way. Anyway thanks for your time.--Bonafide.hustla 08:15, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I nominate you to answer the questions. Sort of thing that's right up your alley as of late I see. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:00, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

How sweet of you. I didn't tell bonafide.hustla any of that stuff, I think he has a good idea of what admins do. I merely evaluated his chances right now. You can do that with ML. Free suggestion: structure it round a reminder of how it went last time. Bishonen | talk 16:32, 17 July 2006 (UTC).

I lack Bishzilla's gentle tact. And I'm plumb worn out from explaining autoblocks to him yesterday. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:38, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Bunch! You understand autoblocks????? May I have your autograph? And if ML understood them by the time you were done explaining, I'd like to have his, too. Bishonen | talk 18:27, 17 July 2006 (UTC).

I am like the novice giver of guitar lessons, who only has to stay one lesson ahead of his paying pupils. In the meantime, I have attempted some stern advice regarding the merits of running for admin. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:46, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

E - G - A; E - G - A# - A; E - G - A - G - A. (And now you're playing the simplified version of "Smoke on the Water.") Geogre 20:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

(Next week, it's A A A D D E E E D D, and you're playing "Louie Louie" or "Wild Thing," your choice. Oh, and make sure those barre chords sound out clearly.) Geogre 20:40, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't remove my own comments from my own talk page. It's as simple as that. I understand the number of problems admins have to deal with is growing exponentionally, but ignoring context and believing the first person to accuse me of trollery certainly doesn't make it any easier. I hope you will allow me to add my input to discussion about me in the future. Thanks, Psycho Master (Karwynn) 20:42, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Where did I do that? I haven't intentionally removed any comment of yours from your own page. If I did it unintentionally, I'm sorry. There was a silent edit conflict, I saw--yoou and I posted simultaneously. Unless you're referring to me removing your strike-through through *my* comment? Because then I'm not sorry at all. There was no question of "believing the first person". I reviewed your silly edit war on MONGO's page plus your posts on Hipocrite's, and you're lucky Tony Sidaway got there first with a mild block; you'd have gotten more from me. Bishonen | talk 22:02, 17 July 2006 (UTC).

Well, then I apologize for the misunderstanding, but am even more disturbed by your insistence on rushing into a decision. If you'll sit back, cool off and READ my rationales for my actions, you'll find that I did nothing wrong. I'd love to clarify what I see as a massive misunderstanding about my alleged policy violations, but not unless you're willing to lend an ear. Otherwise, I won't take up any more of your time. Happy editing, Psycho Master (Karwynn) 22:17, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Bishonen,

The last sections of the criticism of Islam article is planned to be revised completely(it is mostly original research, or written based on unreliable sources). I don't think it worth spending time on it at the moment. --Aminz 06:19, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Aminz, I realize that. It was just itchy fingers, sorry. I knew from Talk that you're rewriting it, so I wasn't going to mess about any more. I hope I didn't edit conflict you. Bishonen | talk 06:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC).

No, it is just planned to be revised. Thanks for your recent edits to the article. I just felt that the section may, not at the moment, worth your spending time on. Thanks again. --Aminz 07:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi. We've really got off on the wrong foot here, and I think a lot of this friction is bult up on misunderstanding. One good way to reduce anxiety and distress over the actions of other editors is to listen to what they have to say in an effort to clarify a miscommunication. I know this was the case when I thought you had intentionally silenced my comments on my tal page, but I see now that it was just overlooked in your attempt to revert my strike-through. I wish to clarify something that I was made aware of by your post here. My complaint on the noticeboard was not about you, nor did I say on your talk page that it was you who "alleged" that I had violated policy. If you cool off and actually hear what I have to say, rather than assume I'm only a troublemaker, you may be able to distill your hostility and refrain from the sort of uncvil sarcasm you've flung at me with your persistent "wikilawyering" comments. I've been able to restrain myself from such behavior, and I don't think it's too much to ask for a little respect and civility from you. Thanks for your consideration, Psycho Master (Karwynn) 14:42, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm officially tired of trying to tell you anything. I'd prefer it if you don't post on my page again. Thanks. Bishonen | talk 15:00, 18 July 2006 (UTC).

