User talk:Eric Corbett/Archives/2010/February

Gods...

On top of lame mare, another destroyed blanket, I get... this. (Whimpers) Ealdgyth - Talk 23:25, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry Ealdgyth, nobody will understand it anyway, so you can just assume a default position of reverting all edits. :lol: --Malleus Fatuorum 23:29, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, I won't get the guy who insists on inserting a weird bit about palliums... that's one thing good. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps he's confused palliums with phalluses? Anyway, well done on sorting out the trivia dispute on that foxy lady. We'll need to summarise some of it, obviously, but the article looks better already. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:35, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

I hope to have my Blackbeard book by tomorrow. Something is waiting at the post office for me... Parrot of Doom 23:58, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd forgotten all about that! --Malleus Fatuorum 00:04, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

I have been sort of dodging around some of the more problematic massacre and death subjects - and have considered the problem of both over-tagged article talk pages, or of the horrible mix of parent/whatever projects and related projects all turning up for the party - not to mention mixed categories of parent and child on article pages... I suspect I should take care what I say about peterloo in that case... btw your header to this page looks like something I would feel very tempted to copy/add to my talk page... sigh SatuSuro 14:18, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I understand now why you tagged it for the Death project, it was a massacre. --Malleus Fatuorum 14:29, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

There are indeed some issues about massacre article tagging - I am assuming the 'sensitivity' issue has settled down in Manchester about it by now and there a no further issues pending in the current political climate or collective psyche  :) - at least Pete Marsh's demise appears to have been a solitary one (I was wandering his marsh area last September whilst doing some family history stuff over Alderley way SatuSuro 14:34, 3 February 2010 (UTC))

For a long time Peterloo was almost entirely ignored, but in recent years I think there's become an increasing respect for those who demonstrated that day. There's a proper plaque close to the spot now admitting that people were killed by the yeomanry, and even talk of a memorial. --Malleus Fatuorum 14:44, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good - I was most disappointed when I was staying near Manchester that I did not get the chance to walk the streets of the main part of town - too busy seeking out graveyards and old family homes SatuSuro 14:52, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Parc Cwm long cairn

User:Nev1 has (very kindly) carried out an academic peer review for Parc Cwm long cairn, prior to nomination for WP:FAC. In his review (User talk:Daicaregos#Comments on Parc Cwm long cairn) he suggested that the article could be improved by asking someone to have a look at the way it is written, and your name was suggested. Please let me know if you have the time (and inclination) for the task. Any suggestions for its improvement would be gratefully received. Many thanks, Daicaregos (talk) 14:43, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

That's a nice piece of work. I'll be happy to take a look through. --Malleus Fatuorum 14:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree - a good catch for the death project as well SatuSuro 14:49, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you both. Daicaregos (talk) 14:50, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Constitution of Virginia

I see you recently did the GA sweeps review of Constitution of Virginia. Thank you for that. I've toyed with trying to take the article to FAR, though I have virtually no experience there. I see you have quite a bit of FA experience. So, I wonder if you might share a brief assessment of how near or far the article is to FA standards. I won't pester you for a thorough review; I am just curious about the general impressions of someone who recently reviewed the article.--Kubigula (talk) 05:30, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I think it's pretty close. The two things that jump out are that every image needs to have alt text, and there are a few bits/claims uncited. For instance, in the final paragraph of the 1870 subsection some voting figures are given but no indication of their source. Similarly, the second paragraph of 1776 is uncited. There's an external link in the Article VI – Judiciary section which you wouldn't get away with at FAC either – all external links must be in an External links section – and that dead link needs to be dealt with. The way the References are laid out makes it a bit difficult to track down sources as well; it's better to separate the footnote, e.g., "Salmon (1994), p.52.", from the book details by putting them in a separate Bibliography section. It makes the citations look more consistent as well. I've moved the Salmon book as an example to show you what I mean. You need to check through all the nitty-gritty details as well, even the small things like punctuation in your citations. For instance, sometimes there's a space as in "p. 127", and sometimes there isn't, as in "p.127". Whichever you pick needs to be consistent.

Overall though these are just minor things that could be sorted in fairly short order, and if they were I think this would stand a good chance at FAC. --Malleus Fatuorum 13:59, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Great feedback. Thank you again.--Kubigula (talk) 17:26, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

for defending me on that ANI topic I started. It's nice to know that you think that I'm here for the right reasons now.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 17:42, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I think you've got a legitimate grievance, so hopefully IMatt will get the point now and stop picking at your every spelling mistake. Let's hope so anyway, for his sake. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:50, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Of course. I don't want to get revenge on him. I just want to be left alone so I can continue my work on German subs and the Battle of Belgium. In fact, I think that community is now used to my spelling mistakes. Not that that is a good excuse but I don't really think that it's that big of a deal. I have a feeling that I am Dysgraphia. I can read anything fine but I can't seem to spell any of it!--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 18:02, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

tee hee

Bollock dagger. Hopefully I'll be able to sneak that into Blackbeard somewhere :) Parrot of Doom 14:42, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy call

Just to let you know I mentioned you here [1] . (It's an honorable mention.) Writegeist (talk) 21:43, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Roux returned from reitrement to give you lessons in civility? Now I've seen it all. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:33, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

The irony seemed to escape him though. Strange how so often it's most abusive who bleat so loudly about civility, or what passes for civity here anyway. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:00, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Tis not strange, but the norm. "Civility," narrowly defined, is an almost requisite element of bullying... (One solution is elaboration to include clarification of the bullying aspect so that it can be constrained.)

Of course, with even Obama opining about "civility" at a "prayer breakfast," the issue is hard to tackle — but a beginning is to address the issue of "bullshit" and that "incivility to bullshit" is GOOD. etc etc (smiling but not joking, as usual) Proofreader77 ^(interact) 20:27, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I worry about America. WTF is a "prayer breakfast", and why? --Malleus Fatuorum 20:30, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

See also: National Prayer Breakfast. (And yes, we Americans are going to be very unhappy to learn that the Antichrist will be arising here.) Proofreader77 ^(interact) 20:35, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm horrified to learn that we apparently have one of those over here as well. A prayer breakfast that is, not an Antichrist. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:51, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Tony Blair was in the running, but then the Iraq mess ruined his chances. :-) Proofreader77 ^(interact) 20:55, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Wythenshawe

No source to hand ! Have noted two or three deletions of our piece. So be it, no skin off our nose !! cannot be arsed to do any more !!! ROBERT TAGGART (talk) 17:12, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

No great loss then it would seem. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:38, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Even the average Wythenshawnian would have sussed it out by two deletions I would have thought! Fred the Oyster (talk) 01:35, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Ones thanks to Moni3 ! Moi be still to get the hang of all this gubbins ! ROBERT TAGGART (talk) 17:14, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

QUEEN (BAND)

I saw your reversion of the edit on the Queen (band) article.

Please proceed to edit any and all parts of the Queen article in any manner you deem appropriate. I have no interest in editing this article. I stepped away from the computer I was using in the University's computer lab to visit the men's room and during this time someone apparently used my then open account at Wikipedia to make the change(s) you addressed. Again, please proceed to edit any and all parts of the article in any manner you deem appropriate. I have no interest in editing this article.

Please do not reply to this message. It seems that the article in which you are interested was the only one affected and I do not want to clutter up my talk page, or any other pages, with messages about the article in question. Please feel free to edit the page upon which this message appears by deleting this message in whole or part, as you deem appropriate.--LexVacPac3 01:24, 5 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by LexVacPac3 (talk • contribs)

Well, I thank you kindly for giving me permission to correct the work of those of your fellow students who think it's smart to impose colonial English spelling on an English article. It's much appreciated. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:31, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Who says Wikipedia isn't educational? That young man has learnt not to mess with the Brits, to log off before taking a leak and finally how to make the acquaintance of SineBOT. Our work is done :) Fred the Oyster (talk) 01:34, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

That young man, if indeed he is a man, or even young, is talking bollocks, So let's hope he has learned something. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:50, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, Brits still rule the mighty British Empire! pretty much nothing, except maybe the use of antediluvian terms, e.g., learnt; and wisdom in the realm of “taking a leak.” God save the Queen, what would the world be without the Brits? Let us not forget that Guy Fawkes, the only man ever to enter Parliament with honourable intentions, was also a Brit. We Brits must stick together like glue gravy suckled from His Majesty’s Bollocks. And no Brit worth his wife’s bollocks would fail to reply (this is the fifth reply, and not a fortnight has passed) to a post that specifically asked that no replies be made to it. God loves the Brits, and he has a sense of humour. They really do stand out in the mid day sun, with or without mad dogs.--75.4.202.97 (talk) 21:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Guy Fawkes was English, not British. Parrot of Doom 22:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

You can't expect the Yanks to know anything everything. How do I know this is a Yank? "His Majesty". We haven't had a king for well over 50 years.

I had an Amanda King once, but that must have been about 20 years ago. Fred the Oyster (talk) 22:10, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

OK then. I haven't had a king for over 50 years then. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:24, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Come now Malleus. It isn't fair to deride a man over his country's lack of any interesting history. He probably doesn't even hail from one of the many colonies or cities to be named after their homeland. Canada even has its own London, with a River Thames, bless. Parrot of Doom 22:11, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Ironically, my wife is currently watching some God awful Gordon Ramsay programme set in the United States where he continually refers to spring onions as "scallions" and prawns as "shrimp". Dear me. Americans, generally clueless at best, are like a fungal infection of your intimate body parts at worst. What does make me smile is when you meet Americans in the UK; to a man they relentlessly bang on about how great America is. Well if it's that bloody great piss of back there. We didn't want you in the UK in the fist place. Pedro :  Chat  22:32, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

They do though have a certain naive innocence that I find quite charming – not the city folk of course, but the hicks – and I just llluuuvvv that accent. At least when i can understand it I do. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

A fair point sir. And on that note, Goodnight John-Boy......... Goodnight Mary Ellen. :) Pedro :  Chat  22:42, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

We generally visit the UK to remind ourselves how great the States are in comparison. :) --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:47, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

One thing my trip to the States taught me (only been there once, to California and Nevada, which I guess isn't typical of the rest of the country) is that the US is mainly empty space. You certainly don't get too much of that in the UK. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:50, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm trapped on the east coast, but prefer the West for that very reason. I'm surrounded by far to many idiots here; they're spaced much further apart out west. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:57, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

On my several trips to the states the only thing I found wrong with America, was it was full of Americans. Had it been full of Manchunians I would have considered relocating. Fred the Oyster (talk) 22:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Americans have got lots of things wrong. Look at the lack of kettles in the country for instance. How the Hell are you supposed to make a decent cup of tea without a quick and easy supply of boiling water? Mind you, they do get some things right as well. I just love driving my wife's Jeep Grand Cherokee. Talk about effortless, brutal power ... better stop now, getting over-excited, starting to sound like Jeremy Clarkson, and that can't possibly be a good thing. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:07, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

You might want to wikilink Jeremy Clarkson for our American brethren. And Fred, you remind me of the Jack Dee joke that France is great except that it's filled up with the f'ing French! Pedro :  Chat  23:10, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

That's a pretty common meme. We had an old Danish family friend who said the same thing about Norway. "It's a truly beautiful country, shame about all the Norwegians". It used to drive him insane that all the Americans he knew considered Danes, Swedes, and Norwegians pretty much completely interchangeable. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:21, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps uniquely among the English I actually like the French; they're in many ways just like us. Not surprising really when you think that they invaded us over 1,000 years ago and never left, and in fact my surname suggests that I might even be one of them. The key thing with the French is to remember that they're even worse at learning foreign languages than we are, so if you just make a bit of an effort to speak French they're fine. I've been in Spain watching French tourists do exactly what the English are often accused of doing: speaking very slowly and loudly to someone who clearly has no idea what you're saying. One time, after having had my fill of entertainment, I actually offered to translate; all they wanted was some postage stamps. Job done, I took off my superhero suit and went on my way. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:23, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Fatuorum isn't French... How gullible do you think we Colonials are? --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:27, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Very. How many alien abductions reports have there been in the States? (Well, you did ask :lol:) --Malleus Fatuorum 23:33, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

They can't even make chocolate, or good coffee. The French call Colonial coffee "Sock water". Parrot of Doom 23:32, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Thomas of Bayeux

He's ready... Ealdgyth - Talk 15:06, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Gunpowder Plot

I asked for protection. I'm pretty bloody sick of these idiotic little acts of vandalism. By the way, I just noticed how absolutely huge that article is :) Parrot of Doom 16:42, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Good idea. It's a great piece of work, be a shame to see it turned into the more typical wikishit. --Malleus Fatuorum 16:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Marwari horse

Hi Malleus! I know that you always have a bunch of requests for your wonderful copyediting skills lined up, but would you be able to add another one to the list? I've been working on Marwari horse on and off for a while now, and would like to take it to FAC if possible. Besides copyediting, I would like your opinion on whether the article is thorough enough to make it at FAC - I've included all of the reliably sourced scraps of information that I could find on the breed, but I'm worried that there may still be too many holes to meet the comprehensiveness criteria. If you could let me know what you think, it would be much appreciated! Thanks in advance, Dana boomer (talk) 16:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm very far from the best to ask about horses, but I'll have a look. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:24, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

February GA Sweeps update

Progress as of January 2010

Thanks to everyone's efforts to the GA Sweeps process, we are currently over 95% done with around 130 articles left to be swept! Currently there are over 50 members participating in Sweeps, that averages out to about 3 articles per person! If each member reviews an article once a week this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. At that point, awards will be handed out to reviewers. Per my message last month, although we did not review 100 articles last month, I still made a donation of $90 (we had 90 reviews completed/initiated) to Wikipedia Forever on behalf of all GA Sweeps reviewers. I would like to thank everyone's efforts for last month, and ask for additional effort this month so we can be finished. I know you have to be sick of seeing these updates (as well as Sweeps itself) by now, so please do consider reviewing a few articles if you haven't reviewed in a while. If you have any questions about reviews or Sweeps let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 02:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Unbelievable

I'm sorry you got dragged into this. Parrot of Doom 17:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

No worries. I was getting pissed of with wikipedia again anyway. There's only a certain amount of stupidity and dishonesty I can stomach. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:53, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

If you were in the US, I'd suggest watching the SuperBowl ... but somehow I suspect you wouldn't enjoy it much. At least no Janet Jackson this halftime...Ealdgyth - Talk 18:00, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't have TV reception and don't give a shit about football anyway. Last week I had a dream where I was standing in a shallow river with dozens of other people. A Florida spring-fed stream that was clear blue with white sand underneath. Awadewit was there, although I've never met her. Upriver were some buildings, homes, and cars, and in the dream I looked upriver to see a massive mudslide breaking houses apart and carrying cars along. All the people began to run out of the way. I turned to run as well and I woke up. I've since interpreted this to mean that the mudslide is Wikipedia. Get out of the way or not. It does not care. --Moni3 (talk) 18:15, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Blocked

I blocked you and Roux. Putting aside whose definition of "civility" you ascribe to, Wikipedia is not a battleground, and forums such as the Content Noticeboard and Administrators Noticeboard are not venues for you to drag out the same accusations, attacks, and vitrol. So you think Roux is a hypocrite? Congrats, you've made your point many, many times. Comment on the relevant thread, not a participant with whom you have beef. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 17:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

You're a fucking idiot from whom I had no higher expectations than this stupidity. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs, you have not specified the incidents as grounds for blocked 2 editors. This is certainly againt natural justice, and I expect WP to have some policies and/or guidelines about such incidents. I suggest you suggest explain the incidents and the relevant policies and/or guidelines which will prived the grounds for your block. --Philcha (talk) 18:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

What a total gross abuse of the block tool. I have commented on David's talk page and suggested he might like to take a little more time out before he wields the block button next time. Foolish would be the best word for his actions. Pedro :  Chat  21:16, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

ANI notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Interaction ban requested. Thank you. Equazcion ^(talk) 18:51, 7 Feb 2010 (UTC)

I note that the initiator of that thread did not have the decency to inform me himself. No surprise there frankly. Those who bleat loudest about incivility are almost invariably the most uncivil. --Malleus Fatuorum 18:54, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Malleus, I'm sorry I was too busy to join your block party, but I see we're at ANI at the same time. Bud !!! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:59, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah what fun. I think I'll sit this one out though, I've had just about as much as I can stand of that particular editor and his friends for one day. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

As much as you can stand? What the fuck? You're the one who started harassing me, you have been doing so for months--for fuck's sake, you showed up at my talkpage in August to ask me a question, which I responded to extremely politely, only to have you throw it in my face. You showed up at ANI to harass me when I had said absofuckinglutely nothing to you, and indeed had said nothing about civility, but had merely pointed out that a given comment was unconstructive. I did not notify you here of the thread because I do not want anything to do with you. I just want you to stay the fuck away from me, and believe me, I am happy to return the fucking favour. Your bullshit over at Fuchs' page--initiate a case against me? for what exactly?--was really just icing on the cake. Leave. Me. Alone. → ROUX ₪ 19:05, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Repeated personal attacks (I don't give a shit about your habitual incivility) and harrassment, for starters. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

What harassment? Where? Entirely in your own head. Or are you complaining that I called you on your bullshit at the Content noticeboard? Is that what's got your knickers in a twist? Well, again, let's go back to where we use these fun things called facts: you were browbeating Ohms Law (someone I have absolutely no time for), but I was in agreement with your goal. I pointed out that your behaviour was unacceptable, but your end goal was correct. Apparently there's something wrong with that? Uh-huh. And personal attacks? Where? Truth is an absolute justification. Just leave me alone, ok? → ROUX ₪ 19:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Uh, Roux? If you want MF to leave you alone, it might be best to .. not post on his talk page. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Uh, Eladgyth? I reserve the right to defend myself against lies and mistruths. → ROUX ₪ 19:18, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

(ec)So reserve it then, but you really should find another venue to actually cash it in. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 19:21, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

So, basically, you want MF to not say anything about you ever again, but you can come here and post until you feel like you've finished defending yourself? So it's a one sided interaction ban? Gotcha. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:19, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

No. If he voluntarily agrees to simply never discuss me onwiki again, I will be more than happy to do the same. As long as he is telling lies about me, however, I will defend myself. → ROUX ₪ 19:23, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

So what does Malleus get out of this one-sided bargain? --Fred the Oyster (talk) 19:24, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I fail to see why he should 'get anything' out of being required to stop harassing me. → ROUX ₪ 19:25, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Why should he stop discussing you? If your position is sound, use a cogent argument to defend yourself. It isn't difficult, is it? You're not Hugo Chavez, are you? Parrot of Doom 19:30, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Sheesh, PoD, with that well placed comment on a certain politician, you may have just earned a picture after all !! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:03, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

(ec)You weren't proferring a requirement, you were attempting to broker a deal. "if you will, I will etc". So I say again, what benefit to Malleus is this deal you are suggesting? --Fred the Oyster (talk) 19:37, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Way to miss the point. Well done. → ROUX ₪ 19:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Alas I think the glove is on the other foot. If you aren't fully cognisant of what it is you are requesting I'd suggest 'using' someone else's word skills. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 19:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Because it is against policy for him to harass me? I think that is more than reason enough. It is not incumbent upon the victim to argue why they should not be victimized. → ROUX ₪ 19:34, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

It is incumbent on the 'victim' to demonstrate that they are actually being harassed though. So far it's only your opinion that he is. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 19:38, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Ah yes, one must stick up for one's friends, whether right or wrong. I have no further use for you. → ROUX ₪ 19:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

It's a bit presumptive of you to think that I am available for your use. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 19:46, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

You're no fun ... let's get circus tickets and go together ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:04, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

There's too much f'ing on this page ... I need a cold shower. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Pics or it didn't happen. Parrot of Doom 19:13, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, no f'ing pics. Wouldn't want to stir Malleus up when he's already hot and bothered. [2] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:30, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

:( Parrot of Doom 19:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Totally changing the subject... but...

