Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:09, 13 September 2013

"It was reading the ultimate paragraph of this post: that finally convinced me it was time to go, yes, Hans is quite right, I am stuck in a vicious circle and there was no likelihood of things improving."

— Extract from Giano's retirement statement

Archives

2007
April May June July August September October November December
2008
January February March April May June July August September October November December
2009
January February March April May June July August September October November December
2010
January February March April May June July August September October November December
2011
January February March April May June July August September October November December
2012
January February March April May June July August September October November December
2013
January February March April May June July
Molon labe!

Precious again

forum
Thank you for content such as today's Chadderton, for adding quality to the articles of others, for speaking up to the point with "amore e studio elucidandae", and for running your talk as a fascinating forum of ideas and beers, - and yes, to quote you, "we need some perspective", - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (30 September 2010)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:52, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 139th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style. What do you think of "move at greater than the speed of consensus because any large discussion results in no consensus"? - Thank you for today's Cotswold Olimpick Games, it's your day! Thank you for leaving the Olympus of an awesome Wikipedian (never a Wikipedian anyway) to be a human Olimpick gamer, Eric ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:43, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda, very kind of you. Eric Corbett 12:50, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

How do you like the game BWV 39 for GA? (I will have to ask Bencherlite if he scheduled on your day on purpose.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:26, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

ps: tell George that I mentioned Little Moreton Hall as an example (although I don't like it so much) (you have to scroll, infobox discussions grow fast) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:32, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

• Interesting article, I enjoyed this, thank you.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 21:59, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

did I say "grow fast"? - reached the swamp again, look for "gang", that's probably me ;) - but BWV 103 (You shall weep and wail) is almost GA now, the other still open, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:32, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Do you remember polishing the lead of several articles, including Franz Kafka? If you have a few moments: 1) I started the blurb for TFA, improvement welcome. 2) I would like to see the writing of the pivotal "Das Urteil" (in one night, after meeting Felice Bauer) mentioned in the article lead. 3) Shouldn Kafkaesque perhaps be kafkaesque? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:56, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Now this is Kafkaesque:

HULLABALLOO: {(unblock)} I'm sorry. This is Kafkaesque. It is not disputed that I did not make the edit for which I was blocked.. (snip)

SANDAHL: You say you are Kafkaesque, if you are User:Kafkaesque you need to need to make this unblock request in this account name.

-- Hillbillyholiday 22:36, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

By now the swamp event seems also Kafkaesque, - at least the term "off topic" is mentioned eventually. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:32, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Can't believe the infobox rubbish is still rumbling on when it would be so easy to solve by banning Andy Mabbett for another year. Eric Corbett 20:51, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

That would not help at all, they would still have to deal with me ;) - I wish him good recovery. - Kafkaesque: he started "stalking", a few edits later it was "infobox" again, he was caught by emergency surgery, but - as you said - it's still "rumbling on", - thanks for a new phrase, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:25, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Kafkaesque: it's his birthday, you saw it on Google or the Main page, even without you improving the lead ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:56, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

That's good. Was I supposed to have improved the lead? Eric Corbett 14:59, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

BTW, I saw on the BBC News web site yesterday that "shitstorm" is now an official German word, maybe in exchange for your very perceptive "schadenfreude". Eric Corbett 15:02, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I saw that too, but in a far more respectable source. -- Hillbillyholiday 15:06, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

"The French don’t even have a term for ‘bell end’, that’s how far behind they are." That's unbeatable. Eric Corbett 15:19, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

(ec) Define "supposed". Read above for the expression of a certain hope in the matter. - If you read above about a kafkaesque thread, it was mercifully closed after three weeks ("the expectation of the community is the editors involved need to figure out how to get along") and archived, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:13, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

ps: While I never succeeded adding Hitler to a Bach cantata DYK for more clicks, I at least managed this little birthday gift: "DYK ... that translators of Franz Kafka's works must cope with ambiguous words like Verkehr, which refers both to traffic and sexual intercourse? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:21, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

SCOMN! (Snorted coffee out my nose)! Hugs to all! Great accomplishment! Montanabw 16:59, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

What do you think about the myth that an infobox is supposed to summarize "the article"? (I just saw that mentioned a second time.) Kafka's infobox of course doesn't summarize his personality and creation, only some key facts, as a simple practical tool (with two endangered collapsed parameters), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:31, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I think that if infoboxes stuck to a short summary of the basic facts there wouldn't be half as much controversy surrounding them. The problem is with the metadata zealots like Andy Mabbett, who demand everything plus the kitchen sink in them. Eric Corbett 15:06, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

To answer the edit summary: I don't think Kafka thought of translation, - his prose is complicated - as probably he was. Would I like to have inspired Das Urteil? No! (Felice Bauer obviously did, inspire and like, they were engaged twice.) - Andy: I would like a citation, not for the kitchen sink, but for "demanding" and "everything", both terms. The Andy I know (is it possible that he has changed?) is a master of being short, also of (self?-)irony. - As I was not part of the longest opera on Misplaced Pages in 25 acts (see my talk for that, "25 acts" appears twice), I supplied some recent evidence, awaiting The Judgement ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:24, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Remember Andreas Scholl? Just heard him, singing not only BWV 82 and BWV 169, but as an encore the Agnus Dei from Teh Mass on top of my talk! - I used the image to illustrate the longest opera, DYK? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:57, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

2 more pics. - The kafkaesque longest opera keeps us waiting for Teh Judgement, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:30, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

The pic now decorates my talk and user, - image of an impressive concert (no opera, five young men singing psalms in Hebrew article under construction), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:17, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Update: now I show other fascinating music and a bit of campaigning there, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:25, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Want a simple but real task?

I have Paynter (horse) up for GA. You helped with his half-brother, Oxbow. This one is shorter, easier, but the horse is also quirky (as are his owners, they have a twitter feed going on him). He's also racing this weekend (as is Oxbow, but in a different race), so maybe do a basic run-through to catch everything that needs fixing now, but another paragraph (or at least a sentence or two) wIll be added on Monday ... Montanabw 17:13, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey Eric, seeing as how you appear (below) to have bailed on a GAN, want to review this one? It's still languishing in GAN limbo. You won't even have to call me an asshole... ;-) Montanabw 21:23, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

I'll look at it tomorrow. I know how disappointing it is to have to wait for GA reviews, and after Bramshill House I owe one. Eric Corbett 21:28, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Cool. Not sure how solid the article is, have not had eyes on it other than mine for the most part, (though Froggerlaura did her part) but at least you know my style -good and bad! Montanabw 22:36, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

And you know mine. Eric Corbett 22:51, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Exactly. And thanks for helping with this, I've responded to your post on the one issue raised so far. Montanabw 19:29, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your thorough(bred) review. ;) Montanabw 05:33, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Malkin Tower

Hi Eric, it's been a while. I've seen all the drama that's been going on here so I'm not sure if you're up for much writing at the moment, but last summer when we worked together (along with User:Trappedinburnley of course) we always said that we'd try and get the Malkin Tower article up to FA standard. Would you still be interested? To be honest, if we do this it will probably be the last thing I ever work on here, I'm bored of this place nowadays. But anyway I have a few spare weeks at the moment so it would be good to get something useful (if you can call writing Misplaced Pages articles useful any longer) done. What do you think? BigDom (talk) 21:53, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure there's much else we could do to it, it's about as good it could get I think. We're out of sources until someone comes up with a credible site revealing convincing archaeological evidence, so I'm inclined to believe that GA might be, at least for the time being, the end of the line for Malkin Tower. But if you and or Trappedinburnley want to take a shot at FAC I'll certainly help. Eric Corbett 22:12, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Upon reflection I've changed my mind, as I've explained on your talk page. Eric Corbett 16:56, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't get back to you last night. Glad to hear you think that it might have a chance. Like you say, there are shorter FAs and it's the most comprehensive account of Malkin Tower in existence; it certainly covers most if not all of the available material. It's likely I'll be going to the library some time this week so I can have a look if they've got any new books in or if I missed anything last time and then we can get started from there. I'll leave Trappedinburnley a message to see if he's interested and get him to post here if he is. As for the swansong, we'll see. Maybe this will be the tonic I need to reinvigorate myself. Cheers, BigDom (talk) 17:10, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

I'll have another look around as well, and when we're satisfied there's nothing more to be found we'll have a go. Eric Corbett 17:29, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

If possible I'll go into Nelson library and have a look there; they might have more on the witches with it actually being in Pendle. BigDom (talk) 19:28, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi chaps, thanks for thinking of me. I'm not particularly active here at the moment, I've been busy with other stuff. But I've still been doing a bit here and there. I'll happily contribute if I can be of use. I've never been involved with FAC before, so on that front I expect to not be vastly useful. But on the content front one area that I've always wanted to expand on is the Mawkin Yard location possibility. The present Malkin Tower Farm seems to be in about the right place to be the same site. As I mentioned previously it seems to have had its name changed from Blacko Tower sometime between the surveys for the 1848 OS 1:10,560 and 1893 1:2500 County Series maps. A little way down the road is the Cross Gaits Inn. I’ve seen a photo of the old sign there. It shows a fairly classic witch blocking the road in front of a man on horseback. The road appears to be an impression of the junction where the pub stands today but prior to its construction. I say impression because there was probably a building there in the 1610s. And the tower in the background? Well that looks amazingly similar to the view for that location of the 1890ish Stansfield tower. Stansfield was ostensibly built to provide its owner with a view over the hills into the Ribble Valley. It is considerably sort of achieving that aim, it seems to be much more useful as an attempt to claim the legend. Just need sources...maybe these guys can help us?? --Trappedinburnley (talk) 22:08, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