Gosh, Bish, I suppose. I didn't know you were trying to tell me something. By the way, the answers are 20 cm and 108 F. Geogre 17:10, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Will comply. Only stated a really bad concern that could affect Wikipedians, such as the current heat wave. How can I state that a really bad heat wave is currently going on ? We have one in the U.S., and I've just heard that Japan is also having one. While watching the news last night, casualty results came in, mainly those due to heat exhastion and heat stroke. So far, no fatalities. I did not mean to bother the Admins on the WP:AN at all, and do apologise for doing so. In the U.S., the south, S.E. areas, the S. coastal areas, the New England area, the S.W. US. has been experiencing this for 9 days, and it continues.

Can it be stated in the Heat wave article that a current event is going on ? Again, I do apologise for being in error. Martial Law 17:09, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's not the kind of thing Wikipedia articles are for. I'd say Wikinews is your man. That's a wiki where the users write the news — click on the link and check it out. Bishonen | talk 17:31, 18 July 2006 (UTC).

My $0.02: it's definitely appropriate at WikiNews, as the story is on all US evening news broadcasts. Geogre 18:34, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

or on Tap! Kudos, you are now even more impressive. KillerChihuahua^?!? 22:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Heheh, cool or what? I feel like a 17th-century patron of the arts having a play or a book of poems dedicated to me by an impoverished poet who expects five guineas — though Francis expects nothing, I'm sure. Bishonen | talk 01:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC).

Thank you very much. How secure is email?Itsmejudith 13:27, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, if you supply your e-mail address in your preferences, nobody can read it from there. That's guaranteed, your preferences have very good security. People will be able to write to you through clicking on the "E-mail this user" link in the lefthand column of your userpage, under "Toolbox", but they'll never see your address. You'll receive an ordinary e-mail from them, where (of course) you can see their address. If you choose to reply, but only if you do, you will be giving them your address. I would suggest not using your regular address for wikipedia, but get a yahoo or googlemail address or something, so you can reply to people you don't completely know and trust without worrying about it. But perhaps you mean, how secure are the contents, can somebody at wikipedia read what you send or receive through it? No, they can't, it's e-mail--just regular e-mail. The recipient gets it, no one else. I suppose, if the government is after you, they can dig into your computer or the recipient's and read it, I dunno...;-) But the wiki e-mail is as safe as anything else in your mailbox. Bishonen | talk 14:09, 19 July 2006 (UTC).

Thanks for this very thorough reply. I will consider enabling email. In the meantime, could you help with the H.E. Arbcomm case. I can't even remember how to find my way back to the page for the case. And when I last looked there didn't seem to be a statement from me there any more. I would like to dissent from the allegations of POV-pushing that Merzbow made against H.E. I have the specific edits (diffs?) and would appreciate it if you and/or WooHooKitty could hold my hand through the technical process of adding these to my statement or making a new statement.Itsmejudith 16:09, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll be glad to help, I understand what a jungle that stuff is when you're not used to it. Your statement is in the right place for it, on this page, which is where the action is now. You were perhaps looking for it here. Please look at your own page. Bishonen | talk 16:55, 19 July 2006 (UTC).

thanks, I'm trying to make sense of it. I've enabled my email if you want to communicate that. wayItsmejudith 17:26, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Cool. I have done. Bishonen | talk 19:26, 19 July 2006 (UTC).

In the end I submitted some more points and have added references to the diffs but they're obviously not in the right format. I don't mind fixing it if you can get me to the right help page. Thanks for what you've done so far. Today in England was the hottest July day for 90 years but the weather has broken now and I can get a night's sleep. Itsmejudith 22:23, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I can't find anything better than Help:Diff to refer you to, which really isn't ideal at all. I'm putting in a request to Woohookitty to let you know if he has something better. Bishonen | talk 22:41, 19 July 2006 (UTC).

You presence is requested at the Arbitration Re: Removal of humus sapiens admin privilages due to administrative abuse. Please click Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration Israel Article--Oiboy77 17:14, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Read the article history. Oiboy77 reverted Israel to a version that was obviously vandalism (he even admitted this later on Talk:Israel). Claiming that is Israel is "actually a part of Palestine which was occupied and taken over by the Jews after WW2 with help from the British Army" and that it "is a semi-theocracy democratic republic with universal suffrage that operates under the parliamentary system, with restricted rights for non-Jewish citizens" is not a content dispute. Inserting patent nonsense into the article is not a content dispute, it's vandalism according to WP:VAND. I do not revert content disputes, I revert vandalism. Oiboy77 did add a section from a report on human rights abuses of Israel and while I was online I did not revert it. Why not? I felt it was a legitimate addition content-wise, though the wording needed to be re-worked as it looked out of place (indeed, it was a verbatim copy of the reference).

