Jump to content

User talk:Dennis Brown/Archive 27

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20←Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30

Medicine

Hey Dennis. If there are any medical articles that need to be looked at following this paid editing issue I am sure a number of us at WP:MED would be happy to help look into it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 02:13, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) medicine-related articles that are still on the wiki: ITelagen, John T. Knight, ViSalus, Martin Bayne, Moderna Therapeutics, RxWiki —rybec 02:41, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Okay so these seem to be vanity or company pages. No evidence of editing disease or medication related content? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 04:55, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Unquestionably, I would want you looking at them Doc. I'm not really around much right now, however. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 21:38, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Great work on this case by the way. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 00:46, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

And you have my support to continue blocking sock puppets / paid editors. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 07:42, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Hey Dennis

Sorry to hear the frustration in your voice at Jimbotalk. Remember, if you feel you need a place to vent or to go into detail that might not be fully allowable at WP, WPO is always available to you. (I've got your back if they start throwing rocks at you...) Best regards as always, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 07:04, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Quick question for you Dennis

(or any talk page stalkers) If I'm at work (as I presently am) and one of my co-workers makes an account on one of the computers that also I edit from do I have to declare anything or do anything? Or do I just add {{User shared IP address}} to my userpage and that's it? I just dont want -in the future- someone to think an account created from this same IP is me or something. Apparently me talking about what I do on WP and funny things that I find on Wikipedia over the last few months has made a few of them interested in it to the point where at least one person has registered an account, I'm not sure who else has though. Anywho, I hope all is well. Thanks, —  dainomite   19:08, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

  • If you and the coworker don't want to disclose publicly that you work in the same place or share an IP (recommended due to outing concerns) then just forward the information to Arb so they know, then avoid the same articles. Otherwise, the IP template is adequate, again avoiding the same articles. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 21:27, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

If anyone ever deserved this ...

The Purple Star The Purple Star
I regret to say that I just today noticed the rather lengthy discussion at WT:AC, and what you have been put through lately. I assume the Arbs have some sort of reason, and that maybe, in some way, they think they might have indicated it to you. That still may not make it right, though, and I sincerely hope that this brouhaha gets resolved as soon as possible. And that you can, eventually, hope to forget about this mess. This is a hugely important matter, but that also makes it one which we can't allow to cost us good independent editors and admins like yourself. John Carter (talk) 21:22, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Thank you. It is complicated, but suffice it to say there are some serious flaws in our existing system and I'm not willing to just ignore it anymore. I'm hoping this can get solved off-wiki in a dignified way, as I don't require dragging this ugliness through the pages here. I haven't done anything I'm ashamed of at Wikipedia, and have nothing to hide, but some of it needs to stay off the pages in the interest of the Foundation. I also don't want to politicize the situation, I just want solutions. If not, that is fine, but I'm not interested in devoting hours a day with the current situation as it is. I have plenty of other interesting things I can do, a fulfilling career and a wonderful wife. Wikipedia is just my way of giving back. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 21:41, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I think I can figure out some of what happened here. I think I have a bit of a grasp of what this about, and that's why I think it is really important here. I do hope the broader issues involved can be resolved quickly, and I kind of get the impression that things are being done to address it in some way. I just hope that happens sooner rather than later. John Carter (talk) 21:48, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Morning277 is complicated, I'm sure everyone knows that. Heck, I spent a few hours compiling data on potential socks (about 40 or so of them iirc) and no checkuser looked at it for a while. Some got blocked, others not, then it got archived in a massive archival. When I had put it in bullet points of why they're socks. Simple bullets. With damning behavioral evidence. My guess is that the CUs, ArbCom, and the WMF do not want to deal with this issue. Yet they don't want people who do work towards dealing with it to deal with it either. Don't take it personally :) ~Charmlet -talk- 22:14, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
There is also another discussion at WP:AN about wikexperts or however they spell it which deals with roughly the same problem, which is what inspires some hope in me. One case might not have done anything, two is another matter entirely. John Carter (talk) 22:19, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Linking Morning socks are not easy, but there are two individuals are arguably the most experienced and efficient at doing so. Myself (I've blocked over 300) and User:WilliamH, who WAS a CU, a Bureaucrat and Admin. He retired out of frustration and handed in all his advanced bits. The rumors that it was unrelated to Morning are incorrect. Trust me, he is a good friend who I still talk to regularly. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 22:23, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
When you say only one that has shown enough interest to email me is Jimbo Wales are you referring to WMF staff? Because I emailed you and haven't heard back. Just checking in case it didn't go through.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 22:32, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Actually, yours and email from over a dozen other normal people have come through, all very supportive and I apreciate. I should have been more clear. I haven't received any email from Arbs, Foundation, CUs or people with advanced bits except Jimmy. Really, I'm not shocked that is part of the problem. A great many of us lowly admin seem to be concerned about the very same thing, and very confused about Arb's stance on all of this. Again, at this stage I'm not trying to raise a stink, just find a solution. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 22:42, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
That was my guess, but I wanted to make sure. Thanks for the clarification. I hope Jimmy steps in and helps, and I hope some from the Foundation step in and respond. This isn't exactly a run of the mill situation, and some clear support for those trying to do the right thing would be good.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 00:50, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
I was a little sad and somewhat disconcerted to see your comment on Jimbo's talk page regarding "being chased away" from Wikipedia. I sincerely hope that you don't let anything chase you away from our project here - you are one of the top administrators we have, and our community needs much more of your calm voice of reason, not less. I hope work allows you to edit more regularly in the future. Thanks for all you have done, and thanks in advance for all I am sure you will do here. -- Go Phightins! 18:39, 12 October 2013 (UTC)


Dennis, I want to leave you some words of encouragement and good will, too. I've been watching this situation with concern, and I have a lot of trust in your good judgment. I very much hope that you will continue to feel appreciated at Wikipedia, because you truly are appreciated. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:26, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
I've got no idea what's kicked off here, but I do know that WP needs more decent articles on muscle cars, so I hope you'll be back soon to help out. Eric Corbett 18:33, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Nothing would make me happier, particularly since I have spent several hundred dollars buying books to source exactly those articles. I'm not holding my breath, however. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 21:49, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Not interested in the wiki places in which you've encountered difficulties, so will not read them, but I do hope you don't decide to abandon wikipedia permanently.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Funny thing, I'm losing interest in those places, too. And I wouldn't wish it on you, friend. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 22:02, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Have you seen this?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:39, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Oh yeah, several brought to my attention when it went live. For the record, they contacted me and asked me for an interview, they were very nice about it, but I replied back and told them that I felt it wasn't in the best interest of Wikipedia for me to do so at that time. The quotes of me in that article were from public messages I had left here on my talk page and in SPI archives, not new quotes. They actually went back a bit, so they seem to have done their homework. There is a bit more to the story than they could know and some of the explanations are a bit fuzzy, but I think they made a valiant effort to be neutral and accurate. I think it best that I don't comment on specifics, however. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 20:23, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Wishing you well

Dennis, I think I have expressed my gratitude for your work here a few times before. This seems an appropriate time to repeat my thanks. You are one of the "good guys" and I am really sorry that you are going through some tough times here. I am very concerned about these aggressive paid editing concerns, and deeply worried that you have been pressured to step aside. I hope that this matter is addressed promptly and aggressively. I wish you well. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:27, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Me, too. You have a reputation as a voice of reason here and I have some idea of how much effort you were investing in the sockfarm situation. I'm not too keen on what appears to be some sort of deployment of smoke and mirrors by people who'd rather not have you involved but seem also not to want to publicly explain their rationale. As so often, your response to a tricky situation demonstrates how your integrity shines through the murk. - Sitush (talk) 06:07, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
    • I appreciate the kind comments from you both. There are some frustrating issues here, and getting them worked out is no small task, but it is only part of the reason I've been scarce. I really am slammed with work as well, making dealing with the enwp issues even more difficult. In a way, being so busy at work is a blessing as it insures I don't waste too much time frustrated about Wikipedia. On the plus side, a couple of the things I'm doing at work are oddly interesting and challenging (for an old marketing guy / wannabe engineer). I particularly like the "it can't be done, that is impossible" aspects of it. Work, the wife and my dogs matter most and have to come first. I really do miss helping people here, however. We'll just have to wait and see what happens next. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 00:07, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Request for comment

As you previously participated in related discussions you are invited to comment at the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC for AfC reviewer permission criteria. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:17, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Would you take a look?

An IP editor, 174.56.57.138, has changed the column formatting on a bunch of articles. Unfortunately, the method he used separated the columns so far apart that they no longer are easily perceived as two halves of a single list. I explained this to the IP, and asked him to revert, then set about changing some of them back myself. When I looked again, he had not started to revert, but had instead pressed forward with making the changes, entirely ignoring my objection. At that point, I told him I would be rolling back his edits, and did so (such use of rollback is permitted, as long as a general explanation is given for the edits). The IP editor has now accused me of owning the articles (most of which aren't even on my watchlist) and has started reverting my edits.