I've been watching the FAC progess, so far as I can tell it seems to be going OK. As very much the junior partner at this stage, I did't want show any discord on the comments page, but I do think that the sheep thing is worth adding. I could easily knock something up merging Potts "Device stole a Wether from John Robinson of Barley" and Halsted's (and probably others) suggestion that he was a neighbour. However it just occurs to me that James didn't live at the tower, so maybe not. --Trappedinburnley (talk) 17:33, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Quite. Only Demdike and Alizon lived at Malkin Tower, so I fail to see the relevance of John's theft of a sheep. Eric Corbett 18:56, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

It might be just me, but I can't work out what Quadell's angling for. It's not meant to be an article about the role of Malkin Tower in the witch trials. BigDom (talk) 18:42, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

There's already a rather good article on the witch trials for anyone who's interested. People get bees in their bonnets, but I'd rather see the FAC fail than pad it out with irrelevant stuff about sheep stealing or exactly who was present at Nowell's examination of Demdike and Alizon, or the value of goods stolen in a reported break-in. The only relevance the break-in has is that Alizon mentioned a fire house in her statement, nothing more. Eric Corbett 18:56, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I suppose the current arrangement is a good compromise, even if the footnote seems a little pointless to me. BigDom (talk) 21:44, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

It seems pointless to me as well, but sometimes it's politic to bend a little. What I will not compromise on though is padding out the article with irrelevant details just to bulk it up. Eric Corbett 22:01, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Copyedit/comment request

I know you are a busy man, but if you can find the time I would greatly appreciate a few edits/comments at Ringo Starr, currently at FAC. Cheers! GabeMc 21:21, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I won't be able to help. Eric Corbett 21:29, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

No worries. Best wishes! GabeMc 21:30, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Information Technology (IT) Industry Article

Hi Eric,

As discussed, I spent some time putting together an article on the IT Industry, located at User:FGuerino/Information technology (IT) industry, that is intended to be distinct and separate from IT (as in ICT). And, while I think it can definitely be improved, I believe there is enough to start to move it forward so that others can help review and contribute to it. I was hoping you could help me understand the next steps for proper review and/or submission for GA. Any recommendations?

My Best, Frank --FGuerino (talk) 01:01, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

The article is a long way from being ready for GA, but once you've moved it to main space you might usefully try it at WP:DYK to get some feedback. Also, once it's in main space others can help improve it. Just a few specific points:

• I don't think your proposed title meets the Manual of Style recommendation, which is that "The title is one that readers are likely to look or search for and that editors would naturally use to link to the article from other articles". People are likely to search for either "Information technology industry" or "IT industry", not "Information technology (IT) industry".
• The MoS also says that section headers shouldn't start with "The".
• The claim that billions of people are involved in the IT industry simply because they use a mobile phone doesn't really hold water.
• I think you go way too far back in your consideration of the historical background. Added to which I believe it's now generally accepted that Franklin is highly unlikely to have actually carried out that kite-flying experiment. This article is about the IT industry, not the background to IT, which is covered in the IT article. What we need to know in this article is when did the IT industry begin to blossom, who were the early players?
• The first computers section is inaccurate, incomplete, and completely US-centric. For instance, in the context of the IT industry the most significant product isn't ENIAC but the Ferranti Mark I, the world's first commercially available general-purpose computer. What you need in this article is a brief overview of the IT article with a link to the main article, not a rehashing of the history of IT. Eric Corbett 11:49, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Eric,

I think all of your feedback is pretty clear except for your statement that the title does not meet the proposed MoS. What do you believe it is that needs correcting? Is it the parenthesis with the abbreviation? (BTW, how do abbreviations normally get handled in article titles?).

Thanks for the help, Frank --FGuerino (talk) 12:14, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

By the way, I was a little confused about your reference to the Ferranti Mark I being the first computer so I went and compared the two WP pages Ferranti Mark I and ENIAC, the dates in the WP articles seem to be consistent with most computer books that give a historical accounting of computing. The ENIAC was delivered five years earlier than the Ferranti Mark I. Is it possible that you're confusing the Ferranti Mark I with the UNIVAC, which was delivered shortly after the Ferranti Mark I, also about five years after the ENIAC?

My Best, --FGuerino (talk) 12:37, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

It's the abbreviation in the article title I'm referring to, and I'm suggesting that it shouldn't be there. I never said that the Ferranti was the first computer (and neither was ENIAC as it happens); what I said was that the Ferranti was the world's first commercially available general-purpose computer. And as we're talking about the IT industry, that seems far more more significant than a one-off project for the US military. Eric Corbett 13:02, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the ENIAC and the Ferranti Mark I... I originally created this section in an attempt to highlight the significance of the the birth of the first electronic computer with no intent to address commercialization, which I agree is also an important topic that I had not considered. I've added content about the Ferranti Mark I being the first commercially available electronic computer. I believe that having both events clearly improves the section.

Regarding the title of the article... I read the Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style and the Misplaced Pages:Article titles (which it pointed me to). In both cases, the format of the title seems correct and appropriate, as abbreviations or acronyms appear to be allowable when they're commonly used. Also, the parenthesis are not considered to be unsupported special characters which is the only thing the policies advise against. If this is incorrect, could you please point me to the correct policies so I may better understand them. Also, if it does need to be changed, could I please trouble you to point me to the procedures for doing so without disrupting any of the work or history of the article's progression?

Thanks again, Frank --FGuerino (talk) 13:52, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

But ENIAC was by no means the first electronic computer, that was Colossus, and it was never able to store its programs, so it was a dead end both technically and commercially. I already pointed you to the policy on article naming, which to put it in simpler language says that the title ought to be what a reader might reasonably be expected to type in to find the article. Nobody, absolutely nobody, is likely to type in "Information technology (IT) industry". When you move the article into main space you can give it any title you like, but obviously it ought to be moved over the existing IT industry redirect. I'm beginning to wonder why you keep asking for my advice when you're so reluctant to follow it. Eric Corbett 14:14, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) For the title, you should EITHER pick Information Technology Industry or IT Industry, not both. Having had a quick browse through your draft in its present state, there's a massive chunk of history missing (while the inclusion of coin-operated arcade games seems puzzling). Currently it reads like "electricity, then first computers, compression, internet, arcades, WWW and poof, there's your industry". What happened in the 60ies and 70ies with the IBMs, HPs, Digital Equipments, Sperrys and all the others that built an industry? That's what is interesting about the history. As for the present... what is the size of the industry? What are the remaining key players? What are the major markets and trends? That's what would be expected under such an ambitious title. MLauba 14:47, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, again.

Regarding following your advice, please be patient with me. Please understand that it's not that I'm unwilling to follow your advice, it's just that I want to understand things to the best of my ability before making the changes. And, while I respect your body of work and experience, please understand that I've found you're not always right. For example, you mentioned that "Nobody, absolutely nobody, is likely to type in Information technology (IT) industry" when searching. We get daily reports from some of the major Search companies (including the big G) to understand and watch our consistent rise against the terms in the reports. These SERP reports show that people do, in fact, type in this string, and it is far more common and frequent than you'd think. (This is not to say I'm not going to change the title, which I gladly will.) In previous discussions, you also mentioned that ITIL was a fad, after it's being around for about 2 decades, and that it had little use outside of government when, in fact, it has much greater and establishment in private industry, outside of government. So, please understand that I tend to try my best to understand things before jumping in and making changes. I always come around when I see the documented facts and I'm using this whole experience as a learning process.

Also, some things you recommend, such as what you find important in the history versus what I find important in the history are based on our opinions, neither being right or wrong, so I'm trying to work in as a much as I can to accommodate both and make the article as interesting as possible, across the board. Your criticisms are heard and followed far more than you think. I just need you to be patient as I work things in. Hopefully, you've noticed that I've arguably put more into the topic in a weekend than many contributors have published, together and in years, for the general Information technology article. So, given some time and review from a broader audience, I'm hoping it will evolve quite nicely.

Regarding Colossus and your points on B. Franklin and Electricity, those corrections will be worked in as soon as I have time.

Thanks, Frank --FGuerino (talk) 17:32, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Nobody is always right, not even me, but I'm right far, far more often than I'm wrong, and in this instance I'm bang on the money. Your suggested article only mentions the IT industry in passing, and what coin-operated arcade games has to do with the IT industry completely escapes me I'm afraid. You obviously don't have in any faith in what I've been trying to tell you for weeks now, so here's what I suggest you do. Publish your article under whatever title you think fits best, nominate it at WP:GAN, and see just how long it takes for it to crash and burn. You're not listening to me, so I don't think there's any point in our continuing with this discussion. Eric Corbett 18:56, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Eric,

It's as if you personally want to be irritated all the time. For clarity, I keep coming back to you because I do have faith in what you're saying and because I feel that you're a smart person who I can learn a great deal from. If I didn't, you would have been ignored immediately, as I looked for someone more competent. Let's face it, it's not your personality that keeps me coming back!  ;-)

BTW, where did I ever say that I wouldn't implement anything you suggested? I just wanted to understand and double check everything to be absolutely certain, before doing so, and I intentionally ask a lot of questions so I can learn.

