Jump to content

User talk:Bishonen

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by KillerChihuahua (talk | contribs) at 14:40, 5 July 2006 (Peterklutz: a-hah!). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please post at the foot of the page!

Moods

Talk archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16



Wikimood


Belton House

Thank you all for your kind copy-edits and attacks on my foot-note system, yes it is a pity there are only four ref books (actually realy three, as one was only something unconnected) which will cause some-one to comment on FAC: "not enough references". While I appreciate yoor efforts (Paul - I can't actually see what you have done!) could I just point out the page is nt in fact finished, it has yet to have its section titled "Abdication and the broken heart" This will be a very moving and poignant section in which Lord Brownlow drives the Duchess of Windsor away from Belton and the King to France, with her soft tears echoing in his heart! Namely he has a broken heart because he has just realised he has backed the wrong side and knows he is about to be hacked up by the new Queen, who was at that time not a cuddly old granny, but when thwarted, a very unpleaseant piece of work. So you see there is a lot of murder and mayhem yet to come in this exiting page. Oh, and yes Ok Kinsman! hahahah very funny, you lot should be on TV! Giano | talk 09:38, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Efforts, is it? OK, copyedit it yourself. Bishonen | talk 09:45, 17 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Well if you are going to be like that!....I shall shortly be going to Japan and never ever ever returning! - so there! Giano | talk 09:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You think you're Queen Elizabeth or something? Bishonen | talk 09:54, 17 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
No, but I wish could could chop someone's head off - jusyt look at this Wikipedia:Peer review/Neo-Renaissance Ghirlandajo and I have been working on it for ages, it is far from finished, but may have been an Fa one day, and suddenly look...........bloody cheek! You wopuld think they could mention it to two obvious primary authors first! Giano | talk 10:11, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So very nice to see that peer review is now being taken over by a javascript program! It's about time! Human beings are only a hair's breadth from monkeys, you know: would you trust a chimp to give feedback on your writing? No! Give me pure, sterile code any day. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:15, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I thought that was nice, too. People are talking to the script. "Please, ScriptMaster, accept these changes as a token of our esteem." It's absolutely flippin' nuts. (And, with compromise, we find ourselves compromised.) Geogre 17:33, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't cope with this, my life is in ruins, I go to very expensive bookshops buy out of print book thus depriving my children of food and education. Sit up in bed reading them half the night (thus depriving my wife of tea bags or whatever) then write my beautiful pages - for what?.......A fucking robot to read. No, you lot do not exist you are all figments of my imagination. OK my first dry week-end is about to end, I'm off for a few drinks teabag the wife and beat the kids! Giano | talk 18:58, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And then little USA tied Italy in soccer, and you guys were trying to win the approval of a robot. Oh, I'm with Bunchofgrapes: there is something incalculably lovely about a javascript robot giving peer review notes. It's exactly where a certain segment of Wikipedia wants to go: potato mashers and sieves and Procrustean beds -- things that can't be argued because they don't need reading because they're just filling out forms in a particular way. Geogre 21:05, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Giano my edits are invisible and can only be seen using special browser code. They all make fun of Italian football and your manhood. By the way I've sent copies of the code to all your female admirers Bish, Freply, every women in Japan … and several others. Regards Paul August 15:35, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are you saying that Giano can't teabag? (I heard the term in a John Waters film, and it referred specifically to doing a particular thing while wearing Y-front briefs. I wonder if I should put a "disputed" tag on the page?) Geogre 17:33, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • No Giano can't teabag, and Y-front briefs are surely only worn by nerdy Brits whose parents hate them by giving them daft names. As for the code Paul, I'm sure there is a Lady in Japan waiting just for you, would you like me to notify her of your existence? - NO!, I thought not. So you know what you can do with your code - don't you? Is it the fact you are going to loose to us in the footie realy hurts? - You surely don't immagine I would rub it in and mention it at every opportunity for the next four years do you? Giano | talk 18:24, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Geogre, to know what I'm "saying", you will have to see if Bish will loan you the code. And no, there is absolutely no relationship between the size of my edits, or the need for a magnifying glass, and Giano's manhood — none whatsoever. Paul August 19:51, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I can't even do Sodoku, so I have no hope of spotting the number patterns in a reference section. (The real reason I don't like footnotes: I'm innumerate!) Geogre 03:27, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think Paul, like poor dear BoG you are becoming exitable, and should calm down, it is only natural that you should need a magnifying glass - self examination is very important in those over 50, I was only reading a very interesting poster in the doctor's waiting room the other day. You Brit's all have an (understandable) obsession with size, it must be very troubling for you all, but apparently it does not matter in the least (if you beleive that you will beleive anything). Now off you go to bed with a nice cup of cocoa. Giano | talk 20:14, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cup of tea, I think you mean... And as for Italy's um, ... showing against USA. I'm flabbergasted. What went wrong? Perhaps they should have had you on the team after all? I hear you have the balls... ++Lar: t/c 21:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It was an ugly game all the way around, but the USA did better than I expected. There was a huge difference in the game, in the US, depending upon whether you listened to satellite radio with broadcasters who follow all soccer all the time or the stupid TV people who appeared to think it was a baseball game. To say that they were out of their depth was an understatement. While radio complained about ticky fouls getting called early, they thought the redcard was well deserved (an elbow to the eyesocket of the guy who just scored on you). The TV people thought that there weren't any fouls being called and that all the yellow and red cards were just the refs messing things up. American television: the next best thing to living in a cave with your ears filled with mud. Geogre 03:27, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The inept ABC announcers liked the eye-gouging red-card (and were impressed that the ref saw it, since it was pretty quick) and they also liked the offsides call on the goal, the one that had the US coach in near-hysterics. They didn't like any of the sliding-tackle red- or yellow- cards. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:37, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm so pleased the poor American people all been given this encouragement by the kindly Italian team, what magnamanitude, I weep with pride. Meantime!.. my beautiful page - what happened overnight? - It's bad enough having to add these distracting little numbers to every verb, bit now the cite police want to fight over their bloody form - it's enough to make a ELC's cat weep. I've half a mind not to finish it properly, but add another 5000 words on the beautiful Duchess and the treacherous Lord instead Giano | talk 08:50, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, Giano, you continue to do the writing, and let us little minds follow behind looking for hobgoblins. Those who can do — those who can't (like me), niggle about with citation style. As for the game of footsie, we Yanks have a saying: "a tie is like kissing your sister". Paul August 14:28, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Paul - Oh dear how can I explain this, you seem a little confused - footie is a game where one kicks a ball about a field with lots of other men, footsie is an altogether different game, played likewise with the feet, but discretly under a dining room table with another man's wife. Perhaps this could be one of the problems Americans have understanding the game of "footie! - More seriously I am almost (but not quite finished now) - I wasn't refering to you as cite police, but whoever the anon was, I am now confused though, am I supposed to be putting (Jones 367) or [1] etc. Giano | talk 14:45, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for rolling back the person who "pestered" me on my talk page. :) Extraordinary Machine 22:56, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. A real nogoodnik IP, that — a school, probably. Bishonen | talk 00:23, 18 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Er...

File:Roy Lichtenstein House I.jpg
YOU ARE NOT LOOKING AT THIS HOUSE; THIS HOUSE IS LOOKING AT YOU.

Er, Jobjörn? Did you click on my links on WP:ANI? Here's a couple more. Many similar threads have been archived. Bishonen | talk 23:56, 17 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Heh, no, I didn't, actually. I was (for some now lost reason) in a hurry and just thought I should comment on it. Thank you for clarifying :) Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 00:06, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your talk page is crazy by the way. Kittens and italian flags everywhere. wooah. overwhelming. Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 00:08, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
[Proudly] I have gotten prizes for Craziest Talkpage! But the credit goes entirely to my... friends. Bishonen | talk 00:14, 18 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
It deserves them. I'm almost willing to say it's worthy of an inclusion in the article on Surrealism... however, something tells me that wouldn't be appreciated. Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 00:21, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Right, no self-references. Bishonen | talk 00:31, 18 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Exactly. Now I must be off to find an obscure image to add to your nonsensical talk page, accompanying our conversation appropriately. Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 01:09, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Scary image added. My work here is done. Jobjörn (Talk | contribs) 01:11, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's the Lone Ranger's house on Tonto! Geogre 03:28, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, that didn't work. According to Wikipedia, a hill in Stockholm is a Japanese dagger. Geogre 03:30, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The photo does not do this sculpture justice - it follows you around the sculture park. I recommend lunch sitting beside the large central circular fountain. One of my favourite places in D.C. -- ALoan (Talk) 14:18, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hate it when sculptures follow me around. I always end up looking even more physically ugly when a Rodin is standing behind me, looking thoughtful or engaging in public displays of affection. I was tremendously fond of the small pond around 80th St. E. in Central Park. From there, you could see the two redtail hawks perching and pooping on rich people's apartments. Geogre 14:33, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TM

It's time you start taking your job as an admin seriously, "Pretty boy."