As I told him on his talk page, I don't really care what method is used in creating columns, all I care about is the result, that the reader can easily read both halves (or all parts) of the list as parts of one whole thing. His method of splitting them to extreme sides doesn't fulfill that necessity, but he's aware (see that talk page discussion) of how to do it, he just apparently want to do it.

Would you take a look, please, and comment if you think it's appropriate? Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:12, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Why not asking in wider forum? See WP:LISTGAP, the use of {{col-break}} to split lists creates an unncessary gap in the lists.174.56.57.138 (talk) 05:21, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
The edits you are making go against the formatting of lists in about 75% of Wikipedia articles, so there is clearly no consensus for them, no matter what an obscure guideline says. Please stop. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:27, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
This is total of what WP:LISTGAP[ says:

Do not separate list items, including items in a definition list (a list made with leading semicolons and colons) or an unordered list, by leaving blank lines between them, since this causes MediaWiki to end one list and start a new one. This results in screen readers announcing multiple lists when only one was intended. Lists are meant to group elements that belong together, and breaking these groups will mislead and confuse a screen-reader user. Improper formatting can also more than triple the length of time it takes to read the list.

There is no mention of using or not using "col-break", which is standard item in formatting lists. You have misread the guideline, please stop creating lists that are visually separated and difficult to read because of it. We are here to serve our 'readers and not to act like robots. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:30, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
a {{col-break}} splits the list into two lists. it's the same situation. hopefully someone else can explain this to you in a way that you can understand. 174.56.57.138 (talk) 05:37, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Please don't be condescending, it doesn't help you. The policy you are citing to remove "col-break" from lists, a format that is used in a vast number of Wikipedia articles, does not advise not using "col-break", it only advises not using blank lines. Please stop, and read the text for what it actually says, and not what you think it says. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:40, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Do you see what it says? "Do not separate list items ... by leaving blank lines between them..." That is all this guideline is saying, the sum total of its advice. It does not say not to use "col-break", and would not be accepted if it did. Please stop. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:46, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

This dispute may be over. As of 1:19 (5:19 UTC) with his edit to Sullivan County, New York, the IP began to use the method I had suggested, which involves using "col-break" with the "gap=" parameter. Why he continued to argue against "col-break" while doing that, I can't guess. but I hope that this is now behind us. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:10, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

The {{col-begin}}/{{col-end}} technique encloses content (which might be a list, but doesn't have to be) in a single-row single-column table. What {{col-break}} does is to start another table cell on the same row, which again, can contain any content you like. Thus, if you have {{col-break}} occurring in the middle of what is otherwise a single bulleted list, the effect is to create two separate lists, which are shown side by side because of the table that encloses them.
There is another technique, which is specifically intended for enclosing lists (bulleted or numbered) - it is {{div col}}/{{div col end}} (also available via the redirects {{colbegin}}/{{colend}}). This has no marker to show where a fresh column should start - instead, the browser calculates it based upon the number of rows and columns. It can produce a similar visual appearance without semantically splitting the list: you can see one possible effect at Wikipedia:Meetup/UK#London - as entries are added, the split points adjust themselves automatically. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:54, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, Redrose64; I came here to say pretty much the same thing. For what it's worth, as a screen reader user, I've never really minded the use of {{col-break}} because it splits lists that are fairly big anyway (two lists of ten items is nowhere near as big a deal as twenty lists of one item). Graham87 10:33, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
I added 'tabular column breaks' to the listgap section, but something more specific would probably be good. The use of {{col-break}}, {{col-2}}, etc. isn't the worst of the listgaps, but I never really understood why people continue to use it when we have {{colbegin}}/{{colend}} and {{columns-list}}. Frietjes (talk) 14:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
IIRC {{colbegin}}/{{colend}} don't work with IE9 or earlier, for the same reason that multi-column {{reflist}} doesn't work: the column-count: and column-width: properties are unrecognised. {{col-begin}}/{{col-end}} works going right back to IE4, possibly earlier. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:13, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

WikiLove Message

 Hello Dennis Brown, Miss Bono has given you an Irish Leprechaun, for some extra luck! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else an Irish Leprechaun! Enjoy! ----- I wish you can solve the problems as soon as possible.

P.S. This new template I made is giving me headaches because it replaces my name everytime anyone else post in the same page, but well, I am leaving you this note to prove it was me :D... Miss Bono [hello, hello!] 15:39, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Hehehe you're welcome. Miss Bono [hello, hello!] 16:36, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
The name replacement must be because Template:Blank WikiLove has recently been edited to invoke REVISIONUSER. I'm not good enough at templates to fix it myself, but I've put a note on User talk:Pjoef about it. --Stfg (talk) 23:49, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Well....dang. Now my name is there. ARG!--Mark Miller (talk) 00:47, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Ha..ha..ha! REVISIONUSER picks up the last editor of the page, not of the section. Still, at least I'm off of it ... um ... oh damn! ... --Stfg (talk) 00:55, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
I think it's because it's being transcluded instead of being substituted. Mojoworker (talk) 01:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Ah yes, transcluded is when the actual template is being sent over to the page and sub opens the template as permanent text. Got it. Thanks!
Fixed. Mojoworker (talk) 01:44, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Glad you guys could figure out it. I can wire a house, a guitar or most standard appliances, but templates confuse the devil out of me. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 01:53, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Its all very difficult but like math, as long as you don't miss a number it should all add up.--Mark Miller (talk) 02:28, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
That's the thing, I'm not much of a programmer. I would rather chase physical wires with an ohm meter, things I can actually touch and see in 3 diminsions. My eyes glaze over reading the docs for templates. Oddly, I can read through hundreds of diffs or policy pages but just can't fall in love with templates. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 12:44, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Sadley...I am the opposite. I will stare for hours at a code to figure out what it does and how. I have little experience with such things but learn more with every discussion and attempt. I make mistakes but I try to learn from them.--Mark Miller (talk) 17:08, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Enjoy! Logical Cowboy (talk) 13:53, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Leaving this note....waaaaaaaay down here to be safe...I hope.

If my name shows up on that template....I'll really be confused. I looked and someone did attempt a fix....just don't know if that was enough. I believe the message needs to transclude with the signature in permanent text. That doesn't seem to be working. What I think needs to be done is remove the tildes from the hidden message as that is what seems to be the issue. Although the last tildes doesn't seem to work at all.--Mark Miller (talk) 01:06, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

..well....crap!--Mark Miller (talk) 01:07, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

. See http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Magic_words. REVISIONUSER (about a third of the way down the page) uses the edit history, not the sig. --Stfg (talk) 01:41, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I see. """Revision variables return data about the latest edit to the current page, even if viewing an older version of the page" and under Revisionuser it says clearly, "The username of the user who made the most recent edit to the page, or the current user when previewing an edit." Why do you suppose that was edited in. Mistake?--Mark Miller (talk) 02:34, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

It's normal with appreciation templates, such as barnstars, to include something that shows who edited the page to add the barnstar, etc. To avoid having too many parameters on the template, this is normally achieved by utilising {{REVISIONUSER}}; and indeed, with this edit, the intention was clearly to show the name of the user who originally placed the template - Miss Bono. This works provided that two conditions are met: (i) the template must not be coded to use {{REVISIONUSER}} alone but {{{{{|safesubst:}}}REVISIONUSER}} instead (which had been done) and (ii) the template must be substituted - by using {{subst:Blank WikiLove}} not {{Blank WikiLove}} - but this was not done. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:31, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Yes, the template usage documentation was missing the "subst" - even though it had a messagebox at the top that said the template should always be substituted, it was easy for an editor to miss it. I updated the template doc page right after I left the message in the section above. Mojoworker (talk) 07:33, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Do you have the power to ban?

Do you have the power to ban? If so, this kid needs to be banned:

VanDerEyes (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I've just undone his last lot of vandalism at Hamilton-Wenham Regional High School, presumably the school he goes to. LudicrousTripe (talk) 07:40, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) No single individual (Jimbo Wales excepted) has the power to ban; it's a group decision. Some users have the ability to block, which is a very different concept. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:45, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
another (talk page stalker) WP:AIV is the best place to report vandalism. —rybec 18:21, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
The user has already been indeffed by JamesBWatson. Peridon (talk) 18:50, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Note

Hi Dennis. You blocked User:Souslalune as a sock of Morning277.[1] Souslalune created an article on Plumbee, which was deleted under G5 Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban.[2] An editor posted at the Help Desk that he/she created a draft of Plumbee. See this. There probably is no connection between the user and Morning277, but given Morning277's numerous accounts and being banned from the English Wikipedia, I thought you may want to be made aware of the Help Desk request. -- Jreferee (talk) 12:59, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Help?

Could you have a look at the 'Socks' thread on NativeForeigner's talk page? S/he is busy, and I don't feel competent to deal with this - and don't want to mess up. Peridon (talk) 17:12, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_October_25#Category:Rape_victims

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_October_25#Category:Rape_victims. You are being notified since you participated in the last discussion. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 15:30, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Holdsworth

Check out the sounds and chord voicings 57:00 onwards As dark and mysterious as you can get.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:17, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Check out this too. One of the best electric players I've ever heard!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:25, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Sweet. I sold a couple vintage guitars, and bought a new toy. First new guitar I've bought in a very long time, I usually buy used. Fender Cabronita Thinline, on the way as we speak. I think you would approve. Identical to this one: [3] Guy was selling it at his cost, $200 off real street price and shipped it free. I was debating between the thinline vs. non-thinline, but this was too good to pass up. This guy shows what the non-thinline can do clean. [4] It has a slightly jangly but thick sound. Can't wait to crank up the Super Sonic 60, play some Tom Petty and such. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 11:43, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!

