User talk:Eric Corbett: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:28, 21 July 2013

"It was reading the ultimate paragraph of this post: [1] that finally convinced me it was time to go, yes, Hans is quite right, I am stuck in a vicious circle and there was no likelihood of things improving."
— Extract from Giano's retirement statement

Precious again

forum
Thank you for content such as today's Chadderton, for adding quality to the articles of others, for speaking up to the point with "amore e studio elucidandae", and for running your talk as a fascinating forum of ideas and beers, - and yes, to quote you, "we need some perspective", - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (30 September 2010)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:52, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were the 139th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style. What do you think of "move at greater [speed] than the speed of consensus because any large discussion results in no consensus"? - Thank you for today's Cotswold Olimpick Games, it's your day! Thank you for leaving the Olympus of an awesome Wikipedian (never a Wikipedian anyway) to be a human Olimpick gamer, Eric ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:43, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gerda, very kind of you. Eric Corbett 12:50, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How do you like the game BWV 39 for GA? (I will have to ask Bencherlite if he scheduled on your day on purpose.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:26, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ps: tell George that I mentioned Little Moreton Hall as an example (although I don't like it so much) (you have to scroll, infobox discussions grow fast) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:32, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting article, I enjoyed this, thank you.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 21:59, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

did I say "grow fast"? - reached the swamp again, look for "gang", that's probably me ;) - but BWV 103 (You shall weep and wail) is ~~almost~~ GA now, the other still open, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:32, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you remember polishing the lead of several articles, including Franz Kafka? If you have a few moments: 1) I started the blurb for TFA, improvement welcome. 2) I would like to see the writing of the pivotal "Das Urteil" (in one night, after meeting Felice Bauer) mentioned in the article lead. 3) Shouldn Kafkaesque perhaps be kafkaesque? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:56, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Now this is Kafkaesque:

HULLABALLOO: {(unblock)} I'm sorry. This is Kafkaesque. It is not disputed that I did not make the edit for which I was blocked.. (snip)

SANDAHL: You say you are Kafkaesque, if you are User:Kafkaesque you need to need to make this unblock request in this account name.

-- Hillbillyholiday ^talk 22:36, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

By now the swamp event seems also Kafkaesque, - at least the term "off topic" is mentioned eventually. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:32, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can't believe the infobox rubbish is still rumbling on when it would be so easy to solve by banning Andy Mabbett for another year. Eric Corbett 20:51, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That would not help at all, they would still have to deal with me ;) - I wish him good recovery. - Kafkaesque: he started "stalking", a few edits later it was "infobox" again, he was caught by emergency surgery, but - as you said - it's still "rumbling on", - thanks for a new phrase, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:25, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kafkaesque: it's his birthday, you saw it on Google or the Main page, even without you improving the lead ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:56, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's good. Was I supposed to have improved the lead? Eric Corbett 14:59, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I saw on the BBC News web site yesterday that "shitstorm" is now an official German word, maybe in exchange for your very perceptive "schadenfreude". Eric Corbett 15:02, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I saw that too, but in a far more respectable source. -- Hillbillyholiday ^talk 15:06, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"The French don’t even have a term for ‘bell end’, that’s how far behind they are." That's unbeatable. Eric Corbett 15:19, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Define "supposed". Read above for the expression of a certain hope in the matter. - If you read above about a kafkaesque thread, it was mercifully closed after three weeks ("the expectation of the community is the editors involved need to figure out how to get along") and archived, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:13, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ps: While I never succeeded adding Hitler to a Bach cantata DYK for more clicks, I at least managed this little birthday gift: "DYK ... that translators of Franz Kafka's works must cope with ambiguous words like Verkehr, which refers both to traffic and sexual intercourse? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:21, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

SCOMN! (Snorted coffee out my nose)! Hugs to all! Great accomplishment! Montanabw^(talk) 16:59, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anglesey churches (2)

Thanks for your three recent GA reviews. At some point, would you mind casting your eye over Old Church of St Nidan, Llanidan? It's the longest I think of my Anglesey church series - ironic given that it was part-demolished in the 19th century - and I think it's worth taking a shot at FAC with it at some point. An EC copyedit would work wonders, I'm sure. No rush, and no obligation, of course. Bencherlite ^Talk 13:41, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but I'm probably not going to be around much now until Monday. Eric Corbett 14:39, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - neither will I! Bencherlite ^Talk 14:44, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, done now. Good luck at FAC. Eric Corbett 18:56, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Norman conquest of England...

Looks like John's done with it, you ready to take a twirl over it and whack a lot of commas? Ealdgyth - Talk 15:16, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Will do, but maybe not until tomorrow. Just got back from a weekend break. Eric Corbett 20:20, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you enjoyed your holiday! I need to address a comment or two that Iri left on my talk page, but it shouldn't affect much of the article. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:24, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comma purging now done. Eric Corbett 15:59, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Think we're good now? If so, and if John's happy, I'm leaning towards FAC shortly. I'm sorry I don't have more to offer you on Mount Vernon... but I've never been a big student of American history. (I think it's the old "familiarity breeds contempt" thing... I got force-fed it so much in school that it never interested me...) Ealdgyth - Talk 22:37, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, other than the brain fart of totally unciting one of the explanatory footnotes (Blargh, that was a big oversight!), I think we're ready. How's Mount Vernon looking? Ealdgyth - Talk 19:54, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think we're about as good as we're going to get with the conquest, so FAC sounds like a plan. I haven't looked at Mount Vernon again yet, been a little diverted with The Coral Island and a few other things, such as SandyGeorgia being blocked earlier today. Eric Corbett 20:56, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I saw that. I took a break this afternoon and went to see mindless entertainment and bled off some stress. Back to the trenches tomorrow! Ealdgyth - Talk 02:18, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Who else...

You asked... well, queens, emperors, empresses, czars, shahs, popes.... I think some ruling princes have been also. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:47, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, the Sultan of Brunei also.Ealdgyth - Talk 19:48, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, but in this case I don't think there's any ambiguity? Eric Corbett 19:54, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ealdgyth, you beat me to it! (I was just logging on to say the same thing...) :) Hchc2009 (talk) 19:55, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) In the context of the Normans, it isn't as obvious as it seems to the modern eye. After Stephen and Matilda, Anglo-Norman/Angevin custom was to hold the coronation of a successor while the reigning monarch was still alive (to make it obvious to all who the chosen successor was, and prevent a repeat of the civil war that followed the death of Henry I with no confirmed successor). I can easily imagine someone aware of this practice, but not aware of when it started, taking it to mean that William's coronation was just to anoint him as the successor to Edgar the Aetheling as-and-when Edgar died, not to crown him king on the spot. – iridescent 19:58, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's me put in my place then. Whatever Ealdgyth thinks is fine with me; I'd be hard pressed to think of anyone I'd be less likely to edit war with than her. Apart from you maybe. Eric Corbett 20:02, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Although the hypothetical reader who is aware of the (dare I say "obscure"?) Anglo-Norman/Angevin custom of crowning successors but who is not aware that William was crowned king rather than the Aethling's successor would be exceptionally well-read and exceptionally poorly read at the same time, surely? Bencherlite ^Talk 20:09, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Angevins (the Anglo-Normans sorta end with Stephen (The "Norman dynasty" is really a misnomer ... and no one is really sure what to do with Stephen .. .he gets lumped in with the Normans, but strictly speaking he should be his own dynasty. But then, Stephen's always been a problem child) so it's not good to say they had that custom - their custom on the succession was "sprint to Winchester to seize the treasury") borrowed the idea from the Capetians, who did it for a very long time - 200 or 300 years. The Angevins only did it once, and it didn't really work so well - see Henry the Young King. (Richard I was on the outs with his dad, John had to get rid of Arthur, Henry III was too young to have been crowned, and by the time of Edward I, the Capetians had pretty much quit doing it, so there wasn't much point in it. And Edward had a very secure succession - he was actually on Crusade when he became king, and he was so unworried about it that he stayed a while longer...). But, some folks might not be clear if William wasn't crowned something else... better to be specific. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:15, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) You could dare say obscure, but you'd be wrong. This originated with the Anglo-Normans and Angevins, but so did the British monarchy; this is still the practice today. The difference is that since 1301 the heir is crowned Prince of Wales, not Crown Prince of England—they still go through a formal investiture ceremony. – iridescent 20:21, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I realize you've been busy terrorizing poor unsuspecting editors at GANs and stuff (my tongue is very FIRMLY in cheek - your GA reviews are excellent and I'm not sure why that article blew up in your face...) but surely I didn't do so well that you only had that few issues with the poor NC article. I really doubt that I didn't manage to strew commas liberally .... Ealdgyth - Talk 00:27, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As you say, I've been busy terrorising unsuspecting GA nominators, allegedly, so I haven't yet finished with your opus. I'm amazed you even want me to continue with it given my reputation. I sense that my reviewing style is not the Wikipedia way, so I may restrict myself to commenting on FAs in the future. Eric Corbett 00:45, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not easy to scare off. I kinda like your crumudgeonly persona. I'm trying to summon energy to figure out what the big "push" is next. I should do Battle of Hastings, but I'm feeling like working on a bad boy cleric instead... just to pick the cleric... Do I wanna work on the first guy to escape from the Tower or the wanna-be abbot of Evesham that was accused of all those nasty crimes by his monks? Ealdgyth - Talk 00:52, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand this "curmudgeonly" thing. You ask me a question, I tell you what I think. What's curmudgeonly about that? If you might be offended by my reply then why ask me? Eric Corbett 01:00, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Poor uncle Eric. Weren't you a bit of a mod once? "Curmudgeonly" indeed! Who would have thunk it? -- Hillbillyholiday ^talk 01:28, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Flambard’s definitely the way to go. He was a son of a bitch, but his life is an interesting story. He got his guards drunk so he could climb out of the window, but the rope which had been smuggled into the Tower was too short so Flambard had to jump the last bit and portly bishop nearly broke his ankles.

Speaking of which, the article describes the story as a "popular legend". Orderic Vitalis may be embellishing things, but the details that Flambard was held in a room where the window had a dividing pillar rings true. That would have been one of the high status rooms, befitting the bishop's status. It might be more neutral to say "According to Orderic Vitalis..." than "popular legend", a term which was in the earliest surviving version of the article. What do you reckon? Nev1 (talk) 16:21, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperactive friar

By nature extroverted, since young he has always distinguished himself from his pears. I tried editing the trashpile, but it's too brain-mangeing. Ning-ning (talk) 12:02, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Trashpile" is about right. The whole thing needs rewriting, preferably in English next time. Eric Corbett 13:03, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I tried a bit myself. Then I saw the notes. I'm not sure we have enough tags to cover this. Drmies (talk) 17:23, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys. I'm a multilingual speaker and red some of the articles linked to this "personage". Undoubtedly his hyperactive life generates confusions but no doubt leaves an intriguing test above all for his campaigning against priests pedophilia. Absolutely brain-mangeing but if someone has time to go deep and through the articles about his life, may be something interesting could be made out of it by a competent English writing user. Yeah the problem seems only be the conversion of thoughts from Italian to English. You guys are great editors so you should find a way to tell the personage religious experience washed up as though poor online-sourced, his story is well recounted by the available sources linked to the article itself and all the information about it are there concentrated, above all on the link "Gabriele Bojano (September 25, 2011). "FROM MONKHOOD TO CRIMINOLOGY. THE THOUSAND FACES OF ANGELO A TORIELLO." (in Italian). Cronache del Mezzogiorno (Corriere della Sera group) (Italy)". If this said: "Besides many life's experiences, Toriello is a former “showman”, having rubbed shoulders with some Italian and International artists, and a Franciscan Friar with the religious name of Friar Emanuel, who in late 1996 exposed catholic priests as paedophiles, marking the point of his social activism peregrination, although since he was young he has always been involved in volunteering activitieBold texts", you should also let be written the religious experience in more details and of course in cleaned up way and English language, but user Drmies should not just omit it, as if the source is valid for this introduction, the same source should be valid for a deeper content. Yes just the right way to be written has to be monitored.

Just had a cursory read of Kidnapping of Aldo Moro which also exhibits (but not to the same degree) the defects of the Toriello article. For instance "On 9 May 1978 Moro's corpse was found...after 55 days of imprisonment, during which Moro was submitted to a political process and the Italian government was asked for an exchange of prisoners"- and the rest of the article gives an impression that Italian "political speak" is allusory and full of circumlocatory phrases. To paraphrase an English writer on the Years of Lead (can't remember his name) you've read three pages of the newspaper article and you still don't know what the fuck they're going on about. So Toriello is a former "showman"- what was he? A carnival barker, an Italian Bruce Forsyth, a flasher? Ning-ning (talk) 08:49, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey again. Forget about what he is and what. As much he has been or he is a "news subject" which could be of some interest for the public and follows wikipedia guidelines what we care about. I think users and above all expert editors like you mission is to edit over the top contents to restrain them to wikipedia guidelines preserving form, tone, neutrality, grammar, rubbish and from vandalism as well. That's all!. Rest we should leave to the press and be neutral about the subjects as much as sources are verifiable and reliable. This guy may be hyperactive, eccentric or whatever...I think we are not his judges of what he does and how many things he does! We should just stick to our best motive to expand and edits contents in such a way to preserve Wikipedia from rubbish. I have seen user Ning-Ning doing a great editing job and in the end that is what matters, above all keeping in consideration the Italian format of writing which pumps up contents. though not expert I can try editing the content with the help of you guys after seen user DrKlain asking help. I would appreciate user Ning-Ning feed back. Thanks guys. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.205.118.236 (talk) 08:26, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar

Thank you for the help achieving my first FA, Sunbeam Tiger. You deserve the bulk of credit but I am grateful to have been riding shotgun. Working with you over the last few months has been very rewarding and educational, hopefully for both of us, and I want you to know I sincerely appreciate your efforts in showing me the ropes for GA and FA. I hope to use those lessons to be a better editor and more empathetic admin. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 16:28, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I'm feeling childishly pleased with that, and I probably wouldn't have been so bold as to go straight to FAC without you. So it's credit to both of us. Eric Corbett 16:36, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you aren't alone in the childish delight. I would not have gone to FA without you either, that is certain. This is why I thought the teamwork barnstar was apropos as it was well earned. I still have a long way to go, but this FA is a nice milestone. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 16:40, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa, you guys/gals did it! Great work! Well done, Dennis. Now Love tag awaits you. Drmies (talk) 17:13, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We'll be up next Drmies. Eric Corbett 19:43, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I notice someone move protected it, in anticipation for TFA. Guess I need to read up on submitting for that. I think it is a perfect candidate for the front page, which has always been lacking in automotive muscle. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 20:14, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's going to appear on the main page on 12 July, no need for you to do anything. Eric Corbett 20:18, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, how did that happen?? Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 20:19, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ask Bencherlite. Eric Corbett 20:21, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That is beyond cool. We need to contemplate a new project to piddle with, not so much with a fixed end goal of GA or FA, just something fun to work on an let it take us for the ride, and see how far we can take it. Just like with the Tiger, we really had no idea if we could make it a GA when we started, but that worked out pretty well. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 20:32, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, when we started out with the Tiger I was dubious we could even get it to GA, sources seemed so thin on the ground. But I'm up for another ride. Eric Corbett 20:47, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Enjoy this ride and more! Feel free to share baklava ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:30, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you haven't been keeping up Gerda. Apparently I scare away new nominators at GA and I'm unable to collaborate. Eric Corbett 21:35, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Define "apparently" ;) - You helped me with Andreas Scholl and us with Kafka, and I would still like you to have a look at the BWV 39 GA nom, for the experience, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:17, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK, you asked for it! Eric Corbett 22:24, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Too late, taken, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:19, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is that why we skipped GA and went to FA? I can dress you up, but I can't take you anywhere, Eric. ;-) I think a lot of people simply misunderstand you. You give direct, concise advice and some people some how take it offensive, then they react, which creates a spiral. I honestly think some of it starts off as good faith misunderstanding and is followed by everyone digging in. I'm usually pretty good at taking (or giving) criticism, so I don't have an issue with it. Not everyone is as comfortable with that. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 21:55, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA would have taken ages, and I knew we were good enough for FA, give or take. I'm trying to encourage Montanabw to take her Oxbow article straight to FAC as well, but she doesn't seem to have our courage. Ealdgyth is to my mind a model nominator; she never gets upset when her prose is "fixed", except if the meaning is altered or citations misplaced ... it really is my impression that WP's female editors tend to gravitate towards the higher quality end of the scale. If there really is a gender gap, that's a good enough reason to try and plug it, not some PC hand-waving. Eric Corbett 22:08, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I completely believe that women are generally more cooperative and collaborative than men by nature, and that may very well lead to better articles. Wikipedia would undoubtedly be a better place with an even gender ratio. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 22:43, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While I vote for an even gender ratio, I cannot enshrine my own gender, and as for collaboration, I have to say that in my quest for quality control, I have been accused of WP:OWN so many times that I've just, um, owned it. Montanabw^(talk) 22:48, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think there are a lot more women here than the headline stats suggest, as I recently said elsewhere. I completely understand anyone choosing not to reveal their gender, but my own experience is that in the editors I've worked with the gender ratio is about 50:50.

I also think that people will simply be people regardless of gender. Some of the nastiest, least collaborative people I've met have been women. It may also be worth considering what areas draw large clusters of articles, and then looking at what sort of people tend to follow or support those areas. If you follow the supposition that most video gamers, for example, are male, then it also stands to reason that most article writers in that area would be male. Same can be said for sports. Both areas seem to be fairly combative (at least that's my impression). Everyone's mileage will vary, of course, but I've found MilHist pretty agreeable, and most of them are male. It could simply be that the more academic or "high brow" topic areas attract editors that are more accustomed to working with others, and if those areas are in turn frequented by editors who happen to be female, it would tend to create the impression that Dennis commented on. So for the TL/DR version - I think topic rather than gender is the driver behind a collaborative atmosphere (or lack thereof). Intothat darkness 13:51, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While I try to celebrate the differences in men and women, Brits and yanks, I try to not stereotype. This all reminded me of a story I heard a long time ago, and I finally put it on a page here just now. A little parable about bias that I've always enjoyed and found useful at cocktail parties. User:Dennis Brown/A Texas Farmer Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 14:38, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(to Into) ... "It could simply be that the more academic or "high brow" topic areas attract editors that are more accustomed to working with others" ... ROFL. You obviously have never been seriously involved in actual academia. True academics (as in university profs) are so not amenable to actual collegiate working together (unless there is an obvious benefit to them...) that it's not even funny... sometimes I wonder if that's one reason so much of Wikipedia's original editors wanted to avoid attracting actual academics. (And Eric ... me? Model nominator??? (snickers) You just can't see what I do BEFORE I start typing replies to folks... ) Ealdgyth - Talk 23:06, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I missed this earlier. I have actually been involved in academia. Still am, actually (as in the university prof variety). I also said "accustomed to," which doesn't necessarily mean "good at" working with other people. In fact they quite often are not especially good at it. Horrid in many cases, as you pointed out. It's a festering mess in its own way, but I'd also contend that you need at least some of them to catch the major content errors wandering around in the history stuff. Intothat darkness 20:26, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maserati Bora

See WP:AUN for rules regarding using commas in numbers with more than three digits, as well as parentheses. As for the image size, "use the size specified in preferences for logged in users, and use a size determined by resolution for anonymous users." I.e., do not force a different size thumbnail. If you have any other problems please reply here. Mr.choppers | ✎ 06:23, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I don't much care for your tone ("try educating yourself, then come back"). Mr.choppers | ✎ 06:27, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My tone seems to be consistent with yours. Also, see my "I don't give a fuck for your so-called rules if they're against common sense" here. Eric Corbett 06:31, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but I am just trying to apply the consistent formatting decided upon by a multitude of WP users. I personally would never use a comma and a space rather than writing 4719cc, but "4,719 cc" is what WP has agreed to. This is not my preference, but the goal is to have everyone here using a unified style. I have not accused you of being uneducated but only provided links supporting my edit, so my tone is nothing like yours. Mr.choppers | ✎ 06:40, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are being too rigid in how you view the idea of "rules". The "policy" you linked isn't a policy, it is a page on a WikiProject. While I'm a fan of Wikiprojects, they have no more authority than an essay in user space. Since you agree that the comma is superfluous (as do I) then perhaps we would focus on the fact that all 3 of us agree and just call that a consensus. As to the larger images, the templates have the ability to do so, so it much be ok to do when appropropriate. If it really were such a hard and fast rule, that capability would have been deleted. Some of these photos are begging to be a bit bigger and since the goal is to make the article more engaging, not just to follow "rules", enlarging makes sense. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 11:11, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think consistency is better than each individual choosing his/her style preferences. As for the picture size, it is so that individuals can choose their thumbnail setting preference individually, but I agree that for a wide and low picture such as that one a little wider would be better. As for the parentheses in the infobox there is a rule: Wikipedia:MOSNUM#Unit conversions. I would love to have WP agree to let us write engine sizes and engine speeds without the comma. In some countries you only use a breaker when there are five or more digits (e.g. 5000 and 50 000) which seems best to me, but again, it is not for us to decide here. I would love to partake in a conversation about this in a place where some change could be engineered, btw. Mr.choppers | ✎ 16:14, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to what Choppers is about to ask here, since I need to go to lunch :)

I would have to have a link to that discussion before I ignored it, well, not really but a link would be handy. If someone disagrees and wants to make an issue of it, a full blown RfC, then it can be looked at then, but I see no reason to insert the comma at this point. Wikipedia:MOSNUM seems to be soundly in agreement with me. If we all agree, then the best thing to do is move forward with that agreement. I will be happy to deal with someone who disagrees at that time. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 16:12, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In line two of my link above is spelled out, as an example of the chosen style: the Mississippi River is 2,320 miles (3,734 km) long; the Murray River is 2,375 kilometres (1,476 mi) long - commas and all. Enjoy your lunch, I am making an omelet with peas. Mr.choppers | ✎ 16:15, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Using the comma with 4 digits is optional in all things. I'm not persuaded by other articles on Wikipedia, which are more often wrong than right. If I were working on that article, I would have deleted the commas. If I'm not working on that article, then I will leave it by. I'm not dogmatic about things I'm not involved with. With cars, it makes no sense. It is the very definition of "superfluous" since ALL auto engines are going to be less than 10,000 cc, thus never need the comma. It makes it harder to read. If consistency was the "rule" that we had to follow, then MOS would not allow for both uses. I don't go around and enforce my interpretations on other articles, that isn't my style, but I will use my interpretation on articles I'm working on. That some fellows some time ago decided it needed a comma doesn't influence me. Let those fellows start an RfC or approach me. Since you, Eric and I agree that the comma is superfluous, that is all that is needed here for this one article. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 16:53, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wow! I guess I shouldn't have listened to my automobile project brethren: Wikipedia:MOSNUM#Delimiting (grouping_of_digits), Numbers with four digits to the left of the decimal point may or may not be delimited (e.g. 1250 or 1,250). I am going to take away all those stupid commas right now. The only problem is that conversion templates automatically add commas, which will lead to a wild mix of styles in all articles. Mr.choppers | ✎ 16:45, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We can fix them in time. There is no WP:DEADLINE, which is why I'm more concerned about the article I'm working on today. That guideline is what we were talking about. In places with a lot of 5 digit numbers, I might be more inclined to use them as they match up better. Cars are not one of those topics. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 16:56, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

yes, let's fix Bora right now but I also started a conversation here, please drop in an state your support for a change to this silly policy. I've also started a conversation at Template talk:Convert#Commas, which will hopefully lead to some better code, at least for engine sizes as that is where it is most likely to affect us. Cheers, Mr.choppers | ✎ 17:03, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tiger II

Also pinging User:Dennis Brown. First congratulations to you both on a splendid article. I was reading through it once more (my last read through was shortly before you started the FA process) and noticed something. It's nothing I'm complaining about, simply that I noticed it. First I'll preface my comment by saying that I do have a reference script installed in one of my *.css or *.js files which does cause me to see this, so it's nothing that the normal reader would ever notice. In reference item #15 I see:

^ Shelby (1965), p. 218 Harv error: link from #CITEREFShelby1965 doesn't point to any citation.

and in Bibliography:

Shelby, Carroll; Bentley, John (1965), The Cobra Story, Trident Press Harv error: There is no link pointing to this citation. The anchor is named CITEREFShelbyBentley1965.

I'm likely seeing that due to the script from:

importScript('User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js');

which I have in my monobook.js file. Which causes a big bold red "Harv error" to appear in references. While I've had a "poke and hope" go at {{sfn}} in the past, I'm by no means proficient in it or even familiar with {{sfnp}}; so even though I looked - I don't see what's causing it. Just thought I'd bring it to your attention. IIRC User:Shyamal was able to find and fix a similar issue with the Aylesbury duck article a while back. As I said, a very minor issue, but I still thought I'd mention it. — Ched : ? 14:24, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ched, fixed now. Eric Corbett 16:30, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhh ... OK. Because there are two authors, both have to be in the sfnp .. got it. Sorry I wasn't able to catch it myself, but I'm teachable. — Ched : ? 17:00, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Harassment

I'm taking an online mandatory training on harassment as we speak. In about half an hour I should be an expert on the matter, with a PDF diploma to prove it. Drmies (talk) 15:14, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"You know, Sarah, those comments that you keep making about my disability, they really hurt my feelings". "Oh come on, you know all the girls think you're hot with those strong arms from pushing your wheel chair." [I'm not making this up. And both characters are pretty hot, by the way. Wait, that's harassment.] Drmies (talk) 15:16, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[Dave is 65.] "Did you use to ride a dinosaur to work?" Drmies (talk) 15:19, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That seems unnecessary. I've seen you in action here for years, no one harasses others better than you. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 15:18, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks Dennis! Oh, we're not supposed to leave swastikas on other people's desks. Can I have mine back, please? Drmies (talk) 15:19, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There may be a few middle fingers that need to be returned to me. — Ched : ? 15:22, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You know what's funny? Alle these people, including Dave, are so goddamn goodlooking. Especially the girl who dated her professor for a few weeks. Ah, one can always dream. Drmies (talk) 15:25, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a particular reason they are making you take this class, or anything else you want to confess? Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 15:57, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Something about a "hot" 65 year old woman in a wheelchair perhaps? :P — Ched : ? 16:08, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mandatory, so we can feel good about ourselves and say we're actively promoting a happy work place. You should tell your boss to do the same thing, and maybe United Educators will give you a cut of the action. Dennis, I wouldn't mind, if it wasn't such trivial bullshit. A dude in a wheelchair gets harassed by a woman who says he's hot--really, when did that ever happen? A guy hugs too many people--sure, that can happen. But it's all so trivial compared to the shit that happens in real life, and it's all presented like it's solvable. "Harassment traning"--there's a section where you hear a bunch of examples and then you have to check the box, was it an employee being harassed, a bystander, was it via email: duh, too stupid for words. What's useful is helping people figure out what can be considered harassment, and what to do short of reporting to stop it. How does one stop a bunch of construction workers from whistling to women? You empower the woman to be convinced that it's wrong and that it's entirely acceptable for her to find the supervisor and rip him a new one, for instance. Saying "that's harassment by bystanders"--no shit. And that's what I'm getting a certificate for, for realizing that someone who gets demoted because they're always late for work is not a victim of harassment. Sheesh. Drmies (talk) 16:13, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