[TM talk]

Peterklutz

<sigh> Someone's mantra appears to be a series of enraged expletives. You'll never reach enlightenment through POV forks or edit warring, I'm sure. Geogre 11:47, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A hairy article I like

I just wrote Genius (literature), and I like what I done (which no one will know), because I synthesized a large amount of obscure stuff. My reference said one thing (one approach to the subject, and a good 'un), and I synthesized with what I know, and no one will know how rare that was. Anyway, it's good, but I'm afraid that it's about 55 miles above anyone's head but yours. Geogre 14:00, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And, since it had been red, I did afflatus. I was a flautist in 4th grade, but I haven't had afflatus since I started taking charcoal pills. Geogre 03:15, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you blocked RhinoRick as a sock of Israel shamir. This was probably unfair, since RhinoRick is most likely a different person named Richard Wilcox. See here. --Denis Diderot 15:45, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Tanto, Stockholm that isn't a knife. (I made Tanto a dab.)
  2. Swedo-Finnish Modernists ("A group of significant poets in Finland writing in Sweding during and shortly after World War I....")

Geogre 12:15, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edith Södergran has a long article on sv (and as far as I can judge from a quick look a good one with actual references). It may be worth translating. Tanto or Tantolunden is a park on Södermalm. It's named after a person, Hans Tanto or Danto, who owned a plot there in the 17th century. It is also mentioned a couple of times in songs by Bellman. (A webpage on Tanto) Tupsharru 12:37, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you want more, eh? Fine: among the Swedo-Finnish Modernists listed in the Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics are:

  1. Edith Södergran
  2. Hagar Olsson
  3. Elmer Diktonius
  4. Gunnar Björling
  5. Rabbe Enckell
  6. Henry Parland,

and these people published in Ultra and Quosego. Their influence "can be seen in Sweden, particularly in the leading poetic modernist Gunnar Ekelöf, and in the fyrtiotalisterna (q.v.)." I don't think I'll vide at this time. Geogre 12:58, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Copyedits

Thanks. It is almost finished it just needs a hard prune, and re-write of the lead, It'll be a waste of time to copy-edit properly before then, as you know how I change things about, I've already hived a huge section off into a page of its own. I'm not happy with it at the moment, it's lacking an architectural essence to bring it together (don't worry, I know what I mean). Love Giano | talk 20:26, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't think there is much more to say about such a small house, but let me sleep on the new lead! What d'you think? Truth! Giano | talk 21:39, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Too long! Sort of... I don't know, a tad heavy? Not sunkissed? Bishonen | talk 22:32, 19 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Mmmmmm I'm not happy with it either, I probably would vote for it on FAC, but only because I wrote it! Problem is people don't like sunkissed, I've shortened it by shunting the beautiful Duchess and the strong limbed aristo off to a "royal watcher's" delight of their own (even the wretched man's name makes me wince, his parents must have loathed him on sight), I'll have another drastic prune. Then of course we have the cite v footnote fiasco (sorry I know you hate that word) I think the (Smith, 245) method is distracting, but the little numbers method tempt people to click away in exited anticipation, they should be reserved for thrilling and gossipy peices of information that are a little off subject, but will entertain or enlighten the reader - I jave a couple of those, but should they be muddled up with all the fact citing - poor dear Agatha Christe never had these problems with writing her exiting books. I can see the page's problems just not quite get my mind arownd them. Anyhow I must do some proper work. Adieu. Giano | talk 13:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Idiot, that was my opinion of the lead section. I thought that was what we were talking about! Bishonen | talk 13:26, 20 June 2006

(UTC).

Happy birthday, Bishonen!

It's a birthday bug! (Don't anyone get "butterfly.jpg": it's obscene.)
File:Careymusic.jpg
Enjoy this stirring performance from the Carey Baptist Grammar School band on your birthday, Bish! Bunchofgrapes
Hope you found a pot of gold on your birthday!MONGO

]

Happy Birthday. A summer baby - how sweet. I of course was born in the winter! Giano
You guys are so sweet! Please join the salon, pull up a chair, help yourselves! La précieuse ridicule.

Still as cute and lithe as ever, and a little more wise. Happy birthday! (And Jonathan Swift used to read from Job 50 on his birthdays.) Have a butterfly! Geogre 02:40, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chortle. Thank you, dear Geogre. Everyone's lithe on the Internet! Bishonen | talk 13:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
A GIFT for your birthday! (I didn't know what to get you - this one is a cathedral, I hope you like it!) KillerChihuahua?!? 09:59, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aw, Puppy, how did you know I always wanted one! Bishonen | talk 10:20, 20 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

When too many trolls turn up at the salon, bus them out! ++Lar: t/c 13:38, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy birthday. You must be pleased to finally be old enough to drink! (KIDDING, I expect our fair Bishie is a LITTLE older than that, but a gentleman never asks... ahem... and neither do I!)++Lar: t/c 13:38, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I don't know about old enough to drink, Lar. "Highschooler" and "immature" are the favorite epithets that infuriated tro... eh, unhappy users, throw at me. I'm not even sure I'm old enough to ride in a bus that psychedelic. And for your other question: ARN. Bishonen | talk 13:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
File:Gertjonnys-large.jpg
Swedish musical superstars Gert Jonnys have turned up to celebrate your birthday. Tupsharru 15:32, 20 June 2006 (UTC).....Que???..C'mon they are a spoof aren't they?.. they are aren't they? Giano. Studying the article... apparently, they have an internet cult following. "The members also have day jobs." :-) Bishonen....Probably a good idea Giano[reply]
They're all bozos on that bus!. Geogre 13:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Random Firesign Theater references are ALWAYS a good thing... so I guess I'll respond with Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right... ++Lar: t/c 14:33, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Jesus Just Left Chicago and I'm Waitin' on the Bus. (Yeah, a ZZTop reference, but a really old one.) Wasn't there a bus with a troll on it in the last episode of The Prisoner? Geogre 19:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
...filled with whatever marine product you prefer!
File:Sushi4.jpg
Perhaps this is a more toothsome presentation after all. Have a happy and surreal birthday!! FreplySpang 14:45, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Happy B1FFday Bish'! How about a celebratory talk page archive? It's huge. --GraemeL (talk) 15:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What can I tell you, my friends are verbose. I'll try, but archiving seems to encourage them! Bishonen | talk 15:37, 20 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
A barren page just seems to call out for scribbles, doesn't it? And further, it is better to have verbose friends than none at all. (My talk page seems to suffer the same problem as yours, my friends are always on about how it needs archiving) ++Lar: t/c 18:51, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday! Raul654 15:23, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File:Scary pumpkin.jpg
This should scare away the eleven-year-old trolls! Happy birthday Bishonen! -- getcrunk ? 18:41, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no.. you must take Camilla with you, Your Majesty! -- getcrunk ? 18:51, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks crowded enough already, so I'll just give a *hug* in place of another image. Happy birthday!!! - Corbin Be excellent 19:45, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tsk tsk, Bishie, you're aiding and abetting mopery and dopery, delinquency of the spaceways, etc... Image:Gertjonnys-large.jpg is copyright (If I looked the way they do I wouldn't want my picture widely circulated, I must say, is that a chest wig I spot on one???) , thus fair use applies, thus not eligible for talk pages, but your enormous and rabid fan club won't let niceties like that stop them! ++Lar: t/c 20:30, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Enormous and rabid???? I am neither, and I resent the personal insunuation. 1) I had my shots and 2) I'm not enormous! I'm little! So I can't fit into the jeans I wore when I was 17, that's not the same as enormous!. And don't even try to pretend this wasn't aimed at me. SFAIK, I'm the only dog posting here in the salon. Hrmph. KillerChihuahua?!? 21:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Settle down your yappiness. It's the size of the club, not the sizes of the individual fans, for which enormous is the correct appelation. Most of us can't fit in the jeans we wore when we were seventeen (assuming we're at least 18), foam covered or no, but that's besides the point... And for the record any mammal can be rabid. ++Lar: t/c 23:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah but um, Bunch is a cluster of ... let me rephrase. We're not all mammals here. KillerChihuahua?!? 23:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It takes a mighty dose of rabies to make a Ge-ogre. I am a figure of great gravity, these days, as the earth seems to love me more and more and attract me ever more powerfully. Geogre 03:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another cake from me. Enough for everbody I think. Happy Birthday. Paul August 21:22, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Mmmmmmmmmmmmm, BIG CAKE! Bishonen | talk 22:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I hope it's for sharing. Happy birthday! Sam Korn (smoddy) 22:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! Dearest Sam! If the ArbCom wasn't already in my pocket, you could have the WHOLE DELICIOUS THING! Bishonen | talk 23:11, 20 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Season's greetings, from me! El_C 09:53, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]



