User talk:Intothatdarkness/Archive 4

Please comment on Talk:Winged unicorn
Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Winged unicorn. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Interesting
Do you think this little shitstorm here has a similar style to  the shitstorm here? I am having cataract surgery on Thursday, and so have no time to haul anyone to a drama page until next week, but I've been tracking the situation and I sense a sock. Montanabw (talk) 02:57, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Not a ton, actually. There are some behavioral similarities, but I think you could make that case with some other people as well. I think people are starting to notice that the "I'm a victim" trolling strategy is becoming more and more effective here and are copying it. I could be wrong, of course. Intothatdarkness 17:26, 26 February 2015 (UTC) [adding] Also, I'm not an expert at spotting some of the bad behavior (socks and so on) that goes on here. Hope the surgery goes well! Intothatdarkness 17:28, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Editing pattern is identical, 50 edits to make a paragraph, obsession with "experts", anger when thwarted, personal attacks. But if you aren't seeing it, then I'm not ready to file an SPI yet. I am usually able to tell by the bad feeling I get in my gut.    Montanabw (talk)  06:17, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd say go with your gut. You've got more experience with this kind of thing than I do, honestly. Intothatdarkness 15:57, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Now compare the tone to that Kit Carson article - I think yet another sock of the same editor.  Montanabw (talk)  08:33, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I would concur on the Kit Carson one. That person also got very quiet once more eyes appeared on the article. Intothatdarkness 15:43, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks
for your continuing support from me personally and I'm sure from the other WER clerks. . Buster Seven   Talk  22:05, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
 * BTW. The source of the banner can be found at User:John Carter/Anti-PC. . Buster Seven   Talk  03:33, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Long overdue
Hey Into .. how's life and the 'pedia been treating you? Hopefully all is well. I really did mean to drop by earlier, but it's so easy to get pulled off on a tangent and get distracted here. I hope you and your family and friends are all doing well. I'm glad to see you're still providing you sage advice and abilities to the project. We could use 100 more like you about the place. — Ched : ?  17:21, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Good to see you back as well, Ched. Sadly common sense is anything but around here, but I still kick in my little bit from time to time. Intothatdarkness 17:56, 4 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Hey - have to share this, and since you're in the room (so to speak) I figured I'd post it here. I was taking a break, and watching an old Cheers episode - one which Rebecca flirts with a gay guy.  At the end, Rebecca says something like "I always assumed that anyone was straight, unless they said otherwise."  The guy says: "That's funny, I always assumed that a person was gay, unless they said otherwise".  Not that it has anything to do directly with any recent conversations, but it made me think how different one person's perspective can be to another's.  Thought you'd get a smile from that.  Cheers. — Ched :  ?  20:01, 4 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Yep...did get a smile. Perspective is always an interesting thing, and one I think is often underestimated (at least when it comes to understanding that there are different perspectives). Intothatdarkness 17:18, 5 March 2015 (UTC)


 * By the way - I had a look at your contribs, and see you're still plugging away on the "old west" stuff. I absolutely love that topic.  Really enjoy the improvements you've made to Kit Carson.  Thanks for that.  Long live the Duke. :) — Ched :  ?  20:07, 4 March 2015 (UTC)


 * That Carson article could actually stand a total prose rewrite, but I don't know that I want to mess with it. We've got a tendentious editor there whose apparent interest in the topic is sadly not matched with writing skill. It might turn into a bit of a tussle. Intothatdarkness 17:18, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Got a minute
Can you or one of your stalkers take a look at the article T. C. Cannon. I've been working on it recently and I question how the references are used. I usually use the cite template so I'm a bit rusty with references but the way that article uses them doesn't seem to be MoS. I want to get better at reference use so I want to learn what the proper way is so I can recognize an improper way (which I think this is). Thanks. Buster Seven   Talk  23:08, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Easily offended banner
I am rather surprised and I guess heartened to see the template taken up so quickly. But the current working original was only really intended as a working draft, and I myself think the language could probably use some revision, particularly to make for some sort of more striking impact on the reader. Please feel free to make or propose any edits you might deem reasonable to the original. One thing I think might be particularly useful might be to include some sort of link to probably a userspace page where discussion of the concerns expressed by the banner might take place. John Carter (talk) 15:36, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I quite like it, and may tinker with language at some point. I couldn't tell from Gandy's talk where it originated, but it makes sense. Intothatdarkness 17:19, 5 March 2015 (UTC)


