User talk:Bishonen/Archive 14

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Bishonen. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 10

←

Archive 12

→

RfAR

You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Shakespeare authorship question and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

Thanks, If you are aware of any other parties who might be usefully added, please list them etc. LessHeard vanU (talk) 23:43, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Care for a glass of water?

With your alter ego's habit of biting, I am most concerned... LessHeard vanU (talk) 11:31, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

The state of being rabid does indeed come from having rabies, so you'd best keep out of Darwinbish's way. The person I myself bit is now blocked, which, considered per WP:ROPE, is surely a pity. For what could be more economically illustrative of our (or Shakespeare's) problems than her own words? The statement she has already posted on the RfAR page, for instance, provides a kind of shortcut to the heart of the matter. I plan to argue this with the little Futzilla as soon as I have time to spare, i.e. WP:NOTNOW. Bishonen | talk 12:22, 15 January 2011 (UTC).

Of course, hydrophobia is indicative of and an alternate name for rabies - what erudite jesters we are...!

File:Very scary.JPG

Little user need monster hug!

The hopefully soon to be opened SAQ Arbitration case should not, I feel, become the NinaGreen Arbitration case - the issue is far too long standing for the focus to be on the most recent focus of advocacy/pov issues; I am hoping that you as an established custodian of that article can provide some historical oversight (pre or contemporary with Smatprt?) of the concerns. (Do I now end this with some reference to Bishzilla? Your removal of others examples has somewhat restricted my understanding of your talkpage protocols...) LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:38, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry, she'll refer to you! Bishonen | talk 22:15, 15 January 2011 (UTC).

[Flashing her most reassuring smile at the little Less, Bishzilla comes towards him to give him a hug. Watches sadly as he disappears over the hills. ] Little user come back! Need big hug! Remember hugging protocols! bishzilla _ROARR!! 22:13, 15 January 2011 (UTC).

Happy 10th

Thank you, Bzuk. No offence, but I just don't like templates on my page. Bishonen | talk 19:53, 16 January 2011 (UTC).

Serious Question

If I wanted to blow a raspberry at someone on the internet, how would I go about communicating that in writing? How would you spell it? PHTTHPTH? Someone needs to come up with a spelling and create a meme so that everyone on the internet knows what you are doing when you type that. Tex (talk) 21:25, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Serious, or even doom-laden, reply

Only User:KillerChihuahua knows. Ask the puppy. Bishonen | talk 01:12, 21 January 2011 (UTC).

I tend to prefer THIIBBBIT! :P myself. SirFozzie (talk) 01:43, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I am not sure that this is legal, and even if it were it should not be mentioned in polite company (therefore, this page is fine...) LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:49, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

THIIBBBIT would work. However, in my experience, the more time-honored "pppppppppppppppbbbbbbbllllht!" is just as effective; this form may have the bs between the p section and the l section omitted. Remember that the raspberry, or Bronx cheer, is an unvoiced linguolabial trill. As such, while specific spelling is open to interpretation, repeated consonants are a must. In this day of modern technology, there is always the linking or sending of a sound file, as well, which will leave no doubt as to the nature of your communique, even for the more obtuse. I trust I have been of some minor assistance. KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 14:39, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I have to say, I have never seen a raspberry with an L in it before. The customary spelling over here is phthaarpElen of the Roads (talk) 22:42, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

(e/c with the Elephant Man) My own feeling is also that I like to see an R somewhere in there. But this is an encyclopedia, not a record of editors' feelings. This sound file, Pups? How about sending the whole article? Oh, look, it's rhyming slang, ha! Raspberry tart / fart! Bishonen | talk 23:07, 22 January 2011 (UTC).

The Elephant Man? The Elephant Man!!!!! You're getting as bad as that young fishersnapper friend of yours. Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:55, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

[Sententiously :] Bishonen is regrettable compound of all worst features of all her socks, little Elen. Tetchy, difficult personality! Naughty 'shonen always embarrass easy-going popular Zilla! Whole family hopeless! [Bishzilla slouches off, grumbling. Somehow doesn't seem so easy-going today! ] bishzilla _ROARR!! 00:44, 24 January 2011 (UTC).

[Bishzilla returns to make a final point: ] As for 'shonen bias, need seen to be believed! Look how many ways is biased! bishzilla _ROARR!! 00:44, 24 January 2011 (UTC). [Bishzilla finally leaves. Bishonen considers topic banning the sour monster from her page. Sighs. Fixes the link. ] Bishonen | talk 00:56, 24 January 2011 (UTC).

regarding phonetics

My grandfather, who served in the Indian Army under Auchinlek, once witnessed a discussion between two aged gentlemen at the Officers Club who were insisting upon their interpretation of the of the subject matter. One insisted that, phonetically, it should be represented as "Baaa-room" while the other remained adamant that "Bar-ooom" was the better approximation. This discourse was eventually interrupted by a young officer who, in attempting to draw the situation to a conclusion, noted that each vowel in the word had equal prominence and the correct pronunciation was "barroom". Silence ensured, while each of the ancients contemplated this new opinion. Finally, one stirred and said, "Bright young fellah, no doubt, but I rather fancy he has never heard an elephant fart..." LessHeard vanU (talk) 23:01, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Ha!

Toasty warm vested contributor sealskin vest

I must have inadvertently deleted the "parties" template on the workshop page. I don't really think anybody would mistake me for an arbitrator. Tom Reedy (talk) 03:53, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

You don't fool me. You fancy those golden arb robes, don't you? Bishonen | talk 05:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC).

"If nominated I will not run; if elected I will not serve!" I think WP policies guarantees I will keep those promises! Tom Reedy (talk) 06:25, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

"You all did see that on the Lupercal Bishonen thrice presented him with kingly robes, which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?" Two more to go... :P MastCell ^Talk 17:39, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Genuwine ermine robes! Get yer robes at Bishonen's Discount House! Bishonen | talk 18:27, 2 February 2011 (UTC).

There were robes? I could have used one. I spent most of my time huddled shivering in a corner. Paul August ☎ 01:59, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I think you might find this vested contributors sealskin vest warmer, Paul. Here, wrap up. Bishonen | talk 02:17, 3 February 2011 (UTC).

"Genuine ermine" - there's a scene in Dish and Dishonesty that explains how they really make those robes (not suitable for cats of a nervous disposition). --RexxS (talk) 02:56, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

That's "genuwine", Big Rex. But don't feel bad, I missed it in the caption, too. Fixing. Oh, I hope you enjoyed this, before Shell Kinney removed it. You're in there too, somewhat. The author seemed upset to lose such a masterpiece of raillery, but I think Shell did him a BIG favour. In fact I had some thoughts of reverting her, but I guess I'll stay nice for these last few days of arbitration. Nice-ish. Bishonen | talk 04:45, 3 February 2011 (UTC).

I thought it was spelled Ginuwine, in honor of the spokesman for Adult Chocolate Milk (a 40-proof vodka-based version of chocolate milk, presumably marketed to people who don't want to be bothered pouring vodka into chocolate milk themselves). MastCell ^Talk 06:12, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the vest. I'l save it for dress up though, as I've abandoned that cold corner for warmer climes. Paul August ☎ 14:50, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I copied the caption, honest guv (my excuse and I'm sticking to it). Thanks for reminding me, I did spot that invective before Shell expunged it, although I was clearly treated far too leniently for the heinous crime of adopting you and your supplementary proposal. Never mind, I'm roundly battered somewhere else on that page for having the temerity to suggest a bunch of principles that almost everybody seemed to agree with. And while I remember, your point at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Shakespeare authorship question/Workshop#Upon editors compliance with the standard model of interactions is well made, and the argument so compelling that I gladly concede (being threatened with the Darwinbish always does the trick). Hmmmm, now there's an idea for a Remedy. --RexxS (talk) 05:10, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

You adopted me? Daddy, daddy!!!! Er, you do realise the socks go wherever I go? (With the fortunate exception of Bishzilla, who always prefers moving in with her faithful manager, or taking a nap in the cosy Great Pacific Garbage Patch). Still, I hope you have a big house. I bet young darwinbish is looking forward to helping out with the remedies in that bitey case. Bishonen | talk 15:42, 4 February 2011 (UTC).

Fortunately the house is so large that you could even fit Jimbo's ego into it. Your socks will be very useful indeed for executing the necessary remedies. 'Zilla's breath will be invaluable in clearing Tom's drive; and the darwinbish will make short work of terminating with extreme prejudice those who are foolish enough to refer to us dinosaurs as 'toys'. Did I miss anything else of importance in that case? --T-RexxS (talk) 04:47, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

List of Surrealist poets

If you have a moment, can you revert this page move? List of surrealist poets should have a capital "s" on Surrealist to indicate the connection to the movement. Thank you. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 00:08, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Done. Is there a battle about the spelling? Bishonen | talk 00:38, 3 February 2011 (UTC).

No, I only just discovered the article today, and was cleaning it up. When I attempted to move it, I discovered it had been moved to the lower case "s" in 2004. I could find no reason for it. Thanks for moving it back. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 00:50, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Shakespeare

I was wondering what you've been up to...so I checked...just so you know...Shakespeare didn't write Shakespeare...THIS GUY DID!!!!--MONGO 02:05, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Was he one of the typing monkeys? Bishonen | talk 15:30, 4 February 2011 (UTC).

In much the same vein, a previously unknown scholar weighs in... LessHeard vanU (talk) 23:34, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Sounds like

Simple wish fulfillment... LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:44, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Uh-huh. How about that cup of coffee? Bishonen | talk 22:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC).

Your slightest wish ...

While we're on the issue, when all this frivolous diversion is done and dusted, can I expect both of you to head over to Coffee and do some content work? Cas and I have been struggling for the past year to get that into shape for FA. --RexxS (talk) 00:46, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the pretty latte, Rex! Content work? A half-forgotten concept! I'll take a shot at it.. eventually.. I hope. I've got another diversion first: doing the footnotes for my mum on Swedish wikipedia. Trickier than you might think! Meanwhile, why don't you inquire at the darwinbish's place? Now there's a caffeine freak! Bishonen | talk 15:18, 9 February 2011 (UTC).

