Thanks for all your help. I appreciate it. I will keep plugging away trying to improve the citations for the information on this page. It's not easy getting the hang of this but with time i am sure that I will. Wikipedia is really an incredible resource that has changed the information game in a profound way! I will be back later to keep working on these issues that have been clearly identified. Best, Auerbach88 (talk) 17:32, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How do you add references? Rileyschneider (talk) 04:34, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• a. you can click on edit and see what I did; b. look at Wikipedia:Citing sources (that's maybe more than you want; c. drop a note at Wikipedia:Teahouse, which is full of nice people willing to help. Make sure your sources are good--don't go around citing commercial websites and fan sites and what not. Newspapers are best for your topic; see also WP:RS, in case you haven't done the research paper in Freshman Comp yet. And that source I added says he won that competition three times, not four--I have to take their word over yours.

  I saved your article for the moment by adding a few citations and toning the language down a bit (that whole "best rider ever" stuff doesn't fly in an encyclopedia); good luck with it! Drmies (talk) 04:38, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, now he's socking. Softlavender (talk) 17:11, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's kind of silly. Ha, no good deed goes unpunished. Drmies (talk) 18:53, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts exactly. Softlavender (talk) 06:12, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• This I wrote for you. It's crap - and I can't finish it, but it's a start. The Immaculate Conception (Tiepolo). Hafspajen (talk) 17:15, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I got cramp in me mouse arm. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 23:42, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Starting to reek of an old coat now. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 17:38, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are an admin that took part in the "Slow-walking, sweet-talking Jones" discussion at AN/I, can you please pull the plug and end this, one way or the other? Nothing good is coming of it. There are new personal attacks that are drawing in bystanders. What is the point of letting this run on? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:57, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• As you wish. Drmies (talk) 21:15, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• [1] — Ched :  ?  21:01, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for that, Ched! Drmies (talk) 21:15, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I agreed to use greater care and respect AGF and WP:CIVIL. User:Skyring has decided this is his opportunity to attempt to taunt and provoke me [2] because he's decided to build a case against me: User:Skyring/DBPromises. When I asked him to respect civility policy[3][4], he responded with more taunts [5]. This comment spells it out clearly: he thinks I'm vulnerable, and therefore an easy tartget for taunts, baiting, and personal attacks, and if I object, he thinks he can use it against me. So he has free license to hound and provoke me.

  If I take this back to ANI, it's just going to be yet another 10,000 word shouting match. Skyring was clearly Wikihounding me before, and now he has decided to take it to another level, without fear of consequences. I don't see a point in a block, but can he be put on notice to find another target for his uncivil behavior, or else face sanctions? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:03, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Skyring, Pete, I really don't want to get in between you and another editor again. Nor do I want to look at all the diffs Dennis Bratland has provided, and maybe a set of counterdiffs, and etc. I will say that WP:POLEMIC applies to that page in your user space. Back in the old days you could have such material if you were preparing an RfC/U, but those days have gone. Right now it says you can't have such materials "if they will not be imminently used", so please keep that in mind. Dennis Bratland may be wrong in all kinds of ways, I don't know, but hounding is still a policy violation. I really, really, hope that you two can leave each other alone. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 20:26, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • As the purpose of such pages is that they never be used for the putative purpose, I have removed them elsewhere. Thanks for the advice. I'll do more watching and less helping. --Pete (talk) 20:36, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you Pete. Drmies (talk) 20:40, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What is your issue with my updates to Independence Day? How do you reference "apparently destroyed" to anything except the imagery in the film?

Bd64kcmo (talk) 21:11, 13 January 2016 (UTC)bd64kcmoBd64kcmo (talk) 21:11, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• It's redundant, a waste of words--and original research. This is an encyclopedia: we don't do "presumably" unless a reliable source says it. As a side note, I was the third editor to revert you; that should tell you something. Drmies (talk) 03:17, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why did u send me the warning notification?What wrong I have done? Ultrastar1989 (talk) 23:09, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Besides that incredibly offensive and racist note you left on that talk page? Drmies (talk) 03:13, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Pehaps "aggressively nationalistic" might also describe it? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:20, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cullen, that's a really good option. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 13:04, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Drmies, I might need your help regarding the West Virginia Radio Corporation page. User:Patrickrinehart made several edits (including several removals) to the page back on the 6th.

He posted to my talk page saying he was the company's "Corporate Director of Digital". I responded back and made the changes requested with the exception of the removal of stations.

The user posted again today regarding the same issue. The language ("I need to make changes" and "the same changes I made originally") along with the obvious not reading of my last post, show that this user might become a problem. I did respond to the new post.

I believe there is a clear COI problem here and I believe the company might be trying to whitewash their Wikipedia page as part of a station buy. The station buy has brought their operation of a few stations (the same ones the user is wanting to delete from the page) into question by the FCC.