She might have a fetish, although I have never figured out exactly how a woman does harass a man sexually. We are dogs, after all. If we men are honest with ourselves, when the news shows a male teacher having sex with a female 17 year old, we call him a monster. When we see the blonde female teacher having sex with a 17 year old male, we think "where the hell was she when I was going to school?". I suppose we are guilty of some double standard, pro or con. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 17:07, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh Dennis Brown, reread Essentialism (I know, it's not a very good article right now). Not all men are dogs. Not all women are angels. Besides, where does that leave the Third gender? I was (I realize in hindsight) sexually harassed a few decades ago by a female coworker. ("How?" you ask? That's private. We'll discuss over beers.) It wasn't a big deal to me, but man it was uncomfortable. Eric! Sorry to take up so much of your allotted server space. Drmies (talk) 17:30, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dennis Brown never read Disclosure now, did he? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:00, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Robert Radclive, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Hangman and Quandary (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from Malleus talk page by Ched with~~out~~ a PA on how stupid bots are. — Ched : ? 11:38, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More proof of double standards

here. Admins do indeed get treated better, but you and I have long known that.PumpkinSky talk 12:06, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's already pretty obvious how that's going to turn out. Eric Corbett 12:19, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And that'd be more proof of how continually lower wiki sinks.PumpkinSky talk 12:21, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When it takes an uninvolved user (i.e. me) about 30 seoonds to dismiss one of your claims (the "IP block without escalating blocks", when it actually had twelve) as complete fiction, it's hardly likely that people are going to waste their time reading through the rest, is it? Similarly the Fladrif stuff - you don't mention that Doc James actually unblocked Fladrif first, before reblocking him after further evidence turned up at ANI. It hardly makes me wish to plough through the rest. His block of you was wrong, and it was overturned. But I see nothing to suggest a continuing pattern of abuse of the tools; indeed, many of your diffs are purely of issues that don't involve tools. And there's been no RFCU. So good luck with that one. Black Kite (talk) 13:19, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Utter hogwash, BK, stop cherry picking info to defend your friend. PumpkinSky talk 19:00, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there's your point, really. I've hardly interacted with Doc James in my 7 years here, and only saw the case because I have the page watchlisted. But you should know that evidence for a RFAR needs to be both clear and watertight. And it wasn't. Black Kite (talk) 19:07, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is, sorry you can't see it for whatever reason. And people wonder why participation in wiki nose dives every year...abusive admins and bullies rule the place. PumpkinSky talk 19:11, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Putting aside abusive admins

Eric, do you think Mount Vernon is ready for GA yet? I've been away for the last few weeks, but am more or less around now. Giano 19:30, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much, although we've still got a problem with sources for the last paragraph of the Lawrence Washington (1718–1752) section. Eric Corbett 21:25, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What do you need sourced? Weirdly, I might have it in my genealogy files - first hubby was distantly related to that Washington family, so I have a few things on the Washingtons. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:37, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that there are no sources at all in that final paragraph, and MONGO has been unable to come up with any. Eric Corbett 21:39, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, my files were nothing useful, but do you have this or this or this? (Still looking deeper on JSTOR) Ealdgyth - Talk 21:50, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Emailed you the Wall article - it looks useful. Check your usual email for something from me. I will post any others I find useful. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:55, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

this and this look useful too. Let me know if you want them. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:58, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ealdgyth. That pdf has some interesting additional details – I just followed your link and downloaded it. The story of who built the first house at Mount Vernon seems more complicated than the article would lead one to believe, at least according to Wall. May to have to rewrite this paragraph to match the available sources. It's rather curious that the work of getting Mount Vernon up to GA spec has fallen to a Brit and an Italian don't you think? Eric Corbett 22:48, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No odder than me doing most of the medieval English history articles (it sometimes feels like it's a one-woman research project (I know that it's not a one-woman polishing effort... you and John and everyone else do a LOT of work on my prose) but there is at least HC and Nev who are doing castles and kings... (Yes, Nev, I saw your comment about Flambard. I'm half-afraid that if I finish off Flambard I'll lose interest in editing Wikipedia....) Ealdgyth - Talk 23:02, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aaaagh! don't give up just yet Ealdgyth - I've just ordered two books to use as reference material for a new article I'm planning on a Medieval English subject that hasn't been covered yet, and I'll be looking for your help on that. Intrigued? - I hope so. :) Richerman (talk) 00:08, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

before we GA it, I am just playing arownd with some ideas here [[:File:Mansionplan1.jpg] (which is far from finished) - I wonder if any one here knows where there are any plans on the internet - I can only find an old one allegedly drawn by Washington himself. I don't want to spend hours on it, only to have someone say that's not right. Giano 13:51, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we're quite ready for GA yet. I'm still trying to sort out who it was built the first house on the site. Eric Corbett 14:08, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know; for a national monument and shrine, it doesn't seem very well documented does it? If it's ever finished it looks like this will be the definitive work on the place. Perhaps we will get some sort of national recognition - a sort or republican Légion d'honneur or a life ticket to Disneyland or something like that. Giano 14:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A ticket to Disneyland I could quite happily do without; I'd probably punch Mickey Mouse in the first few minutes there. Eric Corbett 14:56, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Epcot is pretty cool. I enjoyed our Disney cruise also. But I'm not terribly into DIsney either. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:29, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When you have it ready for GA, let me know. I owe BOTH you guys a review (actually, more than one), plus I've visited there and specialize in that era when I teach US History over at the local college. Thus, if you screw up, I should be able to spot it! (LOL) Montanabw^(talk) 17:52, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you know who it was who built the bloody place then? Giano 18:07, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have some biographies on the shelf, will look. No guarantees. Montanabw^(talk) 23:08, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From what I've read I'm pretty sure it was Augustine, but I'm unclear about when it was renamed Mount Vernon. Eric Corbett 23:22, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For you...

	Greatest Comma-Purger Ever
	For all you do, in corralling wild commas, and herding them safely out of articles, we, thank you. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:33, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Philharmonic Orchestra

Thank you very much for an expeditious and, to me, stimulating review. At your service if I can be of help with any of your articles at peer review, GAN or FAC. Tim riley (talk) 21:35, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your very welcome Tim. As it happens I have The Coral Island up at FAC now if you're interested in boy's own adventure Victorian novels. Eric Corbett 21:48, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh! I haven't read it for 45 years! Shall be enchanted to renew acquaintance with it at FAC. Tim riley (talk) 23:05, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I loved that book, especially the first half, until the pirates arrive. I'm pleased to hear you're familiar with the book, as my co-nominator Drmies wasn't. Eric Corbett 23:08, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies read the Dutch equivalent of said books; they always ended up in Indonesia. Hey Eric, I just made Peterkin a 13-year old boy, since that's what he is on p. 191 of my Penguin edition--I see now that on p. 13 Ralph refers to him as "about fourteen years old". We have a slight inconsistency, esp. since on p. 191 the boys have already spent months on the island. I leave the choice up to you, to either revert me or leave it be. BTW, rereading the book I'm enjoying it more than I did the first time around. That 19th-century English takes a bit of getting used to. Drmies (talk) 01:41, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It does. I'm struggling to get through Ainsworth's Lancashire Witches at present. It seems pretty obvious that authors in those days were paid by the word. Eric Corbett 01:47, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not readers, though. I just lost a couple hundred bucks reading Irvine's "Separate Accounts: Class and Colonization in the Early Stories of R.M. Ballantyne" (one of Nikkimaria's suggestions), and found it not only a total drag to read but also of little use to us, unfortunately. On to the next one. Drmies (talk) 02:50, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Back to the island

I don't like the sentence I just added. It's from the Maher article, who'll find a better use elsewhere in the article. Can you add it to the Works Cited? I'm asking because it has DOI: 10.1353/chq.0.0620 and I don't know how to those DOIs, apparently... Drmies (talk) 03:16, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon the long quote: "The choices that Frederick Marryat and Robert Michael Ballantyne made in recasting Crusoe tell us much about the influence of ideology on children's fiction, as well as the complex interchange between history, myth, and text. Marryat and Ballantyne had to find means to simplify the Robinsonade, to make it a mouthpiece for celebrating God and country. Their adventures must necessarily lack the subtle colorings of the prototype, Robinson Crusoe, a book written for adults, though beloved by children. In simplifying the Robinsonade, they produced romances that express an ambivalence to romance, novels that present a pedestrian realism." So it is the two of them also, the "novels that" being in apposition to the "romances" they produced". Drmies (talk) 16:37, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think we could make a decent sentence out of that. Later. Eric Corbett 17:12, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But the "unlike" is incorrect. The article says that Marryat and Ballantyine exemplify that shift. Drmies (talk) 17:39, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've never read the article, so how the Hell would I know? Better now? Eric Corbett 17:51, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because I quoted it above? :) Drmies (talk) 18:52, 25 June 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Added a bit more from one of the useful articles linked at the FAC. (Please copy edit for my usual infelicities, US spelling, hyphen/dash issues...) Can't comment there right now; housecleaning... Drmies (talk) 21:29, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm reading "The Broken Telescope", which makes me want to add to the background section (not unlike what we did for TMitM)--a paragraph that discusses (briefly) the Robinsonade, Rousseau and the idea of the child, and (social and natural) Darwinism. She argues that the novel isn't simply a reflection of Victorian values imposed on the world and reflected in the novel, but that there is an instability. E.g., on Jack's "miniature Pacific", "it always remains evident that the exotic is viewed through a distorted western textual lens--a circumstance which ultimately undermines, and introduces irony to, the surface display of absolute authority" (139). Wait--that last note probably fits best in the Themes section. Anyway, I'm pondering this; don't know if I'll be able to take care of it today. There's fried chicken for lunch, with some luck a nap, and company tonight. I wish you and Dr. Malleus could come by for an evening, or two. Drmies (talk) 17:03, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There's almost certainly something in there that could be added, but I've tried to steer clear of getting too much into the Robinsonade stuff, which has its own article anyway. What's for drinks? Eric Corbett 17:09, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's not so much the Robinsonade but the context of the genre in the early 18th century. Can you re-evaluate your "except for works such as..."? Drinks--well, it's not payday yet, so it's regular beers. I'm terrifically low on liquor, I'm afraid. Maybe you should come next week and I'll make Old Fashioneds. Or Sidecars! Drmies (talk) 17:29, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've re-evaluated. I'm going to Wales next week I think, so maybe the week after? Eric Corbett 17:34, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you get a chance to enjoy yourself there. Me and Mrs. Bink were stunned by the beauty of Tintern Abbey. Cheers! Binksternet (talk) 17:43, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I live in Manchester, so I've been to Wales loads of times as it's only about 45 miles away. I think we're going to somewhere around the bottom of Cardigan Bay, but I leave all the arrangements to my wife. What's the point in having a dog and barking yourself? Eric Corbett 17:48, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Did I lose something in the translation, or does Dr. Corbett need to thump you? Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 17:53, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean to imply that that she was a dog, in fact she's a very sexy lady, it was just an analogy. Eric Corbett 17:58, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was more worried about the aspects of how the dog must serve man, saying she was subservient to you. I still think she needs to thump you, for good measure. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 18:02, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've always wanted to go to Wales. Green Knight country. Dylan Thomas country. Even W.G. Sebald country. Drmies (talk) 18:52, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Haven't found any 19th-century reviews yet. I did find this (anonymous) comparable tale, and this--neither book/author covered by our encyclopedia. And my searching confirmed the amazing popularity of the genre, if that needed confirmation. Drmies (talk) 19:06, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Wrecked on the Bermudas is quite a yarn. I don't know what it is--it's totally predictable and formulaic, with totally unbelievable dialog, and yet I just read one chapter and find it difficult to put down. It's about three brothers going from New York to England on an old ship that their father commanded decades ago, and they even brought their dog with them. And the captain is a drunkard. Drmies (talk) 19:20, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Commas

...and can spot a tendentious troll reviewer at 50 paces. But I'm not saying that at the article talk page. I've also probably pissed off a person who usually haunts FAC recently, (for other reasons, so like "Voldemort" please don't say "infobox") and may need backup to address anything that person might raise -- or better yet, someone other than me to address it... ;-P Montanabw^(talk) 22:15, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It'll be fine, don't worry. Eric Corbett 22:18, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Person I've pissed off is, sure as shit, weighing in with comments on sourcing; may want to take a peek... Montanabw^(talk) 18:30, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It'll be fine, don't worry. Eric Corbett 14:03, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And you are right, looks like she will support. Surprised me, but in a pleasant way. We have two support votes now, if you know a good third reviewer, maybe let them know it's out there?? Montanabw^(talk) 23:07, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Navboxes on author pages'

Since you have over 100 edits at Ernest Hemingway, you might want to participate in the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Novels#Derivative_works_and_cultural_references_templates regarding including navigation boxes for adaptations of and related subjects to an authors works on the author's bio page.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:41, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so Tony, the infobox wars have worn me out enough already. Eric Corbett 17:05, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And now for something completely different

Do you and your English talk page stalkers still drink your tea and coffee from fine bone china? I'm particularly fond of Roy Kirkham which, to my surprise, is only a few decades old and has no article. Moreover, I am having great difficulty finding any reliable sources to write them up--I thought they were old and well-established. Any of you able to help out? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:46, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What a ridiculous question! Do Mr Corbett's close friends appear the type of people who would be drinking out of plastic beakers? While I'm sure Mr Corbett ownes a humerous mug or two, we are certainly not drinking out of Mr Kirkham's rather twee floral designs either. Personally, I always think it's only decent to drink one's coffee from Royal Worcester post luncheon and from Sèvres post dinner - I think you'll find most people will agree with me. The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 18:28, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect the only source would be a collector's guide to their Toby jugs. I've never seen any turn up at auction, only those bloody Royal Doulton things, which all seem to have the same smarmy expression. Ning-ning (talk) 20:08, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ha. Sevres is a formerly nice little town, and just a small step to Jeunes filles en serre chaude. I still don't have an article, though. Drmies (talk) 20:17, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not an RS but a nearby company has some info. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 20:28, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And Roy Kirkham has a brief history and a mission statement- they're perfectly willing to employ hothouse girls. Ning-ning (talk) 20:41, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Kirkham stuff, as Lady Catherine says, does look rather twee. Eric Corbett 00:04, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lord, how did I land among such a group of macho men? Alright, Corbett, you can drink your coffee from a jam jar when you visit. I'm sure that Dr. Corbett has more sophisticated taste than you do. And I say this after looking up the word "twee". Drmies (talk) 01:19, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(od) I prefer Cath Kidston floral design- Kirkham's a bit derivative of book illustration. The sort of stuff that'll be stocked by Govier's of Sidmouth, alongside their range of porcelain statuettes of the Leaderene. Glyn Colledge is worth an article. Ning-ning (talk) 06:50, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. But tell me, where the obit speaks of "Denby pottery", is that in reference to Denby Pottery Company? Or is "Denby pottery" also a more generic term? I'll write it up with that assumption, but would appreciate help. Drmies (talk) 23:35, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, it's just the pottery at Denby. I have three pieces of what I assume is "Glyn ware"; I'll photograph them- might be useable for the article. Looking at examples of the same type (free-painted leaves in autumn colours) I wondered why the standard of painting was so variable (some are crap). The obit says there were 70 decorators employed- unlike Poole where the decorators signed their pieces, the Denby just has what I assume is his signature- he must have "signed off" on their work. Ning-ning (talk) 07:25, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One more British question: our supermarket sells some British stuff, but I can't decide if I should spend over $3 on a can of "Devon Custard". Is it any good? Drmies (talk) 22:33, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason they always use artificial sweeteners in the canned stuff. Much better to buy some Bird's custard powder and make it yourself with sugar and milk. Richerman (talk) 23:06, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's a discussion on how to make a copy of the Devon custard here. Richerman (talk) 23:16, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That last link didn't open for me. I suppose I've made the Bird's stuff myself, following the cornstarch-inflected recipe in The Joy. Drmies (talk) 20:45, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason it's not working for me either today, but it did last night. Maybe those Ambrosia people have sabotaged it. Richerman (talk) 21:00, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe they also installed VisualEditor. Drmies (talk) 01:33, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