I do not engage in revert wars over content disputes. I will, however, and should revert patent nonsense edits when I see them. Kari Hazzard (T | C) 17:22, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

It's July 20th here, but I'm off now. You have the information I sent in the e-mail. I'm gone now. See you again someday, perhaps. Bye. —EE

♯ ♪ ♫ Goodbye, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, adieu... ♬♩♬♩

♯ ♪ ♫ ☼ ☞ 簀 + 眸-i ♬♩♬♩ -- ALoan (Talk) 10:29, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

♯ ♪ ♫ We'll meet again

♯ ♪ ♫ Don't know where, don't know when

♯ ♪ ♫ But I know we'll meet again,

♯ ♪ ♫ Some sunny day. ♯ ♪ ♫

Geogre 11:26, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey, someone here does remember Vera Lynn! FreplySpang 14:56, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

♯ ♪ ♫ Does anybody here remember Hollow Wilerding Vera Lynn?

♯ ♪ ♫ Remember how she said,

♯ ♪ ♫ That we would never meet again,

♯ ♪ ♫ Some sunny day...

♯ ♪ ♫ Hollow! Eternal! (et al)

♯ ♪ ♫ What has become of you?

♯ ♪ ♫ Does anybody else in here feel the way I do?

Sorry for butting in - but I just couldn't resist! ;) Nothing to see here, please move on... Phaedriel ♥ tell me - 16:56, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, yes, Roger Waters mourning the mourning of the fallen when the Tigers sprang free. Geogre 01:24, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

A little more obscure - this is by Bob Dylan.

♯ ♪ ♫ If your mem'ry serves you well,

♯ ♪ ♫ You'll remember you're the one

♯ ♪ ♫ That called on me to call on them

♯ ♪ ♫ To get you your favors done.

♯ ♪ ♫ And after ev'ry plan had failed

♯ ♪ ♫ And there was nothing more to tell,

♯ ♪ ♫ You knew that we would meet again,

♯ ♪ ♫ If your mem'ry served you well.

KillerChihuahua^?!? 12:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

(Sung by Rick Danko. This wheel shall drop the bomb on Pearl Harbor. Geogre 13:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC) )

I do like a good sing song. From what I know of all this, can I recommend we all join in with a hearty rendition of "We're going to miss you" by James? james/millionaires/we_re_going_to_miss_you/. Worldtraveller 13:07, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

What, this? No, I think perhaps you're missing the point. KillerChihuahua^?!? 13:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

All right, thank you, that's enough of pointless ditties, think Japanese, please. All together now, the Sailor Moon Kurissomassu version of "We want to wish you a merry Christmas"! There are three hundred thousand of you fuckers out there, I want you to sing it! Bishonen | talk 13:33, 20 July 2006 (UTC).

And its one, two three, what are we editing for? Don't ask me, I don't give a ..... didn't even have to follow the link, sheesh I'm old. KillerChihuahua^?!? 13:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

And its five six seven, open up the perl-y gates... -- ALoan (Talk) 14:00, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

If you want to end war and stuff, you're going to have to sing better than that. (Obscure to kids these days.) Geogre 13:57, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Nonono... you must think in Russian... Open fire! All weapons! Dispatch war rocket Ajax... -- ALoan (Talk) 14:00, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

How did Clint get involved? Bad ref. Better: Gee, I wish we had one of them doomsday machines. KillerChihuahua^?!? 14:05, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Sure, but there's no fighting in the War Room! (Even if it does drop the bomb on Perl Harbor.) Geogre 14:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Happy Happy Happy2.jpg An image posted on the talkpage of admin Jiang. Please show your support at[[34]]. The image is deeply racist. Thanks--Bonafide.hustla 04:56, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

The Barnstar of Good Humor for being kewl on IRC to me, and being the best dang admin ever... TehKewl1 10:41, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Kewlie...! Thanks very much. Bishonen | talk 12:23, 21 July 2006 (UTC).

I second the above about you being the best dang admin ever. Thanks Bish for clearing the block. Askolnick 14:10, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Heheh, power! :-P It's easy when I know both the original blocker and blockee, I just hope it doesn't happen again. I hope those unfamiliar IPs through which you were blocked don't mean that your ISP has started routing you through AOL. That would be bad news. Bishonen | talk 16:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC).

