User talk:DuncanHill/Archives/2010/February

Hello
Can I just clear the air over something? Can you please state, for the record, whether or not you believe me to be a dishonest person and/or a liar? - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 16:41, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I just commented on your talk page before reading this, but to recap, I don't think that a single act makes a person a dishonest person. I was commenting on the edit, not the person. DuncanHill (talk) 16:48, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I would not characterize the following edit as an attempt to be helpful. You wrote the following:
 * "First, NEVER change my comments in a talk thread again - even for a simple typo. It is misleading and dishonest."
 * As I made that edit, you are indeed calling me someone who intentionally misleads and you are implying I am a dishonest person. I don't consider such a strongly worded order to be a helpful suggestion. If you call someone's edit dishonest, then you call them dishonest as they made the edit, and this I do not appreciate. Good day. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 16:53, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You said I was being ridiculous in response to my explanation on your talk page of a better way to fix indents, which is the "being helpful" I was referring to when I made the comment about you getting away with personal attacks. Perhaps of you had not chosen to fragment this discussion by raising it here when we were already discussing it on your talk page you would be less confused. DuncanHill (talk) 16:59, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Edit summary reply
Ouch! You've used a template to send a message to an experienced editor. Please review the essay Don't template the regulars or maybe listen to a little advice. Doesn't this feel cold, impersonal, and canned? It's meant in good humour. Best wishes. User:DuncanHill (talk) 01:21, 19 October 2017 (UTC) - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 18:45, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * DTTR was an essay last time I looked, and a silly and counterproductive one at that. You should know by now that repeated failure to provide edit summaries is widely seen as disruptive. DuncanHill (talk) 18:50, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, and a might fine one too. I believe that you already covered this in the previous thread. Adding a template to my talk page is not only unproductive, but its rude. Do you do this to all editors who don't leave an edit summary on talk pages? You might be a bit busy... - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 18:57, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not just talk pages is it though - for example on AN and ANI you do not provide them. I had imagined that using a standard template would make you realise that it's not just me that finds your behaviour disruptive. I'm sorry you find templates rude, it is not a feeling I share. DuncanHill (talk) 19:04, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Templates are not rude in themselves, but if you template a regular they are likely to look at you with some disrespect. It's considered rude and completely lacking in judgement by many, including myself. The only template I would ever really use is the ANI one, and even then I tend to edit it after applying it. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 19:09, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Is this where I get to act all hurt and self-righteous because you say I'm rude and completely lacking in judgement? Or is it where I just think to myself "there's no hope for some people" and write you off? DuncanHill (talk) 19:18, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That's a bit rude, Duncan. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 20:57, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Not half as rude as what I wanted to write. DuncanHill (talk) 21:06, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * To use your own argument Duncan, I am not saying that you have bad judgement and are rude, I'm saying that adding a template to my talk page when you know how long I've been on Wikipedia is indeed rude and a poor display of judgement. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 21:13, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * When I want advice on what constitutes good judgement, rest assured I won't be disturbing you. DuncanHill (talk) 21:18, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, count the above as some free advise then. It's not a good idea to template the regulars. Of course, you are free to try this on a more regular basis if you want, but don't hold me responsible for the resulting reaction. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 21:28, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

In regards to my experience...
I saw your comment on Off2riorob's page, and feel rather compelled to respond. I rather think that your assertion that I'm not aware of policy and guidelines is not the case. I am fully aware of the major guidelines and policies, having been a regular editor for over 5 years. In defense of my experience (this feels quite ridiculous to have to say this), but I helped modify the fair use criteria at one point, I started WP:AN and I created the fact tag. Of course, I know there are some norms that I may not know everything about, but there is so much policy that isn't that important and that nobody really worries about that I don't really feel all that concerned.