C.A. Peñarol

Is this really a GA? I found a few little things already, but I'm not soccer expert. Drmies (talk) 18:01, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another one of Buffbills7701's reviews I see. I certainly wouldn't have listed it, it needs an awful lot of work. Eric Corbett 19:39, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

... in fact it's pretty dreadful, so I've opened a GA reassessment here. Buffbills clearly doesn't have much idea what he's doing. Eric Corbett 21:46, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And the good faith smokescreen has been deployed.[2] Eric Corbett 21:53, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, and the "personal attack" claim. Drmies (talk) 22:01, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that too. Any criticism is seen by kids as a personal attack these days it seems. I've found from experience though that you tend to make more enemies than friends when reviewing, especially at GAR for some reason. Eric Corbett 22:06, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Buffbills doesn't strike me as an asshole. He may well be nicer than us, and I think he's of good faith. Listening to criticism is hard; so many years of marriage and teaching writing have taught us that, I suppose. Oh, I've been looking at Cath Kidston's mugs, and there's some pretty ones, but so much of it is soft and pinkish. Prettiest mug I own is from Royal Kendal, and I broke the ear. Drmies (talk) 22:53, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If I ruled the (GA) world I'd institute one simple rule: every reviewer should have written at least two GAs themselves. When I was heavily into windsurfing the rule for instructors was that to assess anyone you had to be at least one grade higher than they were. Eric Corbett 23:03, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've now delisted the article. Eric Corbett 13:09, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I never knew...

"GA reviews are hard" Err.. Oops? I've never thought of them as hard to do or (usually) hard to receive. Oops? Ealdgyth - Talk 00:18, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've always found them hard work. Eric Corbett 00:35, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I'm just an anal retentive asshole editor at heart or something. I'll admit I find the pop culture topics such as music or tv shows to be more work than history articles, but reading for flow and clarity is something that I find reasonably easy. Why do you find them hard? Maybe I should do more GA reviews... pick up some of the slack. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:56, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The reading part usually isn't the hard part! Hey Ealdgyth, thanks for linking my main man Ker. Too many Anglo-Saxonists still need to get written up. Or wrote up, if you like. Drmies (talk) 01:12, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't everyone read and keep a running list of "oopsies" in what they are reading? Ealdgyth - Talk 01:16, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you find GA reviews easy Ealdgyth then you should do lots more of them. ;-) Eric Corbett 13:11, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

C.A. Peñarol GA Reassessment

I wanted to let you know I revised the article and copy-pasted the text to Word so as to check any typos and spanish words that could have remained. I corrected every mistake I saw. I reckon its prose is good enough to be GA, though I think those mistakes had to be corrected. I have also taken away unnecessary flag icons. I've replied saying this same thing, in Talk:C.A. Peñarol/GA2, but just wanted to make sure to inform you.—Nuno93 (talk) 03:05, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What you really have to do Nuno93 is to get a native English-speaking copyeditor involved, and work with him or her to make the text presentable. Buffbills was wrong to list this as a GA, and I've now delisted it. Eric Corbett 13:15, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

discussing a small change to Gunpowder Plot

I see from the edit history that you've been vigilant about Gunpowder Plot. It seems you've made a lot of reversions of both deliberate vandalism and ill-advised, if well-intentioned, edits. I want to thank you for your hard work and skilled editing, but I'd also like to discuss a change that I think the article needs. I fixed a grammatical error, and you reverted the fix. Do you want to discuss it on that article's talk page? Maybe we can come up with a fix that meets your high standards. TypoBoy (talk) 15:36, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What grammatical error are you talking about? Eric Corbett 15:38, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If I may, no grammatical error was fixed: there was no missing conjunction. However, there is something to be said for the change, since "unmarried, childless, and steadfastly refused" places three words in parallel that can also be seen as not grammatically parallel, since the first two are adjectives and the third is a past participle indicating an ongoing action/attitude. But that's style, not grammar. Drmies (talk) 16:12, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't like the "and ... and" construction. But as you say, this certainly isn't a matter of grammar. I can't help but wonder why it's taken TypoBoy seven months to bring this up though. Anything to do with my delisting of C.A. Peñarol do you suppose? Eric Corbett 16:16, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let's discuss it at Talk:Gunpowder Plot. There's already an explanation there of what's wrong with that sentence. TypoBoy (talk) 18:00, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing wrong with that sentence, therefore nothing to discuss. Eric Corbett 18:02, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Uruguayan War

Eric, unfortunately, the Uruguayan War FAC nomination isn't going well (as I expected). It needs more reviews. Do you know any good (and respected) reviewer whom I could ask to take a look at the article? --Lecen (talk) 14:28, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm not sure I fit the exact description of the type of reviewer you're after (!), I'll try and take a look at it tomorrow night Lecen. Hchc2009 (talk) 17:48, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The review seems to be going pretty well to me Lecen, fingers crossed. Eric Corbett 20:28, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both. I really appreciate your help. --Lecen (talk) 14:57, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Geography of Scotland in the Middle Ages

Many thanks for a very helpful and rapid GA review. Much appreciated.--SabreBD (talk) 12:14, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's very satisfying to be able to wrap them up so quickly, which is in no small part due to the excellence of your Scottish articles in the first place and your rapid response to any questions I raise. Eric Corbett 12:18, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

General articles back in time are extremely poorly covered on here so great to see quality work on a general subject back in time. Somebody has to create Agriculture in the Middle Ages or. Farming in medieval Wales or something at some point!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:55, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

sometimes...

User talk:Ealdgyth#Malfosse Incident and diff - am I being stupid here? I don't see why a possible modern-day location of a small incident late in a battle should be described in such detail in the battle's article. Most of the scholarly treatments of Hastings don't go into where this incident might be located on the modern battlefield, so I feel like it's trivia best confined to battlefield guides. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:25, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But, it also appears in version 2.0 of the video game and someone on a sitcom somewhere, about 10 years ago, mentioned it! :-P Montanabw^(talk) 22:14, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're being stupid if you think that all those fans of version 2.0 of the Malfosse video game don't believe that's the single most important event in the Battle of Hastings. But to be serious, fighting the addition of trivia is an impossible task really. Eric Corbett 22:22, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copy edit / peer review

Thanks for your improvements at Old Church of St Nidan, Llanidan. I've put it up for peer review, FYI, in case you (or any TPSs) had any comments on it before I take it to FAC. Bencherlite ^Talk 14:34, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck with that. I'll have another read through later. Eric Corbett 14:40, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm TheDJ. I noticed that you made a comment that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, 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. Thank you. Your edit here was unacceptable. Please rectify this. I can't believe I have to use this template for someone who has been in this community for 7 years.... —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 01:09, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Go rectify yourself asshole, I'm not a babysitter. Eric Corbett 01:14, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can't quite believe I've just read that, and not just your bad punctuation. For your name-calling and swearing it seems you should be reprimanded. I will investigate this later. Inglok (talk) 01:52, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What kind of idiot are you Inglok? Eric Corbett 01:55, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any more abuse to throw at your fellow editors? Your behaviour is appalling and completey unwarranted. I'll make sure to report it. Inglok (talk) 02:10, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean generally or just in your case? Eric Corbett 02:12, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since punitive blocks aren't allowed, I have nothing left other than to advise you to take a really long wikibreak. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 07:19, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion

Hello. I'd much appreciate it if you could explain why you reverted my edit here. "Thanks, but no thanks" isn't a great explanation. Thanks. Inglok (talk) 01:38, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because your writing is at a level I'd expect of a primary-school child, who's taught to follow rules they'll learn later aren't rules at all. Eric Corbett 01:49, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Inglok - if I say it over in my head, it sounds more natural without the "the". cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:51, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Casliber. Eric Corbett, your reply is rude and without evidence. Please provide a good reason for the reversion. Thanks. Inglok (talk) 02:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You write like a ten-year-old, time for you to fuck off now. Eric Corbett 02:10, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yet more evidence. I can't quite believe your behaviour. It's utterly baffling. Inglok (talk) 02:12, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What's baffling to me is that you seem to be completely unaware that you write like a ten-year-old kid. Eric Corbett 02:15, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay guys, let's just calm down a bit. Inglok, your additions were not necessary to keep the grammatic structure of those sentences intact. "The", although sometimes taught as compulsory, is slowly but surely being eliminated in this use. Eric... well, we both know how this works. (NPA and whatnot) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:20, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I know exactly how it works. Some asshole turns up, winds me up, and I get blocked. Eric Corbett 02:26, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

you know too much too well, - kafkaesque again, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:00, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks

Please be aware that personal attacks, such as calling another editor an "asshole" as you did with this edit and in the section above this one, are never acceptable on Wikipedia. Please read and familiarise yourself with the Wikipedia:No personal attacks policy, or you may be blocked from editing. Thryduulf (talk) 01:42, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since when was calling an asshole an asshole a crime? Eric Corbett 01:45, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't I have been blocked by now, to prevent any further disruption to the project? Eric Corbett 03:19, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To perpetuate the cycle of the diva? Causes more drama than it's worth. Looks like you win! You officially have free rein to be as rude as you want. Congrats! Doc talk 03:32, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think that privilege belongs to the assholes like yourself. Eric Corbett 04:38, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wish! You are an inspiration to assholes everywhere, though. Doc talk 04:49, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think they look to those like you for leadership, not me. Eric Corbett 05:01, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong. I'm just a small frye. You're a big fish. Your influence eclipses little idiots like me. Doc talk 05:10, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly ought to. Have we finished with this nonsense now, or are you determined to carry on to round two? Eric Corbett 05:15, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Round Two"? As if! You'd likely run off and retire again. We simply can't have that. Glad to see you're maintaining your stranglehold of power. Yeah, we're done for now. Doc talk 05:33, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you still here? What is it you hope to achieve exactly, apart from making yourself look like an idiot? Eric Corbett 05:43, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Blocked

For multiple (recent) clear personal attacks, and a long history of the same, I have blocked you for a month. Examples: "asshole", "go rectify yourself, asshole", [3], "idiot", "assholes like yourself". All this from today. Being one of our best editors doesn't mean that other policies no longer apply, and this isn't an occasional outburst or one editor who was trolling, it is a pattern without any noticeable change to it. Fram (talk) 08:46, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have raised the block at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive250#Eric Corbett blocked. If you have any comments to add to that discussion, feel free to post them here and someone will copy them for you. Fram (talk) 08:57, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well Eric at least you won't have to deal with this Visual Editor mess. Kumioko (talk) 12:59, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You might as well make the block indefinite, as I won't be coming back here while those like you are in charge. Eric Corbett 13:33, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just relax, Eric. It's not like you were blocked for reinserting a hyphen.... :D

If you had commented on "sanctimonious bullocks" rather than on the person, you would have been fine.

Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:12, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fram, go ahead and block Doc9871 for taunting. I'd do it myself, but I'd like to see a serious breach of civility (something beyond "asshole") before I put on my little politeness patrol hat. What reason did Doc9871 have to come to Eric's talk page but to put oil on the fire? None. What's more disruptive, taunting on someone else's talk page or using a cussword on one's own? Seriously, how do you answer that in good conscience? Drmies (talk) 15:56, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Yep, the one that poked the other person in the eye should get blocked too.PumpkinSky talk 16:48, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing will have changed by 4 August, and certainly not my attitude to editing here. Consequently I'm making a formal request to have the length of this block made indefinite rather than one month. And as I've never appealed a block, and made it very clear I never would, as I consider that to be demeaning, that should satisfy all those who so much want to see the back of me. It'll also mean of course that any temptation on my part to return on 4 August is removed. Eric Corbett 20:40, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Really? I'll do it, as a "self imposed block" but I can assure you I take no pleasure in it. Perhaps think on it? Pedro : Chat 20:43, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  I was trying to make the point that one week, one month or one year would make no difference. I'd still be the same person. Eric Corbett 00:10, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll block you for six months if you're serious. Please first read my conditions here. Bishonen | talk 20:46, 4 July 2013 (UTC).[reply]

