Loading AI tools
I'm in awe of your copy editing, it's a real object lesson in how to take sentences that seem ok, but then transform them into something much more fluid and logical. Even though you make it seem easy, I'm sure it takes a lot of time. I think it's an amazing skill and I'm studying your changes closely to try and learn as much from them as I can. Thank you. Alistair Stevenson (talk) 23:36, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Barnstar of (ploop) --oh NO it fell in the water! | |
for the wise and humorous "combative injurues" --> "combat injurues" edit Cramyourspam (talk) 05:03, 3 Oct 2012 (UTC) |
guarded logic
Thank you for quality articles such as John Harvard statue, developed with care for detail and explicit edit summaries, revealing "the idea of the three lies is at best a fourth", and other math, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:48, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
A year ago, you were the 463rd recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Two years ago ..., - and did you know that several editors I know enjoy your user page inspiration, unable to decide which pair of image and caption is most to the point? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:59, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
I searched and searched the aisles, and they were fresh out of troll food. So, on to other ventures. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:22, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Nothing you ever did or said regarding the use of "emigrate" or "immigrate" made any sense to me. Sweetmoniker (talk) 08:43, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Maybe this will make sense to you. You asserted, with palpable condescension, that immigrated from and emigrated to are blunders :
Though no possible level of appropriateness to debate on doesn't recommend you as a wordsmith, I would never deny my own fallibility. Thus I double-checked and... guess what? Your prissy 7th-grade English teacher Mrs. Snodgrass was wrong, and my warm and wonderful 8th-grade teacher Mr. Dunkum was right (hi, Mr. Dunkum, wherever you are!): one may emigrate from or emigrate to or (if one prefers) immigrate from, or to, as well.
You've been offered three compelling arguments for why this cannot be but so:
The true difference between imm- and em- is a subtle one of emphasis and narrative point of view. These --
-- are all fine and all subtly different, and would be irreparably crippled if twisted to fit your Procrustean bed of linguistic over-prescription.
EEng (talk) 06:14, 29 January 2014 (UTC) P.S. The link in your post above proves only that emigrate from is acceptable, not that emigrate to is unacceptable
Mr. Dunkum would be right proud, not to mention Sir William Schwenck Gilbert. "Procrustean bed" indeed. I doff my specifical QED to you, dear EEng. – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:49, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Did you really... and I mean that... need to spend all that time making such a post? Its your time, but I think some of this is a bit ironic. Glad to see you are still floating about. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 06:45, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
WARNING! Text inside constitutes, according to one editor, a personal attack! |
---|
|
Not sure if you realise that your edit at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers inserted your reply in the middle of Makyen's comment, which I believe is poor form: your reply should be below, after Makyen's signature, to avoid confusion about who wrote what. I suggest you move your reply.
Sorry to always be harping on the negatives instead of admiring all the good stuff you've been doing! I get the sense that you sometimes seem to be in a rush to post your changes and then having to repeatedly edit again and again to patch things up, and there's always the risk that someone will revert, edit, or start a conversation while you're still perfecting your work. Maybe it would be beneficial if you tinkered in the sandbox before posting your finished product for all to enjoy, which might make us all more inclined to praise your work rather than criticise works in progress. I digress. Keep up the good work! —sroc 💬 14:29, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Reading on my iPad and did not mean to revert you! Deepest apologies! Kafka Liz (talk) 01:28, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
I'd be interested to know what you think of the article. EEng (talk) 01:35, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Cash | |
Here's some cash for coming up with that alt hook . --Jakob (talk) 21:54, 29 June 2014 (UTC) |
Your recent editing history at Template:Did you know/Preparation area 4 shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
You should know better than to behave this way. Orlady (talk) 13:44, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | |
When I left a message on the DYK talk page, I didn't expect much to come of it for at least 12 hours, but the deadly duo of EEng and Yoninah performed magnificently, I expected it would need some fixes from me, but you, Yoninah, and Belle fixed all the issues. Thank you very much for getting it done for me, I am very grateful. Best, Matty.007 07:00, 29 July 2014 (UTC) |
The Special Barnstar | |
For becoming the target of administrator Orlady. ...William 13:23, 29 July 2014 (UTC) |
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
For this God-tier pun - that is the first and probably the last papal decretal related pun I shall ever see. I'm afraid I do not have a witty responsionum :( Acather96 (click here to contact me) 20:50, 8 August 2014 (UTC) |
Please be careful about WP:3RR. Thanks. --Tryptofish (talk) 14:47, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at ANI regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is EEng and edit warring. Thank you. —Bgwhite (talk) 07:39, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
[Referring to caption at right] Dammit, I'm going out. I hate for my tickets to go to waste. Know anyone who can use them? To answer (Ritchie) your question re GA (not FA) delisting, see which incidentally makes some blushworthy comments.
But seriously, I'd be very happy for you to comment on who's right and who's wrong. .
EEng (talk) 17:54, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
EEng (talk) 18:09, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
See section immediately following -- so thin-skinned he even made this edit! EEng (talk) 05:52, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bgwhite (talk) 05:36, 30 August 2014 (UTC)I asked you to stop your name calling. You did the same exact thing at ANI and went on to call editors "self-satisfied roving enforcers". Disagreeing with editors is one thing, but belittling editors is another. Bgwhite (talk) 05:42, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Before quitting the subject of freedom of opinion, it is fit to take notice of those who say, that the free expression of all opinions should be permitted, on condition that the manner be temperate ... If the test be offence to those whose opinion is attacked, I think experience testifies that the offence is given whenever the attack is telling and powerful, and that every opponent who pushes them hard, and whom they find it difficult to answer, appears to them, if he shows any strong feeling on the subject, an intemperate opponent.
Just for the record, a former member of Arbcom called this block "outrageous" . EEng (talk) 02:09, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, missed these comments until now, and they bear responding to, just for the record.
EEng (talk) 05:52, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
"The Manual of Style is not yet an education-free zone." I love your style. Cheers. Jonathunder (talk) 18:45, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Bgwhite (talk) 20:26, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
EEng (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Decline reason:
Your edits weren't exempt from the rules on edit warring, because you weren't removing a copyright violation, a libelous statement, or vandalism. In this context, you were edit warring, and considering this is your second block, 72 hours is a reasonable duration. PhilKnight (talk) 07:52, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
{{unblock|1=The unblock decline did not address any of the points I raised in my request, which are, again:
}}
EEng it's not "your" version. Any block to bots that you added was removed exactly because it served no reason as I explained you but you kept reverting me and another editor. The nobots tag on the page is only to prevent bad typo fixing by editors who won;t understand the template you put inside a word. In fact, the template inside the word is not needed since the browser takes care (or at least should care care) of this. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:27, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Wow, a second block by Bgwhite. What a coincidence. Do you have any idea how user:Bladesmulti learnt of your lil spat with Magioladitis in order to revert you 11 minutes after your second revert of Magioladitis? It seems like another coincidence. Did they participate in any related discussions about the article? p.s., for future reference, 3RR is a fairly strict limit; once you hit it, you need to take a break or take the matter to talk / another venue for more people to see the dispute and help one way or another, irrespective of right or wrong, unless the article is a BLP or very clear-cut vandalism. John Vandenberg (chat) 16:39, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Martinevans123 pinged me.
Unblock request was declined per WP:UNINVOLVED which reads "One important caveat is that an administrator who has interacted with an editor or topic area purely in an administrative role, or whose prior involvements are minor or obvious edits which do not speak to bias, is not involved and is not prevented from acting in an administrative capacity in relation to that editor or topic area." -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:36, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
This is all quite academic at this point, but still enlightening. Magioladitis, you don't seem to have looked at the diff I supplied re INVOLVED -- a discussion in which I asked (not of Bgwhite):
and Bgwhite jumped in out of nowhere to reply
(All false statements on Bgwhite's part, BTW, other than that I did refer to certain editors as "MOS Nazis", for which I later substituted "schoolmarmish know-it-alls" or something like that.) Now, does that really comport with UNINVOLVED's criterion, which reads
--? Hardly. Bgwhite lost his temper, repeatedly, and still allowed himself to act on his anger in an administrator's capacity. EEng (talk) 01:26, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Please don't make a personal attack in an edit summary as you did at Wikipedia:Did you know]. Dispute resolution is made that much more difficult. Binksternet (talk) 16:29, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Template:Did you know/Queue/LocalUpdateTimes. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. —Bloom6132 (talk) 21:43, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. —Bloom6132 (talk) 22:06, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:09, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
I suggest you revert this edit. The comment is off-topic there and makes you look petty. I don't think it contributes to a good working climate, either between the two of you, or in general. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 02:54, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
Too true. Oh well, there's lots of other hooks in the sea. Yoninah (talk) 18:44, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. ked me, I'll consult my glittering salon of talkpage stalkers for advice on whether I should file the ritual futile appeal. EEng (talk) 22:14, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
@Drmies:, @Yngvadottir: - I've just had a GA review torpedoed as a result of EEng's block, I don't suppose you've be awfully kind like you were to the Best Known For IP and consider "time served" would you? EEng, I think you've made your point in the AfD (as have I) and we should both leave it alone. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:51, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Potentially Polemic Userbox. Thank you. --Mr. Guye (talk) 00:06, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
I think we'll just have to put Widener behind us, but on the general principle I am in pretty much agreement with your views on GAs; on more than a few occasions (eg: Talk:1988–94 British broadcasting voice restrictions/GA1) I have passed a GA with a comment like "well we've got issues with x, y and z but they're not part of the GA criteria so I'm passing anyway". IMHO the following are not required to pass GA : infoboxes, templates, categories, URLs for print sources that happen to be online, non-free images, audio files, an inline source at the end of each paragraph, links to other articles, any external links .... I could go on.
Even so, I would say this : although you generally have free reign to run your talk page as you see fit, you don't WP:OWN it. Not everyone appreciates my sense of humour either, but arguing about it isn't a particularly productive use of your time. In this instance an admin has implemented consensus from ANI to not include something on your user page and while you didn't directly revert, you have effectively stuck two fingers up at it. I think we'll draw a line under this conversation now and hope it goes away, because all it takes is one cheesed off admin to look at it and you'll be in trouble. Let's hope Martin can fatally wound the dispute with some sarcasm before we can finally kill it off with irony. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:01, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Maybe you could get me one of those shirts at discount rate, EEng? I was thinking of getting involved at ANI. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:00, 6 February 2015 (UTC) <"chortle">
...your User Page is quite entertaining! Thank you for the invite. Atsme☯Consult Agent 99 14:06, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
I haven't checked out your userpage in a long while, but I laughed so hard (I particularly liked the "head in the sand" picture) I nearly snorted coffee out of my nose. PS: I would like to apologise for being tempted to go to the dark side.... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:30, 20 March 2015 (UTC) |
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
I don't care if others appreciate your humor or not. I do! Your posts give me many a laugh. And thanks for your many clever emendations to hooks in the preps, like this one. Yoninah (talk) 22:56, 4 April 2015 (UTC) |
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
I lost track of the number of times you literally made me laugh out loud while reading your comments. The latest being this - NQ (talk) 20:12, 24 April 2015 (UTC) |
The Barnstar of Good Humor | ||
For your medicine against chronic wikidespair.[note 1]
|
I know they say no one's indispensable, but in the case of catchy hooks, you have been the only one doing anything about it. Where have you been lately? I really felt I had nothing but "blah" to work with while assembling Preps 3 and 4 last night. The part about hooks being "hooky" should be written in the rules in blood! Yoninah (talk) 09:12, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
I will probably catch hell for this, but my patience has run out. Will you please stop making personal attacks against The Rambling Man on WT:DYK and anywhere else. I'm dead against blocking established contributors, but other admins are not, as you well know. Attacks don't help your argument, it just means people either think the other party is right or ignore the conversation. Please, do something else. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:14, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
Did you know ... “that the cart blanche was invented by supermarket entrepreneur and inventor of the shopping cart Sylvan Goldman.?” Martinevans123 (talk) 15:21, 11 June 2015 (UTC) I had a cart blanche once, but it wouldn’t go in a straight line.