 Trick or Treat! Happy Halloween Dennis Brown! I hope you have a great day and remember to be safe if you go trick-or-treating tonight with friends, family or loved ones. Happy Halloween! —  dainomite   15:14, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Help spread Wikilove by adding {{subst:User:Dainomite/HappyHalloween}} to other users' talk pages whether they be friends, acquaintances or random folks.

Boo!

Hello Dennis Brown, Mark Miller has given you an lovely bat, to wish you a Happy Halloween! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a lovely bat! Enjoy!
Spread the goodness of a lovely bat by adding {{subst:User:Miss Bono/Halloween}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Me too

Hello Dennis Brown, Miss Bono has given you an lovely bat, to wish you a Happy Halloween! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a lovely bat! Enjoy!
Spread the goodness of a lovely bat by adding {{subst:User:Miss Bono/Halloween}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Happy Halloween!

 TheGeneralUser has given you some caramel and a candy apple! Caramel and candy-coated apples are fun Halloween treats, and promote WikiLove on Halloween. Hopefully these have made your Halloween (and the proceeding days) much sweeter. Happy Halloween!


If Trick-or-treaters come your way, add {{subst:Halloween apples}} to their talkpage with a spoooooky message!

Hi Dennis! Wishing you a very happy Halloween :-) TheGeneralUser (talk) 22:11, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Advising an editor

I always turn to you after I find I am in danger of failing :)

Please would you take a look at this editor, both at the contributions, the string of criticisms of the many very poor stubs they are creating, and at my and PamD's attempts to steer them into a more correct path, and consider what help you can be to this editor? He has huge enthusiasm and energy, but is hard to steer into using it well. Or I am finding it hard to steer him. Fiddle Faddle 10:51, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

  • It is complicated to explain, but I am swamped with work, home and Wiki issues off the site and I just can't devote the time necessary to be fair to your concern. If I could, I would, but I know I can't. Hopefully, a friendly admin will jump in and help here. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 21:48, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Unfounded accusations of sock puppetry

What is our current guideline or policy regarding false or unfounded accusations of sock puppetry from a blocked user found to have been edit warring?--Mark Miller (talk) 04:38, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

No need to answer I believe I remember hearing that it needs to be brought up at AN/I and have done so. Thanks. Sorry for bringing this to your plate that is already full.--Mark Miller (talk) 04:56, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
  • No problem. Stuff like that fall in the category of "it depends". Making a unfounded sock claim is incivil but the context matters when figuring how to deal with it. ANI is probably the best place. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 21:59, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

A cup of chamomile tea for you!

Eons ago, you helped sort out the mess at WP:RIGHT, which you may remember. Luckily the trouble has died down there since that last discussion, but I very much appreciated your help and ability to mediate between the different parties during the course of the dispute. I'm very sorry to see that you've been bogged down lately, and that you are thinking about retiring. As such, I'd like to give you a cup of chamomile tea. It works well for headaches. You will be a great loss to the project, but I can understand your reasons if you feel you cannot continue. RGloucester — ☎ 02:51, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Love the stuff. Seriously...right next to Sleepy Time. Good for heartburn and indigestion as well.--Mark Miller (talk) 03:18, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Semi retire

If you semi retire who is going to take care of all the socks? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 23:07, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Good luck, and come back soon!

Thank you for being a wonderful support to me and everyone else on wiki. We're all waiting and hoping you come back actively, and once again guide us all through delicate issues. May you match much more unpaired socks in the future too! TheOriginalSoni (talk) 02:46, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

A personal reflection

Dennis: I'm not sure if you're aware that I work in the theatre as a career (huh, some career, more like a hobby given what I earn). The problem with "The Theatre" is that once you catch the "bug", you can never really get rid of it. It caused me to drop out of MIT, and leave behind what would probably have been a lucrative career in computer science; it keeps me working for small companies for peanuts because I enjoy the work they do, when I would earn more flipping burgers at McDonalds; and, worst of all, it makes me entirely unsuitable for doing any other kind of work at all.

Well, Wikipedia is, I think, a lot like "The Theatre". Once it's in your blood, it's goddamn hard to get rid of. Oh, you can fight it, you can resist for short periods of time, maybe even for significant ones, but Wikipedia will call you back again -- and when you return you'll find that it's just as exasperating and annoying and aggravating and enervating and full of assholes and idiots as it was when you left. (If for no other reason, Jimbo Wales will burn forever in Hell because of Wikipedia.) But, like addicts everywhere, you won't be as concerned with the adulterants in your drugs as you will that you get that "kick" than only your personal monkey can deliver, so you'll stick around, at least until the next time you kick.

Which is all to say: I appreciated you while you were here, I understand why you're gone, and I expect to see you again at some future time -- at least, I hope so. I'd really hate to see us lose one of the good ones. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:29, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

And yes, I am aware that I am, in my own way, a pain in the ass. My hope is that, overall, my positive contributions outweigh my detriments, but that's difficult to judge from my perspective. In any case, two steps foward, one step back still makes progress. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:15, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
I like the analogy. I understand that fully and agree. Its something that is rather engrained and you can't help thinking how something you see might make a good image for an article or something you think of might be notable enough for an article and then if it could be expanded. It is like building a production with separate departments all working together and trusting that, where we each cross over into each others "Departments", we don't step on toes or disrupt the process. But everyone needs a break from it all now and then to try different things. Taking a less active role for a while can be a good thing sometimes.--Mark Miller (talk) 08:45, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar Awarded!

The Barnstar of Integrity
This barnstar is a humble acknowledgement of the many services you have provided the 'pedia over the years. Blessings and best wishes to you always, Jusdafax 20:35, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
some words for you
I wasn't sure my report about Sublimeharmony would be taken seriously. If it hadn't been, I would have stopped participating in Wikipedia. Thank you for what you've done here and may your other endeavours go well. —rybec 14:05, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

My email has been overflowing with warm sentiments and I appreciate the kindness. I always enjoyed working ANI because it was often an opportunity to take complicated, heated or seemingly unsolvable problems and find solutions through patience, diligence and compromise. It was incredibly challenging but equally rewarding. I always enjoyed working SPI because I'm a sleuth at heart, and I know that puppets cause problems for good editors, and quickly dispatching with them made the place more enjoyable. It was demanding and exacting work, but also very rewarding at times. I would like to think that I was pretty good at both of those. Burn out isn't the problem.

My problems aren't with my fellow editors, those that write articles, format and clean up the templates and categories, and who turn mediocre lists of facts into GA+ grade articles. On the contrary, I have tremendous respect and admiration for you. It is why I became an admin, to mop up around those with more talent than I have, so you can make Wikipedia a better place for reading. The reader is more important than you or I, and content is why they come. This is why WP:WER was founded, to keep the (sometimes erratic) highly skilled editors. Wikipedia has so many talented writers, likely the largest pool on the planet, and I loved working with and learning from each of you. I received more than I ever gave, and I'm indebted to you.

I do have some serious misgivings about our bureaucracy, our system of governance, but it would be unfair to single out any individual for the failings of the entire system. The problem is systemic, and it isn't something I can fix. Several people in that bureaucracy have been incredibly kind and helpful (Dave and others), but the beast is what it is. There is nothing to be gained by laboring the details, so I won't. Don't fret, it is personal and of no real importance.

I will still read Wikipedia occasionally, correct a spelling here and there, but don't expect much. I may come back some day, as admin or not, but I don't see it happening any time soon. This is why "semi" is used, the future isn't written yet. For now I'm just stepping back. Far back. Please understand if I don't reply to each message or email individually, it isn't personal, I just won't be checking email nor this page often. Anyway, I just wanted to say thanks to everyone who has been kind to me over the last seven years. It made a difference, more than you realize.

Now, do the reader a favor and go write some articles. ;-) Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER

I want to thank you for telling me about a diversion you were creating that could give me something to do when content creating got rough on a particular subject or subjects. It was a great and VERY learning experience for me. Really. It gave me an outlet to express what I felt was important and where I felt others agreed and supported that. A goal of reaching out to find ways to keep skilled editors.
Part of what you achieved is summed up in what you inspired in others in that direction. Buster 7 is a great example of that as are a lot of other editors. A lot of stuff I won't even mention. As long as editors carry this: WP:RETENTION This editor is willing to lend a helping hand. Just ask." or just that spirit then you can rest assured at least, that you achieved a goal you set out to achieve.--Mark Miller (talk) 14:58, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
I don't know you so lomg ago, but I wanted to thank you and tell you that you are an awesome admin and editor. Keep rockin' and don't let the bastards grind you down Miss Bono [hello, hello!] 15:43, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Come and go as you please, friend

If you do ultimately decide to move on, I'll respect your decision, and I wish you the best of luck for any future endeavours. And if you ever feel like coming back, just know that you're always welcome around here. Your contributions have not gone unnoticed. :-) Kurtis (talk) 10:44, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Sad times at Wikipedia have gotten sadder

I hope you haven't forgotten my invite to share the '79 Puligny Montrachet if you're ever in Philadelphia! Joefromrandb (talk) 04:38, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Gold watch time...say it ain't so...