Oh don't be so daft Eric! We have dealt with these people a 100 times before and lived to tell the tale. Besides which we have the immense satisfaction of GAing Mount Vernon to achieve - the plan is driving me mental; I think I am going to dispense with it altogether unless you can do one of your line drawing plans. A month should be long enough! Giano 21:02, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. Who gives a rat's ass about WikiProject Protoctology? The block will be reduced to a day or two. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:05, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that nothing will have changed no matter what the length of the block, so it's kind of absurd really to be arguing about 48 hours, a week, a month or whatever. Nothing will have changed, unless block-happy admins such as Fram and Kww are ejected from the project. Eric Corbett 21:11, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not, but let's have a laugh: why don't we paste Mount Vernon onto your user page and GA it from there - it's quite legal and you can edit it legally there too;I wrote a page on my user page while blocked once, and everyone joined in; it was quite jolly rather like a party and made those supporting the block look even more ridiculous. Giano 21:14, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's an interesting idea. But I'm going to be away for the next week or so anyway, so being blocked is no big deal. Eric Corbett 21:21, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's a shame, I was feeling like a laugh - you writing publicly writing while blocked and your detractors are squeaking about dong their usual F-all. Giano 21:25, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kww is even more disliked and politically ineffectual than Automatic Strikeout. Fram is Fram, like Galactus a power whose attention is best avoided; as in the past, one of his ~~sentinels~~ heralds shall protect you from Fram, even at the risk of losing The Power Cosmic. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:19, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's time something was done about them. Eric Corbett 21:24, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW I have to agree with Giani -- these people are fleas -- you've flicked them off a hundred times before -- what's different now? You've said repeatedly that you won't leave until you're good and ready -- are you really good and ready? I don't think so. Wait out the silly block, flick off the fleas, carry on. DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 21:42, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really not sure what's different this time, it just feels different somehow. Anyway, I'm off shortly, so I'll consider my options when I get back. Eric Corbett 21:48, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eric, I know you despise ballet, but I still thought of you adding a pic, dancing sacrifice, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:31, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just ballet Gerda, I don't see the attraction of dancing, except as an excuse to get close to a female you fancy. Eric Corbett 22:39, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the attraction of sacrifice ;) (I saw the performance pictured.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:48, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We all think differently. Pictures don't help me very much. I need you to explain it to me in words and then I need to go away and think about your explanation. Eric Corbett 22:55, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Words hurt too easily. I enjoy company. If I will have to miss yours until your condition is fulfilled I will have to wait a long time. I can wait ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:04, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Words do hurt. How many times have I been accused of chasing off new editors, without even a scrap of evidence? Eric Corbett 23:10, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just thought about that, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:21, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't seen anyone talk about all the editors you have educated, encouraged or helped, which far outnumber the butthurt editors who asked for criticism then couldn't handle it once they got it. Maybe a day or two off to ponder (which is for your benefit, not enwp's), but I'm selfish enough to say I don't want to see you leave for longer. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 23:17, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to take some time off to think about this, but to be honest the level of vitriol from those who aren't even fit to wipe my arse makes the outcome rather obvious I think. Eric Corbett 23:24, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Having just seen a suggestion that user:Doc9871 should also be blocked, for baiting, I'd like to make one final comment. Wilkipedia's blocking mentality will be the death of it, and it really can't come soon enough. Eric Corbett 23:16, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well have a good break and come back roaring (and I mean roaring) to edit. In the meantime, Fram can strut the encyclopedia buoyed by the adoration of his acolytes for being such a big brave boy and the rest of us can add some content. Giano 08:14, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AN review closed

The AN review of the block has been open for 24 hours, and closed. The result is that the block has been endorsed as being in line with policy, and supported by the majority of participants in the discussion. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:35, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was still waiting for an answer to my question, before voting Oppose. Premature. (Now I will probably be blocked for this judgement.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:43, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Damn right it was premature, as well as incompetent. We do not normally consider a simple majority as a consensus. --John (talk) 09:22, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

see my answer over there, - the question in the above is who is considered "we", some certainly do, but not a "we" I would like to be part of, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:31, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For those who follow such things only through the medium of Eric's talk page, that close by Sjakkalle was contested by various people (myself included) as an obvious "supervote" and no longer stands. Discussion continues at WP:AN on the usual basis (i.e. that Eric is somewhere between Beelzebub and St Peter, albeit rather nastier to commas that Beelzebub is or was...) and an order for extra rations of popcorn has just been placed. Bencherlite ^Talk 12:10, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And for the first time ever (I believe) I've posted on an AN, RfC/U, or Arbcom that concerns Eric/Malleus. Not that I'm going to contribute anything that will affect the outcome either way, but I'm gonna need that popcorn... Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:17, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I made a few comments over there. I've never seen Eric drive off one single editor, and if he did, it was some snarky asshole (ASSHOLE! ASSHOLE! ASSHOLE!) (see, Montanabw said ASSHOLE on wikipedia! So block me !) who roundly deserved it. He speaks for all of us. And, like a couple of other editors I know (one of whom has also posted here) the drama queens of wiki never seem to forget or forgive, and it also seems (from comments there) some who live on the dramahz boards seem to have declared war on content editors and consider us the problem. Montanabw^(talk) 16:30, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just for the record Eric, even though I don't agree with a lot of what you did, I really do respect your content creating abilities. As I noted before, "...you will remain an asset to the encyclopedia, perhaps long after you are gone, through your remarkable work in mainspace. Even while I was typing up this post, I imagine that multiple readers, perhaps in multiple countries around the world, were reading something that you wrote in one of our articles and perhaps finding information that they seriously needed. Furthermore, it cannot be doubted that you have been a helpful collaborator to many of your fellow Wikipedians during the years..." It is sad that it's come to this, but even if this really is the end, your contributions to Wikipedia will not be forgotten. AutomaticStrikeout ? 18:33, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh for god's sake, leave him alone. Does anyone mind if I archive this to stop further drivel driveling in? [Truthkeeper88] now Victoria (talk) 18:36, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Edward Graham Paley

FYI I have nominated this article at GAN. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:46, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck with that, can't see you having too many problems. Eric Corbett 21:35, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted already. Wow!! Thanks for your help. I shall need it again no doubt when those idiots have finished having their way with you. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:04, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was pretty sure it would be OK. I don't think you're allowed to suggest the possibility of another editor being an idiot though, even when it's patently obvious that they are. Eric Corbett 13:40, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What a nicely written article. Lovely lead, and I admire the diction. Drmies (talk) 20:54, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is indeed nicely written, as are all of Peter's articles. Eric Corbett 21:23, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's the copyediting that makes it so. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 21:54, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disappointment

I am very unhappy as to the way the Wikipedia community handled this issue, I archived the top discussion because I didn't want to see poor Eric getting harassed and verbally abused even more. its a goddamn encyclopedia, and were here to build it not to go on and bait people and laugh at their blocks. This is just sick. Prabash.Akmeemana 19:56, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If only it were really true that we're all here to build an encyclopedia. Just look at Fram's contributions for instance. He obviously couldn't write an encyclopedia article if his life depended on it, so why is he here? Eric Corbett 12:33, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have written GA's and even this year a FL. I normally don't brag about them, don't put cute icons at the top of my page, but that doesn't mean that I can't or haven't written encyclopedic articles, even if they aren't of FA level. Apart from that aspect; people who can't write encyclopedic articles but do a lot of gnomish work, let's call it polishing and maintaining the work of those that do write articles, are also here to build an encyclopedia. Please show some more respect for the contributions of everyone who tries to maintain or improve Wikipedia. Fram (talk) 06:36, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure that you are very clever Fram, but here you sound like a drowning man trying to save himself by floating the tired old sayings of the IRC chatterers who seldom edit, but always have an opinion. I can see no benefit to the encyclopedia when I have to make edit summaries such as this. However, if such things make you happy, then you just keep right on the way you are - closely monitoring hard working editors to ensure that their etiquette and manners come up to the standards of whichever Eutopian community it is that you inhabit. Others like myself, will just give thanks that we live in the real world. Giano 07:15, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sanddunes Sunrise III

ps Every day, we lose what the wrongly blocked would have given that day. And a little bit of our souls.

nb: Sanddunes Sunrise

People can be incivil using the politest words, and civil using rude words. Eric, I found you helpful, gentle and ready for an unpopular oppose. Missing you (with a nod to the designer), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:30, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

VE

Sorry to see the block, not least because good experienced content editors are needed at Wikipedia:VisualEditor and are in short supply. Of course it's only implemented in article space so won't be affecting those who spend their Wikilives editing the drama boards. Calling all Eric's talk page stalkers: please try using VE for some serious editing,and give them your feedback when you find glitches.

Enjoy the summer while it lasts, Eric: this isn't the weather for sitting indoors at a keyboard). I look forward to seeing your edits again in a month: please don't walk away over this latest silly spat. PamD 08:56, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite right Pam. Eric Corbett 12:24, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You continually choose the wrong fora.

The reason you are blocked is not that Admins are more polite than you, but because you are less than polite here. On the other hand, on the Admins IRC channel it seems that a group can happily giggle about cremating another editor alive [4], but here one can't tell someone rather bluntly where they keep their brains. In spite of Jimbo strenuously and unambiguously telling the Arbcom that they have control over IRC Admins [5], the Arbcom are never going to spoil the fun that is had there - why should they? They all grew up chattering on IRC hoping one day to graduate to the big-boys channel; and what do your blocking Admins have to say about this atrocious behavior - absolutely F all. You see Eric, you are not a member of the club. Giano 09:34, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously not, thank goodness. Eric Corbett 11:53, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To take a Marxist point of view (Groucho, not Karl), I would not want to be in one of these groups even if they thought I was eligible to be a member. The acceptance of (or perhaps the lack of realization of) the inconsistencies brought about by phoney ideas of privilege based on grasping at power and holding onto it are just amazing. The mental contortions that are gone through to justify the unjustifiable are both a wonder and a horror to behold. DDStretch (talk) 12:15, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Giano and I have a plan that will demonstrate to those who believe themselves to be in charge just how impotent they really are. Assuming of course that he hasn't been blocked again by the time I get back home in a week or so. So Giano, behave yourself! Eric Corbett 12:22, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Moi? Blocked? Shock, horror. No, I won't be blocked. Enjoy your holiday and take some nice snaps for the project. Giano 13:37, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a member of that select forum either. I went to the local country club the other day, to see how the other half lives, and found myself wondering whether these people didn't need to go to work, that they could spend the whole day playing golf and drinking cocktails. Same here--with leaking roofs, kids needing food, the carpet to be vacuumed, a day job, and Wikipedia, who has time for chat rooms? Eric, Wales would have been the better choice, weather-wise. But who knows, maybe Dennis Brown will buy me a beer when we get to North Carolina. Drmies (talk) 19:14, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just put you a PBR in the ice chest. It should be "rodeo cold" by the time you get here. I had to send the definition for "rodeo cold" to Urban Dictionary. Can't believe they didn't have that. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 19:30, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ha. Your infidelity will be noted at the next occasion where we will determine whether you get to keep your tool or not. Which of the three or four procedures we'll follow is to be decided on later. FWIW, I don't see that definition up there (yet?).
Quick anecdote: when Mrs. Drmies and Drmies were living in Asheville, during their first year of matrimonial bliss, they went out, with a friend, to a dive where some band was playing. Mrs. Drmies has cash, and gives it to Drmies, who goes to the bar. It's like $8 or so, so Drmies, a certified slime bucket, gets hisself a Leffe or something like that, and a PBR for his missus, who has never drunk it before. He thinks (or fools himself into thinking) that she should appreciate the introduction to hipsterdom that drinking a PBR is. She thinks (not incorrectly) that she got short-changed with a beer that's no better than Milwaukee's Best. She has not, to this day, forgiven or forgotten said Drmies for the action(s) related just now (it's been almost ten years). There's a lesson about marriage in here somewhere, but I'm on cocktail #1 right now and I'd rather not do allegorical exegesis at this time. Drmies (talk) 20:51, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They have to review it before publishing, and I made one error there, so let me define it for you here: "Rodeo cold" is the temperature of beer when you load the ice chest up with ice and beer first thing in the morning, leave the cooler in the truck while you are at the rodeo, and then come back later than night after all the ice has melted to have one. Using the Fahrenheit scale, that equates to 3 to 5 degrees below ambient temperature. Put another way: slightly colder than urine. It is an old Texas expression. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 21:19, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A wee note

Hi Eric. I don't read the dramaboards very often, so I only just noticed this. Last night I was discussing with my other half about my favourite Wikipedia editors, and I specifically mentioned you. She liked what you did with Tickle Cock Bridge. I just read the ANI thread and this talkpage now. I can't defend your response to the revert on Sunbeam Tiger no matter how hard I think about it. Sorry.

I don't suppose there's any chance in you having the weekend off and reconsidering all of this? I think everyone's got a bit giddy and excited and got carried away with all the dramah - again, and we all have good and bad days. I could do with someone willing to do a good copyedit on Van der Graaf Generator when I've finished going through my book sources and I am in a position to take it to FAC. They came from Manchester and wrote a song about the Malleus Maleficarum - what's not to like? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:59, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No chance at all. If you want to sleep in the same bed as admins like Fram that's your choice of course, but I've made mine. Eric Corbett 14:07, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My energy and time are limited, Ritchie333, but I can help with a section or two---and more if the Spirit moves me. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 20:24, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the band, with Genesis as 2nd on the bill, in Preston Town Hall once. Johnbod (talk) 12:49, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I saw them last year at the Barbican, and by jove they are no less experimental and daring and occasionally bloody terrifying as they were 40 years ago. Meanwhile, I'm regularly fixing WP:REFPUNCT violations like this one and missing Eric, who can stamp on them like a game of whacamole. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:31, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have a moral responsibility to edit!

I have just had to post this [6]. Does that make you or anyone else happy? I can't do GAs, I don't understand the criteria or the mentality - you do. Giano 21:09, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't. I once thought I did. Eric Corbett 21:35, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well perhaps when you had a couple of weeks paddling at the sea-side you will feel differently. Giano 21:51, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eric, you are one of the best editors on the project! you could do some things nobody else can, literally this place is a mess without you. Also a side note for the future; when I'm not in a good mood I don't edit Wikipedia, maybe you should try practicing the same thing literally this train wreck, wouldn't happen again, though I do hate how it was carried out, anyways hope to see good editors like you back on Wikipedia again! Prabash.Akmeemana 00:35, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eric, I don't normally get to hear about this sort of thing, came across it by chance, but ... you are missed already. Very grateful for your stern comments that improved Thomas Bewick at GA, and happy to say that John Struthers made it when I rewrote it... hope to see you back soon. Keep up the good fight ... Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:14, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A random comment from a random editor

When I first saw your name pop up a couple days ago, I had no idea that you previously edited as Malleus Fatuorum. Then I check your userpage's logs, and it comes to my attention that you've been editing under your real life name for almost two months now.

Guess it just goes to show how much attention I've been paying to WikiPolitics these days (aside from the big things, like the WMF petition). :/ Kurtis ^(talk) 22:46, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats!