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:22, 12 June 2015 (UTC)The Barnstar of Good Humor | ||
For your wit, constructive sarcasm and edgy humor, your perspective and contributions, sometimes contentious but worth it. I could bet serious money that your wiki-adventures here may someday be the start of a novel novel.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:19, 12 June 2015 (UTC) |
The Barnstar of Good Humor | ||
Here, add another to your collection. You had me shaking. ~ RobTalk 20:36, 9 July 2015 (UTC) |
0:03, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
I will admit that I stand with User:Softlavender. You're talk page is hilarious! Well done at getting into so many hilarious scenarios and being able to be both serious and humorous as needed! You deserve every single one of these that you get:
The Barnstar of Good Humor | ||
message Dr Crazy 102 (talk) 10:30, 31 July 2015 (UTC) |
Dr Crazy 102 (talk) 10:31, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello E. I got a chuckle out of this though I am not sure if that will be the reaction of everyone. Should someone start editing from the great beyond I think a new SPI report (that would be a spookpuppet investigation) would need to be opened. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 17:35, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
This made me laugh out loud. I volunteer to write those policies. Sarah (talk) 17:25, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Just came across this perverse little brushoff. Who do you think you are, trying to apply logic and common sense to such a sweeping emotional issue? (I was reminded of this classic.) —Steve Summit (talk) 23:31, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
You've won a free trip to WikiJail!
Looks like DYKUpdateBot and BattyBot can't agree on where to put a DYK talk banner . Do you think the pair of them would make a good Bodice-Ripper? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:23, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Nakon 04:31, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Unhide for comments from a clueless admin -- see WP:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive277#Review_of_EEng.27s_indefinite_block |
---|
HighInBC: Oh, I see. First you cast this as "a difference of opinion on what justifies an indef block" . When that turned out to be ridiculous, you wanted 48 hours. Now it's a trout. Have you no idea how corrosive to the project are this kind of careless and imperious pronouncements on the fate of us peons? Yes, I'm having trouble "seeing [my] comments as disruptive", because you've dodged my repeated demands that you say what talking about. And now that Nakon has issued a full (and very gracious) retraction and apology , you're alone in insisting that I did anything wrong at all. So you have two choices now: admit you were just shooting your mouth off, or make it obvious you're one of those people who has to always insist he's right, no matter what. (I put that last bit in big-bold so that, since you undoubtedly will continue to bob and weave, it will be obvious to everyone, at a glance, what's going on here.) EEng (talk) 10:45, 10 January 2016 (UTC) |
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Dr. K. 06:15, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia is something of a millstone round our necks. After some such tribulation, I started a page about Tennyson's poem and, by coincidence, I notice a burst of activity there, years later. See also illegitimi non carborundum... Andrew D. (talk) 10:33, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
I've been around in Wikipedia for a while now, love EEng's humor, and don't know the particulars of what the current dispute is about, but my two cents is that an indefinite block is way too much punishment, that we need sharp guys like EEng in Wikipedia if only to help others think, and that EEng does contribute to the encyclopedia. But I haven't examined this subject in depth -- it is my two cent opinion.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 13:06, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Tomwsulcer, are you gonna make that trip to Boston any time soon? EEng (talk) 18:37, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi EEng sorry to see what happened, personally I appreciate your sense of humor. Anyway I've taken the liberty of restoring your page headers, and also all of your old messages have been moved to User talk:EEng/Archive 3. So your talk page is fixed a bit better anyway. Good luck with things --Jules (Mrjulesd) 21:24, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
I am blocking you for your continued disruptive levity toward a serious and important educational enterprise.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 06:16, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
I'm at a birthday party in London for Wikipedia – surrounded by the celebrities like Jimmy Wales and the WMUK crowd, cutting the birthday cake. They have a visualization of Wikipedia running on a big screen here and I was watching the edits just now. I recognised many of the topics and was especially tickled when I saw an edit to Phineas Gage pop up. I said, "I bet I know who did that – it must be EEng". I was right – don't you ever stop tinkering with this thing? Anyway, thanks for beavering away to provide the cabaret while we party on... Andrew D. (talk) 21:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
I keep [a] subject constantly before me, and wait 'till the first dawnings open slowly, by little and little, into a full and clear light.
#s
? Is there something fancy hiding there? Let's see Martin "Easter" Evans beet those. Cheers, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 00:35, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
#s
as of now, but it gives me the flexibility to send the click somewhere special, should I desire that in the future. EEng 02:54, 18 January 2016 (UTC)<code></code>
because it was a tad /small. I so want to anchor it to THE Dramaboard of Wiki but who would know if I'd end up blocked, boomeranged or site-banned? Now, I do think I said I was eccentric, not demented in my collection of useless factoids but you're welcome to check. I bow before the Master of Easter. Cheers, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 03:27, 18 January 2016 (UTC)Per the ArbCom motion, suggestions Hewitt makes on talk pages should be "brief", and Hewitt was reminded that he is still restricted from self-promotional editing per the original ArbCom case. The posted references do not contribute to the argument and are self-promotional. Do not act as the enabler of Hewitt. If you restore the material I removed again, you will be restricted from doing so. —Ruud 19:23, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Again with the threats ("I will use my administrative tools to make sure this material stays removed, if necessary. I prefer not letting it come this, and am required to warn you before I would do so") instead of engaging what I've said. I guess I can add one to the count of highhanded dick admins who resort to threats as a substitute for engaging what another has said.
Just as I predicted, your altering of Hewitt's post has given him one more thing to complain about . While he'd complain no matter what, this way a bystander (unable to see what the refs were) might mistakenly believe the refs were appropriate, and sympathize with Hewitt. Great work, Mr. Admin. EEng 14:45, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
FYI: Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:31, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
It's from the Greek entomon, meaning "insect"! Eman235/talk 02:04, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Ready? |
---|
"Aah -- I used to eat guys like you for breakfast!" |
Your recent editing history at Wikipedia:Sock puppetry shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Bbb23 (talk) 12:51, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Recently I've noticed that a number of your comments this month have not met the expectations outlined in our civility and no personal attacks policies. Examples include referring to a user as a "prick" and "completely tonedeaf" multiple times, using images and captions to insult other users (1, 2), making personal attacks towards others, and general incivility on a policy discussion page. (e.g. "The last time [you] had to deal with [me]"? Was there another time you gave a high-handed lecture showing you have a backwards understanding of how things are supposed to be done? You don't "have" to deal with me, and as NE Ent so effectively explains below, you're arguing in support of those who have kne-jerk reverted in violation of PGBOLD, so perhaps you should leave the refereeing of minor squabbles over nonsubstantive changes to those with a better understanding of guidelines, policy, and just-plain-how-things-are-done.") Such comments are not appropriate and don't contribute to a constructive editing environment. Please stop with this behavior or your account may be blocked. Best, Mike V • Talk 17:20, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
This user has been blocked several times, and isn't embarrassed about it - (see my block log here!). |
User:Mike V, after your warning ("conduct concerns") on this page, EEng posted this in response. He also made a few innocuous edits on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Images, but I'm sure your block had nothing to do with those. You blocked for his response to your warning, and I don't think that was reasonable. The response wasn't very polite, indeed. It didn't defer to you as admin. The worst of it was that he changed your header, which is certainly inappropriate. But was it a disruptive edit, enough reason to block? No. Mainly it was an explanation of his criticisms of Bbb23. It didn't contain any personal attacks against Bbb23 or anybody else AFAICS. I've unblocked. Bishonen | talk 21:44, 27 May 2016 (UTC).
Well, what else is new. My two cents is that EEng is a valuable addition to Wikipedia, if a bit difficult at times, although I've sometimes considered that maybe he should be blocked for having a too long talk page. Just kidding. Just saying' hello, EEng, hope you'll be back soon.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 19:45, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
http://www.metafilter.com/160081/159-days-to-go-Stay-strong#6549438 —David Eppstein (talk) 04:03, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
A lovely slice of trout | |
An piece of delicious trout for you, to calm your antagonism over how to present the story of sockpuppets ... Deryck C. 16:36, 13 June 2016 (UTC) |
I am sending you a bill for a new keyboard and my ENT's treatment of the coffee burns on the insides of my nostrils.
"Traditionally served with iceberg lettuce". What is the matter with you?
-- stunned museum visitor (still reeling)
The Yuge Barnstar | |
That's one hell of a user page you've got there. I tried to print a copy out (in case my internet goes down), but I don't have the required 63 pages to get the whole thing. I'm off to the store in the morning to buy paper. Anyhow, here's a Trump-sized reward for having a liberal sense of humor. Colonel Wilhelm Klink (Complaints|Mistakes) 23:02, 12 August 2016 (UTC) |
I am the only one here to receive an email (via "Email this user") from Hillbillyholiday reading something like --
--? EEng 04:51, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
For your assistance with the recent research mess that I bought to ANI.
Stuartyeates (talk) 10:20, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm RexxS. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. If you're not interested in discussion, then please keep your ad homiems to yourself RexxS (talk) 20:45, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Reminder User talk:EEng/Archive_2#Notification of Arbcom MOS discretionary sanctions
user:Jayaguru-Shishya sent me an email about this pair of edits 1 2, which was a follow up to a post JS made to my page on, See User talk:PBS#Problems at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style.
I agree with the substance of user:Jayaguru-Shishya accusations.
If you breach WP:TALK again and I am notified, I will take administrative action. -- PBS (talk) 19:30, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
This user is an indented servant. |
Recently, you have more than once altered text on a talk page posted by another editor against their objections. You justify that by stating "Unfortunately there was no way for me to restore the edits by other editors that J-G removed without also removing his comments;" removing others comments against the objections of others is a breach of WP:TALK. After their comments were restored, if you though that such a restoration was unjustified, you should have asked an uninvolved administrator (either directly or indirectly via WP:ANI) to intervene. Edit warring over the content of article pages is disruptive, edit warring over the content of talk pages is unnecessary and disruptive (hence the rules over not altering other people's comments). Alter another person's comments on a talk page (other than those small changes sanctioned by WP:TALK talk) and I will take administrative actions. Is that clear? -- PBS (talk) 06:12, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
No response from the drive-by admin. Surprise! EEng 07:27, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Looks like the phenomena of bots getting into a bit of "rough and tumble" with each other has made the press. New Scientist article. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:14, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Good Humor | ||
For water bottle policing Ribbet32 (talk) 20:42, 10 October 2016 (UTC) |
The Barnstar of Good Humor | ||
I enjoyed your sense of humor. Regained a part of my lost energy. Thanks! Mhhossein talk 12:55, 15 October 2016 (UTC) |
Allergy warning! This talk page may contain nuts, nuts, jokes about nuts, and nuts who converse with a nut who often concerns himself with nuts. Be aware that epinephrine shots are unavailable, although, judging by this page's content, shots of alcohol are quite bountiful, as are those ever endearing "cheap shots", which will be handed out to all attendees on a regular basis. Page may also contain copious amounts of corn and cheese. |
"Fussing" is insulting. Implying I'm a bigot who thinks "cross-dressing is somehow wrong", if that's what you were trying to do, would be egregiously insulting. When all I did was take the time to provide an in-depth review, and pick the hook where I anticipated there would be the fewest problems, there is no need to be that offensive. Ribbet32 (talk) 00:27, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Did you know ... that a cross-dressing squirrel sold World War II war bonds?
Wearing clothing is a human characteristic. An animal can't be a transvestite, or a cross-dresser, really.
fussing that cross-dressing is somehow wrong.
cross-dressing is wrong
cross-dressing is wrong.
Quirky Hook of the Year | |
A toast for the quirkiest hook of the year with Juanita Musson, currently appearing in Prep 5. Job well done. — Maile (talk) 22:54, 31 October 2016 (UTC) |
Please be advised that I have filed an Arbitration Enforcement request regarding your userpage here. The WordsmithTalk to me 22:20, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Softlavender (talk) 23:46, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Can somebody remind me what the problem was with that picture of a gorilla with a caption "Even though I'm an arbcom member, I'm simply commenting here as an everyday, average editor?" I've just made a subtle reference to it elsewhere. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:23, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
I've recreated your userpage as of immediately before the AE posting, minus the disputed section, at User:EEng/temp; feel free to just cut-and-paste it as you see fit. Intentionally created in your userspace rather than mine, to allow you to vanish it just by slapping {{db-u1}} on it if you don't want it hanging around. ‑ Iridescent 23:53, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
instead of ------------>
like the June 14 version did. For the moment I'll just leave things be, until discussion has concluded. EEng 00:12, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
I knew something good would come from all of this, and maybe some of that good will be that someone will change the name of that image asap (blp and xyz being taken into account) not to mention that maybe you should throw some obscuring moondust on your caption there. Randy Kryn 01:32, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but your comment assumes that there's something shameful about being a hooker, and is thus a form of hate speech. I'm reporting you at AE. EEng 03:04, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Looks like I missed quite a party! It could never have lasted, I guess. I suggest you put your creative energies towards political cartooning; the Crimson keeps advertising for a contributor, or you could go for national syndication. FourViolas (talk) 19:55, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
<joke>Since you dislike the use of synonyms for boomerangs, let me be blunt: your comment was offensive enough that it boomeranged on you.