I understand. For whatever it may be worth, I felt the same way. The second guessing in this case is of the director. I didn't think that it should have gotten where it got, but such is the case with other pop cultural phenomena. This particular item is a fantastically popular and widely used text, so that would color perceptions in the director's mind, I imagine. It's particularly not version 1.0, and I hate to think what serious snooping into references would reveal. Lamentable. Geogre 16:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

• Bish, check out the last edit to Dunciad & see what you think. Geogre 02:09, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Looks OK, except I changed one thing. But man, that's a bad reproduction of the Variorum frontispiece. Isn't this better? Bishonen | talk 02:49, 24 July 2006 (UTC).
• For the most part, I didn't have a problem, but the move of a comma outside of a quotation mark is a British convention; since I've been writing as an American everywhere else in the article, it introduced inconsistency. However, again it was a "grammar" fix, when, well, there wasn't any grammar involved. Nevermind that. For the most part I didn't have a problem, either. When I wrote most of that article, there were slim pickings on images, so I'm sure that the other image is better. Geogre 11:38, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Did you see [35] this? Geogre 11:40, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, yes. Uh, is it significant? Carl couldn't hear me either at first, but we have ticked some boxes and now he can. :-) The issue seems to be that the boxes revert to some stupid default whenever I move a hair. I'll just have to remember where these boxes are, and keep checking them incessantly, and keep my hair still, and we should be fine tonight. Oh, and keep checking the separate little volume control on the cord, because that has a "mute" position that it'll assume if a draft from the window hits it. Bishonen | talk 13:00, 24 July 2006 (UTC).

It might be significant, depending upon whether you think that, like EE, he went away or, like EE, he didn't. It will only be significant if there is contentious ownership of articles again. I'm glad to hear that you are no longer silenced by a conspiracy of hardware and software and that you've escaped Apple Corp's attempts at shutting out free speech freely delivered for free. Geogre 13:31, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Back to you in talk. - MSTCrow 01:14, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll block you if you don't stop abusing those vandalism tags right now. Bishonen | talk 01:25, 24 July 2006 (UTC).

Thank you for the support. I was on the verge of leaving some very rude (okay, ruder) comments on his talk page regarding his bald attempts at intimidation. --Calton | Talk 01:27, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad you're ok with my revert; I thought perhaps you were enjoying the templates. :-) Bishonen | talk 01:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC).

Back to you on talk, it's not abuse, please fully read WP:Vandalism. - MSTCrow 01:29, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, ok, Calton and Rattboy don't know the policies and now I don't either? Bishonen | talk 01:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC).

Hauled in front of the ArbCom pillory again, eh Bish? It's becoming scandalous just to admit my acquaintance! We need to tear down those damned "policy" pages and rebuilt them from scratch with an emphasis on common sense. Although at least the second paragraph of WP:VAND still puts the lie to this particular perniciousness. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:02, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, fine pic. To think I wasn't even mentioned by name this time, and I had to go and blurt it out! Well, doesn't matter, it's starting to kind of go without saying anyway, isn't it? "I request arbitration against users X, Y, and Z... oh, yeah, and that Bishonen, of course." Bishonen | talk 03:13, 24 July 2006 (UTC).

Maybe you should just throw that into the template. Save everyone a little time. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey Bish, thank you for your help in this matter. For some reason I also get involved in more than my fair share of ArbCom actions. Maybe you could put in a good word for me? --Ideogram 05:49, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Modifying the template per Bunchofgrapes seems a good way of cutting through some of the red tape. I'm changing it to "Involved parties besides Bishonen and Ideogram" and sticking in a default "Statement by User:Bishonen" ("It's all my fault!"). You'd better roll your own — perhaps a simple "It's all Bishonen's fault!"? Bishonen | talk 11:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC).

Since you protected the userpage in the first place, I assume you could explain this this? It's really just ut of curiosity. He does look like a troll. Circeus 01:45, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about the diff thing. I should have been more careful. I have edited my comment above for the benefit of everyone Circeus 02:07, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

--TheEmoEater 03:53, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Wherever in the world some angry POV-warrior speaks your name in anger, she will come! At least I think it's she. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:23, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Amazing, it never struck me! But I do believe you have it. A cautious avatar--follows me around, but does not speak my name, not even when as here she's invited to! And avoids some of the other things that you kindly listed for her as dead giveaways. Tha trademark is there, though: the talkpage anger and the lack of mainspace edits. Bishonen | talk 22:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC).