I'm not completely sure how to proceed at this point, so I am bringing this to your attention. I'm also pinging Diannaa and Mlaffs as they are knowledgable in radio stations as well. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've notified the user about our conflict of interest guideline and our disclosure requirement regarding paid editig. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:26, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Diannaa! Good enough, Homer? :) Drmies (talk) 03:12, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that'll work. Thanks! :) - Neutralhomer has Escaped • Talk • 07:27, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Ed 11 ed (talk) 06:55, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I removed the ANI report before seeing this (diff). For reference: Ed 11 ed (talk · contribs). Johnuniq (talk) 07:07, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My oh my, is he persistent... PS: I put my LP-player at the livingroom again, connected with two computer-speakers, and played my old Bowie-LPs again. Bought most of them in 1992, and had to find a job then because I spent too much money on buyig second hand LPs. Those were the days! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:31, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All The Young Dudes, Joshua Jonathan. I owned a "rock and roll hits" record store in the Detroit suburbs in 1971-1972, when Bowie was first taking off in the U.S. Selling his records was total enjoyment, apartment rent and 99 cent Coney Island hotdog meals. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:09, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Low and Station to Station in the kitchen, Diamond Dogs in the car, The Man Who Sold the World at work. I'll switch em out today. Cullen, you are rock and roll. Drmies (talk) 13:06, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a great loss, notwithstanding his penchant for thermally challenged vagrants: [6]. Vain Man Rest 123 (talk) 20:14, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, that's from a Dutch show--TopPop. I wonder what kind of guitar that is; maybe a Burns or something? Yes, you look divine. Drmies (talk) 04:08, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What a groovy show. Yes, maybe a Burns, but more of a statement I feel. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:50, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen the notification (I highlighted your name)? Then, get busy man! I forgot to write it in my summary, it's reference #5 in the article (the last). Indeed, RIP Ziggy, but also Scott Weiland and Lemmy (they will continue to fall like over-sarcastic ripe melons, sadly; Justin Bieber(s), where are you when you are needed?)...

All the best, as always, thanks a million in advance --84.90.219.128 (talk) 01:25, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm not sure those pings work. I tweaked your translation--I never know the code in a template for translated title, but you do--of that rather awkward title: the "but" is uncalled for. I sang Ace of Spades on the karaoke on New Year's. Drmies (talk) 03:59, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for using The Drmies Noticeboard^TM in this way but I rarely do more than gnoming on US-centric articles. I've just expanded Tierney Dining Cars from a stub but need someone to check my spelling, terminology etc per MOS:TIES. One oddity is that the sources do in fact refer to toilet even though I'm pretty sure that the usual US term is bathroom.

Since I'm also struggling to find an image that is definitely not in copyright, if anyone happens to be in the Rhode Island area there is apparently a Tierney-based diner at 64 Brown Street, called the Wickford Diner. A photo of that might do the trick. (WP:RHODEISLAND is inactive).

Thanks in advance, and apologies once again to the owner :) Sitush (talk) 07:29, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sitush, just a small note on one of the things you queried: "Toilet" is perfectly fine American English terminology, especially since it's not clear in the wiki article whether the item referred to is the toilet itself or the room containing it (the term can refer to either; so you might want to clarify which in the wiki article if possible). "Bathroom" would not be correct in this instance in my opinion since, as the name implies, bathrooms generally contain bathtubs or showers (and thus are found mainly in residences or hotel rooms, not in public places or transportation). "Restroom" (singular, or plural if seeking both separate facilities for each gender) is the modern term/euphemism for a (generally public) room which contains only toilet(s) and sink(s), but I'm not sure when that term came into existence in case you are seeking historical-term accuracy.

(PS: Nowadays people also say "ladies' room" and/or "men's room" if being even more euphemistic, but by now in some quarters that's slightly passé except in very polite society [or maybe Down South where when I was living there some of my parents' friends still said "little girls' room" and "little boys' room" <eyeroll>]).

Hope that helps. Softlavender (talk) 08:32, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Softlavender, here in the really Deep South we say all kinds of things, depending on the time of day. I really have no opinion on what's proper and what's not, esp. now that one of the little people living in my house has reached double digits. Sitush, as you know no one "owns" anything on WP, and I gave up ownership of this page long ago--I want to thank you for the potty talk, of course. I'd love to chat--but I gotta pee. Drmies (talk) 17:45, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Restroom is the word I was thinking of, not bathroom. My ignorance is only bettered by my failing memory. (In the north-east of England, the traditional vernacular was "netty" - perhaps a prescient association of the web and where the human waste goes.) - Sitush (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And don't forget the great euphemism "Summer house" - as in, summer for boys and summer for girls. (Sorry!) --MelanieN (talk) 22:17, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Or WC for "water closet" which makes no sense unless you know it's an old term for a bathroom. In schools, they were called "lavatories" but I never heard this term used anywhere else. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:46, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• To be frank, I'd never heard the term WC / water closet before moving to Indonesia. I winced noticeably when I realized that, because of said term, Indonesians tended to associate the word "closet" with bathroom/restroom/lavatory as well; it causes physical pain to read a subtitle for "Let me get my coat out of the closet" that reads (translated) "Let me get my coat out of the bathroom."