SAQ

Much as I can understand your urge to comment [1], perhaps it would be better to just not provoke her into further replies, don't you think? I mean, it's not as if further refutations like this would be likely to either teach her something, or tell anybody else something new, is it? Just a thought :-) Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:52, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Ah, but she's so interested in policy, remember? But I know you're right (dearest)! Bishonen | talk 15:02, 9 February 2011 (UTC).

And why are all of you guys having coffee, and I'm not getting any?! Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:53, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

For the coffee I need a link. Watch this space. Bishonen | talk 15:02, 9 February 2011 (UTC).

Uh, two links. [2] [3] Bishonen | talk 15:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC).

Bish: Why have you written your latest evidence section in green? It provides a lot of discomfort to the pedantic clerk in me, but, really, I'm just curious as to why you did it :P. AGK [•] 13:30, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

To unmask the people who don't read my evidence, because there's an explanation in there, AGK! :-P Did you happen to notice that there are a couple of green bits in my "real", original evidence section also—the one that's not about Smatprt? All my green text has the same function: to look different from the rest. To look new and green. See, I disapprove strongly of people adding to their original text without indicating that "this was written later, and refers to stuff that has happened after my original evidence." That is information I want, when I read other people's evidence. It makes things much clearer. But I usually don't get it: people chop and change, remove and add, and mostly don't even date the changes! The more I read such palimpsest evidence, the more discomfort it causes the pedantic editor in me. So much so that I wanted to make my own additions really different, as different as possible. Proper dates! Green dye!

Lots of reasons! Still uncomfortable? If you are, I suggest a non-green way of doing it, which you're very welcome to implement: wash out the green dye and give those bits a different font instead. That's beyond my skill, or I'd do it myself. Bishonen | talk 14:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC).

Let dino help. Little user should put:

span.bish { color: black; }

into user's monobook.css or vector.css or what skin they in. Refresh cache like you told to. Then they see 'Shonen's evidence in glorious Technicolor black. Other colours on request. --T-RexxS (talk) 16:08, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Uhhh.. er.. And that will provide me with different fonts to use? Big Rex been partaking illegal substances or something? [Oh dear, she's channelling 'Zilla again. Little 'shonen tries to picture how much weed would be required to mellow out a Tyrannosaurus Rex. A haystack appears before her inner eye. Giggles. ] Bishonen | talk 16:34, 10 February 2011 (UTC).

Was really for Little Tony (wanted black). Little Big Shonen want fonts as well? 'z easy:

span.bish { color: fuchsia; font-family: "Comic Sans MS", "Brush Script MT", cursive; }

Can play to heart's content. Rex grateful for haystack-offer, but already mellow. --T-RexxS (talk) 17:06, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I thought of mentioning Little Tony to AGK as well (Tony uses green to say "It's me"), but figured he was probably combobulated enough already. AGK, that is. Font family..? But Rex, to play, I need to see what fonts I have. Doesn't look like so many.. ? Or is it a big family? (Any darwinsocks in it?) If I put script in monobook, will it do its own playing? (A little scary, that notion.) Or how can I choose font? Entering very difficult territory here! Bishonen | talk 18:22, 10 February 2011 (UTC).

Stop asking such stupid questions, 'shonen! Embarrassing the smart twins! Just melt into the wallpaper, I can't keep order in this entire dumb family! Too much work! darwinbish ^BITE 18:26, 10 February 2011 (UTC).

[Half outraged, half amused. ] Well, 'ark at 'er! Bishapod!!!! This is all your fault! Lock your naughty sock in a closet or something! Bishonen | talk 18:30, 10 February 2011 (UTC).

Your woes are now legend

Hi, Bishonen, I probably don't have any distinct identity among the WP legions, but when I need amusement I visit the adventures here. Thought of you when I read this piece by Adam Gopnik in the current New Yorker. Search "Shakespeare." Cynwolfe (talk) 14:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

That is too spot-on to pass up ([4]). MastCell ^Talk 20:14, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Hehe. Speaking of fame and the power of stupid, I'm still not over the disappointment of this case failing to escape from the confines of Wikipedia to lead the other media a merry dance. That would have been an awfully big adventure. But too many people were determined it wouldn't happen, I guess. Anyway, do feel free to join in the adventures, meet all the nutcases! Just look out for the more alarming of the socks, they bite. Bishonen | talk 20:35, 11 February 2011 (UTC).

It almost made it. And don't despair, it has not been forgotten. It may yet appear in some context. All is not lost. -- Seth Finkelstein (talk) 08:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

But now it's so yesterday's news... Thanks for your mysterious hints, though! I'm glad to hear them. Bishonen | talk 10:08, 12 February 2011 (UTC).

I rather think passée is the word you are seeking. I am jolly glad it was not in Mr Fungalstone's newspaper, do you really want your name linked with Mr Wales and dragged through the mire for just anyone to read? Lady Catherine Rollbacker-de Burgh (the Late) (talk) 19:50, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, exactly! That is indeed what I want. Can you arrange it, dear Lady Rollbacker? I know you and mr Wales are ... close. Bishonen | talk 20:50, 12 February 2011 (UTC).

All this Shakespeare business is nonsense, it's well known in senior academic circles (such as those which I inhabit) that all 'his' works were written by none other than my forbear Phimosis Bonquebuster, 3rd Earl of Scrotum – a very close personal friend and “intimate” of the Virgin Queen herself. Lady Catherine Rollbacker-de Burgh (the Late) (talk) 19:50, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Ah. So it wasn't you? Bishonen | talk 20:50, 12 February 2011 (UTC).

Woe-lessening

There's only one answer to that sort of nonsense at ARBSAQ. And it's over there on the right. As Eric Idle sang, "When you're chewing on life's gristle, give a little whistle ..." --RexxS (talk) 01:30, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I bet they were nice. [Casts a stern eye on the darwinbish, still chewing. ] Are they a suggestion for a user RfC? Thanks, but I don't think I will. RfC's are pretty woeful. (Darwinbish, if you're going to eat all the cupcakes that show up around here, you'd better learn to bake, that's all.) As Woody Allen sang, "Enjoy yourself, enjoy yourself, it's later than you think".. " Bishonen | talk 18:39, 14 February 2011 (UTC).

No, an RfC/U hadn't occurred to me. I was just doing what everybody should do when they see ridiculous allegations being made: give Bish cupcakes! I'll make a fresh batch and deliver them on a tall table. How high can the little terror reach? --RexxS (talk) 04:43, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

[Darwinbish, proudly. ] Can reach top of Nelson's Column! Can climb Reichstag! Bring cupcakes! darwinbish ^BITE 22:37, 15 February 2011 (UTC).

[Bishonen rolls her eyes. ] Yeah right. Look, no hands! Bishonen | talk 22:40, 15 February 2011 (UTC).

Oh so that was you? I knew it! --Xover (talk) 22:47, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Shakespeare authorship question closed

A grand tradition

It pains me to see that the absurd allegations brought against you have driven you into a Wikibreak. Although there's no RFC against you, I think this would still be an appropriate time to follow that grand tradition of thanking Bishonen for her hard work as an administrator and awarding her cupcakes! Heimstern Läufer (talk) 06:25, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Block

Since I've been handing out blocks left and right:

You have been given a block.

Blocks increase cohesion, serve to lift heavy burdens, and help making sure that everything functions smoothly. Therefore, have one! Thank you for editing. :-) Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:29, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

[Bishzilla, having a taste for Stockholm tar, eats the block in one swallow, licks her chops. ] Mmm, tasty morsel! But very small! Little Futzilla got a well-tarred Petterssonbåt or so, for a fuller 'Zilla lunch? bishzilla _ROARR!! 16:40, 20 February 2011 (UTC).

Little Shonen think he'll bite...?

[5] --Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:25, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't think so. Jack was promised a return to unrestricted editing and is not interested in new restrictions. The old accounts, which are now all at the bottom of Scapa Flow, were clearly marked by transcluding {{User:Jack Merridew}}. Poor Wayang kulit never hurt anyone, never even got to edit outside his user space. He was just created to show a Balinese webmaster how to create an account. Gold Hat (talk) 09:24, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

So it doesn't look like it... I don't think the restrictions were that onerous as such (Coren might have called them more ridiculous than harmful). What Jack wanted was surely to be trusted, at last, after all this time and all his good work; and, therefore, to that end, to have no restrictions.

When the ArbCom weighs good against bad consequences of their actions and sanctions (as I hope they sometimes do), they seem to me always to underestimate the trust factor, and also the power of wiki-friendship. They are a little myopic and oblivious that way, as are so many other wikipedians. I bet they were surprised, healthily so, to see John Vandenberg blank his pages over this. And the worst thing Risker and Coren did may have been to radicalise the famously mild RexxS and drive him out on a limb.[6] This a T-Rex, mind you, and an object of Bishzilla's (admittedly wide-ranging) romantic interest![7] Bishonen | talk 13:57, 26 February 2011 (UTC).

Ah well, it was worth a go. I suspect there are some in the community who will never forgive. I do wonder though - I think the vote would have been close. Not the wholehearted endorsement Jack's looking for, but close. Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:15, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Go further, just what was promised; and given that the old accounts are scuttled, there's no reason for them to be blocked. Damned, Jack Merridew 22:19, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

A/R/E request

I just noticed your Enforcement request. I'm unsure of the propriety of commenting there, but the IP-editors and new accounts popping up on the FAC review page are also pretty blatant signs of off-wiki coordination. The new user account Sucamilc is registered mere hours after it was nominated for FAC, but in the first edit finds their way to the FAC page and cites Wikipedia guidelines at me. The IP editor 72.234.212.189 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) exhibits remarkable familiarity (with a sadly biased interpretation, but still) with the article's history over “4 years”, and their manner of writing is eerily familiar, which makes me suspect it is an instance of block-evasion or socking. (131.118.144.253 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is just BenJonson who's forgot to log in)

I'm expecting more of these to pop up, as indications are the several little web forums and mailinglists they keep will consider the current article achieving FA as some kind of ultimate defeat to be disrupted at all costs. --Xover (talk) 08:30, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Xover. You'll just have to use your native wit and make the call yourself. All my years on Wikipedia, I've enjoyed the good fortune of being able to avoid WP:AE. (Didn't know how lucky I was. Horrible template.) Socking technically belongs on some other board, but I don't see anything improper about presenting it together with the personal attacks and such. I agree about the signs of off-wiki coordination. If you'd put the accounts and signs into my Enforcement request (now newly spruced up), it'll be in convenient form for me to take to a checkuser. Could be worth trying. Bishonen | talk 08:52, 2 March 2011 (UTC).