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. </joke> I couldn't resist :-) Nyttend (talk) 17:03, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | ||
Just letting you know your improvements to the Fred West article are appreciated from the heart, EEng. Sometimes overlapping information and personal lexicon can be overlooked. Seasons Greetings, too. Kieronoldham (talk) 00:03, 24 December 2016 (UTC) |
I've had my own share of disagreements with The Rambling Man, but please don't do this again. Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:25, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
...as the proposer, I am not actually wanting this to pass. I rather want to lay the issue to rest against a tendentious argument. Thanks for your support by so clearly opposing (one of the odder thanks I've given another editor, to be sure). Happy New Year. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 01:10, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
You callin' ArbCom a bunch of chickens? DMacks (talk) 16:26, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
EEng, I could be way off base here, but I thought Eisbock was awarded for chilling effects that produce great unhoppiness, whereas sour grapes are related more with the award for acetic whining. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 18:13, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Almost nudged you to be more civil over this thread at the time, suspecting that your opening comment might just goad the other editor into being elaborately defensive of something that didn't matter, and I see this has now happened. Someone made an edit without being aware of policy, we made them aware of policy, they went silent: you should WP:DROPTHESTICK at that point. Civility policy is there to avoid wasting everybody's time with unnecessary arguments, as much as anything. --McGeddon (talk) 09:50, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
The MoS Eisley barnstar | |
You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious... O Fortuna!...Imperatrix mundi. 14:54, 17 January 2017 (UTC) |
A shiny whistle | |
Here's a whistle for you to blow at some point. I hope you don't anytime soon though! TonyBallioni (talk) 04:44, 23 January 2017 (UTC) |
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Wikipedia talk:Did you know. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.
If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block.
I'm one of those people that doesn't get the joke. Wikipedia welcomes your edits but there are other venues for your off-topic discussion. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:51, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
Unhatting a discussion which was inappropriately hatted, so that it can continue, is not "reverting to a preferred version". In fact, our mutual friend's latest "close" even removed another editor's post—my post, if you can believe the nerve . So if anything, it's our dyspeptic friend who is "reverting to a preferred version". Next time, get a clue before butting in.
And the discussion's not off topic. While you may be unable to comprehend it, we're discussing the extent to which politically charged hooks are appropriate. The fact that we're having a little fun along the way, or that you personally are unable to share in that, makes it no less true. Welcome to Wikipedia! EEng 23:42, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | ||
For taking up the cause at University of Texas Tower Shooting, which, although you may not know it, was started by a brand new editor from basically scratch, and was probably the best first article I've ever seen. It's good to see the thing stick and get substantive attention from an experienced editor, which is exactly how this whole thing is supposed to work. TimothyJosephWood 16:07, 19 February 2017 (UTC) |
For making me laugh out loud with this and this. Well played, sir. bonadea contributions talk 14:19, 2 March 2017 (UTC) |
As a (talk page stalker), I am frigging glad that I don't have to keep up with your TP posts on my cell phone. Atsme📞📧 18:22, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
You may wish to take a gander at User talk:Robert Towers#Important Lessons Learned, point 2 (in this case, don't call your sandbox "Eat my faaaart"). I feel the two of you may have much to talk about.... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:59, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Could you help out with a review of Template:Did_you_know_nominations/George_Ronald_Richards I was hoping for an April 3rd DYK. —አቤል ዳዊት?(Janweh64) (talk) 16:34, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
EEng, I've been considering this for sometime. As to what I've been considering, I mean starting over. I don't like how we've generally left things between us because of how we've butted heads at the MOS:IMAGES guideline. Because of that, it now seems that there is some tension between us when we are involved in the same discussion; I don't think I'm imagining that. Anyway, I see you around often enough and appreciate the work you do. And I'd rather be on good terms with editors, unless they are the few who I have a significant tempestuous history with and I know we will never have a decent working relationship. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 20:06, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Another editor requested the discussion was made an RfC as we appeared to be going round in circles. There is some point to it, I might add, even if you do not agree. I will thank you for responding, though. --Sb2001 (talk) 00:42, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
A Mary Berry Raspberry Putin Devil's Food cake for you!!!
N.B. Top tip - Mary says: "Be careful to bake on Gas Mark 4 or below, or the cyanide may all evaporate into the icy Neva River." Martinevans123 (talk) 17:22, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Oh, yeah - well go ahead and cake it on...but wait for the best part: the icing on the cake...yep...WAIT FOR IT....and just keep waiting cuz it may never come. It needs a hook that only EEng can provide. Atsme📞📧 19:46, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
The Technical Barnstar | |
For good sharpshooting comrade. RaRaRasputin (talk) 17:40, 22 April 2017 (UTC) |
A new forum for dispute resolution that's currently under development. Wikipedia:Angry Mob Noticeboard. You know, for when you need an angry mob. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 02:11, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Their main objective is to lighten the load of ArbCom.To be fair, we're also trying to do something about the huge pitchfork and torch surplus burdening our economy lately. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:56, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Hola, I have fixed two cite errors you introduced in January. Months after the fact, it took me about 30 minutes to hunt them down (WikiBlame was no help for this purpose). Please watch for introduction of this type of cite error, especially when making major edits to well-cited articles. Gracias, adios. ―Mandruss ☎ 21:31, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Actually, turns out that was just the decrease in raw source size. I checked just now, and in terms of rendered text, the reduction was to 8,200 words from 13,200, a decrease of 40%. And to my astonishment, I got almost no pushback. It was amazingly bloated. EEng 17:36, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User talk:Leprof 7272. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Don't do this, and don't do this. Needlessly insulting the user isn't helping anyone. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:54, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
The 2016 Cure Award | |
In 2016 you were one of the top ~200 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs. |
Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. I make no comment on the merits of the point you were making, but it is never, and never will be, acceptable to call another editor a disruptive prick. --John (talk) 13:39, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Jrcla2 was offering a way to see what you're doing as the result of a cultural difference rather than you just being a disruptive prick. Where in this is EEng actually calling Djln Djln a "disruptive prick"? My reading of this is that EEng is telling Djln that Jrcla2 was suggesting an alternative explanation for Djln's inability to understand the issue that did not resort to calling Djln a "disruptive prick". The reason for EEng to bring this up is obviously the fact that Djln telling Jrcla that they are being "borderline racist" is an extremely prick-like thing to do in response to a non-prick-like explanation. On top of the fact that making mass changes to categories is (or could be readily construed as) disruptive. I.e., In other words "you're Irish and so might not understand American Football" does not deserve the response of "that's racist". I can't really think of another way to spell this out. Mr rnddude (talk) 16:00, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
EEng (despite his block log, which is not as bad as it looks at first glance if you understand it) ...
I've asked User:John to lift the block, as I think it was based on a misunderstanding — basically, I agree with Mr rnddude's comment here — and have notified him that in case he isn't online, I'll do it myself. He doesn't seem to be, so here goes: you have been unblocked. Bishonen | talk 17:59, 7 May 2017 (UTC).
EEngness: I believe the OED prefers EEngitude. EEng 19:04, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
The following is actually how I have always related to the slang use of the word: Prick (slang)#Psychology The prick, in some crazy way, is feminine....The prick does not play by the rules: he (she) is a narcisstic [sic] tease who persuades by means of attraction and resistance, not by orderly systemic discourse. The latter interpretation is harmless and how I've always perceived its use. In fact, my fun Wiki❤️ banner confirms my position, so I hope there's no chance of blockage if I use them as [FBDB]. Atsme📞📧 18:15, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Lost in all this is that Roxy got blocked in the crossfire. Not to canvass, but comment may be helpful at WP:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Block_review_3_and_revocation_of_talk_page_access:_Roxy_the_dog. EEng 19:24, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Do you get some sort of kick out of causing disruption by using gendered obscenities, EEng? If not, why don't you go and learn from your lucky escape instead of joking about it like it was some sort of badge of pride? Also, do you stand by your comment I highlighted in the diff above? If you do, I agree with The Rambling Man that you may quickly work up to another block. If you don't, you should reflect on what a fool you've made of yourself and the degree of disruption you have caused with your unsolicited intervention at AN/I; two blocks and one unblock, so far. --John (talk) 6:07 pm, Today (UTC−4)
do you stand by your comment I highlighted: If you're talking about , yes I do.
Do you get some sort of kick out of causing disruption by using gendered obscenitiesI take no more delight in obscenities than in any other words chosen to do their job. But I'm fascinated by this idea of gendered obscenities. I notice you didn't object to my saying, earlier in the same thread, of "Oh for fuck sake"; is that OK because you see fuck as ungendered? If so, I think that's very narrow of you: what if it's a gay male fuck? Or a lesbian fuck (if there is such a thing, I guess)? I think you need to reflect on your heterosexist biases.
disruption... two blocks and one unblock: Well let's see... one of the blocks was the one you imposed; the unblock was an Arbcom member reversing the block after giving you time to do it yourself; and the other block was someone who got understandably pissed off at you for imposing the block which the Arbcom member reversed after giving you time to do it yourself. So really, I think the disruption's all on you.
reflect on what a fool you've made of yourself: Speaking of reflection, look in the mirror.
unsolicited intervention at AN/I: Is there solicited intervention at ANI? Can I get on a list???
your lucky escape: If Trump ever needs a new press secretary, you'd be a great candidate.
badge of pride: If there's any pride, it's at being part of a community robust enough to self-correct so promptly and decisively.
{{fbdb|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. --Tryptofish (talk) 01:19, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
An admin is threatening another admin with a block!
Like us on Facebook or follow the discussion on Twitter and Instagram. EEng 02:05, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
How To Avoid Pricks | |
When you land in a place that is prickly at best, |
For anyone out there who does not believe temptation is placed in our paths to test us, please consider that there is, right now – today of all days – an ANI thread centered on this user. Talk about potential for gendered obscenities! EEng 02:01, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Given your interest in museums, you might be entertained by the wonderful The Museum of Curiosity! PamD 15:37, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Have you made your 3-month proposal anywhere? If you haven't started an RFC about it somewhere, then I guess the first thing to do would be to figure out where the RFC ought to be located, and whether similar ideas have already been rejected. Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:35, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
To help with the brainstorm, here are some recent examples:
Good grief. This will be in all the relevant RS by tomorrow.). Wild speculation on their serious consequences ensues. Impeach him! Prose could have remained in the dismissal article; instead it gets repeated in the Trump and Comey bios, in the presidency article, in the dismissal article and in the dedicated memo(s) article.