Incidentally, for someone who likes edit summaries and likes to note that experienced editors aren't aware of policies and guidelines, I rather think that an edit summary of DTTR can go boil its head is somewhat inappropriate. But this is your opinion, so I'm fine with it; however know that DTTR directly relates to WP:CIVIL. Just a thought. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 19:07, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * You think "DTTR can go boil its head" is inappropriate? That's priceless! DuncanHill (talk) 19:15, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Why is that? - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk
 * The problem is, Im left with the choice of either assuming you really are clueless but good-hearted, or that you're a very clever wind-up merchant, and whichever I plump for I'll get crucified. DuncanHill (talk) 21:05, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Neither, I'm merely frustrated that you decided to take it upon yourself to call me inexperienced with little understanding of policy. If someone said that about you behind your back, I'm fairly sure you'd be a bit miffed as well. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 21:14, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I was trying to be kind and put your unhelpful and disruptive behaviour down to your inexperience of Wikipedia today (as opposed to your idealised memories of Wikipedia long ago). Of course, I am prepared to accept your word that you know exactly what you are doing. DuncanHill (talk) 21:24, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You know, I hear a lot of people talking about the disruption I'm causing, but can you tell me exactly which article I stopped someone from editing in, or an article where I initiated an off-topic conversation? Seriously, I'd love to know what article that might be, as you seem to believe I'm disruptive. Please do let me know... seriously! - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 21:26, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * You are wasting a lot of people's time and effort at AN and ANI with your trolling against Giano. You forum shop. You split discussions across two or three pages for no reason (except possibly to confuse people and distract them from your behaviour). You claim to be opposed to incivility, but make personal attacks on editors with whom you are in disagreement. You claim to want clear and enforced policies, yet ignore whatever policies don't suit you. I am not going to waste my time giving a long list of diffs, you might just as well list all your recent contributions. DuncanHill (talk) 21:32, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That's some fairly serious allegations! Can you tell me where I was forum shopping? It was generally agreed that an interaction ban should only be done on WP:AN, and not on an article talk page. So that's perfectly reasonable. I have not been incivil to anyone, unless you can give me evidence to the contrary. I'm afraid that this disagreement here doesn't really count. I have not ignored any policies. I have not been trolling Giano. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 21:41, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thread closed per DNFTT DuncanHill (talk) 21:48, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll remember this comment next time you accuse another of bad faith editing. Good day. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 22:55, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * As I think I suggested somewhere above, you are either utterly clueless or deliberately trying to create trouble. As a few old hands seem to think you used to be a good admin, I suspect the latter. DuncanHill (talk) 23:04, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Happy DuncanHill's Day!
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk  • 00:16, 1 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks - I think I've already got one, just don't really feel like having anything much on my userpage at the moment. DuncanHill (talk) 00:22, 1 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, if you have two, I'll take one off your hands. :-) Proofreader77 (interact) 00:38, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I checked. If you got two, the other wasn't from me. So it's fine. Several people have given this type of award out.  — Rlevse • Talk  • 02:40, 1 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you - it is really appreciated. DuncanHill (talk) 01:01, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Cornjsh pasty
Have lost access by keyboard, so am handicapped till able to learn how else to compose etc As far as I know pastry wd b short. Detail shd be at [pasty] not in Cornwall. The Cornishness of the cook is relevant also. Congratulations on the medal of honour--not before time.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 05:53, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey
With regards to this comment, don't you think that it would be a good idea to say this directly to Guy? After all, part of the cause of this drama was that Giano felt he was being talked about behind his back - which in fact, sadly, was the case. If you are upset with this sort of behaviour, don't you think you should be careful not to do the same as what you are unhappy about? - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 00:50, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I've tried talking to Guy in the past. Not a happy experience, and not one I wish to repeat if at all possible. Any even slightly negative comment I should make about his behaviour results in him accusing me of bearing a grudge. Any praise I give for suggestions he makes is met with silence. I am certain that Guy intended to cause drama and disruption with his comment (Giano baiting is a game much played by a certain breed of lone-gunslinger admin) - the real question is not "how do we make a civility procedure work on Giano" but "how do we make a civility procedure work on Guy?" He has a history as long as your arm of incivility, foul language, outright "saying something that is untrue about another editor's contributions" (I'm forbidden from using the proper English word for it. DuncanHill (talk) 01:01, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't see that we are targetting anyone. When civility breaks down and either causes someone to leave or disrupts articles, then we should have a clear policy that tells us what to do. I don't think we need to bring up Giano or Guy into this at all. I'm sad that Giano got brought up in the first place, it should never have happened. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 03:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, try "how do we make a civility procedure work on admins?" I agree we should have clear policies and have been calling for all policies to be both clearer and better enforced for a long time, but as long as our "policies" are descriptive and not prescriptive we're just whistling in the wind. You could make a policy as clear as day, but if it remains optional (like all the other behavioural policies), it'll be a failure. Optional policies may have been a good idea in a small community, but they are unworkable and inevitably a source of friction and drama in a large one. DuncanHill (talk) 03:46, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