Bishonen, would you consider counseling User:His excellency to remove the remaining personal attacks from his talk page, or removing them yourself? I don't mind him quoting me (though diffs are always helpful), but his section title is personalized, inflammatory, unsupported by the material contained in this section, and, most germanely to this discussion false. Other false claims, such as the allegation of homosexuality, also remain. I removed one section, but he reverted it. Block or no block, Wikipedia should not provide a platform for false and malicious claims.Timothy Usher 00:08, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since you're OK with the section itself — as you say, it's almost wholly made up of quotes from you — you mean will I counsel His Excellency to remove the heading "My charge that Timothy Usher is in fact a bigot", right? (Or remove it myself.) I'm afraid I won't. Sorry. You speak of that heading as if it said "Timothy Usher is in fact a bigot"; it doesn't, and I think the distinction matters. His E is discussing Tom Harrison's block reason — stating his case against it, defending himself against it, arguing that he shouldn't have been blocked for it. That's what blocked users do, at least very often they do, and I would be cautious in hamstringing anybody's self-defense; I think it's a context where latitude is necessary. I understand that you don't like the section title, I even sympathise, but I think there's a logic to it, as a description of his self-defense. I have blocked him for calling you a bigot, you know. When you speak of other false claims on His E's page, I'd like to look further before I reply to your request to have them removed. Please tell me what and where they are, especially the homosexuality allegation. I don't see them on a quick read-through, and the page is rather long. I presume you're not talking about the section you removed yourself, since that is the section with the heading "My charge..." etc, and you specify these as being other false claims. Bishonen | talk 17:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
I removed his "butt buddy" comment as well. Think Google, Bishonen. If you think it acceptable that my name pops up with a screaming headline calling me a bigot, preceded by "My Charge that" or not...well, think again. Anyhow, he's already thought the better of it and changed it.Timothy Usher 19:35, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We're not responsible for Google, though, and Bishonen's right: it's his talk page, and he labelled it according to what he wanted to do. We can't take responsibility for what some postulated person might understand from a search. Those of us jealous of our real life identities use assumed names on Wikipedia, and those who use real names are, more or less, accepting that this online world is going to be irresponsible with that name. Geogre 19:41, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's conceivable that the office might disagree.Timothy Usher 19:48, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free, by all means, to contact the Foundation. Geogre 20:42, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am sending this message to serious contributors who may be interested in articles related to U.S. politics. I believe I am receiving an unreasonable response-- and at times insulting and rude-- from the editors of Norm Coleman article, who refuse to remove a section that may offer some interesting trivia for Wikipeidia users, but is irrelevant to people interested in reading an encyclopedia article on a member of U.S. Senate. If you have time, please take a look at the article. Regards. 172 | Talk 03:19, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does the article (based on an obit) do him justice? Who is his aunt, Ture Rangström? -- ALoan (Talk) 13:05, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ALoan I can't beleive you don't know who Ture Rangström, I even had you marked as a radio 3 person, now I must re-assess you. Poor old Mrs Rangström. Giano | talk 16:36, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Radio 4, particularly TMS on longwave, I am afraid. -- ALoan (Talk) 17:01, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've just knocked off a little stub from memory, I often hum one of his catchy little numbers in the bath Giano | talk 17:02, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Gyllensten died? Wow, that's sad, but...on the other hand, Ture Rangström his aunt (snicker)? One thinks irresistibly of Charley's Aunt. A nationally well-known composer, yes. Well done Giano! Gyllensten needs a fuller article IMO. I'll look into it (though I fully expect Tups to get there first). Bishonen | talk 17:36, 21 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Yes, thanks for the stub on the aunt, Big G. (I think a machine mistranslated/misparsed "whose sister was"/"sister of"... Have you seen who wrote Charley's Aunt? ;)
There is not much more on Lars at sv:Lars Gyllensten, unfortunately. -- ALoan (Talk) 18:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm. To be absolutely frank, the phrasing of the Swedish article sounds a goodish deal like it thinks Gyllensten was the sister of Ture Rangström, lol. Bishonen | talk 18:43, 21 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
  • Oh dear, how can people be so culturally ignorant, one despairs - had there been no Rangström there would have been no Abba - then where would you be on a Saturday night ALoan? Giano | talk 18:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ignorant? Pah. Did you see my Pellegrini on the Main Page? -- ALoan (Talk) 19:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I added a link to the English version of Gyllensten's official SA bio. Now we are waiting for someone to write an article on Östen Sjöstrand. I added him to the deaths in May page). Tupsharru 13:19, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Persuade a UK broadsheet to do an obit and I'll write him up. But sv:Östen Sjöstrand exists, although it is pretty stubby: why not translate? -- ALoan (Talk) 13:24, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
His official biopage is still up: English version. (I hope the Academy will move these to some archive rather than just deleting them from the website after the chairs have new sitters.) Tupsharru 13:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thanks a lot!

Hello. I just finished my last exam today, so I am now back! Thank you very much for looking after my user page and also posting the relevant stuff on my arbitration; I am indebted - if there is anything you need or want doing, then just ask. :) I'll try my best, if it's not too much effort :P -- infinity0 15:06, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. I'll hold you to it. ;P Bishonen | talk 19:32, 21 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

The measure of genius

I've just written a nice little e-mail to my disciples explaining the critical history of "genius" before the era my article discusses. I'll share it with you later, as the question is whether or not I ought to change genius (literature) to incorporate it or if that would be repeating, essentially, stuff from the articles on poetry, Plato, and Pentecost. Geogre 17:27, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have disciples? Acolytes too? Is tonsure required? ++Lar: t/c 21:28, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not tonsure but tenure, not heaven but purgatory unending. We make a heaven of hell and a hell of working 4 hours a day. Geogre 22:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No one told me

No one told me it was your birthday. Many Wishes and regards. As a birthday present, go ahead and make yourself a copy of my toolbox/Wiki-links located on my User page. Martial Law 21:03, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Bishonen | talk 21:07, 21 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]


Belvedere

It is Belvedere (structure), the army are hiding in the trees because they were based in the park during the wars, take them out if you like, I just thought ir was nice to give them a plug! I'm like that kind, caring and thoughtful. I won't edit in case you are in there. Giano | talk 12:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just was, but right now I'm going out for at least an hour. The Lead is fantastic now! :-) Bishonen | talk 12:55, 22 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
What a gyp! I looked at that article, and I didn't see anything there about the owner of the place, Mr. Belvedere. He needed lots of security guards. Geogre 12:56, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well I'm going out now too, to kick some ass - may return in a good mood about 6, on the other hand I could return in foul mood. Lead looks great! Thanks Giano | talk 13:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Would it look out of place in my pleasure gardens? -- ALoan (Talk) 13:14, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You know, Ranelagh and the various Augustan gardens are amazingly involved subjects. One neat thing, though, is that they kind of evolved from the established habit of the mall. St. James, in particular, had become something like a pleasure garden, when it had begun just as an open space. As fashionable folks did the promenade, other people (mercantile people) showed up to entertain and furnish them. Therefore, when there were developed public spaces, they sort of settled on classical models that would match reality. Geogre 13:24, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I believe if you want Mr. Belvedere linked in there is a vandal that would be HAPPY to oblige you there. Some luser admin blocked him though, I think. Oh, and Giano kick ass??? I thought he's like, all gentle and stuff? Giano: does the chest wig slip off while you are asskicking? ++Lar: t/c 13:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm unlinking it. Since I am adjudged an AOLuser because of my ISP, I don't want people to think I'm a vandal and get the entire ISP blocked indefinitely. Geogre 13:20, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No it goes on my head! Giano | talk 13:19, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

159.218.41.27's continued vandalism

I noted that you have already warned 159.218.41.27 for repeated vandalism. They're still at it. I'd like to request that the vandal be blocked. Cheers, Kasreyn 15:05, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I've given 'em a week this time. Here's hoping there's no collateral damage, keep your fingers crossed. And thank you! Bishonen | talk 15:23, 22 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

YAE

Yet another essay wending your way via e-mail. This is my statement of political principles. I come out firmly as a Tory. Geogre 17:58, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In that case I'm sure you will be big fan of the seated Great Jonny who looks just like Mrs Thatcher when younger. Giano | talk 18:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not that kind of Tory. Besides, I think they'd already started calling themselves conservatives, which is a good thing, as it separates them from their better past. I think Thatcher was the reincarnation of Walpole. In the 1720's, if you were an anti-Walpolean, you were a Tory. Geogre 20:01, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Into the breach I go, armed with nothing to say and 4 hr to say it in. Time to speak slowly and digress often. Geogre 21:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you said it superbly. ;P. But I'm a little conflicted about your Tory essay. Bishonen | talk 06:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Nominated

Have nominated, thank you for all your help. I'm off to bed now, if you are staying up late, look after it for me. Giano | talk 23:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well it looks to be going OK...so far! Good work last night. Have to pick the tools up now for a couple of hours, see you later. Giano | talk 08:51, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
so far so good, you like English lit, what do you know about pride and prejudice? Giano | talk 12:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What was the nom? I need to go look at it and then rashly speak out against for it... As for " pride and prejudice", Giano... I'm not prejudiced against your pride! Hope that helps. PS, Italy's valiant sacrifice on behalf of USA was much appreciated but unfortunately was not enough, USA has been eliminated. Oh well. ++Lar: t/c 12:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quabble

Quibble is what I meant, but I think 'quabble' sounds so much lovelier... anyway I just attacked the ice cream truck and I'm too tired to use 'real' words. Has anyone ever raised the issue of discrimination against made-up words on Wikipedia at WikiProject:Countering Systemic Bias? RyanGerbil10 (Drop on in!) 01:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What you got yourself there is a Neoplorgismanteau. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:39, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
quabble (n.) - a minor complaint (or quibble (q.v.)) that is half way through escalation into a major argument (or squabble (q.v.)) -- ALoan (Talk) 10:11, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

=P

Sorry to bother you with another EE related issue. (I know you're probably just as tired of hearing it's name as everyone else is) But you're the only admin on Wikipedia I know. I'll try to make it short. (S)He "happened" upon an image I uploaded to the site and removed it along with another image claiming they didn't have fair use rationale[1]. It's obvious this is all being done to atagonize me, but his/her sthick is tired and I'm done feeding the troll, playing his/her little games to keep him/her entertained. So if you could just look at the fair use rationale, see if it passes muster and if not, suggest what I should add to it to reinclude it in the image. Thanks again!