Could you find some evidence suggesting which sockmaster is behind them? In that case, it would be worth filing a CU request at WP:SPI. The BenJohnson request can probably be handled separately. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:20, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

While I do see some echoes of Nina's prose style in the IP's comments, I don't really see enough to point any fingers. From the prose it could equally well have been Smatprt, but he's been rather meticulous about adhering to his topic-ban (as he understood it), and absent clear evidence to the contrary I really wouldn't expect that from him. A quick check of WHOIS for the IP doesn't particularly suggest anyone either. If I'd had anyone specific in mind I'd probably take it straight to SPI, but I fear it's far too inconclusive. I will however post the above comment to the Enforcement request as at least a point of information. If it stays as calm as it has been the last few hours I'll be a happy camper, but I'm seriously worried there will be an influx of similar stuff that will essentially sink the FAC. --Xover (talk) 17:44, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Please see the result of your AE request at WP:AE#BenJonson. It seems that the problem is now under control. If not, open a new request. This is a sufficiently obvious problem that even random admins will probably assist, even without another AE. You only need AE if you think topic bans are required. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:20, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

OK. Thank you. Bishonen | talk 19:05, 4 March 2011 (UTC).

Any guest is cordially invited to improve the caption of the image. Are you there, Swedophile?

Someone can always be relied on to lower the tone: Thanks Eve, nice apple, said Adam, but er… aren't you supposed to get your kit off?

As usual, Bishonen's pet is trying to get his nose into the food basket.

But, My Lady, I was asking for your cherry, not your apple.

You look like some sort of Nordic heathen, so make sure you eat it with your mouth closed and keep that nasty, unhygenic animal out of my Harrods picnic hamper.

[Bishzilla eats all the naughty little vikings. ] Yum, little viking users! Flavourful! Been long time! Where Sleipner? Zilla partial to taste of eight-legged horses! Where good friend Fenris wolf monster? bishzilla _ROARR!! 14:58, 26 May 2011 (UTC).

– And the best bit about Vikings is that you can use their helmets as tooth-picks afterwards. --T-RexxS (talk) 21:56, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

"... so when I drop the apple, you will observe that the Coriolis force induces a curved trajectory ..." --Famously Sharp (talk) 21:56, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

The dropped apple turns into a bathtub draining counter-clockwise through a vortex over the plug hole. Bishonen is impressed. Clever old Famously! With a scream, Little Stupid drains through the vortex and disappears. Oh-oh! Get him back! Now! Bishonen | talk 14:12, 29 May 2011 (UTC).

Fortunately, Famously is accustomed to removing littl'uns from plumbing and quickly unscrews the waste trap, allowing a rather dishevelled 'poddie to run free once more. --Famously Sharp (talk) 20:00, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Aahh! Relief!

From the water

To the land

Tik-tik-tik taalik

Tik-tik-tik taalik [8]

bishapod splash! 20:47, 29 May 2011 (UTC).

[The unmaternal Bishzilla is amused. ] Waste trap good place for Little Stupid! Always embarrass 'Zilla! bishzilla _ROARR!! 22:21, 29 May 2011 (UTC).

Just checkin in

Is 'Please post messages below' a request or an instruction? Either way, Chère, I'll comply. I'm back from my much-needed wikibreak and ready to get to work. As a gesture of solidarity with Gold Hat, I've made my own sock to partition my editing & watchlist. Taking a leaf from the twins, I thought it would be useful to have an avatar that could be a little more 'radical' when necessary. Many thanks for the inspiration! --Famously Sharp (talk) 01:35, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Neither, it's an order, and I hope it's clearer now. Is this.. uh.. the famously bitey twin? Bishonen | talk 02:21, 9 March 2011 (UTC).

Duly posting to avoid the wrath of Darwinbish or any of her ilk. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 02:33, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

[Thoughtfully ] Ilk, eh? [Goes off to create scary sock of her own: Little Ilk ] ! darwinbish ^BITE 02:55, 9 March 2011 (UTC).

This is actually the ... famously prohibited bad-hand account. You can tell that by the inappropriate pages that he links to. --Famously Sharp (talk) 02:38, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

[Darwinfish, a great admirer of Famously Mild, runs off in horror when he sees the scary fishing rod page. ] Yikes! Where did good-hand account go!? darwin^fish 02:49, 9 March 2011 (UTC).

Still around

Thanks for the note. I've been inactive, but I might get around to doing something on Wikipedia when I have time.

Yes, I'm okay -- sore from walking 15 km to get home from the office because the trains stopped running, but okay -- but other than massive inconvenience and some isolated structural damage Tokyo was okay, unlike those poor people up in Sendai and Miyagi prefecture.

Personally, I was astonished at how fast Wikipedia whipped up an entry on the disaster, and how, ironically enough, I knew too little -- despite being in the middle of the thing -- to reliably contribute. --Calton | Talk 04:36, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I read about Sendai. It's only too easy to imagine Armageddon in a university town (I'm a uni teacher myself). Great to hear from you! Bishonen | talk 05:36, 12 March 2011 (UTC).

Baby Tex

I've started a thread at WP:VPT#Error trying to lift a block to see if we can figure out what the problem with the unblocking is. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:30, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I saw, thanks. You take a look too, Tex. This baby has been born into The Movement! Bishonen | talk 22:36, 12 March 2011 (UTC).

Just posted on Pump - I blocked Adam Cuerden on Thursday night for a couple of hours (to keep him from digging a deeper hole), and when I tried to unblock him it gave that same message. In the end, I reset the block end date to 10.00 as the town hall clock struck the hour, and that worked.--Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:54, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Waaahhhh!!!! HJ big meanie!!! Baby Tex (talk) 16:37, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Baby, will you please quit crying? Don't make me strap you in to the car seat and take you for a drive. That seems to be the only time you sleep! Tex (talk) 16:39, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

[Bishzilla cautiously straps Baby Tex into pocket of spiderman suit. Baby begins to snore faintly. ] Go to sleep, all little users! [Gosh, Bishzilla is as mild as User: Famously Mild these days! A bad business! Darwinbish looks at her with distaste and suspicion. ] bishzilla _ROARR!! 23:55, 15 March 2011 (UTC).

My, my...a kinder, gentler 'Zilla these days. She must be planning something big! Tex (talk) 14:29, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, I dunno. Starting a baby collection in her pocket seems a little sinister to me. Weenie Bishonen | talk 05:39, 17 March 2011 (UTC).

Well - it's always a good thing to open your heart to new arrival — Ched : ? 10:19, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

OOOOOO-kay then ... that didn't work out so well did it? ... let's try this link: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/monkey-babies-couples-treat-adopted-monkids-children/story?id=8723105

That works! Tex, does your baby look anything like that one? Very cute! Bishonen | talk 14:21, 17 March 2011 (UTC).

(pfft .. hey - it's been a while since I did this WP thing, luck I remembered "HOW" to sign my sig ... well ... 2 outta 3 times anyway. :) — Ched : ? 10:24, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Ched, nice to see you back! Check out your young friend User:Bishapod, he has refurbished his page and created a couple of socks (the Darwin twins)! Little pests! Bishonen | talk 14:21, 17 March 2011 (UTC).

Now that you mention it, why is 'Zilla putting babies in her pocket? Sinister, indeed! Tex (talk) 13:57, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

[Tactfully ] Er.. Bishzilla? You do know babies aren't snacks, right? [Bishzilla looks unconvincingly indignant. Adds User:Baby Stupid to her collection. ] Bishonen | talk 14:21, 17 March 2011 (UTC).

Deletion

Informational note: this is to let you know that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Regards, NYyankees51 (talk) 02:06, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Uh... thank you. It's not actually necessary to alert people who post in an ANI thread that there's an ANI thread they may be involved in. But I appreciate it. Bishonen | talk 05:56, 17 March 2011 (UTC).

Could you restore the userbox and take it to MfD please? I don't think this out-of-process deletion was appropriate because it is controversial and there is not currently consensus for it on the ANI thread. Thank you — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:35, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree with MSGJ. There is no speedy criteria for this and admins shouldn't be speedy deleting things via IAR without a heck of a good reason. I don't see harm in letting it hang out for a week. Please restore and take it to MfD. Hobit (talk) 15:04, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

FYI: @ Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 March 17 — Scientizzle 15:09, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

(e/c) No, I'm afraid I won't do that. Anyway, I see Prodego already has, which is fine by me. In my opinion, I had good reason to speedy delete that userbox. Personally, I dislike all political userboxes, and therefore dislike all or nearly all of NYyankees51 boxes; but that wasn't the reason I deleted the "heartbeat" box. Political boxes are currently allowed, and I go by that, not by my personal opinion. The reason for my deletion was instead that I don't think the heartbeat box is a userbox at all. Consider the definition on Wikipedia:Userboxes:

A userbox is a small colored box designed to appear only on a Wikipedian's user page as a communicative notice about the user, in order to directly (or even indirectly) help Wikipedians collaborate more effectively on articles.

The userbox definition will perhaps stand some stretching—many boxes are social rather than being anything to do with collaborating effectively, and the community seems to like it like that—but not this much. The main problem is that the heartbeat box is not a communicative notice about NYyankees51; it's more like a polemical statement on a forum (compare WP:NOTFORUM). Socially, it's extremely aggressive, and I'm quite unimpressed by NYyankees51's defense that it's merely "medical fact" etc. Sorry, NYyankees51, but there is no way you can be unaware of how touchy and inflammatory this issue is. My WP:AGF will only go so far. Bishonen | talk 15:15, 17 March 2011 (UTC).

I'd like to offer my thoughts on this topic. I share the idea that userboxes of this nature are not helpful to WP.