Now, where may I please find the procedures for properly changing the name of the article without damaging the history?

As for the article content, again, please be patient. I have a long list of open items I'm working on and I'm in no rush. It will all come together.

My Best, Frank --FGuerino (talk) 00:05, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

About how to move/rename an article, hope this helps / hope this is at the right level: you don't need to be an admin, and you can/should just move it yourself. It's a menu option, above the article, perhaps under a triangle, to "Move". Select that, and you can move it from User:FGuerino/Information technology (IT) industry to User:FGuerino/Information technology industry or to Information technology (IT) industry or whatever. Pay attention to the first part of the two part title, i.e. User: or (Article). It's only if there's already a page at the target title, that there is any problem. Otherwise, you can follow instructions at wp:RM to request help with a move. --doncram 01:35, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

doncram, thanks for the instructions. I appreciate the help. Frank --FGuerino (talk) 21:10, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Articles reviewed

For some reason every GA reviewer now has a tally in brackets of articles reviewed I think. I was surprised to learn that I've reviewed 111 articles, I've only been recording the last 75 but I thought it was more 90. Do you know where they're getting their information from and if the articles reviewed by reviewer has some page on here? I'm sure I saw something a while back on articles reviewed and I didn't bother including myself but it seems it is now doing it automatically?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:31, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

No idea where it comes from, or what its purpose is. Eric Corbett 20:48, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

It seems pointless to me, and I don't like the fact that it places emphasis on review count like some competition for all to see, a little creepy actually! Did you get around to watching those Strange But True? episodes afterwards?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:53, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I watched the one on the Stocksbridge By-Pass, and I'll probably have another look at what's available later after I catch up with the latest episode of Count Arthur Strong on iPlayer. Eric Corbett 20:59, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I saw Count Arthur on stage, I prefer the radio version so I don't have to look at him, he's rather creepy. I think the tv version is awful, I only saw the first one. J3Mrs (talk) 16:46, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

I think both the radio and TV series are great, and I can't wait for the second series. It's just about the only comedy programme I watch that makes me laugh out loud. You should watch the last episode, which is on iPlayer, it's really good. Eric Corbett 18:06, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

My husband laughs out loud but I usually squirm, I don't like creepy men. J3Mrs (talk) 18:15, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

I can't imagine what it is about him that you find creepy, but there you go. Mr Bean is my idea of a creepy man, and Some Mothers Do 'Ave 'Em always made me squirm. Eric Corbett 18:19, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

• I think it's the pencil moustache. J3Mrs (talk) 11:12, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Ricky Gervais in The Office makes me squirm too. J3Mrs (talk) 18:33, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Another squirmer comes to mind, the first series of Blackadder: Mr Bean in the 14th century. Eric Corbett 22:15, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Doug Hutchison and Dean Gaffney are the creepiest guys I can think of. David Mitchell (comedian) has creepy eyes!♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:42, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Our naming conventions

I was surprised to see that Great Eastern Hotel, London was renamed to Andaz Liverpool Street London Hotel. I don't know why that rubs me the wrong way, or maybe I do (besides the fact that the mover didn't think to ask anyone's opinion)--I don't think the title of the article should depend on the present owner of the joint. The place had 122 years of history as "Great Eastern Hotel", and the present owner (not even owner--their brand) is just a speck of fly poop on the radar screen. Does our MOS mandate that present ownership/present name determines title? Even if history speaks against it? Sigh. Drmies (talk) 00:06, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

If Newcastle Central station is possible, any of that sort of crap is possible, Andy Dingley (talk) 01:27, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

According to WP:COMMONNAME, you go for whatever the majority is in the sources you cite. If most sources talk about "Great Eastern Hotel", and the bulk of the article is cited to those references, and due weight is followed, then Great Eastern is what you should use. To give another example, Rowntree's has not been officially recognised as that name since 1969, yet that's what's on the article name (although Rowntree Mackintosh, the last UK-only name before Nestle moved in in extremely controversial circumstances, is also used). Ritchie333 15:53, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes we should not give in to WP:Recentism. Ian Spackman (talk) 16:53, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

It seems Jamesluckard (talk · contribs) has done the rounds on a number of hotel articles, saying "hotel has been renamed" without discussion. I have set up a requested move on the talk page - since the move is controversial we have to go discuss. Have your say! Ritchie333 17:18, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Ritchie, I appreciate it. Drmies (talk) 02:55, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Latest bad boy...

How's Roger Norreis looking to you? Battle of Hastings just passed FAC, and I'm ready for an obscure clergyman for a bit. Still trying to get the energy up to work on Harry or Eddy Ealdgyth - Talk 21:22, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure it's quite ready, but I'll take another look through tomorrow. Eric Corbett 21:39, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

That's fine. Again, I should thank you for all you do with copyediting my stuff. I don't want you to ever think I don't appreciate it greatly. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:47, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

I was watching a TV programme on the Anglo-Saxons the other evening, which was mostly about Alfred's children, and in particular Æthelflæd. What a formidable woman she must have been, pity our article doesn't really do her justice. Eric Corbett 16:12, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

I came,

I kinda wrote, I failed. I should not have pissed you off Darkness Shines (talk) 21:17, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

It's rarely a good idea. Eric Corbett 21:35, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Which? pissing you off or failing Darkness Shines (talk) 21:43, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Failure is sometimes inevitable, luck of the draw, but it's quite easy to avoid pissing me off. Just don't be dishonest, a complete dork, or try to patronise me. Eric Corbett 21:51, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

I am guessing I am the dork then? My honesty tends to get me in the shite, and I suck at patronizing given I can barely spell it. Please tell me I did not try to patronize you? If so it was purely a drunken accident, dork I can live with, even arsehole, but to patronize, ugh. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:56, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Drunken accident I can empathise with, we've all been there. I ought to have included that in the list. Eric Corbett 22:02, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Well I am sorry for being all of the above, I never actually meant to piss you off. But it no longer matters, if you recall a while ago on Dennis's talk I mentioned an admin who was stalking me, well he did it again and muffed up the FA, personally I thought it was damn close anyway, but so long as he has his axe to grind I will never get it there, again thanks for the help, and I am sorry to have been such a dick to have pissed you off. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:10, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

It was always going to be a difficult article to get through FAC. Eric Corbett 22:12, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

The thing is Eric, it should not have been, I spent over a year reading and researching this, it is as close to being spot on as one could hope for, I honestly think I covered everything. Bet you a tenner if I were a popular guy it would have pissed it. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:17, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

I dunno. I'm not a popular editor, but I've only had one FAC flop, which I'll sort out one day. Eric Corbett 22:34, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

That would be because you are far better than I at writing , cheers and take care. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:36, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Darkness, if there is a long-standing dispute over the article neutrality then it would never stand a chance of passing FAC anyway. Issues really need to be sorted out before nomming, otherwise they'll manifest at the FAC.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:39, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Teahouse

I've hatted the discussion there where you were pretty obviously the topic of discussion. To be frank, I've never seen discussions like that before at the Teahouse. I don't really care about who is right / wrong in the disagreement you two had, but when I don't think an editor is taking my advice (and I advise many new editors), I usually just disengage and direct them to someone or someplace else without saying that they're not listening to me. Might be worth considering next time. I, Jethrobot (note: not a bot!) 01:27, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

If I ever feel in need of your advice I'll rattle your cage. Have you addressed FGuerino's personal attacks simply by hiding them? Are you really naive enough to believe that the question wasn't in reality a vehicle for those attacks? Eric Corbett 01:31, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Eric, I regret that this guy keeps discussing his grudges with you at the Teahouse. I also apologize for my poor word choice on his talk page. I did not intend to predict anything, as I have learned long ago that my crystal ball is cloudy. Best regards. Cullen Let's discuss it 01:44, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

The so-called friendly Teahouse ought to have dealt with that immediately, but chose to ignore it, because a new editor such as FGuerino is so much more important than an old editor like me. I'm just a number, I can easily be replaced. Eric Corbett 01:48, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)That's fine-- you can take it or leave it all the same. I talked to FGuerino about their comments on their talk page here. I don't think there is much else to be done now except get on with our business. I, Jethrobot (note: not a bot!) 01:56, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

So you're determined to avoid the problem, that the Teahouse was allowed to become a forum for personal attacks. Fine. Eric Corbett 02:10, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

That feels unfair to me. Look, I'm also frustrated that these kinds of comments appeared on the Teahouse-- it's not what we're about. But after keeping the comments redacted, hatting the thread because it was unproductive, and speaking to the editor directly to admonish that behavior, what would you have me do, exactly? I, Jethrobot (note: not a bot!) 02:27, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Take your blinkers off and recognise the truth. FGuerino wasn't asking a question. Eric Corbett 02:41, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