P.S. Happy belated birthday, I'm the 21st of June, close enough. HeyNow10029 02:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, almost-birthday twin. I wonder if we could construct a wiki birthday chain that runs a whole year round? Raul654 is June 19, so there's a three-day core already. :-) Speaking of belatedness, I'm sorry I haven't replied sooner. I would kind of prefer e-mail on this subject, rather than give Eternal Equinox any excuse to resume his/her Eternal Entertainment of jumping into my conversations with other people on this page. Have you considered fixing up your wiki mail so people can contact you that way? Bishonen | talk 18:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
That's actually a really neat idea! As for the other thing, e-mail would be a better way to communicate. I'll send you a basic e-mail so you'll know it's me. HeyNow10029 19:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
dear me, I missed this before. Mine is Jul 7, and I will be oldoldoldoldold darnit. KillerChihuahua?!? 10:59, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why I responded as I did

You have written to me four times now, and the first three included threats to block me.
Your first post to me started with the gentle "Desist immediately if you don't want to be blocked. And, yes, I have clicked on your links in the exchange immediiately above, and see nothing which justifies this kind of harassment. It doesn't make any difference if your warnings are justified"
I did try to dialogue with you and explain the situation and my understanding of the official policy as a victim of an unwarranted attack. What I got from you was threat, threat, threat. Please forgive me if I don't view block threats as speaking as one grown-up to another, appealing to a better side, or treating me with respect. They are just a standard bullying technique that appear to me to be regularly employed by some Admins.
I am a very reasonable person and very willing to dialogue, however after my treatment from other Admins, I am increasingly disenchanted with them, their disregard for the communities' policies, and frequent attempts to make up policy violations to justify their need to take administrative action. I apologize if you don't behave like this, but if you read my RfAr you can see why I am disenchanted.
What really got me with your post is that you stated that civility and personal attacks are absolutely notorious for being subjective and debatable. Your statements make it seem like you don't consider them worthy to warn other users about. Of course you threatened to block me over harassment, which is a form of a personal attack. You made a subjective call, which the user didn't even allege. To me that is quite hypocritical.
Of course the worst part is I took time to demonstrate that I felt as if I was the victim of a personal attack. That must have some validity. Yet your comments and actions make it look like the situation is somehow my fault. If the user didn't attack me three times, with the encouragement of another Admin, I would not have had to post a tag on their talk page. Given all the attention it has received, and the comments from other Admins that I was justified, why didn't someone else warn the user. He clearly does not veiw my post as legitimate, so someone should help me. By removing my post from his talk page, you helped him, not me, and I was the one he repeatedly attacked.
I hope this is clear. PoolGuy 04:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


hey Bishonen

Hey dude,

thanks for your concern r.e. the abu saga (or as I like to call it the abu graib saga!). Basically, I just overheated a little when he systematically went through all of my edits/images to see if they were 'fair use' or not. I mean God, what a sad existence the guy must have! Jesus Christ, what a loser! I'm surprised he didn't answer my questions though, and felt the need to come crawling to 'the feds' - there was me thinking he wanted to be a cop - guess he's not cut out for it! Still I'll follow your advice and stay civil - you never know when Henry Kissinger's going to drop in do you? Twat.

Oh btw I'm being sarcastic. Megawattbulbman 15:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know you are in on this already, but you and Geogre are the literature people, I want to do a page on a comletely fictitious building so this "User:Giano/Rosings Park" is a bit of fun and conjecture probably breaking all the rules too, do you have an opinion, Chatsworth claims it is Pemberly how do you see Rosings - Geogre I know you will see this here so I'm not spamming your page, or yours Aloan (turn that dreadful classic FM down for a moment - and listen) your'e English you must have an opinion. I think we should bear in mind if Rosings is stil standing it is probably a very badly run Prep School, my stomach and buttocks are churning at the very mention of the word - I wonder why - that is a red link - one for you ALoan Giano | talk 17:28, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

jeopardy shmepardy

:o)

I should remember to look on the bright side of AN/I more dab () 21:08, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never let the Dark Side take over. ^_^ Bishonen | talk 21:17, 23 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Summer is near

Hi Bishonen, you might not remember me well, we met a while ago. Much has changed, I am an admin now, and it is almost summer, at least in Seattle. Here is a squirt gun, a late birthday present, to be used for fun in the thaw since S. A. Andrée's Arctic balloon expedition of 1897, or for zapping vandals. Hope there are warmer climes in your next FA. DVD+ R/W 01:03, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File:Super soaker.jpg
A squirt gun for zapping vandals
Thank you. I was thinking of primping up the Great Fire of London, so the gun should come in handy! Bishonen | talk 14:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Wow, an inferno, timely reading and writing. Up to you it could be wikipedia's summer blockbuster. If I had access to a better library right now, I'd offer to help write about the architectural losses, and the reconstrucion. However, I am not close enough to one, and have to make do with purchases on Amazon, with a meagre budget. I could use a monograph on Christopher Wren though. Anyway, hope all is well. DVD+ R/W 19:12, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lumione

The text has been copied. Thank you.

Cool. Bishonen | talk 14:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

User talk:Leonard23

This is last time I am telling you to leave my talk page alone with your reverts or edits. If not, I am reporting vandalism and harassment on both you and CFIF to the administrators. It is my page and if I want to leave it blank that is my permission and not yours to make. Leonard23 9:04, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

No, your talkpage is not "yours", it's a wikipedia page and subject to certain rules. This one for instance: don't remove valid vandalism warnings. Perhaps you think Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Leonard23 is yours, too? Bishonen | talk 14:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
By the way, you're being discussed on the adminstrators' noticeboard. You can put your side of things here if you like. Bishonen | talk 14:44, 25 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Speaking of which...

I think this is a WP:BITE violation. Apparently, Erwin Schwab, the user Erwinschwab (talk · contribs), is an astronomer working at the Starkenburg Observatory, and all the asteroids added by him to Wikipedia and removed as copyright violations by CambridgeBayWeather (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) were discovered by him and his colleagues at that observatory. The correct way to go about here would, I think, have been to actually {{welcome}} the user and explain that he needs to prove that he has permission to post these articles on Wikipedia or change the wording a bit. But calling it "disruption" is just extremely rude. I pointed this out to CBW (his reply). I don't want to be one of the rättshaverists complaining about rouge admins on ANI. What should one do? Tupsharru 20:07, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A very new user. :-( I'll be frank, Tups. I don't think you made it quite clear to CBW what your focus was, i.e. the newbie-biting, the lack of talking with the user and lack of a friendly voice explaining what the problem was. I thought you indirect. CBW seems to have taken your post as complaining that it shouldn't have been a speedy; only that, no more nor less. Yet that wasn't your point. If I were you, I would write to CBW more explicitly. Incidentally, this worried me a little. Bishonen | talk 21:00, 25 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
I was actually hoping that CBW would realize the problem himself once I have made it clear that this was not just some teenager copying pieces of text on space thingies from a random website, but a professional astronomer posting text from a website where he is quite possibly one of the authors. With the risk of perhaps seeming aggressive, I have been more explicit about this now. Tupsharru 03:13, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, you sure do go from one extreme to the other. I hope it all works out for the best. Bishonen | talk 03:19, 26 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Maybe I was too blunt now, but I really don't know how to be more subtle about it. I hope he can take it without feeling bitten himself. Maybe it is all for naught anyway, as the newbie is already bitten and possibly gone for good. Tupsharru 03:49, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
CBW took my criticism very well and has posted an apology to the user. Tupsharru 10:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I saw, that worked great! :-) Bishonen | talk 11:24, 26 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Copyvio

Haha yeah, it is well put plus I'm still learning on how to talk like a wikipedians and the situation feels right. Unfortunately, it was removed by Andrew Norman. Anyway, I feel for you so I'm not gonna use it again. By the way, happy belated b-day. Peace out.--Bonafide.hustla 21:50, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bishonen | talk 22:13, 25 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]