Congrats on the FA! I just got back from camping and saw it - thanks for making it into such a great article! Wadewitz (talk) 18:28, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What FA are you talking about Wadewitz? Eric Corbett 09:26, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Damn

I've been away quite a bit lately, I just wanted to say how disappointed I am that the civility police have once again kicked your door down. They should visit Sweden, where I've just been. People there are genuinely mentally disturbed (in a good way). I imagine the Swedish Wikipedia has no such thing as civility. Parrot of Doom 21:31, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoy your innocence. :) Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:43, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about Eric! I'm quite sure he's got a few spare socks ferreted away -- Hillbillyholiday ^talk 03:47, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And I'm quite sure I don't. Eric Corbett 09:25, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Only kidding! -- Hillbillyholiday ^talk 09:36, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1950s automobiles

I managed to place tiny symbols of the 1950s German automobile culture on the Main page, look for Blood Wedding, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you still blocked

Is this daft block still in force? Never mind if it is because I have the solution and you need never be blocked again. Bearing in mind the comments by Arbs here and spectacularly here, all you have to do in future is say before calling someone an undiluted idiot of worse is precede the comment with "Were I an admin posting in the Admins IRC Channel, I would call you X Y or Z." That way you can vent your anger without actually saying it because you are not an Admin in their private chat room, and no admin can block you for saying it because you have not said it, and they all know that were you an Admin you could easily say it in the chat room and get away with it. But you're not saying because you're not an Admin. Clever isn't it? Giano 20:18, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Arsten filed his odd request with the parties notification giving me a userlinks template, which included an invitation to block me, and the administrators administrator templates. When I changed everybodies' to administrators, Salvio first reverted me, and then re-reverted---a sign of progress.

Mark Arsten has been busy at Wikipediocracy too. SandyGeorgia noted some odd patterns in his editing, at her talk page.

Did you see Qworty's victim's essay on a few of the pathologies of Wikipedia in the Wall Street Journal today? Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:37, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently it is. I have to be punished don'chaknow. Eric Corbett 09:24, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well if I were an Admin taking in the IRC Admins Chanel, I would say that the blocking Admin was a power-crazed blithering idiot who doesn't know his ass from elbow, but then I'm not an Admin so I won't say it. Once you are returned from your holiday, we can sort something out, but I'm not adding anything to Mount Vernon until you are able to advise; that way the GA should be quite plain sailing. Giano 09:40, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quite certain you can easily guess what my opinion is of Fram and those who have supported his pointlessly extended block, so no need to say more about that. I'll be back late tomorrow, but with the weekend probably won't be able to do much until Monday. Strange that I'm not allowed to use sandboxes, still, there are so many strange things that go on here. Such as Fram becoming an administrator for instance, so it's pretty small beer. Eric Corbett 10:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Go to Germany. Several of our articles were developed there, this for example, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:20, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can edit on your user and talk pages, just paste the page in there or I will do it for you. There's no problem; anybody objecting to that would just be vindictive and really rather stupid - not traits which are known amongst our highly respected Corps des Aministrateurs. Giano 11:45, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're not seriously trying to suggest that WP has a shortage of the vindictive and stupid are you? Eric Corbett 22:45, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've thought about this Giano, but it's clear to me that in the current environment the likely outcome would be that I'd be accused of trying to circumvent my block and you'd be accused of aiding and abetting me. Not good for either of us really. So I'm just going to sit it out and do other stuff for the next three or four weeks, after which we'll see what happens if Fram's still an admin by then. Eric Corbett 00:18, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Just a quick note to say thanks for the copy editing work you did on (mainly) the text I had added to Jaguar XJ220, it's much appreciated. Nick (talk) 21:46, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A beautiful car deserves a beautiful article. Eric Corbett 10:19, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another beautiful car will be on the front page tomorrow, thanks to Eric. That should be fun. I upgraded my flame thrower for the occasion. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 10:59, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eric, I asked for you to be unblocked for the occasion ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:16, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Block message is still on editnotice though Eric apparently can edit the article, but to be on the safe side, I've also watchlisted the Tiger. We got your back, buddy! Montanabw^(talk) 17:05, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can't edit the aticle, but I wouldn't be able to blocked or not anyway, as I've got a long drive home tomorrow. Thanks for watchlisting. Eric Corbett 17:12, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll babysit, too, guessing that it will be easy compared to the Lynching of Jesse Washington --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:39, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm quite glad to be away from it all tomorrow, TFA is pretty much always a wind up. Eric Corbett 22:42, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sssshhhh! Gerda! Don't say THAT! We are talking about a CAR here! OF course there will be more "drahmahz" than over a controversial article about the death of a human being! :-P Montanabw^(talk) 22:52, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was actually surprised how easy it was to watch Kafka, with that massive spike in interest, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:26, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Our Shelagh

Hello Eric. I've just started an article for our born and raised in Salford Shelagh's second play. Your thoughts? Email me, perhaps?--Shirt58 (talk) 12:19, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reading material

Hi Eric, I recently realized whilst snooping on someone else's talkpage [7] that you don't have JSTOR access, which made me feel doubly guilty for posting sources from JSTOR to The Coral Island review. This is an heads up to expect an email shortly with the sources for you. I realize you might not want them right now, but at some point you'll get back to that piece. Take care. Victoria (talk) 16:38, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have access either currently, so much for a renewal of the yearly subscription...♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 17:23, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have access either, I used to piggy-back into it using a student son, but i now have to wait for another son to attain university age to do so again. Can Wikipedia not use some of its millions of dollars to gain us access? It's donated enough to IRC in the past, would JSTOR not be a more useful investment. Giano 18:48, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are people willing to help. J Milburn (talk) 19:01, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, Ironholds I see, most useful. Giano 19:07, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if Ironholds still does, but I do (like all Oxford alumni, though few seem aware). Happy to help. Johnbod (talk) 19:21, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're very fortunate to have been at Oxford after the internet was invented. In my day, one had to borrow a book from the local monastery. Giano 19:53, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I wasn't, but they give all alumni JSTOR now - apply via Oxford Alumni - just google it. Very handy. Johnbod (talk) 23:30, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I still have access, yes. If anyone needs articles, drop me an email. Giano, I think I recall getting you some articles for a page on a stately home a while back - I forget which one. I want to say Blenheim Palace, but that, ah. Doesn't look like your work. Ironholds (talk) 21:01, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well funnily enough, I did write it, and do seem still to be the majority editor at Blenheim Palace, but I long ago gave up trying to keep it in order. I don't recall either where you helped out, but I'm sure it was very useful. Giano 21:16, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As an aside, I have one of the WMF JSTOR accounts, and am quite happy to acquire things for folks. Email me what you'd like. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:21, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Heh! That explains it then. I could've swore it was Blenheim, and then went to checked and went "..there's a pretty strong inverse correlation between Giano and maintenance tags. I must be going silly." Ironholds (talk) 21:25, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wells Cathedral

I came here to ask if you would be kind enough to turn your copy editing skills loose on Wells Cathedral, but reading all this stuff about (another) block, I suppose that is a bit pointless at present. Once the block ends you will probably have too much of a backlog of requests, but any help from talk page stalkers would be appreciated.— Rod ^talk 20:08, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing will have changed once the block expires, except that the block will have expired. For Fram or anyone else to believe differently is sheer lunacy of the highest order. Eric Corbett 22:39, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An asshole blocking me for a month for calling an asshole an asshole really says all that needs to be said I think. Make mine a three-month block now and see what difference that makes. Eric Corbett 21:56, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and my talk page access ought to be removed as well now, as the truth is never welcome here. Eric Corbett 21:59, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you...

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Norman conquest of England/archive1 - just promoted. When the turkeys (do you guys over on the other side of the pond even have turkeys?) get you down, remember that things like Norman conquest of England help folks who wouldn't know what a Wikipedia admin or what the internal politics of the site are. That's why we're here. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:00, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great work. We do have turkeys over here, millions of 'em; just ask Bernard Matthews. Wikipedia has a choice to make, not me, and it seems like it's made its choice, for better or for worse. I've never been happy being a part of this social engineering experiment, and I can't imagine feeling any happier about it when this ridiculous block expires. The die is cast. Eric Corbett 22:34, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

George III bred them to run wild in Richmond Park for the shooting, but the locals poached them all. Now we traditionally have them on Christmas Day. Johnbod (talk) 23:34, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As a nature photographer ... I hate the things. They are like spooky as heck and noisy too... so not only are they difficult to photograph, they scare away the OTHER wildlife... Ealdgyth - Talk 00:34, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

High performance

Great collaboration on a great product, Wikipedia as I like it, - thank you and Dennis for showing that side! I hope it has a future, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:00, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on another TFA.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 08:19, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So far so good, Eric. I'm home today and armed for bear. I won't bother will little edits I disagree with but are arguable ok as don't want to burn all my powder. Again, thanks for allowing me to share this TFA. I think I want to work up a few more in time and this has been a good experience for me to learn with. You are certainly a good teacher, even if many around here aren't good students. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 11:06, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just got home from Wales, where it was baking hot all week. Unlike the weather where poor Drmies is vacationing I understand. I haven't looked at the Tiger's TFA, and as there's nothing I could do about anything anyway I probably won't. Eric Corbett 19:54, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to leave a long note, but it's raining on my netbook and my track pad is all over the place. Does that tell you enough? I'm closing this up before I short out. Glad you had a nice trip, Eric. That is, I assume you had a nice trip. Best, Drmies (talk) 03:19, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It was a really enjoyable break. I'd not been to Wales for years, and at the risk of offending Dr. Blofeld my abiding impression had always been how sour and unwelcoming the Welsh were, with their "English go home" graffiti and blanking of any signs in English. But everyone we met was so helpful and friendly that my opinion of the country has turned around completely. Eric Corbett 13:38, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad. We spent part of the day in Asheville, the Paris of the South, where we lived for the first year of our marriage. I'd love to go back there. As my wife said, we'd be skinnier and wouldn't have half the marital strife we have now, since it's such a nice place. I'll find a job there and you'll come visit. Dennis can't come, since it's too liberal for him. Drmies (talk) 22:48, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it has been baking hot indeed, it is right now! Where did you go Eric? It's hotter down here in the south. I've gone a golden brown colour relatively quickly and I've been spending an average of 3 hours a day in direct sunlight. Don't want to overdo it! Luckily I don't go red I go brown straight away! It's not as if we have many days in the year in which you can bask in it like the Med.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 20:25, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A tiny little village whose name I can neither spell nor pronounce a mile or so outside Cardigan. Eric Corbett 20:30, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm good for fiddling with the minor nitpicks. Will be online only another =/- 3 hours, though. Montanabw^(talk) 20:18, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What will be, will be. It's only going to be on the main page for another three or four hours anyway. Thanks for all your efforts in looking after something I bet doesn't interest you in the slightest. :-) Eric Corbett 20:25, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It survived with minimal drama, and all is well. Congrats! Montanabw^(talk) 23:32, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The strange thing is I feel quite detached from it now, almost as if someone else wrote it. Maybe that's a good thing. Eric Corbett 00:24, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

block

this block is outright foolish. I'll talk to Floq and Fram tomorrow. — Ched : ? 00:24, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't take the trouble Ched. Even if the block was lifted tomorrow I wouldn't be back to editing while the likes of Fram were lording it over me; I'd only be back to see him desysoped. Eric Corbett 00:29, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is totally ridiculous that you are not permitted to comment here [8]. As one of Wikipedia's leading editors, you have more experience of this subject than almost anyone. For the sake of the project, this half-witted block needs to be lifted now. Giano 13:19, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Totally agree this block is stupid. PumpkinSky talk 13:22, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support that, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:24, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I need to be punished and taught a lesson, although what that lesson might be I have no idea. Eric Corbett 13:52, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will of course respect your wishes Eric. But I also see this as "punitive" and something that doesn't "prevent" anything. (other than you being able to add content). — Ched : ? 14:04, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it's punitive, as are most blocks on established editors. And I'd like to discuss the sale of a very substantial structure spanning London's major river with anyone who believes that I'll be a changed person next month Eric Corbett 14:12, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to add this. Obviously I can't contribute to the ArbCom case you initiated, but IMO you need to focus it on the behaviour of those involved, and in particular Andy Mabbett, rather than on the issue of infoboxes per se. Very few others apart from Mabbett seem to feel strongly one way or another about them, and for those who do feel strongly Giano developed the compromise idea of a partially collapsed infobox. It works well and I've used it with some success in a few articles, including yesterday's TFA. There are obviously issues with individual infoboxes, but ArbCom has no remit over those. Eric Corbett 14:22, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One of the main problems is Mabbett's style of interacting with others in "discussions". That inflames things almost immediately, and has been the root reason why he has had bans from wikipedia in the past. But he not only seems to not acknowledge this, if you try and gently make the point (as I have done on the infobox discussion page some months ago), he immediately accuses you of personal attacks, and everything falls apart from then on. In my opinion, if he wasn't around, much of the drama associated with infoboxes would be resolved gracefully, as befits a collaborative project, even if some of the words used in that debate were ones that maiden aunts would swoon at (as I've said elsewhere, some people need to grow a pair of balls over language used in discussions). DDStretch (talk) 15:57, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Get rid of Mabbett and there's no infobox problem. Eric Corbett 16:30, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In agreement too. Mabbit accuses of personal attack and then WP-OWN unless he can gave his own way. I would treat him rather like a rather badly behaved child throwing a tantrum except he's too big to be ignored, too single minded to be diverted and as for the good, sharp slap round the back of the legs - well I expect that's illegal now. I will link to this discussion from the RFA Page - if Eric cannot go the Arbs, then the Arbs must come to Eric. Giano 18:08, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We have also the other feature of the discussions involving him an infoboxes: that is, the refusal to answer a simple and direct question: whether there was any intrinsic reason why infoboxes were the only way metadata could be added to articles. I asked him that question (using various rephrasings) many many times, and he never answered any of them. I know he read the messages in which I asked him. So, there is no other more plausible conclusion to make other than that he chose to refuse to answer them, and it took others to tell me what I had already suspected - that there was no intrinsic or necessary reason why adding metadata to articles had to be done via infoboxes. (This fact would then lead to a suggestion that other ways should be written to add metadata to articles that editors thought should not have infoboxes, but he seemed to not even register this as a suggestion when it was made). In my opinion, this kind of behaviour was certainly not consistent with the objectives of wikipedia being a collaborative editing environment, and his constant refusal naturally led many to suspect that we were not being told the entire story, because it seemed that something was not being disclosed to us when there seemed no reason to keep it from us. This created and creates a toxic environment for collaborative editing. Now Mabbett will always jump to the accusation that one is indulging in personal attacks by making these points, but in fact, one is not doing this because the intention is to improve the editing environment by pointing out deficiencies in behaviour that feed through to approaches to collaborative editing. If what I have said is a personal attack, then every warning message, and every temporary block of a disruptive editor is also a personal attack, but this seems to be lost on him. In fact, it is well known amongst experts that even ad hominem comments are not always fallacies, and to determine whether they are or not, one has to look at the entire framework of dialogue that is taking place, not just say "comments about myself = personal attack", which is what he seems to do. There are other issues, like refusing to admit he was wrong, and resorting to more and more pedantic and almost irrelevant "get outs" to avoid admitting he was wrong that wears one down so his view prevails by attrition of the opposition rather than a critical examination that is ultimately collaborative in nature. The problem is, no one seems to be prepared to deal with this because everyone wants "an easy life", and there are too many factions that twist and distort the rules of wikipedia in a permanent gaming way for anything good to come out of it. I would like to be shown to be wrong on critical discussion and examination of this point, but I am not confident I will be. This is what drives many expert editors away. It all becomes just too much when it should never be as tricky or hard as others make it to be for reasons of gaming or ego. DDStretch (talk) 00:25, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A final thought

I'm going to be away again now for while, and I may or may not be back next month.