The Teahouse is not a living being with consciousness, Eric. It is simply a place for experienced editors to answer questions from newer editors. Accordingly, the response to such matters depends on which Teahouse host is available to field which which question, and they may not always have the time or insight for a complete investigation. Sometimes, it may not be immediately clear whether a new editor is acting in good faith, or is grinding an axe. I have tried, at least twice, to speak in your defense, or at least to present a more balanced view incorporating the positive contributions you have made to this project. I venture to guess that you may think that I am a wimp. So be it. But is it necessary to skewer your allies as well as your adversaries? Cullen Let's discuss it 04:07, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't know if Eric can take all the blame here. Sorry, but this situation began at the Teahouse with the other editor and ended with the other editor making personal attacks...back at the Teahouse. Read what Eric is saying. Look at how much time was put into the engaging the other editor. Will Eric ever be as sweet as a rose here? I doubt that, but sometimes we try as hard as we can, and in this situation I can tell you that Eric tried. We really can't ask much more, but I know for a fact that he was attempting to help the other editor.--Mark 05:20, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't think Eric was at fault in this matter, Mark. He was a bit abrasive regarding a content dispute, but nothing that constituted a personal attack. The other editor just can't give it up and move on, and just moans and groans at every opportunity. OMG, a child might read adults having a forceful debate. The tyke will be scarred for life! Cullen Let's discuss it 23:31, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

I simply pointed out the truth, which is that Fguerino isn't competent to write an article on IT or the IT industry. Call that a personal attack if you will, or even bullying as FGuerino does, but it remains a fact nevertheless. Eric Corbett 23:56, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

The Teahouse is increasingly being visited by passive-aggressive forum-shoppers in this way. Their catty and sometimes underhand behaviour is being rewarded and reinforced by often well-meaning but naive and meddlesome do-gooders giving them saucers of milk and scratching their ears. Keri (talk) 09:37, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm rather surprised that Jethrobot is so clearly unable to see that. Eric Corbett 14:24, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Attractively coloured.....

Is "attractively coloured....." a grammatical no-no? See Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Boletus calopus/archive1 for context - I was surprised as I'd never come across that before and I thought it was a good neat construction......Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:47, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

It's fine grammatically, but it does beg the question of attractive to whom? Eric Corbett 12:52, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Books talk about how pretty it is - I guess sometimes writers assume some supposed objectivity with these things, like peacocks, roses, y'know..pretty things. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:14, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't have a problem with saying it's attractively coloured, I was just playing devil's advocate. Eric Corbett 13:24, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes so was I - I don't really like roses as much as Australian flora either. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:36, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

PS: Note discussion and dilemma on "pending" too for bonus points....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:50, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Pending of course means in anticipation of, or waiting on, so "will most likely be placed in a new genus pending further study" is clearly not correct. You could say "has been placed in a new genus pending further study", but that's not the sense of what you're trying to say, so something like "after further study" is better. Eric Corbett 12:58, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Hmmmm, so one would only use "pending" if it already had been placed in a new genus and that placement depended on the study....? Had to read that a couple of times....thx. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:14, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

That's my understanding, yes. Eric Corbett 13:24, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Ned Painter

More details here from p. 49-53♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:07, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

I just wanted to make a start on it, nothing more. Eric Corbett 21:27, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, I doubt it'll ever be expanded much further, I can't imagine too many biographical details existing for him and we don't want to reel off every punch thrown in the fight of course.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:51, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

I simply felt that someone who has an ODNB article ought to have a WP one. Eric Corbett 21:55, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

DNB too in my opinion. still about 10,000 missing articles stored on wiki source I believe. Not sure exactly how many missing ODNB articles there are but I gather it's in the thousands too. As if there isn't enough to do already... ODNB at least is updated though, some of the DNB articles have known inaccuracies of course.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:09, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

And yet some use the excuse that there's nothing left to write about to explain WP's declining editor numbers. Eric Corbett 23:05, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Do people actually cite that as a reason? I'd think a stronger reason would be the rules that have grown in number and complexity, and an increasing (subjective to me) tendency for new editors to arrive here for the purpose of promoting something, whereupon they are blocked and don't return.

I seem to find a new article topic a couple times per year. Most of my creations tend to attract almost zero other editors, though. I thought funding bias and Just This Once would be sufficiently controversial or interesting that they would grow boundlessly, but that was not to be. At least my latest creation, Bitmessage, seems to have taken off. I haven't tried my hand at a full blown biography yet. The only one I've done is a stub, Sayyid Baraka, and I moved on to other things. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:13, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

They do, very frequently. Much easier than addressing the real problems here of course. Eric Corbett 00:17, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Yep, and it's the ones who say "wikipedia has run out of topics" who do nothing to build content on wikipedia. Just looking on other wikipedias for five minutes gives you a headache with just how much is missing. And often whenever I start another article from another wikipedia most of the links in it end up being red links. There are millions of missing notable articles, especially if you consider that there are "hidden" topics on subjects in past periods which could have a general credible article written about them such as "Sheep farming in medieval Northumberland", "Road building in Roman Wales", "Neoclassical architecture in 18th century Florence" etc.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:49, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

An interesting exercise is to look at the interwiki links on other languages' Featured Articles, and realise just how many of them are still redlinks on en-wiki, which is theoretically supposed to be the most complete of them all. We're not talking obscure popular-culture pages that wouldn't have any English-language interest, but relatively major topics like one of the most significant ecological reserves in Latin America, the former mass-transit network of a major French city and one of the defining moments in modern Germany's coming to terms with its wartime past—three of the areas (geography, railways and WWII) with which en-wiki is supposed to be most obsessed. – iridescent 11:08, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

And Britain's first private detective, who used his fee from his first case to build a terrace with busts of himself in disguise; the last man to be gibbeted in England (attracted 40,000 viewers in 3 days); and a merchant captain, trained in youth as a butcher, who served his ship's carpenter to the rest of the crew telling them it was "beef", and who went on to a successful career in the Russian navy. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 11:56, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

The statement that the encyclopaedia is almost finished or that nothing of major significance remains to be written up flabbers my gast every time I encounter it. I think it is a sad commentary on the state of education, or at best, on the limitation of the writer's frame of reference. Until recently (someone else wrote the stubs; despite the official classification of most of my articles, I don't like to write stubs) we had articles on only 2 or 3 of the stations on the Vienna U-Bahn, and I recall being mocked when I used that as an example in some discussion. I admit I can be accused of having peculiar tastes—I was the one finally got Techno Viking to stick after a long trail of deletions (there's even a YouTube video about Misplaced Pages not having an article on Techno Viking), I rushed in where angels fear to tread and did Vagindra script after the linguists wouldn't, and my current project is central and northern European wooden idols many of which are joyously ithyphallic—but that I should have had to write Organ building is a disgrace. And Kristni saga (I very very much did not want to write that, but unfortunately someone created it as a totally erroneous redirect, and it would have been intellectually dishonest to delete it). And Old Saxon Genesis. Quite apart from things like my first major article here, Heathen hofs, which an encyclopaedia needs but there are not many who can write up. For us not already to have had those others is really pretty sad. And yes, the existence of such embarrassing gaps by no means means we don't also need expansion and improvement of existing articles. I have a guilt-inducingly long personal list of those that I need to get to, too. But the redlinks in almost everything I write! Argh! I cannot really understand how others can fail to see all those redlinks. They must only be looking at articles on TV shows and pop stars ... but every season brings new pop stars, new hit songs, new TV programmes, new winners in everything from literary awards to the Nobels - not to mention the new theories that come out every five years or so in science, education, politics ... so even so, I just don't really understand how anyone can think that. So I guess I'd better get back to my sacrificial bog with dismembered human sacrifices and the first European record of house cats like a good little ivory-tower academic. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:47, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Cross burnings

Ah yes, the good old days: it's been over twenty years now--so those days are not that old (paragraph starting with "Each new story of cross burnings", though there weren't that many stories). Our article on The Machine doesn't include that cross burning and really needs a good scrubbing. FWIW, I was elected into the SGA the year it was allowed back, and nothing had changed. Those white good old boys and their perfectly manicured girlfriends still ran the show. Oh, someone needs to write Bryan Taylor (politician), haha. (That's funny to me cause I was there when he ran for SGA president, as a Greek boy against the Machine. And now you couldn't tell him apart from his former opponents.) Drmies (talk) 23:56, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Be careful you don't blow your cover. ;-) That US frat thing just seems totally bizarre to me. Eric Corbett 00:01, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

There's money in it. It's the way in which the Old South (well, they have the same system up North and wherever else there's power and privilege) keeps its money and its genes contained within certain sections of the population. Place I teach at, the students are just too mature and, in many cases, too poor to be involved with that nonsense, and the Greek system we have on campus is nothing to speak of. Also, there's a pretty direct line from the Alabama campus/SGA to Montgomery (the state capitol), and that's how they keep running things. Ah well. I should do something with Beowulf, but all my books are at the office. Drmies (talk) 00:29, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

(Northerner weighs in) It's bizarre to a lot of us who wanted no part of it, either. As far as I can tell, the "Greek system" also serves a primary purpose to consume large quantities of alcohol (particularly cheap beer and oversweetened "cheerleader beer" drinks that girls like...) and I guess that means that it's to basically make sure that if the sorority girls party, it's with fraternity boys whose genes their parents could live with in offspring should accidents happen. :-P Montanabw 05:41, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