User:RevolverOcelotX

User:RevolverOcelotX has been repeatedly harassing me on my talkpage and often involves himself in POV edits and edit warring. Please check out his talpage and carry out sanctions if necessary. Thanks a lot.--Bonafide.hustla 01:08, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bonafide.hustla made 3 reverts on List of Chinese Americans and Anti-Secession Law of the People's Republic of China. Furthermore, Bonafide.hustla has BROKEN the 3RR by repeatedly removing warnings from his talk page. See here for more details. --RevolverOcelotX 01:16, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He placed the tag on my talkpage when i only made 1 edit on the article. Sorry to involve you in this. Don't worry it, I'm gonna file it to the admin noticeboard.--Bonafide.hustla 01:20, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually if you look at List of Chinese Americans and Anti-Secession Law of the People's Republic of China articles, you would see Bonafide.hustla made 3 reverts in the past 24 hours. He has also BROKEN the 3RR on his user talk page after the final warning. --RevolverOcelotX 01:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
ROX, I don't know about the articles you mention (this is my bedtime, I'm not checking anything more today), but please stop harassing BH by reverting his talkpage. The 3RR doesn't apply to him reverting his own page. If anybody's violating the 3RR on it, it's you. Please compare my warning of Poolguy (now blocked for bootless wikilawyeriing) and following dialogue with him. It's a mystery to me why people want to get dug into this kind of trench warfare over another person's talkpage; you realize, of course, that he has read your warnings, so what's your point? Do you want them kept there as a form of public humiliation? That's not what Wikipedia is about. Please use common sense. Good night all. Bishonen | talk 01:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
I'm not trying to harass BH by reverting his talk page. He is deleting valid warnings from his talk page which constitutes vandalism according to the policy. Currently BH is very close to breaking the 3RR on the articles mentioned above and some other articles, he has been POV pushing on many Taiwan-related articles, even an admin reverted his POV pushing here. The policy clearly states that the offender have to be warned about it before someone can report him for 3RR and that the offender is not allow to hide warnings by deleting them. --RevolverOcelotX 01:57, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(Butting in here) Use Common Sense!!!! You have warned him. He can be blocked for 3RR on an article whether or not the warning stays on his page. Don't worry so much about what he does with his own talk page. Fighting over that is just antagonistic. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Bunch, my sentiments exactly. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Bishonen | talk 02:04, 26 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Ok, I'm not going to fight over his talk page and re-add the warnings to his user talk page anymore, but I thought that removing warnings on one's own user talk page is considered vandalism.
The policy from Wikipedia:Vandalism states that:
"The above does not apply to the user's own Talk page, where users generally are permitted to remove and archive comments at their discretion, except in cases of warnings, which they are generally prohibited from removing, especially where the intention of the removal is to mislead other editors." --RevolverOcelotX 02:11, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Look, I went through all that with PoolGuy, who gave me the very same quotes, probably with the same triumphant bolding. I asked you in my first post above to please review my dialogue with him, and linked to the first post. It doesn't look like you have. Bishonen | talk 03:28, 26 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Hey Bishonen, How's it going? Anyway, I logged in today on wiki and noticed I was blocked for 24 hrs for the issue discussed above. I hope you can look into this situation and possibly wipe clean my record since I saw no violation myself. I also has a list of finding of facts on my own talkpage. Thanks a lot. :)--Bonafide.hustla 23:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the block notice on your page and meant to look into it, but a 3RR is kind of hopeless if you don't know what page it's about. I've asked the blocking admin about it now. I'm assuming it wasn't your talkpage. Bishonen | talk 00:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks sooo much--Bonafide.hustla 04:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was scared to have the conversation there...

But I did think your third entry in the race might be the winner, yeah. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:31, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Svenska Wikipedia

Jag måste be om ursäkt för det sjukt dåliga klimatet på svenska Wikipedia. Det finns vissa som tror att Wikin är till för reglerna och inte tvärtom och kan inte förstå, hur många gånger jag än upprepar det, att man måste använda sin känsla för vad som är bäst för Wikipedia och inte blint följa reglerna. Ett bra exempel är ju att man ska vara vänlig och förstående mot andra användare. Jag ber återigen om ursäkt. /Grön sv 09:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! You've restored my faith in (Swedish) humanity. :-) Remarkable how fast the "I-don't-make-the-rules" "rule" disappeared when I asked for a link to it, I thought. Best, Bishonen | talk 09:26, 26 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Yes, altough the Swedish Wikipedia is quite big we haven't grown away from our infantile disorders. Stubdesises going wild and that we let people who behave badly continue to far and let them spreed this bad mood over the Wiki, and since we stil are so few, this bad influences in many cases dominates. /Grön sv 09:44, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It was the same way when I registered there two years ago. I wonder if the Swedish Wikipedia will ever outgrow its problems, especially as they seem to be self-perpetuating. I concluded some time ago that Sweden is just too small and that the Swedish Wikipedia will probably never get the critical mass needed to create an encyclopedia according to this model. Tupsharru 10:12, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia and the Future of the Past"

Have you seen this article: "Can History be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past", by Roy Rosenzweig (no, still a red link), Professor of History and New Media at George Mason University. Quite interesting, especially the point he makes about the "factualist" approach to history common in Wikipedia. Tupsharru 10:12, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Your RFA

Thanks, and I agree that it is inappropriate to continue a content dispute on an RFA page, which is why I'll refrain from replying to him there again. The one thing I'm worried about is that I might cause this situation to "explode", as I'm aware of the history behind these Ashlee Simpson articles and I don't want the situation to escalate like it did before. Thanks again. Extraordinary Machine 13:22, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Afternoon tea

Dearest Bishonen (and hangers-on) - I should be most gratified if you would accompany me to afternoon tea in my boudoir.

(Which is to say, I am sure that someone hereabouts must be able to expand my most recent execrable stub. But I am also rather fond of another effort of today, Anthony Marreco, who sounds like he had much more interesting time than most of the people whose biographies I have written up from their obituaries recently.) -- ALoan (Talk) 21:22, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

/me tries to look up "Boudoir" in the OED, am utterly distracted by learning that the OED now has "featured additions". Latest FA is "yada yada". :-) Bishonen | talk 22:17, 26 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Wait a minute, pout ? It comes from the French word for "pout"? WTF? (The very thought of boudoirs makes me go aristocratically outspoken and say fuck on public pages.) Bishonen | talk 22:21, 26 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Hnnnh. Do you have a source for the Anna Russell story? Other than the Anna Russell article, itself unsourced? Bishonen | talk 00:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Perhaps they cribbed it from this highly scholarly page. I'm seeing ok sources say Anna Russell is traditionally credited with "inventing" the afternoon or low tea-time, but nothing good connecting it to any particular room, blue or not, boudoir or not. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:11, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, you academics and your sources. As you correctly surmised, pinched the anecdote from Anna Russell, Duchess of Bedford. How about this "source"? -- ALoan (Talk) 10:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • "....Duchess anna Maria is credited with the invention of this meal (afternoon tea). She had foind the time between luncheon and dinner too long, so a small repast was served mid afternoon" cite. Page 23. Woburn Abbey. Researched Lavinia Wellicome. Privatly Published. Copyright 1983: Woburn Abbey and jarold Colour Publications. Norwich 783. This same story is repeated in the book of the same name this time by Wobun Abbey and Jarrold Publishing 1995. No ISBN number. Pleae don't hesitate to ask if you wish me to research in my extensive library on the subject again. Giano | talk 11:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Furthermore the Blue Drawing Room is indeed the room in which the book states she was supposed to have guzzled her tea, but as it is a vast room one of a sequence of state appartments, it is doubtful it would have been her private apartments, as the family traditionally lived in the South wing. part of which is now demolished. The Blue Drawing Room is in the West Wing Giano | talk 11:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, damn. There goes a good anecdote. No doubt boudoir will be AFD'd again now. (On the other hand, perhaps that just displays drift in the use of the term from a quite private chamber to a less private one: I seem to recall that there are quite large "boudoir"s at Russian palaces, for example.) -- ALoan (Talk) 11:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, note that boudoir does not say that the Duchess of Bedford invented the meal - merely that the English custom of afternoon tea was developed in her boudoir (emphasis added). The link I provided above says that she is "credited with introducing afternoon tea to England in around 1830" (introducing, note) and it goes on "The habit was also happening in France, as it crops up in the work of Madame de Sévigné" (over 100 years earlier). Madame de Sévigné is strangely silent on this contribution to world culture, though. And given that we have a triumph on the main page, perhaps Behn's portrait painter, Mary Beale, deserves some attention. (It mentions the redlinked poet and divine Samuel Woodford, for example.) -- ALoan (Talk) 11:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Both books are very specific that she took tea in the Blue Drawing Room, and English Ladies of that era had "sitting rooms" they did not have Boudoirs (which would have smacked of tarts -No! - not the edible afternoon kind). I have amended the article on her accordingly as these things are very important Giano | talk 11:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fame!