It seems clear that the userbox in question fails to meet the criteria of WP:Userboxes, in that it is not communicating, per se, about the user (although it does provide information from which one can infer, rightly or wrongly, that the user is opposed to abortion).
It is also not clear that the contents of the userbox, in at least its original incarnation, was verifiably true.

As a thought exercise, consider that I were to create a userbox that stated "The only real Golden Retriever is the American type".

The content of this userbox is not describing me, per se (but one could infer that I have a strong opinion in favor of American-type Goldens)
The content of this userbox does not appear to be verifiably true (per the referenced article).

Would this userbox be subject to deletion? I suspect that in practice, no, because, while controversial perhaps to some other Golden Retriever aficionados, it is not as controversial as positions on abortion, politics, or religion.

Cheers and best regards, JoeSperrazza (talk) 16:07, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, Joe, in theory the Golden Retriever box would be subject to deletion, for the very reasons you outlined. And No, Joe, in practice, it wouldn't, because I can almost guarantee that no-one would be bothered. When the lineage of Golden Retrievers becomes as inflammatory a topic as abortion, I may revise my opinion. Cheers, --Famously Sharp (talk) 18:16, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Userboxes/Politics (2nd nomination)

One can hope ;/ anyone feel like fixing the mess that is the first nom? Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 00:55, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

I can request a block?

I sort of did it ad hoc. [9] TCO (talk) 00:58, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

You can, yes, though you won't necessarily be accommodated. I apply the same conditions as User:LessHeard vanU. They're strict, so please read them carefully here and think about them before putting in your request. An extra condition, specific to me, is that User:Bishzilla will eat you if you attempt to evade the block. Bishonen | talk 01:40, 19 March 2011 (UTC).

I can haz cheezburger? Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/WikiBreak Enforcer --RexxS (talk) 01:42, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't find the Enforcer that useful, actually—it's too easy to get out. And no, you can't haz cheezburger, Darwinbish is having them all as we speak. Bishonen | talk 01:50, 19 March 2011 (UTC).

I would have failed for all of this.

You cannot have any recent warnings for vandalism or other bad-faith edits.
You cannot be "under a cloud." If there is a current discussion at the admin noticeboard or elsewhere regarding a possible block of your account your request will not be considered.
If you have ever been blocked for abusing multiple accounts your request will not be considered.
You must also otherwise be considered an user in good standing.
Wikipedia is not therapy. The more often you ask to be blocked the lower the chances are that I will do it for you.

Of course if I were really a man, I would have just posted tubgirl instead of ban my fatass bitch. Interestingly, it led to a permaban instead of a short one. Except you all here are so weak, you did not keep me permabanned. Tsk tsk. TCO (talk) 01:55, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

All those? [/me is horrified, while darwinbish is distinctly interested by this impressive collection. ] Maybe you'd better check out the rest of the Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to consider placing self-requested blocks, then, and look for some admin weenie enough to block you. Bishonen | talk 02:13, 19 March 2011 (UTC).

TCO, give me your password...I'll make sure you get blocked.

Real men can walk away for a while and then come back if they want to...or not. The weather is nice now; find a bicycle and get to it. Take plenty of pictures...you can upload them to Commons later when you come back. Turtles will be popping their heads out soon...go find some....turtle soup is good for you.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 02:44, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I got my fat ass down to 10% bf. Gained 60% average on lifting. And got the measurements from dangesous down to 99/58, 62. And biked a lot. Big salads!!!!!TCO (talk) 02:52, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

And the list is featured, I see. :-)Probably because of my brilliant remarks. Congradulations! Bishonen | talk 20:20, 19 March 2011 (UTC).

HuggumZ! I smooch your sharp toothed fish-reptile-ness!TCO (talk) 00:18, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, you schizo reptile-fish-person

Thank you for the fun interaction and with working together...and putting up with me. And with Jack. Hope we can collaborate more in the future. We already got the star, but feel free to help the article get better anyhow!

Don't bite me, Hammer! TCO (talk) 00:17, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

You just wait till I'm an admin, then you'll see fun interaction, reptile man! [The fun-loving darwinbish smuggles the rattlesnake into Bishzilla's pocket, having first removed the babies. In dulcet tones: ] Oh, Ancestral One! Have you read Rikki-Tikki-Tavi recently? Check your pocket, but don't look! It's a present! little ankle biter 00:53, 20 March 2011 (UTC).

You sound like the kind that would have fun working on an alligator snapping turtle article...we NEED GAs. We are not proud. Go plus signs!TCO (talk) 00:57, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

An essay about Wikipedia not being my friend

Hello, Bishonen. I seem to remember you having linked to an essay once, about how Wikipedia isn't my friend, how it doesn't wait for me to come online, and doesn't react when I do, or something like that. I honestly only have a vague recollection (which is why I want to re-read it). Was that you? Does it ring a bell? If so, can you find it for me? Thanks! ---Sluzzelin talk 01:26, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Noo.. I don't think that was me. It sounds more like Geogre, actually. I'm always telling people not to think they're famous, because 90% of the present editors arrived last week, and have never heard of them.. but I don't think there's an essay about it. Maybe I ought to write one. It's a little sad, though. Who am I to tell people their cherished beliefs are lies, like Gregers Werle in The Wild Duck? (If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it's probably Henrik Ibsen.) And there's a saying that "Wikipedia isn't your mother"... hmm.. no, I got nothing. Sorry, Sluzzelin. Bishonen | talk 03:12, 21 March 2011 (UTC).

On-site searching for "Wikipedia is not your ..." gave me "... not your mother", "... not your grandmother's recipe book", and "... not amused", but nothing like what I thought I remembered. Misplaced memories, along with all the other junk. Thank you for your swift response! ---Sluzzelin talk 03:29, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Hmm. Long time. Lady Bish once mentioned something vaguely similar on my unworthy little pages. If that's perhaps what you thought of? Kosebamse (talk) 21:52, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Humm. I don't see it. Is it possible you're confusing me with some family member or other? They're getting to be as the sands on the shore in number, (and ever naughtier in character). Life is very difficult! Bishonen | talk 22:52, 4 April 2011 (UTC).

No, no, I mean, yes, yes, that must have been the source of my unreliable memory! In my head, I must have mixed together Bishonen's comment with Kosebamse's essay, maybe with a little bit of Geogre on the side. Thanks, for making and linking the connection, Kosebamse! ---Sluzzelin talk 07:46, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I sometimes say "Do not love Wikipedia. It will not love you back.". Especially to people who are surprised and distressed to find that, after extensive devotion, they have no rights, no power, and no effective recourse against abuse. Although I haven't expanded that into an essay. Maybe I should. -- Seth Finkelstein (talk) 04:13, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I applied to be on a reality based game show. If I get picked to be on, I think Wikipedia should send me some free t-shirts. Then it would be my friend. Hamster Sandwich (talk) 19:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Hamster, long time! If it's a wikipedia-based game show, it'll prolly be your friend and cover you with free t-shirts. Bishonen | talk 22:16, 23 March 2011 (UTC).

Wikipedia is not your friend because it has too many low acheiving idiots who have no friends (for all too obvious reasons) who join the project to meet new and interesting people and then hinder the development of the project because having joined and found tens of kindred spirits, they are then encouraged to boost their low self-esteem and become admins and thwart those trying to write the project. Giacomo Returned 23:24, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

[/me, crushed: ] Yes.. yes.. I know who you mean, how could I not? :-( [Cheers up, fleetingly: ] But at least I met you, Giacomo! That's broadened my horizons a little! :-) Bishonen | talk 00:13, 24 March 2011 (UTC).

Indeed you did meet me, and how fortunate you were. But I was not referring to you, but the great multitude of Admins who appear not to have noticed that Wikipedia is not only not their friend, but neither is it a social networking sight or some sort of therapy for the marginally and less marginally insane. Anyway enough of the sniping on such a beautiful spring morning; I was awoken today to hundreds of little birds cheeping happily outside my window - what an enchanting sound. If they do it again they are dead! Giacomo Returned 08:34, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

[Disappointed. ] And here I was hoping for some of Lady C's uniquely bracing social networking! Bishonen | talk 12:37, 24 March 2011 (UTC).

Credo accounts

400 free Wikipedia:Credo accounts available - just in case you wanted one, but didn't already have access. Anybody else you can think of who would find one useful? --RexxS (talk) 00:18, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm.. OK. (Ungracious Darwinbish-type answer, just because this reminds me of how much I want my access to the OED back. :-() Giacomo and Malleus, maybe? Tony1? Bishonen | talk 01:31, 25 March 2011 (UTC).

Well, I have online access to OED as well as Credo and ODNB through my local library's subscription, so you could always 'ping' me if you wanted something looking up or confirming. Tony will know because a notice was posted at FAC, but I'll attend to Malleus and His Excellency immediately. --RexxS (talk) 02:10, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Words of one syllable

Click here. Under "useful things", click "range contribs", copy and paste either the IP range or a list of IPs into the box. Submit. That'll give you the last 50 anon edits from your range. ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:38, 25 March 2011 (UTC

Ooo-kay. [With crazed optimism. ] I bet I'll understand most of that tomorrow morning! (Currently 4:30 AM in this timezone, yawn.. ) Bishonen | talk 03:33, 25 March 2011 (UTC).

One syllable

God, you make this hard. So: Add the eye-peas to this list. Click. Find range. Put range in box. Click eye-pea list. Click. Check for good faith eye-peas who are not mad at the Bard. Block if you want. Done. I hope this helps. If not, poke me. NW (Talk) 02:20, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Hehe. Thanks, Nucular. And now, can I have it in words of one syllable in Japanese, please? Bishonen | talk 03:33, 25 March 2011 (UTC).

I'm sorry, you've reached your monthly limit on free help from NW. It will be $15/month if you would request help in the future, and $30/month if you use one of those silly square thingies. NW (Talk) 04:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Waaahhhhh!!!! Baby Tex (talk) 13:38, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh, good grief! Well, you did only want one syllable, right Bish? Tex (talk) 13:39, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh, for... You won't believe this, Tex. I went get User:Baby Stupid for some monosyllabic baby conversation, but now he's been blocked! By User:Erwin, for "abusive username" (what? It even says on his babypage that he's Little Stupid's ~~sock~~ alternative account !) Anyway. I don't get to unblock my own sock, so I've e-mailed Erwin, and also asked HJ Mitchell to help. Sigh, this family is getting to be more trouble than they're worth. It's your fault, you know, Bishzilla! Your Bishapod has started breeding like a rabbit, what did you have to create him for? (Bishzilla sighs in complete agreement. Has long regretted creating Little Stupid. ) Bishonen | talk 16:46, 29 March 2011 (UTC).