HMS Warrior FAC

I appreciate your work on the article, but I just saw a delegate's comment that he didn't see a clear consensus to promote, so I'm hoping that you might be willing to formally support, if only on the prose, so we can put this puppy to bed after all this work. If not, then I'd hope that you could identify any remaining issues that should be addressed.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:23, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

I'll try and look properly at the article tomorrow. Eric Corbett 02:15, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Borley Church

Thanks for your help. It's not the first time I pull a red link out of one of your articles. Ha, it's the first day of school for the kids, and I am pooped! Drmies (talk) 00:54, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I find cats and ferrets enough work. The Coral Island is still gnawing away at me, but I'm going to be away again in a couple of weeks time, which is why I haven't rushed it. Eric Corbett 00:58, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

My gosh. I've only just noticed that Borley Church has appeared in the DYK slot today. At least it's got an interesting hook for once. Eric Corbett 01:04, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Ah well, it's all in a day's work. :) I just wrote up a set of articles on a bunch of Dutch TV stuff of Monty-Python level silliness, and am grinning with every reference I look at. And I can't translate a single one of the jokes! Who cares that it's "Wilhelmina Kuttje" with two t's? Ask a Dutchman and they're in stitches! Or the title of Jacques Plafond's show Plafond over de vloer--it's idiomatic and totally stupid. Over the vloer--get it? (no!) Drmies (talk) 01:37, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

You're quite right, I don't get it all. But perhaps you may be able to help with an article I failed at GAN earlier today? It's Netherlandish Proverbs. The nominator is unhappy with my decision not to list the article, and I'd be interested to see what you think. Eric Corbett 01:50, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Ah, well, I can guess why you failed it, after reading the first half dozen paragraphs. I'll have a look at the review. Marvelous painting--had no idea it existed. Drmies (talk) 02:27, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

The Dutch article points to "adage" as well as a possible translation. I suppose "spreekwoord" is as narrow in terms of grammar as "proverb", but "gezegde" (adage) might be broader--and "idiom" is a possibility as well; could easily be done with some explanation in the text. I agree with your assessment, though you point at things (correctly) I hadn't even thought of. I'd have failed simply on quality of writing (below par) and the fact that it's just a list, mostly. Drmies (talk) 02:35, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I made a few tweaks to the article, but yeah, that's a problem. If the article had ten times the content it wouldn't be so unbalanced, and if it is to be a list some of the newly added content needs to be scrapped as irrelevant. Hey, I'm thinking about putting Jacob de Wilde and Maria de Wilde up for GA--do you think they're anywhere near ready? Drmies (talk) 03:02, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

• The church had over 6000 visitors today. Drmies (talk) 02:09, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Well done Dr! Lead needs expansion on those Wilde articles.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:47, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

FA

Hi, you might have seen the image discussion/!vote at Talk:Paris. I would be interested to know your opinion regarding which would be better at FAC. Thanks, Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 02:29, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Barton Aqueduct

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Barton Aqueduct you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 12:57, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

The "I just wanted to introduce myself" part is really irritating. ...♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:21, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

It is. I wonder whose brilliant idea that was? Eric Corbett 13:27, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Goodness knows. I've reworded Template:GANotice (last section) but it could probably be improved further by a decent copy-editor... Bencherlite 13:33, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Chris G seems to own the GA bot. I'll ask him to reword the message, I'm sure most find it patronizing and annoying.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:35, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: it's not a bot-only message - anyone can use and edit {

I see, I've reworded. Still not perfect, but better.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:39, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Borley Rectory

The article Borley Rectory you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Borley Rectory for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Pyrotec -- Pyrotec (talk) 15:47, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I enjoyed reviwing it and it brought back memories. I attended a series of evening lectures on this topic / theame given by the late Prof Archie Roy, some twenty to twenty five years ago (I've got a signed copy of A Sense of Something Stange, so that would tie it down to 1990 or 1991). Pyrotec (talk) 15:47, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Just wanted to drop a note saying that I appreciate your comments and replies to questions at the Teahouse lately, particularly here on the role of gender. I, Jethrobot (note: not a bot!) 15:54, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. WP is a strange place. One month I'm blocked and accused of driving editors away, the next I'm thanked for my contributions to helping new editors. What's doubly curious is that I only looked at the Teahouse because I was being bad-mouthed there. Either I'm Jekyll and Hyde or there's something seriously wrong here. Eric Corbett 15:58, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Or both... --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:14, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps, but I think The Hulk would be a better analogy than Jekyll and Hyde. Eric Corbett 16:26, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Is that why your signature is green? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:29, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Possibly. Eric Corbett 16:31, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

My over-simplified analysis: when you see that an editor is clueless, but new, you recognize this and help. When you see a similar edit by an editor who has thousands, or maybe even tens of thousands of edits, so ought to have picked up a clue by now, you are less willing to tolerate it, and sometimes express your views with colorful language.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 18:02, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

That's about right I think. Eric Corbett 18:14, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

You also don't like bullies, which is admirable. Even if you occasionally look before you leap. ;-) And speaking of leaping, how's the kitten? Speaking of kittens, Kitten's Joy sired three winners at Arlington last weekend, including the official winner of the ]. Never mind, I'm just rambling here ... Montanabw 00:18, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

The kitten is a bundle of energy. She's just woken me up playing with my hair. Eric Corbett 03:57, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Barton Aqueduct

The article Barton Aqueduct you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Barton Aqueduct for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 10:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

SFNP

I just saw your article on this and made a minor edit. I also noticed you used sfnp, which I didn't know about, even though I usually use sfn. I am going to start using sfnp as I like that even better and will now go convert the Sherwood article to sfnp. PumpkinSky talk 01:03, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

I favour sfnp because it make for a more consistent look with the source formatting. Eric Corbett 03:56, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Ned Painter

As this is evolving into a personal discussion, I though I would drop you a line on your talk page. Thanks for your kind assessment of my reading abilities. If the lead is not referring to the baptism of Mary Painter, then why were you so upset at my initial edit "He was baptised at St Mary's Church Stretford on 15 February 1784" (unless, of course, there is a record of the parents attending a baptism of their unidentified child)? But I can see we are going round in circles here. I don't normally run into such difficulties with other editors - in fact I think this is the first time in years and years of editing that my edits have been reverted twice without adequate explanation. Although I do not usually edit biographies of 19th-century boxers, when I come across something strange in the lead to a recent article, I often try to improve it. Pity we can't cooperate on this one. I see you have only recently started to write articles under your new user name but I have for years appreciated all the great work you have undertaken as Malleus Fatuorum. I know you have a special interest in Manchester and surroundings, a city with which I have both family and professional connections myself. Perhaps we'll meet again on a more positive path in the future.--Ipigott (talk) 07:16, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

I've just taken a look at this and at the cited source ... and I for one have dealt with 19C pugilists previously, eg: Isaac Perrins. Eric seems to be correct here: the source makes no definite statement and indeed is explicitly uncertain. - Sitush (talk) 07:20, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

March 1974? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:53, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Glad to see everything has now been sorted out. The latest version of the lead certainly conveys the element of doubt. If I had had access to the latest version of the ODNB, I would probably have appreciated the problem. The 1900 edition only served to add confusion. --Ipigott (talk) 08:45, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

If you're in the UK you can quite probably get access to the online edition of the ODNB through your local library. Eric Corbett 10:52, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I know. Unfortunately I am not resident in the UK and therefore have no access to sources available through the public libraries. I spend most of my time in Luxembourg and Denmark where I am now. The local library here does not have a very good reference section and it usually takes about three or four days to get books delivered via ILL. If I had been able to consult the latest edition of the ODNB, I would no doubt have realized why you worded the lead as you did. I'm glad Sitush came along with a clarification. I apologize for adding to your "travails" but I certainly had no intention of causing an argument: I was only trying to understand what the lead actually meant. I also realize why you wanted to cover Ned Painter in the first place now that I note the special interest you have shown in the Stretford area since early 2007 as well as your recent work on another bare-knuckle boxer, Tom Spring, one of Painter's opponents. I see, though, that Painter is not included under the notable people in the Stretford article itself, only via the category. If ever you should feel like further enhancing the coverage of bare-knuckle fighting, there is an interesting background article here with quite a few boxers from the Manchester area. Keep up the good work.--Ipigott (talk) 09:36, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

That's an interesting link, thanks. Eric Corbett 10:04, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Mew!

Sorry if my messy indentation caused a bit of an identity mix-up at the Teahouse! Here's a kitten to make up for it :P

LukeSurl 21:19, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Just thought we ought to get that straight, as some are all to eager to accuse me of anything. Eric Corbett 21:22, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Actually, that kitten looks remarkably like my own kitten, who's climbing up my leg and wanting to play fight even as we speak. Eric Corbett 21:24, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Love kittens. They don't make accusations. ;-)--Mark 21:00, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Do you have any spare change?