In summary, my hunch would be to suggest a 3-day ban on creating new articles based on "breaking news" in the political domain. People could still add such stuff in existing articles, but at least they would get some eyeballs to evaluate due weight, and we might avoid AfD drama, link-spamming of navboxes or See also sections in dozens of marginally related articles, and monstrous cleanup tasks when finally the pile of rambling "he said-she said" quotes has to be sorted and summarized into something vaguely encyclopedic and readable (while being accused of censorship). Another bonus: existing articles on controversial subjects are often restricted to some degree, whereas new articles are a free-for-all until an admin wakes up and slaps an 1RR/DS restriction which nobody understands, and we spend more time explaining the sanctions than editing or even arguing the merits of the edits... Thoughts? Choice of venue? Popcorn? — JFG talk 23:43, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
@Volunteer Marek: Your recurring aspersions are disappointing. For the record, I spent countless hours defending the primary season pages of both Democratic and Republican parties against vandals and sneaky bad-faith editors, and I have dozens of witnesses who appreciated my work then. At that time, the most aggressive were Bernie Bros spewing all kinds of nonsense theories against an imagined cabal of paid Hillary shills. So, the examples I choose today are Trumpian because that's what shows up on the radar. Rewind a year to springtime 2016 and I'd be busy whacking a different set of moles. Apologies to EEng for bludgeoning his neatly-collapsed thread, but I won't stand to be disparaged. — JFG talk 23:01, 20 May 2017 (UTC) |
Taking into account both this thread and the parallel thread at ANI, there's at least some hope for some version of something like this getting some serious consideration. Who would like to be pinged when I'm ready to start seriously shaping a proposal (which might be a week+ from now)? Add your ~~~ (three ~s) below, please. Pinging Drmies, Softlavender, Ritchie333, David Eppstein to see if they can be tempted into helping. Others, feel free to ping in others you think can help. EEng 03:12, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
I-want-to-be-pinged list:
Where should this generic proposal be submitted? In closing the ANI thread, NeilN suggested WP:VPP. Thoughts? I'm not familiar with proposing site-wide RfCs. Hopefully it doesn't end up at WP:PERENNIAL. My hunch would be to suggest this in a limited-scope subject area, such as US politics, so the community could ascertain its effectiveness on real-life cases without disturbing the bulk of Wikipedia. Is there a venue for this? WT:WikiProject Politics/American politics perhaps? That place looks strangely inactive. — JFG talk 02:59, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
|
Many of the articles created quickly after "breaking news" will likely be important 10 years from now. These include Dismissal of James Comey, Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections, and Donald Trump's disclosure of classified information to Russia.
Here's one more example of a WP:RECENT, WP:TOOSOON, WP:NOT#NEWS article:
I think this article should've been created in another two weeks. Or a month. But the notability of this arms deal is clearly significant. Deleting this particular article is pointless.And here we hit the crux of our modest proposal: if the arms deal gets more coverage in the next weeks or months, it may be spun off as its own article, but if it remains a one-day news story, then it will have been properly documented in the relevant article from the onset, and a lot of editor time and content duplication will have been saved. — JFG talk 11:10, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
On June 1, 2017, Resorts World Manila in the Philippines was the subject of a terrorist attack initially believed to be perpetrated by Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Well, that wasn't true. What good does such an article do the reader? In fact, right on the Talk page is the following thread:
Has anyone actually read that this may not be a terror attack ?TheGracefulSlick (talk) 21:42, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
It may very well not be a terrorist attack, but so far ISIL has claimed responsibility (whether that be true or not) so they are regarded as the probable perpetrators until something else is proven. Inter&anthro (talk) 22:53, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Sigh... this is why breaking news stories need a small waiting period to sort the facts. I find it terribly problematic that we cannot even confirm whether this is a coordinated attack by ISIL or a robbery gone wrong.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 23:43, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Two more recent examples:
Both of these cases perfectly illustrate the rationale behind the envisioned proposal: encourage editors to place "breaking news" stories into the most relevant existing articles. According to its AfD discussion, Covfefe was speedy deleted and recreated several times, whereas a redirect to Donald Trump on social media#Covfefe would have contained the issue safely and immediately. There's always time to WP:SPINOFF a full article if covfefe expands beyond the initial excitement. — JFG talk 09:11, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
This is on my mind, but it will be some time before I can get to it. But I will... eventually... and you'll all get pinged at the appropiate moment. EEng 03:29, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
For use in the discussion in the halcyon future when we get back to this, there was a a related thread at What WP is Not. EEng 21:57, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
EEng, you should really know better than to make a "joke" which is nothing but a personal attack, even if it is against someone from the extreme right. Comments like this are not relevant to the article or the dispute and can do nothing but make the situation worse. Fram (talk) 12:54, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm sure that it was unintentional but you recently added a BLP violation to WP:ANI. I have removed it and will post a section at WP:AN which you may be interested in viewing. I have no greater liking for the man than you do but we need to leave aside our feelings on the matter. Take a quick review of Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 22:44, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
I do not think Putin would be interested at all, but right now there are a lot of cases in Russia when people are jailed for twits etc. The signals typically come from, um, unstable whistleblowers. I am not currently in Russia, but still...--Ymblanter (talk) 16:02, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Content note: Article contains the passage:Three dolphins applauded the president for feeding them fish, while the walruses even shook his hand.EEng 17:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
I preferAdorned in white overalls to resemble a bird, Putin did manage to get some cranes to fly. ‑ Iridescent 17:51, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
It's a shame the title of this thread isn't something like BITEy behavior at Pets of Vladimir Putin. EEng 18:05, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Putin is too busy running the White House to be bothered with these editorsis a BLP violation who's the LP who's being besmirched? Is it Putin? Trump? Reince Priebus (who's supposed to be running the White House)? Putin's actual dogs?
I was/am not attempting to get anybody banned or blocked on BLP grounds. Both comments were minor and removing the one by Legacypac was probably too much. The one by EEng seemed to me to imply that one was the others bitch. I have no liking for either of the two politicians concerned but making those comments without some sources leaves Wikipedia open to accusations of partisanship. Disparaging comments about politician A are removed immediately but those on politician B are allowed to stand is seen all the time and I guess it was one time too many. Legacypac, I'm not going to reply on your talk page, unless you want me to, as I think that it would just make things worse. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 10:24, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
Editors must take particular care when adding information about living persons to any Wikipedia page. Information. Information. When someone says, "Who knew Putin's dog is tracked by Russian GPS?", a response of "Wait... Donald Trump is tracked by Russian GPS???" is not information. It's not an assertion of fact. It's a joke. No one with common sense would actually think I was actually suggesting that Trump is a dog, much less Putin's dog. What I might have been implying beyond that is left to the reader's intelligence, but it's at best a puckish thought, not any kind of information as covered by BLP. Same goes for
Putin is too busy running the White House. Thinking that stuff like this, outside article space (not that either of these would be found in article space) needs to be hunted down and stamped out stems from an absurd misunderstanding of the purpose of BLP. It's a tiny minority of admins who worry about this -- that should tell you something. EEng 23:29, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
HERE IS A BUBBLE TEA I DONT KNOW WHAT THAT IS BUT DRINK IT AND CALM DOWN YOU ARE WAKING UP THE CHILDREN TimothyJosephWood 18:29, 27 July 2017 (UTC) |
I figured that was it. See, the problem is that my fellow editors respect me to the point of veneration, and simply assume that any edit I make is ipso facto correct – see . So if I want someone to check what I've done, I have to raise a ruckus. I hope you checked (assuming you actually understand how all those moving parts in pending changes work, which I'm not sure anyone does). EEng 19:10, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Bats.
--Shirt58 (talk) 09:32, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
...this, I can only say... Hallelujah! ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 09:07, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
Re: Go ahead and snark, but for what it's worth, Pardis (as a practicing geneticist yet) manages to fit a nod to the limitations of twin studies [ghastly section, btw] and common abuses of "heritability" into her intro genetics course, while Wilson couldn't resist gambling the credibility gained through a career of stellar entomology on a bunch of cockamamie just-so stories about hard genetic determinism"sociobiology". So. FourViolas (talk) 23:51, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Your edit summaries are entertaining. I was watching the proj med editing feed.
Jeopardy's game board game uses Sony monitors caused it is produced by Sony Pictures Television. I agree with AldezD's edit. ACMEDeputy (talk) 12:09, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Some people have too much time on their hands..... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:34, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Does anyone know what "Created claim" means? See the following diff: I didn't think WP considered "humans" above notability.<---that's probably going to go over quite a few heads but I adore the guy who said it and it's fun to repeat so let's just say it's an inside joke and focus on the diff..Atsme📞📧 21:39, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Tryp...pings are like the low voltage lights that light your way to the exit just before the plane crashes. Atsme📞📧 00:23, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Your redundant close of the AN/I complaint about DoRD confused me until what you had done suddenly struck me. Very nice!! One of your better ones. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:50, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
I always love seeing your antagonitic comments on ANI. — nihlus kryik (talk) 05:07, 21 August 2017 (UTC) |
That's high praise coming from a nihilist. EEng 05:13, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
For introducing me to the term "ANI flu". "Please excuse me from WP:ADMINACCT, I have a cough." Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 07:40, 1 September 2017 (UTC) |
You know how you have buttons Save changes and Show preview and Show changes when you edit? This adds Show preview and changes in a single button! It's amazing! Seriously, add this to your common.js e.g. User:SoAndSo/common.js:
mw.loader.load("https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Writ_Keeper/Scripts/previewAndDiff.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript");
Report bugs (and there are some minor ones) at User_talk:Writ_Keeper/Scripts/previewAndDiff.js.
Also, you can use <ctl><alt>o as a keyboard shortcut instead of clicking the button.
EEng 00:10, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Yup I use that. It's really fun and useful. ♠Dinah♠ 🎤 16:17, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Orgasmic? EEng, you are so easy! --Tryptofish (talk) 22:10, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
Just for this. Well done. Home Lander (talk) 03:03, 2 September 2017 (UTC) |
I'm afraid I think this edit oversteps the boundaries of no personal attacks and civility. Please desist. Andrewa (talk) 22:58, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
I was away for the weekend and only just received it.– Thanks for explaining. I was counting the hours until I heard from you.
I realise that you have a problem with my behaviour. But this is not the place to discuss that.– Who the fuck are you to tell me what can be discussed on my talk page?
This is about your behaviour.– No, it really is about your behavior.
unless this is escalated– Christ, please escalate. It's been a while since one of you grandfathered admins made a fool of himself like this. Always entertaining.
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Personal attack by EEng. Andrewa (talk) 12:04, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
I have mentioned you on the NPOV noticeboard 9and50swans (talk) 03:58, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
I mentioned you on the NPOV noticeboard discussion 9and50swans (talk) 04:19, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
I haven't mentioned you on any NPOV noticeboard discussion. Am I missing out? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:11, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Oh, and by the way, is this how it's done? Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 15:09, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Plimpton 322. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
In exchange for calling me to Talk:Ted Kaczynski maybe you could look at Maryanthe Malliaris and User talk:Adam8592. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:18, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
This was dickish. You won your point. Learn how to win with grace, or you will lilely run afoul of other editors as well. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 17:34, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Don't know whether he's a sock or just a troll, but I'm sorry you are the target. Cheers! Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 00:01, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
Well, this page is over one million bytes now, so I guess you can have this as a reward. —MRD2014 Talk • Edits • Help! 02:24, 27 September 2017 (UTC) |
The Barnstar of Good Humor | ||
As the barnstar documentation says, for lightening the mood, defusing conflicts, and generally making Wikipedia a better place to be. Including this. -- Euryalus (talk) 06:01, 9 October 2017 (UTC) |
Since you sent Thanks, I thought I ought read this talk page. My first reaction was "how can one editor be so talented?" Then the answer hit: no effor required—each night you tilt Wikipedia and next morning les noix roll in—as if this were Orange County. User:Neonorange (Phil) 07:39, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Since you sent thanks I thought I ought read your talk page. My first reaction was "how can one editor be so talented?" Then the answer hit: each night you tilt Wikipedia and next morning les noix roll in as if this page were Orange County. Neorange (Phil) 07:58, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
User:Ritchie333/Any 'Dmin Will Do - currently running at the Dramaboard Playhouse Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:15, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
I actually agree with most of them; I tend to err on the side of more information rather than less when I write articles as (as I'm sure you know) it's much easier to cut later than add (and also a sort of a defense against casual tagging ... I think I put in the names of the pathologists because a) I wasn't sure how often I'd have to refer to the writers when I began that section and I didn't want to keep saying "the pathologists" and b) I've had people tag that sort of thing with {{who}} a few too many times). I was sad to see those bits about the black water go but ... it has been over four years now and I have not found anything about what happened with the lawsuit over it, so I guess all we need to do now is note it and move on.
I did, however, restore the "mechanics of the body removal" because it's a subtle way of debunking one of the so-called "mysteries" of the case intended to suggest paranormal involvement, i.e. people who think themselves clever and ask "If they had to cut her body out, HOW COULD SHE HAVE GOTTEN IN THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE? HUH? HUH?" With that explanation in the article and cited to a reliable source, people can link to our article (as a lot of web forums do) and quote that part and shut that down real quick. (I also read somewhere, but haven't found an RS repeating this, that (rather sensibly when you think about it) the rigor mortis was so advanced they couldn't pull the body back through the hatch without severely damaging it in the process).