Did you check out my changes to Thomas of Bayeux? I'm sure I've mispelled something in there... you know me. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:51, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Not yet ... been a bit distracted over the past couple of days. I'll get to it later if I'm not blocked again by then. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:53, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Nokian

I am so sorry to see that you arewere blocked. I am too busy at the moment to investigate exactly what happened unless you want me too. I came here to thank you for your Nokian comments. At first, I was a little ticked off at your opposition to FA (Nokian Tyres) but I've come up with a plan that will takes weeks to execute. I have ideas for much more content, interesting stuff for the article. That and prose improvements planned. Try not to get mad and leave Wikipedia, for I still need your editorial help. Try to act in an exemplary fashion and don't let others who don't make you degenerate to their level. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 21:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Ticking people off is a skill I seem to have off pat Suomi, but I assure you that it was completely unintentional on my part in this case. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:34, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

arrrhh

I've only got as far as the "Primary sources..." bit, but is this section a bit...piratey? I've tried to make it a little more exciting than the usual fare, as everyone likes a good pirate yarn, although nothing has been invented. Lee's explanation of events is a little bit colourful (presumably all taken from contemporary reports, of which there are several). I'm hoping more sources that I have coming will offer more in the way of an explanation as to what may, or may not, have happened. Parrot of Doom 19:58, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

It's a bit too flowery for my taste: "Several more moved in to finish him, and finally the notorious pirate was dead." It says twice as well that Teach was shot five times, once is probably enough? --Malleus Fatuorum 20:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah that bit can probably go. The five times bit - haven't got that far yet :P Parrot of Doom 20:26, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

What think yee of it now, you scurvy dog? Parrot of Doom 22:11, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I think you've done a really good job with that, very impressive. Just one question: "The attacking force had no less than 58 men—the 2 pilots, 32 men under Maynard's command, and 22 under Hyde's." That seems to make 56, not 58, and I find the "no less that" a bit strange as well. "At least"? Where did the others come from? --Malleus Fatuorum 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, its meant to include the two commanders, Maynard and Hyde, but I admit that isn't at first clear. The "no less than" is supposed to reflect against Teach, who had only 15 or so mangy pirate dogs. Can you suggest an alternative? Parrot of Doom 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd just drop the "no less than", doesn't seem to add much except potential confusion. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

What about something like "The attacking force of 56 men – 32 under the command of Maynard and 22 under Hyde, plus the 2 pilots – ...". --Malleus Fatuorum 01:12, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I removed the 'no less than' bit, maybe it could use a ", however, ". Trouble is with your phrasing is that the 2 pilots (I suppose) could have been called into action, if things had got worse. Parrot of Doom 01:17, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

That's why I said 56: 32 + 22 +2. The pilots were certainly part of the attacking force, whether they intended to fight or not. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:58, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, think I'll leave it as it is for now. I want this for FAC anyway so I'll let them fight over it :) Thanks for the help. Parrot of Doom 01:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Issue

I need SM U-10 (Austria-Hungary) and SM U-11 (Austria-Hungary) to be brought up to GA class before I can get German Type UB I submarine to GT status. Can you tell me what else is needed prior to a GAN of both of these articles?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 03:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't have any experience reviewing articles, but I think I have spotted some minor things that need fixing. For both articles, I think the lead needs some citations. There are some red links in SM U-11, so they either need be fixed (if there's article for them) or removed (if, of course, there are none). Just my inexperienced two cents, so I'll leave what needs to be done up to Malleus. ;) --Twilight Helryx 04:08, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

The lead does;nt need citations per WP:LEAD. Anyway, it does'nt matter. They are not in the same topic as they belong in the Austro-Hungarian Navy. Not the German Navy as the GTC implies. I removed the other 3 AH subs articles form the GTC as well. Perhaps now the nom will pass.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 04:14, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Mm-kay, as I said, I'm inexperienced with these (not to mention it was only a quick look). ;) Good luck with the nom.--Twilight Helryx 04:17, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I hope that it passes. There will be a debate as to wither or nor the Austro-Hungarian U-boast are the same thing and should be classified as such (which would result in a failed nom as 2 of them are not GA yet) or if they need to be "German" type UE I subs. (in which case it passes as all of the articles are GA class)--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 04:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

They both look fine for GAN to me. Might be worth asking for someone from the Military History project to take a look through if you haven't already, but I'd nominate them at GAN now if I were you. --Malleus Fatuorum 13:42, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll nominate them right now as soon as I get another opinion.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 21:59, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Those tenses don't match CE. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 22:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean. Oh I should have said that I'll nominate them as soon as I get another opinon. Why did I put "right now"?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 22:08, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Man! someone beat me to nominateing U-10. Oh well. At least I still have U-11 to nominate. Of course Bellhalla gets credit for the GAN as well as he wrote 85% of the article. (Thinks to self, hmmm...perhaps this may be my first GA to pass)--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 23:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

The nomination doesn't matter spit. What matters is what you know you've contributed to the article. I routinely refuse co-nominations at FAC becauee I know that I haven't contributed anything to the article's content; it's not a competition, and there are no winners. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:24, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

True. Well I have enlarged (in terms of bytes) the article by about 25%. I've added soem more refs and about 5 sentences ect ect. I think that It will pass a GAN now. I'm not looking to "win", just to get a GAN of any kind.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 23:52, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Let me share something with you CE. I've made many mistakes in my wikipedia career, most egregiously upsetting a few who subsequently rose to positions of power within wikipedia's risible system of governance. One admin in particular (was at the time called Rudget, but he's had more name changes that I've had have breakfasts, so I've no idea what he calls himself now) took me to WQA and ANI because he wanted to be the one who took Didsbury to GA, and he felt I was ruining his chances by editing it too much and too quickly. His admin coach had of course told him that a GA or two would be viewed favourably at RfA. Don't fall into the same trap. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:17, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Malleus there's nothing wrong with awards and recognition. Lots of people collect them and proudly display their accomplishments. Don't be such a prude. If I weren't so lazy I would give you some kind of barnstar for your many good efforts. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:19, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

What trap? I'm not really looking to further myself but rather this site. While I would love to get a GAN for me to proudly display at my userpage. I dont need to. People get this sense of acomplishment when they do stuff like this and I'm no diffrent.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 00:22, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) There is a great deal wrong with a culture that says you can be an administrator if you make 5,000 mainspace edits, write at least one GA/FA, comment on at least 100 AfDs, be bland enough so as to avoid any blocks, and stick your nose into every ANI so that you'll be noticed by the diminishing number of disinterested editors who bother to turn up at RfA. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:29, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree but I doubt that things will not change. It's things like that that made me write User:Coldplay Expert/Wikipedia is falling apart. Sadly, in order to pass an RFA, you have to have those things.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 00:34, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Life is about making choices, and living with those choices. You can either accept the status quo or you can can choose to be what I am, an unreasonable man: "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." --Malleus Fatuorum 00:41, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Butting in (sorry Malleus, watched your page after your nice comments on SandyGeorgia's page): the alternative is simply to edit. Don't worry about stars and little questions marks, etc. Just edit. The best way to improve the place (in my view as a relatively new editor) is to work on a few articles from the dusty corners, to be found over at the copyeditor page. Simply edit, work on your writing, learn how to format, etc. All that should be the point of being here. (Going away now....) Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:46, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I made nice comments on SandyG's page? Are you absolutely certain it was me, and not an imposter? Usually I'm telling her what a slag she is, and she's telling me what a dick I am. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes but you fighting the status quo just get's you blocked. You are in no position to change anything (and as for me, I have an even less chance) You have more FA/GA than I can count and yet you can't seem to get things to go the way that you (and others) want them to. How in the world can I cange anything? I'm just a "kid".--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 00:57, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Fairly nice. I meant to leave a note to thank you, and watched your page to remind myself. This is an interesting conversation you're having, particularly for newer editors who, in my view, tend to get caught up with all the twinklies when there's a mountain of work to be done. Apologies for butting in! Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:00, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

"Yes but you fighting the status quo just get's you blocked. You are in no position to change anything." You have much to learn grasshopper. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:18, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Your comment about Sandy being a slag and your being a dick is the only thing that has made me laugh all day. Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 01:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Are y'all gonna let me pack or not? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

(@ Malleus) but it's true isn't it? That's why you failed your two RFA's right?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 01:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Failing an RFA is a symptom of the problem. It isn't the problem. Unless of course one wants to be an admin just for the "glory". Parrot of Doom 01:34, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)You don;t get it. I never said that It was the problem. I said that that was an example of how the system is broken. If it was fixed then Malleus would have passed. (In theory) I never said anything about the "glory" of becomeing an admin. That's why I took off that UBX on my Userpage about me wanting to be one someday. I realized that I wanted it for the wrong reasons.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 01:42, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't referring to you when I said "one", I meant in general. But you know what really changes this encyclopaedia? Good articles. No, actually, fucking good articles. That's what 99.9% of the readers want to see here, and giving them those articles is infinitely more important than silly complaints about people using rude words, or some minor policy not being followed to the letter of the law, or somebody being called a cunt. Believe me, when you get your first FA, and then your first TFA, you'll be much happier than you ever would if you chose to try for admin status. Parrot of Doom 01:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I don;t belive in self-noms. I have said it in the past and I'll say it again, I will never nominate myself for adminship. And to be honest, I don;t even know if I wold accept any nom at all. I also doubt that I can write a FA, much less than a TFA. Perhaps a co-nom with someone on a page like German Type UB I submarine or World War II (of wich I have over 100 edits to) or some other article that I contribute to. I can't see German Type UE II submarine or SM U-118 ever being promoted to even GA class.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 01:55, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Of course you'll be able to write an FA. You're still learning, I'm still learning. Read plenty of books, see how people write. Listen to advice, become a cynic. Let people like Malleus copyedit your articles. Watch and learn, because Malleus is so old that soon enough he'll forget which articles he's supposed to edit, and he'll be relying on you to check he hasn't made mistakes. Parrot of Doom 01:59, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Very funny. However there is a diffrence between writeing and promoteing. I can be a major contributor to an article and promote it to FA. But I will need alot more sources (books that I own) to write an FA myself. Thanks for the support though :)--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

That's why we have libraries :) Real buildings, with row upon row of books to borrow, for free! Parrot of Doom 02:14, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Um...I can;t go anywere right now. I'n snowed in. Now, Im off to expand teh UB I sub article. I'll come back in a bit.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:19, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Look at the first RfA. Which admin do you see jumping in there to oppose, and think about why he opposed. Sure, it's perfectly true that I'll never be an administrator here, but it ought to be equally clear that I'd be embarrassed to be associated with what passes for decency and honesty here. You have choices to make; I've made mine, you will have to make yours. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I doubt that I would become an admin EVER. But in the unlikely chance that I ever do, I would;nt think of it as being part of what passes for decency and honesty here. Would;nt you being an admin actually further your cause to change things here? After all, you would be "important" and people may actually listen to you.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 01:45, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Any editor who volunteers for adminship should automatically disbarred from asking ever again. Admins should be invitees based on their performance, their editing and social skills. It's very much like politicians, i.e. the person wanting to be a politician is most probably the wrong person for the job as there is ALWAYS a personal agenda involved. Have you spotted the drawback with invited appointments though? --Fred the Oyster (talk) 01:53, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Dugh! If it would be an invitee process then only budy-budy's would ever get the position. We would have more idiot-like admins who don;t know what the heck they are doing.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 01:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Tell that to Octavian :) Parrot of Doom 02:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

What?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Ah but you are looking at it as the situation is now, how about if that procedure had been adopted right at the start? --Fred the Oyster (talk) 02:07, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

We can't even have a revolution and chop off their heads...damn..Vive La Prole ! 02:09, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm soooo confused.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Maybe Jimbo and Wikipedia staff should have been the only ones to choose admins. Ah, if only more people understood that "with great power, comes great responsibility" (no denying that admins do have powerful tools) then Wikipedia would be a much better place.--Twilight Helryx 02:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I wonder how many people realise that Jimbo is just a bloody programmer, not a new messiah. It's true what little black book said: "the geeks shall inherit the earth". --Fred the Oyster (talk) 02:25, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Uh, I didn't say he was. -_-" I meant to say that the people in charge of this place should have made the admin decisions from the start. But, alas, it is much too late for that.--Twilight Helryx 02:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

No it isn't. Boycott RfA for a few months and watch the navel-gazers start to panic. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm...Sounds like a plan to me Malleus. =3 Good thing I'm not in habit of hanging around RfA.  ;) --Twilight Helryx 02:43, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I am.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:46, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Better go someplace else now, Coldplay. I'd like to see how a boycott would turn out (though I think it needs to be organized to be effective). As a side (and off-topic) note, I just realized that "Malleus Fatuorum" means "Hammer of Fate" in Latin.--Twilight Helryx 02:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

No it doesn't; it means hammer of fools. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:55, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Rats! I got the stems confused (they both have "fatu-"; the difference is in how they are pronounced). >_>" --Twilight Helryx 03:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Well how would we organize a boycott of the RFA? to get anywere we would need dozens of participants and a goal.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 03:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I guess someone creates a sub-page and publicizes it someplace for things like this with high traffic, like maybe the RfA talk and/or Jimbo's talk page.--Twilight Helryx 03:07, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Anyone up for something like that?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 03:12, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I would do it if my schedule isn't so cramped right now (I'm won't go into detail, but I'll tell you that I'm at a very critical point in my life). Such a page would require some careful thinking and good rhetoric, which I sadly don't have the luxury to spend time on. What about you, Malleus?--Twilight Helryx 03:16, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I have a feling that he's sleeping. And you don't have to make the page, just put your name on it. I would start sucha thing but I don;t carry any weight with my comments. It would be a joke if I started a thing like that.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 03:19, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

If I made a page, I would try to make it persuasive so people will join the effort. ;) I'll outline it in my spare time, but I welcome anyone to make/contribute to it.--Twilight Helryx 03:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Wait, before we get knee-ddep in this idea, Malleus, would you be willing to participate in such an idea? Createing a wikipedia page on "Boycotting RFA's" and spreading the word, trying to get people to join. And hopefully changeing the way the process is run?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 03:32, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Because your opinion matters. =) --Twilight Helryx 03:34, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

My advice would be don't do it. Let nature take its course. Softly, softly, catchee monkey. --Malleus Fatuorum 03:39, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Just leave it at status quo?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 03:44, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia depends on volunteers like you, and entices them with the idea of being an administrator, able to block mere mortals like me. If nobody put themselves forward at RfA the crisis would become evident pretty quickly, but sadly the reality is much more selfish than that. No need for you to get caught in the crossfire. --Malleus Fatuorum 03:54, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Wait, does that mean that you want or at least think that I should be an admin someday? And how is the reality more selfish? CAn you explain a bit more?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 03:59, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

No. It means that I think wikipedia's governance is broken beyond repair, but it is being temporarily shored up by those who present themselves at RfA. --Malleus Fatuorum 04:05, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

So, who should be running Wikipedia? And what's your opinion on how to repair the "broken governance"?--Twilight Helryx 04:16, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Who gives a shit? I'm here to help build a free encylopedia; my only hope is that our freely given content will survive wikipedia's inevitable death. --Malleus Fatuorum 04:55, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

What's a willy ?

Darn you, Malleus, I just set up a joke six editors deep, and you removed it ! I hadn't even gotten to Karanacs and Ealdgyth yet. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, just restore it. I thought you were feeling sorry for yourself, but I was probably projecting. Have at it young lady! --Malleus Fatuorum 02:11, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Too late now, you spoiled all my fun! Moni3 arrived here and didn't get to vote. I'll go away and feel sorry for myself while I pack! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I've said before that even tough nuts like us have feelings, and I was afraid that you'd taken my "slag" comment the wrong way. But I see that Moni3 turned up regardless. Honestly, I'm not a male chauvinist pig ... on reflection I probably am. :lol: --Malleus Fatuorum 02:22, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

You foiled my plan :) I was going to make The Fat Man click through ten editor pages to get here to call me names! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:35, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

A portable toy one can take anywhere. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 02:05, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

That was a joke? You are a slag.

That's just normal Wikipedia confusion, like in the WIAFA talk page where, just when clarity is needed especially, folks start posting...

all

the

way

over

here.