The keyboard on the laptop I usually use to edit here has suddenly refused to accept one of the cursor keys. I understand that WP has in the past offered help with hardware. Any chance I could have a top of the range laptop to allow me to continue contributing here? Eric Corbett 20:39, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Sure....but then you have to fix the r that never seems to appear when I type "your".--Mark 21:01, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Blame the kitten...? Montanabw 19:20, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

I've already given her a severe telling off, and forbidden her to even to put one foot on the alphabetic keys. I think she got my drift. Eric Corbett 19:24, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

She s cat, you think that is going to work? Foolish fellow! :-D Montanabw 21:17, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

She's certainly very determined, but one of us is going to have to break soon. I'm amazed by how much she's grown in the four or five weeks we've had her; she'll soon be big enough to square up to the ferrets. And believe me, they take a lot of squaring up to, even if you're a human. Eric Corbett 01:29, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

from formerly Ling.Nut, question for British English speakers

• Hey. First of all, I was quite surprised to see that Malleus is now Eric. I dunno if that's a sign of mellowing, or a form of protest... but... I'm sorry to intrude. It's not even vaguely on any topic related to Misplaced Pages, and I don't even edit any more.. but.. may I be so bold (and off-topic).. if any speakers of British English would be willing to answer one question about prosody in spoken usage... if you would be so kind as to email me, I would be grateful... tks. Sorry to intrude, again. • Serviceable†Villain 12:00, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Spam--but not my spam

Hi Eric, and maybe Ealdgyth, Johnbod, and others, I received a link through email with some sales for books, from Oxbow Books (aka David Brown Book Company), with lots of historical, classical, and medieval stuff on it. There's some ridiculous sales there. If it's too spammy for you, Eric, just hit rollback. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 16:21, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Gods, no. No Chaucer or Piers. (shudders). I was a Anglo-Norman HISTORY major, not a Middle English major. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:00, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Lead us not into temptation, Drmies! I've seen these before, & this time these are 3331 bargain titles. Archaeology and the M3 , P J Fasham (Author); R J B Whinney (Author), Regular Price: £25.00, Special Price: £2.95 - fortunately I have just no room. Did people see The Early Anglo-Saxons on Misplaced Pages: an Assessment btw. Deserves a response. Johnbod (talk) 17:16, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Interesting article - but waaaay outside my normal topic area - once long long ago I briefly thought of pursuing biblical archaeology, but got distracted by other subjects. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:25, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

A rather well balanced blog, I thought. Would be great to have more of that sort of person as an editor here. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:28, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Archeology is out of my league. If it were of professional interest and benefits for academics to contribute here we could quickly be in much better shape, but it's hardly encouraged since contributing to Misplaced Pages does not ordinarily count as professional work; I speak from experience. Drmies (talk) 18:37, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if you've seen this? J Milburn (talk) 00:28, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Things chance, JMilburn, and don't you know better than to take Misplaced Pages for a source? Let's just say that there was spin on all sides. Drmies (talk) 02:49, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

need a translation for "televisiemaker"

Eric, et al., I need a word. "Television maker"? Someone who writes, directs, produces, acts in--all of those. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 02:51, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Generally interpreted as producer. Dutch online monolingual dicos may provide additional definitions. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:54, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

"programme-maker" ? (Oh, alright, "program-maker"). Probably with "television" first. Other examples: "Sir David Frederick Attenborough /ˈætənbərə/, OM CH CVO CBE FRS FZS FSA (born 8 May 1926) is an English broadcaster and naturalist. His career as the face and voice of natural history programmes has endured for 60 years. He is best known for writing and presenting the nine Life series,...". Louis Sebastian Theroux (/θəˈruː/ LOO-ee thə-ROO) (born May 20, 1970) is an English journalist and broadcaster. He is best known for his documentaries in the television series Louis Theroux's Weird Weekends and ....". But I think "broadcaster" is a bit limp. Johnbod (talk) 16:20, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I went back to "television writer and director"--also limpish. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 20:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I'd be inclined to go for something like "creator of television programmes". Eric Corbett 23:25, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

FLC again

Following the latest "success" with the Sharpe and Paley list, I thought I would offer List of ecclesiastical works by E. G. Paley as a candidate. It incorporates the lessons learnt from the review of the previous FLC, and is of the same format. Would you be prepared to copyedit the text and make any helpful comments? Appreciated, as always. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:33, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Of course, but it might take me a day or two to get there. Eric Corbett 18:47, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Absolutely no rush. It's been sitting around for a time while we enjoyed our golden wedding celebrations. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 19:24, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Now that really is something to celebrate, Congratulations to you both, I hope one day we can say do same. J3Mrs (talk) 20:17, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I think I've had enough. What was good enough for this reviewer last time is not good enough now. Another day wasted. I can't design templates anyway. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 21:00, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

I could change the template, but no doubt that would make someone else unhappy. Every day here is a wasted day. Nobody cares about your work unless you're working on a "vital" article such as house. Eric Corbett 21:02, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer, but please do not change the template. What matters to me is that the list, its links and its refs work for the reader, which they do. I don't really care that the bottom of the page, which no sensible reader studies anyway, looks pretty for a reviewer. This reviewer demands consistency, but is not consistent himself. I'm pretty pleased with the list, certainly from the point of view of the reader, and I'm reluctant to waste any more time on it. Will sleep on it, anyway. Thanks for your concern, and sorry to have wasted your time. I shall certainly continue to write more articles and lists, but these will be for the sake of the readers and not to satisfy pedants. Gold stars are nice (and flattering) but life's too short. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 22:02, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

As you wish. I'm really not sure that FLC/FAC is worth bothering about anyway. The rules seem so arbitrary, particularly in the case of FLC. Eric Corbett 22:19, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

If you can be arsed (and I'm sure you and I have a million and one better things to do, particularly with a feisty kitten), what's arbitrary about the rules at FLC? Just wondered in case there's any scope for improving it instead of just slating it. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:25, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

And at one time I seem to remember that you tried to persuade me that embarking on FAC was a good thing! I see a parallel here with the management of the NHS. It seems more important to follow the letter of the MoS than to make the content more accessible to the "ordinary" viewer with few or no IT skills; just as NHS management seems to be more concerned with meeting government targets than having the patient at the centre of their concerns. Ah well, today I've enjoyed the therapy of writing a couple of church articles; much more important IMO than making a list of references look like each other. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:19, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

I am not withdrawing the nomination. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:06, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

No reason why you should withdraw the nomination, just the luck of the draw with reviewers. I wouldn't try and persuade you of that now Peter, and I can't really see me ever taking another article to FAC to be honest. Can't be arsed really. Eric Corbett 16:46, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Of course, never a problem at FAC. Goodraise has made a few dickish edits lately, I'm not sure why. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:48, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

It's a problem at FAC as well, of course. Eric Corbett 16:50, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't know if you're following the happenings at FLC, but I have to admit to a certain mischievous delight when a pedant cannot deal with the apostrophe. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 21:52, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Keith Moon

I've put this up for a pre-FAC peer review here, mainly because there are still a few sources I deliberately tagged, and somebody could do with giving it a serious copyedit, as I could chip away at it for years at my glacial pace. Since I'm relatively inexperienced in the FA world, I thought I might as well do things "by the book" first. Ritchie333 16:12, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

If you succeed in enticing Brianboulton to cast an eye over it then the exercise will have been worthwhile. Eric Corbett 01:56, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Ping on former article

If the illustrious Mr. Corbett has a moment, I added a section at Oxbow (horse)#Remainder_of_season and tweaked the lede to match. as you know, it's already FA thanks in large part to your previous copyedits, just want to be sure the new material conforms to the standard. Horse pulled up lame in his last race and is out for the season, so not likely to add any more to this until 2014. Thanks. Montanabw 19:39, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I'll try and take a look at that tomorrow. If I may ask you a personal question, do you really live in Montana? Eric Corbett 23:08, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

and are you a dental floss tycoon? Incidentally, I've heard great things about that state, and they involve mountains and horses. Drmies (talk)

Yes, I live in Montana. But no, I can only wish I was a dental floss tycoon! We refer to the wages here as the "scenery tax." Ask User:Mike Cline, who made his fortune elsewhere... LOL Montanabw 23:29, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

What little I know of Montana comes from cowboy movies, but it looks to be a beautiful place. Eric Corbett 23:34, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

The Horse Whisperer (film) and A River Runs Through It (film) were both shot in a radius of about 100 miles of where I grew up; I think I mentioned somewhere here that my parents' old barn (now torn down) outside Bozeman, Montana (where only people with Mike's resources can afford to live these days, it's getting to be a lot like Jackson Hole) was actually scouted as a location for the Horse Whisperer (but, obviously, was not selected). However, only in the movies would someone haul a horse in a trailer from the east coast to Montana via what looks like the Beartooth Highway when Interstate 90 will take you straight in... movie errors, sheesh! Montanabw 23:41, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Mike Cline made his fortune right here in Montgomery, and he spends it in Montana, fly fishing. And some of it he spent in a very expensive sushi restaurant in DC, at Wikimania last year; he was kind enough let me share that bounty. You know my uncle from Mississippi drove his horses in a trailer up to Montana for a vacation? Drmies (talk) 00:13, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

I hate Japanese food in general even more than I do German food, except for teriyaki of course. And as for that disgusting saki, least said soonest mended. Did the horse enjoy its vacation?