(BTW, maybe I should take the time now to apologize for things I said during that long war we had over at DYK two summers ago. So, I'm sorry). Daniel Case (talk) 02:06, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you trim out blatantly excessive text from a long standing rights description page making the text far more digestible and less complex for the average reader, as you did with this edit, I shall have to praise you again.
Seriously, I saw the edit summary and immediately assumed it was vandalism. But, the edit summary was perfect. Nicely done on trimming that text down! --Hammersoft (talk) 13:53, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
You probably deserve the "Iggy Pop Memorial Barnstar of We Take No Textual Passengers." Martinevans123 (talk) 14:08, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
You're edit-warring and approaching 3RR. Softlavender (talk) 09:18, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
So where I am from we used to give rope for mere possession of a running brand (Mac10s were ok, you can't hurt anyone with them) but duffing is okay if you rustle goats in odd numbers. (!) So you might want to get a GPS tracker for this goat. And that link is on purpose for 2 reasons: a goat is a goat and a ram is a sheep with an attitude; FCA doesn't make a GT model for the 1500.
L3X1 (distænt write) 04:34, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
What do you want a cookie? Well... RickinBaltimore (talk) 12:59, 21 November 2017 (UTC) |
Per the discussion at ANI, you are hereby deleted from this world for wasting the 1 millionth edit on ANI. If you wish to appeal this deletion please contact the creator of the universe, whoever that may be.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:56, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
[a] characteristic of the idler's work is that it looks suspiciously like play. This, again, makes the non-idler feel uncomfortable. Victims of the Protestant work ethic would like all work to be unpleasant. They feel that work is a curse, that we must suffer on this earth to earn our place in the next. The idler, on the other hand, sees no reason not to use his brain to organise a life for himself where his play is his work, and so attempt to create his own little paradise in the here and now.[1]
References
Can we have him WP:Salted? --Tryptofish (talk) 02:55, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
All those pithy comments about Trump on your user page, including links to YouTube videos, and not a single mention of Peter Serafinowicz's Sassy Trump? For shame! nagualdesign 22:00, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:55, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
Not a Sassy Trump video, since I was barred from linking to the latest one, but a musical mashup from October last year (with no mention of any allegations of molestation, paedophilia, necrophilia or any other such BLP violating content, it's just a bit of fun): DONALD TRUMP : The Muppet Show Mashup nagualdesign 22:37, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
A bit of off-Wiki comic relief from all the huffing and puffing that fills Wikipedia talk pages: There's been 3 more Sassy Trump videos released in the last couple of weeks. I won't link to all 3, but this one had me in stitches: Sassy Trump sings 'The Star-Something Hmm-hmm' I'm surprised more people don't do funny voiceovers. Maybe it's my puerile sense of humour but I find them hilarious. Bad Lip Reading never fails to amuse me either. nagualdesign 22:30, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
Wishing You A Happy Turkey Day! | |
A Thanksgiving tale... Two pilgrims go out hunting. One has two blunderbusses (guns). |
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
I have to know, why is the Phineas Gage article not at the very least recognized as a GA? In my opinion, it deserves its own tier of "GA-ness" or "FA-ness". Something like Bully! article status. Is there anything I can do to help amend this? I do not possess the heroism (or patience) to navigate the depths of your talk page for a similar discussion so I apologize in advance if I am not the first to ask these questions.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 07:39, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
The very small amount of attention that has been given to [the article] can only be explained by the fact that it far transcends any case of recovery from injury of the head that can be found in the records of surgery. It was too monstrous for belief ...
— J.B.S. Jackson (1870)
( Buttinsky) I totally agree with you TGS and AFE. I can't overemphasize the engaging prose by our one and only EEng, an editor I admire and consider to be extraordinary in so many different ways. I would definitely be among the FA reviewers if PG became a WP:FAC. Atsme📞📧 19:57, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
I've mentioned before that we need this article like a hole in the head. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:14, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
The eldest Oyster looked at him,
But never a word he said:
The eldest Oyster winked his eye,
And shook his heavy head—
Meaning to say he did not choose
To leave the oyster-bed.
et al.should be italicized;
et al.should not be italicized;
No attempt will be made by me to cite analogous nominations, as after ransacking the literature in quest of such, I learn that all, or nearly all, soon came to a fatal result.
— J.M. Harlow (1868)[H]: 344
Do you think the original poster was waiting for an answer all this time? He must be quite relieved to have gotten one, at Talk:Mafic#Pronounciation [sic]. – Corinne (talk) 00:42, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
"The name is a pun of Osama Bin Laden and a Unix program named /bin/login, which runs to let people log into the system."– And apparently he had to defend it at one point. --–A Fellow Editor– 02:08, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
{{Toenail}} | The Toenail | |
"Given to editors who have a good sense of humour, and adore using thumbnails." For many funny talk-page sidebar comments in picture form [even if I grumped about two of them]. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ< 20:07, 13 December 2017 (UTC) |
... about the lack of need to state that the quote is by Koenig about Chekov. To my surprise, Template:Quote box says the attribution fields are optional! Ylee (talk) 00:15, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
See: User:EEng#Museum of Bad Starts – Tnx 4 sharing dat, EEng. ––A Fellow Editor– 09:37, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Well, I'm glad we got that sorted. His head shot looks particularly good in the article. I hope you're happy with all that. All the best for Christmas and the New Year. Regards, nagualdesign 22:57, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ and Merry Christmas 01:01, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
But Merry Christmas anyway. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:08, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for posting at the ANI (although the discussion was closed and may be considered bit ill-timed because of that, but whatever, it's fine...). I gained good amount of community feedback (including yours), and I will take it to heart, I will honor it, apply it, learn from it, and carry on positively. I appreciate your input very much, and I thank you. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:54, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
@EEng: I think that Murder of Heather Rich might need a check-over. Could you please do it? Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 06:57, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
I have nominated another article today that I worked on to be included in the DYK section on the main page on April 1. Perhaps I can be the first Wikipedian to have two mentions on April 1! Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 21:49, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
She did, in fact, occasionally wear Army boots. My old ones, to be precise; US Army issue. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:52, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
Do you remember the fix for the Harv warning: There is no link pointing to this citation. The anchor is named xxxxx? See Barbara Taylor refs. I bookmarked the fix somewhere, but I can't recall where. Atsme📞📧 20:51, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
|ref=harv
; is that what you're thinking of? —David Eppstein (talk) 20:54, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
Ok, the culprit is importScript('User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js'); Not sure why it shows up as an error or if it's really necessary to fix it but with that script gone, the error disappears. Apologies for any confusion I that js script may have caused. Atsme📞📧 21:33, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
{{citation}}
defines an anchor by default, so it is not (necessarily) an error in that case. It is possible to add |ref=none
to suppress the anchor, I keep meaning to document that! {{Cite book}}
etc only define an anchor if the |ref=
param is set. In that case it is an indication that the intended link to that citation is missing so correcting the problem will probably improve the article. I like the "no errors, no warnings" mantra when adding content or programming, so I would always fix such a message. --Mirokado (talk) 00:49, 1 January 2018 (UTC)My only response:
A Game Warden is walking along a beach one morning when he spots a man with a bucket of lobsters.
The Warden walks up to the man, flashes his badge and says, “You’re in big trouble, buddy. Poaching lobsters is a serious offense.”
The man answers, “You’ve got it all wrong, these lobsters are my pets! Every morning I take them out for some exercise.
I let them swim around in the ocean for a few minutes and then whistle them back in.”
The Warden looks at the man skeptically and says, “Okay then, prove it.”
The man proceeds to throw the lobsters into the ocean and both he and the Warden stand there waiting.
After a couple minutes the Warden looks at the man and says, “That’s long enough, now whistle your lobsters back in.”
The man turns to the Warden and says “Lobsters? What lobsters?”
So, David - I ask...What error? Atsme📞📧 22:17, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
I'll probably be indefinitely blocked in the next few minutes for making death threats . EEng 21:31, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
You are about to be the recipient of a WTF Block...maybe | |
Remember how much fun you had playing with blocks as a kid? Now that you're |
I created an article on blocks y'know. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:25, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Dax Cowart - perhaps not quite on the level of a Phineas Gage but very close. Give it a look when you have time. I admire and recognize your gift to "engage the reader". Atsme📞📧 00:05, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't realize you'd reverted the punctuation at Sacred Cod—I thought I'd simply somehow missed it. Regardless, you're wrong—it's not about the punctuation being in the original or not, it's about what the period is punctuating. The period logically punctuates the enclosing sentence, not the quoted fragment, which is not a complete sentence that can be terminated on its own. I'm not going to editwar over it, but you are totally misunderstanding the "logical" part of "logical quotation". Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 00:52, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
*Sigh* ... whatever, man. I get the message—don't fucking touch Sacred Cod. I've got more productive things to do than this bullshit. Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 00:58, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Include terminal punctuation within the quotation marks only if it was present in the original material, and otherwise place it after the closing quotation mark– and ignore its confusing, prissy, and contradictory examples, which in many cases produce jagged-looking results.
correct an error you've reverted– huh? When someone invites you to have the last word, you do know that's a test, right? EEng 05:31, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
correct an error you've revertedmakes no sense, since an error that's been reverted has thereby already been corrected. Head games – that's such groovy vernacular! So with it and hip! I dig it, daddy-o! But hey, dude, when someone invites you to have the last word, you do know that's a test, right? EEng 07:37, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
...discussion at User:Atsme/Blocking policy proposal. Atsme📞📧 19:27, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
...for comments in your edit summaries. You have a block log? Well, I'll get some popcorn, put on some background music, put my feet up and read the novel for myself. Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 13:20, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
A warming Cup-a-Soup for you | |
Noddy and the boys send you a hearty Glam rock cup-a-soup to help you warm up!! But beware... don't leave your cosy tent or you might be "some time".
....or I guess you could always build a nice bonfire? |
The Red Barnstar | ||
Because WP lacks an "against my better judgment barnstar", this red barnstar is for the new and revolutionary policy in the Manual of Style that you devised for attributing quotations, and any similarity to a Soviet star is accidental and not even worth mentioning in a footnote to a footnote. Perhaps this award will jinx us and the improvement will be reverted, but you can at least briefly enjoy this thingy, as much as such things can (or should) be enjoyed. Cheers. Anythingyouwant (talk) 22:04, 11 January 2018 (UTC) |
Please would you mind helping me do a copy edit of this article. Regards, Mahveotm (talk) 23:07, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
Thank you for this. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:06, 16 January 2018 (UTC) |
Have you seen this? I love it. User talk:Oshwah#Vandal part two. I wonder if two vandalisms equal one positive, and three become negative, like numbers. (From looking at Oshwah's talk page, I have concluded he is a saint. Invariably polite and helpful, no matter what people say to him.) – Corinne (talk) 17:51, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
I have BIG plans for the April Version of the Signpost but it is super duper secret and I can't leave it on your talk page because, believe it or not, my edits are being closely watched?!?!?! I can involve all the other talk page stalkers and it will be a lot of fun. Basically, you will respond to interview questions. Before you begin to respond, I will assign you an imaginary character. You will respond as the imaginary character probably would. For example, perhaps you would like to respond as Donald Trump's left shoe. Or you might be a famous sock puppet. Call me crazy, but this will work and no one will know it's you because it will be a super duper secret. Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 00:56, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
I appreciate your support today, or rather your having principles and standing up for them. Cheers. nagualdesign 17:28, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
Although, like the Brittle star, Trump's cake hole doubles as a shit hole, his speech from May last year really resonates with me today, and if I was to elect a representative to stand behind a podium and issue a statement on my behalf this would be it: You Can't Let Them Get You Down nagualdesign 00:49, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
Be honest. You've been on the internet long enough to know that there's got to be a market for ass-ground corn, and probably a lucrative one. It can't imagine it can be comfortable being either the grinder or the grindee, though. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 07:55, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Sorry - we're being caught up in a "cross-edit" situation here - I wasn't trying to be difficult or "counter edit" (really!) On the other hand - I did have a specific reason for all my changes - including some that you have reverted. Not that any of them are real big deal, just trying to get everything absolutely clear... --Soundofmusicals (talk) 05:36, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
Cuckoos | |
---|---|
Of the phylum "Phallucus" | |
Critically Endangered (IUCN 3.1) Kingdom= Animalia | |
Scientific classification | |
Species: | |
Synonyms | |
Confusion |
Been meaning to tell you that your Wikipedia:Principle of Some Astonishment is wonderful, but then you already knew that, so why bother. It would be great to adapt this to the stuff I often see in term papers, e.g.,
In a journal articleSmith and Jones (1969) stated...