As for euphemisms: we always used "boys' room" and "girls' room" back in school. No "little". — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:59, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WC is very common in Britain. Winston Churchill used to joke about the fact that his initials were on "countless doors throughout the country". --MelanieN (talk) 01:32, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Very droll. It may have been common in Churchill's time but I cannot recall ever seeing it in my 53 years other than in period dramas/TV/books etc. (Seeing includes "hearing" in my my case.) Stephen Fry seems routinely to use "lavatory", which I suspect is very much a public school thing.

BTW, I recommend Temples of Convenience and Chambers of Delight by Lucinda Lambton, ISBN 978-0-31214-191-2. Bought it for one of my brothers years ago, borrowed it off him and he never got it back, ha ha. - Sitush (talk) 02:29, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All the modern conveniences EEng (talk) 02:44, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikivoyage has a [7] page specifically for all this crap (sic), can tell there is a predominately male conversation, there is nothing about powdering the nose yet... JarrahTree 02:35, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, the military term is "to hit the head" or simply "the head". Not the slightest clue where that one comes from, but as a Navy Brat, I learned the term quickly. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:54, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think it refers to the practice of putting the toilets on the beak of a naval sailing warship. Forcing the crew to shit in full view of the ship's officers. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 10:44, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Head (watercraft). I first heard the term on JAG, but never knew why it was called that, or that it was limited to watercraft (I thought it was a just a military thing). Softlavender (talk) 11:38, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)@Softlavender: Your edit summary made my thoughts drift to the 1960s when I was an avid alpine skier, and saw a big sign outside a ski shop that read "The perfect gift for Christmas this year: give Head". Thomas.W ^talk 12:11, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This must be one of the most euphemized (is that a word?) words in the English language. While we are at it, how about john (mostly U.S. usage I think), loo (seems to be the most common expression in Britain), and of course potty (for the kiddies). --MelanieN (talk) 13:48, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In southern California the celebs and other rich image-oriented folk believe the more bathrooms the better. Also, the more expensive the bathroom appointments the better (gold plate, marble, etched glass, jacuzzis a must). In many homes there are more bathrooms than bedrooms. For people on diuretics it's actually quite convenient.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:12, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We have more bathrooms than we have dogs, Bbb. And all of them have a tub (a complete wast of money and space...). I'm getting a quote from Cullen328 for redoing them, but no doubt he wants to turn all our 1920s tiled bathrooms into recycle-ready eco-friendly poop holes. Damn hippie. Drmies (talk) 16:16, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All your dogs have bathtubs? Lucky dogs! 0;-D --MelanieN (talk) 21:48, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We used to advise people that in case of severe weather they could shelter in the bathroom, one of the assumptions being that bathrooms don't have big windows allowing entrance to flying debris. We have to qualify that advice now that bathrooms have turned into showcase rooms in modern homes. I've never understood some of the trends in home fashion. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 21:38, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There's more to it than the lack of windows. The plumbing helps hold the framing together, and the tub is a good refuge, especially if you pull a mattress over yourself. I keep telling myself to unwatch this discussion, but it exerts a strange fascination. EEng 21:56, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Head is a naval, not military term -- the ground pounders typically use "latrine," and civilian vessels also use head. In the Northeast US at least, "water closet" is still used to annotate toilets on building plans. Incidentally the article has been copied edited per the original request. There's apparently a Tierney diner in operation in not terribly far from my location; if someone wants to remind me come May or so (when the weather is more conducive to a sightseeing trip) I could probably be persuaded to get a photo of it (if no one has yet). NE Ent 23:54, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be silly. Head is a cephalic term; umbilical is a navel term. EEng 03:16, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Marines use the term, heard a few grunts use it too. :) Let's not forget "the can" as well...and my favorite "the hopper", which is hilarious when you heard Dish Network's "Hopper" commercials. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:32, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And of course, let us not forget the classic low British English term "loo", as in "Skip to the loo, my darling". John from Idegon (talk) 21:31, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On 15 January 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Astrid Roemer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Surinam-born Dutch author Astrid Roemer is the first Caribbean writer selected to receive the highest Dutch literary prize, the P. C. Hooft Award? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Astrid Roemer. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cool...we had DYKs on the Main page at the same time.--Mark Miller (talk) 22:22, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Whoa: that's a pretty substantial article for such a little dish. Nice work. It's making me hungry. The Schnittchen don't look so appetizing (ha, it brings back a pretty funny memory, related to my ex-girlfriend's mother making Schnittchen for a friend of mine who was clearly trolling her with his enormous appetite...I hated her as much as she hated me, haha), but Ringier's 175th anniversary, that looks tasty. Drmies (talk) 03:32, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I gained ten pounds after I decided to field test some of the research through the holidays!--Mark Miller (talk) 04:22, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It's been a while since I edited Wikipedia in earnest and so I am out of practice with the procedures. I was hitting random articles recently and stumbled across Helen Doron English which led to Helen Doron. I suspect the former is advertising and the latter is not notable. I have spent a fair amount of time examining both articles with a view to suggesting improvements. I cannot, however, find enough reliable sources and therefore both articles would be, in my opinion, candidate articles for deletion. I do not feel current enough to initiate that process and would thus welcome your recommendation on who, within Wikipedia, to approach. --Senra (talk) 02:24, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• It's been two years, Senra. You've changed your signature since then--our procedures have changed less than that. Let's see...RfC/U has disappeared...ANI is less fun...yeah that's about it. Drmies (talk) 03:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• I slapped some nominations around. Yeah, commercial. Drmies (talk) 03:23, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you. Much appreciated. I will have a look at your nominations --Senra (talk) 14:15, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your input would be useful: [8].Thanks. Montanabw^(talk) 03:19, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Oh, that's a lot of words, Montana. Drmies (talk) 03:26, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • True, perhaps just observe the actual article edits. I'm mostly concerned about keeping the personal attacks to a minimum. Skim the usernames, you'll figure it out. The crux of the talk page debate is basically a MEDRS dispute over the weight and balance between two meta-analyses ("Anestis 2014" and "Selby/Smith Osborne 2013" with a side debate over a literature review "Lentini 2015" -- all linked in the article refs -- at least last I looked) the most recent drama beginning here: [9]. Montanabw^(talk) 07:23, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello to you : watching your article, Vera Songwe doesn't work anymore for the World Bank (end : June, 30 2015) : look at that french link, with google translate. Best regards. Sg7438 —Preceding undated comment added 19:16, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I tweaked the lead. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:14, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am opening this section on your talkpage just to get some guidance. Please do not consider it shopping. The fact of the matter is that I edit Islam/Religion related articles and every few months some new accounts are created who think that they must protect certain articles which are about their religion. Any changes which I do to their beloved articles are seen as a red flag and they drag me to ANI. ANI being what it is, it takes days, sometimes weeks to solve the problem either via archiving, or closure. Even though I am found not guilty , it remains a hassle for me to take time out from my normal editing to reply to these accusations at the ANI. Now I have a very very, VERY thick skin, and I am by no means crying here. But the problem is that this just wastes my time, causes disruption in my editing and is just a great hassle. I have to spend time at the ANI just to clear up my name. Given below is my ANI trial from last year.