I'm reminded though of a recent exchange in an episode of Count Arthur Strong. He walks into his local cafe and is offered the new menu item, croque-monsieur: "No, I can't be doing with that foreign muck, I'll have a toasted ham and cheese sandwich." Eric Corbett 01:12, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

It reminds me of that exchange in Life on Mars : "What's a vol-au-vent?" "It's puff pastry shell filled with a savoury meat mixture." "So its a pie then." Ritchie333 15:02, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh, that's sad, to hate Japanese food. I didn't ask the horse, though I'm sure anytime it's not being sat upon by 300 pounds of Uncle Chip it's pretty happy. Chip's a big man--his palm can basically hide a 9mm, though the Colt 45 he favors sticks out just a bit. Drmies (talk) 18:21, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Million Award

		The Million Award
		For your contributions to bring Middle Ages (estimated annual readership: 1,733,000) to Featured Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Misplaced Pages's readers. -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:59, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Misplaced Pages's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Misplaced Pages:Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:

This editor won the Million Award for bringing Middle Ages to Featured Article status.

If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it! Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:59, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't feel I deserve that as it happens, the credit should go to Ealdgyth. Eric Corbett 23:05, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Okay--I'll remove you from the listing for this one. Thanks all the same for your work on it, though-- Khazar2 (talk) 23:40, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

All the credit does NOT go to Ealdgyth - quit being modest. That was an insane amount of copyediting and figuring out bad prose. You deserve it. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:40, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps. But until I get paid royalties on page views it doesn't seem very important to me. I couldn't have written that article, but you not only could, you did. 01:39, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Collaboration is what I like here. I could not have written Kafka, I would not even had the idea to touch it without PumpkinSky. Of course I don't deserve "all" of the award that I now proudly present on my talk, next to a city in England - sorry it's not Manchester ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:15, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Invention

Hello, Eric Corbett. You are invited to join WikiProject Invention, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Misplaced Pages's coverage of inventions and invention-related topics. To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000 10:15, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, but I'm looking to decrease my involvement with this dysfunctional site, not increase it for the further glorification of Jimmy Wales and his fawning acolytes. I suggest you try and recruit some females, the only editors WP seems to be interested in these days. Eric Corbett 11:20, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, if we were all here to solely work for Jimbo for free on such a hostile website we'd all be mugs of course. I edit here for myself and the personal satisfaction I get out of the project, like most who edit here I think. I don't like the fact that a small group of people are being paid, Jimbo is glorified as if he's created it all ,and the real people who are the life and soul of the encyclopedia don't, but at the end of the day it is what you get out of wikipedia that matters. If you're not getting anything out of it anymore then I understand. I get much less satisfaction out of it than I used to which is reflected in how much I edit nowadays.. Above all beyond the nonsense, it's frustrating just how much work is needed on the vast majority of articles and how few people on here really seem interested in it as a proper encyclopedia.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:10, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Amazing how many people think that making drama instead of articles is what the place is all about. How to remind the collective semi-conscious around here that absent content there is no encyclopedia?? Montanabw 20:36, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the invitation; oh well, if you change your mind, great. Regarding editors (per other above comments): many people spend the majority of their time contributing to discussions and the minority of their time actually improving or creating articles. Some almost exclusively contribute to discussions, only making the occasional minor edit to articles. It's an increasing trend that's unlikely to minimize in the near future. It would be great if Misplaced Pages were to become more topic-centric. Just my 2 cents. Northamerica1000 01:10, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Interview

You might be interested in seeing this.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 15:37, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Strangely enough I'm not. Eric Corbett 02:14, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured list removal candidates/Ah! My Goddess (season 1)/archive1

The Featured List status of Ah! My Goddess (season 1) is reviewed. There are issues, so you can fix them. --George Ho (talk) 08:33, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Why would I want to fix them? Eric Corbett 12:32, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Greetings

WP:WMF now exists, FYI. Best regards. Biosthmors (talk) 09:30, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Not sure why you think I might be interested in that. Eric Corbett 12:33, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

I recall you mentioning something about the WMF before, something about consultant contracts if I remember correctly. Anyhow, I envision it as a place where English Misplaced Pages editors can engage, document, and organize things of importance to them about the WMF. But if you have no interest, then nevermind! Best regards. Biosthmors (talk) 14:16, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

I have little enough interest in WP these days, never mind the bloated WMF. Eric Corbett 14:23, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

I understand. Perhaps a point on Talk:Low back pain/GA1 could strike your fancy. It's my review, and I'm still not sure if the background info on "pain" and "back" there is appropriate. But maybe it's a minor sin even if it's not. Best. Biosthmors (talk) 15:00, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Re Uxbridge

Sorry, I didn't realize it was in the article before—a friend quoted it, but I read it as a suggestion to change it. I'm a fan of deadpan humor in articles, but that's just me. Ed  01:37, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Whatever you're a fan of is of no interest to me. I'm only concerned that you don't wreck what's already here, which God knows is bad enough already. Eric Corbett 01:58, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Alright then, best of luck. Ed  04:32, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Luck is no defence in the war of attrition against editors such as yourself. You may of course feel similarly about me, but like most other of your admin colleagues you'd be wrong. Eric Corbett 06:43, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't feel at all similarly, and I'm puzzled as to why you think I would. Ed  13:05, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm quite simply astonished that you considered that edit to the image caption to be a good idea. You need to get your arse in gear if you want to remain an administrator. Eric Corbett 13:19, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Regardless of the merits of this particular instance (borderline, at best), I'm just as astonished that deadpan yet accurate humor is seen as a "wreck". What do you think of this? ~~

• No offense, person with unfinished signature, but Cracked.com got there first (Link) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:29, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

• That was me, sorry Crisco. Ed  03:04, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Am I reading the above right—a Misplaced Pages admin using "a friend told me to off-wiki" and "I did it for the lulz" as an excuse for vandalizing an article and apparently genuinely not seeing why this is inappropriate? – iridescent 09:25, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Errr Ed, that was not a good move. Just please don't do anything like that again - The reason is that if we condone this for one....and then 50-100 people think its funny....this could be a real headache to clean up, a bit like April Fools' day...but in mainspace.... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:41, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

The other thing is that one never know who one might offend with some flippant quip. Misplaced Pages is really at a crossroads to be taken seriously. This sorta thing is very risky and we can't afford upsetting folks. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:06, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Gee, everyone's taking the worst possible version of this story—enjoy yourselves, you can be assured that I won't do it again. Ed  12:53, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

• My apologies for (unintentionally) setting this off. I posted a link to Uxbridge's leg on Facebook, as I did with Drmies talk page. On Facebook I quoted the caption which Eric deleted in the article soon afterwards. The rest, I think we all know. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:29, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

When you get the notification saying I rolled you back, ignore it. I was trying to compare two versions of the history to see what you had improved and "missed" with the mouse click. Useless. I have rolled myself back and restored your version. Sorry. QuiteUnusual (talk) 10:29, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, when Jimbo himself edits an article and inserts a blog as a RS, I can only add Facepalm. Montanabw 21:26, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

That shouldn't be at all surprising. Intothatdarkness 21:35, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

August Closs

I took care of some dab issue for you and removed the unattractive template; perhaps you or someone else can help me a bit. Herr Closs was eminently notable, if only for his love of books, and I don't have access to the ODNB. (Someone told me recently how to get in the backdoor, but I can't find where.) The article needs a bit of help while I'm elsewhere occupied. Thanks ever so much! Drmies (talk) 03:17, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't think I've ever edited August Closs have I? I can certainly look up his ODNB entry for you though. Eric Corbett 17:31, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Old user name in list of GA reviewers

I just happened to notice that Malleus Fatuarum is still listed as a GA reviewer at Good article nominations/List of reviewers. Just in case you hadn't noticed and wanted to change that. --Boson (talk) 07:25, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't really review anything much these days. Malleus did that, and look what happened to him. Eric Corbett 16:44, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

A challenge...

Here's a challenge - I am reviewing Pinniped for GA, and think it'd be good if not all four paras of the lead began with "Seals/pinnipeds...." - however I have been staring at it for a while and can't for the life of me tweak it so that the flow and prose sounds good with any change I can think of. The challenge here then is to change at least one para so it starts with something different....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:16, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done – iridescent 09:37, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Nice one/thx/much appreciated - will buy you a pint or three in the Old Dart sometime.... :) - we should rename this page the real guild of copyeditors then I guess ;) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:46, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Dorchester House

Being interested in former buildings and country houses, you or Giano might be interested in seeing if you can finding something on the house which existed on the spot of the Dorchester prior to 1931. It was supposed to have been something of more architectural note than the hotel, probably a crying shame at the time that it was demolished in favour of a rather bland looking hotel. It was inspired by a villa in Rome, sounds interesting, not sure you'd find enough for an article, there was at least one house built on the spot though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:56, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Seems we already have it: Dorchester House and looks to have been inspired (very loosely) by the Villa Borghese or the Villa Farnesina. The Dorchester House article has more than a whiff of plagiarism of copyvio to it.  Giano  20:30, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Surprising, I took for granted we didn't have an article on it because our coverage of demolished buildings isn't great really..♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:26, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Likewise, I only found it doing a Google search. Seems to have been written by one User:Maypm - who looks to have written some interesting stuff; I've not come across him/her before. On reflection, I think the whiff of copyvio is more to do with a heavy reliance on quotes rather than any infringements of of copyright.  Giano  11:36, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

What's going on with talk pages?