Have you done anything like this? Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 03:57, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
I'm surrounded by weirdos. EEng 04:09, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Anyway, back to the original topic of this talk section, here is an example of the kind of excess verbiage that often happens on science pages: . --Tryptofish (talk) 22:20, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
← Here's a prime example of a superfluous caption in the Rockall infobox that imparts no useful information whatsoever. From a boat, you say? Okay. And which island is that again? nagualdesign 00:30, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Ouch! Well, I did say relatively - but yes, I do try to pack it in. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:21, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I must be slipping. But I do try to keep things jolly. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:24, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
On 31 January 2018 at 16:51 (UTC), you added two images to the top of the discussion at WT:NFC#uneven, inconsistent, and weightless application of NFC policy. I couldn't find any illustrative benefit of File:UmbrellaVendingMachine.jpg or File:It's an umbrella in a toilet (2308844594).jpg to my text with which you associated those images. I would have moved them to accompany your comments, but I couldn't find any on the page, so I've removed them. If you have any questions or concerns, please let me know. — fourthords | =Λ= | 20:04, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
See this discussion. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 05:29, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
I have to enforce this policy– no, actually, there are plenty of other admins around to enforce it – are a deadly combination. This incident reinforces what I have said before: that the best thing for the project and for Coffee would be for him to resign under a cloud, or if he fails to do that, for him to be desysopped. EEng 21:40, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
Thank you for your vigorous defense of the right of editors to think for ourselves. And for your sense of humor. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:24, 3 February 2018 (UTC) |
I'm still of the mind that some minor tweaks to Blocking policy would help immensely, and I wish you would consider contributing to our attempts to make things better for all - admins and editors alike - which basically establishes some consistency and clarity in current policy wherein unfettered powers result in a handicap to editor retention. When you get a chance, please take a look at how changes were adopted back in 2006 at Wikipedia:Blocking_policy_proposal. Fair compromises have been/are still being offered at User:Atsme/Blocking_policy_proposal and User:Atsme/Block log proposals. Atsme📞📧 15:43, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
But see also this Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:56, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Happy Valentine's Day! | |
It wasn't easy to come up with an innocuous Valentine's greeting to share with collaborators on Wikipedia, so I went for "evolutionary". Nobody will ever win the battle of the sexes. There’s too much fraternizing with the enemy. ~Henry Kissinger
|
Most deadly school shooting in a long time still getting wall to wall coversge 5 days later and Wikipedia informs us Trump and the FL Governor were briefed? Should we also note Trump watched the coverage on TV while eating cheeseburgers? Legacypac (talk) 21:11, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
If only Donald Trump had been there. He would've run in without a weapon. He's so sassy! nagualdesign 04:05, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi there.
A couple months ago, here, you undid my edit. I had added a comma before a nonrestrictive clause, stating in my edit summary "this relative clause is nonrestrictive". In undoing my edit, you stated in your edit summary "actually it's restrictive".
This is the sentence in question:
I added a comma just before "whose".
By removing the comma, you are implying that there also is another "American author, editor, and Civil War historian whose story The Greatest Gift, published in 1943, inspired the classic Christmas film It's a Wonderful Life (1946). The trouble is that there was not also another such person: there was only one—namely, Philip Van Doren Stern.
You can have
I'm putting the comma back.
Thanks for taking the time to read this explanation.
President Lethe (talk) 19:33, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
The man, who was waving at us, suddenly disappearedversus
The man who was waving at us suddenly disappeared, but in an article's opening sentence where there's no ambiguity it's not, and the added comma just makes for clunky reading. According to you, various other articles should open:
The Barnstar of Good Humor | ||
You probably already have a dozen of these, but still. --Dlohcierekim (talk) 02:41, 9 March 2018 (UTC) |
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Prostate cancer. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sex. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
I thought to comment on Talk:Sex you needed to dial 0898 something and calls cost £350 a minute .... unless you're David Mellor in which case you could reverse the charges. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 00:53, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Comedian. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
I'll begin by saying I can still smell peanut butter in both nostrils up to 3 ft. away, so (debatably) I don't have a memory issue. I have a where the hell is it issue. I can vaguely recall a TP discussion wherein editors weighed-in and shared their thoughts. It was shortly after that then Can you please confirm, and provide a link? Atsme📞📧 21:45, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
I thought you may enjoy this book cover, which seems to show Hillary Clinton cross-examining that scoundrel Mohandas Gandhi (with an American flag in the background no less, so his sainted reconstituted ashes must have been profoundly extradited). Randy Kryn (talk) 14:16, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
There are 2 phrases our beloved EEng has used that may require intervention because...well, they predate or imply "elderly":
Please...no Go Fund Me proposals, or suggestions for senior care. I have looked into vet administration but they don't offer internet. Ok, I admit that it's Friday and I'm bored. Atsme📞📧 22:32, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
the semester's over, if you liked Tealuxe or Cambridge Common, could be nice to chill at either place. -Darouet (talk) 21:08, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
"... 'ere mate, I 'ad that Sassy Russian Spy in the back of me self drivin' Uber cab the uvver nite. An' I took 'im right up Russia Row an' all, the poor geezer." .... this anecdote brought to you by.... Novi-Cabs (Our motto: "We put the Novi into Novi Chocs") 21:03, 27 March 2018 (UTC) @Martinevans123: my life will never be the same again . @Darouet:: I feel I should warn you that posting that video puts you at risk of indefinite expulsion
Many of us have worked alongside User:Corinne here and there around the project, or shared a pleasant word with her right on this page. I'm sorry to tell you that Corinne passed away recently.
I hope you will share your thoughts and memories at User_talk:Corinne#You will be missed. EEng 23:29, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
Devastating...Atsme📞📧 01:18, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
She used to work in combination with Rothorpe and I see that he has not edited since Sept 2017. The 'pedia is a lesser place without their presence. Best regards EEng. MarnetteD|Talk 18:24, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Instead of leaving me message on my talk page or a mature edit summary after reverting me, you just had to be rude about it. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 00:03, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
The page isn’t a nutshell, I meant to say WP:ESSAY in my edit summary. Anyways, try to remain civil in your comments. I don’t know how removing an image could be wasting anybody’s time, but you really don’t have any room to be scolding anyone with your history of personal attacks via your block log. Happy editing and Cheers! — JudeccaXIII (talk) 01:36, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
This user has been blocked several times, and isn't embarrassed about it - (admire my block log here!). |
Hello EEng, I apologize for my overreaction. Starting a discussion and then mentioning your block log was completely unnecessary. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 02:43, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
Well, I didn't manage to be sneaky enough, but I still feel a bit fuzzy inside :3
With the utmost respect, I am Ned Kelly (Ok?) 05:09, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
fish, frogs, bunnies, attack helicopters, and talk page stalkers in limited quantities. Based off a statement on Kudpung's TP, I created User:L3X1/RoastDuck, but am having some creative issues with it. I don't know which version is better, and if it possible to make one with File:Cyberduck icon.png on one side and File:Fire02.jpg or something on the other side of the text, but my HTML skills are not enough in that regard. Clerk note: His HTML skills are not enough in any regard . If anyone has any ideas feel free to discuss or implement them. Thanks, Lord High Permanent Senior Undersecretary to L3X1 (addressed as His Worshipfulness Lordy Lord) 18:20, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
I saw the new poem on your user page about Ode (owed?) to ANI. Where is it from? It looks vaguely familiar, but I'm too lazy to look it up. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:36, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | ||
For your excellent copyediting to Southwest Airlines Flight 1380, creating a clear, coherent and concise Lead that mentions the salient points of the subject without unnecessary details, I hereby award you this Barnstar. YSSYguy (talk) 01:59, 21 April 2018 (UTC) |
Well, we'll see how long before some airfan says all accident articles have to be uniformly unreadable and stuffed with trivia. EEng 02:22, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Your "take no prisoners" approach (your words) is not the Wikipeda way.
See: Ryanair Flight 4102 was a flight from Frankfurt-Hahn Airport, Germany, to Rome Ciampino Airport, Italy, that, on 10 November 2008 suffered multiple bird strikes.
Southwest Boat (talk) 18:42, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
On 10 November 2008, Ryanair Flight 4102 from Frankfurt-Hahn Airport, Germany, to Rome Ciampino Airport suffered multiple bird strikes.
Enjoyed your user page and talk page! Sethie (talk) 05:59, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
Nice picture. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:09, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
I believe you have an essay named after a teacher about how not to insist on every style or grammar thing that you were taught was a mandatory rule in school. I was going to cite it on Talk:Catholic Church, but can't find it for the life of me. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:43, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
...for User:EEng#Museum of I Didn't Know That Was Possible. The biggest laugh I have gotten out of Wikipedia in a long time. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:26, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
You can't possibly be insinuating that editors who work hard getting articles to GA and FA level—something I'm moderately well known for not having the stomach to do—and continue to watch over them rather than putting them on the metaphorical mantlepiece like a trophy are narcissists? Or that doing what Arbcom said to do, and discussing a matter on the merits for each individual article, is narcissistic? As I say, I must have the wrong end of the stick and you must be snarking at that talkpage about someone else wasting the time of those who administer Arbcom's increasingly byzantine set of fiats. I just hope I don't get dragged over there; I can't make head or tail of the system, those administering it seem to have all forgotten that we're supposed to be writing (and improving) articles. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:19, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the English Wikipedia Manual of Style and article titles policy, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.Hi EEng, regarding Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images rather than edit warring please engage in discussion on the talk page. Continuing to edit war may lead to a block. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:22, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
The following sanction now applies to you:
You are page banned from editing Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images for a period of one week.
You have been sanctioned for continuing to edit war after being told to stop, being "right" does not give you a pass to edit war as you please. This sanction does not prevent you from editing the talk page and I encourage you to do so.
This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article titles and capitalisation#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.
You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 22:17, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
For those playing along at home... For several years the image + caption at right have appeared in WP:Manual of Style/Images. Two days ago, a series of edits to the caption began:
This image shows neither what a helicopter is, nor what the Sydney Opera House looks like adequately.
This image does not adequately show what a helicopter or the Sydney Opera House look like.
This image is inadequate to show either what a helicopter is, or what the Sydney Opera House looks like.
This image would be inappropriate in the article on helicopters or the Sydney Opera House, as neither is adequately shown in this image.
This image would be inappropriate in the article on helicopters or the Sydney Opera House, as neither is adequately shown.