Let me leave you with this last thought. Anyone who believes that this article is anywhere near FA level needs to have their bumps felt. Eric Corbett 18:53, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eric, enjoy your time away! I sort of took your case to ArbCom, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:39, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be defending Mabbett, who by any rational judgement is a functional cretin at best. Eric Corbett 22:01, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am defending Andy. I have seen reasonable posts from him since September 2012, didn't look before, late to the scene. See here, for example. Do you know better? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:15, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ps: I also like his sense of humour, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:20, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think he's an obsessive idiot, but YMMV. Eric Corbett 22:55, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How would you feel if I'd written about you that "You should however have instead taken your pen, punched a hole in her windpipe and looked on as her attempts to wave for help got increasingly feeble"? Eric Corbett 23:41, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For two days (off Wikipedia) I thought hard and unsecessfully about how to respond to your comment, - I am happy that you changed it. Do you have a source to substantiate "obsessive"? Or one for "idiot"? - The last quote: sorry, I don't understand it, and am not curious enough to find out.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerda Arendt (talk • contribs)

I find it strange that you appear to be saying that "obsessive idiot" is more acceptable to you than plain old "idiot". Nevertheless, my opinion is informed by my personal experience of Mabbett's obsessive intransigence, intransigence that is quite simply idiotic. Eric Corbett 17:11, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Plain old "idiot" is not what I remember but I don't want to repeat what I didn't like, which sounded like attributing supernatural powers. My English is limited, idiot seems not right by my personal experience. Intransigence is a new word, seems similar to "not able to compromise". I can see cases where that is a positive quality. Two great musicians, asked "What do you do if your ideas of a tempo for a piece you want to play together are different", answered: "We do it my tempo one day, his tempo the other. A tempo in the middle would be a bad compromise, not right for either one." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:50, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have your opinion of Mabbett, I have mine, and very likely nothing we say will change the other's mind. I don't know whether English is a really difficult language or not, but one of its subtleties is that there are often several different words to describe the same basic idea, and over time their meaning changes, acquiring either a positive or negative twist. "Intransigence" would never be seen as a positive trait, and what you're describing would better be called a compromise. One of my favourite examples is the possibly apocryphal story of either Queen Anne or King James II on seeing the completed St Pauls Cathedral and describing it as "awful, pompous, and artificial" which was then a compliment meaning “awe-inspiring, full of pomp, and artistically done". Anyway. let's not argue about Mabbett. Eric Corbett 18:08, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll learn more about the new word before using it. I like to explore more subtleties of language, thanks for helping with that! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:05, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I used to work for a German company, and I was always shaking my head at the translations they produced. One that sticks in my mind is "interlocutor", a word you never hear these days and would probably only ever come across in an old Black and White Minstrel Show TV programme. Eric Corbett 19:18, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty similar to calling someone an asshole or a functional cretin, really, though a bit more hyperdramatic and I also will acknowledge it depends on the context; you have the deft touch of mostly targeting those who probably would benefit from being knocked down a peg, but have missed on a few occasions. The truly mean-spirited stuff in general needs to be toned down around here by everyone. People grow, people change. We're all human and flawed. Your getting blocked was ridiculous, but Mabbett is not satan, either. (You both share the trait of others thinking you are, however...) Just saying. From my end, you've both been pretty decent to me. Montanabw^(talk) 00:45, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"You should however have instead taken your pen, punched a hole in her windpipe and looked on as her attempts to wave for help got increasingly feeble" is one of many IRC comments by Oliver Keyes, who uses the Ironholds and Okeyes (WMF) accounts, the latter presumably when employed as the community liason for WMF---which wishes to increase the number of women writers apparently. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 09:14, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we need to add ^{[citation needed]} tags to talk pages? Montanabw^(talk) 22:29, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Linking to the logs will get you blocked for violating BLP. Adding a citation-needed template might get you blocked for ... "disruptive editing". Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:42, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me you are joking of something...? Montanabw^(talk) 23:53, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nope,. IRC logs are off-limits here. - Sitush (talk) 23:59, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's easier to understand WP/WMF's pathetic posturing as wanting more women and simultaneous covering up IRC misogyny as incompetence or stupidity, not a joke---also the most likely explanation for the preterm deployment of the Visual Editor.

Look at the page history of the my ArbCom case to see the kind of remarks which are celebrated as "sex-positive and third-wave feminism". P!nk had a song about self-hatred, "'Pull my hair! I'll suck it!' girl./ Stupid Girl!" Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:54, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pony treats!

Treats!
As a previous recipient of the Pony Prize, (as George Ponderevo) here is some sugar for your pony, recognizing the promotion of Oxbow (horse) directly to FA, bypassing GA, following your rigorous copyediting, upon your recommendation and with your encouragement! Ponies do not really need sugar because they are prone to be easy keepers, so this is a special treat, only given once! (Subsequent awards shall consist of carrots). Montanabw^(talk) 22:33, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To send a pony or a treat to other wonderful and responsible editors, click here.

Chin up man, you do some great content work around here and we await your return. Montanabw^(talk) 22:33, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a few scores to settle next month, and they will be settled, no matter how long it takes. Eric Corbett 17:18, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like I'm a drummer boy or errand runner that's caught in the crossfire between the trenches. There's a lot of other good faith people getting stuck in that spot too. We aren't precisely noncombatants, as we have views, but we aren't the trolls and if not 100% neutral, we are at least able to see past the personalities to the issues. You are a bit more of a combatant, but there was no grounds for the ambush that occurred. When you get back, it might be a whole new world. Or maybe not. Either way, enjoy the break, I guess! Montanabw^(talk) 20:30, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It'll be a whole new world for the assholes like Fram, I can promise you that. Eric Corbett 21:12, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Methinks hopes for a "new world" are greatly exaggerated. There's the usual flurry of sound and noise, but it will likely grind to a halt once corners of the shadow bureaucracies realize they might lose power. Intothat darkness 21:17, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We'll see. It's a big mistake to treat me like a silly schoolkid. Eric Corbett 21:42, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

True. Also illustrates how poorly we treat schoolkids; no wonder they misbehave so often! Montanabw^(talk) 23:28, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Things could worse, Fram could have always exiled you to Gibraltar, I'm sure Drmies would happily join you eh Dr? Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 16:47, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, I've worked on plenty of Gibraltar-related articles, yes. I'd follow Eric everywhere, of course, since everybody knows I'm nothing but a fanboy (and according to a drunk email by one of our FA writers, a "lightweight" to boot). If they exile you, do they pay the fare? Drmies (talk) 02:52, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Exiling Fram to Gibraltar would be far more interesting. Agathoclea (talk) 06:30, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It would indeed, but Fram's days are probably numbered anyway. Eric Corbett 12:27, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I'm sure the Thomas Cook wikipedia promotion scheme will cover the costs of your flight to the rock! There's enough new flights happening now to Gibraltar anyway thanks to wikipedia... Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 12:29, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you back from your vacation now Drmies? Did it ever stop raining? Eric Corbett 12:50, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, it never did--thanks for asking. Even on the day we packed it rained--in fact, that was the only day that it rained in the morning. Clearly God was trying to tell me something. Monday morning I was back in front of the class, so yeah, it was a bit short. But, dear Eric, let me tell you, the countryside there is spectacular, and the rain has a fringe benefit: look at Upper Whitewater Falls. The main picture is "normal" in terms of water quantity. Then look at the little video I just added. Sublime. Drmies (talk) 14:27, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bramshill House

Giano or anybody else here interested in helping expand this house? It's been put on the market for £25 million and looks architecturally quite important. If I can find enough sources I'll try to get it up to GA.Tibetan PrayeTibetan Prayer^᧾ 11:50, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is architecturally important, but not very well written up. From a quick glance glance to it looks to be an excellent example of the English Renaissance; I will have a scout around and see what's reliable. Hopefully before some one alights on this and Andy Mabbett demands its inclusion in an infobox. Giano 18:57, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Jacobean mention grabbed my attention the most.Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 12:34, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow Giano--while you were typing this up, I was adding the ghost story (look at the time stamp). Eerie, huh? Drmies (talk) 02:49, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw that - great minds obviously think alike. There seem to be a lot of very good edits going on there at the moment, so I'll sit back and watch - too many cooks can spoil the broth. Giano 13:50, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why does this article have such a ridiculously wide table of contents? Eric Corbett 12:26, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting stuff Drmies, thanks! Haven't noticed the table Eric as I don't display contents by default. Will try to add more to this over the next few days. Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 12:32, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to have helped, but that won't be possible for the next couple of weeks, obviously. The project must be protected against me trying to improve it at all costs. Eric Corbett 12:46, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From what I gather there was a software update yesterday which temporarily caused the contents box to span the page. All back to normal now, whatever it was. Keri (talk) 12:39, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A software downdate more like. Don't the developers ever test anything before deploying it? Eric Corbett 12:44, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course they do ... they just test it badly, and barely enough, so they can upload the build and go back to playing World of Wikipediacraft. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:07, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clear the cache. - Sitush (talk) 13:09, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just did that, and it didn't do anything, Sitush. Drmies (talk) 14:18, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, more grades (whether up or down): videos now open in a separate screen, as my experience at Upper Whitewater Falls suggests. I'm too old to keep up. Drmies (talk) 14:29, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We need Eric's copyediting skills - the "History" section has no fewer than 5 paragraphs all starting with "In (date)" in quick succession. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously Fram doesn't agree with you, but John might be prepared to have a look. Eric Corbett 13:36, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article development, Ritchie. First one finds the information, then one sticks it in, then one asks Eric to clean it up. A teacher of writing would tell you that the writing process is evidenced in the drafts, and that's what you're looking at. Moreover, it's a draft produced by two editors, hacking away at the same time. Feel free to whip it into shape. Drmies (talk) 14:12, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry Richie, I didn't see that Eversley was already linked in the article. The ghost story will make for a nice DYK hook (we're almost at 5x expansion). I know how much Eric loves DYKs. Yes, the history section is the worst of it, right now; it needs a few more factoids on ownership (and when was it Grade-I listed?) and then cleanup. Drmies (talk) 16:02, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I hate DYKs even more than I hate ballet and opera. But not quite as much as I hate Fram and his fellow civility police. Eric Corbett 16:12, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there's not many editors who focus on FA and GA and bother with DYK too. Crisco is one of the very few remaining I think who does, but he does a tremendous job all across the site anyway.Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 18:34, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ealdgyth does too I think, and more power to her elbow. Eric Corbett 18:55, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suffer in silence, my dear Eric. Like me. Did I tell you how one of my socks marked a "new" article for speedy deletion, giving the exact same reason under which an admin actually deleted the article ten minutes before (the exact same version), and then my poor sock got blasted by another admin and two established editors? And that subsequently the first admin refused to back me up and thus denied the validity of his earlier deletion? And that at the following AfD discussion the article was of course deleted and the contributor blocked? The injustice of it...my bootless cries go up to heaven. Drmies (talk) 16:49, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, Kaldari (remember?) dropped by on my talk page the other day to lecture me some. Drmies (talk) 16:57, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I remember Kaldari, with some distaste. Eric Corbett 17:16, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article would look better with some interior images, this is the only freely licensed one on flickr and that's obviously not owned by the uploader and would be deleted. Some copyrighted images here, looks fantastic inside as you'd imagine and it only seems to have images for the reception hall, a conference room and some tapestries. Imagine what the other 327 rooms and halls look like! I think I'll ask around on there tomorrow, begging for images in return for plane tickets to Gibraltar but I think the police academy would be the best to ask for images, although if they're anything like the policemen on wikipedia we'll get nothing ...Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 18:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously copyrighted, but here are some more views. Anyone have access to back copies of Country Life for referencing? Yngvadottir (talk) 19:10, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If somebody could get hold of a copy of Bramshill: its history & architecture it has lots of images I think from the early 1880s which could be scanned and uploaded.Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 22:02, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I never ... I have apparently successfully ordered it via interlibrary loan from the Claremont Colleges. If and when it arrives I'll find someone who can assist with scanning and uploading logistics. And now I must go to bed. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:37, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tibetan Prayer, that is some fine, fine work you did. Thanks. But don't tell Eric Corbett about what you did with that reflist, or he'll have a hissy fit. Drmies (talk) 23:28, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why, it was 30 em vs reflist|2. On my firefox the 30em doesn't show as two columns and it is now a long section... Perhaps Eric could explain? Anyway, it would be wrong to put such a decent article we've developed through DYK and spoil them with it, they don't know what they're missing.Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 12:26, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can't give you the long answer. The short answer is, because that's what Malleus did. Drmies (talk) 18:10, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll say this here to Yngvadottir, Drmies and Tibetan Prayer, so that it's perhaps not picked up elsewhere. Is this GA a little premature; I had intended to go over it before the GA? However, in Eric's absence I began a small copyedit - he would normally do it. Now, I may be wrong (and I really, humbly apologise if I am), but I smell unwitting copyvio! It's an instinct that I have. I suspect that in the hurry to GA someone may have innocently used a few too many phrases from the reffs - there's just too much professional and rather antiquated phrasing, suddenly interspersed by clumsy phrasing - it's ringing alarm bells. Giano 17:52, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article uses a lot of public domain material from the book in the architecture section with attribution in the references at the top, that's why. I removed a lot of the original and reedited it in with the rest, but the drawing room section especially contains a lot of material from it. Perhaps it could be further reworded to reduce some of the more antiquated phrasing in part to fully integrate it and make it look more like the work of one person, but generally the article looks GA quality in my opinion. I'm sorry that you feel it is being rushed. I'll ask the reviewer to put off the review for a few days if you want to edit it, I didn't think you were interested in editing it.Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 17:58, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Template:Did you know nominations/Bramshill House. Drmies (talk) 18:23, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eric's the expert on GAs - I suggest that you wait and see what he thinks; me? I know nothing. it's just that phrases like "the building consists of terminal pilasters of the Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian style, from story to story" with no mention of the colossal order and "the parapet is an architectural feature that in the Elizabethan era was much varied" when we are actually in the Jacobean era and "the imposts of the arches rest upon the pillars, conveying an appearance of instability" are just a few of many phrases which concern me. I know I'm not the only architectural writer here, but I do question some of these opinions and their phrasing. I even wonder if who inserted the phrasing actually understands what they are talking about. Anyway, as I said - I think Eric is the man to know. Giano 18:24, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't finished editing it, but I took another look at it and tried to imagine how it would look through Eric's eyes. I tried to mostly remove what came across as pedantic architectural "gobbledy gook" which he or I would find irritating, but there is still a few features mentioned with some terms neither of us have probably heard of, but are linked and seem appropriate to mention. I don't honestly think the article reads too badly at all, a pity Eric can't edit it. Is he permitted to edit his sandbox? Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 18:49, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Officially, no, according to Wikipedia:Blocking policy, nor are we allowed to edit by proxy. I don't know if I still have a pair of Eric-colo(u)red glasses laying around; I may have left them at the office. Drmies (talk) 19:06, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's theoretical, as I can't edit my sandbox anyway. But I think this article still needs some significant work before it's ready for GAN, and as Giano has said I suspect plagiarism at the least. As a rule I'm not fond of incorporating text from sources even if they're in the public domain without paraphrasing or attributing them the same as any other source. A quick look through reveals more than a few problems with the prose, some of which I've listed below:
"The roof consists of red tiles, mostly hipped, but have large gables to the west ..."