--Moni3 (talk) 02:08, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

All someone needs to do is some funky ASCII art here now and we'd be rolling. Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:11, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I was getting to you, when Malleus stopped the party ... <grrrr ... > SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:15, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Jeez, I feel like a shit now. How many ways can I say I'm sorry? (The ASCII art does look nice btw Moni3) --Malleus Fatuorum 03:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Send chocolate :) Don't feel bad; I had fun anyway. Beats packing ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:33, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

?? I've used all kinds of media, including white boards and markers, crayons, and bar napkins, but I didn't do the ASCIE reptile below. Give credit to whomever it is due. --Moni3 (talk) 16:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

                                            tfGj:  jGDDf,     ,,
                                   ,,:     :GLLGDLLDGDGGGj   jLLj.   :
                                  :DDDEDft,fGGLGDLLEDDGGGDL.fLfLDG :fDf
                                   GDDGDDWKLDLLDGLGDDDDGDKKLLGfGLGLDDGD;
                             :LLGGjfDGDDGEKDfGGLGGLGDDDEDKDGLGLLGLLDEGGDf
                             LGGGGDDDEEDEELGfGGLDLGEGEKWDLGLGLLLGDGELGGD: :ti
                        :,,,:;GLGGGDGGDKEKKGGLDGDGKDEDGKEfGLELDLDLGEGDEK.tDfG;
                        fGDKWDGGGGGGDGEEGLDGLjjtt;;;itttjjfjLLGEDDDGKWELGGLLDGjLL
                        GDDEKLLLGDDDDGLtttiiii;;;;;i;;ii;iiiiiitjfLGKtfLGGGGDEGGG
         .   .      .jGDDEEDKKDGGLLttttiiitttiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii;itifGDGDDDDGGj ..
  .:   , i   i.     LGLGEGDDDGLftiittjfjjtjttttttii;itjjjiii;;;tiii;iiiitLGGGDED;tGf,
   ;,   tf.  i,  jjjLGDDGDGLtiii;itiijLLLfjttittttii;itffjjttttttiitittiii;tff:fLGDED,
    it   Gt. jj ;DDWGfffji;;iitttttjtffGEGffjti;;;ii;iijffjt;ttttiiitii;iii;;itDDEEEGif:
:   if,.GfG;fj,;fjjjttiiiitiiiiijjtjtijDEDGjjtti;;;;;;iLjt;iii;;tjttttii;tiii,;jfLiiGEEii
.,;tjLLjjjjjttiiitt;;;iiiittttjttjfffLDEEEDGfjjjii;tttijLii;iiitffjjt;,;,iijtiiii;;tfLfiL,,,..
       .:,;itjjjjjffLLLGLLGfffLLjfjttfEEDEEEDDGjfLtiiiiitGjftiitLjjtfjjtii;ti;i;,;iittttttjjLfttti,
                                      :tLGDDDDDDfjfjtiittDffjjjfLLDDLiiij;ttjitiiiiiittjfLLLLLLj;ii
                                        ;DDGDDEDDGfjffjt;DELfGLGDEEGtttitfGGGLGLjfLLLLfjtii;:..
                                      :jDDDEEGGGEDDfjtjtiLEDDDDEEEGftttiGDDDEGLfi,:..
                                     :LGGGDDDL,,itGGjjjjjfffLGDDDDGLjiii;;GDEDfii,
                                    .LGGGDft;     ,GLjjti.     :,jGjti;   .LDGfti;,.
                                   :LGGGj:         iGftii:       .Gjti;      ,tLfjji:
                                  .LGDG.            .Gftt.        iLii;:        ;GLjt.
                                   GDGf.             jftt;         Lfjt,        :DLjt,
                                  ;GjGj,            ,GLttji:      .DLtii,       ;fffLt
                                    DtED;             KGt;EtG      DDf;KiG          E

user page protection

Seems like you have a fan on a dynamic IP. I've semiprotected your user page indefinitely, since this seems to be a recurring problem. If for some reason you don't want that, just say the word. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, that's fine with me. --Malleus Fatuorum 15:39, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Anthony Roll at FAC

I've nominated Anthony Roll for FAC. The nomination can be found at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Anthony Roll/archive1. You are most welcome to contribute to the review of the article.

Peter ^Isotalo 16:53, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Are you sure you want me to comment on the article? Sometimes my opinion "ticks people off", as you'll see above. --Malleus Fatuorum 16:56, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I dropped a note here because you took an interest in improving the article by making a lot of useful improvements before it went on DYK. I don't have any urge to engage in bickering, but I'm not going to withdraw an open invitation. If you have useful constructive for improvements, I don't mind hearing you out.

Peter ^Isotalo 19:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

You're very kind. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:25, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The Avery Coonley School archived

Hi. The Avery Coonley School FAC was archived before I had the benefit of additional comments. To be honest, I was less hopeful about the nomination itself than about getting feedback that might make it a successful FAC at some point in the future. I would welcome any comments you might have in that vein, since you clearly have a wealth of experience (and I clearly do not). If your time and inclination allow, I would appreciate any feedback you could offer. Thanks. Nasty Housecat (talk) 17:26, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry I didn't get back to the review, but you've got a big advantage with this school in that it's got a great history, so I'm sure it could be an FA with a little bit of work. My major problem with the article was that it looked almost like a school brochure rather than a neutral account of the school and its history. Have you taken it to peer review? Let me know if you do and I'll comment there. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:39, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Treading on your toes

Hey, I hope you don't think I'm treading on your toes but Canteruby just "hit" me. I'm off to York tomorrow so I was just reading some background stuff, I like to appear knowledgeable to the "ale suppers" I hang around with! :-) --J3Mrs (talk) 20:15, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Not in the slightest, and I'm sure that Ealdgyth will be very grateful for your fixes as well. The more eyes the better. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:17, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

‎ (moved my comma, about all I'm fit for apparently)??? Not like you!!! --J3Mrs (talk) 20:29, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I was being ironic. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 20:30, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

(pstttt) Don't tell MF, but I leave in extra commas just so he feels useful... Ealdgyth - Talk 20:32, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I know you do. You also pretend not to be able to spell words like "honour" properly. I'm exceedingly grateful to you, as otherwise I'd have nothing to do here, except hang around waiting to be blocked – again. :lol: --Malleus Fatuorum 20:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Drat. My sneaky attempts to teach you to spell "honor" and "favor" properly aren't getting through... drat, drat, drat! Ealdgyth - Talk 21:59, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I hope you didn't mind me poking my nose in either Ealdgyth, York is one of my favourite places and the Minster is just amazing, especially from the top of the tower. --J3Mrs (talk) 22:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I never mind copyediting, as long as it's careful with the sourcing. I hope to see York Minster this summer, we're taking mother to Europe and one of the days we're in London we're planning on leaving her behind (she's 79 and not THAT interested in architecture) and takign the train up to Durham and York to see both minsters. Otherwise we're doing London and surroundings for a week and a half then catching a cruise around the Baltic for 32 days... it'll be wonderful! Ealdgyth - Talk 23:08, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

24 Waterfall salute!

Thanks for your advice on FAC vs. FLC. Waterfalls in Ricketts Glen State Park made Featured Article today! Dincher (talk) and Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

FYI

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Malleus_Fatuorum_reengaging_Roux Gerardw (talk) 22:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey there Malleus. I wanted to let you know that rather than let this thing spiral out of control, I have removed both your comment and the ANI thread.[3][4] Can you please try to avoid engaging Roux? NW (Talk) 22:56, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. Roux needs to be reined in. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Errr, so would this be a really bad time to ping you about Marwari horse? *grin* Dana boomer (talk) 23:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

No, a good time actually. I'll be there shortly. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

... Actually I won't; I'm sick to death with this place. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:33, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh, poop. Wish you wouldn't leave, you're one of the better editors (and copyeditors) around here, and I would ask you to stay just to continue reading masterpieces such as the ones you've consistently produced, even if you never copyedited one of my articles again. Well, best of luck in whatever you decide to pursue in your new leisure time, and I hope to see you back around after a restful vacation. (Hope none of that is too patronizingly American, per the above conversation...it's meant to simply be friendly!) Dana boomer (talk) 03:41, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Bestest vandalism ever

[5] Parrot of Doom 00:07, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Petlyakov Pe-8

Auntieruth55 has been kind enough to clean up the text; I ask reviewers to reread the article to see if their objections have been met.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:45, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

"This is a perfect example of why I refuse to have any of these gaudy bits; they're just treated as baubles to be handed out and taken away at the whim of any passing administrator who's having a bad hair day."

Well said! Andy Dingley (talk) 12:41, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Whoa..

I miss two and a half days because of the great North American Blizzard of 2010 and I come back to see that Roux has returned and you all got into a fight and you eventually got blocked for an hour. What the heck happened in the past 48 hours?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 21:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Beats me. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:52, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Well did Roux just start it out of the blue or something?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 21:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Best not to dwell on it, it's over now as far as I'm concerned. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Alright then.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 22:24, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Sleeping dogs, CPE. Sleeping dogs. Sometimes protesting what may be right is better and more simply dropped in favour of safe guarding what is expedient. Pedro :  Chat  22:32, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I remember advising the late-lamented Ottava Rima to choose his battles more discriminatingly. Nobody can fight every injustice on here; most just have to accepted with as much grace as can be mustered, even if that's none. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Some things never change. 1. Jimbo ignores every other comment on his page, 2. The most rediculous threads can be started on the ANI, and 3. Malleus is like Simon Cowell, he's harsh but honest.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 22:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Simon Cowell or some derivative of green seaside leaves in the Kale family I've never heard of? :) Pedro :  Chat  22:54, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh crap. How did I spell that wrong?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 22:55, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd be interested in your opinion on something CE, particularly as you and I haven't always seen eye to eye. I'd make a very large bet that I'm a lot older than you are, mainly because I know you've said in several places that you're a "minor". There's a lot of talk about wikipedia not being "child-friendly" (I'm not calling you a child, but you can probably remember being one more clearly than I can), so do you think I ought to temper what I say depending on how old I think the editor I'm responding to is? --Malleus Fatuorum 22:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

No offense taken to the comment. I too have a feeling that you'r alot older than me. Now as for the question, it would depend on the situation. Now I doubt that you would need to if you were taking to Julian as he seems to be fairly mature. Long story short, Yes (in most cases)--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 23:00, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

What a very interesting question and dynamic to the wiki concept. I'd be fascinated by CPE's thoughts on this if he/she is indeed a minor. As a father of two unruly brats beautiful children the meta elements of this are quite profound both personally and for WP. Pedro :  Chat  23:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

They are. Some editors we know the ages of but most we don't, and most youngsters are discouraged from revealing their ages anyway. Yet if I don't know how old you are, how can I tailor my responses to your life experience? Could this be at the root of at least some of the strife on here? I wouldn't tell, for a 12-year-old girl (or boy) to "fuck off", for instance, but I'd have no hesitation in telling an 18-year-old to do exactly that, in spades. Or is it that we're all expecting to treat each other like 12-year-olds, which I for one would find very insulting. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

The simple answer is to treat people as you find them, regardless of age. I know people older than me who are little better than teenagers, and I know of children who would shame adults with their clear thinking. PS - did you see my pirate comment up there? Parrot of Doom 23:13, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

(@Pedro, yes I am a "minor" but just to let you know, Im a guy)Look, WP does not have to be "Child-Friendly" Those who think that it does need to "grow-up" themselves. You can't have the whole site tailored to the specific needs to a certain age group. Yes, there does seem to be a bias against minors here but look, that's all the more reason to present yourself as a very mature and productive editor. Outright comments like "s/he's a minor so s/he's must be immature and a total idiot are going to be ignored by the majority of the community. I hope that this answers the question as I did;nt really get waht you were asking for. You don't need to treat us all like 12 yrs. Heck, I'm older than that! But you may want to try to see what the person's age is before cussing them out. Over 16 IMO may be ok but under...maybe not.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 23:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

In other words, Forget about the age and foucus more on their skill and ability to edit. There are some fine teenagers on this site no doubt and there are of course those who are not. On sense putting them all into the same category.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 23:18, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I wonder why 12 was picked? Most of the 12 year olds round here I would have no problem telling to fuck off. Come to think of it I doubt I'd have a problem with it for most 12 year olds in the Noughties. A 12 year old in the 70s or 80s or earlier, now tha twould be an entirely different matter. A 12 year in my neck of the woods in 2010 is more likely to respond to being told to fuck off by keying my key and then telling me that I'm an "old paedophile c*** who should go fuck himself up the arse". I think these things are relative. That and the price of a bag of sweeties has skyrocketed! --Fred the Oyster (talk) 23:21, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I just picked 12 out of the ether; 10 if you like. My developing thesis though is that those who are younger may interpret "incivility" in quite different ways from those who are older, and with some justification if the speaker was aware of the age of the person being spoken to. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:23, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Sadly the ideas of morals in the USA and indeed the world seem to have dissapeared in the past two decades. I would have given anything to have been born 5 years earlier. You should hear the things that I hear in my own HS. vomit inuceing to say the least.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 23:25, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Twelve is a "magic number" when it comes to the whole ageism-on-Wikipedia argument, because COPPA makes "13th birthday" the magic cut-off for when someone is considered able to make rational decisions in an online context under the Florida law under which Wikipedia operates. My position is that I judge people by actions, not age (there are grown adults here who behave like squabbling eight year olds; there are relatively young kids like Juliancolton and J.delanoy whom one would assume were in their forties at least, had they not self-identified as minors). What all the people who accuse me (and Malleus, and Friday) of wilful ageism don't understand is that it's not discrimination on grounds of being young, it's discrimination on grounds of acting young. (I do make one exception; I won't knowingly support anyone under the COPPA cut-off for adminship, but that's because I think there's very shaky legal ground if an admin below the age of legal responsibility makes a wrong decision regarding copyright or libel. Jimbo refuses to allow Checkusers under 18 for the same reason.)

(edit conflict)It all stems from your treacherous activities in the latter-half of the 18th-century. You stuck two fingers up at our monarchy, and now you're paying the price for your disobedience. Parrot of Doom 23:32, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Nah. You taxed us without fair representation and now you lost all of your empire and now Scottland is even considering leaving.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 23:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

We didn't want that tea anyway :P Scotland only joined because it was broke, and now a minority want to leave because they think the EU will pay them millions of monies. Scotland will never leave the UK, if they did the Labour Party would never form a government again, and the socialists won't stand for that... Parrot of Doom 23:37, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

(e.c., re to CE) - Remember, a lot of it is cultural values. Words which would be considered gross incivility in the US are just verbal punctuation in Britain and Australia – depending on the context, in Britain one could tell one's boss to "fuck off" and it would be taken as polite banter, but in the US it would likely get you fired; likewise, things which would be considered polite and respectful in the US are considered patronizing and offensive in Britain. (Try telling a British person to "have a nice day" and watch the reaction.) Because Americans tend to have a relatively poor understanding of the rest of the world thanks to the way the media operates, a lot of Americans really don't understand how much "civility" is a relative term; to a British (or Irish, or Australian, or Singaporean...) editor, the assumption that American standards of "civility" are correct and every other culture is wrong is itself extremely uncivil. – iridescent 23:38, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

(ec)I have to admit to being a bigot when it comes to dealing with people of the 'yoof' persuasion. I make no apologies for it as I am very definitely into my 'grumpy old man' years. That said I respond to politeness with politeness regardless of the age of the person being polite, I respond to aggression with aggression and disregard with disregard, again the age of the protagonist is unimportant. I don't get bullied in my middle years for exactly the same reason I didn't in my younger years. I meet like with like and take no prisoners. Having said that I do find it much more preferable to sit down with a coffee, a hob-nob and some good conversation. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

How can "have a nice day" be a bad thing? And yes, I know that most Americans seem to foget that there are 190+ other nations outside of the US. Sadly. Whle most editors of this site are in the US, I don't think that's it's right to have all of our policies to be "pro-american". Civility is a very broad term and should be treated as such.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 23:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Trust me, in every other nation in the world it's considered patronizing and offensive. We even have a (stubby) article on it. The very fact you have to ask shows how easy it is to be rude without meaning to. – iridescent 23:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

What a load of nonsense. Most clerks at American retail establishments say something like "Thanks," "Have a good one", "See you (or ya) soon", or the like. If people outside America find it offensive that it is said inside America, then they can be easy in the knowledge that it isn't actually that common. They can also go fuck themselves because they don't see us complaining about how the Swiss, for instance, handle transactions with a politeness that makes you feel unwelcome. If, the concern is that American-owned stores make employees outside the United States say, "Have a nice day!", then the joke is on them. For god's sake, for those of you saying, "We think it's stupid", we Americans feel the same way. For those objecting to being told what kind of day to have, again, you get the same reaction here. -Rrius (talk) 01:23, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Most clerks? Have you been in most stores? No? Ah so it's okay for you to generalise, but not us? And the fact it pisses off Americans is meant to ease how much it pisses us off? The fact of the matter is that atrocious utterance was birthed in the US of A and like a lot of other US-centric things started a life of its own outside Fortress America (the only country in the world that insists that all visitors enter the country barefoot). This conversation wasn't about how much the Swiss piss of the yanks, it's probably just karma anyway. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 01:36, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

The term you are looking for is "Fortress America". Most Americans didn't know there was terrorist atrocities going on in the world prior to 11/9 (I just refuse to use 9/11), purely because it was never reported on their local TV news. as for "Have A Nice Day". That's easy to answer. It's because it has no value, it isn't meant and it's uttered as if from a script and is normally accompanied with a shit-eating grin with all the emotion of a Madame Tussauds' dummy. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 23:46, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Because we're British, and we may not want a nice day. We're not happy unless we're whinging (yes, whinging, not whining, which is a US bastardisation) about something. Usually the weather. We don't sugar-coat life. People get confused about civility and think it means "don't use rude words", whereas true civility is treating people with respect. Telling someone to stop being "fucking stupid" and respect are not mutually exclusive. Parrot of Doom 23:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Well I appologize to those who take it as an insult. Sorry about that.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 23:49, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

There you go, see, you should have just told us to stop being moaning fucking Brits, and to cheer up! No need to apologise, nobody takes it as an insult, we just think that "have a nice day" is stupid! Parrot of Doom 23:53, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

As the old Scottish joke goes "Don't ye tell me wot sorta fucking day I should 'ave!" Basically, artificial politeness in the UK is worse than no politeness at all. It's deemed to be patronising, sanctimonious and totally objectionable. Something which the managers of McDonalds franchises haven't yet sussed out. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 23:54, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Check out George Carlin's view on 'have a nice day', at YouTube. GoodDay (talk) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

iridescent is quite right, there's a cultural gulf in what's considered to be "uncivil". Not just between the US and the rest of the English-speaking world but generally. I remember watching with astonishment Iraqi's throwing shoes at the statute of Saadam Hussein as it was being pulled down after the invasion. I remember seeing some shoes being thrown at George Bush during a press conference as well. That's an insult? Just made me laugh. Do those saddos bring extra shoes, or do they walk home bare-footed?--Malleus Fatuorum 00:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Have you ever smelt an Iraqi's shoes!!!!? --Fred the Oyster (talk) 00:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I suppose it's the same conundrum as in the UK, well have you ever seen anyone walking into a theatre with a pound of ripe tomatoes and a few soggy iceberg lettuces (can't think of a better way to get rid on an Iceberg though, nasty horrible crunchy things!)? --Fred the Oyster (talk) 00:43, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

No. But I have seen a friend accused loudly in public in Cumbria of being a pedophile for taking his own kids to the park. —mattisse (Talk) 01:31, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Fuck sake, I cant believe all this was over a few swear words...ah well live and learn
Being from Manchester those words are no different than "fucking idiot"="great big idiot" or "fucking excellent"="really great"
(reminder to self...only swear in conversations with British people...) Chaosdruid (talk) 00:17, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Well we now know the correct call and response: American says "Have a nice day now yuh hear", Manchunian replies "I will if you'll just fuck off back home". Seems to me that sums it all up :) --Fred the Oyster (talk) 00:33, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