I reverted them all as either simply not as good as the longstanding wording, or illogical, or just plain awful. I repeatedly asked that potential changes be proposed first on the talk page; one editor's (an admin!) edit summary was I don't think I'll bother with the talk page: I mean ultimately it's not very important, is it? why waste time on long discussion? as he editwarred in his preferred version again. And I get a page ban? EEng 05:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Nice , you deserve it due to "barbaric state" LOL . Alexson 97 (talk) 23:54, 2 June 2018 (UTC) This user has been blocked indefinitely. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:40, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
I was just taking a look at some comments about me at Wikipediocracy (bonus points for anyone who finds that one!), and I found that when I typed "wikipedioc" into Google, the third autofill that it returned was "wikipediocracy eeng" . The first search result isn't even about you (someone abbreviated English Wikipedia), and the second is the old Gage thing. Apparently someone is searching a lot for that one! Quite the search engine optimization! --Tryptofish (talk) 22:01, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
You recently left a reply on my talk page about foornoting. What did all of that mean? HorsesARENiceRide me to my talk page 14:40, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Um, you explained footnotes, but I still don't know what a foornote is. Searching Google I found this but am still not enlightened. And the old deleted version of foor is no help either. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:37, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
An addition to your mighty organ. Robevans123 (talk) 10:57, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Forever alone. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi EEng. I know I've stopped by to say thanks for the smile a time or two before but your finding the clip for "Crush-Kill-Destroy" sets the bar just that much higher :-) Many cheers to ya! MarnetteD|Talk 05:08, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Here's a thought. Let's start a separate set of dramaboards just for beauty contests and pro wrestling. Then all of us reality based editors just ignore them completely. Let them argue amongst themselves until they get so pissed off at each other that they quit. Then possibly we can impose the same version of PAGs the rest of the encyclopedia has on them and do away with 98% of the content. John from Idegon (talk) 05:22, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Why did you “merge” two unrelated sections? Interqwark talk contribs 05:56, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
While I generally with you on the wrestling and beauty pageants, they are undoubtedly a significant cultural event for the US going back at least 50 years. Japanese Animation however is entirely another kettle of fish, being a distinct art style in animation, as well as having many (within film and the TV industry) highly influential (to the rest of the world) works. And thats before you get to the 'cultural' aspect for Japan. (I am of course talking about stuff like Nausicaä or Macross and not say to take an example completely at random Kill la Kill) Only in death does duty end (talk) 11:22, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Oh for God(win)'s sake!!! It's hilarious!! Atsme📞📧 18:57, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
What on earth do you do for a living that gives you time for things like this? Natureium (talk) 02:12, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Just want say I like the way you radically declutter the AN/ANI headers. They look much better, really. –Ammarpad (talk) 02:27, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
In reference to long things not being read, this one only took 9 hours and being pushed halfway up the page for the first person to respond to it. Although the response was just telling them to shorten it... Natureium (talk) 23:30, 12 June 2018 (UTC) I no longer believe this to be true. See math. Natureium (talk) 00:41, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Nothing more to say...it says it all.] Atsme📞📧 13:49, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Looks like a hater tried a #savagaclapback- But THey failed, 😎 fam 😎, come at the king and u better not miss when u do that 😎😎💯💯💵Money💵emoji💵💸 00:40, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
Good, i was starting to think I was doing too well at being incomprehensible....💵Money💵emoji💵💸 03:45, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi EEng, if you have a moment, copyediting help at Shooting of Antwon Rose Jr. appreciated! Thanks. -Darouet (talk) 14:46, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
I heartily endorse this product and/or service. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 04:01, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
I keep meaning to tackle that page, but I can seem to muster the "heart" for it. It needs a clarification that it doesn't mean Proper name (philosophy), even if that's just in a footnote, then the salvageable content needs to be merged, per the consensus discussion months ago (maybe that was even last year). And I think there was one bit in it that doesn't actually represent actual practice and directly conflicts with the rest of MoS (I forget the detail, right off hand, other than Randy Kryn was arguing to keep that part). — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 04:12, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
You may have picked up on this already, but there a large amount of factional overlap between WT:WPBIO, WT:BLP, WT:CITE, and WT:FAC. The only MoS pages with which that editorial cluster regularly intersect are MOS:LEAD and MOS:BIO. This has a great deal to do with the flareup at WT:MOSLEAD, and why it seems so weird. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 22:05, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
More Tom Lehrer is always appreciated. Sure wish there was a Tom Lehrer userbox...
—Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 01:28, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Cheers Risk Engineer (talk) 12:05, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:Air rage for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. Funplussmart (talk) 22:59, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
I concur with you and -sche that we have a lot of weird, unencyclopedic examples that need replacing. I've had this on my mind for years, too, and occasionally replace one. Doing more of that is surely in order. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 03:15, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
I give you the article Flying Head. I am afraid I can not narrow the brilliance of this article down to a pithy sentence or two; frankly nearly any two sentences will qualify. I would, however, like to draw your attention to this relatively recent edit comment, which I noticed when looking at the edit history to see whether this article had been vandalized: (no obvious cleanup needed). --GRuban (talk) 14:58, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
Follow this link and once there follow my link after the word rebuke. EEng 02:23, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
For drama lovers: c:COM:AN#Proposal for desysop. Apparently, over at Commons, when an admin acts fishy,[lower-alpha 1] they first conduct an advisory !vote to decide whether they will conduct a desysop !vote. From what planet are these people? Kafka-61b? — JFG talk 18:07, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
And since when is Wales part of the English-speaking world? English requires vowels.I'm 'Murikan and I laughed out loud at that. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:14, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
As we're talking about our favourite orange-headed goon again, I'd like the peanut gallery to take this edit into consideration and read it in the style of Trump talking off the record to Billy Bush. It seems ... uncanny. Of course, if there is a video of this "episode", I wouldn't be surprised if somebody had uploaded it to Commons (as "own work", naturally), then a bunch of admins !voted to keep it at a deletion request. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:09, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
I'm astounded to read that you've been accused of canvassing over on Commons, which has no rules about canvassing, for posting a simple notice here on WP:AN, as though the English Wikipedia admins and those that follow that page are somehow partisan! Just another example of the kind of thick headed approach that makes me want to spend time doing other things. I suppose if I'd just shut up and fucked off none of this would have happened, but I hope people can see that sometimes standing up for what you believe in, however uncomfortable it makes you feel, really is the right thing to do.
Be brutally honest, EEng, do you agree or disagree? nagualdesign 18:09, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
Here's my take on Commons. This evening, I thought I'd look for a picture of someone crying (preferably in a humorous way) so I could lighten the mood in an edit war with the picture + caption of "it's NOT FAIR I got reverted!". So I did a Google search for site:commons.wikimedia.org crying
and got File:Young female protester cries in despair as the violence spreads during clashes in Kyiv, Ukraine. Events of February 18, 2014.jpg, which is too serious to use in a light-hearted satirical situation. So I back up one level to "Category:Crying women". I then think, "hmm, a grown man crying, preferably in some non-serious content like a momentary and minor knock in a sporting event will do the trick, I'll go up a level to Category:Crying people and look from there". You can't get to "Category:Crying people" from "Category:Crying women". But you can go to "Category:Nude or partially nude women crying" and "Category:Woman crying as she hails Hitler". At this point, I gave up. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:39, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
The Brilliant Idea Barnstar | |
I could probably call Mr. Lehrer to be certain, but I believe he would be insulted to be said to have done something in the vein of "crooned"; as I recall, he called "Alma" a ballad, and (as you well know) they need not be crooned. But thank you for your masterful support in favor of the lyrical resolution of that DYK about, well, the loveliest girl in Vienna. —Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 02:00, 10 July 2018 (UTC) |
Yeah, when I put in crooned I made a mental note to check the denotation, but then I forgot. It's truly the wrong word. I'm glad my efforts to get TH on the front page were appreciated. However, now that the DYK's been rotated off I think I want to modify the article's treatment of the song. Take a look. EEng 02:20, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Alt-right. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
EEng, I reverted the latest comment you (re)-added to ANI as needlessly provocative. While humor when it lightens the mood is helpful, in this case it is just adding oil to fire and I don't see any good coming out of continuing this line. Hope you understand. Abecedare (talk) 08:41, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
As this place gets a faster (and, generally, wittier) response than the village pump .... last Friday I took a number of photos of protestors on the Women's March against Trump. In particular, I have a photo from one young cheerful woman holding up a sign saying, "Fuck off Trump, you absolute prick". I asked the protestor if I could take a photo, she agreed, so I emphasised I would be uploading it to publicise the march (but didn't specify exactly where). I seem to recall people getting hassle for uploading images with blatant profanity on them - something to do with them being put in articles by vandals? Can anyone refresh my memory? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 23:23, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
I saw This page is for discussion of urgent incidents and chronic, intractable behavioral problems
in the ANI header and couldn't remember seeing it previously - so I had a dig through the history of the header.
Just wanted to say thanks for the thankless task of updating that, and making it clear what sort of things ANI is geared towards - good work - TNT 💖 18:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
created and edited only by admins and template editors. TonyBallioni's suggestion is probably your best bet, short of making an edit request - TNT 💖 19:36, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
Here's an new image of me and my flashmob ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:07, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.
Regarding: "[I] simply went to the last good version before you made a mess and clicked Revert to this version;"
Where is that button? I can't seem to find it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:16, 23 July 2018 (UTC) (feeling dumb)
Hello EEng, what did you mean when you stated in your edit summary to this edit reverting mine that you "can't restore [my] other changes"? Is there a problem with the changes I made? Or is it simply that you are not available to do so right now? So long as you are okay with all the other changes, I can simply change the |U2-banned=
value back to yes
and add information about the topic ban using this diff. Is that acceptable? —Nøkkenbuer (talk • contribs) 15:03, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
Please stop unilaterally making the table bigger, uglier, and inconsistent. Take it to talk, but MOS readers shouldn't be subjected to that horror without consensus to assault their eyes. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:09, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Talk page stalkers! To the barricades! The powers of darkness are massing to remove painful visual puns from a project page (be sure to scroll down to see all four images). Now is the time for action! Discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Identifying_and_using_independent_sources#Inclusion_of_images. EEng 17:00, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
Are you trying to hint it's your birthday, EEng? Either that or another cause for celebration for you?--Kieronoldham (talk) 21:23, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
I think that's a bloody good pun that Jytdog (talk), and it does not reference sauce. I bet you had a semi-chuckle. It's not easy getting a light-hearted politically satirical pun given such poor material. A bun and a burger. Marx never managed it. It's a little gem. I say. It came to me in a flash. Under ten seconds and the masterpun was fully formed. Irondome (talk) 03:03, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
"Anagrams don't lie" can be rearranged to "damnation lagers." TTFN, I think I hear a bottle of Beck's calling to me. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 05:15, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I see that you have removed my sources three times. Can you think of any better source that I could use, or do you think I can mention Ardith Dondanville anywhere else in the article? Davidgoodheart (talk) 06:06, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Initiated discussion for revising the lead on Talk:Chesley_Sullenberger. 173.73.10.191 (talk) 23:39, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Chesley Sullenberger. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. 173.73.10.191 (talk) 05:02, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Galatz גאליץשיחה Talk 21:21, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
A real barn-burner at ANI. How about a "loser leaves Wikipedia" match? Don't worry about losing, you can always come back as User:TheMaskedEEng. Primergrey (talk) 03:27, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Please don’t joke about being from QAnon on the noticeboard. Thanks, Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:45, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Re: , I will take a smartass over a dumbass every time. :) --Guy Macon (talk) 06:30, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:RF resonant cavity thruster. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
We absolutely need something lewd about soft and hard blocks. Blackmane (talk) 01:38, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
You may be thanked without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did in this edit. Comment on content, not on idiots. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:58, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
2 things:
1. Who knew she was even still alive?
2. I'd still appreciate it if you eased up on Galatz...it would make my life easier in dealing with him if nothing else.
Vjmlhds (talk) 19:55, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
I have no words GRuban (talk) 13:51, 31 August 2018 (UTC) |
When you get a chance, will you look at this source and tell me what you think about it as a source for Fan service#History? Thanks in advance...Atsme📞📧 17:11, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
Can you think of a witty entry in WP:ASTONISHME for this edit? I'm afraid my sense of humour is recharging in the garage at the moment. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:50, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
I know it wasn't you who has been using the word troll, but I always address comments like mine on that talk p. to both people, so as not to look like I'm taking sides DGG ( talk ) 14:44, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you purposefully and blatantly harass a fellow Wikipedian, as you did at Cambridge Companions. DGG ( talk ) 06:17, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
I take it you have already heard of this? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:37, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Unhide for the answer | ||
---|---|---|
|
That's impressive! But what does it mean if the tablature says "go fugue yourself!"?It doesn't mean much, but is usually written on your copy of the music after you've helpfully pointed out to the singer that they were just a bit flat on that last song. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:12, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Whatever happened to BRD...? GiantSnowman 16:21, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
I just want to clarify I do not object to images not having captions but to thumb images not having captions. Since your latest image edits do not have thumb images with no captions but just plain images I have no objection. I didn’t like the gallery at the bottom before and am glad you have changed it. IWI (chat) 12:41, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
I spruced up WP:NDR a bit today, but I'm sure you and your merry band of talk page stalkers can do better. Have at it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:44, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
I've had a complaint that my talk page is too long. What should I do?