"The stairs on the north side of the hall were originally in Eversley Manor and are dated to the early 18th-century ..." No hyphen.

"... inspired by one of the great Italian architects of 16th century Mannerism, Giacomo Barozzi da Vignola". Should be "16th-century".

"Although the ceilings at Bramshill are not any less characteristic of the Elizabethan period than the other architectural parts of the mansion ..." I thought it was a Jacobean mansion?

"... the ceilings of the Drawing Room and library are more elegant and ornamented". Why is it "Drawing Room" but not "Library"?

"Staircase and First floor" Why is "First" capitalised?

"The andirons are large and well-adorned ..." Should be "well adorned".

"... which he considered 'a source of constant delight',[53], fondly naming them 'James the First's gnarled giants'[57]" Punctuation

"The altar retable depicts four saints, probably dating to c. 1840." The four saints dated to 1840?

"The surface of the panels in plain, but the ribs or styles are carved."

"It is two stories in height, the lower being Doric, and the upper being Ionic." It would be much less clumsy if those two "being"s were dropped.

"The balustrades and bannisters of the staircase are elegant in style, and the walls above the stairs going up to the first floor and the walls of the first floor landing contain some very large paintings, including several portraits." You've got a run-on sentence there. Should also be "first-floor landing", not "first floor landing".

"Beyond the staircase on the first floor are the state rooms." Isn't everything on the first floor beyond the staircase, by definition?

Eric Corbett 19:52, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the bloody man when he's wanted? There is a solution; it's pasting the page onto his user page and letting him copyedit it there. I think I'm going to paste it there and he can either revert me of edit it - his decision. Giano 19:26, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There [9] done; it's up to him now to either help the project or show it the same contempt that it shows him. Giano 19:31, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nice of you to put the pressure on the poor guy, Giano. Don't you know that he's still got to finish a kitchen floor? Also, do we know which four saints are on the altarpiece? Rosiestep just changed the reflist layout; I don't know if I have an opinion on it. Drmies (talk) 19:37, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not allowed to edit my user page anyway Giano. Eric Corbett 20:01, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you can edit your user page - do you want it pasted here? Giano 20:57, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eric is right; he can't edit his user page. He can edit only his user talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:02, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A kitchen floor? Bugger his kitchen floor. People always change 'relist' it just makes it smaller print and in more columns - nothing to worry about. Don't worry about Eric either, he'll let us now if he's unhappy about the change of editing venue; for the time being edit on his user page and then paste back to the real page, so that's Eric's version is current. Giano 19:43, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's the hall floor actually and the kitchen lights. Then on to the bathroom. Eric Corbett 19:57, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, the laws of karma given by Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Charles-Valentin Alkan/archive1 come back at me! Thanks for the input, have addressed most so far.Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 20:30, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm actually not bad on architectural terminology, although at least 2 of you are undoubtedly better :-) I see this material has been taken from Drmies' paydirt source, which given its date may well be hazy on Elizabethan vs. Jacobean, and I can see where it's replaced the few details I was able to add from Pevsner via de.wikipedia (they gave me page numbers and some massaging of Google let me see what they had rendered into German and summarise it myself.) However, I can only see it in snippet view on Google. I have the Pevsner ordered on interlibrary loan; if any of you can get it faster, I recommend doing so, since his summaries are unimpeachable even though I do sometimes disagree with his taste '-) Otherwise, please stall the reviewer till I can get said book. I'm afraid they come by post and this is not a fast area of the country in that respect. ... And then I will of course close my eyes and shiver while Eric slices and dices my prose. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:48, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You're right to be afraid. If I find any redundant commas then someone will be brought to account. Eric Corbett 21:50, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If somebody who often visits the British Library could obtain a copy of this and see if it has anything. This might be worth a buy].Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 21:10, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See above with regards to Bramshill: Its History & Architecture; supposedly also on its way to me. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:25, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! I've just managed to find some info by searching in "search in this book" with a key word, but no doubt the book will be highly valuable, has information on things like the bedrooms and gatehouse etc.Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 22:19, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't realise this was already at GAN when I posted earlier, so I'll keep any further comments to myself until the review is over. Eric Corbett 23:57, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Any idea what "wrought hangings" are? These are apparently what the Wrought Room's named after- they dangle from the bed in that room. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:06, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be surprised if it wasn't tapestries of some sort, see here and all the hits on "finely-wrought hangings". Yngvadottir (talk) 12:15, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The house owner thought it worthy of mentioning in his book.. Having received some emails and what has been said here by Giano, I've withdrawn the GA nomination as I'd rather we were all happy with it, especially given that Yngvadottir has ordered books. There's little good feeling in an article passing GA when others who you value think little of it. I think it would pass GA currently but you have one of the highest standards for GA reviewing here so I won't argue with you on that. I hope that people will continue to edit this and see the potential in it that I see.Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 12:24, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A quick search for "Wrought Room" seems to show that other houses here and in Ireland had one. Tapestries on the walls? Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 12:38, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox case

Per this edit [10] - where else dis you tell me that there were some? Giano 15:33, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The one in Sunbeam Tiger springs immediately to mind, as that's a fairly recent FA. Although not an FA/GA Pendine Museum of Speed also has one, which I think demonstrates very nicely the problem with some infoboxes; they're longer than the bloody article! Eric Corbett 15:52, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Does this help? 78.149.172.10 (talk) 16:09, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks that's really useful, I have pasted it in my evidence section. Eric, I am more than happy to paste anything in the evidence page for you - if you want - or in fact do anything on Wikipedia for you. I do not acknowledge this absurd block on you and if they try to ban me for coming to your aid; they will soon wish that they hadn't. Giano 16:18, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's only a couple of weeks to go, so maybe we could try out your idea for Mount Vernon. I've got some papers I think will give us enough to plug the few gaps we have left, and it might be rather amusing to get a GA while blocked. Eric Corbett 16:26, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are allowed to provide evidence for the Infoboxes arbitration case if you wish. You may post your evidence section here, and any editor may copy it to the appropriate arbitration page. This would apply to any blocked editor, at least in the case of a time-limited rather than indefinite block.

(I'm deliberately not commenting here on the block itself, although I would certainly do so if you made an unblock request or expressed interest in that direction. However, that is a separate issue from evidence for the case.) Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:32, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Giano has expressed my view on the case quite well, so no need for me to echo what he's already said unless the case becomes a vote. As for appealing my block, that's something I've never done and never will do. I'm a lapsed Catholic; my days of beating my chest in front of a faux authority figure and chanting Mea Culpa, mea Culpa, mea maxima Culpa are well behind me. There was some fault on my side admittedly, but only some, not all. Eric Corbett 16:42, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, even unlapsed Catholics do not think it's right for Admins to have their egos stoked in such a perverse way. Giano 16:46, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My wife is so concerned I might lapse back again that many years ago she hid my rosary. It was a pretty tacky bauble anyway: plastic beads with a tiny bit of holy water supposedly blessed by some pope or other in the bead where the long bit dangles down, where you have to parrot some other prayers for each bead. As a kid, it was always a race to see how quickly you could say the Hail Mary to get round the bloody thing. Eric Corbett 17:11, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

number of characters in your comment was exactly 666.

I had thought of asking for a stay in the Mars RfAr so that all Martian sex-workers could participate, but again self-control got the better of me. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:20, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You'll be sorry when you get to the Pearly Gates and see me on the other side having a ball with my handmaidens, and you can't come in, but have to go downstairs and sit with Fram for eternity. Giano 17:16, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I'll become a Muslim and blow myself to bits. How many virgins does that qualify you for in the afterlife? But before I did, based on my experience of Islamic countries, I'd want to have some assurances that the virgins would be female. Anyway, I remember being given my rosary after my confirmation, and thinking "Wow, the pope blesses all of these rosaries?" Now of course I realise that at best the pope blessed a thousand gallon tank of tap water. Eric Corbett 17:20, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you weren't already blocked, you would now be blocked by the blasphemy police - probably all Southern Baptists. It won't be those nice little people who drive around the USA in horse-drawn buggies because they don't have computers Seriously though, It's rather boring you being blocked like this - bloody inconsiderate really. Giano 17:39, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm simply speaking from personal experience of Islamic countries. The block will soon expire, and then the fun can begin. Eric Corbett 17:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

At one time, a sensible Admin woudld have come along and unblocked you and said "don't be ridiculous - all of you." Butof course now they are all shit scared of the civility police and have exchanged their balls for a lesson on how to daintily fold a paper table napkin. Which is all rather distressing. Giano 17:49, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't blame them really, I obviously needed to be taught a lesson in their eyes. As for what that lesson might be I have no idea. That Fram is an asshole perhaps? Eric Corbett 18:48, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Virgins? Who wants virgins? Not I thank you. I'd rather have a woman experienced enough to know what she's doing, and how to do it properly. — Ched : ? 18:45, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The attraction of virgins is rather lost on me as well, but it seems to be important in some ~~medieval~~ Islamic cultures. Eric Corbett 18:51, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stop fantasizing Ched; put both hands clearly on the table and unblock Eric. Then we can all get on with writing an encyclopedia. Giano 18:53, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocking me would be wikisuicide really, and as the block is just about halfway done now wouldn't achieve anything much anyway. I'm content to sit it out and take it from there. And those who think I'll have changed in two weeks time are going to be in for rather a shock. Eric Corbett 19:01, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm, but Liz McDonald "knows what she is doing", there has to be some sort of happy medium, experienced but not leather-skinned, wrinkly old slappers which only appeal to a certain type of fella...Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 18:59, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Above topic promptly reminded me of this. Montanabw^(talk) 22:02, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As you've once more attracted way too much admin attention...

(Wish you'd stop it too, or the admins would stop... or both!) I had to turn to User:John for help with Battle of Hastings. I hope you're back to good form soon, as I've got to start cracking on Harold Godwinson and Edgar the Ætheling as well as a little naughty boy named Roger Norreis. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:37, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how you manage to keep churning them out Ealdgyth. Eric Corbett 19:54, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wife selling

Sigh. I see you're blocked again. How demoralizing.

Anyway, on to the affectless notice I intended to leave.

In 2011, you participated in a deletion discussion re: wife selling. I believe the article should be revisited to assess whether concerns about synth and scope have come to fruition. My own concerns, expressed most recently here, are based on the material pertaining to ancient Rome, the area in which I mainly contribute; I'm hoping to have some input from other perspectives. Several people participated in the AfD, but since I don't wish to canvass, let me explain that I'm contacting only you and Kaldari as the two other editors who followed up actively on the talk page. I may be overreacting. Cynwolfe (talk) 21:59, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've never had a very high opinion of that article, not least because almost nothing of it is actually to do with wife selling, as your example of Ancient Rome illustrates. Eric Corbett 22:13, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A general request re my block

I appreciate the efforts of Nick and Ched to try and get me unblocked, but I'd really prefer just to sit this one out. Fram being what he is, any unblock would be be dressed in weasel words implying that I'd been in the wrong, he was in the right, I'd recognised the error of my ways and so on. The evident truth though is that we were both in the wrong, although him far more than me, something he's never likely to admit. Eric Corbett 16:28, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1,049: / Line 1,049: @@
 :I've never had a very high opinion of that article, not least because almost nothing of it is actually to do with wife selling, as your example of Ancient Rome illustrates. [[User:Eric Corbett| <span style="font-variant:small-caps;font-weight:900; color:green;">Eric</span>]] [[User talk:Eric Corbett|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;font-weight:500;color: green;">Corbett</span>]] 22:13, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
+== A general request re my block ==
+I appreciate the efforts of [[user:Nick|Nick]] and [[user:Ched|Ched]] to try and get me unblocked, but I'd really prefer just to sit this one out. Fram being what he is, any unblock would be be dressed in weasel words implying that I'd been in the wrong, he was in the right, I'd recognised the error of my ways and so on. The evident truth though is that we were both in the wrong, although him far more than me, something he's never likely to admit. [[User:Eric Corbett| <span style="font-variant:small-caps;font-weight:900; color:green;">Eric</span>]] [[User talk:Eric Corbett|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;font-weight:500;color: green;">Corbett</span>]] 16:28, 21 July 2013 (UTC)