Are you retiring? Noooooo.--Mark Miller (talk) 22:11, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

:( Legoktm (talk) 23:22, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
  • You've been carrying a heavy load for quite a while. I'm hoping you can rest up, take a long, well-deserved break, and return when your gumption is back. We'll miss your contributions, but everyone gets weary of this at some point. Know that you are respected and cared about. BusterD (talk) 23:38, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
  • I can't say I care for it. Last night Mrs. Drmies had some Creme Brulee beer (a stout with vanilla and other stuff) from an American brewer, and it worked. Try it with Mrs. Brown, Dennis. Drmies (talk) 13:41, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
(adding from yesterday's Main page, written with some of the missing ones in mind, - I didn't know then you were in the group:) Did you know ... that the song "Ermutigung" by Wolf Biermann, encouraging people not to become hardened in hard times, was written for Peter Huchel, then under house arrest? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:25, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
+1 ES&L 11:49, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Wow, this is unfortunate. Good luck in real life. If you ever pop by, let me know. Sportsguy17 11:30, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
  • You'll be back. Though God knows why... In the unlikely event you're not, we'll all suffer the loss. If that happens, get in touch if you feel like it - I'd like to thank you personally for the invaluable help you gave me. But you'll be back... (we hope) Begoon talk 14:37, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Damn. I know it's "only Wikipedia", but this is very sad news. Have fun in the real world, enjoy your garden, and know that many things you did here—and the way you did them—were tremendously appreciated. Rivertorch (talk) 06:09, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm just putting this here

because I don't want anyone to think that I am not among the ranks of users who are very sad that we will have to get along without your contributions. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:09, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

+1. I've held back because I've been unsure of what to say, but I hope you return soon. --Rschen7754 10:40, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Is this a done deal? Or could we enter a bargaining stage? ;-) Liz Read! Talk! 23:17, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Berghia coerulescens, an animal on holiday far, far away from Hassletown
How about a holiday bargain? Why not stay and work in really boring, leisurely, relaxing, recreational areas for a while? Why not make a nudibranch article?
Wikipedia is a world. Don't get in a rocket and fly away. Just leave town. Depart Hassletown and spend some quality time in Nudibranchville. It's lovely this time of year. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:42, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Empty Chair Barnstar

— The candles you have lit will not wane. WE (Wikipedia Editors) cannot replace you but will do our best 'till you return. B7
Uh-oh -- watch where you sit when you get back! :-) DoctorJoeE review transgressions/talk to me! 16:27, 13 November 2013 (UTC)


relevant AfD

Having participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vert skating, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Davide Giannoni, where I raise some general questions about the topic. DGG ( talk ) 22:12, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm notifying you because I notified the others. Enjoy your break. DGG ( talk ) 22:17, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
What DGG says. I got a couple of cold beers somewhere around here for you, Dennis. 207.157.121.52 (talk) 15:41, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Just thought I'd stop by and say hello. I see you're on break, which is nice, especially from admin hassles. I haven't missed my bits in the least. They couldn't give me them back, unless they came with a paycheck. That goes double for checkuser. Anyways, happy holidays, if you go in for that sort of thing. See you around. INeverCry 22:57, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Billy Garland

Hallo Dennis, I hope you're not too retired ...

You nominated Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Billy Garland (Ex Black Panther) in Jan 2012, and the result was "Merge to Tupac Shakur". A new stub was started at Billy Garland (Black Activist), and I've redirected it to TS, but you might be interested to watch it. All the best, PamD 15:21, 4 December 2013 (UTC)


The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 16:01, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Dennis Brown. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 03:00, 11 December 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Sportsguy17 (talk • contribs • sign) 03:00, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Cold?

Best wishes
for the holidays and 2014 from a warmer place than where you probably are ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:32, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Supposed to get to 20C today, we are in a bit of a warm spell, so I can't complain. Hope you and all the talk page stalkers have a good holiday season, and get some quality time with family and friends. I'm building a new home recording studio and working overtime at the office, all the work keeps me out of trouble. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 16:33, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

a random beer because it's the week-end...keep it somewhere warm :) —rybec 21:57, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

User:Sportsguy17/Happy Holidays 2013

Holiday wishes!
Dennis Brown, thanks for your hard work this year, you deserve wonderful holidays!

I wish you success and happiness in your endeavours for this coming year, and I hope we'll be able to carry on improving the wonderful project that is Wikipedia together! Keep rocking on! :)

  • Salvidrim!, wrapping up another great year of collaboration with y'all!

Merry Christmas!

I wish you a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year 2014!
This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person.

Happy New Year! — ΛΧΣ21 Call me Hahc21 21:04, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

 Dennis Brown, I hope you have a Merry Christmas and hope your day is full of the true spirit of the day.
Plus, good food, good family and good times. :) Have a Great Day! :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:42, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Spread the joy of Christmas by adding {{subst:User:Neutralhomer/MerryChristmas}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Seasonal greetings




Merry Christmas and best wishes for a happy, lovely and productive 2014 to you! Don't forget about us.
Hafspajen (talk) 17:02, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas! :-)

Happy Yuletides!

Merry Yuletides to you! (And a happy new year!)


~TheGeneralUser (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hi Dennis, Wishing you a very Happy and Wonderful Merry Christmas! Hope you are having a great time with family and friends :-) I see you're very busy with work and real life for quite a while (most people are), but I do believe that eventually someday you'll be active once again. Best wishes. ~TheGeneralUser (talk) 18:24, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Best wishes!

Hope the new year brings many happy returns! isaacl (talk) 04:17, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year Dennis Brown!

Happy New Year!
Hello Dennis Brown:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, BusterD (talk) 06:15, 1 January 2014 (UTC)



Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2014}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Happy New Year Dennis Brown!

Happy New Year!
Hello Dennis Brown:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 06:32, 1 January 2014 (UTC)



Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2014}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Sock investigation

Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ali Mohammad Khilji.

Notifying you due to your prior investigation of related case.

Thank you for your time,

— Cirt (talk) 17:14, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

E-mail

Hi Dennis, sent you an e-mail. Thanks. ~TheGeneralUser (talk) 21:21, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello

It is very nice to see you editing, even a little bit. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:36, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Socking question

An obvious COI/SPA created a promotional article on BP Logix, which came up in my routine searches for promotional articles that need to be stubbed or deleted. It looks like the COI/SPA voted Keep twice then created a second SPA sock account to vote Keep a third time. Question, should I submit an SPI request or do you think I can expect the closing admin to see the obvious socks? CorporateM (Talk) 23:42, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Never expect a closing admin to do anything. Some won't touch sock issues (understandably, they are complicated and prickly things), which is why it needs to go to the board that specifically deals with them. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 23:45, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
The one part that CorporateM doesn't have quite right is that the second SPA sock (as described above) wasn't just created to !vote. It has a contrib dating back to early 2010. It is possible that one of our chronic socks has moved in on the AfD. Alternatively, the COI/SPA is a long time sockmaster.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 00:12, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Heh, I didn't notice that User:Berean Hunter. It could be a chronic sock, or maybe it is a sign that they are not actually SPAs/socks, however unlikely it may be. It says I have to submit "Evidence" in the form of a Diff, but I don't really have that. It's basically circumstantial. Is that ok? I imagine we probably never really have proof per se. CorporateM (Talk) 00:40, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
This is why it is best handed by SPI or a clerk (I'm not an SPI clerk). They work those cases all the time and get a groove about research, separating the wheat from the chaff rather quickly. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 01:35, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. I just submitted it. CorporateM (Talk) 02:23, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
So the AfD was closed as Keep and the checkuser result was inconclusive. I let the closing admin know. CorporateM (Talk) 00:34, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Typo...thanks!

When I start typing too fast I toss out the occasional typo mixing up words! Thanks for fixing that!--Mark Miller (talk) 01:43, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

How Wikipedia helped me find my family!

Sharing with Dennis and friends. My sincere apologies for the length. Feel free to not read this.

They weren't really lost but, my father has never really spoken about his past, his family or our relatives beyond his brothers and sisters. I have only met my own grandmother two or three times and was never allowed to talk to her. I was no older than 14 the last time I saw her.

A couple of years ago I tried to convince myself that it should be easy to track my genealogy. But without the proper spelling of family members it was impossible. I didn't even have the proper spelling of my father's middle name.

Blind searches for certain Key words associated with old family stories seemed to come to dead ends...but in reality I would end up back at those dead ends that...with names, cracked open a history dating back to the very beginnings of the Hawaiian islands.

Last April my sisters found a hand written family tree, only partially researched by my Uncle, a Harvard educated, Dean at a local Hawaii University (Dean of mathematics...odd considering I suck at math. LOL!). With the proper spelling and limited amount of names I trotted off to begin in earnest.