eusday
Thanks for your comments on my talk page. I am not fond of those who fill the Ref Desk pages with questions which seem to be trolling. Note that he started his editing career on a Thursday by labelling Thursday as a "current event." Troll enough for you, or does that seem like the behavior of an editor interested in making Wikipedia a great encyclopedia? But as I have noted on the Ref Desk talk page, even a silly or trolling question may elicit some encyclopedic answers. I certainly have nothing against a little humor. Edison (talk) 03:13, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It could look like a lot of things, probably mainly depending on which side of the bed someone got out of that morning. Maybe we should just block anyone whose first edits don't meet your standards? I am sick and tired of the intolerant, "label them first and think about it later" behaviour of far too many editors. I'm not fond of people who make fun of other's names (real or chosen), particularly when the other appears to have English as a non-native language - something that looks to me very like trolling. See? Just about anything anyone doesn't like can be labelled trolling, and it rarely helps anyone. DuncanHill (talk) 03:24, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Nice strawman argument of saying that anyone who objects to trolling wants to "block everyone whose first edits don't meet (his) standards." Do think it is likely that he is a very sincere editor who thinks that each day of the week needs, in turn to be labelled a "current event?" If you like hursday's edits, there are lots of articles full of such humor at Uncyclopedia. Edison (talk) 04:23, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I'm not saying anything about "anyone who objects to trolling" (though as often as not "trolling" means "I don't like that") - I'm suggesting that you have a problem with recognising that others may not meet your own high contribution standard, yet still be good-faith contributors and able to improve. The questions of his that I have seen seem reasonable enough. If you want an encyclopaedia that no-one can edit, try Citizendium. DuncanHill (talk) 04:30, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * hello this is edison. A truly new editor is extremely unlikely to know all about how to apply templates on his first edit. I see a clever person who has been around Wikipedia before is having a bit of fun with a new ID. As long as RefDesk questions are not disruptive and lead to informative responses bring'em on, even if there is the annoying "hello this is hursday" at the beginning of each and the e.e.cummings-like aversion to capitalization. The career of vandal templating of articles did not continue after appropriate warnings were placed on his talk page (which he promptly removed as is his right). Note that others have on the ref desk talk page called the posts trolling. Note that others have responded with truncated weekday names to his posts at ref desk. Do you ever spend time reverting vandalism and warning vandals? Help is always needed. Edison (talk) 15:24, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Stopped after warning? Oh, yes, obviously a troll! Yes I do a lot of reverting vandalism on articles on my watchlist, particularly Humphry Davy, Michael Faraday, James Watt, William Golding, Walter Ralegh, and the Boscastle flood of 2004. DuncanHill (talk) 16:05, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Cheers Duncan for adding those categories to Inglewood Football Club. Much appreciated... I was wondering what to use, and you've solved my problem :-) Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 07:03, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem, I was attracted by the edit summary on its talk page when you removed the speedy tag! I'm good at categorization and I think cats are vital for readers, so always try to add them when they're missing. DuncanHill (talk) 16:08, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Another Cornish Fox
Duncan said: Hi Vernon, I hope you are well. Have you found Joseph Fox the elder yet? I just came upon him while dabbing links to Falmouth. DuncanHill (talk) 02:25, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Vernon replied -Good to hear from you. Hans Weebers is a bit of an enthusiast, isn't he!  He is descended from Joseph Fox and has put a lot of text up that needs wikifying.  I've been working on Francis Fox of St Germans, so that the data on other branches Francis's descendants can be moved from the Fox family of Falmouth to there, hoping no deletionist will spot it.  Vernon White  . . . Talk 15:40, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Refdesk

 * This thread started on Cuddlyable3's talk page, but he decided that he wanted it here, regardless of my wishes. DuncanHill (talk) 20:40, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I keep this thread off my page, following my policy stated at the top of my page. I think the thread ends now, see below.