I was amazed, checking the history, that you in fact do archive your talk page. Kendall-K1 (talk) 20:12, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
I sent you an email, but don't know if it included what I intended to send. Yes or no? Atsme✍🏻📧 20:15, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
I've been implementing some WP:ASTONISHME upon reading it but am unable to do it at BT group due to one user who basically owns the article if you look at the history. Could you help me reach consensus? IWI (chat) 21:05, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
Dr. | This user is a Doctor of Acnestis. (Scratch my back, I'll scratch yours.) |
You and I must--must--become friends! It is a galactic imperative! You are, maybe, the second person I have found on Wikipedia with a sense of humor, and I desperately need you in my Wp life! Plus I want to steal some of your stuff... I absolutely must have that pyramid for my talk page! If you had any idea how much trouble I have had with exactly the issue of authoritarian editors--well one really--you would swear it had been created just for me! I'm sure they were reading my talk page and simply neglected to tell me they had made a pyramid out of it. I have every intention of becoming one of your 'crazed talk page stalkers', so giving me the pyramid would be a good start! Does it need a US copyright tag--no wait--aaarrgghh!!!--I have been assimilated! Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:51, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
EEng: Please stop spending your time (and wasting mine) by criticizing and deleting information. Your actions before and for a good part of today suggest some personal bias for DeVoto: only when I added favorable rebuttable did you let information stand. Now you want secondary sources? (–when this material is already so simple, clear, and strong!) Why spend the time giving advice when you could take it yourself? You want secondary sources, too? Please, go out there, tiger, and get yourself (and the rest of us) some secondary sources! And use your time (and that of others) more constructively, to boot! :) --Aboudaqn (talk) 19:33, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
Re this edit: if a thread is closed, it stays closed unless there is something new or important to say about it. The reverted edit was neither, and the edit summary was incivil. Also, I didn't want Paleofacts (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) to run off to the media and say that there are rude idiots on Wikipedia. Please keep your pearls of wisdom polite and helpful.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:44, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Did you hear about the bad thesaurus? Not only is it awful it's also awful. I'm not humorless or unamused I just didn't want that permanently on the discussion page. Best, User:Barkeep49 (talk) 01:41, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
I'm looking for someone to make a personal attack at Talk:Homonym so I can open an ANI thread entitled "Ad hominem at Homonym". See Talk:Homonym#Ad_hominem. EEng 22:22, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Hah! I had previously said "All things being equal, if my saltiness at my talk page encourages other editors not post edits like those I was responding to, then mission accomplished."
Which fits your metaphor perfectly. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:39, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
Seems like you are in big trouble now! (not) Apparently, it has been scientifically proven that you are homophobic: . --Tryptofish (talk) 20:42, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
Did it. GirthSummit (blether) 20:46, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
My next RfC would target the term "bloody hell" :D But seriously man, this message is to commend you for your absolutely rollicking, sarcastic and brilliant comments on the RfC. And I know why you supported the listing of the RfC at CENT :D You just love to have the popcorn ready when a good drama is taking place. Have fun man, Lourdes 00:47, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
One should beware of those who cannot or will not laugh when others are merry, for if not mentally defective they are spiteful, selfish or abnormally conceited ... Great men of all nations and of all times have possessed a keen appreciation of the ridiculous, as wisdom and wit are closely allied.
Given that the length of your TOC is reaching the length of my talk page, would you consider making a TOC for your TOC? Thank you in advance for your kind consideration :) Lourdes 09:43, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Shouldn't that be, "Regnal numbers are normally written with Roman numerals (without suffix, e.g. Elizabeth II not Elizabeth IInd or Elizabeth 2d)"? Kendall-K1 (talk) 02:34, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Do you think you could add the two images (with captions, as per usual) that you had here to your userpage? SemiHypercube ✎ 12:53, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Go to Special:Preferences and click on the "Gadgets" tab. Then scroll down to "Appearance". Near the end of that section there should be a box to check off that says "Strike out usernames that have been blocked". Makes it very easy to see who is blocked. Both that option and the one above it should not be optional and should be on by default. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 15:55, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
I appreciate your attempts to inject your attempts to inject humour into that discussion, and I know it doesn't look good for me to only be posting to ANI and a policy talk page that at this point might as well be ANI. But I really am just that busy IRL at the moment (specifically until 11/21) that creating articles is out of the question, while signing into Wikipedia to see and respond to the latest drahms is ... well, it doesn't take as much time as writing articles. :P Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 07:07, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Regarding this, I'm inclined to just let it lie unless/until it comes up again later. The idea had some merits, but I think it got both mired and entrenched. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 09:08, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
...so I had no choice but to come here. Never imagined Fucking Austria would be the remedy to one of our civility issues. Atsme✍🏻📧 18:16, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
See this - the punch line was intended to be homonyminous-like for “civility” but I don’t think it’s close enough. Any ideas? Atsme✍🏻📧 14:49, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
I wonder if we should open a related RfC on the question of the appropriateness of an Arbcom candidate using the phrase functus officio in public . EEng 06:05, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Just a reminder to any talkpage stalkers that the Mediation Committee (that's ArbCom's obscure sister committee) has been disbanded. (You probably already know this. I needed some place to put an allegory for it.) SemiHypercube ✎ 23:08, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Museum of False Cognates
From Proselytism:
(No text is needed. The image says it all. It's not what it looks like it's implying at first glance, since it's German, not English) SemiHypercube ✎ 16:42, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Someone at ANI just took a quote of "fucking" being used for emphasis ("blindingly fucking obvious"), but removed the following adjective so it sounds like people copulating in a manner so hideous (or so amazing) that onlookers are struck blind. It's begging for your attention. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 09:23, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
accuse you of illiteracy – I always carry a copy of my parents' marriage certificate in case anyone tries that on me
erm, how would a marriage certificate help to prove that. are there cultural clues that I missed ? --DBigXrayᗙ 14:33, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Your parents marriage certificate wouldn't actually prove your legitimacy. As for literacy level, true story, one of my wife's extended (male) cousins got accidentally married to the groom at the wedding he was witnessing, due to the registrar writing the names in the wrong place on the certificate. 10 years before same sex marriage was legalised..... Only in death does duty end (talk) 21:13, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:EEng reported by User:Ivanvector (Result: ). Thank you. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:51, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Courcelles (talk) 15:19, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
For those playing along at home, the image at issue is this one ...
... appended to an ANI thread that had been an absurd waste of time (including – and I am not making this up – a side debate on whether someone saying Jesus F. Christ might prompt Pakistan to block Wikipedia) with the hope that the participants – who had been continuing an almost identical dispute elsewhere – would think twice next time.
That should have been the end of it, but ...
Courcelles's block rationale is
TParis only seems to have made three reverts ... no block will be forthcoming from me as they stopped behind the "bright line". EEng did not.
Well no, actually. I made two reverts at ANI, three at ANI/Archive996 (yesterday), and one today. So no crossing of the bright line, if that's what matters.
TParis' removal of my post was a clear violation of WP:TPO, which provides "Cautiously editing or removing another editor's comments is sometimes allowed, but normally you should stop if there is any objection". I was simply restoring what had been improperly removed. I explained what I was doing repeatedly, with links to governing guidelines, in my edit summaries. I also explained in a discussion TParis himself opened , with no response from him or anyone else.
As Legacypac succinctly put it , He restored his own comment - against inappropriate removal. Hardly an edit war. Bad block.
SemiHypercube, I agree that "there's no need to edit war over one thumbnail". But that's not what this is about. As I said elsewhere
So sure, Courcelles, unblock me. But if someone again removes my post (which I somehow think is unlikely – funny, that) I hope you'll actually read the links above and participate, with a fresh mind, in the ensuing discussion. And I'd appreciate your unblock comment including a permalink to this thread.
EEng 20:21, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm tempted to speculate that you know how ridiculous your claim is but simply have no shame, but on balance I think you honestly don't know how foolish you are.
Your explanation is ridiculous, as expected. If you don't want to end up like MikeV, Coffee, Fred Bauder, and other bygone self-appointed enforcers of their personal tastes, I suggest you find somewhere off-wiki where you can release your pent-up busybody impulses without bothering the rest of us.
And no, I do not agree you are UNINVOLVED with regard to me, because in removing my post you were not acting in your capacity as a WP:ADMIN, but rather in your capacity as WP:IMACOPANDYOUWILLRESPECTMAHAUTHORITAY. Admins have no special standing to evaluate others' posts; you merely wrapped yourself in your magic administrative security blanket in an effort to intimidate .
Have a care, big man. EEng 04:46, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
Followup: Hey, TParis, will you be removing the image added by The Blade of the Northern Lights here , calling it trolling and a personal attack? Just wondering. EEng 07:33, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
...that you are referring to me with this edit. So thank you. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉ 13:43, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Drawn from life, I think. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 21:34, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
I spent the last thirty-minutes scrolling to get down here (only to scroll back to the top to click on "new section"). I just want to say that the phrase you fashioned is a fitting motto for AN/I. A shame that too few seem to heed it. I felt that notifying you of this fact was non-urgent, hence my lateness in stopping by. Though now that it's done, it's irretractable. :) Mr rnddude (talk) 10:33, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Mr. Nude Dude is referring to what you see at left and right.
Re: the newly-added User:EEng#Museum of Behind Closed Doors, I can't quite get over the fact that there really was someone's mistress who was named Fanny Pistor. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:26, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Hello EEng. Thank you for the User:EEng#Museum of Duty and Remembrance. We should indeed never forget, and I read Lionel de Jersey Harvard as suggested. Very interesting. The last war cemetery I visited was Ridge Wood Military Cemetery, interesting because it was started near the front line during the fighting (hence the irregular layout of the gravestones). That is fairly close to where my grandfather served during the first world war. --Mirokado (talk) 21:44, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Good Humor | ||
For adding humor to an otherwise humorless area |
[Username Needed] 11:58, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
EEng, I note that you reverted my reversion of your deletion of text indicating that gradual pressure drops can go undetected. This phenomenon is actually of enormous importance. It has been implicated in a number of crashes where the plane sails on, incommunicado, while the crew, and passengers, inside are unconscious or dead The body is quite unable to detect low oxygen levels other than losing consciousness because the urge to breath is controlled by rising CO2 levels not falling O2 levels. This is something drummed into every trainee pilot from day one. I myself, with fellow students, was taken up in a hypobaric chamber to 25,000' on oxygen and then switched to air and allowed to lose consciousness just to demonstrate that it cannot be detected, even when you know it is going to happen. In the case of the cosmonauts the dump valve was located out of site under one of the seats, it got missed after venting the cabin. If the crew had been able to detect low O2 levels then they would immediately have reached under the seat to close the valve. Its location was a little awkward but they knew how to do it because it was used for extra-vehicular activities. On the ground, the only symptom was no radio contact, this happens naturally during re-entry and should have been restored in the parachute phase. It wasn't but the diagnosis at the time was not hypoxia. It was only on opening the completely undamaged capsule that they realised the cosmonauts were dead. The points that have been deleted are actually very important and need to be a part of the story. I'm not going to enter a reversion war but please have a think, do some research and consider how these phrases might be better worded. Ex nihil (talk) : Ex nihil (talk) 02:25, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
I'm sorry to tell those gathered here that our friend User:Shock Brigade Harvester Boris passed away last month. EEng 06:56, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Have you ever noticed that "smock" is a lot like "mock" with an extra "s"? That makes it easier to mock someone over a smocking accident and helps keep America smoke free.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 21:04, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Family obligations make it impossible for me to accept the position of Donald Trump's next chief of staff. Just in case any of you were wondering. EEng 15:38, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
Instead of giving presents 🎁 this year, I'm giving my opinion. Get excited!! 🎅🏻🎄🤶🎁 Atsme✍🏻📧 02:49, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
Commie fag — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pilesabuse (talk • contribs) 13:04, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
Well, it is Christmas (or will be tomorrow, in my socialist, faggot friendly, secularised corner of the world), so balls are surely traditional. --bonadea contributions talk 21:20, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
I see you restored this. Removing a contribution to a talk page was not an action I took lightly, I'm assuming you can appreciate why someone might have done that; please consider how others can use this form of 'comment' to paint user's comments with their indignation (i.e. blowback). All very cunning mind you, a post to a thread to which reply is not directly possible and insists on attention to itself. cygnis insignis 04:37, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi EEng, you may be right about reverting me and I'm not going to argue the point further. But you made 4 reverts within 2 hours to that article. This is just a friendly reminder regarding 3RR, because I appreciate your valuable contributions. Also, I didn't get a notification about being reverted -- be sure to use the 'undo' link if that's the reason. Gap9551 (talk) 22:47, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
Huggums537 (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Thank you for the comic relief on the ANI pages and other talk pages. I enjoy reading them. Huggums537 (talk) 21:57, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.