The way the tree was written, with no explanation, seemed to indicate a line to Kamehameha I otherwise known as King Kamehameha the Great, but off to the left of a figure only called "Moana". With no true direct lineage attached and no explanation of who the figure was, I admit, it meant little to me at the time. Sadly, even having grown up in Hawaii, we were never taught about Hawaiian history. In a way, this kinda helped me, as I find it very difficult to believe some stuff without seeing it in writing.

So, in order to understand what I was looking at, I decided to research the earliest names on the family tree starting with the name "Kilinahe Puahi". I was rather shocked to be directed to one of those dead ends. While that "dead end" had nothing to do with my family...in a way it did. The name "Kilinahe Puahi" was listed on a court document fighting against an eminent domain land purchase. The figure who was fighting against the purchase said that they were Heirs of Kilinahe (actually it turned out they were not, but hey...it had the name). The document also made mention of Charles Kanaina, and that name I was familiar with. A little more digging, a lot more research, and hours scrolling through document after document finally resulted in uncovering who Kilinahe Puahi was beyond the fact that he is my Great, Great, Great, Grandfather. He was one of the named heirs to Charles Kanaina, father of King Lunalilo who died before his father...Kanaina. That was such a huge thrill to find. I have always said my brother looks like Lunalilo. That alone would be a huge find and could leave me happy for years, as I admired William Charles Lunalilo as a kind monarch, with the most democratic beliefs of any of the Kingdom of Hawaii's monarchs. Lunalilo died before his father, Kanaina and when his father died a few years after his son, it kicked off about 5 years of probate hearings on the estates of both men (Lunalilo's will indicated a desire to use his fortune to assist in the creation of a trust to benefit the Hawaiian people).

The documentation I found was from the Hawaiian Supreme Court Probate. It showed that Kilinahe Puahi was a cousin of Kanaina and a listed heir to his estate. Further documentation showed that Kilinahe had died before the courts had declared him an heir. Very unfortunate for Kilinahe, but his wife and three children were declared heirs to him and were listed in the probate as heirs to Kanaina. The great part about that, it also listed all the children and their current spouses.

If it were not for my experience with Wikipedia, researching obscure subjects and BLPs, I would not have had either, the endurance needed to keep going in the face of one dead end after another, or the will to try to understand the facts surrounding this history.

As much as that alone would have been a tremendous find, that was simply not all I discovered. You see, with the names of my 3 x great grand parents came a full disclosure of the line to the figure known as Moana. She turned out to be "Moana Wahine" and it is her lineage that gives us a relation to many of the Hawaiian Royal family. Reliable sources have confirmed this genealogy, as have the documents from US census in Hawaii as well as Hawaiian newspaper articles.

To wrap this up, further research has shown that my father is directly related to the very creation myths of the Hawaiian Islands, all the way to Kane and Papa (the Hawaiian Adam and Eve), the same line that Kamehameha declared showed he was fit to rule the islands.

In short, my father and his mother and Grandmother are direct descendants of the ruling Kings of the Big Island of Hawaii as well as being descended from Kanekapolei, one of Kamehameha's concubines (wives) and the person who is credited with alerting the Hawaiian people of the kidnapping of her husband (at that time), Kalaniʻōpuʻu, which led to the death of Captain Cook.

That is an amazing link to history and on top of everything else was shocking and humbling to discover. But that was not all...it seems that if you keep going back in my family tree....it ends with the most common of the Hawaiian creation myths. Moving forward I found that Kamehameha I had inherited Liloa's Kāʻei. Liloa turns out to be my 14th Great Grandfather. Almost all of the Hawaiian Royal Family turn out to be, either direct descendants or cousins. Kamehameha the Great is my 5th Cousin, 5 times removed from one line...and, at the same time, my third great grandmother's ex husband, on the side of my Great Grandfather, Samuel Kalimahana Miller. His father was Alexander P. Miller JR. who was the son of Alexander P. Miller Sr. and Kanekapolei. His brother was John Mahiʻai Kāneakua and that subject was very much a part of the attempt to restore the Kingdom after the overthrow.

Many of our Wikipedia articles on the Hawaiian Royal Family are filled with misinformation using very bad sources. During my research I discovered just how bad our articles are. Many reliable sources have been ignored, over less reliable sources that have almost no publishing info. My new project (among so many here) is to improve the Hawaiian history articles as well as those relating to the Hawaiian Royal family....that I am very proud to call....my family.--Mark Miller (talk) 08:28, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

  • Is it Prince Mark then? ;-) I know what you mean about Wikipedia teaching you how to dig deeper and being more persistent. Congrats on the find, and I hope you are able to clean up some articles with the info. We have a lot of subject matters in the same condition here, but you can't tell which from just a glance. I wanted to do the same with some of the automobile articles (and had some excellent help and training from Eric), but lacking the time and inspiration to do so now. Maybe someday. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 12:48, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
    • LOL! I once proclaimed myself King of the Compendium in a discussion about giving out false titles and styles on BLPs. I did find tons of reliable sources on history and was given a great suggestion about Hawaiian newspapers from the turn of the last century where a lot of history was recorded. Some of the papers still exist. And the Supreme Court documents have all kinds of relevant stuff. I haven't had a lot of time in the past to research and create content for our Hawaiian related articles. The history is really long, the situation very frustrating and the information seems a little buried, but the secondary source interpretations of a lot of the primary source stuff is really interesting to read. A part of history I avoided learning about in the past but am really having fun doing. Found all kinds of dating issues that need fixing.--Mark Miller (talk) 01:24, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
      • I actually got not only a neat anecdote out of this, but a very important morale out of this. Wikipedia has taught me that even when the gold isn't, some digging and hard work can get you from rags to riches. I have always worked hard for things in my life and Wikipedia is one of them, not to mention it has fascinating articles too . Sportsguy17 (T • C) 02:55, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Just a heads up

I know you're not very active any more (a very great pity) but I thought you should be aware that one of your former mentorees is making some claims about you here and here. --NeilN talk to me 01:04, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Jimmy Henchman's page

Hi Dennis - I hate to ask because I know you're semi-retired but I was hoping you could help resolve an issue on the Jimmy Henchman page. As you may remember we went through the AfD litigation process in which we looked at the underlying articles and built an article on which everyone voted. We vetted the underlying articles a year and a half ago. People were adding to it peacefully as Henchman was sentenced to life and then tried for murder. Suddenly, on January 23, 2014 as he is being tried for murder, a few people have wiped it out and ask that we start all over. A few of us have tried to save all the work litigated over a year and a half ago and have been met with attacks. Given that you worked so hard to help us navigate this process and you even read the underlying articles, I was hoping you could mediate to help us fund an easier way, a way of saving the work so many of us worked so hard to create (and which has been getting great attention of late.)

Your comments would be greatly appreciated. All the best and my congrats on your semi-retirement. Scholarlyarticles (talk) 05:20, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

The reason why the article is receiving more attention is because it was mentioned here and here. --NeilN talk to me 05:42, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
  • I would have to pass on getting involved right now. This would require more hours than I have to dedicate, and I don't think a drive by comment would be particularly helpful. There is an obvious COI at the talk desk and a lot of heat around it, so there won't be a quick and simple solution. Sometimes, it is just a matter of waiting for things to calm down a bit and resuming normal editing, or using the regular dispute resolution channels if there is a policy violation. Getting into a revert war, even when you are confident you are right, is seldom productive and just makes it more difficult for others to consider your perspective. They tend to dig in, as now they have something to protect. The hardest thing in the world is stepping back, staying calm and being patient. However, it is usually the most productive. The article isn't going anywhere and the history is still intact. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 13:47, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for the tip. Hadn't known about the reasons for the uproar until reading the above comments. Thanks for the feedback. Scholarlyarticles (talk) 18:43, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Malleus Fatuorum Eric Corbett

Just a word of thanks for permanently blocking this most irritating Uber Nerd / Wiki Moderator. One assumes DB not to be MF in another guise ? Either way - glad to be rid of him. Signed, an old MF adversary ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.196.231.210 (talk) 11:39, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

  • I think you really misunderstand that block. I suggest checking the block log, and the two GAs, one FA and TFA that he and I worked on together. And no, Eric and I are not the same person. Mrs. Brown and Dr. Corbett would be very shocked if that were true. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 01:36, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
    • I'd be surprised at that as well, Dennis. Have you tried the New Belgium beers yet? And how's the fishing? Drmies (talk) 01:38, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
      • Ha, I haven't had a beer in weeks, nor fished in a long time. Too busy with the day job plus planning this new business. I actually spent half the day assembling hardware because we are behind in production, and the other half talking to an engineer that flew in. That, and researching light spectrum influences on flavonoids and capsaicinoids, to which there is zero research done. I actually need the agricultural research dept. of a major university to do the testing, and I can supply the lighting gear for free. Email if you want more info.Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 01:49, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
        • Well, that spells big Auburn--not the ugly little cousin I work for. But aren't you near the research triangle? Don't you have an old college buddy at NC State? Don't burn your fingers on them chili peppers! Drmies (talk) 03:00, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
          • I wear rubber gloves when working with and cutting up peppers, as we grow cayenne and jalepeno. If you think it hurts your cuticles, try washing you hands 20x, then go urinate and see how useless that hand washing was. I actually pass by NC A&T on the way home, I probably need to drop by there. Even ugly cousins are welcome to the dance, if they can properly do the research. It isn't difficult, really, it just takes proper methods and controls you would expect any university to know how to do. The really big places are less likely to this type of research, to be honest. We did have Purdue buy some gear for testing, but we didn't get to see the results. I will pay for the gear to have access to the results. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 15:03, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
            • Changing headers is the fashion now, can you please change this one? I miss Eric, sorrow on my talk, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:24, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
              • Nothing to do with the opening post, and from a talk page watcher: Dennis, the stuff about capsaicinoids sounds truly fascinating (and painful, in what you described)! I do a lot of cooking with the stuff, and I always store it in the dark. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:39, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Buckboostransformer.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:24, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Arbitration request motion passed

An Arbitration Clarification request motion passed. You contributed to the discussion (or are on the committee or a clerk)

The motion reads as follows:

  • By way of clarification, the formal warning issued by Kevin Gorman was out of process and therefore has no effect. The provisions of WP:BLPBAN will be reviewed by the Arbitration Committee and where necessary updated.