Sweet, sweet fame has finally smiled her toothy smile my way! The Signpost pointed me to this interview in a local rag, in which Chuck Klosterman (never heard of him) says:

[Wikipedia is] something I'm kind of obsessed with at the moment. The thing that I want to find out is who's doing the entry for butter. There's an entry for butter! What would motivate someone to do that? ... But how bored do you have to be to say, "I want to write a Wikipedia entry on balsa wood?"

I'm half-tempted to go to his book signing tomorrow and discuss my motivations. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:54, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. You know, a sentence like "He went on to receive critical acclaim in Februrary of 2006" really ought to be sourced. Preferably killed with a stick, but if not, then sourced. Bishonen | talk 23:40, 26 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
You may rest easy. Doubtless this edit will be taken to be payback of some sort. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I notice, though, that the butter knife article is still underdeveloped. In a severe case of systemic bias, it lacks any information on Swedish-style wooden butter knives (usually bought at IKEA or produced by kids in woodwork classes at school and presented as Christmas gifts to parents and grandparents). Tupsharru 10:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
But good work removing the strong bias from the article! We have to keep those whacky anti-butter knife POV pushers at bay! Tupsharru 11:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I spent some time during butter's PR actually trying to research butter knives. I didn't have what it takes, it seems. About the only thing I learned is that the larger, dull, rounded knives we Americans usually call butter knives are properly called "table knives", and a butter knife is a smaller thing, often with a sabre-shaped blade. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:41, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"The difference between a person who is a gentleman, and one who is not is that a gentleman always uses a butter knife even when he has tea on his own" Introduction to The English Gentleman., Douglas Sutherland. Debretts Peerage Ltd. 1978. Giano | talk 14:53, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, see, in Idaho we don't even know to drink tea with a butterknife at all. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You need an Eton education to know how to do that. Tupsharru 16:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, I'm horrified all this talk of butter knives and afternoon tea has made me look about the etiquette sections here - I'm afraid to say it all very lower middle class, so I'm going to do something about it. See Table setting, can you beleive they have a picture with, you won't believe this, or ever guess it - so I'll tell you - coloured wine glasses! - and talks of something called "culture service" sounds like something unpleasant growing in a laboratory. I can hear the horrified and shocked silence, it will be coloured napkins or even paper serviettes next, time to nip it in the bud. I have mad a few minor edits at List of faux pas , time for us all to motivate ourselves and improve standards. Geogre will take Georgia, BoG Idaho, and Bishonen Scandanavia, the Balkans and Russia (I expect it's all very similar). We need someone for Australia - where has that nice Freppie gone? I can sense she is very tasteful and would be an improving presence. ALoan will take the British Empire (or whatever they are currently calling it) I of course will be supervising. Forza Italia Giano | talk 18:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
PS: all that transcedental business below - waste of money - I did a course once, you sit there going um um um for twenty minutes, they told me they could fly, I thought this would save me a fortune in air fares, but it turned out all flights were strictly local, I never once even became air born, then they claimed they could rematerialise in other rooms without opening the door like Doctor Who, or that man in Star trek, that failed too, would they give me my money back - Oh No! Giano | talk 18:34, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the butter knife article: I never heard anyone born after 1920 refer to a table knife as a case knife, and then only if they were "country", and I was born in Atlanta and my grandparents were from Tennessee. The two knives pictured are master butter knives, and the caption correctly notes they are to remain with the butter dish and not be used for spreading. However, the caption refers to them simply as "butter knives" and goes on to state that a side knife is used for the actual spreading, while in the US we would use the individual, or personal, butter knife. Are they the same thing, and it is an English/American terminology difference? I never heard of a side knife, and if someone were to use the term I would think table knife not butter knife. KillerChihuahua?!? 11:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The side knife, is the smallest knife laid on the table, sometimes laid on the side plate, or on more formal occasions placed on the extreme outer of the right hand side, as it is picked up first to put butter on the piece of roll you have pulled of with your fingers, it then remians on the small side plate on the left of the place setting, and sometimes used agian for cheese (in Europe) before the sweet course, (in England) the penultimate course before the fruit and nuts (desert).—The preceding unsigned excited rhapsody was added by Giano (talkcontribs) .
Which would make the side knife what we call the individual butter knife, which means that should be in the Butter knife article. KillerChihuahua?!? 12:50, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Bishonen and family on a good day (fishnet stockings underneath).
KillerChihuahua about to nibble gently on Great Dane (click on image to enlarge it and see gleam of madness in Puppy eyes). Bishonen 16:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
I suppose everybody noticed Giano and FreplySpang snuck away from the afternoon tea I had just invented? Well, here they are, 10 years later! Giano is wearing his pelmet, and I think that may be FloNight babysitting. I feel for the current Mr Spang and Mrs Giano, I really do! Bishonen, 19:30, 30 June 2006 (UTC). Sigh, so much for my attempts at anonymity, now my piccy'll be all over teh Intarweb. At least now I can indulge my urge to yoik indiscriminately! FreplySpang 01:09, 1 July 2006 (UTC) Your tendency to yoik indiscriminately? Too much like shooting fish in a barrel! Bishonen 03:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]
When I search for side knife all I find is knives worn at the side, for hunting or fighting. Who uses side knife to refer to the butter knife? KillerChihuahua?!? 12:54, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Awww. This is so sweet I can't see it without tearing up. I've dreamt of Giano finding a kindred spirit to discuss tableware with! Bishonen | talk 13:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
This puppy has salt spoons, Giano will be running for the hills soon. I have four different kinds of butter knives in my pattern, and the spousal unit is going to be taking a picture tonight for upload. KillerChihuahua?!? 13:25, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Whew. What a relief. <hides the fast-food wrappers underneath a sofa cushion> Go puppy go! :-) FreplySpang 13:30, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In your p-... pattern..? I think they're starting to be tears of fear. Born a century before 1920 | talk 13:39, 30 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Note to self: Bish is afraid of flatware patterns. Odd phobia to have... KillerChihuahua?!? 13:52, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

YOUR LACK OF SOURCING ON THE BUTTER KNIFE ARTICLE IS VERY TROUBLING. It will cause the RUIN of Wikipedia. --FloNight talk 14:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, we appreciate your prevention of the total collapse of WP. Will you fix table setting now? No sources there either. And inaccuracies!!!! The article stated that for a formal dinner, serving dishes are placed on the table. Please! At best, that's semi-formal, and really, that's informal or family style (which was called, oddly enough, "culture" style.) KillerChihuahua?!? 14:16, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What is troubling me is if people are placing (shudder) "serving dishes" (which in itself is a very "middle class" word) on the table, what on earth are their footmen doing while all this is going on. I'm sorry I don't see anything cultured about behaving in such a fashion - these are the sort of people who leave the ketchup sauce in the bottle instead of placing it daintily in a refined plastic tomatoe. Giano | talk 14:57, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OMG, I laughed so hard I thought I'd hurt myself... refined plastic tomatoe....— Preceding unsigned comment added by KillerChihuahua (talkcontribs)
</me hides the family wooden spoon under FreplySpang's cushions and sinks gratefully on to the floor of the kåta after a hard day's nomadising> What are "cushions"? Bishonen | talk 16:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
  • Good thing we know you are joking - I can see you now presiding over the samovar as the guests in the salon are tinkling on the bone china teacups, ALoan drifting dreamily towards the white grand piano to entertain you, Geogre propping up the marble chimney piece gun in one hand Royal Worcester in the other, Puppy nibbling delicately on a cucumber sandwich, head tilted gently to one side, as she listens to ALoan's soft crooning as the crystal chandelier reflects a soft warm glow over the assembled intellects with their sparkling conversation, reposing on the gilded XVIIIth siecle furniture their elegant reflections mirrored in the pier glasses between the tall swagged and pelmeted windows........ Giano | talk 16:18, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the divan was Empire. Silly me. KillerChihuahua?!? 16:26, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maharishi Mahesh Yogi article

Good evening Pretty Girl,

Is there any chance wikipedia can lock the MMY article as it now looks? The controversy seems to be gone - but I fear the moment the Christian Fundamentalists turn their attention to it and once again tears it apart..

Thank you

Peterklutz 00:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No chance, sorry. The protection policy is very conservative: protection is to be used as little as possible, for as short periods as possible, and never preemptively, only to stop ongoing and acute vandalism or edit warring. And not on a particular, selected version, either. I'll add the article to my watchlist, and please get in touch again if you see an acute problem. P.S. You really shouldn't ask people what the purpose of their existence is, you know. Please be nice. Bishonen | talk 00:40, 27 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

If I see an aucte problem..? It's a war going on :-)

Why won't Quapeds admit that MMY was a disciple of Brahmananda Saraswati (BS)? Because BS is above critiscism and don't want to admit that MMY had this relationsship with him. It's the same with Maharishi's name, some of the die-hards won't even call Maharishi for Maharishi, since the word i sanskrit means great seer - which they don't like to call Maharsihi. The rationale is the same when these people dig up forty-fifty year old allegations of inappropriate conduct (like eating chicken) and plaster them all over the articles - they just want to destroy the guy and his work.