Bishonen, it doesn't look like Erwin did that on en-wiki; his block log here is empty, which I guess makes sense since he isn't an en-wiki admin. I think this is a "global lock"; I know almost nothing about these, except that lowly en-wiki admins can't do anything about them (it appears that if it was a "global block" of an IP, we could, but I don't think we can unlock named accounts. You might ask someone smarter than me for confirmation, tho). ~~Perhaps the block message has more info? Or perhaps there's an equivalent of... (I usually hate to advise anyone to do this, but) ...ANI on meta?~~ It appears, if the email is unsuccessful, you can ask for help here. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:24, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Ha! If the little babies weren't so cute, we'd have to throw them out with the bathwater, wouldn't we? Abusive username. Hehe...who is it abusing? I doubt "Little Stupid" minds having a Baby Stupid around! Anyway, come to think of it, ever since all the ~~socks~~ alternative accounts started showing up, Mighty 'Zilla has been much more ~~boring~~ maternal. When was the last time she ate a newbie? Tex (talk) 17:28, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Baby Stupid, designated "baby sturgeo-pod" by its discoverer MONGO. Note the uncanny likeness to Bishapod, though the little critter is actually a juvenile Pallid sturgeon.

Thanks, Floquenbeam. There was no block message. It took some ferreting about to find the block, in fact I'm not sure I could ever find it again. I suppose I could appeal... but then it's a little embarrassing, you know. "What do you mean abusive username, sir? The baby is merely named after Bishapod's pet name Little Stupid, and Bishapod is Bishzilla's sock, and, er.. Bishzilla is my sock, so there!" Why do I get a nasty feeling Meta would tell me to get lost and it's all my own fault? Life is very complicated. Maybe I'll simply leave the little bugger blocked. He's pretty useless anyway. Tex, your baby may be cute, but this one ain't. [/Bishonen surveys her sock drawer. Is depressed. ] Bishonen | talk 17:38, 29 March 2011 (UTC).

Cheer up, Chere. You could get an admin who knows what they are doing to add Baby Stupid to the en-wiki's Global Whitelist. See WP:GlobalBlocking:

* Local whitelisting — A user who is globally blocked can be unblocked locally (to edit the specific wiki concerned only), by any administrator, at Special:GlobalBlockWhitelist.

It may be for the best, as it would allow Baby Stupid to edit here, but prevent him from rampaging around the rest of Wikimedia. --RexxS (talk) 17:49, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

LOL, podbaby on the rampage! Excellent idea about the whitelist, I know the very person to ask. Bishonen | talk 18:55, 29 March 2011 (UTC).

Tried that already; global whitelist appears to only be for Globally Blocked IP addresses, not Globally Locked names. I looked for Special:GlobalLockWhitelist, but it doesn't seem to exist. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:12, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh. Well, how about adding the baby sturgeopod to the local whitelist? In the unlikely contingency that I understand what RexxS says, that should work, shouldn't it? Bishonen | talk 19:42, 29 March 2011 (UTC).

Hopefully I've warned you enough that I'm over my head here. ("Well, then why the hell do you keep coming here and saying stuff?") In the unlikely event I understand what's going on: there does not appear to be such a thing as a local whitelist for account names; the global block whitelist is actually a local whitelist for globally blocked IP addresses. But a "lock" appears to be different, and as far as I can tell does not have a similar whitelist, and cannot be overridden locally. I hope that I'm wrong, and it's quite possible I am; I can't even find a log of Baby Stupid being globally locked, anywhere on meta, so this could very well be an example of the Dunning–Kruger effect; I know so little, I don't know how much I don't know. I'm not even 100% sure Baby Stupid is globally locked, it's just the only thing I can think of. Now, I am off to collect my award for "most useless admin". --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:47, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry, all is fixed! John Vandenberg unravelled it, and I've just noticed this! :-) LOL @the Dunning-Kruger effect. Bishonen | talk 21:02, 29 March 2011 (UTC).

I leave the wiki to its own devices for one day...! I know very little about global b/locks, which is fortunate, since crisis seems to have been averted without my help (or lack thereof!), but if it happens again, I would say your best bet is to contact a steward. I don't know any, but there's a list of them on Meta somewhere. They deal with all things global and I believe they're the ones important enough to make global blocks/locks. As far as I know, you can tell an account is globally locked by opening Special:block and entering their username (as if you were going to block them) and there'll be an "already blocked" message. The reason field usually makes some reference of a global lock and the steward responsible. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:34, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

O... K. Well, that actually sounds reasonably simple. It was a Dutch steward who blocked the poor mite, and who fixed the problem after I had fired off a stern e-mail. So much for the dangers of getting involved with the wikipedia crèche! Bishonen | talk 22:49, 29 March 2011 (UTC).

Huh?

'Nishidani, your move of only his proposed new text was frankly a little confusing, sorry.'

I moved nothing of his proposed new text.Nishidani (talk) 20:55, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Wut? Sorry, I thought that bit was part and parcel of your comments. It was confusing, anyway! ;-) (Effortfully checks the History. It was Paul. Maybe I should go and annoy him, too!) Bishonen | talk 21:10, 29 March 2011 (UTC).

No wuz. I'm getting used to it. My arse has been kicked that much I think I'd better take the hint and read Ring Lardner :) Nishidani (talk) 21:17, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Matti Nykänen

Hi Bish! Can I ask you to please take a look at Matti Nykänen? I've just done a major copyedit, and just wanted someone to check that the sources, which are mainly in some north-European language I cannot fathom, are accurately reflected in the text. Seems to be a controversial ~~character~~stripper, so I hope you can help ensure that the article is WP:BLP compliant. Thanks, --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 03:30, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, Oh, those sources are in Finnish, a language extravagantly unlike my own. (Finnish isn't even Indo-European.) I don't understand a word of it. Appealing to WikiProject Finland is probably your best bet. Bishonen | talk 17:51, 30 March 2011 (UTC).

Thanks. I knew you were from somewhere up there, but had you for being from a few kilometres further east! ;-)

Swedes are more extrovert than Finns. (And less extrovert than the rest of the world.)

Q: How can you tell if a person is Swedish or Finnish?

A: The Swede stares at your shoes.

P.S., I've tried to disable the SineBot on this page (interfering thing!), now we shall see if it works. Bishonen | talk 07:50, 1 April 2011 (UTC).

Whoooo hooo hooo!

You are sure to know - where is the place to nominate categories for deletion. I have found this silly nonesense here Category:Haunted houses which is not only bollox, but unencyclopedic bollox. If it's allowed to remain, then Lady Catherine should become an admin and preside over it. Giacomo Returned 07:45, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

WP:CFD. Not that that would preclude Her Ladyship from becoming an admin...Nikkimaria (talk) 12:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you; that looks very stressful and complicated, but I will try it sometime. Giacomo Returned 18:26, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Like lightning

Thanks. Man, you're fast ! Bishonen | talk 13:22, 7 April 2011 (UTC).

Thanks :) I do my best. The tools I use really help. Gscshoyru (talk) 13:36, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

And you still had time to post all those warnings on the IP, I see. What tools are they? Bishonen | talk 13:38, 7 April 2011 (UTC).

You can see from the edit summary -- I'm using igloo. I used to use twinkle, and still do, some -- igloo automates most of the process but is really bad at some things (currently, it's still being written), whereas twinkle is easier to use on a case-by-case basis. Gscshoyru (talk) 13:43, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Theophilus Cibber as Pistol.png needs authorship information.

Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:Theophilus Cibber as Pistol.png is missing information as to its authorship (and or source) , or if such information is provided it is confusing.

Although images may not need author information in un-controversial cases, or where an applicable source is provided, such information aids those making use of the image, and helps verify the copyright status of an image.

If possible, please consider updating the media information page to make the authorship (and or source) of this media clearer.

If the media is your own work, please consider explicitly including your user name or using the {{own}} template on the media information page.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:55, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Just delete the sucker. Bishonen | talk 22:35, 10 April 2011 (UTC).

I was trying to rescue it, not get it nuked. If you can't give an exact citation, try and provide as much information as you can recall, like "Source= Archive image now in public domain" or something :) . Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:37, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

I can't recall a thing, but I've looked again, and added an excruciatingly detailed description of (obviously) the right image from the British Museum catalogue, and the age (created c. 1733) and the author (a certain mr. Anonymous). The images out there seem to all come from Wikipedia, though not all acknowledge it, and I've mentioned that also. So I still don't have a source, sorry. Please feel free to change my input if it isn't the right kind. Bishonen | talk 23:56, 10 April 2011 (UTC).

So it begins ... --Famously Sharp (talk) 01:41, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

And I've added {{keeplocal}}to all the Bishzilla images, to counteract the template which currently recommends admins to move them to Commons and delete them on en. File:Bishzilla spin.gif had had this done to it by some bad person, AND also had a recommendation on Commons that it be deleted on arrival! Useful to be an admin sometimes, even though I don't know what I'm doing half the time — I undeleted the en.wiki sucker, haha. Incidentally, Famously, do you think it would be safe to put it back in the "Images of users" category on Commons? :-) A very noble user by the name of Pieter Kuiper had put it there (what a charming man, Bishzilla was delighted), but then a bot had come along and boringly changed it to "User page images". :-( Bishonen | talk 21:11, 11 April 2011 (UTC).

Speaking of 'Zilla - she's such a great comic character. Have you ever considered writing a children's book based on B.'s adventures? Or better still, a children's book that's really a book for adults. Just a thought ... Gatoclass (talk) 05:11, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Comic.. ? [Bishzilla is nonplussed. ] Not usually thought of as "comic" ! [A little haughtily: ] "Popular", "amiable" and "warm-hearted" spring more readily to mind — example, little Gato see Zilla arbcom vote! [Bishzilla starts to plan a rather sad, immensely moving, book about herself on arbcom. ] bishzilla _ROARR!! 11:00, 12 April 2011 (UTC).