• Free tuition for MF at Proofreader77's Charm School and Musical Theatre Song & Dance Academy (PCSaMTSaDA) ... Our slogan: Why be blocked for an hour, when you can be blocked for a week? :-) Proofreader77 ^(interact) 00:43, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Or you can take a course at "CE's school for idiots and mispellings" where our slogan is "Why make yourself look like a fool just on Wikipedia when you can be the butt of a joke at the Wikipedia Review?"--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 00:57, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Don;t do yourself down CE, leave that in my capable hands. ;-) Now, back to work on your submarine articles; meanwhile I've got a pirate and an archbishop to help sort out. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Ooh, submarines. My faves are the beef and cheese and the chicken teriyaki. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 01:24, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Chav. Parrot of Doom 01:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Bugger! You spotted the Argos catalogue next to the throne didn't you? --Fred the Oyster 01:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for butting in here (we Yanks-as British people sweepingly refer to us, irregardless of our regional origin- have a rather unfortunate habit of doing this), but I think you are being rather naive in assuming that it's perfectly OK to tell one's boss to f..k off in Britain or Ireland, yet would get you the sack in the US or Canada. I have lived and worked in both England and Ireland,and I know that telling the boss to f..k off would not only get you the sack, but in Dublin, you'd be told "not to let the door hit your arse on the way out". I also need to point out that not all Americans are going around telling everyone with their toothpaste-ad smiles to "have a nice day". I have never, ever used that asinine, and potentially dangerous homily in my life( What if the person you have said that to has just lost a loved one and pulls out a pistol?) And if one really wants to hear some good old yankee-style swearing, go onto a US military base. Most of the men and women there would make Gunnery Sgt. Hartman sound like a honey-tongued telly evangelist in comparison. --Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 09:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, were you referring to the unfortunate habit of Yanks butting in, or we Brits referring to them as Yanks? But in response to the rest of your message, I have told my boss to fuck off (yes, actually used fuck and not f..k) many times, mostly when he gives me a project that involves various levels of impossibility. The secret to doing so is tone. That is what gets one a proctological exam with a door handle, i.e. the incorrect tone, not the word itself. Unless of course one's boss is a middle-aged male who is still single and lives with his mum. As with all things in life, generalisations can be wrong, and in fact frequently are. That doesn't discount the underlying truth of the situation being presented though. As for your national homily, although you may not have used it personally, it has become almost a national trademark, certainly in the US retail trade. And to a lot of countries outside the US it simultaneously represents everything that is false and patronising, but used for sales assistant scripting everywhere. It's also a pretty good indicator of who ultimately owns the retail establishment it has just been uttered in. But back to the swearing. One doesn't need to visit a military base here to hear examples of good old Anglo-Saxon (they call it that for a reason ya know!), all you have to do is wander down a local High Street. No, scratch that. The local High Street has been decimated by that infectious and distasteful American invention, the shopping mall. Travelling on the bus will achieve the same thing, frequent use of invective to nail a point or even just to throw it out every third word out of sheer habit. It's cultural. I don't care how worldly-wise you are, you are still American and you have most likely been brought up with American values (I pass no comment on them) and you will continue to carry them as an adult. Obviously I'm generalising, I don't know you personally, but I do know several Americans, personally, who have lived in the UK for years (in one case about 22 years) and they are still American through and through. They still have the accent, they still have the perceptions born of an American education (and I don't just mean in school) and they still don't fully understand Brits. Now, back to your message, what was your actual point again...? --Fred the Oyster (talk) 11:47, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

That's the problem with Mancunians - they're always making sweeeping generalisations. Richerman (talk) 12:41, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh, so it's all down to the tone is it? Well, I'm sure you will forgive this American, who despite being-how did you put it-worldly-wise, does not posseSs the innate subletly, divine sense of irony, and sarcasm (which sadly passes as wit to the unenlightened). Nor do I as an American possess the skills to deliver the finely-honed, calculated Julie Burchill-style of insult, which you British are so adept at. And not only are we tone-deaf, but we lack the inborn class detector system which is part of your DNA and that by the mere raising of an eyebrow indicate whether or not the bearer of this gesture is from the uppah clahsses, a reasonable fascimile of the middle-class or a housing estate where "Have a nice day", becomes "Oi, mate, gissa fag". As for that infectious American invention known as a shopping mall, well nobody's forcing you or your missus to frequent it anymore than I was forced to use a shopping trolley when I lived in Sussex. Oh, what was my point, yes, my point is that your unrestrained use of f..k doesn't make you a wee hard mon anymore than my wearing of balck clthing and ability to curse in Enochian makes me a rough bitch. You obviously think you are intimidating, but it only shows how much you despeartely wish to be.

Aah, this dense Brit has finally got your point. It seems you equate the use of "fuck" (what is the point of those two full stops, or should I say periods?) with a 'hard man' mentality. Is it fuck lady! It's just one word, no different than any other. At some point in time someone, somewhere decided that it was to be decreed as being "foul", no doubt religion having some weight in the matter. "Fuck', when used contextually and timed right can be an exceptionally useful word. Where have you got this idea that its use is to give off the image of aggression and intimidation? Yes it can be used that way, but based on your description you seem to believe that this is its de facto purpose. Nothing could be further from the truth. I use the word frequently in the real world. I have never been battered and I've never intimidated anyone through its use (if you could see me in the flesh you'd know why).

Ah, the ubiquitous shopping mall. Just how do you expect me and the missus (you assume I have one, you also assume that my sexuality requires one?) to not shop in one when most of the local shops have been decimated by that very mall. Unless I wanted a tan or a pedicure of course. Shops are no longer there for our convenience, we, as customers, are merely there to boost their profits. Or perhaps I should rephrase it as "boost their fucking profits"? But would that come across as aggressive or as despairing? --Fred the Oyster (talk) 13:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Warning, may offend people without a sense of humour - Suck my bawws Parrot of Doom 13:28, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Holy shit dude! --Fred the Oyster (talk) 13:32, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Good one, PoD (but there's no f'ing or cold showers in that video, no chavistas either). Malleus, I was busy last night and I'm not gonna read your whole darn talk page before coffee: how 'ya doing? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm fine, cooled down a bit now. But so help me, if anybody comes here bleating about civility again with daft block in hand I'll swing for them. --Malleus Fatuorum 13:47, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

...laughs @ how wikipedia <3s double standards. -- Jack1755 (talk) 15:47, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid that my gibberish is a bit rusty. Any chance of a translation? English preferably. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I am heartily amused by the editors on Wikipedia who practice double standards. <3=heart, as in I <3 double standards. --Moni3 (talk) 17:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for translation – how the Hell does <3=heart? I'm still puzzled though. Who are these editors who practise double standards? I've never seen any evidence of that kind of thing on my time on wikipedia (tongue just burst through my cheek as I wrote that last bit). --Malleus Fatuorum 17:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

It's borne of SMS language. Simply turn it 90 degrees left and it looks like a stylized heart. –xeno^talk 17:42, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure the strong accent doesn't help. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 17:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Turn it 90 degrees right and it looks like Marilyn Monroe's cleavage. Much more interesting. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:58, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm such a stickler in text messages that I even insist on getting the punctuation right. Properly spelled words for me, none of the "I 8 u" crap. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:55, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Unless Marilyn Monroe has been preserved, her cleveage no longer exists (morbitly speaking). GoodDay (talk) 19:38, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Her cleavage will never die, so long as it is embedded in my mind. We only die when nobody still alive remembers us. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:49, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Giggle giggle. GoodDay (talk) 20:17, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

(undent) Inorically, the best prospect of dealing with problem admins is User talk:Roux/RFA-reform and User:Roux/RFA-reform!! --Philcha (talk) 18:38, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Civility warning

Person attacks such as this[6] will result in a block. You are already well aware of this so you will receive no further warnings. This is not the first time you have come out of nowhere to take a shot at this user. You need to disengage Roux entirely, nothing productive comes from you two conversing. Chillum ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 23:19, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Fuck off. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:20, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of coming out of nowhere to have a shot at someone you obviously don't like. Is it adoration of Malleus Chillum, or just withdrawal symptoms? Given your past history with Malleus and your propensity for throwing petrol on the fire perhaps it may be better if you weren't the admin leaving the above message. There's a good chap. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 23:29, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

This is the last posting that Chillum or anyone else is likely to see from me, so let's just leave it as an idiots 1–0 win shall we?--Malleus Fatuorum 00:12, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Partly because I hate seeing the idiots win, but also because going cold turkey isn't always the best way to give up something that has been important to one for a fair while. Perhaps a slight easing off may be the way forward instead of trying to quit all at once. Also, it's a real bitch when one sits down and remembers that one had certain plans and missions lined up and the thought that they may not get completed can be a bit gutting. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 00:25, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

You shouldn't quit Malleus. You've produced far too many good articles which have been read by tens of thousands of people. Those people are more important than the greasy ladder you keep kicking (rightly so). Parrot of Doom 00:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm gone, should have gone a long time ago. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:37, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Please don't go.....--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 00:38, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi, My name is Chillum - what have I achieved today? Well, I finally pissed of one of the best editors on wikipedia so much with my pathetic little schoolyard warnings about fuck all that he's thrown in the towel - what else have I achieved? oh yes, someone gave me a barnstar for spreading wikilove. Today was a good day - wikipedia will be much improved by my invaluable contributions. Richerman (talk) 01:22, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

In other words, way to go Chillum, you've killed this site. Way to drive away one of our best editors...--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 01:24, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

• Oh, goodie! We're keeping Off2riorob, and losing Malleus? Fine work, Chillum, fine work! Scottaka UnitAnode 01:56, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Would you stay if I told you that my first GAN has passed?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 01:58, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Please stay! You're in the musical!

Wikipedia:Song/The RfA Candidate's Song

We'll even make you an admin by acclamation if you will learn to sing this ... and provide you free virtual beer for life! :-) Proofreader77 ^(interact) 00:55, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

(Where is he in the musical?) Many readers would miss Malleus Fatuorum without knowing it. As someone who does more reading than writing WP, I have encountered and admired lot of his work. I selfishly wish to be allowed to read more in the future. Chillum, perhaps you have now reached a point where it would be wiser not to post here, certainly as far as the topic civility is concerned. Please give it some thought per your own line above: "You need to disengage [...] entirely, nothing productive comes from you two conversing." ---Sluzzelin talk 03:05, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

@Sluzzelin re "the musical" - There was a previous discussion of profound philosophical depth :-) regarding Malleus's alleged hatred of musical theatre ... and that the consuming of much high octane ale would cure such, um, un-musicality ... Meanwhile, I (Proofreader77) have been making continuing noise about a Wikipedia Western Musical ... and it is quite obvious that it would have a character based on Malleus ... who hates the musical he is in ... etc etc. :-) Proofreader77 ^(interact) 03:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

• I'd say I'd miss him, but this would involve lying, so... HalfShadow 03:06, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

You expended all that energy for what reason? --Moni3 (talk) 03:17, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Party for the laughs, but mostly because I'm a bastard who never forgets a slight or insult. I may physically celebrate this day; there are a couple of new restaurants I've wanted an excuse to go to. HalfShadow 03:20, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Then go. Forget what big drag queen you are, acting like Joan Collins in a cat fight on Dynasty. Reclaim your dignity. --Moni3 (talk) 03:29, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Just for that, I'm not bringing you back anything. So there. HalfShadow 03:35, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Neither would Joan. --Moni3 (talk) 13:14, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Today is a sad day indeed. Thank you Malleus for pointing out our stupidity on the self injury page. *tips hat* --Guerillero | My Talk 03:20, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to offer some encouragement and one of those reasoned suggestions to sleep on it or to take some time out for a break, but all I can think to say is that you'll Roux the day you left Wikipedia.

Sorry Malleus. With friends like this... I suppose it's no wonder you're taken with heading out. At any rate, I enjoyed our past interactions and look forward to more in the future if you change your mind. Either way, vaya con Dios.

I trust you'll still be in the musical. ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh no! I've just witnessed another wikicide: a good editor gets chewed to death on Wikipedia! :'( Why is it it that every time I'm off Wikipedia for more than a day, something bad happens? Wikipedia without Malleus is like American Idol without Simon Cowell. To those who have a dim view of Malleus: I understand why you dislike him (to be honest, my views were initially dim as well), but that's no reason to treat him any more poorly than someone you like. Really, he's just trying to point out our follies. If you don't like his bluntness, just (mostly) ignore him then. Biting back doesn't solve anything. Trust me, I've been confronted by blunt users before and I've never lashed out at them. And look at me now; I've bloomed! So don't go all "good-bye, good riddance" on him, thank him for giving you a wake-up call on your actions.--Twilight Helryx 15:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

At the end of the day, Mallues did break the rules, so I don't know why people are acting like he was attacked...-- Jack1755 (talk) 15:38, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I admire your faith in "the rules" but you really must learn to develop a little more cynicism. Parrot of Doom 15:42, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)As for Malleus getting attacked, let's just say that not everyone takes blunt criticism very well. So, things escalate and the last person to make an insult takes the brunt. I'm not saying Malleus is right to insult Roux, but I don't think people should be grinning smugly after him either.--Twilight Helryx 16:01, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Civility rules are enforced inconsistently. They are applied when an admin lacks substance in arguments. Admins tend not to get punished as severely--or at all--as non-admins. There are significant cultural differences in what remarks are considered civil and ones that are normal fare in arguments. Civility rules are enforced by admins who are much younger and have less experience weeding out valid points in disagreements. Malleus makes it quite clear that the civility policy is flawed and its greatest adherents tend not to put thought into their actions. Young admins and editors put stock in their identities as admins or civility patrollers. When Malleus points out these flaws, they feel their identities are invalidated. It hurts their feelings, so they respond with uncivil comments--with little to no reaction from the same admins who did the blocking. Sometimes they take the extra time and energy to come to Malleus' talk page to state they they are glad Malleus has been punished for stating his views, to agree with the blocking admin and try to regain their fragile identities. This is quite clearly vindictive and unnecessary and does not even accomplish their goal of re-establishing that they are morally right and superior, but rather exposes their insecurities. Rather than disengaging, people commenting here exacerbate the drama. The rules are questionable. They are inconsistently applied. They may be invalid. Does this make it clearer? --Moni3 (talk) 15:58, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, thank you, Moni3, and everyone else who commented, too. I understand what you're talking about; alas, I've come across some inconsistently applied rules elsewhere on wikipedia, especially in regards to made-up grammar, and nobody caring. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:21, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't be here if it wasnt for Malleus. After reading some of his articles & discussions (boy that was some reading !) I decided to stay. It was a direct result of reading his work and the Greater Manchester stuff that led to me joining them. Malleus along with Nev1 Parrot Jza Richerman Mpeel and Mr Stephen made Wiki somewhere that I could tolerate and actually enjoy.

After returning after my little illness problems and losing my mother I have delved deeper into Wikipedia and it shocks me that the number of good editors is falling away against the numbers of "LittleHitlers" many of whom have edited less than 100 times and yet have 10,000 to their name through undo, reverts warnings to vandals etc. We are left with people arguing over "spaces before refs" and "you called me names" while in the background ridiculous POV edits go without correction and articles fall from GA to Start as editors who do not care mercillesly hack and chop at them

Malleus - please reconsider. Soon there will be 100 Hitlers for every 3 editors and that is a WikiWorld I dont want to be in

Chaosdruid (talk) 16:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree. I've seen a few cases of mass disillusionment, but lately it's gotten a whole lot worse. If enough good editors leave, pretty soon Wikipedia really will collapse.--Twilight Helryx 17:13, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

A shame

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Okay, everybody out of the pool. I think everyone has made their point in this section...maybe more than once

---

I want to see heads on spikes, and not just Roux's. I want to see the admin corps cleaned up, but I know that will never happen. I want to see administrators like Chillum and GeorgeWilliamHerbert chased off the site. Sadly though I also wanted to help write a free encyclopedia.