1. Most recent Closure. When I started removing POV and other un encyclopedic additions from Shia related articles an editor who has pro shia POV and only edits Shia related articles opened up an ANI. I was accused of edit warring, POV pushing, Removing sources material and altogether disruption. Now none of this was proven but this ANI took up almost 8 days running from 14th till 21st December 2015. It was 8 days of accusations, replies and other shenanigans which wasted quite a lot of time.In the end I was reminded to be more civil, but no disruptive pattern was found in my edits which was the topic of the ANI.
2. Earlier in november. I nominated some Shia related articles for AFd and starighaway I was taken to ANI. This was quickly closed thanks to a non admin, but again, no action was taken and other editors agreed that there was nothing wrong with my edits.
3. Late August. I was doing cleanup work on a Fringe religiuos entity known as tolou-e-Islam and lo and behold thier protector takes me to ANI and accuses me of vandalism. This too was commented upon by uninvolved editors who said that my edits were fully endorsed by wiki policy.
4. Almost the same time I was again taken to ANI just becasue I was editing Islam related articles to add the Ahmadiyyah sect as muslims and becasue I was editing India/Pakistan related articles. This ANI also resulted in a semi-boomerang for the nom as he was admonished for having IDLI and other various issues. One of the admonishers was Dougweller.
5. In the last days of August. I was again taken to ANI just because I was removing POV from articles. Here too the nom was Boomeranged and almost blocked. He has since given up editing I think, and is almost non existent.
6. During April I was dragged to the ANI two, times. Both times by the same user. The underlying reason was that this editor had created a thinly veiled hate page called Rape Jihad and I was trying my best to either AFD it or at least clean it up a little. The combined ANI's lasted almost a full month. So vociferous was the nom in his accusations that when I edited rape jihad again I was blocked by an admin who told me that I was POv pushing. By mid May the Hate page was deleted and salted for good measure, and the nom who had started the reports and wasted a full month, quietly disappeared never to be seen again.
7. Even now I am subject to a concerted effort by five different editors who, instead of opening new threads just update a thread which is kinda "combined FreeatLast hate thread". I have shown that these guys are not just assuming bad faith on my part, they are outright lying about me. And I have provided diffs to that effect. I am also sure that they will most probably be admonished, but they have wasted almost a full month of my time. every day they just take one of my edits, then post the diff on this ANI thread and say some fabricated thing about it.