See talk:Aphra Behn. We're going to have some real trouble if D___ C-----d discovers Wikipedia. Oh Noes! Geogre 21:50, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I think DC is more internet savvy than to shout like that. Bishonen | talk 22:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC).

He is. In fact, he would be duty-bound to say that we're great, I imagine. Still, I can think of a few people who might do something like that from my days on C18-L. I went to look through their archive, and the mentions of Wikipedia were just the run of the mill groaning, so I think it was just a troll post. Still, as you know, I'm in no flippin' mood for university d-ck measuring just now. Geogre 22:13, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

It appears that it was Linda Payne, but maybe not. If one of them gets off his or her butt and does some helping, that would be great. Geogre 11:28, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Olaf Simons contributes to the list. One of his recent comments was:

and yet it is strange: this is a medium produced mostly by students -

and their teachers wonder: is it reliable?

But anyway, it is rather gratifying to see the scholars recognising that no source is inherently irreproachable. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:13, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

• Well, the articles they're talking about are not generally done by students, but, of course, the fact that we say, on every page, that we're not definitive can only be ignored because, indeed, our peer review model has made us somewhat definitive. Believe me, ALoan, they know that no source is irreproachable. Their primary job is to complain and to pick at everything. They have to. If they don't, they lose any rationale for their own jobs. They must find a mistake, or else they won't have anything to say on the subject, and if they can't say something on the subject, they can't publish on it, and if they can't publish, they can't be promoted. The bigger the problem, the better the chance for "setting the record straight." This is one of the many reasons I walked away from that crowd as a congregation of pisspots. It's more educational to visit an abatoire than to read what "scholars" have to say to one another on such a list. I wanted to actually help students by making available texts and accounts. They wanted to publish snotty articles in Theory and Practice of Practical Theory of 18th Century Language Text Literature Social Production. I have not decided whether such persons are successful because they are small minded kernels of bitterness or if the system's illogical and inhumane structure makes honest people turn into such, but I know that I don't want to be near them. Geogre 12:22, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Have you seen this [36] ? Paul August ☎ 04:31, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Fred Bauder wanted to desysop Dbachmann in this arbitration case (in the conflict over the Rajput page) and ban SimonP here (in one of the cases concerning the troll -Ril-). In both cases he was (in the end) the only arbitrator advocating this measure. That he suggests banning Giano seems consistent with his positions in these arbcom cases. up+land 17:21, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry - this measure has considerable opposition now, and Fred has admitted that his one-sided proposals often meet considerable opposition from other arbitrators. Besides, only two arbitrators have voted in the EE case, and this measure is currently 1-1 (with Dmcdevit opposing). With the great possibility that more arbitrators will oppose this measure, please don't count yourself out just yet. Editor88 18:44, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I thought it might be the customary, "Caution everyone to play nice" motion, myself, and therefore not to be taken too seriously. The move to block Giano was more concerning, but, as Editor88 says, there isn't a great deal of sentiment behind it. It's all quite preliminary at this point, so no one should be sounding alarms. Geogre 18:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you all, I appreciate it. Thank you Geogre for your eloquent support of me and Giano, it is indeed appreciated. Hmmm, Thursday... I'll phone you tomorrow rather than today, right? I know what Thursdays are like. I hope your news is good. Bishonen | talk 18:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC).

Yes thank you Geogre, very eloquent indeed - life is a drag isn't it, the tedious people that do seem to exist, what do they do for the rest of the year one wonders. Regarding the message above "please don't count yourself out just yet" I certainly don't do you Bishonen? I have decided if I go it will be in a blaze of fireworks. Giano | talk 20:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

• Giano, don't even play like that (and don't be serious, either). It's all going to be fine. Really. As I said, the way I read it, Fred was motioning for "everyone should be cautioned, so no one feels picked on," and I've seen people clearly in the right, who had the ArbCom ruling go wholly in their favor, get that. Giano, you were closer to the line than anyone else with EE, so it makes sense that you'd be the one isolated, but I thought that you never did anything more than express the frustration we all felt in a different way. Having that kid show up to fling boogers at everything you do was, well, like a kid flinging boogers: there was never any damage done, but it made the thing dirty in some deep way. Bish, are you saying Friday? It's Thursday now, and I should be reviewing the 500 poems I assigned for today. (Good thing for me that I have taught these poems many times before.) Barring more crud, I'll be home 9:00 ish, unless you've moved to another time zone. Geogre 20:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