A shame the way things worked out. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:52, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

That's all most of us want to do. Quitting will give them the satisfaction. Continuing to produce brilliant content and helping the building process is a wonderful way of saying "Fuck you". Which would you rather? --Andy Walsh (talk) 23:06, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

(ec) Malleus, we all have a few rough days. Take a breather. Banana-blueberry bread and hazelnut coffee have done wonders for my wikistamina. If it were possible to email bread, you'd be getting some in your inbox. Take care, Durova⁴⁰⁹ 23:10, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I need to take some time out to think about it. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:11, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

A break is good. I'm going to be a bit less active for a bit myself, a couple of projects just got dumped on my lap, so the paying work needs to come first. Whatever you decide, know you're appreciated at least by me. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:13, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I find 30 a day and a bottle of wine helps to take the edge off things - failing that have a short break, but don't let them get you down.  Giano  23:16, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I've just had a bottle wine Giano; nice enough but a little too sweet for my taste, and I've never smoked. But as someone who's been in the firing line even more times that I have I do thank you for your advice. It's kinda lonely being one of wikipedia's "most hated". --Malleus Fatuorum 23:24, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

A 1/16th, a movie and a good woman. After that one's opinions and feelings about everything change... and mostly for the better in my experience! --Fred the Oyster (talk) 23:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Malleus fools won't always be fools, time and experience often matures people (I know this from very personal experience). Besides, thanks to us two several hundred thousand more people know about Gropecunt Lane than was once the case. Things like that are important. ;) Parrot of Doom 23:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I reckon it's best you & Roux no longer cross paths. Each start with a clean slate. GoodDay (talk) 23:30, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Roux is irrelevant. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:35, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I have proof from real life that sticking with it is far more excruciating to those who want you gone than being able to get rid of you. Have a break, and then do what you want to do. You know you aren't one of wikipedia's most hated, quite the opposite. Take care :)--J3Mrs (talk) 23:32, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

And of all the times you have retired or "left", I don't think you have ever lasted 24 hours away from wikipedia. I will eat my hat if you ever actually leave. But it is great drama! :) —mattisse (Talk) 23:40, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I thank you for usual helpful contribution Mattisse. Remind me, where do I go to complain about your abuse? --Malleus Fatuorum 23:48, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

You are so welcome, Malleus. You have contributed so much good to my life so I really appreciate what has gone on here. Great stuff! :) —mattisse (Talk) 23:50, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I have to wonder why "career admins" such as Chillum are on Wikipedia. With less than 15% of his edits are to article space it's clearly not to write or correct errors, and yet that is precisely what draws many into Wikipedia. People who are actually writing articles do far more good than those with the tools through interacting with others, teaching them how to better write articles, and generally helping out and making the experience enjoyable. Malleus, your effect on Wikipedia's articles goes far beyond the articles you've written yourself. There are people writing their own articles who have learned a hell of a lot from you. Losing someone with that influence would be a crime not just against articles and other editors, but Wikipedia itself. Let's not lose one of the more insightful voices clamouring for reform. Your experience and skill will be missed if you decide to call it a day. Nev1 (talk) 23:45, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

^This, in spades^ Parrot of Doom 23:52, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm in at least two minds. On the one hand I think that Malleus did some great stuff, and I don't see why I shouldn't have credit for that, but on the other I think that starting again under a new name may be the best option; that way Chillum might get off my back. The other option is course to say "fuck wikipedia". --Malleus Fatuorum 23:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Whatever you choose. Please stat one way or another. Your the reason that I started to become a content conrtibutor instead of a myspacer. Your insults actually got through to me and helped me write two DYK's and promote a GA! I am living proof that you can help out this site! Wouldnt you agree?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 00:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I need time to think CE. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:06, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Well if you can still say "fuck Wikipedia" after a bottle of wine, I'm impressed. Try "red leather, yellow leather, (repeat)". Fainites ^barleyscribs 00:09, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

And here's something to think about - the most hated on wikipedia? I don't think so. OK so a few sensitive souls don't like your blunt talking or understand the northern English sense of irony but look at all the people who've come out in your support in the last day or so? - and they're only the ones that have your talk page on their watchlists. How many do you see in support of Chillum and the other guy? Richerman (talk) 00:12, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Since when has this become the I-hate-Chillum club? Seriously, people, I don't think belittling his contributions is going to help anyone. -- Jack1755 (talk) 00:23, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

If you read carefully what I said, you see that I used Chillum as an example, I did not say he was the only problem. I did not belittle his contributions, I merely compared those of career admins with editors who spend time writing the encyclopaedia. Nev1 (talk) 00:25, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Per the Wheeltappers... "Point of order!" It's very difficult to belittle anything that is already little. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 00:28, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Let me be a little more blunt. Chillum is a dangerous waste of space. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:30, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Richerman, I don't think Malleus's telling me I'm the reason people don't have children constitutes "the northern English sense of irony", so am I still a "sensitive soul" to be offended? -- Jack1755 (talk) 00:31, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

It's difficult to tell if you're a troll or an idiot. I'm going for idiot. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:37, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm going for personal attack. Why must you persist in breaking WP:CIVIL?! -- Jack1755 (talk) 00:40, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Judging from the poor comprehension skills you displayed earlier in the thread, I'd say Malleus is calling a spade a spade. Maybe you should find something useful to do. Nev1 (talk) 00:42, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Please guys. Don;t start this again....Just leave the poor kid alone.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 00:43, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

You two are the epitome of class; I simply asked Richerman a question, and you attack me! Tut. Tut. -- Jack1755 (talk) 00:46, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

If you were being attacked you'd know it, and that wasn't it. My money's on troll anyway. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 01:13, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

More of a waste of space than me?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 00:33, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I was referring to this Jack:

"Person attacks such as this[7] will result in a block. You are already well aware of this so you will receive no further warnings."

But if the cap fits...... Richerman (talk) 00:52, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

That sounded more like Malleus was agreeing rather than attacking. Roux decided on the title. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 01:15, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey Malleus, I honestly can't encourage anyone to stay editing here, I don't think it's a healthy or happy place. It's an Orwellian dystopia where incivility is encouraged and the calling out of it is punished. But don't get baited by the lowest element of jokers into making your decision one way or the other for them. If you want to stay, or leave and come back, or play it by ear, or leave for good, or whatever do it. And if you change your mind, that's fine too.

The people that count know what's up. You've earned an enormous amount of respect here from the quality people. There are countless editors you've provided collegial assistance to and uplifting good humor. It seems likely there will always be all sorts of adolescents and lower hominids running around here and elsewhere, it's quite a chore to keep from slipping on the banana peels, but you're most welcome and appreciated any time you want to stick your head in or take a seat at the table of this madhouse. Take care and enjoy yourself. Don't let the bastards get you down. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:59, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh and do you know if the phrase fuddy-duddy is used across the pond? All the sources indicate it's an Americanism, but I don't trust them I want anecdotal evidence so I can be sure. Thanks to whoever answers. ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:08, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

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.

Compadre

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Okay, everybody out of the pool. This is getting silly (pulls out water cannon). Let's all just leave the page for a bit

---

La plus grande chose du monde, c'est de savoir être à soi. -Montaigne
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:45, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Stop taking this place so seriously; what is this crap about "most hated"? People who know your work and character, appreciate it; and those who don't, don't matter. Don't give people and things power over your identity or more place in your life and time than they deserve. You're Wiki's best turkey test; we can tell the character of others by how they get on with you. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:45, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Real shame. --Moni3 (talk) 00:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks SandyG, that's something I'll think about. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Support, per nom, though I was momentarily confused about the reference to a turkey test; i couldn't work out how someone could think any Malleus article could possibly be a turkey :-) hamiltonstone (talk) 01:04, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Malleus flushes out the turkeys. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:09, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Basically I want Chillum gone, but that just ain't gonna happen, so I have to go instead. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:12, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Malleus is the most wonderful, kindest hearted, and the hardest working man in show business. He is dancing as fast as he can! I know he doesn't really hate Chillum, as Malleus is a loving person. Besides, you can't really "hate" someone on Wikipedia, or can you?  :) —mattisse (Talk) 01:20, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

You can apparently. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:36, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

This is wikipedia after all, there are plenty of synonyms to go around. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 01:38, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Malleus likes to have enemies, I am beginning to believe. He sees me as an enemy when I have never done anything to him. I cannot change his mind. Once he sets another editor as an "enemy", apparently it is etched in stone. It is very sad, especially when he sets up all young people as enemies. —mattisse (Talk) 01:49, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, try walking down Deansgate/Bridge St at 11pm on a Saturday night. You may get your mind changed. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 01:53, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Can't imagine what you mean. I guess the first thing that springs to mind is that there are a lot of teenage prostitutes there? Or what? —mattisse (Talk) 01:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I do hope that wasn't Freudian matisse :) I was referring to lots of young people getting drunk, making fools of themselves, fighting and generally giving a bad name to the human genus. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 02:02, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

WTH was that edit summary for Fred? Perhaps if you pulled you head out of your butt you realise that teens are a huge part of this site.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 01:59, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, as I have no idea what he means. I am a big defender of teens. I defend them, as I support you. I believe they are the future of Wikipedia and should be welcomed rather than attacked. I don't believe age is relevant, but rather other factors. I have never opposed an editor on the basis of age. —mattisse (Talk) 02:03, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

It's a very simple concept. I have certain opinions about teenagers, these opinions happen to coincide with MF's. And yes there are a lot of teens on Wikipedia and yes they are the future of Wikipedia. And yes I have the same opinion as MF in that it is going to self-destruct. If there's a corollary then so be it. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 02:12, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

• I'm rather astonished that Mattisse's mentors are allowing her to get away with this nonsense. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm "rather astonished" that Fred would say such a thing in an ES.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:04, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

It is "nonsense" to be welcoming to teens and other younger editors? —mattisse (Talk) 02:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Ahhh, I remember the days when I could be astonished so easily. I think it was in my teens. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 02:12, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

You must be suffering from memory loss due to your old age.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:21, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

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.

Munch

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Really, let's all just take a step back and take it somewhere else. I've fully protected the page for an hour now. Come on everybody. Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

---

I fancy a Manchester munch, preferably before MF buggers off into the great grimy yonder. If for no other reason than to buy him a drink. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 01:54, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I will eat my hat if he leaves. He has threatened many times and never lasted even 24 hours before posting again. Compassion fatigue has set in, sorry to say. —mattisse (Talk) 02:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd happily eat your hat if you'd just fuck off. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:03, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps you could quit threatening to retire so frequently. It gets tiresome. —mattisse (Talk) 02:05, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Guys, knock it off!--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:06, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Remind me again Mattisse; where's the hidden page I can complain about your abuse? --Malleus Fatuorum 02:09, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Not hidden. Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse/Alerts --Moni3 (talk) 02:12, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

As I said, I'm astonished that none of your mentors have stepped in. The process doesn't seem to be working. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:19, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Why do I even try?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:13, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

As an off-the-cuff thought, I'm sure you're not the only one who has asked that very question. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 02:15, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

OK then. Why don't you answer this mr know-it-all. Why are you such a jerk? Or better yet, why do you act like a snotty know it all who thinks that they can bash younger editors? I'm a human as well.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:20, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

No, I started this section as a serious point. The fact remains that I do fancy a munch, and I do fancy buying MF a beer. So let's get back on point please.--Fred the Oyster (talk) 02:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

If you started this secton as a "serious point", then why the @#$% are you attacking my age group!?!--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:39, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for proving my point, yet again. Now please drop it. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 02:40, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I"ll drop it when I get an apology from you. Who do you think you are to call teens such things? Like your age group is any better.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:44, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

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.

Heads up

You have email. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 11:49, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

SM U-11 (Austria-Hungary)

Hey. can you go over that article and correct and of my spelling mistakes for me please? That is the last issue that needs to be fixed for it to pass it's GAN. Much appreciated!--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 18:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Looks fine to me now. Good luck with your review. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

PS. One thing that may be worth bearing in mind for your future articles; "it's" is an abbreviation of "it is"; it isn't used as a possessive, as "its" can't own anything. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:35, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

PPS. What do I get as a reward when your first GA passes? ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum 20:32, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I just read that! You want rewards for GAs. You'd better not say what I owe you!! --J3Mrs (talk) 20:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

If I may be serious just for a moment J3Mrs, you owe me nothing. To see you blossom into the confident and productive contributor that you've become is all the thanks I need. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:46, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Productive yes, confident, not really, I delete more than I save :-( --J3Mrs (talk) 20:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

You confidently edited Thomas of Bayeux; many would tremble at the prospect of having to deal with my wrath (or Ealdgyth's) if they'd got it wrong. Come to think of it, I tremble at the wrath of Ealdgyth myself. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:07, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Ah but didn't I say last week you don't scare me, and anyway I checked everything I did 4 times, and I nearly didn't do it! But you at least are more than fair, at least as far as I can see. It's conflict I can do without, I had more than enough bullying at work--J3Mrs (talk) 21:45, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Malleus. And as for a reward, how about a barnstar?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 21:26, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not a great fan of barnstars. Has your article got through GAN yet? --Malleus Fatuorum 21:28, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Well then how about partial credit for it? And It will go through GAN once the reviewer logs back on and checks it. I've fixed all of the issues that he has addressed. Now it's just a waiting game....--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 21:32, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

It's your article, take the credit. Nothing to do with me, I just offered some advice. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

HEY! What wrath? I rarely get wrathful on Wiki... now my poor barn doors got a blast of it today, but that's because it's frigid outside and I was forced to go out and deal with cranky horses... they seem to think they are entitled to food or something! Ealdgyth - Talk 21:44, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what this reveals about me, but the editors I'm most scared of on wikipedia are all women: you, SandyG, Karanacs, Awadewit, Moni3 ... --Malleus Fatuorum 22:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Sandy and I aren't even admins! Not sure about Awa, honestly. And Karan's the easiest going lady around... Ealdgyth - Talk 22:47, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I shall point out the obvious: Ealdgyth made no attempt to explain that I am no bitch on wheels. However, it is always interesting, and sometimes jarring, to see that I have such an affect on another editor when I consider my own to be negligent, plebian, and generally insignificant. I share some of that sentiment with you, Malleus. Not that I am afraid of these editors, but as a woman who I'm guessing feels differently than you, but at the same time shares the vulnerability of being hurt more by women than men, I attempt to get my work to a standard as exemplified by these folks. In the instances that I actually do get my feelings hurt, I chastise myself for allowing it to happen. It's not generally their words that hurt, but my errant expectations of what I think I should read. --Moni3 (talk) 23:22, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I lost the plot, but I'm glad for Ealdgyth that it's frigid outside, not inside. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:53, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

In real life, I'm considered pretty scary (Cajun temper + low tolerance for incompetence + strongly held opinions + Southern belle ability to insult people without them always realizing it). The glory of the internet is that I can delete posts before I hit save, but I still feel better for having typed them the first time! That's probably how I managed to fool Ealdgyth ;) Karanacs (talk) 16:21, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Cookie break

Try to frown while eating a cookie - I dare you

Geez, I guess I need to start reading from the bottom of the talk page instead of the top. I didn't have time to make brownies today, but I just got in my order of Girl Scout cookies. Have some chocolate - all that angst usually brings on the munchies. There's ice cream in the freezer too. Karanacs (talk) 16:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Tight sod, where's the milk? Parrot of Doom 17:19, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

You try dunking a Girl Scout Cookie in milk, you can clean up the resulting mess yourself. The closest British equivalent would be the Viscount. – iridescent 17:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Listen biscuit noob, you keep out of this. No biscuit shall be denied the chance to bathe in milk—or tea, for that matter. Parrot of Doom 17:53, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

we even taught Jimbo to do it with a Tim Tam at a Sydney meetup I was at. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:08, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

A few thoughts

I've been rather encouraged that the abusive postings against me have continued across several user talk pages the past few days; to be disliked by so many whose attitudes and opinions I find incomprehensible must mean I'm doing something right.

Obviously I've realised for some time that there's an orchestrated effort to force me to abandon wikipedia, but I'm not bothered about being disliked. Hell, I despise the civility police and their acolytes who bleat on interminably about what laughably passes for civility here more than they could ever imagine, so it's mutual. If I wanted to continue contributing here the sensible thing to do would be start again with a new account, but that seems dishonourable to me so it won't probably won't happen. On the other hand, as dishonesty and corruption is endemic in this project it might. I'm not sure how much I want to contribute here in the future anyway, perhaps not very much, perhaps hardly at all, but I am sure that if for no other reason than to piss off the rabid dogs that have been biting at my heels for so long I'll be around for a bit yet, in one guise or another. --Malleus Fatuorum 16:41, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

That's good. I feel a FAC coming on soon and will need you. Cheers. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:03, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

(ec)

I am so glad that you have decided to not abandon Wiki. Although we havent really had much discussion you are one of the main reasons I am still here MF

You are one of the people who speaks their mind and responds to stupid comments with civil answers. Your civility has been in no dispute as far as I am concerned and hearing so many people that believe in you I hope makes you feel your comments and input are wanted and valued by those who appreciate you and those that did not previously have contact.

THe main problem with WikiWorld is that those with an agenda continue to force those with editorial skills out to the detriment of the encyclopedia - on the Ukrainian side we have lost 6 good editors due to constant attacks, somewhat reminiscent of a flock of starlings attacking an eagle, and are left with 4 or 5 that continue to quote consensus to edit to their own agenda whilst leaving the one or 2 others unable to restore accuracy and NPOV

On all levels of editorial input from newcomers to those more experienced, and especially on working at getting articles up to above B class, I have always found your comments and work to be of a high standard. It is regretful that there are some out there that cannot understand that stupidity often results in comments that cannot be taken out of context and sometimes an idiot is an idiot.

I dont know if you are a WikiDragon but i sure as hell see you (and some others) as one - hence this user box I made completely as a result of goings on over the last week and a bit

Save the WikiDragons!^{Extinction Alert}

Chaosdruid (talk)

The trouble is the natural monopoly nature of WP. Whatever the problems it has, the idiot vandals, the Peter Damians, the hounders of the Peter Damians, it's still basically a good idea, and it's still the only game in town. What else can one do? Go to Citizendium? A narrow niche on Wikia? This is why I still think it's worth bothering, and why I'd encourage you to still consider it. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:21, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm glad you're reconsidering your position. I'd just like to add to Chaosdruid's comment, that if it wasn't for your help I wouldn't have been able to write most of the articles I've gotten promoted to FA and GA largely by myself. Also, your copyediting skills and guidance here have made me give very serious consideration to a career change—I wouldn't have had the confidence to consider this without your help. I'm quite set on going for a Degree later this year as I've enjoyed writing some of these articles so much.

Step back a little from the cockpits and consider the superb articles you've written. They're what's important. Parrot of Doom 19:44, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

PS, The Bottle Conjuror is now at DYK. Just goes to show, there are loads of bizarre English things that need articles, and you're the man to do it. Parrot of Doom 19:51, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

PoD is, of course, right. Just a voice from the bastard admin cabal of support to you Malleus. What that support means... well you can take it as you will. Wholehearted would be one word. Pedro :  Chat  21:16, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Ernest Hemingway

HI! I'm sorry to bother you, but wondered whether you'd be interested in copyediting an article about a man who was married four times, went to war three times, almost lost his leg to a shell explosion at age 19, survived back-to-back plane crashes in two days, romanticised the art of bullfighting and big-game hunting, and by the way is considered by many, to be one of the best American writers in the 20th century.