Now seeing this kind of shenanigans can you advise me? To be frank I was OK editing as an IP for the past 6 and half years, it was anonymous, and editing was fun. However these days most pages are semi-ed and you need an account to edit most topics. But it seems that anytime a religious article is touched there is someone around the corner shouting his head off that I have somehow done incalculable damage to his god/temple/shrine/holy book etc. and he just launches an ANI report to falsely accuse me. Please be kind enough to give read this and give some advice. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 06:58, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Hey. That's a lot to read. I'm reading and jotting down notes. First, I wouldn't be the first to note that the more you tone it down the more successful you will be. Second, UltraExactZZ had some good advice for you in that mass nomination thread. (By the same token, they also didn't see that this was ANI-worthy, so you should be happy with that.) Third, if I saw this comment of yours I wouldn't think anything of it, and the comments by for instance Doug Weller in that thread are clear. So what's the worry right now? Who's ganging up where? You could start an ANI thread, or ask a real admin... Drmies (talk) 15:38, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can only echo Drmies advice. Tone it down, don't go over 2RR, if there is an obvious (and I mean inyourface) NPOV violation or terrible source take it calmly to the appropriate noticeboard. You are editing in an area where there is very strong feeling and there's no easy solution. And as Arbitrators Drmies and I really should stay uninvolved as possible in case something comes to ArbCom. Doug Weller talk 15:50, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, thanks for the reminder. Drmies (talk) 15:57, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Doug Weller By "ganging up" I meant [the latest thread on ANI that was opened up by one person]. It was clear that the complaint was going nowhere then another guy instead of starting his own thread (which he knew would be closed) added his own subsection to the first thread and then another and then another. Now I have four/five guys who just edit each others section daily and prevent archiving through bot and when they feel like it they create a new subsection with fabrication(And I do mean fabrication like 100% made up stuff). They have been successful for 17 days so far, with not a single uninvolved agreeing with their accusations. One guy even called out the first reporter saying that he should stop editing the thread as he was using his edits to prevent archiving. Anyway I'll try to use the noticeboards but this is one of the most irritating things to face once you make an account. I don't think I even knew about a TP when I was editing as IP. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 04:20, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Doc. A series of IP users and newly-registered accounts are edit-warring to insert untimely information into the Doug Pederson article. Pederson will accept the Philadelphia Eagles' head coach position at the conclusion of the 2015-16 season, but he remains the Kansas City Chiefs' offensive coordinator until then. There have been almost three dozen edits over this in the last 24 hours, and the established editors are all going to violate the 3RR rule if we aren't careful. The article needs to be restored to its last stable version, reflecting Pederson as KC offensive coordinator, and semi-protected against IPs and all newly registered editors warned about the insertion of inaccurate information. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:57, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

 – semi-protected. NE Ent 02:52, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I suppose the real problem is with an offensive or even defensive coordinator taking a head job while still coaching. I mean, it would be like Kirby Smart signing on with some SEC rival while the National Championship is still to be played. Unthinkable. (And I'm glad the other problem was sorted out--thanks to all. I was attending a boring birthday party and hosting a very tasteful dinner party.) Drmies (talk) 03:35, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes. None of that could ever happen. Sort of like an iconic Heisman Trophy winner becoming the head coach of another team within the the same division of the same college conference in which his former team competes -- after winning a national championship for his former team. Sometimes reality is stranger than fiction. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:49, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Impact