Absolutely - change it back. "User page images" is an ambiguous category as it may be expected to contain images of 'user pages'; "Images of users" is a much clearer category and is naturally preferred on Commons. Anyone who has followed the adventures of Arnie in the 'Terminator' series will understand the dangers of letting bots override humans, so the next time it happens, drop this image on the bot owner's page with a stern warning. --Famously Sharp (talk) 05:37, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Mary Kent for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mary Kent is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Kent until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:47, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Uh.. no, quite.. I should point out that I haven't removed it. But I think you may have forgotten to add it. Bishonen | talk 12:19, 12 April 2011 (UTC).

If I'd have thought you'd actually want to talk without lolling at me I'd have asked you first. I've caught a snippet at here which says she was a minor actress. That book source you added is very good but we need a good range of sources to write a good article about her. It is exactly the sort of subject we need on wikipedia, imagine all of the stage actors missing from like 17th century etc. But we do need a few sources... Mmm I think maybe its the period and subject which accounts for the very poor coverage of her perhaps?...

In regards to your comments. Honestly I had no idea there was so many against infoboxes. I'd have to agree for biographies which rarely contain any useful statistics beyond date of birth and place of birth and spouse. Maps are my thing, so I thought it was a good thing to identify where in the city it is. If I had my own way we'd have our own proper Atlas project and the ability to make much better quality maps. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:46, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Can you find the page numbers of the book and add citations? I've withdrawn it and added a bit from what I could find, I think the severe lack of sources is more due to the period, I am well aware of hundreds of notable actors from the same period which are barely mentioned in books. She was a minor actress but her roles perhaps meet guidelines.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:11, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, no, I can't find the page numbers I'm afraid. Can't and don't want to. Come on, it's a dictionary! Alphabetical! I remember once reading in the MLA Handbook — don't remember which edition — that they deplored the bureaucratic practice of putting useless information, such as page references to alphabetical works, into citations. Also, as far as I remember it, the Mary Kent entry is perhaps a page long, so I believe a reader can navigate it for information without the help of a pepperpot of superscribed note numbers (which would all refer to the same page).

I don't really think she has poor coverage, in relation to being a minor actress. It's significant that her death date is unknown — I've done quite a few actor stubs from the period (they're listed towards the end of this page, in case you wish to ~~delete~~ consult them), that go with the long play articles The Relapse and The Country Wife, and I've seen that normally, while the birth date for actors may well be obscure, when they died is reasonably well known . The Relapse is sort of illuminating about Mary Kent, and puts the high point of her career into context. If you'd care to look for her in that article, you may get a sense of her notability, such as it is. But otherwise, I think the stub already gave the information there is. It could be expressed with more puffery, of course, and I could list one or two performances from Van Lennep, William (ed.), The London Stage 1660—1800: A Calendar of Plays, Entertainments and Afterpieces Together with Casts, Box-Receipts and Contemporary Comment Compiled from the Playbills, Newspapers and Theatrical Diaries of the Period, Part 1: 1660–1700, Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press — an extremely reputable source — in order to list that book as a reference, but meh, there's no real point, only a puffed-up point. Plus, I'd have to traipse to the library.

About your new references: I don't think Pearson is a very good source (shrug). It's an academic book and so on; just not very good. Elizabeth Howe is fine, but the info you refer to her is all in Highfill as well, so I don't quite see the point, other than formally achieving your "more than one source" desideratum. (Is that supposed to be a rule? Every stub needs more than one source or it should be deleted? I don't think so.)

As for your vile suggestion that the period and subject are less than fascinating, what can you mean by it? Snort. Bishonen | talk 21:09, 12 April 2011 (UTC).

Why not?

We have nearly everywhere else... LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:49, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

And nearly all the other sexual proclivities? (Can somebody explain to me why the same post has two different diffs? FGS, I've written a Help page on this stuff, and I know nothing, but nothing, about it.) Bishonen | talk 13:02, 12 April 2011 (UTC).

I don't understand your conversation, but I can explain why there are three different ways of writing every simple (one-edit) diff. Say you want a diff for the edit that turned page version A into page version B.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AGiacomoReturned&action=historysubmit&diff=423597625&oldid=423596656 -- This is what you get when you pick the points A and B in the page history and click "Compare selected revisions".
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:GiacomoReturned&diff=prev&oldid=423597625 -- This is what you get when you go to revision B and click the left "diff" link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:GiacomoReturned&diff=next&oldid=423596656 -- This is what you get when you go to revision A and click the right "diff" link.

Hans Adler 13:29, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Hans. I've often stumbled across pairs of diffs for the same post, so I knew there could, somehow, be two — I had no idea there were actually three possibilities. That's kind of scary. Sorry about the conversation. Less Heard doesn't always understand his own conversation, I feel. Bishonen | talk 21:27, 12 April 2011 (UTC).

Although Jack would have wanted you to use {{diff2|423597625}} which links as [10] - this respects whether the viewer is logged on via the secure server or not. As you can see, you actually only need the diff=423597625 from the first of Hans' examples (which is what shows up in your watchlist btw) to create a link for the diff you wanted most of the time. In memoriam. --RexxS (talk) 00:00, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Paranormal places

Proposed merge of Category:Reportedly haunted locations into Category:Paranormal places. Please see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_April_24#Category:Reportedly_haunted_locations. Simply south...... trying to improve for 5 years 16:18, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Bishonen | talk 18:27, 24 April 2011 (UTC).

Oh the exitement!

Ignore all that paranormal rubish above. I expect you have all been wondering where I have been - Well I'm off the yacht and back in London for the week (obvious reasons - No, I will not disclose my secrets of the Royals, allthough, I may "tweet" to you all from the Abbey during the dull bits on Friday. Poor dear little Kate (obviously Catherine, like me now) is so eager to learn of my advice for a long and happy marriage - so I am very busy, but why am you here you ask? well poor dear Giacomo needs some help here [11] - so pop along and help. Now I must go, the poor dear Queen keeps pestering me for advice on what to wear (I keep saying to her: "is Ms Westwood really your sort of thing") and what title to give darlingest William (it's going to be Lancaster - you heard it here first) and that Jimbo man; I keep telling him, I already have my "Plus 1" sorted out, but will he take "no" for an answer? So much to do and so little time, I do will wish I had a dull, humdrum little life like you, dearest little Mrs Bishonen. Do take care. Lady Catherine Rollbacker-de Burgh (the Late) (talk) 19:24, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I think Giacomo seems to be doing quite well in his charitable work giving reading lessons to the lower classes. What odds do you have on Lancaster m'dear. In the right place, 5 will get you 10 on Kate becoming the Duchess of Dagenham (argent, a Ford Escort gules fesswise surmounted by three pallets retrait in base, each bearing the inscription "Omnes ex":) --Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:33, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Does the inscription mean "All bring your exes to the party"? That might improve my humdrumness a bit, though I'm far from expecting to reach the zany heights of bestowing barnstars of diplomacy on User:Kiefer.Wolfowitz. You're one of a kind, Elen! Bishonen | talk 22:56, 27 April 2011 (UTC).

LOL! I have to admit, what I was thinking of with young Master Wolfowitz was what used to be termed 'shuttle diplomacy' - where some poor politician ran to and fro between two warring parties, earnestly entreating them to rethink their position, a thankless task which he carried out without any prompting. As to the Duchess, while 'all bring your exes' might well make for a more exciting party - perhaps more along the lines of the marriage of Caroline of Brunswick, I was actually thinking more of the frequently strikebound Ford car plant at Dagenham.Elen of the Roads (talk) 10:29, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

And for any youngsters watching this episode, The Rag Trade catchphrase may shed some light. --T-RexxS (talk) 11:06, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

[Unreasonably, 'shonen starts to think of the catchphrase "Bring out yer dead" in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Murmurs:] "I'm not dead yet!" "I'm feeling better!" "I think I'll go for a walk!" All very fine catchphrases! Bishonen | talk 13:07, 28 April 2011 (UTC).

The best catchphrase from that particular motion picture must surely be, "What..? A window"?" LessHeard vanU (talk) 18:00, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I see your window and raise you a "He looks like a king. He doesn't have shit all over him." Bishonen | talk 20:54, 29 April 2011 (UTC).

@His Tyrannicalness, RexxS - gosh! the obscure things Wikipedia has articles on. Elen of the Roads (talk) 11:38, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Ah, Fredrikssons fabrikk. With Magnus Härenstam as the naive Swedish owner, if I'm not mistaken. Excitement indeed. Bishonen | talk 14:39, 29 April 2011 (UTC).

Well, the Late Lady Catherine and I both lost our shirts - who remembered that the Queen had Cambridge in the bag! And the bookies must have been relieved when Wills borrowed daddy's Aston Martin, instead of riding back to mum's gaff in either the pram or Cinders coach. Elen of the Roads (talk) 08:39, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Random hello

Just a hello to my fav consumer of Japanese metropoli (are Japanese disaster jokes in bad taste these days?) --Lyncs (talk) 23:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I think they may be. :-( Maybe that's the reason Bishzilla has become so mild lately.[12] Bishonen | talk 23:38, 28 April 2011 (UTC).

Then I will pass on the obvious word play inherent in my parenthetical remark. So to speak. --Lyncs (talk) 01:08, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

['Zilla stuffs all little Japanese users and also User:Calton tenderly in her pocket for safekeeping. ] Jump in, little Lynx! bishzilla _ROARR!! 23:41, 28 April 2011 (UTC).

Yee Haw. Move over dolphin and whale. --Lyncs (talk) 01:08, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Stop reverting, please

Qwyrxian, please stop reverting 125.162.150.88. His message is welcome, and I will respond to it as soon as I get a chance. Bishonen | talk 14:38, 1 May 2011 (UTC).

ma'af

'Zilla eat ANI? 125.162.150.88 (talk) 11:10, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

or rather the dose of sanity (no sarcasm intended). Cheers, --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 05:26, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the nice message, Oh! Bishonen | talk 22:29, 7 May 2011 (UTC).