I've been working to restore the article and have had a comprehensive peer review done by Awadewit. The prose is a mess because I wrote over the existing article, first adding sources then fleshing out, and now it's stiff as well...a plank. I've read the article too many times and need a new set of eyes and a good writer. Would you be interested? Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 17:27, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

That's a big subject you've chosen to work on, but if Awadewit thinks it's OK then it more than likely is. I can't promise anything though I'm afraid as I'm not really in the right frame of mind. Perhaps in a few days ... --Malleus Fatuorum 17:43, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

It started as a single edit months ago. Then I realized entire sections were unsourced and decided to add sources, and then decided to make it as good as I could, all of which has taken a very long time. Not to worry, it won't go away. If you decide to swing by and help that would be wonderful, otherwise I'll keep at it on my own. Thanks for the speedy response. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 17:51, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

CDA

Can I take it that you read the poll correctly? It is all I need to know. Matt Lewis (talk) 19:01, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

The poll questions seemed clear enough to me, no need to reconsider my votes. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:40, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Re Mattisse

I've already said at Mattisse's Monitoring pages that she should not have posts in the way she did on your Talk page. Please don't make the mistake by posts at Mattisse's Talk page. --Philcha (talk) 01:15, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

She is posting in the same way on the talk pages of others as well. I want it stopped. --Malleus Fatuorum 04:58, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Vilification

I have no answer, only an answer. First, he is not vilified by all or even most (most don't know he exists), secondly, he spoke as he saw it, and what he saw was senior members of the establishment of this site abetting - either actively or by doing nothing - in the character assassination of another editor in a related website, and was brave enough to publicise it on this site. Thirdly, there are those who have never forgiven him for that disclosure, for allowing their reputations to be tainted by their own actions. Fourthly, when they attempted to use the processes of this site to remove such stains Giano used those processes to further publicise the issues, and further to expose the processes for what they were being used - instruments of intimidation and suppression. Lastly, by staying true to his principles Giano has created an environment where abuse of power is recognised as a truth, and where claims of such abuse are treated seriously - thus bringing upon him a constant flow of aggrieved individuals. Therefore, in certain places, the name of Giano is vilified.
My version - others may have their own interpretation. LessHeard vanU (talk) 23:24, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Does he also wear his underpants on the outside? --Fred the Oyster (talk) 23:41, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Seems like the dishonesty and corruption here is long-standing and endemic; no surprise to me. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:22, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

And then there are people like me who are honest and corrupted. Yes sir, I smell like an outhouse and kill grass wherever I walk, but I never tell a lie. HalfShadow 22:46, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

What a boring life you must lead never having had to tell a lie. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 23:43, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, well, the corruption makes up for it. HalfShadow 00:38, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, the name of Giano is not villified here. --Malleus Fatuorum 03:14, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

River Parrett (again)

Since you last sorted out my poor prose on River Parrett it has been to PR & FAC (not promoted) & had a major review on the talk page. This has resulted in a myriad of changes (for the better), but I believe it is now getting near FA standard. If you had any time to take another look at my mangled English that would be great.— Rod ^talk 15:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Looks like you were a bit unlucky in not getting enough supports during that FAC. When are you planning to take it back? --Malleus Fatuorum 03:11, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

No supports & no opposes. Issues raised were being addressed but subsequent reviews have improved it. I'm out of the country later this week so hopefully soon after Mon 22nd.— Rod ^talk 08:02, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your continuing work on this. You changed percent to % but this had previously been changed as part of the review based on Wikipedia:MOS#Percentages.— Rod ^talk 12:59, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

The MoS can be an ass sometimes. --Malleus Fatuorum 13:18, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

While you're here, I can't make head nor tail of this sentence in the Landscape section: "It was sited at a crossing point on the Ilchester Yeo; and the Yeo was navigable by small craft all the way to the Parrett." --Malleus Fatuorum 13:28, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I'll take a look at that this evening.— Rod ^talk 15:26, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully made it clearer.— Rod ^talk 17:04, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

GA work

Elizabeth Cady Stanton approves of your approval

Thanks for your GAN work at The Woman's Bible. You demonstrated dogged determination and a willingness to stick your arms elbow deep in the scary stuff everybody else was avoiding! Cheers – Binksternet (talk) 17:20, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Nothing that happens here scares me – pisses me off sometimes, but definitely not scary. The thanks ought to go to you though, for producing such a nice piece of work on a topic I knew nothing about before reading your article. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:28, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Alan Turing

Redirection vs. pipe leaves me cold. I would, however, be disappointed if you were no longer going to contribute to this article. --TedColes (talk) 14:16, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

When the threats start it's best to walk away, at least on wikipedia. Anyway, such depth of feeling about such a trivial issue is most definitely not a good sign. There are plenty of other more congenial things to work on where my small efforts may be more appreciated. --Malleus Fatuorum 14:22, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		Thanks to Malleus for taking the time to copyedit Ernest Hemingway when I hit a wall and lost perspective. Thanks too for running the script to fix the dashes. Much appreciated! Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:54, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

You're very welcome. He's an important figure and his article deserves the effort you've invested in it. I haven't been through all of it yet – I spent quite a bit of time hacking away at the lead, on the basis that you only get one chance to make a first impression – but I think it would stand a very good chance at GAN now, and with a bit more hacking would make a plausible FAC.

It's very difficult to be objective about stuff you've written yourself. I have a vague memory of someone once telling me that you should be looking to lose about half of what you first write, and that's especially so with a subject like Hemingway, renowned for his concise style of writing. The prose in literary articles is looked at more critically than it would be in other types of article, understandably so I suppose. --Malleus Fatuorum 03:13, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

On a related subject, similar thanks for the assistance with Bronwyn Bancroft. Within hours, or was it minutes, of posting the thing at FAC, no fewer than three editors had piled in to improve the article and save me from (more?) embarrassment. hamiltonstone (talk) 11:42, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for hacking at the lead. I'm weak at beginnings, and the lead was a combination of the original lead and some stuff I added and I didn't think it was a successful effort. Feel free to hack away anything you consider irrelevant or unnecessary. I tend to overwrite to give myself room to cut back, but when one loses perspective it's difficult to tell what to do. Also many pieces of the article already existed, or have been added recently by other editors, so the writing isn't well integrated. It takes a fresh set of eyes to see the problems, in my view. And yes, you're right, there's the problem that it's Hemingway I was writing about. Whenever that thought entered my mind I froze. So, your help is truly appreciated. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 13:30, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

More thanks!! Am impressed. A couple of comments and questions:

• I purposely attempted to avoid noun + ing (in case this article ever gets to FAC and Tony reads it) but prefer the changes you've made;
• the "strange punctuation" is a quotation within a quotation – usually formatted as double quotation mark followed by single quotation mark but cannot find the relevant rule at MoS. I added the non-breaking space to prevent from formatting like this: "'. Will research that a bit;
• isn't the link to Gloria Hemingway a surprise?
• an editor added this sentence: "A letter to XI International Brigade's commander Hans Kahle gives the impression that Hemingway had seen the war as an exciting adventure.[84]" I've been judicious about using Hemingway's letters (in fact none are used in the biography portion) but when I deleted the material it was added back. Do you have an opinion about whether the sentence should stay or go? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:43, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

• Tony's noun +ing thing is a style issue; each case needs to be considered on its merits IMO; there's no right or wrong.
• It may have been a quotation within a quotation in the source, but it wasn't in this article. You may like to make that clear by saying something like "X in Y was reported as saying ...", but I'm not sure I'd bother.
• The Gloria Hemingway link certainly was a surprise. Might be worth a few words to explain that.
• I'm not sure the letter adds much if anything; I'd delete the sentence. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:09, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

• Will avoid twisting the prose by trying to avoid ing; attribute the quotation; explain Gregory became Gloria; and delete the stuff about the letter – when you're done. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 03:07, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

• I'm done for now, so have at it. I'll come back and look at Hemingway with fresh eyes in a couple of days.--Malleus Fatuorum 03:33, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Nokian Tyres

I just looked at Finnish Wikipedia's Nokian Tyre article. Ours is much better. I got one fact about tyres sales in Sweden from theirs which I'll rewrite and insert soon. They have a list of the board members and senior management. Is such list not very useful or is there merit for such list (such as CEO, Vice President for this or that division)? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:56, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd steer away from volatile details like board members; they may all be gone tomorrow and who's going to keep the list up-to-date? Interesting that the English wikipedia has a better article on a Finnish company than the Finnish wikipedia does. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:07, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

*cough, hesitant entrance* If you're back to taking requests, Malleus, Marwari horse could still use a look-over... If you're just not interested and I'm really bad at taking a hint, that works too :) Dana boomer (talk) 17:43, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:57, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I believe I have fixed both of your comments. I'm really not sure what was going on with the "and Sonia" - this is what the source said, but I just removed it since it's not clear. Thank you very much for your help on the article - I feel much more confident in going to FAC now! Dana boomer (talk) 22:11, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, you can at least feel fairly confident that I won't be opposing. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 22:26, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Loutro, Messenia

Hi Malleus. I declined your speedy of this article in favour of a redirect, but I'm now unsure whether the article is a duplicate or not. If you have any thoughts feel free to weigh in on the talk page. Cheers, Olaf Davis (talk) 13:07, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Seemed like an obvious duplicate to me, but your call. --Malleus Fatuorum 13:10, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Mmm, that's what I thought until I saw what the original author actually wrote, which seemed pretty ambiguous. Anyway, it's a redirect now barring any meaningful input from them... Olaf Davis (talk) 13:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

It's a bit strange I think. Depending on what the official name of the village is it's even possible that the redirect ought to be in the opposite direction. --Malleus Fatuorum 13:32, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Good point, actually - I hadn't even thought of that. Funny how easy it is to assume that the earlier/more wikified version must be true. Olaf Davis (talk) 13:40, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Malleus, thanks for your careful research on the Loutro, Messenia article! It was wonderful seeing a kid making such a non-trivial contribution to Wikipedia. There are a couple things that could be learned from this incident — if only people were willing to learn... All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 13:52, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

It was a puzzle that bothered me, and I just had to try and get to the bottom of it. Was it a kid? I just assumed it was someone whose first language wasn't English. Something for us all to learn from the incident, but on the bright side both the Loutro and Palaio Loutro articles ended the day better than they started it. --Malleus Fatuorum 14:24, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Was it a kid? Check the original version of the article as the creator left it. All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 15:05, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Looking things up in OED

To reply to you directly: I do not have access to the online edition of OED, but my list of roots to look up would be massive. I'm ultimately going to fill out an etymology section for every lemur page... and there are somewhere around 100 species described to date, as well as 5 families and 15 genera. (Oops! I almost forgot the 17 extinct species, with 3 extra families, and 8 genera.) Since there are usually two parts to every taxon name, we're looking at nearly 200 roots. If you don't mind doing it, either from time to time or all at once, I'd be eternally grateful. It's up to you. You could start off with the roots I need from Gray Mouse Lemur, Ring-tailed Lemur (species: catta), and the taxa names from Ruffed lemur, as well as another article I'm writing now (about Hadropithecus stenognathus). It's a small start, I guess. I can always make a formalized list to make things easier, if you're up for it. Thanks! – VisionHolder « talk » 22:41, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Let me take a look at the Gray Mouse Lemur and see if the OED is helpful, then we can take it from there. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:50, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

NB: For the record, Nishidani has the big OED, and often likes to go the extra mile and explore some etymology, I also have the one with the damn magnifying glass but I have recently moved house and so stuff is everywhere and I can't find it :/ Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Anyone resident in the UK has access to the full OED; just go here and enter your library card number. – iridescent 23:40, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm a U.S. citizen. Please don't rub it in.   :-P   Anyway, I really want to finish and publish my Hadropithecus article tonight, so the sooner I can get the details on that one, the better. Here's what I have... I just need references to cite: "hadros"—(Greek) thick; "Pithekos"—(Greek) an ape; "steno-"—(Greek) narrow; "gnathos"—(Greek) the jaw or mouth. – VisionHolder « talk » 23:46, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, hadrosaur is in the OED, and the etymology is exactly as you say: hadros means thick, or stout. What about if I format the citation and post it on your talk page? I'll check the others when I've done that. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:55, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Anyone resident in the UK who's a member of a public library – which is free and everyone ought to join who can. It's great here in Manchester because there are lots of different local authorities with different stock, and you don't have to live in their area to sign up. I mostly use Manchester libraries, but I don't actually live in the City of Manchester. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:45, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I've said it before, but it warrants repeating; one of the best recommendations I can make to anyone resident in the UK is to join City of Westminster Libraries (you don't have to have any connection to the place, just to reside in the UK). A CoW library card automatically subscribes you to shedloads of stuff as well as the usual OED/DNB given by most libraries. – iridescent 23:58, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm. There's a couple of things there I don't get with my current subscriptions, so I may well join. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:05, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

The Life in the United Kingdom test is enlightening. I score 19/24, which would only just scrape me through (pass mark is 18/24), and I don't think I'm being arrogant in saying that I probably know considerably more about British life than most other resident aliens. – iridescent 00:16, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Can someone from the UK adopt me? I'm a little old... in my mid-30s. In the US, I'm sure we'd have plenty of loopholes for things like that. – VisionHolder « talk » 00:20, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

It's probably a good job us resident natives don't have to take the test, as I suspect that most of us would fail it. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:34, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Formal Apology

Hello Malleus. Lok, I know that this post of mine made you very mad at me (and rightfully so). I understand that this made you not wish to work with me any more. I understand. I won't ask for you to "help" me any more, I know that I ticked you off and you don;t have to help out editors that you dislike. I just wanted to apologise to you. If you revert this, or just ignore it, I'll understand and I'll leave you alone. If you accept my apology, thanks, and if not.....then I get the message.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 22:58, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your apology. I suppose you had your reasons to write what you did, but that's your business, not mine. I've got a surprisingly short memory for that kind of thing anyway. Comes of getting old. ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum 23:09, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah but your reply (diff if requested) made it seem like you did not ever want to associate yourself with me again. I thought that you were through helping me. PS:I got another GA! (Battle of Belgium and check out its talk page)--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 23:11, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

My bark is worse than my bite, and to be honest life's too short to be bothered about inconsequential little spats like that, water under the bridge as far as I'm concerned. Nobody died. Congratulations on your (second?) GA, you'll soon have as many as me at this rate. I checked the other day and I've only got 11. :-( --Malleus Fatuorum 23:19, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

just checked out the talk page. Well, well, well. It was only a few short weeks ago that your spelling was being criticised. and now here you are helping an article through GAN by fixing up its prose and being complimented on your grammar. What a transformation! --Malleus Fatuorum 23:23, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Well the thing is, my spelling is very bad, but If I really need to, I can look over an article and point out mistakes and gramatical errors and fix them. Its just a pain to do so. My 3rd GAN, WWII (began 3 months ago!!!) is all done exept the fact that I need to replace an image in the infobox. Stupid Russian copyright laws. I can't find a new image (that has a good PD tag) that can replace it. In other words, I can't get the article passed until the image is replaced....--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 23:43, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

(undent) Firefox has a spell checker. • Ling.Nut 00:28, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Sigh.....I know.....--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 00:41, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

FAC schtuff

Hello there; a mighty user suggested that you might be interested in this little doozy. Many thanks, Ironholds (talk) 00:30, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to stick them at the FAC, but failing that the article talkpage is preferred. Thanks in advance for the review, matey. Ironholds (talk) 22:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I've put a few initial comments on the FAC talk page, because it may become quite a lengthy list. If you or anyone else wants to move them to the FAC page though that's fine by me. My overwhelming impression is that the lead doesn't really work the way it's presently organised. The reader gets bogged down in historical detail without yet having been told what the Court actually was or did. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:37, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Fixed most of the points, including rearranging the lede; looking at it, I agree that it works better this way. Many thanks, Ironholds (talk) 18:34, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I think that lead's a big improvement, but then I would I suppose. I'll try and get through the rest asap, and then I look forward to being able to support. It's really a great piece of work, but I want everything to be just so. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 18:46, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Haha, that's fine. Thanks for the work you've done on it so far. And just FYI, whatever the consensus around this place about you, "a really great piece of work" coming from you is one of the highest compliments I've been paid about my work here. Ironholds (talk) 02:20, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I like being referred to as a "mighty user", but I'm not sure how many would agree with that description of me... I tend to think of MF as FAC's equivalent of "The Wolf" from Pulp Fiction (called in to clean up a messy and dangerous situation, does so calmly, carefully and professionally). Glad to see that my suggestion paid off nicely, anyway. Bencherlite^Talk 20:39, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I thought of you and PoD

I saw this [8] and thought of you and PoD. I'm not sure why.  :-) --J3Mrs (talk) 12:20, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, might be able to do something with that. I've discovered that there's also a Fanny Avenue in Sheffield ... still so many important subjects missing articles. --Malleus Fatuorum 14:18, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

There's a "before" pic on Geograph [9] with its prissy name. :-) I don't think I should really be encouraging you. --J3Mrs (talk) 17:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Excellent! I was just going to pop over there and see if they had anything. BTW, I don't need any encouragement. I'll be launching this on an unsuspecting world shortly. I'm amazed how much coiverage this underpass has had. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:15, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm waiting for Holt and Baker to do a bit more research into Gropecunt Lane. Its a fascinating subject, who knows what other curiosities of England have been censored? Parrot of Doom 17:17, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

It is curious, I agree, that when you start probing it becomes obvious that all sorts of facinating stuff has either been forgotten or suppressed. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:20, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

So you're not easily put off what you intended to do today then! I'll see if I can get an "after" pic. --J3Mrs (talk) 17:23, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm feeling very guilty that I've been neglecting the report I was supposed to be working on today. Think I'll need to be burning some midnight oil tonight. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:31, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

There's always my favorite OS grid square if you're after single-entendre place names; Mid Ho, Tongue of Gangsta, Cockmurra, Gutterpool and Nether Button all within a mile of each other, and themselves only about five miles from Twatt. – iridescent 17:46, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Nob End already has an FA :) Parrot of Doom 17:58, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Here's an interesting list. --Malleus Fatuorum 18:06, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

It has to be said that anything Brits can do, Kentucky does better; home of Big Bone Lick, Beaverlick, Sugartit and of course Monkeys Eyebrow. – iridescent 18:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

There is also Intercourse, Pennsylvania. Ironically, it's in Amish Country near a town called Blue Ball! I must say, though, the name Intercourse is a bit clinical for my taste. The British names are more amusing and bawdy.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:55, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I persuaded a friend to take photographs, not the best but here they are[10] if they are any use. Coincidentally since yesterday I have received 3 emails about said bridge and was told about it whilst circumnavigating the local reservoir by a friend of the family. I have no idea why they are telling me. I will refer them to your article :-)--J3Mrs (talk) 23:38, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Here's another I missed last night :( [11] --J3Mrs (talk) 18:13, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. There's a couple of those that would be great if you could persuade your friend to release them under a CC-SA licence. --Malleus Fatuorum 18:24, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

smg51 is more than happy to release the pics for "such a good cause". Use whatever you like. --J3Mrs (talk) 18:58, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

That's great. Can you ask him/her to alter the licensing on DSCF0233 and DSCF0232 to a Creative Commons one please, like most of the others already are? Otherwise they'll just get deleted as soon as I upload them. Thanks. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:15, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I think it's done now:-) --J3Mrs (talk) 19:35, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Some questions

Do you think Ernest Hemingway is ready to be nominated for GA? Had planned to nominate as soon as I'm less busy in real life. Also, is it common for an editor who has never edited an article to nominate the article for GA? An article I've been working on (but which is far from finished) about Hemingway's posthumous True at First Light has just been nominated for GA. How does one deal with these situations? Thank you for letting me bother you. Btw - also thanks for cleaning up the messy sentence on Hemingway yesterday. Was in a rush and didn't have the time to fix. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:07, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

To answer your first question, yes, I think Ernest Hemingway would stand a very good chance at GAN, and with a bit more fettling would make a plausible FAC. As for your second question, no, it isn't common for an editor who's never edited an article to nominate it at GAN, although there's no rule against it, but I don't see True at First Light listed at GAN anyway. Let me take a look to see what's going on there. --Malleus Fatuorum 18:59, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I see that Sadads withdrew the GA nomination shortly after your objection, so that's cleared that up. Just as well really, because it's clearly a work in progress and would have have failed anyway. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:13, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid I got a little pissy but have a stack of papers to mark with not a lot of time for Wikipedia for a few days. Will nominate Ernest Hemingway as soom as I'm out from under all the work. Yes, True at First Light is very much a work in progress, and an interesting one as well. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:38, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Idea

I presented the following idea to one administrator.