Thank you for your impact
in closing the gender gap by a dedicated image that says it all!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:34, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Let's remember. Thank you for approving Template:Did you know nominations/Ach Gott, wie manches Herzeleid, BWV 3! Ah God, how much heartache! Written for last Sunday, it was also the perfect comment to deaths such as this, but I was too absorbed to push a DYK. The next best day would be any time this week, because for next Sunday, Bach wrote a different one. - Hafspajen, I was moved to find your name in the very exclusive list of recipients of Impact, as passing it. I feel so honoured to be a recipient. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:08, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you don't mind if I diversify your team :) Will try to help with articles you start/work on, Sadads (talk) 18:51, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Haha, cold up there, no doubt! Sure, Sadads, thanks--see any others we can write up? I got some paperwork to shuffle and some kids to watch, so it won't be for today. Oh, Anthere left a comment for me somewhere, wherever I found that announcement--they wanted cleanup, categories, a picture. If you could look into that, and fly to Cameroon for a photo, that's be great. Drmies (talk) 19:18, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to add to the overly long ANI discussion, but as I've also considered you a good admin, I was surprised by this [10]. Having said that, I try to be open to other views, so given that you support banning me and several other users, I'd very much appreciate if you could explain which policy I've violated, and provide the diffs. The way I see it, before the "simple proposal", I had joined the discussion (late, 11 days in) and I posted 8 posts concerning the topic, backed up by diffs. If you or anyone else disagree with my posts, that's perfectly fine. But if you argue, as you apparently due, that I have been so disruptive that I deserve quite sharp punishment, I'd appreciate if you'd provide the diffs. Last but not least, how come you propose that all users who found FCC problematic should be banned but those who were just as active but defended him should go free. Again, I may be missing something, which is why I'd appreciate if you'd explain when you have the time. Jeppiz (talk) 19:19, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Look, it should be obvious that I'm shooting from the hip there. I will tell you one thing, though: that very discussion is disruptive. I wish I were a real adult, so I could go into that discussion and yell at each and every one of you to shut the hell up and go to your room. No more iPad, no more GameBoy. Everyone (well, everyone else) is sick of it. You're actually a fine editor, and I was a bit surprised to see you in that melee (you're certainly not the biggest disruptor in that thread), and if we're really going to hand out topic bans we'll go through all of that discussion carefully. But please don't ask for diffs: take a step back, look at that entire conversation without even looking at the names, and consider what level of discourse we're engaging in there. Drmies (talk) 19:30, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, no argument there. The discussion is a monster, I wish I had not commented in it in the first place, and I already stated my intention not to go back there earlier today. Had you suggested that everyone involved, no exception, receive the same punishment I would not have thought it a good idea but I would have understood it. I also understand that FCC names everybody who disagreed with him as guilty but nobody who defended him. What surprised me was that you agreed. The reason it grew so big (and again, I came late and it was already big then) is of course that so many users piled it. Punishing everyone who found FCC disruptive but nobody who argued against it him is what I found strange, coming from you, as I've always found your judgement very sound. If there would be what you say here, a discussion of everybody involved being evaluated for their behavior, I would of course understand that perfectly well, regardless of the outcome. It was just your expressed support for blanket-punishing all who disagreed with FCC and blanket-pardoning all who agreed with him I found surprising. Again, no intention to return to any of that. If I can leave with one final word, a general topic. Last year I posted on AN exactly about this kind of situation, too many easily manageable disputes growing out of hand as they are allowed to spin away like this one did. Of course the involved editors are to blame, but I honestly think the admins (in general terms, no specific admin in mind) have some responsibility. I think I suggested then (last Autumn) that if every report was acted on within 48h, one way or the other as long as there's a decision, we would avoid situations like this one. Jeppiz (talk) 19:43, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Wait--FCC would be banned and blocked or whatever too. And you have to understand that in at least some of the situations I've looked at, FCC was right in terms of content, policy, etc.Drmies (talk) 20:15, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • I have often found FCC to be right, in fact. My complaint was with the personal insults, not content, but enough of that. And I understand that FCC would be blocked, my question was more why Fortuna and all others who defended FCC would go free whereas everyone accusing FCC would be banned. If there would be a case by case investigation, that question is of course obsolete. It was just your initial comment that surprised me. Jeppiz (talk) 20:24, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        • I suppose it worked as an attention-getter then, Jeppiz! I hope you understand I share your concern about the insults, and holy moly, Freeatlast is hard of hearing when it comes to that. Next time I see you I hope it's in a more fun environment, like article space. Drmies (talk) 04:02, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your close here is one of the best-worded closes I've seen on Wikipedia. kcowolf (talk) 03:53, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• That's very kind of you, but I'm sure I've seen better ones. Still, I appreciate it. Now, let's hope that we won't see these players on ANI anytime soon... Drmies (talk) 04:03, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• • Thanks, Doc. Great pic of Ziggy, BTW. 06:10, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Drmies, I read your answer in the noticeboard. My name is Taichi, not Taicho; so please correct. Second, I don't apologize to Mona778 about this. This case is very embarrasing for me and Yeza, because we're trustfully sysops from Spanish Wikipedia. Your unprofessional response to this case indicates that perhaps this should be resolved in a cordial way. We are colleagues, regardless of who come from different projects. If you have a problem in our Wikipedia, we would solve cordially, not with irony. I edit few times here, so if you use the block against me, I will acept, but I think as a matter of dignity, I will not make any apology. Here the integrity of our work is played in our project. --Taichi (talk) 06:52, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but, I think that I must write this. The reasons for the blockade of Mona778 are detailed at Spanish Wikipedia. The established channels that were have already indicated here. She have not been used, and instead has rewritten to Jimbo with a speech used words ("by a gang of Taichi, Yeza from the third world Latin American countries (forgive me for using the word gang, but I can't think of a better word to describe their actions!) One from Panama and the other one I am not so sure, but maybe from the same country. Infact, that doesn't matter because there are both two sides of the same coin..") This, in short, because he was prevented from imposing hers version in an article, using her username and multiple IPs causing an edit war, in his way, without following the guidelines established in the policies and recommendations, without regard to the sources made by another person (who denunciated the situation), no attempt consensus, no attempt dialogue, only hers imposition. Sorry for the inconvenience and my english. Regards.--Yeza (talk) 07:28, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Taichi, I don't have a problem in your wiki: you seem to have a problem in mine. If you are embarrassed, I'm sorry for you; but this edit and this edit are just not done. You get onto someone's talk page to restore, against all our guidelines, an unjust warning from three months before? Have you read WP:OWNTALK, the part where it says "users may freely remove comments from their own talk pages.... The removal of a warning is taken as evidence that the warning has been read by the user"? Did you read the warning, and what it was for? It was this edit--now look at it and tell me why that had to be reverted. And then you make it even worse with this edit. So, "integrity"? You don't have a leg to stand on, and the more you argue, the sillier you look.