My talk page appears to have its own talk page. Strange. Eric Corbett 17:25, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is going all post-modern on us, clearly. Is your talk page's talk page keeping a civil tone to itself? ;) Hchc2009 (talk) 17:29, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

User:Ucucha's TFA notification bot (UcuchaBot (talk · contribs) was talking to your talk page's talk page, not to you on your talk page. To avert the possibility of your talk page's talk page developing unnatural quasi-human intelligence from reading about all the featured articles you have helped to write, I have extermined it. Quite a few people have accidentally created pages prefixed with "User talk:User talk:" through page moves and the like, or Twinkle warnings... Bencherlite 17:45, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Eric Corbett 17:50, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring at Chorlton-cum-Hardy

Eric, could you please stop? That's already 2RR. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:08, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I couldn't care less if it's 20RR; the article needs a lot of work, not stupid accusations. Eric Corbett 00:48, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

• Last warning, Eric. I really don't need to point you to WP:EW, do I? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:12, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

  You don't need to do anything so far as I'm aware, and I'm not even slightly interested in your warning. I'm not a child and I won't be treated like one. Eric Corbett 01:18, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Don't act like a child, and you won't be treated as one. ‑Scottywong| converse _ 01:20, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't recall rattling your cage to ask for an opinion? Eric Corbett 01:23, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Your behaviour today has been nothing short of a child, so I'm not surprised. Do you enjoy being rude and ignorant? Hardylane (talk) 01:27, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't know. Unlike you I've never tried it. Eric Corbett 01:33, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Comments like this are so unhelpful and inappropriate I can't believe I have to point it out to you. Your sheer arrogance and combative attitude on this, whether your edits are right or wrong, will put you right into the soup at EW or ANI. Why are you doing this? If you're such a superb editor, then surely the excellence of your editing improvements will win others over to your version anyway. Instead, "acting like a child" as Scotty puts it (and I agree completely) gets the article nowhere and throws you into another long block. This is pointless and you're supposed to be better than this.

Please, if you're going to edit the article, please take it in smaller steps. A 3k change is a curate's egg. Others will be both for and against parts of it, so it just goes back and forth. If these were para at a time changes, we might get some agreement as to which ones were supported and which weren't. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:38, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Andy, I've often made very decent edits to an article and improved it but some editors will always object to a certain version. I much improved the Paris article and a bunch of disgruntled assholes crawled out of the woodwork and had nothing but nastiness towards me and the article. However great the editors may or may not me there'll always be editors who feel protective towards articles that they've contributed to and disagree with changes. So it has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of an editor in getting universal support.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:54, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley The article needs sorting out, it is bloated and wordy. If editors with Eric's degree of competence can't be trusted to remove crap then what is the point? The other editor is the one who should be justifying re-adding rubbish. I have "pruned" this article in the past but "stuff" accumulates. I certainly couldn't work in the manner you suggest, nothing would improve and tempers would get even more frayed, I don't see your contribution as being at all helpful. J3Mrs (talk) 09:56, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Eric's "degree of competence" is not carte blanche to annoy other editors just for the hell of it. Patience and tact are also required, not this donnish attitude that the plebs have nothing worthwhile to contribute. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:02, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

And surely this works in reverse, other editors should not be allowed to annoy established editors through ignorance and incompetence and who said "plebs have nothing to contribute?" Not me and not Eric. J3Mrs (talk) 10:10, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

• Eric's responses have been (in general) quite measured, at least to this issue. Now, for someone calling another editor an idiot, implying that they have no life, etc. ...  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:29, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Why Andy Dingley said Eric would "annoy other editors just for the hell of it" is astonishing to me. Is that civil? It certainly assumes no good faith. J3Mrs (talk) 10:56, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

• Hardy, you're really not helping. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:31, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Nikki just indef protected the article. PumpkinSky talk 01:27, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

• No, she protected it for three days. The feedback tool was indefed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:30, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

If you make a major effort to begin overhauling and cleaning up an article and somebody blind reverts you completely why would Eric not revert and accept it? There really has to be some adjustment to the 3RR rule over for editors who can be trusted to make appropriate edits to an article. It's happened to me several times and it is rather irritating when you can't make a revert after you'd made decent edits. I'm intolerant of such people and won't accept that sort of blind reverting and clearly Eric doesn't either but when such people irritate you it's somehow childish? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:49, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

The problem is that Eric made no effort to engage with other editors on the article talk page to explain his changes, as he had been specifically asked to do on two separate occasions - , . Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:04, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

The problem is interacting with some editors, particularly those who don't know what they're doing and who revert wholesale can be counter productive. J3Mrs (talk) 11:11, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Like Precisely. No sense arguing with trolls. Montanabw 21:52, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

. I'd have thought the edits he made needed no explanation and he said all that needed to be said in the edit summaries. I'd soon get irritable if I had to explain even the most obvious of edits to people.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:15, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

But that's not wholly true. Deleting a referenced paragraph (about the 1964 blues broadcast - which incidentally is quite notable for those who are interested in music history) on the basis that the section "needs a bloody good clear out" was not "the most obvious of edits", and could have used a fuller explanation. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:58, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I disagree, the way it was worded was presented as mindless trivia. If it was an important concert, then it would be appropriate to mention it in the history in the right context and tone.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:21, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Turns out the concert didn't really take place in Chorlton-cum-Hardy anyway. Eric Corbett 22:57, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Lucky I questioned it then, otherwise we may never have known.... Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:05, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

My corps

I have an inkling that my corps de logis and cour d'honneur are being italicised with a Anglican shudder and only left because I added them (I wrote those two pages too) which is nice of you; but you can take them out of Mount Vernon if you like; they are probably not really appropriate for an American glorified farmhouse. I inserted them rather tongue in cheek. In fact, at Mount Vernon, I believe the natives call the cour d'honneur "mansion rondelle" or something of the kind. As ever  Giano  18:54, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm not really sure whether they should be italicised or not, and as a (lapsed) Catholic I'm certainly no Anglican; I simply strive for consistency. As for Mount Vernon, I think we're getting close to an assault on GAN? Eric Corbett 22:51, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I meant Anglician or whatever the word for the emotions of the British is. Yes, one or two loose ends, I uploaded a plan, but could never get it quite right, so gave up.  Giano  05:46, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

We British don't really have emotions, that's for the Johnny foreigners. Eric Corbett 20:16, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

That's the problem Eric, you need to discover your feminine side.  Giano  20:26, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

What feminine side? Eric Corbett 20:50, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

PS:If a picture of a bus is essential for Chorlton cum Watsit, I have found this one; it's far more attractive and will encourage more people to visit the depressing looking place than the existing bus picture.  Giano  20:33, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

That bus picture will be gone soon enough along with several others, as well at least half of the existing article. I've got no patience for pussy-footing around. Is that what you meant by "feminine side"? Eric Corbett 20:57, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I have never seen such a depressing looking dump; the only cheerful information was the fact that people no longer go there to be buried. Doesn't it have any lap dancing clubs that could be tastefully photographed?  Giano  21:05, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I was there earlier this evening as it happens, and it's not really as dull as it's portrayed. There are some really quite chintzy areas. It's one of those places though where people think that dragging a few tables and chairs outside a cafe makes it seem sophisticated, as opposed to cold and wet. Eric Corbett 21:12, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

A colleague of mine was dragged kicking and screaming by his wife to live there. Apparently it is very popular with the 'ladies who wear comfortable shoes'. Mr Stephen (talk) 21:20, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Does that mean no six inch stilettos and lap dancing clubs?  Giano  21:23, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid not. In that sense it is indeed rather dull. Eric Corbett 21:30, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes but the lack of lap-dancing clubs is somewhat compensated for by the fact that it's unique amongst Manchester suburbs by being above the snowline - as you can see from the main image. The skiing in October can be excellent . Richerman (talk) 22:15, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

That is indeed a rather strange choice of lead image. Eric Corbett 22:20, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

As is the image that illustrates the 20th-century developments section where the main focus is - the shadow of a horse chestnut tree??? Richerman (talk) 22:38, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

As soon as I'm allowed to I'm going to take a machete to this article, and with the help of J3Mrs maybe a half-decent article will emerge. But I've got a kitten demanding to be played with, so first things first. Eric Corbett 22:45, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Grace Sherwood FA

Thank you from PSky and Wehwalt for your comment and review of this recently successful FAC. PumpkinSky talk 20:23, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm really pleased to see Grace as a FA after all the kerfuffle. Eric Corbett 22:55, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Me too. PumpkinSky talk 20:38, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Hi, Thanks a lot for taking up and completing the comprehensive review of Pundarikakshan Perumal Temple with such precision. The comments were very constructive and i am taking this as an input for other articles i am editing. The vernacular usage of words was a difficult part. Once again, thanks a lot. Ssriram mt (talk) 23:04, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

That's very kind of you. I hope you agree that the article looks better now than it did when the review started, which is the point really. Eric Corbett 05:45, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

yes - i do. The major difference from the initial time is the separation of the art/history part with others.Once again, thanks a lot.Ssriram mt (talk) 12:10, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Sunbeam Tiger info

Eric,

I'm prepared to defend the changes I made.

Where would you like to start? Spmdr (talk) 14:07, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to start with you fucking off. I don't have the time or motivation to deal with wankers like you. Eric Corbett 14:09, 13 September 2013 (UTC)