I understand this can be a bit confusing for outsiders, it sure is to me.

Peterklutz 01:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I restored the disciple bit, I don't see why not, either. And removed some "his holiness" embroidery that had, oddly, been left in there. But my start for a copyedit and NPOV version got reverted back to your pro-TM (and, may I mention, hair-raisingly POV) version by an IP. You, was it? You know, I think I'll just semiprotect the article, so people have to at least have an identity to edit it. Bishonen | talk 01:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
moving this convo to Talk:Maharishi Mahesh Yogi -- quadpus 20:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I did wonder why you started to speak to Peter on my page (assuming you weren't telling me my edits were "overwhelmingly evangelical in nature"--I found it hard to be sure). I will now delete the part that's not addressed to me. Bishonen | talk 20:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

RE: Arbitration

Yowza! You scared me with that header, I thought someone had filed a RFArb against me!! Heh. In any case, that arbitration looks quite complex and I really didn't know EE enough to lend any kind of a hand. I just liked her work on that particular single of Carey's. Staxringold talkcontribs 03:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll admit it: that was the effect I was going for. The wikilife is only as interesting as we make it! Bishonen | talk 03:31, 27 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Caramba...

Now I've got fishes running amok all over my user page. A thousand dwarves upon you! Smugface the Tijuanan Dwarf 05:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Askolnick et al

What happens if Andrew doesn't (constructivelly) engage in the dispute resolution initiated by myself?

Will the article remain frozen? For how long?

Is he and his kind going to beat the system/your attempt to find resolution by now staying away - simply to return when the article's protection level is lowered again (at which time their editorial crippling and threats to fellow editors will come back in full swing)?

Peterklutz 18:31, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I plan on keeping that sucker fully protected until a consensus version is agreed on the talkpage. Perhaps I should put up a note saying so. If any regular editor should stay away during that process, consensus simply won't include them. But it seems very early to start worrying about people staying away, I have to say. Bishonen | talk 23:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Peterklutz, the last thing you need to worry about is my going away. The very last thing. TMers have been hopping on their butts and praying that I go away now for 15 years. You need to understand that I'm a dedicated TM cult watcher -- for life. That's what happens when any group brings a SLAPP suit against me to stop me from investigating and exposing their misconduct. They acquire a devoted follower for life.

Good journalists need to be like elephants: they should have a thick skin and a long memory. (God knows, we already work for peanuts.) Askolnick 13:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So, Andrew, do you consider yourself unbiased on these issues? Sparaig 01:37, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have answered on User_talk:Bonafide.hustla#Your_block abakharev 01:31, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Alex. It seems to me very dubious to block him for reverting his talkpage. If I'd known it was about that page, I would have encouraged you to post the block on ANI for review. Bishonen | talk 01:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Blocked anon

Sure, one week is fine - I'm just being very careful because I'm a newbie admin. ;) Cheers, Tangotango 12:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll remove both blocks and reinstate mine, then. (That's the method, just in case you've never done this; if the blocks are left as they are, shortest block rules; and if only the shortest is removed, all other blocks mysteriously disappear with it anyway.) Best, Bishonen | talk 12:14, 28 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

His Excellency

Sigh, fair enough. The guy was treading the line for a couple reasons, I suppose I could have picked a better one to warn him about than personal attacks. --InShaneee 15:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

His excellency

I posted it on AN/I. The posts I blocked him for are for the last few days. I didn't even look at the posts that Tim made on PAIN. I work overnight and I saw all of this just before I went to bed. So I hadn't had a chance to really go through the guy's contribs of the last few days until the last few hours. Btw, the idea that only extreme personal attacks are blockable isn't always true. Persistant personal attacks, no matter how extreme they are, are also generally blockable. --Woohookitty(meow) 04:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

request that the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi article is made fully protected in its current status (last edit by quadepus)

The rationale is that after several weeks of work, it now appears acceptable to all editors - regardless of what might be said on various talk pages.

Kind regards,

Peterklutz 10:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See, that's not acceptable as a protection reason, I'm sorry I didn't make it clear last time you asked for article protection. It's 180° the wrong way around. Articles get protected for being battlegrounds, not for being stable. Bishonen | talk 18:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I would request complete unprotection, on the same rationale.--quadpus 18:37, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Complete? The article is semi-protected right now. This means all accounts more than 96 hours old can edit it, but younger accounts and IPs can't. I semiprotected in order to somewhat calm the edit war by at least preventing people from evading the WP:3RR by IP-hopping. Preventing IPs from editing is in general a Bad Thing, and semiprotection isn't a state I like the article to be in, but with highly contested articles it can be helpful. You want me to unprotect completely? Or did you just mean you don't want it fully protected, i. e. locked, the way Transcendental Meditation is? I don't have any plans for that at present, and I hope it won't become necessary. Bishonen | talk 19:54, 29 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
It seems like Peterklutz was only using IPs because had a habit of not logging in before editing, it doesn't quite seem like anyone was using IPs to evade 3RR on that article. So, unprotect or not, whatever it takes to make things run smoothly around here is fine by me.--quadpus 00:35, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well! - It can't be right - I'm just not having it.

What is the name of that "thing" where you can check out people's edits? - I can't find it, I want to check some one out, I hate these prim, school mistressy edit summaries [2], her name is ringing a bell, I can't think why - do we know her? - I must be thinking of Miss Ellie from Dallas; or didn't that peanut man, who became president have a mother called Miss some-on-or-other. Odd really you would have thought a president's mother would have been a Mrs - very Avant-garde! I know you will know the answer dearest Bishonen Giano | talk 17:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apple sauce, dear Giano. (You can't mean...? There seems to be a lot of interest in... help... categories!) Unless you mean know her more recently? Sure, from some egregious nominations at WP:FARC, if you're that absent-minded. So you want to get the entire breakdown of a person's edits? I think that "thing" is broken and you have to use magic math and wave a dead chicken—let me check.
Yep. :-( You have to either use this tool, which is simple but not up to date, or this tool, which involves sacrificing a goat, or, best, ask Bunchofgrapes. He has the magic math and the goats. Love, Bishonen | talk 18:32, 29 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
No no no, there used to be a marvelous thing where you typed in someone's name and out came everything including their last bank statement, I was always typing myself in to see how amazing I was, typical the moment you realy want something it's not about - just like BoG. Giano | talk 20:14, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'd just agree with Bish's links, I'm afraid. Interiot's tool can give nice breakdowns by namespace, but, is, alas, next-to useless for anything in the last several months, due to them moving the databases and replication being screwed up. I've never even tried to use the javascript-based tools like Flcelloguy's -- slow and cranky and evil. I haven't seen this bank-statement tool I'm afraid. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:23, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh I can't be doing with all those graphs and things, I always see rude and sugestive things in those shapes - (a bit like that rude bandage foto of yours BoG) - and then get distracted. Oh well if she cant be cured she must be endured I suppose - some men (I'm told) find that sort of bossy dominatrix sort of thing exciting - I don't. Probably wears black fishnet tights and a mortarboard.....on the other hand perhaps.....No! forget it. Thank goodness for Bishonen. Giano | talk 20:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Hey, hey!

Thanks :). Also, I think I do know how history merges are done (I've tagged some articles whose histories needed merging in the past), but I'll probably have to do some "tests" in my userspace first.

On an unrelated note, I hope you don't mind that I didn't file a statement at E.E.'s RFAr. It's not because I think the RFAr is inappropriate (quite the opposite, in fact), it's just that I'm a little burned from this entire fiasco and would rather see the back of it. I might comment on the associated talk pages and maybe contribute some evidence, but I won't be participating in it a great deal. Again, I hope you don't mind, and I apologise. Extraordinary Machine 23:56, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, no, not at all! That's entirely optional. Utterly. Bishonen | talk 00:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Evidence