I have to ask

Would you mind creating a category for your alt-accounts/sockpuppets? It's hard to keep track of them all. Thanks, Tijfo098 (talk) 12:47, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

This is not me refusing point-blank, but I have to ask: why do you want to keep track of them? I think the idea makes them a little nervous. And it's not like they're all over the place. They come out and play on this page of mine, on their own talkpages, and on the pages of good friends who are glad to see them. Any other appearance is the exception, and invariably in a self-explanatory context. For instance, if some stranger mentions Bishzilla, the matriarch of the clan, 'Zilla has a certain tendency to immediately appear in the same thread and say something — not something contentious or political, let alone to VOTE or anything like that— but most likely simply "RAWRRR?" That seems helpful, if anything, to people who may have been confused by the original mention: "Aha, so it's a user!" Or even, in the case of the exceptionally smart reader: "Aha, perhaps a sock!" Things were different when she was an admin, admittedly, but that's all in the past now.[13]

Category.. no, it doesn't feel right. Really, it would feel like putting them in jail. I'll send you (and anybody who asks) a list of the family if you like, provided you don't publish it on wiki, or create that cat; how about that? Can't guarantee it would be complete, I suppose; I have some trouble keeping track of them all! :-)

BTW, portraits and animations of them and stuff are already listed on my userpage, here, under "Personal images". Bishonen | talk 14:00, 8 May 2011 (UTC).

It is completely unfair to create cats, when the community seems intent on deleting dogs. This is not neutral; no, not at all.--Scott Mac 15:31, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Iz only <del> bad cats ;> Barong 10:58, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

No worries, 'Zilla taken care of the matter.[14] (Was already archived, but monsters always IAR). bishzilla _ROARR!! 23:19, 8 May 2011 (UTC).

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Number of accounts to be restricted. Flames-on. Barong 08:24, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

No point now. I knew it wasn't going to work, but I wanted to get some opinions on it. I got the info I needed. Silver seren^C 08:30, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
ironic that you use the word point. Barong 08:38, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Aren't you the one that trying to make a point because of you continuing to use the word point to make a point? (See what I did there?) Silver seren^C 08:53, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

This thread is boring; please expand it by adding moar scary monsters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barong (talk • contribs) 09:10, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Every editor should have at least one scary monster. Elen of the Roads (talk) 14:49, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

The only Scary monster anyone has ever needed. Ever. LessHeard vanU (talk) 19:51, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

ya know, he has a house about 3km from here. nice party a few years ago ;) Barong 10:58, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
See also: Rangda

@Silver Seren: I guess you forgot to mention your real reasons for attempting to incommode me with this new "rule", which must have mystified people who didn't know the background (=your hostility towards me). Supposedly I'm merely your example; actually I'm your target. You're a notorious waste of space on WP:ANI,([15], end of post) and now I find you on my page cheerfully acknowledging that you were merely trolling WP:PUMP, too. ("I knew it wasn't going to work" — but you suggested it anyway, didn't you? Do you even know how classic troll behaviour that is?) What makes you think you get to post on this page? Take your bad faith somewhere else. Bishonen | talk 20:50, 9 May 2011 (UTC).
wiki-term is waste of skin. Barong 10:58, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I knew it wasn't going to work because 1) All of your friends were going to be the first to comment and it was just going to cause a snowball effect. I made the proposal to see the opinions of other people and I got a good explanation that the point is to directly focus on disruption by alternate accounts. And, yes, while your actions prompted me to make that proposal, you are not the only person by far that has a bushel of alts and you are by far not the person who uses them the most disruptively. The only issue is that the majority of users that have a ton of alts and end up being disruptive are also established users who have a bunch of friends to back them. I didn't make the proposal to "troll", as you put it, I made it to see the general opinion of such alt accounts, as such things really aren't very clearly defined in policy pages. (And I commented on here because Barong (Jack Merridew) is trying to use this to make jabs at me, since i'm on the list. I'm not going to comment on here again.) Silver seren^C 21:28, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Aha, you "knew" your proposal was going to get shot down because all of my friends would comment? Nothing to do with it being a stupid proposal? Out of the 13 people who commented on it, there are 3 I have ever spoken with, to the best of my recollection: the "snowball" and "bunch of friends" consists of Barong, Hans Adler, and Heimstern. Your world is a weird place with weird accusations. (You may reply if you have something to say.) Bishonen | talk 08:12, 10 May 2011 (UTC).
Facepalm ... NOOOOWWWWW I remember why I don't hang out at the Village Pump. — Ched : ? 11:36, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Infobox themesong?

Thought you might enjoy this? [16].--Scott Mac 00:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Fine young boxen. Tom Lehrer, huh? Bishonen | talk 06:23, 9 May 2011 (UTC).

It's already the theme song for Weeds (the original, not the Decembrists' version), so it would work for infoboxes too. MastCell ^Talk 21:52, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Why you and not Jay?

I don't think it's a secret that Jay and I don't see eye to eye on that particular subject. That, in fact, is the point of having a diverse committee.

As to the tone, well, since he recused he's "just another editor" commenting on that matter. If we started coming down onto editors every time they are snippy or offensive on arbitration pages (where tempers and feelings are unfailingly frayed) then... well, it sure would be quiet out there. :-) We've always been much more forgiving about misbehavior on case pages than we would be elsewhere. I felt his comment was best left without a response on the request page. — Coren ^(talk) 23:41, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Somehow I get the impression that being "just another editor" carries less weight than those who are not "just another editor"; Am I right? It may be better to judge on the strength of the argument, rather than the name of the contributor - wouldn't you think? And I'm sure you'll understand that although my feelings have been more than frayed by the present discussions, that's no reason for my temper to be raised. An angry T-Rexx would not be a pretty sight. --Famously Sharp (talk) 03:06, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

[Bishzilla simpers like a girl. She wants RexxS in her harem, and she does think it would be a pretty sight.] bishzilla _ROARR!! 03:18, 13 May 2011 (UTC).

You're missing my point, or I'm making it wrong. I used "just another editor" to mean exactly the opposite: nobody gets more weight because of who they are or how connected they are. — Coren ^(talk) 11:45, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, if the AC have started treated recused members like "just another editor", it's none too soon, and I'm glad to hear it. I've been around long enough to see startling abuses of "recusal": recused committee members who throw their weight around and bully the rest of the committee just as usual; who are involved parties yet get to read and contribute to the AC mailing list (which is an important venue during a case) just as usual... and I've been around long enough to have my complaints dismissed with "oh, he probably doesn't actually read it and he's a friend of ours, assume good faith Bishonen!" Encouraging to see the worst of the AC old-school-tie system fading away, even if there's been a lot of foot-dragging; I wonder, for instance, if the committee is aware of how badly my supposed access to the ML worked during the 2009 Jimbo/Bishonen case. That was supposed to ensure that "nobody [=Jimbo] got more weight because of who they were." I hope that's all history. (Out of curiosity: do John and Casliber at present have full access to the relevant part of the mailing list?) Bishonen | talk 14:29, 13 May 2011 (UTC).

(edit conflict) I'm glad to hear that, Coren. Please accept my apologies for my lack of understanding, but I find that's an inevitable consequence of the medium in which we are communicating. While we're examining communication, could I be so bold as to ask you to have another think about your attitude to Jack? I know that you don't have a high opinion of him, but is it possible you are also misunderstanding? I still think that if you looked afresh at his contributions for 2009 and 2010 (even a tiny sample of them), you might find that his net contribution to the encyclopedia was a long way into the positive. Everybody agrees that he can be spiky and doesn't suffer fools well, but many of us are guilty of those offences, and we aren't required to carry the stigma of ancient sanctions as a result. --T-RexxS (talk) 14:49, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) FWIW, Arbcom has a secondary mailing list; when a member of the committee is recused from something controversial, the supplemental list is broken out of hibernation, all discussion related to the topic is shunted across to it, and the member in question is temporarily unsubscribed. Arbcom is considerably less corrupt than a lot of people think; if the shit ever does hit the fan, the Arbcom archives are where the subpoenas are gonna be aimed, so it's much more by-the-book than you might believe. There's also the obvious point that if Arbcom were really working as a cabal cooking up deals behind the scenes, we wouldn't have quite so many situations (including this one) where it's impossible to get anyone to agree on anything. The Arbcom mailing list isn't so much "stitching up backroom deals", but more "OK, whose turn is it to reply to [insert crank-of-the-day] this time?".

WRT this particular case, I'm coming round to the view that the right way to stop Jack being singled out for special treatment is to keep the one-account-without-good-reason-to-do-otherwise restriction on Jack, but to spread that ruling out project-wide, even if it means sending Zilla and Catherine into retirement. The time sucked up by endless "is this account legitimate, is that account legitimate?" threads must add up to an impressive figure by now; a straightforward "no more than two accounts for anyone and they have to be clearly linked" rule for everyone would have saved most of this time. – iridescent 14:52, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

OK, that tells me the present arbcom isn't in fact aware of the problems with my supposed access in that old case. Never mind, why should you be? It was IMO never a question of corruption anyway, but of WP:COMPETENCE. Just apply Hanlon's Razor. :-) Bishonen | talk 18:43, 13 May 2011 (UTC).

This member of the present arbcom certainly isn't, although obviously there are still some like Brad who were around at the time. Whatever various conspiracy-mongers may claim (you know who you are) there is no secret database of past problems (the mythical Arbcom Archives are actually a few humungous text files with names like "all emails received in January 2010", and no sane person would read them unless they really had to). All I can talk about is how things operate now (e.g., Elen of the Roads couldn't see any discussion of RH&E when her evidence against him was being discussed). – iridescent 18:53, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

But Brad told me.. [Recollects herself. ] I mean, he told me nothing! Nothing! Who's "Brad," anyway? Bishonen | talk 19:06, 13 May 2011 (UTC).