Some administrator are very wise, like you. Some are not very wise, at all. Some of these unwise ones frequent WP:ANI. Not all the admininstrators who post there lack wisdom, though.

There have been proposals for desysop. Rather than be punitive, I come to you with a positive idea.

What if there were very strict behavioural criteria written up? If one passes them, then they would receive a special certification good for a certain period of time, maybe 6 months, maybe 1 year. The criteria can be discussed. It could be utmost professionalism, politeness, knowledge, good editorial contributions and/or not engaging in any conflict of interest.

What do you think of the general idea? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 00:44, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

My general view is that you can propose whatever you like to whoever and wherever you like, but nothing will change; it's a waste of time. Wikipedia is failing because of its inertia and its inability to adapt, and my only hope is that its content survives the project's inevitable death. The day I stop believing in that will be the day I leave wikipedia for good. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:58, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

You are probably right. I am not sure why people don't shoot for higher, even voluntarily higher standards. If people acted the way here at work, some people would be sacked for misconduct or, at least, rudeness. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 01:28, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Alas, this is not a paying job. If it were, we would have way better people editing and running this site. Instead, we're stuck with a bunch of jerks who block for no reason at all. 92% of all admins are trigger happy with the block tool.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 01:32, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure about 92%, but it's interesting to reflect that in a real work environment they would almost certainly be considered to be bullies. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:45, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Look, I (obviously) don't have a job. But yes, I understand that they would be considered bullies. And as for the statistic, no, it's probably a lot lower but you get the point right?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 01:50, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Clearly I do, and I'm not disagreeing with you. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:53, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

"City of Blinding Lights" FAC

Thanks for your comments on the "City of Blinding Lights" FAC; I believe that I have addressed all of your points in your opposition, though I have asked for a clarification on your final point. Are there any other issues that you believe need to be addressed, or are you content that the article now meets the criteria? I would appreciate any more feedback that you can give if the former is the case. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 02:40, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

The points I raised were just examples. The article needs a fresh pairs of eyes to tidy it up sufficiently to reach the FA "professional prose" requirement IMO. --Malleus Fatuorum 03:37, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Would you be willing to take the time to be that fresh pair of eyes? I've asked around in the past but, outside of the previous peer review, nobody has been willing to perform a copyedit that thorough. I admit that, having spent the most time on this article, I'm much less likely to spot any issues with the prose, and I understand by your reputation that you are very thorough and knowledgeable on that aspect of the FAC process. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 03:42, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid that I probably won't really have the time over the next few days. I looked at the article because it's right at the bottom of the queue and it's been at FAC for well over three weeks, so SandyG or Karanacs will very likely be making a decision on it shortly. I'd hoped to be able to support, but in my honest opinion the article isn't quite there yet. I see that Wasted Time R has made some useful comments on the article's content as well, most of which seem to make sense to me. I think it's most likely now that the article will be archived, which is no bad thing as it will give you a couple of weeks to prepare it for a nice easy second FAC, having been given some good ideas for improvement. But what do I know? Maybe SandyG and Karanacs will ignore my opinion or a couple of editors more knowledgeable will offer their support saying that I'm talking nonsense. Whatever happens, the important thing is that the article has already been improved by its FAC experience.

If it does get archived, then I'd be happy to help you with the prose for its next nomination. Just give me a shout when you want me to look at it again. --Malleus Fatuorum 14:13, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing; thanks for the comments and the edits that you have made – a fresh pair of eyes definitely helps to show what is missing or lacking in the article. Cheers, MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 19:49, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I hate to be a bother, but a couple of other editors and I have given the article a copyedit; would you be able to take a quick look to see if it is on the right track? Cheers, MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 23:41, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

You're working hard at this, so I can hardly refuse. I'll try and find some time tomorrow to go through it again. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:05, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Cheers mate; I know that it likely won't pass but I'd like to get all of the comments addressed in any case while the review process is still open so that I know for sure that it's ready when I renominate. Thanks again, MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 02:13, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much for getting back to it so quickly; I know that you're a very busy person, and I really appreciate you taking that time to go over the article so many times as the changes were made. Thanks! MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 21:52, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Last minute spruce up...

Is Thomas of Bayeux ready? I'm thinking I will have enough time over the next week or so to shepherd him... Ealdgyth - Talk 18:40, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I think so. I'll take another look through later this evening. --Malleus Fatuorum 18:48, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Grocers apostrophe

Oi Malleus! 1940's is not Grocers apostrophe. But I will not die in a ditch. You saw my note about taking this to FA, no? Any help appreciated. HistorianofLogic (talk) 21:13, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh yes it is matey. ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum 21:14, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Oi who says? What about this then [12] plenty there mate. HistorianofLogic (talk) 21:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Because someone else writes poorly is no reason for you to do so. Some are correct in that piece, as in "In the 1880's notebooks ...", but some are not, as in "during the 1930's ...".

Anyway are you going to help with History of logic? HistorianofLogic (talk) 21:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

No. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:24, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh well, thanks for the tip's on Sandys page. The one about date's was completely new to me. Is there actually a solid reference you have for this? HistorianofLogic (talk) 21:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Fowler's Modern English Usage for one addresses the issue, and gives the specific example of no apostrophe needed in "1920s", for instance. Obviously "1880's notebooks" is subtly different though, in that there's an implied possessive rather than a plural. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:37, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Where to go...

Well, Tommy boy is up, so what are you interested in next? We've got Miss Meyers (horse), Hemming's Cartulary (I think Deacon's off on a long break, so not waiting on him any longer), and a pile of bishops/archbishops: Ralph d'Escures, Theobald of Bec, Walter de Coutances, Alexander of Lincoln, and William de Corbeil. That's ... three archbishops of Canterbury, an Archbishop of Rouen and a bishop of Lincoln for your fun. They are also, in terms of reputation, "so-so", "saintly but not enough to get canonized", "definitely political player", "worldly", and "so-so". No one really bad in the bunch, although Coutances is kinda fun, he's the companion piece to William Longchamp. Alexander's the brother of Nigel of Ely, and part of an eventual featured topic on Roger of Salisbury's family. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:09, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Miss Meyers looks pretty easy, after that I fancy Alexander; I've found the Stephen and Matilda era quite fascinating since watching Brother Cadfiel on TV. --Malleus Fatuorum 16:56, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

that script you mentioned

I tried implementing it as you directed at WT:CDA. Fail. I tried it using my own sysopdetector.js file and importing that into monobook.js (which is the skin I use), importing Sparkla's, and even copy/pasting the code. All for naught. I can't seem to get it to work. Ideas? --Hammersoft (talk) 16:48, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

When you say it failed, what do you mean? Have you cleared your cache? --Malleus Fatuorum 16:50, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

• Sorry, I should have been more detailed. Yes, I've cleared my cache (Firefox; tools>clear recent history>select everything click ok) multiple times. Regardless, when I hover over signatures, all I got is a pop-up that says "User:<name of user I am hovering over>". Ideas? --Hammersoft (talk) 16:57, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
• (and yes, js is enabled on my browser). Fails on IE and Safari too. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:58, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

It's not recent history you need to clear. Hold down the shift key and reload the page. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:00, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

• By clearing, it doesn't just clear recent history. It clears everything. Regardless, I did as you suggested and it still does not work. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:03, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

• I think I know what may be happening. Try enabling Navigation popups in My preferences/Browsing gadgets. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:07, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

• Tada! Thanks :) --Hammersoft (talk) 17:10, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Lady of Quality

FINALLY, I made it back to the article. I'm so sorry it took so long - real-life, competing priorities, blah blah. At your convenience, can you please take a look and see if the new-and-improved version bridges the gap toward the GA criteria? (or, in Southern belle speak, You can beat the ever-livin' hell out of that there article now, sugar ;) ) Karanacs (talk) 19:52, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

That's turned into a nice little article Karanacs, not far off FA I'd say. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:43, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much for helping me improve the article - and for being so patient with me! Karanacs (talk) 14:42, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Tickle Cock Bridge for DYK

Just need to think of a good hook. Any suggestions? --Malleus Fatuorum 18:58, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

• ...that Jane Wernick Associates gave Tickle Cock to 50,000 people a week in Castleford?
• ...that Margaret Shillito of Castleford Area Voice for the Elderly asked Wakefield Council for Tickle Cock in 2008?
• ...that 50,000 people go down Tickle Cock each week?

Is this a bridge or a tunnel, anyway? The lead says bridge, but the article text clearly says "prefabricated concrete tunnel". – iridescent 19:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, it's variously called both. The roof of the tunnel acts as the railway bridge. Thanks for the suggestions. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:21, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I decided to be a little more direct:

• ...that Tickle Cock Bridge in England received its name because of what boys and girls got up to underneath it?

--Malleus Fatuorum 19:43, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

How confident are you that that is why it received its name? I know the Daily Mail says so, but the Mail has a relationship with the truth which is not always as close as it could be (looking at their website, the story which is the source for this article is sandwiched between "A snooker table that does 30mph" and "Council blows £2,000 on a 'mouse bridge' to help rodents cross road safely". Obviously it could be true despite being in the Mail, but the most satisfying explanation is rarely the right one in real life; Occam's razor suggests to me that it was either a poultry market or a cockfighting venue and "tickle" comes from its old, adjectival use, meaning "wild". – iridescent 20:02, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I've not seen the Daily Mail article, but I take your point about its dubious reputation. I'm reporting what local historian Brian Lewis was quoted as saying in the Yorkshire Post, the Channel 4 programme The Big Town Plan, and various other places, so I'm pretty confident that it really is Lewis's view of the derivation of the name. Whether Lewis is right or not I can't judge, but it seems plausible to me and I've not found anyone offering an alternative etymology. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:15, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Very amusing hook, Malleus. Raul654 (talk) 21:21, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Sadly I don't think I'll ever make an FA out of this article – I can just imagine the horror at FAC if presented with a bawdily name underpass anyway – but it was just too good to miss. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Its OR of course, but on old-maps.co.uk its evident that the underpass was constructed to allow easy access to the new Edwardian terraces built to the south of the line. It replaced what appears to have been an earlier footbridge slightly to the east. The land around it was allotments. Parrot of Doom 21:42, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for doing the coordinates PoD. I'd meant to get round to that earlier, but I forgot. Need to find out a bit more about the railway line that crosses the bridge too ... --Malleus Fatuorum 22:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

York and North Midland Railway in 1852. North Eastern Railway (UK) (York and Normanton line) by 1908. Parrot of Doom 22:40, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Despite popularly held belief, while both are in Yorkshire, Tickle Cock Bridge is unrelated to Butt Hole Road. –Whitehorse1 21:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

We could try and get a good topic together; we're off to a good start with Tickle Cock Bridge, Butt Hole Road and Gropecunt Lane. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 22:27, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

If you're sticking to a Yorkshire theme, there's always Great Fryup Dale, home of the best {{hatnote}} on Wikipedia ("For the non-geographical usage, see Full breakfast").

One of the things on my "probably never will get round to doing it" list has long been the coastal islands of East Anglia (woefully neglected, given their importance; I don't think there's a single one above crappy-stub level) – if and when the day ever comes, it will take in Foulness, Fingringhoe and the splendidly named Horsey Windpump. – iridescent 23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Some prudish clot has suggested "... that the Tickle Cock Bridge pedestrian underpass was built in 1890 and is used by 50,000 pedestrians each week?" as an alternative hook. Pound to a penny they're American. --Malleus Fatuorum 18:37, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm offended. I may have to start an RFC on my American self. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:58, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Fuck sake. So the most important and memorable and inoffensive fact about this bridge is less important than the number of people who pass under it. Well, perhaps we should nominate the M60/M62 overpass at Eccles for DYK, because hundreds of thousands go under that daily! Parrot of Doom 19:09, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

What about ....that it is believed Tickle Cock Bridge in England received its name because of what courting couples got up to underneath it? Otherwise it completely misses the point of why the local council tried to change its name.

That's not bad, but I'm not certain that the phrase "courting couples" will be understood in the good ole US of A. My offering is "... that it is believed Tickle Cock Bridge in England received its name because of what boys and girls got up to beneath it?" but it's obviously proving a little too Anglo-Saxon for some. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:08, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps boys and girls seems too much like children (which I don't think the majority were):-) --J3Mrs (talk) 20:16, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

That's a fair point. Perhaps "young men and women"? --Malleus Fatuorum 20:19, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I think that's more accurate.--J3Mrs (talk) 20:23, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I've added another suggestion to the DYK nomination ...that it is believed that Tickle Cock Bridge was so-named because of its use as a lovers' lane by young couples? Richerman (talk) 01:33, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

You may have more success with your hook than I've had with my obviously too Anglo-Saxon one. I'll be very surprised to see this on the main page no matter what the hook is though. I think it'll be quietly forgotten. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:39, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I quite like my version, we may as well go out with a bang... or a tug so to speak :) --Fred the Oyster (talk) 01:44, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually, looking at the rules, I think its out of time now anyway. That's a real shame considering some of the spectacularly boring hooks that do make it. Middle American prudery wins again! Richerman (talk) 02:09, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Wait, can't it just be moved to the older noms and possibly still make it?--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:12, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I doubt it. There's no way the hook can be rewritten to avoid the word "cock", so the Bible-belters win again. That Bible of theirs has a lot to answer for. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:17, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Being a Christian myslef, I find that it's stupid that some "Christians" would view that as well...you know. Anyone with half a brain would know that it's refering to a bridge. Sorry peolpe but that's the name and you can't say Tickle Cock Bridge without that word in it.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:22, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

It's in the older noms now but the rules say it has to be an article expanded in the last five days. Can they still get in from the older noms? Richerman (talk) 02:27, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, they can; DYK suggestions are added according to the date that the creation or expansion took place, so an article created on February 21 can still be added to the DYk suggestions on February 26, but it would have to be done in the February 21 section (if that makes sense). The older nominations are basically just a date cut-off; anything created or expanded on those days can't be nominated anymore, but anything put there before it became an "older nomination" is still good, even if the hook hasn't yet been approved. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 05:15, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Furthermore. My Religious and political viewpoints stop at the keyboard. I don't belive in imposeing what I think about Religion or politics on others and I try to keep away from articles that deal with those subjects. I would advise others to do the same but sadly POV pushing is a major issue here.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:30, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Reply to Richerman: I think it can, as it was created the day it was nominated.

Reply to Coldplay Expert: We all have issues we feel strongly about, but wikipedia ought not to be driven by POV pushers which it is clearly is in very many areas, the global warming scandal being just one recent example. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:38, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Trust me I know, Climategate, Global Warming, Barrack Obama, Sarah Palin, and Political articles are very POV-ish. That's why I never use Wikipedia as a source for those topics nor do I edit them. Link I said, I own POV stops when I log in.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:42, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

While you're here, and on a completely different subject, do you have an opinion on this recent WR thread? In your experience, or that of your friends, have you ever felt threatened in that way on wikipedia? --Malleus Fatuorum 02:53, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Well seeing as I can't reply to this until April 3rd, I'll post my 2 cents here. I have never felt threatened at all here. If I was, I'd be gone. With that said, I have no clue about the other people on the other end but I'll WP:AGF as to what they say about themselves.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 03:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Penis thievery or theft

Oh, this and this have just got to be worth a punt. Parrot of Doom 17:47, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Too painful to consider. Not sure what to work on next ... instruments of torture ... 18th and 19th century riots in and around Manchester ... more witches ... another early computer ... UML ... cognitive dissonance theory ... so many choices. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:55, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Well I'll soon have Blackbeard out of the way when this damn book arrives, I can work on Elizabeth Canning in the background, that one will take a while as its more of a historical "whodunnit" than anything else. I have a bazillion things in sandboxes, I really need to finish those. And then there's this London to Manchester air race which I reckon would make a great little article. Parrot of Doom 17:57, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I quite fancy that air race ... could be a nice little article, as you say. --Malleus Fatuorum 18:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like a good job for Tony's FAC "crying women". SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:59, 24 February 2010 (UTC) (the incorrigible one who keeps you all tiptoeing around me :)

I need a link. Which Tony, what's "crying women", and when have I ever tiptoed around you? Or anyone else on here come to that. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 18:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

ah, crap ... you made me go and look it up ... can't you see I'm busy engaging futile POV battles? Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/archive42#Video spoof. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:32, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I've seen you Venezualans have been having a spot of bother. Remind me, where's Venezuala? ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum 19:37, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Northern tip of Africa, near Spain. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:51, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Ah yes, I think I've seen that from our bastion in Gibraltar. But where's Spain? --Malleus Fatuorum 01:56, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

South of that unmentioned country that's across the channel. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:27, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

A propos of nothing at all, I was looking at a map of South America earlier today. What a ridiculously shaped country Chile is. --Malleus Fatuorum 03:17, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I was going to say that's probably all the Argentine's would leave them, but I think it's more related to location of the Southern Andes. Unless you're implying there was some penis thievery ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:49, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I think I've been subjected to this and they've left a very dodgy loaner to keep me going! --Fred the Oyster (talk) 18:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

You must be one of the God knows how many Americans who claim to have been abducted by aliens then. I just wish to God the aliens would keep them instead of sending the sad bastards back. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:34, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

They only abduct the intelligent ones, hence so many reports of cattle going missing. Parrot of Doom 19:38, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't suppose circumcision would be classed as petty theft then? Please note that there are no drawback jokes.

Shudder... being compared to an American!!! You do realise that I know the difference between a pavement and a road don't you? --Fred the Oyster (talk) 22:53, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't know if it's only Jews who're bothered about the circumcision thing, but I never thought for a moment that you were an American Fred; far too straightforward. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to intrude, but felt compelled to share. Penile subincision ack. Oberonfitch (talk) 23:07, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Or even the unkindest cut of all. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 23:09, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I find the whole thing quite incomprehensible. A bit like cutting your eyelids off. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Japanese eyelids? --Fred the Oyster (talk) 23:23, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I think the operation that some Japanese go through to "correct" their eyelids ought to be banned by the UN. We're all different; let's enjoy, learn from, and take pleasure in our differences. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:34, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

East Asian blepharoplasty (sorry 'bout the loaner, Fred). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:55, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually it was a pun on "Jap's eye", given the subject matter, but whatever works :p --Fred the Oyster (talk) 01:56, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Probably a silly question

Hi

Just thought you might still be up - if not someone else who has your page on watch..