• I'm not the least concerned, even though Fred still wants my head rather than a caution [37] I haven't been cautioned since I inadvertently overtook two police cars on the autoroute to Orange - and even they apologised when the realised the importance of my mission and the error of their ways. No, I have a new cause and raison d'etre which will be revealed shortly in which you can all join - it's going to be called "How to tell when one is over the hill" - In fact I'm going to found the "St Giacomo Autumn Rest Home" where lots of old people give me all their money, and I send them off to live in a converted Goat shed on a mountain in Sicily where the sun will be good for their rheumatism etc, and they can be free of all material cares and possessions. Good idea yeah - I've already the first resident in my sights! Giano | talk 20:55, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, that sounds delightful. Where do I sign? -- ALoan (Talk) 10:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I already live in a goatshed, and it's 90 F at 11:00 PM, so sunshine is nothing I lack anywhere but my soul, and, of course, I haven't money to give up. Sounds like I should be perfectly contented and retired. I wonder what I'm doing wrong. Geogre 12:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much Bishonen for not forgetting me. Best wishes, --Aminz 04:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry it didn't help. Bishonen | talk 07:23, 29 July 2006 (UTC).

This is a post to AN/I I repost it here, hopefully you'll check it out. User:RevolverOcelotX is back and continues his pattern of making POV edits, wikilawyering, personal attacks, harassing other users, lack of civity, making groundless, violate 3RR then accuse others for violating 3RR, false accusations and generally wasting the community's patience. His actions is similar to indef. blocked User:PoolGuy (except the sockpuppets part) and constantly engage himself in bootless wikilawyering. (vexatious litigant) For more information please refer to [[38]] for the full length report and his contributions. I urge administrators to take a close look at his conduct and block him immediately. More evidence available if you guys need it. Thanks--Bonafide.hustla 05:17, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

There is no evidence of policy violation here. For the record, I'm not the only person reverting Bonafide.hustla's POV pushing. Other user have reverted Bonafide.hustla's mass POV pushing here and at other articles as well. Bonafide.hustla (talk · contribs) have been repeated mass POV pushing on many articles since his initial arrival to Wikipedia. See Bonafide.hustla's contributions for more details. --RevolverOcelotX 05:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Bish's talkpage is not a forum. I guess Bishonen already has a pretty good idea about this user from [[39]] [[40]] [[41]]. Just another example of this user's bootless wikilawyering see vexatious litigant (quote).--Bonafide.hustla 05:48, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Bonafide.hustla was the only person spamming his complaint on the talk page of other users. Please keep on WP:ANI. For the record, Bonafide.hustla was banned from WP:ANI for wikilawyering. See here for evidence of Bonafide.hustla's banning from WP:ANI. He is now evading his ban and should be blocked. --RevolverOcelotX 05:48, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[[42]] reinstated. Revolver just violate 3RR and should be blocked. --[[43]] Thanks--Bonafide.hustla 05:59, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

There was no violations there, considering there was only 3 reverts made. --RevolverOcelotX 06:02, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

First rv 15:48, 27 July 2006 RevolverOcelotX (Talk | contribs) --Bonafide.hustla 06:04, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

The first edit was not a revert. --RevolverOcelotX 06:06, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

you reverted to this version 14:28, 26 June 2006 RevolverOcelotX (Talk | contribs--Bonafide.hustla 06:10, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

That's not a revert. Other users have since edited the page. --RevolverOcelotX 06:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

<sighs> could someone please explain to him the definition of revert? by the way, sorry to take up your talkpage space. maybe you should delete this crap.--Bonafide.hustla 06:17, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

The first edit was definately not a revert. The edit made was clearly (Taiwan) rather than "(on Taiwan)". Note that this is a subtle, but very important difference with different meanings. This edit was made according to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese), "on Taiwan" would refer to the island geographically, while (Taiwan) would refer to usually refer to the most common political name usage. Thus, there have been no policy violations in the mentioned article. Unfortunately, this was repeatedly reverted by Bonafide.hustla (talk · contribs) who misleadingly labeled clear content disputes as "vandalism". --RevolverOcelotX 09:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry guys, I'm travelling and only able to be online occasionally and briefly. You'll have to take it somewhere else. Bishonen | talk 07:23, 29 July 2006 (UTC).

So far, so good on the user. I think there is some reform, or at least some avoidance, which is as good at this point. Geogre 22:12, 28 July 2006 (UTC)