  Yeza, what this editor did on the Spanish wiki is of no interest to me at all, but if Taichi acts there the way they're trying to act here, I feel for those editors. Please look at Mona's edits on the English wiki and tell me what they did wrong. Drmies (talk) 15:26, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No te preocupes, ya puse en mi anterior escrito las falsas acusaciones y palabras incivicas vertidas en este proyecto, no me voy a repetir. Salutacions cordials, à bientôt--Yeza (talk) 05:44, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies, you are my hero! Thank you so much, I haven't had such a good laugh in a long time. You got it right, unfortunately there's no joy in es.wikipedia. Our friend is not just a normal sysop (definitely not "trustfully"), but one of the most active sysops in Spanish Wikipedia, his unpleasant attitude shown here, is much more charming than his normal behaviour... and his Spanish is not much better than his English. "All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence, and then success is sure".--Hisan'na (talk) 23:24, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for closing this. You deserve a cookie. 🍪 --QEDK (T 📖 C) 10:25, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As you know I started the ANI which later became 1000 thousands screen long! the report which was enlarged by some other editors. I'm not insisting on actions being taken, it's just a question. As it seems, civility issues are not that serious here or at least their limits are so flexible that one may be asked by admins to be civil after being reported on ANI, and he can keep on the same behavior in a much more intensive manner and again he receives a warning. Besides civility issues there are of course some disruptive issues discussed there. But really, how many warnings are needed? Mhhossein (talk) 11:29, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