Please do not disrupt the indentation of my comments again. Secondly, if you want a thread about hitting children, please start a new one and stop derailing a thread about timetabling. DuncanHill (talk) 16:55, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Adjusting a user's comment indentation to avoid the appearance of starting a new thread, if that does not seem intended, is unexceptional minor reformatting. I am inclined to collapse the block of posts about school punishment including yours. What do you think? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 19:44, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * My comment in the thread, which pointed out the illegality of corporal punishment in UK schools, was made before the two comments above it, and the indentation indicated that. The indentation you changed it to gave the appearence of my comment having been made after the two above it. If you change the indentation again I shall have to assume you are deliberately trying to disrupt the thread. As to collapsing the punishment section, as it should never have been in the thread in the first place I would have no objection. DuncanHill (talk) 20:19, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Your indentation is preserved and I have hidden the section. That's all. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 20:31, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Happy Birthday
I am psychic, you know? Have a great one! LessHeard vanU (talk) 00:23, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, but your psychic powers appear to be chronologically challenged. Are your good wishes for the birthday I had last November, or the one I've got pencilled in for this November coming? DuncanHill (talk) 00:25, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Nah, you updated your userpage... I really am psychic, just shitpoor psychic is all! LessHeard vanU (talk) 00:52, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, well, I restored an old version of the page to add in Rlevse's kind gift (I am now officially doubly awesome), and then realised that I was (and still am) older than I used to be. DuncanHill (talk) 01:04, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you ...
I was confused. :-) Proofreader77 (interact) 00:42, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm, and you're not a stupid person - my apologies if the edit summary was misleading! :) DuncanHill (talk) 01:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Whatever my IQ (a matter of much contention, as is everything else in the vicinity of Wikipedia), I was glad to see that go ... since I have some vague memory that DuncanHill is a clever source of goodness ... but see conundrum at beginning of this ellipsical (ellipsis-laden?:) sentence. :-) Proofreader77 (interact) 01:21, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, your IQ is a number you get given after taking an IQ test. It's quite useful if you ever want to predict how well you will do in IQ tests. DuncanHill (talk) 01:29, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Surely the only Wikipedia acceptable marker on the smart/stupid scale would be an IQ score reported in the New York Times ... else accusations of mere opinion-based assertions/aspersions would fly. (Excuse foolishness, I've read far too many noticeboard and talkpage discussions today ... Exciting times, huh? LoL But good fodder for the Wikipedia Western Musical) Proofreader77 (interact) 01:37, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Defense team notes :-)
You seem to have the AN situation well in hand. Here's my notes if you need them. :-) Proofreader77 (interact) 20:36, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Notification of proposed topic/interaction ban on Tbsdy
See here for the proposal. Based on some recent interaction you may have had with the user(s) I thought you might want to know. Thanks. Equazcion ( talk ) 23:54, 14 Feb 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know. I don't intend commenting there for now. DuncanHill (talk) 00:32, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

E J Hutchins
Thanks for adding the cats to Edward John Hutchins Vernon White  '''. . . Talk''' 00:12, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Reply
You just said to me that you should say Cornwall, England, UK. You had put an incorrect flag on a numerous number of articles. I have changed it to both the England and UK flag. Happy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.1.157.16 (talk) 12:05, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Well I have seen a large number of twinning sections Using the flags of Wales or England. Is there a page describing the rules on this? 82.1.157.16 (talk) 12:10, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Ahh, I see now ;). 82.1.157.16 (talk) 12:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Pithy!
Loved your comment here. pablo hablo. 16:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I have my good moments :) DuncanHill (talk) 16:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Final discussion for Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:
 * 1) Proposal to Close This RfC
 * 2) Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip  02:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Just saying 'hi'
Hi Duncan, just a very quick note to let you know I'm back in the fold after an absence from WP. I hope to get stuck into more editing on Cornwall-related articles very soon. Anything particular that needs attention? Best, Andy F (talk) 10:07, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Duncan, many thanks for sorting out those cats in my sandbox. I take it the fix was inserting a colon as the first character? Andy F (talk) 18:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Your work is greatly appreciated
Here you are, Duncan - very well deserved IMO Andy F (talk) 19:56, 24 February 2010 (UTC)