For the Arbitration Committee, --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:59, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Enjoy your vacation and then get back to work!

The Original Barnstar
For your excellent close of the thread on the Kaldari fiasco at ANI. Good work, as usual. Recharge your batteries and come back strong! Carrite (talk) 16:25, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

Good to have you around again, even if briefly. Take care of yourself. Drmies (talk) 00:31, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Excellent! That will go well with the cup of Earl Grey tea I just poured. This place is like the Hotel California: You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave. It won't last, but I figured that perhaps I could do a little good while I have the time. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 00:35, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

And thanks for your assistance with the semi-protection here! Johnuniq (talk) 01:22, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
No problem. I'm pretty liberal with protection, particularly when it comes to slowing down disruptive people. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 01:24, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Nice to see you around WP. Best wishes, JoeSperrazza (talk) 11:39, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Joe, and to everyone who has been patient over the last couple of months (and years...) I probably won't be able to get as involved as I used to be, but will try to at least be around enough to help. I have a bunch of new and exciting things on my plate here in the real world that will be taking up a lot of my time. Once I am able, I will give more details. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 22:54, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Have a Beer!

I'm really happy to see you working around Wikipedia again, even if it's for a short while. Your valuable judgement at various places is highly beneficial and useful. I've always seen you make careful decisions by analyzing the situation first rather than making hasty decisions which is a good trait for every admin to have. Best wishes and Take care! -TheGeneralUser (talk) 13:25, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Hi Dennis, on another note can you please kindly take a look at User:Dennis Brown/RfA/TheGeneralUser and do the necessary updates on all the things that would have changed, as it's already been a really long time since then! That would be really helpful for me :) Regards. -TheGeneralUser (talk) 23:59, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
    • Not sure if I'm up for noming anyone soon, but I took a quick look. I noticed your article % of edits actually went down, to less than 25%. I can think of a dozen people who will automatically oppose based on that metric if they show up at your RFA. I think you have the common sense and good demeaner, but you would do yourself good if you (and I'm being literal here) took a month off of all meta and talk, and just focused on article content. Your total number of edits is still on the light side. There is no right or wrong number, but I remember Basalisk having near the same number and getting a lot of opposers due to that, and he is a medical doctor with some extra skills, he barely passed. Again, I think you have the meta experience, but what you have to prove is that you can actually generate content competently. Gnoming is fine as long as it is content; I never had a GA or FA until I became an admin and mainly just gnomed myself. I didn't check your CSD and AFD stats, but those are hot spots right now as well. I don't doubt you will make a good admin some day, but it is still a bit early if you want to comfortably get over 80%. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 00:09, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
      • Well yes, that's because I mainly work in housekeeping and do administrative tasks. Everyone has different opinions and expectations here and they are welcome to it. Putting statistics aside, for what it's worth I've shown and proven myself to be a responsible, trustworthy and competent editor which I'm sure you already know. And I just wanted an updated review for that page :) so you can feel free to take your time to do it. Best. -TheGeneralUser (talk) 00:33, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
        • I think I just did above :) The thing about edits: it isn't just enough to be ready, you have to convince others you are ready. My article edits were 40% of my total edits and many thought that was too low. I'm just saying you will get oppose votes over a ratio of less than 25%. Some people only care about content. RFA is about appealing to the trusting side of everyone. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 00:36, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Need help

Hi, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Censorship_of_Twitter&action=history I added [citation needed] but it has been reverted twice. Can you help?Wesakgilda (talk) 01:07, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

  • If he has added a source, then the real issue is "what order do we put them in?" The talk page is a good place for discussing that. I'm a fan of alphabetical, since there is no bias in it, but I suggest leaving it in whatever order it is currently in until a discussion is had. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 01:13, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Welcome back and here...this is what you really want...

All the waffles, cookies and beer awards are nice...but what you really deserve.......is bacon! ;-)

Bacon Barnstar
Welcome back Dennis...have some bacon!. Mark Miller (talk) 01:36, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Nice to see you back, even if here less often than normal. Fiddle Faddle 19:54, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

AN/I

Not getting into a debate over this. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 21:00, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

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

It's nice to hear your thoughts at AN/I. I'm not sure why but there are fewer admins weighing in on the noticeboard than there was six months ago. I'm not sure whether people are retiring or just want to spend their time elsewhere. But it isn't unusual for a query to be posted and not getting any response at all from the admin corps. It means that some situations are left unresolved and either resolve themselves or reappear at AN/I at a later date.

Welcome back! Liz Read! Talk! 01:39, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Well, the time I have available fluctuates wildly. Right now, I'm back-ordered on a ton of prototypes for the new business, so I have the time, thus here. ANI tends to be where I hang out when I am here and not editing a new article. Most problems there just need someone to listen calmly, and apply a little common sense, so it isn't so hard. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 01:48, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Also about ANI

Whatever problem the member of the oversight team has, I think that your closing sweeps it under the rug.  The closing has left the WP:BATTLEGROUND in place at the AfD.  In your own comments, you used the word "hate" and put an f-bomb in my mouth.  It was just as well that you found a procedural way to stop the ANI discussion.  But the crafting of the WP:BOLD closing is not a balanced statement and requires that I respond.  Care to comment?  Thank you, Unscintillating (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

  • I have no idea what you are talking about. I didn't put anyone's words in any mouth, f-bomb, hate or otherwise. I didn't "end" the discussion, it ended itself, I just summarized it. He asked for an interaction ban, and no one at the discussion, over a period of a few days, thought it was a good idea. Not one. He opened it, you didn't, I said no relief would be granted, no one argued otherwise. Best to move on, which is basically what I told him as well. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 17:28, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
I see that you have some emotional attachment here, and are in denial about both your own words and mine.  Unscintillating (talk) 20:53, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Removed comment

I hope you don't mind but I thought it best to try removing the "badge of shame" stuff at User talk:CYl7EPTEMA777. I advised the other editor to do that but I think they got stuck on seeing you had replied. Obviously your revert at the user page (to remove a gratuitous "this editor is indeffed" tag) was correct and there should not be any ill-advised commentary on the talk. Thanks for your assistance with the case! Johnuniq (talk) 07:10, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Republic of Crimea

I really think you ought to reconsider. For one, the self-declared country included Sevastopol; the Russian federal subject does not. -Kudzu1 (talk) 18:10, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm sure Dennis is capable of reading what was presented during the discussion. RGloucester — ☎ 18:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
  • As a closing admin, it isn't my position to consider technical facts or other information outside the discussion, only the discussion itself and Wikipedia Policy. I have no dog in the hunt, I'm not interested in editing those articles at all (which is why I can close those discussions), but the arguments in that discussion were decidedly stronger in the support, whereas the opposers presented some good arguments, but most of it was well meaning passion, which has little weight in building consensus. If you think I've erred, you can always ask for review at WP:AN and I will not take offense in the least, but at this time, I have to stand by my close. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 18:21, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

As near as I get to a wikilove message

Dennis, we often disagree and you know I hate "wikilove" messages with a passion (I eat kittens on toast with chilli-sauce) but I had to note my admiration for taking on a judgement Solomon would have flinched at, indeed most admins would have baulked at. Fondest regard, Wee Curry Monster talk 22:30, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

  • I don't mind WikiLove, I encourage them actually, you must be thinking of Eric. At the top of this page, I have a link to my Barnstar collection, so I appreciate the kindness. I don't close many RFCs, so I figured I needed to do my part. The controversy is what it is, and to a degree, was expected. It is a hot topic, there are lots of opinions and even more emotion. It's probably good that I have to endure such a thing every now and then, they say it builds character ;) Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 22:33, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Terrible mistake on closing merge discussion about Republic of Crimea

You made a terrible terrible mistake closing that merge. The Republic of Crimea (country) is a merge of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol which were two completely different separate entities. The new federal subject does not include Sevastopol, it's simply the same as the Autonomous Republic. Here's a timeline:

  1. Autonomous Republic is separate from Sevastopol
  2. Autonomous Republic and Sevastopol merge to form a new country called 'Republic of Crimea'
  3. This new Republic requests to be acceded to Russia
  4. The accession is granted but separately: one for the Autonomous Republic, and another for Sevastopol
  5. The Autonomous Republic is now called 'Republic of Crimea' since the 'Autonomous' adjective doesn't make sense as a federal subject

I have included some maps to help you understand these differences visually.