 * The concept is well worth working on, though I would prefer something other than "politically correct" as that particular phrase has a meaning in the USA where the political right wing bludgeons the political left wing, usually over language tinged with racism or other issues that are a bit more than "PC." "Ideologically-driven" is problematic; for example, the people targeting Corbett are using ideology, but I happen to know that they are misusing the ideology they claim to espouse. JMO.  I do think there is a wide contingent of people on wiki who are too easily offended, too prone to create drama for drama's sake, and let's also not forget the trolls.  Our on-wiki term "POV-pusher" is often quite apt.  Just food for thought.   Montanabw (talk)  07:52, 8 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm not 100% sure. POV-pusher does work to some degree, but it also doesn't convey the level of hostility and dysfunction that can be created. Policy-OWNers are part the deal, too. Need to think on it some. Intothatdarkness 15:36, 11 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I agree that POV-pusher is probably a 6 on the 1-10 scale, but when it comes to ideologically-driven lunatics, the men's rights movement, pro-porn article editors and the some of the pro-gun rights folks can have as much lunacy, hostility and dysfunction as the crowd that tries to paint Corbett as a misogynist (which he's not). My horse in this race (so to speak) is that I am amongst those who identifies myself as a feminist, but more in the "kick ass and take names, don't you dare tell me to act like a doormat" way (LOL) - I am not the sort of "feminist" that is being described by those who are frustrated with the GGTF gang - recall their ringleader accused me of being a "man trying to tell us what to do."  So I'd just say that words have power, and what words are chosen need to be carefully chosen.  You are right to identify that there's a rather dangerous crowd of what can be described as the "easily offended," but on the other hand, when those of us onto certain issues call people on legitimately bad behavior, I don't think it's appropriate to rank that as "easily offended."  For example, that young woman that Rush Limbaugh called a slut for being pro-birth control was not "easily offended" or being too PC; she was the recipient of a vicious attack by an obnoxious (if famous) troll.  On the other hand, people who keep calling for Corbett's head even when told repeatedly that he's just a curmudgeon ARE in often the easily offended camp. Does my description make sense?  Montanabw (talk)  22:15, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Those are good points. I'll admit I haven't had much contact with "men's rights" editors around here, that I know of anyway, and that while I guess I can see some of their points, it also seems to me that in at least a few cases I've seen reported some of them are still basically regurgitating almost verbatim some slanted opinions from the 60s or 70s. And I regret to say that I think at least some of the broad range of editors claiming "systemic bias" are probably more clearly using it as a word to obscure that in some cases they are more clearly promoting their own biases. This isn't saying that there isn't some clearly pro-WASP type problems here too. The initial version of the template is at User:John Carter/Anti-PC, and the most recent version on my user talk page also contains a link to a page I've started which might, I hope, be able to provide some sort of safe place where individuals facing problematic POV pushers of all kind can talk and maybe receive support personally or in terms of content. That page, still in its very early stages, is at User:John Carter/Editors before Politics. I don't know if there is necessarily a clear-cut need for it, but it might, maybe, be useful down the road. Anyone who might be interested in making any reasonable changes to it which might reduce the obviousness of its implicit biases (hey, I'm biased - I know that) is free to either do so or suggest the changes they might want to make. Oh, and FWIW, the "easily-offended" phrase was from a comic strip some years or months ago I found which seemed to be describing "demonstrators" of a sort in general. It might well be easily changed. John Carter (talk) 22:39, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I pretty much use the "gut check" method; discussions that raise my blood pressure in a certain way are things I listen to. To be honest, the tangles I've had with editors who identify as women have been among the worst I've had on-wiki (and I am female, so take that into account).  I think some of the problem is that I take away their "I'm a victim being oppressed by men" shield and they show their true colors.  That said, I do avoid editing gender-related topics in part because of the trolls.  Gamergate is horrible and the behavior of the opponents of Anita Sarkeesian, Zoe Quinn and so on is unforgivably atrocious. Systemic bias is real, an article on some cricket player in Sri Lanka who played one season is defended to the death while a researched and footnoted article on a 19th century woman artist is AfD nominated as not-notable.  That drives me batshit crazy (I really have to avoid AfD).   Montanabw (talk)  01:34, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Something that might help, maybe, at least for a few more historic women, is the list at Bibliography of encyclopedias: General biographies. It is only a beginning list, but I think in general people would agree that someone included in a well-regarded reference source as a separate article probably qualifies as notable. John Carter (talk) 01:37, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Arab Spring
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Arab Spring. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Invitation


Hello, Intothatdarkness,

The Editing team is asking for your help with VisualEditor. I am contacting you because you were one of the very first testers of VisualEditor, back in 2012 or early 2013. Please tell them what they need to change to make VisualEditor work better for you. The team has a list of top-priority problems, but they also want to hear about small problems. These problems may make editing less fun, take too much of your time, or be as annoying as a paper cut. The Editing team wants to hear about and try to fix these small things, too.