Good thing arbcom can't dictate policy, huh. Why is it that everyone "in power" seems to think they know what's best for everyone else? I never thought Iridescent would become one of "those" people when she was elected to the arbcom. Retire Bishzilla? BOOOOO!!!!!! Tex (talk) 16:17, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

See, the thing is, Iridescent falls for the seduction of the dark side of the sock anyway! Once you move away from a straightforward "no more than ONE account for anyone and they have to be clearly linked" rule for everyone, you've lost any chance of getting agreement to it. Some people will give you good reasons for two accounts; some will explain that three are needed. And so on, until you get to six (for 'Shonen, 'Zilla, 'Poddie, the Darwin twins, and a spare). A rule of one would have the saving grace that there's a chance Geogre would still be with us had it existed from the start, but realistically, that's all too late now. Once you've accepted that people need/like having a few accounts, you've got to accept that under current rules Jack is discriminated against. And don't forget that since his socking days of 2007/2008, Jack has consistently edited from only one account until he felt the need to protest his outdated restriction by kicking against it with Gold Hat. One can only assume that had he not made a fuss, he'd be kept under indefinite restrictions until the heat death of the universe. --Famously Sharp (talk) 16:50, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

A rule of one would never work, since there are a lot of legitimate reasons for two accounts—a lot of people have a separate account for insecure terminals, or a second account with a shorter password for use on phones and the like where entering the recommended lengthy-string-of-random-characters password isn't practical. If I were designing Wikipedia from scratch, I'd have the rule be "no more than two active accounts, only one of which has advanced permissions of any kind and both of which are clearly linked. If a third account is required for reasons of privacy or segregation of edits, a written request must be made to the Bot Approvals Group for bot accounts, or to Arbcom (or a successor body set up to handle this kind of appeal) for an account to be used for any other purpose."

What Jack has done is a red herring. The restriction he wants lifted is "will not operate more than one account"; whether he's ever actually breached the existing condition is irrelevant. Bear on mind that all of Arbcom are well aware of what happened last time someone wanted restrictions lifted after promising not to goof about with sock accounts, and I doubt very much if anyone (including you) has any pressing desire for a rerun. – iridescent 17:47, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

What a far-fetched analogy, Iridescent. What does Barong have to do with that editor? Is the ac aware of the last time (to my knowledge) an arbitrator lied to our faces while swearing he was telling the truth and was an example of integrity to us all? Does anybody nourish a pressing desire for a rerun of that ? If not, should we perhaps stop electing arbs, potentially dishonest as they apparently are? Bishonen | talk 22:19, 13 May 2011 (UTC).

That's perceptive, but still not quite there :) If you can be firmly convinced that two is the magic number, then someone else can be equally firmly convinced that the number is three, and so on. Believe me, you'd never get consensus. And as for Jack, the restriction he wants lifted is actually "whatever the four-year old restriction is" - I assure you that the form of the restriction is immaterial to him. It's the existence of any restriction after such a long time that bugs him.

I actually did some work with Matisse not so long ago on Wikisource. Well, we were both editing the same document, which is about as close as collaboration gets there, so it was quite a pleasant experience. But you're wrong about my attitude to the possibility of a rerun in Jack's case; I'm a sucker when it comes to assuming the best in people. It's disappointing when you trust someone and they let you down; but when someone repays the trust you put in them and reforms, that makes it all worthwhile. The opposite, pessimistic view of humankind is too depressing to consider. Steer clear of it. --RexxS (talk) 22:03, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Honestly, RexxS: Maybe you're right, but the problem is that Admins and Arbs work in so many areas where putting hope in people is foolish, because we've been disappointed so many times. I know there is disagreement with the motion that I posted (that is currently listed as passing), however, I will say this. As I said there, Barong (I'm using the recent account name, he asked to move away from the JM name), really shot himself in the foot. Maybe administrators and or the committee should have blocked the Gold Hat account in the first place, rather then telling him "stop doing that", since that seemed to just encourage him. As I said previously, his actions with the JM account (deliberately compromising that account, and later the Barong one was almost like he was doing a behavior straight out of Option B of WP:NOPONY) and constant poking at others via the IP address gave me no confidence that he was going to fly right, (considering a community discussion to ban JM looked like it was going to have a good chance of passing at one point, continuing to be intransigent and pressing the point was at best unwise.) Finally, I hope JM/Barong decides at some point to come back and show by his actions that he can fly right and avoid trouble, then we can discuss lifting the one account restriction. I've never denied that he's made really good edits, and if he could avoid the behavior that's caused problem, would be a real credit to the encyclopedia. SirFozzie (talk) 22:52, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Fozzie, all that would be well and good if indeed admins and arbs had said "stop doing that" about the Gold Hat account, but they did not. T. Canens decided to ask the committee for clarification and got a big "meh" out of them. Then once Jack wanted restrictions lifted, it was suddenly nothing of the sort. The lesson here seems to be that one should not ask the committee to clarify things, for, like the elves, they will answer both yes and no. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 23:37, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

(←) Well, I don't speak for any other arb, of course, but I clearly remember saying that the Gold Hat account was a technical violation of the ban, almost certainly not worth sanctioning over, but profoundly unwise. Perhaps, in retrospect, it would have been better to be more strict then and block him — but it didn't occur to me that he (or anyone else) could mistake "not disruptive enough to intervene" with "perfectly okay behavior". — Coren ^(talk) 00:46, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

@ Coren: He had the Gold Hat account since June 2010. He communicated at various times with four different admins using the Gold Hat account—Shell Kinney, T. Canens, Bish, and myself—before he posted to Arbcom asking for a lifting of his final restriction. He likely felt that under these circumstances asking for official permission to carry on with it was merely a formality. So I imagine it was quite a shock to find that the last arbcom restriction would not be lifted, in spite of the years of productive editing, and the tacit agreement of at least four admins that the Gold Hat account was OK. I would encourage you to re-think your stance on this, Coren. --Diannaa ^(Talk) 02:27, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, there's the crux of the issue, Diannaa. After his contributions to other Wikimedia projects in 2008, and his contributions in 2009 and 2010, did Jack have a right to expect that his remaining restriction should be lifted? In my view, he did have that right, because we are promised that rehabilitation is possible.

The restriction was placed in December 2008, and was respected for two years. Who is going to tell me and the rest of the community that two years of positive contribution is not long enough to earn the right to have someone's restrictions lifted? He had certainly received enough signals that it was enough, and the tragic part is that Jack wasn't in a position to ask for a review on the second anniversary of his unban (Dec 2010).

I still think that the "joke Mexican bandito" second account was unwise, but never disruptive to the encyclopedia. It seems to me that ArbCom has now enforced the letter of the law with no regard to the spirit, and to the net detriment of our project. Pity. --RexxS (talk) 12:23, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. Though it's hardly news that the committee is overly focused on Da Rules and insufficiently focused on the encyclopedia. I mean, that's why people who bother to stand up for neutrality against the raving nationalists get sanctioned equally with the nationalists themselves. Rules Are Rules, and woe betide the one who breaks them or ignores them. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 14:14, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Swedish allotment system FAR

I have nominated Swedish allotment system for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. P. S. Burton (talk) 11:10, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

It's Friday afternoon De e månda morron

...and someone looks to have started early.[17] Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 20:51, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Hihihi! Hohoho! Beware! Beware! Her flashing eyes, her floating hair! Mad, I tell you! Mad! Mad! Bishonen | talk 21:01, 27 May 2011 (UTC).

I can't think why poor Mrs Bishonen is so concerned; it's not as though Mr FT2 is one of our elected leaders - or ever likely to be - is it? If people want to drone on, it's those forced to read it that I feel sorry for, what ever sort of person would ever read beyond word 120 of an arbitration statement? Lady Catherine Rollbacker-de Burgh (the Late) (talk) 22:34, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I read it! Like a fool! I read it! Drone on, drone on, little users with the floating hair! Stick straws in it! Come to Bedlam with me, sjungande the gräsänkling blues! Bishonen | talk 11:23, 28 May 2011 (UTC).

All hail mighty 'Zilla

Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Policy/Update_and_ratification#Conduct_of_arbitrators Well, I'll apologise if nobody else will. If only on the "Q. What do you call a six foot, 250lb meerkat in a spangly top and high heels, armed with twin Samurai swords and an AK-47? A. Sir, yes sir!" principle. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 20:12, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Samurai is the warrior caste/class of Japan, their swords are, most usually, termed Katana. Very superior toothpicks! LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:52, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Well it was nice, and unexpected, to get a crisp "yes" in reply from Roger and Risker. I was frankly expecting more of a "Personal attack removed" type of response, so that's cool. As for Bishzilla, she was amusing herself too much to really need an apology; more than I've ever done with those admin tools, in fact. Maybe I should return them to her. [Bishzilla eats the meerkat. Nom nom. Then stands on her head in an effort to understand the Katana piped link. No soap. ] Now make up your mind, people; is Zilla supposed to pick her teeth with viking helmets or samurai swords? Bishonen | talk 23:17, 7 June 2011 (UTC).

The Katana reference is more to do with the Japan link and Mr David Sylvian, and the fact that I was amusing myself.LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:49, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Re unexpected: I know I risk sounding even more of a wisenheimer by so doing, but I can't help linking to fundamental attribution error. As a simple application, most people would believe that Bishzilla ate the meerkat because she is a monster. Bishzilla probably believes that she had to eat it because it asked for it. The truth is usually somewhere in between. Hans Adler 14:38, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Someone been talking about a wise Heim? Ascend the mountain, mortals, and receive my wisdom. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 14:41, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Über allen Gipfeln ist Heimstern Läufer! [Bishzilla sticks the little Heimstern in her pocket to save his wisdom for later. ] Got more meerkats, little Hans? bishzilla _ROARR!! 19:57, 8 June 2011 (UTC).

My good 'Zilla, now you've gotten me singing Schubert. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 23:19, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Inspired, Bishzilla bursts into Erlkönig in fruity dino contralto. Little 'shonen page visitors flee in terror. bishzilla _ROARR!! 23:29, 9 June 2011 (UTC).

Heim, a tenor in a more peaceful mood, breaks into "Am See" D. 746, hoping so much that 'Zilla will not evaporate the lake and burn up the stars with her fire breath. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 23:33, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm. Maybe Schubert not best vehicle for Zilla vocal resources. (Bishzilla switches to her well-known rendering of Ole Man River). bishzilla _ROARR!! 23:39, 9 June 2011 (UTC).