I have just tried to find out why a talk page Talk:AI_effect has no "Contents" box and cannot find out how to fix it (if it indeed does need fixing).

I cannot log into IRC either for some strange reason to ask there

Any ideas on a solution ?

thanks...Chaosdruid (talk) 01:50, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Why are you bothered? --Malleus Fatuorum 01:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I wanted to direct someone by a #link to a particular comment in case more turned up over the next two or three days before they are back on

When i try to put it in manually, page#link, it seems like it never works properly and just takes them to the top of the page, but if I click on the section from contents box and copy and paste it works fine

I just found out that no contents box unless 4 or more comments so sorry for wasting your time

Chaosdruid (talk) 02:04, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Copyedit?

I'm trying to whip Cerro Azul (Chile volcano) into shape for a run at FAC. I'm still missing a bit of info (ideally flora and fauna) but even now (at only 82000b) the prose could use a good fine-tuning. Would you be interested in giving it a copyedit? No worries if you can't, thanks, ceranthor 16:30, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Done. I can't quite make sense of this sentence though: "Correspondent to lava type, volcanoes such as Llaima have produced Strombolian activity ...". A "correspondent" is someone with whom you're in correspondence. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:56, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Alrighty, I'll fix that. Much thanks for the copyedit. Ruslik0 and I might have found the flora/fauna info, but I'm not completely sure it's for the volcano's area so I'm hesitant. This source appears accurate, and I've used a source from the website before. Beware, I might need your excellent copyediting skills again! ;) ceranthor 20:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Wanted to..

..apologize for the sarcasm at RfA the other day. Abrasive comments just give me a headache. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 20:27, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I'd forgotten all about it. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:30, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, it wasn't a huge deal I suppose, but you and I are on the same side here so it left a bad taste : ) Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 20:45, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

All I was objecting to was the word "confrontiveness" or whatever it was; I wasn't trying to start another world war. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:48, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

• Speaking of RfA, I responded to your support vote at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kingoomieiii. Feel free to reply if you wish, either here, on my talk page, or at the RfA. NW (Talk) 02:54, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

• I didn't feel that your response required one from me. What are you looking for, the full half-hour argument? What did you pay for?

Lmao ! didnt someone say that only the oldies would understand that ?...Chaosdruid (talk) 03:16, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Haha, very good reference. :)

I shall respect your opinion then, and drop the matter here. NW (Talk) 04:40, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Funny

Just saw your user ID for the first time. I rarely see one that makes me laugh out loud, but yours did.
Thanks, Varlaam (talk) 00:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

It gets me into a lot of trouble, but it makes the point. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:45, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Possible FAC for German Type UB I submarine

Well I've addressed (almost/maybe) all of the concerns from the Peer Review. Now I'm thinking that German Type UB I submarine can be a good FAC. Can you be so kind as to give it a quick lok over and tell me what else I need to add/unscrew-up in order to get it to FA status? Remember, I've never even done 1 FA before and I have no clue how to get through it.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 02:47, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure I've said before that FA is a big jump up from GA. I'll have a look asap. --Malleus Fatuorum 03:01, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Glossary

Speaking of word help, would you mind starting a glossary somewhere? Asking "what's a willy" was bad enough ... and then there was the slag ... and I missed another one this week (somewhere on your talk page), but I was too busy fighting meanies to ask. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

We really are two nations divided by a common language. "Taking the piss" just means what you might call "having a laugh". Perhaps we do need an American–English glossary, and most likely an Australian–English one as well, as those guys really do tell it like it is. --Malleus Fatuorum 03:35, 28 February 2010 (UTC)--Malleus Fatuorum 03:53, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, "having a laugh" might still be a bit too European. ;) By the way Malleus, I really have to thank you; I can't even begin to describe how much that cheered me up when I needed it. Cheers, MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 03:40, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. I did wonder, as whenever I think of the phrase I see DellBoy saying "you're 'aving a laugh intcha?" It's a curious thing though, because when I first looked at your article I was dead set against its promotion, but your hard work won me round. I really hope this incident doesn't affect its chances. --Malleus Fatuorum 03:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

"There is no tomorrow, only tonight?" Sheesh, sounds like a line a Brit gave me a bar recently ... I have canned answers ready for most, but not that one. I should start a contest, but Wiki is dying and no one would join. Or Malleus would delete it ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

No self-respecting Brit would come up with "there is no tomorrow, only tonight", much too lyrical. "Get your coat luv, you've pulled" is far nearer the mark. --Malleus Fatuorum 04:00, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Re Malleus: Hopefully it won't, but I suppose it depends on whether the SPI/CU on the account comes back positive. If it does, I'm guessing that the user visited this particular FAC because I restored their deleted comments, but with the previous editor's concerns regarding the SPI and low edit count added in a small note. I really hope it doesn't affect the chances though; I've had bad luck with two previous nominations for No Line on the Horizon, so I was determined to make this my "third time is the charm" break. If it does, I guess I'll just take my lumps and try again in another two weeks.

Re Sandy: Hey, I only quote song lyrics that really resound with me y'know! ;) It ain't easy to come up with so many and still limit them to U2! :P And besides, it wasn't a Brit; It were that drunken Irish lad who dun tried ter save the world. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 04:02, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Knock, knock, knock -- Civility police

Please don't refer to other editors as lunatics.[13] It's not a good way to make friends and influence people. Jehochman ^Brrr 04:45, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Please don't patronise me with your silly warnings. If you choose to associate yourself with the civility police then that's your problem, not mine. --Malleus Fatuorum 04:48, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

• LOL. This is truly out of control! I've got so many pictures in my mind of Jonathan E. Hochman deciding to make this post, that I can't describe, simply because the description would get me blocked! :) Scottaka UnitAnode 04:50, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

  My talk page is a free fire zone. Per the comment at the top, you can say whatever you like to me there, as long is it is witty, insightful, or highly sarcastic. Also, feel free to email me any insults. I don't mind. Malleus, if you don't see the humor in my post, you're missing out on some good lols. Jehochman ^Brrr 04:57, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

It's what I said to you earlier. The intention is to provoke a response that can be used to justify a block. Don't give them the satisfaction. --Malleus Fatuorum 04:53, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

No it's not. Nobody is getting blocked. If you check my logs you'll see that I hate using short blocks on established editors. I generally tolerate users until they deserve an indefinite block. Jehochman ^Brrr 04:57, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

We both know how it works. Administrator X provokes a response from editor Y, and administrator Z administers the block. Job done. --Malleus Fatuorum 05:00, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

• True enough. I usually know pretty well when I'm being baited, and my "baiting radar" is beeping right now. Now he's ignoring my request that he not post at my talkpage, claiming I've "disrupted a noticeboard" with my lil' ol' response to LHvU's warning me for using the honorable Mr Tony Sidaway's surname. He's itching to pull the trigger, but right now, he'd have a very tough time defending as anything other than a block made in anger. Scottaka UnitAnode 05:00, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

• No, I'm not angry at the moment. I'm amused that you're taking this so seriously. Why not go edit an article instead? As for the editing restriction LHvU placed, I don't really support it. I don't like being called "Hochman" by anybody younger than 50 (your age is unknown to me), but I didn't complain about it. In general it's best to avoid pissing people off needlessly. Please call me "Jehochman". That's what I like most. Thank you. Jehochman ^Brrr 05:06, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

  Whatever. So are you now saying that you are offended in some way by my using your actual, given name? You're dropping "warnings" all over the place, but that is what it is. Your arbcom candidacy was soundly rejected for a reason, and part of it is how you come in stomping around a situation that you know very little about. If you were to have to stand for RFA again, I highly doubt you'd get even 50%, based on the way you use the fact that you have a few extra buttons at the top of your screen as some kind of "badge" with which to attempt to move other editors in the direction you want them to go. The sooner you realize that those buttons are only supposed to make you a janitor (and not some kind of "civility police" or hall monitor), the better off everyone will be. Scottaka UnitAnode 05:14, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

  Do you think those remarks are helpful to further the goal of collaboratively writing an encyclopedia? You can't control what I say or do, but you can control your own actions and statements. If you don't like what I've done, your best response is to demonstrate higher standards yourself. Jehochman ^Brrr 05:45, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Jehochman, I find it hard to see how your remarks "further the goal of collaboratively writing an encyclopedia"? Why should others control their actions if you don't control yours? --Philcha (talk) 11:20, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

History of logic

Thanks for the help. I have put the WP:alt in, added more citations for Port Royal, and to Indian logic section. Trimmed the fat from the Islamic logic section so it is duly weighted in line with the other sections. Made some cosmetic changes here and there.

The Stanford Encyclopedia is a stronghold of grocers (see John Longeways article's for instance). On that subject, it still seems odd we write 1's and 2's but not one's and two's. In that case, the apostrophe is to separate the numeric characters from the alpha ones. Writing 1960s without the apostrophe seems arbitrary to me. In any case, I have removed them from all dates in the article, in line with house style. HistorianofLogic (talk) 11:49, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

"John Longeways article's"? ;-) I quote from Fowler: "to insert an apostrophe in the plural of an ordinary noun is a fatuous vulgarism", so it's not just a house style. So far as "1's and 2's" are concerned, they're treated in just the same way as "p's and q's", where the apostrophe is used to indicate the plural of single letters. --Malleus Fatuorum 15:01, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

"John Longeways article's"? - was intended as a joke (note the deliberately omitted apostrophe in Longeways name). I don't understand your point about p's and q's. The letters are used to refer to other letters, so they are common nouns, signifying any token of the letter-type. So if it is a fatuous vulgarism to insert an apostrophe, it is a fatuous vulgarism in the case of p and q also. But it is not. HistorianofLogic (talk) 14:34, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

You might find it helpful to read a few style guides. I find The Times style guide to be a useful resource, and it specifically mentions the case of "p's and q's". --Malleus Fatuorum 14:40, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

It does mention the case of p's and q's, but without giving reason or logic. The letters are being used as nouns, therefore why the apostrophe if it is always fatuous and vulgar to signify a plural with an apostrophe? I'm simply commenting on the reason you are giving. HistorianofLogic (talk) 14:59, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

<--- And here [14] Joke Spruyt who is a distinguished medievalist is talking about the 1250's, with apostrophe. My view is that some points of grammar are really just convention and have no rhyme nor reason. E.g. 'sixes and sevens'. The 'e' in the plural of 'sixes' is just put there for aesthetic reasons. If you spend your time working on medieval manuscripts, which have almost no punctuation, arbitrary line breaks and inventive spelling, you quickly acquire a sense of the arbitrary and ephemeral nature of most of our rules. I have no problem with conforming to house style and conventions such as in Wikipedia. As for Fowler, he is just another style manual, and rather outdated and snobbish at that. HistorianofLogic (talk) 15:09, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

The purpose of an apostrophe is primarily twofold; to indicate possession as in "men's clothing" or a missing letter as in "there's". I already drew attention to the special case convention of "p's and q's" and "1's and 2's". Distinguished medievalists are not necessarily the best of writers, as your example of Spruyt demonstrates. The rules of English grammar are quite clear on the subject of apostrophes, and unless Spruyt is using "1250's" in the context of something belonging to the 1250s, such as "1250's manuscripts" for instance, then he is unequivocally wrong. You may elect to follow Spruyt's poor example or to write correctly and grammatically, entirely your choice and nothing to do with "house style". --Malleus Fatuorum 15:19, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Spruyt says that Peter of Spain died in the 1250's. The purpose of an apostrophe is not twofold. In the examples I have mentioned it is there to clear up ambiguity. Dos and don'ts, for instance, is hard to read, so we write Do's and don'ts. HistorianofLogic (talk) 15:28, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Can you find even a single style guide that agrees with your interpretation of the use of apostrophes? You don't like Fowler, so what about the University of Oxford's style guide for authors, which states categorically "do not use the apostrophe in year dates: the 1960s, the 1990s". [15] --Malleus Fatuorum 15:53, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

BTW, although the American Heritage Dictionary (now there's an oxymoron for you), for instance, allows both "dos" and "do's" as the plural of "do", it's technically incorrect. "Dos and don'ts" is the correct punctuation. --Malleus Fatuorum 16:02, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Well I Googled <dos and don'ts apostrophe> and there is a lot of material there, but nothing authoritative. This [16] was interesting, saying that the apostrophe "is used by some writers to form a plural for abbreviations and symbols where adding just s rather than ’s would be ambiguous". It also notes that "while British English did formerly endorse the use of apostrophes in numbers and dates, this usage has now largely been superseded." Except of course Fowler mentions it. Although I can't find it in my version, which is a 1950's reprint of the original 1926 edition. I am going to have a look at some older books. This is complicated by the fact that referring to whole decades like this is comparatively rare before the mid-twentieth century. HistorianofLogic (talk) 16:59, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

BTW This [17], while it has no authority, is essentially what I had mind. "The rules about the use of apostrophes to signal a plural rather than a possessive may seem complex, but for the purpose of the current question, can be reduced to saying that an apostrophe is used to signal a plural for a word that does not otherwise have a "natural" English plural. Therefore, in strictly correct terms, an apostrophe is inserted in year dates, abbreviations, foreign words that would be rendered in italics, and certain English words." HistorianofLogic (talk) 17:03, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

In my copy of the second edition of Fowler the issue of no apostrophe in "1920s", for instance, is dealt with in the section entitled possessive puzzles. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:19, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

<---- Here's another beautiful example [. Dot the is and cross the ts is incomprehensible without the apostrophes. It's a clear example (a) of precedent (b) of the clear application of a logical rule, in this case to avoid ambiguity. It also says "Even the 19th-century printers (who tried to establish the possessive apostrophe rule) recognised that there were exceptions. They allowed a plural apostrophe after abbreviations (she has three MA's), numerals (he hit three 6's), and dates (in the 1990's). There is a tendency today to omit the apostrophe in some of these cases, but the alternative usage is still widely encountered. So here we have a raft of usages where we have to be tolerant of the plural apostrophe." HistorianofLogic (talk) 17:15, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

And the blogger in question is David Crystal who is definitely authoritative. HistorianofLogic (talk) 17:18, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

That it's "widely encountered" does not make it correct. There's no disagreement about using an apostrophe after a single letter, as in the example of "p's and q's" given several times already, or "6's". The discussion is simply about "1920's", which is absolutely and unequiivocally wrong, no matter how widely it's encountered. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

(Sorry Malleus, am butting in...) The Brief Penguin Handbook (Lester & Faigley, American edition, page 501) states clearly that apostrophes "are not used with the plural of numbers and acronyms." Examples they use are: 1890s, CEOs, VCRs, URLs, and JPEGs. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 17:28, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

This is a clear example of what Crystal calls the 'zero tolerance approach'. The zero toleration approach is wrong. It's the health and safety approach to the beauty of language. HistorianofLogic (talk) 17:32, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

That appears to be his opinion, but that's all it is. He's clearly just cashing in on the success of Eats, Shoots, and Leaves. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:37, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I've yet to see any authoritative guide argue that "1890's" is correct; David Crystal referred to above appears simply to be tolerant of the incorrect use of apostrophes to indicate plurality, preferring to blame the education system for its widespread use rather than those who misuse the apostrophe out of ignorance. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:35, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

No, Crystal also says that it is also OK with dates. See also his site [18]. He is an erudite and sensible guy. HistorianofLogic (talk) 17:30, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

He's a clot, arguing that it's nobody's fault that they can't use punctuation properly, it's the fault of the system that educated them. Typical "no blame" nonsense. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:35, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

No, read and understand carefully his logic [19]. "So we do use an apostrophe, sometimes, to express a plural. We do it when we want to pluralise an unusual noun, such as an abbreviation or a date - as in the 1960's." That is what he says. A writer on linguistics and the history of grammar. HistorianofLogic (talk) 17:37, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Look, this has become an enormous waste of time. You are wrong. Crystal is wrong. End of story. Now let's get on with something else. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:39, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

'Time to get on with something else' is an excellent way to win an argument. Ok. Note: the first edition of Fowler (Possessive Puzzles) does not mention this 'rule'. HistorianofLogic (talk) 17:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Well the second edition does, on page 467, under subsection 6. Now enough. Continue with your poor punctuation if it pleases you, I'm wasting no more time on this. --Malleus Fatuorum 18:01, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Word help

Do you know of a suitable word which describes the relationship between supporter and supported? For instance, a patron may support a charity. What word would then be used to relate the charity to that patron? Parrot of Doom 22:09, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Benefited, accommodated, bolstered? --Fred the Oyster (talk) 22:11, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Its in relation to a woman, specifically "Gascoyne also thought that some of the Canningites doubted the girl's veracity, but supported her cause just to spite him" - 'her cause' just isn't right. She was their cause; their "Virgin Mary" if you like. Golden meal-ticket, etc. Parrot of Doom 22:26, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Which article's that from? I'd probably get a better idea from a bit more of the context. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:00, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I see you already linked Elizabeth Canning. Doh! I'd probably say something like "... but colluded in her version of events just to spite him".

Its a little problematic, because her version of events may very well have been their version of events, if you see what I mean. Parrot of Doom 23:24, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

BTW this case has variously been called one of the most famous in 18th-century England, so I want to spend some time getting this right :) Moore's book doesn't follow any particular narrative, she's basically picking everything apart rather than telling the story. Its going to take quite some time to sort it all out. Parrot of Doom 23:26, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I see what you mean, but it's the version of events she recounted at the trial, so it's her version of events, whether she invented it or not. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:40, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

That makes sense to me, and I've therefore used your suggestion. Just gotta find me an unwatermarked image of Crisp Gascoyne now... Parrot of Doom 00:03, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

If you can't find an unwatermarked one, let me know and I'll have a stab at removing it for you. I do that sort of stuff all day long... unfortunately.--Fred the Oyster (talk) 00:05, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

This is the only one I've found so far. Parrot of Doom 00:22, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

The watermark I can get rid of, but I notice the sneaky gits cut the image in half if one wants the larger one... which I would like as it gives me more pixels to work from. I'll get stuck into it tomorrow as my eyes are a little tired starring at this bloody monitor all day (calibrated or not). --Fred the Oyster (talk) 01:03, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

You can drag it up and down. I can host a stitched version if that helps? Parrot of Doom 16:00, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

ah, didn't realise about the scrolling. I'll have a stab at a higher resolution one later. meanwhile I've uploaded this lower resolution one sans watermark. The cheeky gits claiming copyright on a public domain image. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 17:28, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

s'gone! Very nice work, I look forward to the higher resolution version :) I've been looking in old books, I may find it elsewhere, but thanks for now! Parrot of Doom 17:37, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

(ec) "...confirmed/backed up/gave credence to/verified her version of events..."--Fred the Oyster (talk) 23:27, 27 February 2010 (UTC)