You can share your thoughts by clicking this link. You may respond to this quick, simple, anonymous survey in your own language. If you take the survey, then you agree your responses may be used in accordance with these terms. This survey is powered by Qualtrics and their use of your information is governed by their privacy policy.

More information (including a translateable list of the questions) is posted on wiki at mw:VisualEditor/Survey 2015. If you have questions, or prefer to respond on-wiki, then please leave a message on the survey's talk page.

Unsubscribe from this list •  Sign up for VisualEditor's multilingual newsletter  •   Translate the user guide

Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:13, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVIII, March 2015
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:37, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Nazi Germany
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Nazi Germany. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * Thanks! Quite appropriate in many ways. Intothatdarkness 22:13, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Apparently the Jack Daniels variation got deleted for being a copyright violation, even though it was a wikipedia editor's own photo of his own bottle of Jack Daniels. I'd give you that one instead if it still existed! LOL!   Montanabw (talk)  06:46, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Palestinian stone-throwing
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Palestinian stone-throwing. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Watchlist?
Hi ITD, if you don't already have Mustang watchlisted, I'd sure be grateful if you could. No actual drama at the moment, but, well, the talk page. Maybe all will die down there too, but I definitely think that eyes like yours would be helpful. Montanabw (talk) 23:51, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * No problem. Intothatdarkness 13:43, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CIX, April 2015
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 06:32, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Precious again
  support

Thank you for fighting silent battles in creating content, reviewing, defeating vandalism and supporting civility, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:35, 26 April 2012 (UTC) Three years ago, you were the 107th recipient of my  Pumpkin Sky Prize, and I bet you will enjoy this also: <div style="margin: auto; max-width: 52em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba( 192, 192, 192, 0.75 ); border-radius: 1em; border: 1px solid #a7d7f9; margin-bottom: 1em; padding: 0.5em 1em 1em; color: black;" class="ui-helper-clearfix"> <div style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; background-color: #ddd; border: 5px solid #ddd; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75); border-radius: 0.5em;"> Thank you for reflecting the Gerechtigkeitsspirale!

Did you know ... that a church's 1510 spiral of justice declares: "Justice suffered in great need. Truth is slain dead. Faith has lost the battle"?

The poem ends with "Praise the right thing". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:00, 26 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Gerda! Always appreciated. Intothatdarkness 14:11, 30 April 2015 (UTC)


 * In a later discussion, Iridescent suggested to use "decency" or "integrity" instead of "the right thing", - whatever it's called, let's just do it ;) - --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:23, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

WER Nomination
You deserve the thanks for what you do around here. So....you won't be surprised in a few weeks when the award is delivered. But, let me ask, so I know for future EotW nominees, how did you find out? Do I need to cover my trail better? Did you see me talking to Gerda? I try my best to keep it a secret 'cause that's part of the joy of giving the award to editors like yourself. I should add "Good at Detective Work" to your nomination. TRA! . <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:black">Buster Seven  <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:black"> Talk  18:10, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
 * It pinged me when you did the nomination. Must have come from the linking part. Intothatdarkness 18:49, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
 * See its a great and simple description of the award. Some people think it should be "vetted" like it was an "Oscar". I like to say, Its a glorified barnstar from at least two editors awarded by a third. I'm working on an Eddybox...thats how I found that old quote. . <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:black">Buster Seven  <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:black"> Talk  14:33, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I've always agreed that it was more of a recognition thing as opposed to something that should be "vetted" in an overly-dramatic way. There's enough of that on wikipedia as it is. Intothatdarkness 16:14, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CX, May 2015
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:04, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:1992 Yugoslav People's Army column incident in Tuzla
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:1992 Yugoslav People's Army column incident in Tuzla. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Editor of the Week
User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week: I would like to nominate User:Intothatdarkness as Editor of the Week. He is well known for adding his sage interpretation and advice to many talk topics, and his perceptive abilities help the project. He uses the edit summary 96% of the time and 37% of his edits are to article space. He plugs away at editing Old West stuff and has been called a "a steady common-sense contributor". A well-known and respected Administrator said of him, "We could use 100 more like him.....". WP:Military History, Ancient Pueblo People and Indigenous people of North America are just a few of his interests. This nomination was seconded by User:John from Idegon, and supported by User:L235, User:John Carter and User:Gerda Arendt.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