What needs to be done to revert these changes?

—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 20:22, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

  • You can ask for a review, as I've told another. I've removed the maps, as it isn't about MY opinion. My close was based on my reading of the discussion, not my opinion of the merits. Had I closed based on MY opinion, that would be a supervote, which isn't allowed. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 20:25, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
    • It was based on your reading and on your disrespect or lack of understanding. GO AND REVERT!! The votes were 21 OPPOSE to 15 SUPPORT and you come in, close while the time for discussion still was running. Tibet2014 (talk) 20:26, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
      • I've already said, if you want it reviewed by another admin, then that is what you should do. WP:AN is a good place to start. Continuing to hammer away once I've provided this information isn't helpful. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 20:34, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
    • I'm sorry but you need to review how closing discussion works. WP:CONSENSUS states explicitly that, "consensus is ascertained by the quality of the arguments given on the various sides of an issue, as viewed through the lens of Wikipedia policy." This very same argument was explained in the discussion by @Tibet2014 and @benlisquare. As an administrator you are supposed to listen to all arguments and find out which ones are based on both reason and policies. For some inexplicable reason you decided to consider other arguments as more "qualitative" rather than this one which pretty much renders all other arguments as weak. That's an opinion in itself. However, as you have not shown a desire to revert your decision nor to discuss this further I will then channel this through other means. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 20:35, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Dennis, I'm sure, understands that Sebastopol was included in the independent Republic. But, as I stated in the discussion, it is easy to explain this to the reader in prose in the Republic of Crimea article. RGloucester — ☎ 20:40, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
  • The purpose of the close isn't to tell everyone how to organize the articles, it is to summarize the discussion based on policy and the strength of the arguments. I can honestly say I have no opinion on the merits of the discussion. This is also why I didn't even say where to redirect. It isn't an admin's job to tell editors what to do. Again, WP:AN is a good place to start to get a review. I've said this five or six times now. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 20:43, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Ah, the glorious benefits of wielding a mop :-) --NeilN talk to me 20:45, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

    • Having my actions questioned doesn't bother me, I know to not take it personal, even the unnecessary rudeness of some. That wasn't an easy or simple close, particularly since consensus was counter to count, but I don't shy from closing something just because I know a few will be very upset. I welcome a review and willing to live with the results, regardless of what they are. I really don't get too bent out of shape. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 20:53, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Dennis, if you don't revert this back I will invade your house and claim it was just "local self-defense forces". Then, I will simply annex it to my house and proclaim you are just my federal subject. I better hurry up before economical sanctions come in! —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 20:48, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
  • OUTRAGEOUS. "since consensus was counter to count" - THERE WAS NO CONSENSUS, OR if, then there was one agreeing with the count. GO, BLOCK YOURSELF! Tibet2014 (talk) 21:03, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
    • Tibet, you probably need to go have a tea. Fortunately, I'm not one to get bent out of shape easily, and honestly, I understand your frustration. I've already told another admin to just let you vent a bit, I can handle it, but at some point others will lose patience with you over this. You can ask for review, but if you do so in the way that you are talking to me now, no one will even consider your opinion. Again, go have a tea, try to understand that even when someone disagrees with you, they can be acting in good faith. Then if you want, go get review. There really isn't any need for any other discussion on this outside of a review process. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 21:09, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Dennis, it seems someone has done something weird with the former Republic of Crimea (country) article, and created a new fork. Perhaps take a look? Thanks. RGloucester — ☎ 22:18, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
    • That article was started in 2004. As for where the redirect should point, that is a matter for the talk page. As closer, it is kind of important I don't inject my opinions or force my will. That is the for the community to do, else I'm not independent and instead have a stake in the outcome. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 22:22, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
What I mean is that Republic of Crimea (country) was moved to Political status of Crimea by User:Incnis Mrsi, and then made into a new article. I've reverted his changes, however, I'm not sure what to do in this situation. RGloucester — ☎ 22:28, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
After I read this, I looked closer and "got it", so I dropped a note at the WP:AN discussion on the subject. You might drop by there. I just can't get into reverting to enforce. I did one revert because the person didn't know that I had just closed, but that was a technical revert only. Others must enforce, or overturn my close. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 22:30, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Dennis Brown, you are my admin role model. Making thoughtful, difficult decisions based on the evidence, sticking by your decision and not taking it personally when people are upset at you, even pointing them in the direction where they can get your decision reevaluated. I hope if I ever have a position of authority over others, I can be as fair and level-headed. It is far too easy to let ones ego get in the way when one encounters conflict and personal attacks. Liz Read! Talk! 00:30, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

ANI notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Protection review - Political status of Crimea. Thank you. Dpmuk (talk) 18:45, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm out

It is very likely that I won't be around for a couple of days due to work. Any concerns on the RFC or any other action should be directed to WP:AN. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 01:15, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

  • I don't have time to answer question or check in regularly, but wanted to drop off a note that anyone is free to copy anywhere: When closing the discussion, what I found was a lot of desire to leave the article as a separate article but I didn't see rationales that talked about how sources are considering it independent, or what policy here says that it should still be considered separate. I saw opinions that ranged from "similar articles exist" to "obviously it should be an article", which is a non-argument. There were also some interesting points that were considered and given full weight. I'm not going to break it down any further, that is what an independent review is for. When closing a discussion, votes that are solely about emotion or passion without a clear basis in policy are essentially discounted. It isn't that I don't respect their passion or feelings, but they can't be considered in consensus, which is based upon determining the will of the community as it is supported in policy. Closing discussions like this are difficult, particularly doing so early and against count, but someone has to close these and I suppose it was my turn. It has been a while since I've closed a contentious discussion, and I've never closed one as contentious as this. I can see why so few admin do them, but I doubt it will discourage me in the future. I would suggest letting the discussion continue at WP:AN (and please, the canvassing isn't helpful...) and living with the result. Whether my close is overturned or kept, it doesn't upset me. I try to not get emotionally involved in my duties here, and just try to do what the community selected me to do. I will try to pop in if I can, but work has me very tied up for a few days. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 12:57, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Russia recognised it as an independent state. That's enough source. And 'similar articles exist' is not a non-argument. If there are hundreds of similar articles than the decision to ban this article is extremely bias. --Wester (talk) 15:21, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Dude, seriously. You need to stop. Sometimes it's better to just stay quiet and let others see whether your actions were correct or not. You were told in the discussion that the new country merged Crimea and Sevastopol but you did not consider that in your closing remarks. Your closing remarks even says explicitly, "it is the same country" when the new republic is a federal subject, not a country, and it's not the same as it doesn't contain Sevastopol. Reliable sources were provided that show both of these facts. Mistakes happen. To err is human. But you are doing yourself a disservice by throwing more fuel to the fire. Back off and let the community decide. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 12:57, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Articles we have about Crimean historic structures or periods

So a separate article Republic of Crimea (country) about the short-lived independent country in March 2014 cannot be called 'unrational'.

--Wester (talk) 15:21, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Expired PROD

Could you please delete this expired PROD for me List of Sport Club Corinthians Paulista players.. many thanks, JMHamo (talk) 23:16, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Generally, I prefer to check a PROD before I delete it, to make sure it doesn't get overlooked, and I'm a bit tied chasing a sockpuppet at the moment. It should be in the cue, and other admin kind of do the same. They will get around to it, or should, pretty soon. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 23:18, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
Nevermind, Thanks JMHamo (talk) 23:20, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Done. Bishonen | talk 23:24, 29 March 2014 (UTC).
Thanks Bish. This sock is persistent, done 3 blocks in 10 minutes with them, I didn't want to rush a PROD. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 23:25, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Altimgamr sock

As this may be an actual password, will you please review this edit. You've deleted pages showing passwords before with Altimgamr. Thanks, Bahooka (talk) 05:24, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Future Perfect at Sunrise already nailed him. I didn't change any passwords, I just hard blocked the editor. I think it would be against policy for me to log in and change his account, even if he is a sock. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 12:53, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Republic of Crimea

Hello, I also think this issue should not be handled voting. Having two separate articles is not conform to at least two Wikipedia's pillars.Silvio1973 (talk) 06:24, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
I am glad you are back and wielding a mop once again; we have missed your reason over the past few months. Thanks for all you do around the encyclopedia. Go Phightins! 10:36, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Feel I should add my voice...