By the way I forgot to thank you for entering the thread, and please note that I followed your dialogue with Jeppiz and FCC. Mhhossein (talk) 11:32, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• You're welcoming, Mhhossein; I believe you and I have worked together on things before and I hope my work was satisfactory. Let me assure you that civility is indeed a serious matter, though it is obvious also that different people and different cultures draw different lines. This complaint is ongoing; I have heard it during all my years as a Wikipedia editor, and I doubt very much that we'll ever agree as a community on what is and what is not civil. I seriously hope that all sides in these conflicts will make a better effort to resolve issues before they get out of hand; in some cases that may well mean walking away from something to return to it later, much later perhaps. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 15:17, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for your response. Yeah, I remember our joint works and I appreciate your good cooperations. While I do understand the differences between the different cultures, I'm doubtful if there are cultures which deem the "F" word (and it's derivatives such as "what the f**k and Shut the F**k up), "[you have] mental disease"[11], "you are a liar" (used many times by him throughout the thread), "INCLUDING YOUR OWN DAMN SELF", "He is a shia and any Shia page I edit as he blindly reverts" (case of ad hominem comments) to be civil. Thanks anyway, my doubt will probably be removed after some years! Mhhossein (talk) 04:17, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• My dear Mhhossein, I assure you, the editor is put on notice and I intend to follow up on any infractions. I hope this finds you well, and in good spirits to contribute to our beautiful project. Drmies (talk) 04:24, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I feel much better now. Thanks God, the project has experienced and skillful admins like you. Mhhossein (talk) 12:53, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering about the length of the block you imposed on Wikihil123. In my view, one week seems a bit punitive. The editor wasn't making tons of daily edits to begin with, and seems genuinely confused as to what they're doing wrong. I think it's possible that this could be either (A) an editor for whom English is not their first language; or (B) one of our younger editors, who simply needs a bit of mentoring from a more experienced editor. Hallward's Ghost ^{(Kevin) (My talkpage)} 19:56, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry, I disagree. Here's an editor who for weeks has edited against guidelines and policies and never satisfactorily responded to concerns; they escaped an indef block per WP:NOTHERE only narrowly. If you want to offer mentoring, that's fine, and they are welcome to place an unblock request. Drmies (talk) 21:19, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  If I may, on which part were you disagreeing with me? The editor wasn't making many daily edits, so do you believe the confusion they evince at their talkpage is in some way feigned? Or were you simply disagreeing with my view that the block seemed a bit punitive? As for mentorship, I don't think I'm well-versed enough in Wikipedia policy to help in that way, or I would step forward to help. I'm hoping that one of the Teahouse regulars will do so, as I've seen them be very helpful to new users in the past. Hallward's Ghost ^{(Kevin) (My talkpage)} 21:41, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I disagree that the block seems punitive. I do not see confusion on the talk page; I see stubborn repetition of "I was just trying to this and that" and "I was just giving more information" and, I'm citing, "i shown it where i got it from", when the question was about reliable sources. And you don't have to be that well-versed to realize, as I am sure you do, that we need to cite using reliable sources...you can teach them that. Drmies (talk) 00:30, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for the further explanation. While I still think the LENGTH of the block feels punitive, since he wasn't editing a ton each day, I can see how you would interpret his talk page responses otherwise than I did. I very much appreciate it when administrators take the time to discuss the actions they choose to take. Best regards, Hallward's Ghost ^{(Kevin) (My talkpage)} 07:20, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It may be you can find an appropriate use for certain electrical devices (2nd para) in your new role over at ArbCom or maybe even for the wastrels who plague the Mountains of Misery. One thing leads to another. "I'm from Home Office and I'm here to help." Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 23:17, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for setting me straight I am going to now do my best I make helpful edited and one day become an administrator. What do you think is a good way to become a administrator Jgabe550 (talk) 05:28, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Make lots of edits, and write lots of articles, so you know what it's like to make decisions like deleting something someone wrote... Drmies (talk) 14:55, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies, I was wondering whether you could take a quick look at this DYK nomination to see whether there's any close paraphrasing or copyvio of the Dutch sources. (There was some of the English sources, which is why a check of the Dutch is being requested.) Contra the previous reviewer, Vesuvius Dogg, it is possible to closely paraphrase when translating from a foreign language, and I've actually found cases where it was a Google translate (which was pretty rough, as they always are). A spot check should be fine. Thanks for anything you can do; it's been stalled for a couple of weeks. BlueMoonset (talk) 08:12, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Sure thing, BlueMoonset--but it may take me a minute or two. Drmies (talk) 14:54, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you so much for taking it on. I see you've been diverted by all the questions below; getting to it in the next day or two would be great. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:35, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm working through it, BlueMoonset. Problem is that the second source is unavailable, and it's not just the link in the article; going through a Google search doesn't work either. It's a pretty important source, for another reason also: I think one of the citations for ref. 3 is incorrect. Crispulop, look at your citation for Ritzen: that's not in the Mare article; my guess it's in the Bionieuws article, the dead one. [time ticking away] OK, the Beeld en Geluid reference can verify the Ritzen claims; perhaps that's what you had in mind.

  BlueMoonset, I have looked at refs 1, 3, 4, and 6, and all the sentences sourced to it, and found no plagiarism/close paraphrasing/close translation. I will say, however, that I don't like the "felt" in the hook; "was convinced" is stronger. Crispulop, nice article--are you affiliated with Leiden? Drmies (talk) 03:38, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Many thanks, Drmies. Do you think you could post some of the above on the review template? With that, I think the nomination could conclude very quickly once Crispulop made some quick modifications to hook and sourcing (if the latter is still needed). BlueMoonset (talk) 04:36, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

'FM' is likely the Football Manager video game? WP:NOTWEBHOST here? GiantSnowman 12:26, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Haha--you see, that's why I asked the expert. I can't even play Mario Cart. Drmies (talk) 14:54, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning, Dr, I'd appreciate any attention you or talk page stalkers could devote to KILTR, which is currently the subject of persistent promotional edits by a COI account. I've bestowed advice and warnings to the user, to no avail. I'd prefer not to edit war, so any assistance would be welcome. Now, I've got to stock up on provisions before Snowpalooza. Cheers from 99, 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 13:17, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Good call. Make sure you swing by Blockbuster first, before all the good movies are taken and you're left with some John Candy flick. Drmies (talk) 16:39, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]