Thanks again for your efforts! . . <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:black">Buster Seven  <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:black"> Talk  05:20, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your contributions, and congratulations on the award! --L235 (t / c / ping in reply ) 18:12, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Congratulations, very well deserved recognition! --MelanieN (talk) 18:24, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Support, with thanks for, a reminder of priorities, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:19, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, everyone! Have to say this is unexpected, because I don't have an enormous edit count, an extensive collection of acronym-enhanced articles, and tend to have my own opinions about the status of the project. Intothatdarkness 13:48, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * You don't understand; that's WHY you got the award!  LOL!   Montanabw <sup style="color:purple;">(talk)  16:36, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Heh. I was taking a gentle dig at the "credentialists" who like to quantify every award with meaningless (or at least inappropriate) numbers. Intothatdarkness 17:14, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * All I know is that I immensely appreciate your help and support at Mustang. Full protection goes off today (or early tomorrow) and I expect crazy to hit at any moment.  The two editors who are being the most difficult are making a lot of threats.   Montanabw <sup style="color:purple;">(talk)  04:28, 2 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I also find their conduct rather threatening and obstinate. They do make good examples of the "civil bullying" that is the elephant in the room here.Intothatdarkness 19:18, 2 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Check user contribs, it gets even more interesting. I suspect one or both is a sock, but cannot prove who and, frankly, of the two possible sockmasters, (both of whom got blocked, in part due to their POV and OR-pushing with me) all CU data is stale so it's a worthless trip down a rabbit hole anyway. I'm trying to just let them rattle sabers and make threats. I figure the boomerang will strike if things get too nutty. But that requires a lot of eyes other than mine, as I do have a small group of detractors who would undoubtably pounce if given the opportunity.  Sigh...   Montanabw <sup style="color:purple;">(talk)  06:04, 3 June 2015 (UTC)



Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian states
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian states. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bangladesh Liberation War
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bangladesh Liberation War. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXI, June 2015
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:38, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Derry
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Derry. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXII, July 2015
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:35, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Community desysoping RfC
Hi. You are invited to comment at RfC for BARC - a community desysoping process. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:33, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Sabra and Shatila massacre
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sabra and Shatila massacre. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXIII, August 2015
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:46, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of kings of Persia
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of kings of Persia. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:India
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:India. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXIV, September 2015
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:09, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Question
Could you contact me by my email link? Thanks, GregJackP   Boomer!   03:53, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
 * What's up? I don't tend to e-mail though here. Intothatdarkness 14:51, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Nuclear weapon
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Nuclear weapon. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:21, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Postmortem
Hey ITD, thanks for your support on the RfA and your remark, "take all useful advice on board" (my emphasis). I'm going to contact a few people to ask for some feedback and analysis, (some along the lines of "how would you suggest I should have handled this situation, if you knew factors a, b and c were involved ...") and I'd like you to be one of them. If you are interested in some discussion, just say so here. Looks like you prefer not to email off-wiki, and that's fine, though I do have email enabled if you prefer your comments to not be public. I'm just not wanting to draw a lot of drama to any discussions. Montanabw <sup style="color:purple;">(talk) 20:02, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * People bringing drama to my page will find themselves coming up short. I had a feeling that RfA would be drama-ridden just based on the nature of folks you tend to debate with. I'd be happy to discuss stuff with you. Feel free to ping away. Intothatdarkness 16:30, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Can't email you, so I guess I will only suggest that what you say be phrased so that the next time I run for RfA someone cannot take a diff from you out of context and paste in as another reason to !vote "oppose!" LOL!  I received a message from someone who I think nailed the crux of the issue. To paraphrase their words a bit, "there is a mismatch between the way others see what you do and the way it looks to you. It will be a courageous thing to work out why."  Where I see stewardship and quality control of articles, others claim "ownership"; what I see as holding one's ground, others say it's a "battleground mentality."  What I see as a legitimate review to see if someone is violating key wikipedia policies and calling it out when I see it, others call that "stalking" and "character assassination."  I think the underlying rule is "Run for adminship within your first years of editing, and never piss off any other editor until AFTER you have the mop."  Montanabw <sup style="color:purple;">(talk)  23:50, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
 * People will always take things out of context here, and e-mail communication will likewise be twisted into something sinister depending on who's doing the twisting... It's the way of the police state mindset here. I think what it often comes down to is your choice of words. When we were discussing the Marias Massacre, for example, you tended to make wording choices which made it appear you were discounting other opinions and positions in favor of your favored solution. Your initial proposition regarding an infobox made it appear consensus either already existed or was a foregone conclusion. When others weighed in (and granted it was a limited discussion), your tone made it appear as if it was either an unwelcome or ill-informed intrusion. I am very confident that was not your intent, but it might sound that way to someone unfamiliar with your style. Directness is not favored with admins, it seems (unless they're taking shots at those who don't agree with them). We clearly worked through that, but had others become involved things could have gotten strident quickly. I understand your communication style, but to others it may appear "my way or the highway.' And as an aside, I think your underlying rule of adminship is correct. If you sneak in looking inoffensive you can generally do what you want after you've been appointed. Intothatdarkness 20:41, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's a concern. Anyone who has been around will have some conflict and baggage is inevitable. I'd forgotten the Marias article,,, there's a lot of scholarship out there and so little time... you know, westerners are kind of blunt and straightforward. I guess the question is if there is any way I can do a better job of showing my goodwill and possession of clue.    Montanabw <sup style="color:purple;">(talk)  07:34, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Probably the biggest thing is to always consider how others might read what you've typed before you hit save page. I know we're blunt and straightforward, but there are ways to do that without sounding pre-determined. I can think of some admins who are far too overblown in that regard, but they can repay study. Dennis Brown springs to mind, although to my reading he often comes off as slightly condescending (and sometimes more than slightly). If you can take bits of that style and work it in with yours, I think you'd be ahead of the game. I know you edit in areas which attract more than their share of serious POV types, and I think outsiders underestimate the impact that can have. Finally, never be afraid to ask for outside eyes. Intothatdarkness 17:16, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Grand Duchy of Lithuania
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXV, October 2015
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:47, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your comment and for being one of my talk page watchers! I appreciate your insights and observations. Montanabw <sup style="color:purple;">(talk) 00:46, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I lurk more than I write, but it does allow one to see many of the trends and dysfunctions here. Intothatdarkness 21:50, 12 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Lurking is, no doubt, entertaining.  Montanabw <sup style="color:purple;">(talk)  23:18, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Fellow Lurker. Sorry I missed your RfA. I would have reluctantly supported you. Reluctantly because I think Administrating this giant herd of "cats" is impossible. But I commend you for tossing your hat in the ring. They fact that editors kicked it (your hat) around the arena is a comment on them, not on you. <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:black">Buster Seven  <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:black"> Talk  23:46, 14 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Hard to know how to let people know I was running without violating the canvassing rules. I posted a notice on my talk page, as is allowed, but other than that, I don't really know what else I could have done...all the people I've pissed off over nine years managed to show up, somehow... ;-)   Montanabw <sup style="color:purple;">(talk)  04:41, 16 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Of course they did. That's the name of the game. And make no mistake...a game is what it is. Sad, really, but reality. Intothatdarkness 19:59, 17 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Well, watchlist my talk page, then, eh? ;-)   Montanabw <sup style="color:purple;">(talk)  21:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Did that some time back. Guess in the minds of some that makes me part of the vast conspiracy. Intothatdarkness 17:30, 19 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Nah, watchlisting Corbett's talk page is the way you join... ;-)   Montanabw <sup style="color:purple;">(talk)  22:10, 20 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Did that ages ago. He's a fantastic asshole detector. Intothatdarkness 14:37, 21 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Next step could be to join the cabal of the outcasts, if only for the user box, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:50, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Superpower
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Superpower. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Alternative theories of the location of Great Moravia
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Alternative theories of the location of Great Moravia. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVI, November 2015
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:26, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Greco-Italian War
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Greco-Italian War. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject historian and newcomer of the year awards now open!
On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:06, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:German evacuation from East-Central Europe near the end of World War II
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:German evacuation from East-Central Europe near the end of World War II. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

 * This card was designed by User:Samtar
 * Thanks, Buster. I've been on a bit of a break due to job change, and it's been fantastic to be away from this police state. Not sure if I'll ever be especially active again. Intothatdarkness 20:23, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Agree. I too took a short break due to unfriendliness here and some computer malware problems. The break was relaxing after the initial withdrawal. <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:black">Buster Seven  <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:black"> Talk  21:08, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVII, December 2015
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Plovdiv
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Plovdiv. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 27 December 2015 (UTC)