... (albeit belatedly) to the long list of people who are glad to have you back. You were missed. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:31, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Thanks to both of you. I will still be hit and miss a lot, I'm in the middle of opening a new company while still holding a position at the old one, so my time is about to get tied up, but I will do what I can, when I can. I appreciate the vote of confidence. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 12:27, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Altimgamr

Thanks for your response to my question (and thanks for moving it out of the CU's section). I fully appreciate that as a non-CU I have no way of knowing how many registered editors use a particular IP range, so there's no way for me to ever know if a rangeblock is possible, but I don't understand your comments about the >8 million users. Yes the network in question is a CIDR /9 (166.128.0.0 - 166.255.255.255 with 128 X 256 X 256 addresses), but surely Wikipedia doesn't have to block an entire network? I certainly wasn't suggesting that, and no-one ever would. The 50 low-end addresses I mentioned (plus the next 14 also unused IPs) would be covered by a fairly small CIDR /26 rangeblock, i.e., the 64 IPs in 166.137.191.0/26. I'm not arguing that this particular exmaple block is a good idea or that it would even cover the full range the IP hopper is using, I'm just concerned that I have misunderstood something about rangeblocks. Thanks Meters (talk) 05:53, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

  • The problem is, it is often impossible to tell which sections you can block and which you can't. CUs are prone to punting when it comes to range blocks, and Risker is a pretty savvy CU, so if she says we shouldn't, there are likely reasons why. Range blocks are typically pretty easy to implement (I did one last night) but even if you just do a very typical /24 with only 256 addresses, AND there are some good users on that range, you hesitate. It depends on how the network is allocated. If we KNOW that only a /18 or /20 is used for smart phones and that is what we want to block, then it is easy, but sometimes we just don't know, and if in doubt, we don't. It ties into the 5 Pillars, being the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Also, it could be that the named accounts are using a completely different net range, or not. Since this person is editing a rather limited number of articles, semi-protection might be the best solution, as well as WP:SALTing articles, which I've already done a few of. More importantly, when an experienced CU says "we need to NOT use range blocks", I tend to take them at their word, as that is not something you often here. More than likely, there are reasons that you and I simply don't have access to. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 12:34, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Shiba Inu Doge concensus

Why did you archive this discussion on the Shiba Inu talk page? Yes, the consensus is for it to not be included, but the vote was intended to remain open, as I have seen comments from new users who would like it to be included. I was about to re-open it myself but thought it might not be a good idea. Could you please un-archive the discussion? Felixphew (talk) Ar! Ar! Ar! 19:44, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

  • When closing a discussion, it is common practice to close and archive the discussion. For starters, it makes it clear that the close was based upon the comments enclosed in the archive. It isn't a "vote", and enough time had passed that it was time to end discussion on that one point of contention. Discussions usually take place over a week or so, but this one was open almost a full month, more than long enough to establish a consensus. You can ask that the close is reviewed at WP:AN but I'm positive it would be pointless. Even if everyone had voted to include, I linked a policy in that close that demonstrates why it can't be included, as we aren't supposed to include trivia sections. Reverting the close and reopening the discussion would more than likely be considered disruptive, as it ran plenty long and the outcome was very clear. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 19:54, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Let me add, you are free to still discuss the topic, but doing within the confines of that archive would make it look like the close was based on those additional comments, and be misleading. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 20:05, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
  • And let me add that this discussion was reopened already. There was already a reopening of a previous discussion, that voted no include because of the obvious policy, just like two month ago before, a reopening done by Felixphew. Also s/he was /is mocking me on his/hers userpage, with links that are directed to my talkpage, not so nice:"reason certain people think that Doge shouldn't. "... that certain person would be me. It would be good thing to remove those remarks. Wikipedia is not about winning or loosing and holding grunge. Hafspajen (talk) 20:07, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Hafspajen (talk) 21:27, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

A clean thing

You said you like admin actions where is no doubt of the problem. If you still like them, will you take a look at thr history of this article, Hachi: A Dog's Tale ‎ ?Hafspajen (talk) 17:02, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

  • I left them a note on their talk page. I will be out of pocket, but after that warning, I'm pretty sure any admin would block them if they continue. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 17:19, 1 April 2014 (UTC)::well, i think it did not stopped after your warning. I think socking is involved, also IP,[5] but this might be a bit too unpleasant. [6]. Could you please delete those remarks from the history, please. Gareth was working with that article, and now this. Hafspajen (talk) 19:42, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Absolute last warning, which I expect they will ignore. If they continue, just politely file it at ANI. I'm not around as much as I would like this week, doing all kinds of neat and groovy things at work. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 22:46, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
. Do you think it is possible to delete this from Gareth's userpage-talkpage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User%3aGareth_Griffith-Jones?diff=602423353, I mean remove it from the page history? I have seen things like this deleted from people's pages because it is offensive stuff. Hafspajen (talk) 23:28, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

You are a great guy, thank you Dennis ... Hafspajen (talk) 23:32, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

I just had some baklava for dinner, but this will make a nice dessert with the cup of Earl Grey I just poured, thank you :) Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 23:33, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Ah a tea lover!! You are a man of taste. [7]Hafspajen (talk) 23:38, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Good times

Just wanted to add my to what I'm sure is a chorus of voices behind the scenes, saying how good it is to see you editing again. Glad you're back, however long it's for. Basalisk inspect damage⁄berate 21:12, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

On CIR and trolling

Hi, Dennis. I meant to comment on the ANI Doctornickel posted, for instance to mention the absence of edit summaries, but it was closed so fast. I never thought I'd see the day when I'd assume more good faith than you! (At least technically.) All the process the user has been indulging in — PROD, ANI, weird article moves — is indeed very strange from a new user, but I've given them some good advice for newbies on their page nevertheless. The AGF doesn't go any too deep with me in this case, but I figured it couldn't hurt. (Re the above section: I give a tea and cake appreciation class in Bishzilla's pocket on (most) Saturdays, welcome to join!) Bishonen | talk 21:53, 3 April 2014 (UTC).

  • I'm not sure if I'm getting meaner, or you are getting nicer ;) I was in a bit of a hurry and didn't expect someone would just jump in and block, but I knew that if I said what I said, it would get noticed and by all means, that editor needed to be noticed. I'm not convinced it isn't trolling (and if I was 100% convinced, I would have just blocked....) but I trust your judgement in making that determination. If it isn't trolling or CIR, that guy is very, very, very confused. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 00:47, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
You're getting meaner. You're one of the meanest editors ever and definitely the meanest admin in Wikipedia history.--MONGO 16:50, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
Good to know I'm #1 at something. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 20:15, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
When I was a kid, #1 and #2 were nothing anybody wanted to be ... ;-) DoctorJoeE review transgressions/talk to me! 20:53, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Honey Baked Ham

Hi Dennis, sorry I don't understand, when I put in Honey Baked Ham it now takes me to an American company called HoneyBaked Ham not to an article about ham. Unibond (talk) 14:13, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Most People using the phrase "Honey Baked ham" would be looking for the company, which is why it redirects there. Even the B is capitalized, indicating a proper noun, that is why it redirects to the company as that is a very common misspelling of that company name. Some people might use that search term if looking for "honey ham", but not as many as would be looking for the company. "Honey ham" would make sense to redirect to "ham", but again, most people looking for specific types of ham would first go to "ham" anyway. A couple of discussions have already taken place on the issue, one on the talk page of the redirect. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 15:46, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
    • But how can you make the assumption 'Most People using the phrase "Honey Baked ham"' when the company HoneyBaked Ham is only known in America ? Surely most people who have eaten Honey Baked Ham have never heard of HoneyBaked Ham. Unibond (talk) 19:04, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Never heard of the company. Eat honey-baked ham often. Can't imagine the company would be the primary topic! DP 19:24, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
  • It isn't about what anyone eats, it is about the likelihood when someone enters a search term. If they enter a proper noun for a search term, they are generally looking for a proper noun as the result. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 19:45, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Sorry, I still understand your reasoning, all my life when I have referred to Honey Baked Ham I have been completely unaware of a company of that name and I would assume so have the vast majority of people who do not live in America. After all the Fried Chicken article doesn't redirect to Kentucky Fried Chicken. Honey Baked Ham is a common noun for a very old recipe not a proper noun, HoneyBaked Ham is the proper noun. Unibond (talk) 19:55, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
      • And I understand your reasoning, and by no means am I dismissing it. I also appreciate the fact that you are entering the discussion with the right attitude, persuasion rather than just complaining. I'm giving the reasons I gave previously, but admit it is a bit of a conundrum. I think what might be the best answer is to put it up to an RFC and get outside opinions on it. Let it run a 2 or 3 weeks (it might take a while to get outside opinions, it isn't a "hot topic"), and I'm fine with whatever the consensus is. I think we both have good arguments, which is why we need to establish a wider consensus. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 20:00, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

as requested

Re [8], yes you're wrong. (See ANI thread for the link to policy) NE Ent 22:36, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Not sure if there technically is an "AE warning" (as opposed just a warning), but I expect any action coming from the WP:AE board would have to be by an admin. NE Ent 22:58, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Was just about to correct myself when you answered. I told you, I don't get into many of the more bureaucratic features of the place. I prefer to try to settle stuff with common sense over policy every time. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 22:59, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dennis_Brown/Archive_27&oldid=1091503153"