Okay, Bishonen, here is you defending his supposed right to defame me, which even he thought the better of. Is there anything else I can clarify for you?Timothy Usher 00:24, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please. Try finding an edit that you wouldn't need a time machine to be referring to on June 20. Bishonen | talk 01:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Let's go through this step by step. I wrote on George's page, "while the abusive user Bishonen defends insists upon maintaining an attack section on his user talk page":
  • "the abusive user Bishonen defends" can, according to Standard English usage ("defends" is the predicate of the relative clause, else "defends insists" would be ungrammatical), only be His excellency. Prior to the time of this post, you'd been defending His excellency on ANI against his first indef block. Do you deny that?
  • And at the time of this post, His excellency maintained an attack section on his user talk page. Do you deny that?Timothy Usher 01:27, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, quite, I do see that the sentence can be read that way. But weren't you trying to post some basis (="Evidence") for your claim that I was "defending" HE's "supposed right to defame" you? You say the claim you made on June 20th was based on my edit of June 21st...? If it's possible for you to ever simply reply to something, as opposed to changing the subject and doing a two-step, try doing it now. Bishonen | talk 01:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
His indef block, against which you defended him, was for defaming me on another talk page, was it not? And you shortened this blocked on 17:10, 19 June 2006, correct? The diff to which your time machine comment was aimed illustrates you explicitly defending his right to engage in this behavior - a position which was already implicit in your posts to ANI, and in your shortening of his block with a friendly message without counsel to refrain from further attacks; indeed, he continued them - as you're the one who'd shortened his block, I asked you to do something about it, which you refused to do, as shown. You'd referred ANI readers back to the FairNBalanced report, insisting that H.E.'s behavior be viewed in this context (what context, I wonder?) and delayed this report from archiving. The most straightforward construal is that you believed HE's vicious and calculated attacks on Christians, Jews, Anglos and other editors to be somehow understandable in light of FNB's image upload, and the conversation that followed. And now, lo, you've returned to ANI on the occasion of his second indef block to lend him another helping hand against what was otherwise a consensus.Timothy Usher 02:38, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I guess it wasn't possible. But I do understand that the conjunction "abusive user Bishonen" was a grammatical accident, thank you for clearing up that part. Incidentally, did you see that without me it would have been a consensus for exactly one minute longer, until Geogre weighed in? If you choose to discount Aminz' protest, that is. But that's not a point I want to argue, as I think it no shame to be reckoned she who objected to an indefinite block without process. Your far-fetched "construals" are your own affair. Bishonen | talk 06:18, 30 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Might you explain, then, why you saw it fit to link the H.E. report to the FairNBalanced report - in which, for that matter, did you not argue for precisely such an indefinite block (this for a user who'd never been blocked or even so much as warned)?Timothy Usher 06:28, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe for a minute that FNB was a genuinely new user. I'm sorry, I know I addressed you first, but you'll have to take this as notice that any further arguing on this page really will be your own affair. Bishonen | talk 06:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]
You've changed the subject yet again, but that's alright. He wasn't a new user, actually, he'd had a reasonable number of contributions under FNB, but, I'm curious: who are you saying was he before? H.E. also alleged this, but I've honestly no idea who he or you had in mind. If you're willing to be specific, I can look it over, and possibly agree with you. Still, it'd be nice were you to answer my questions.Timothy Usher 07:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where there's smoke...

can anyone play? KillerChihuahua?!? 22:22, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course. Bishonen | talk 23:50, 30 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

unerring inappropriateness

Glad to be of service. Give my regards to all the cool dudes in the prefects' common room, won't you, Bishmeister. ElectricRay 00:08, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FNB has a point

DarwinFish is a spoof on the ixthys symbol of Christianity, is it not? Why do you mock people's religious convictions from your user space?Timothy Usher 06:07, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on finding another Bishonen complaint. Please add it to today's "look what Bishonen did" file and don't bother me again. Don't leave me any more messages. Bishonen | talk 09:01, 1 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]
User:Timothy Usher, take it do dispute resolution. Any further inflamatory comments on this page will be subject to sanctions. Thanks. El_C 20:59, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think he has ceased. The complaint above makes no sense, though. It's a parody of the Darwinfish, it says. Therefore, it is making fun of making fun of religious beliefs, and arguably he would be asking why she was making fun of the "religious" belief in evolution, which doesn't make a lot of sense, and this ignores the fact that it has nothing whatever to do with either Darwin, fish, or the ichthus and is, instead, about "bishzilla." He might as well be asking why she's making fun of Toho studio executives. Geogre 21:19, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eternal Equinox. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eternal Equinox/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eternal Equinox/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 11:20, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All our problems are solved

Got an article that you can't quite get to FA? Just send it over to the new WikiProject Featured articles, where in mere hours they can bring it up to spec, like they did for Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Durian! (/Bunchofgrapes tears out all his hair.) Maybe you should have them work on Shakespeare's reputation. I'm sure they could find some good stuff in the first page of a google search. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:26, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had no idea you used to have hair! Bishonen | talk 18:29, 1 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]
I miss it already. A grape without hair is like a Darwinbish without hundreds of razor-sharp, flesh-rending teeth. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:52, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps someone around here can loan you a wig of sorts? FreplySpang 22:16, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If it's been where I think it's been, I'm not touching it! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 00:21, 2 July 2006(UTC)
As a matter of fact BoG it is freshly shampood curled and blow dried and casually tousled every morning. Some of the worlds'd most beautiful women have run their hands through it - also my chest wig has the same treatment. So please do not be so rude! Giano | talk 14:17, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
One for each Bishmood. KillerChihuahua?!? 11:54, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Holy smoke

Need to have a skeleton for the page, sort of made a start on one, have a look and alter it about to suit, I think we need to keep social, politice and architecture together but quite separate, so they sort of interelate and refer to each other, but don't become a blurred mess, not quite sure how ee can acheive this, sort of three subs under each big header - I shall think on....Giano | talk 21:10, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes Dear I am getting your emails - all of them, fret not - but for some reason I can't send emails, the goat in the treadmill at the power station has probably been shagging again. I've ben mulling over you idea about covering just the aftermath of the fire, its effects and impact etc., that would certainly be more FA-able, and is a subject yet to be covered anywhere really. We would have to go though quite deeply into restoration politics, social history and architecture before the fire to give an explanation to what came after. I've an old dissertation that was published years ago roughly on the subject - does that count as original re-search though - I think though we could be stumped for refs in the direction you suggest? If we are doing this - lets go deep. I'm back on Tuesday think on it. Giano | talk 21:40, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you should keep those goats in order, how many times do I have to tell you. Referring to your own published work is fine, theoretically—it's not OR—I always try to avoid it, though, for privacy reasons. The most interesting side to me is the plight of the common people, the unrecorded lives—but if they're really unrecorded they're right out, obviously. I'll see what I can dig up. There's a colleague at the anthropology department here who may be helpful. Anyway, bank up your fires and mull it over some more, and meanwhile I'm reading! Bishonen | talk 22:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]
I couldn't agree more, I love common people too, all that joyful singing and dancing, (one hardly likes to ask why they don't concentrate their efforts on getting a job) - anyway rest assure I have the goats harnessed for treadmill work, the common people too, and once I'm back in the civilized world you will see the results of my efforts. In the meantime - I shall be watching you all, to make sure the butter knife remains in its correct place, and Killer and Flo are not eating their fish off the back of the sugar tongs. Giano | talk 20:09, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Erich Heller

Dear Bishonen, a highschool student, User:Harro5, has just deleted my Erich Heller article from user subpage. Please restore it. --Prof02 09:47, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can see from the deletion log, it seems that Harro5 just deleted the redirect in article space left (automatically) after the article was moved to userspace. That doesn't affect the page in userspace and you will still be able to move the article back to article space when you feel that it is ready for that. Tupsharru 10:28, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That redirect from the article space still exists at Erich Heller. As you and I both know, CSD R2 leave no doubt about what needs to be done. I wonder why the article needs to be in someone's userspace this long; from the talk page, it would seem the move was made on May 19! If I didn't know someone as reliable on Wikipedia as yourself was involved, I'd say this screamed of ownership. Please help me come to a correct solution here. Thanks. Harro5 00:38, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'll be... the helpless newbie recreated the redirect! Sorry Harro, I had to laugh. I've deleted and protected it, just temporarily. There are some special circumstances. I'll e-mail you tomorrow, as it's 3 in the morning here, you antipodean. This is Tupsharru's baby, really. (He's very reliable too.) Bishonen | talk 01:07, 3 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Why?

Bish, I come to you in abject supplication. When you are mentioned on the mailing list, you are described as having ArbCom in the palm of your scaly, clawed hand. When I am mentioned, I am presented as being full of excrement. How can I climb the ladder of power from the cesspool to the pinnacle? I await your wisdom and guidance. KillerChihuahua?!? 21:31, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I think you're probably too nice, that's all. BoG had a useful tip a while back: Object Strongly on people's RfAs, and you shall receive awards and birthday presents. (Hello Corbin!) Start gently. Your assignment for next time is to use four-letter words in public at least once a day and to forget you ever knew any warning template except {{blatantvandal}}. Bishonen | talk 22:07, 2 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Be... meaner? But, I'm already a vicious attack puppy! Remember? A Killer Robotic Dog run Amok! And...{{blatantvandal}}? but what about WP:BITE? I don't think I can do that. KillerChihuahua?!? 22:22, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh but I do use four letter words! Bark, bark! KillerChihuahua?!? 22:23, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What about WP:BITE, indeed? [Laughs heartily.] Go count the teeth of the darwinbish, you viciouos attack plush toy! Bishonen | talk 22:29, 2 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]
I just know I'm missing something here. I have a good idea of who linked me here, but I'm not really seeing the reason for it. Anyway, Bishi is right. Be opinionated and skeptical on Requests for Adminship and you will receive praise for your insight and participation. Fight vandals relentlessly and stop assuming good faith from IP editors, for it will portray you as a brave defender of the Wikipedia, a valiant warrior whose selfless vandal-bashing promotes the encyclopedia's integrity. Whenever people group together to consider a community-issued ban, always support it and cite some random edit which that person made, and everybody will applaud your participation in the bureaucratic process. (Note my sarcasm. In all honesty, if you follow the above, you WILL become popular, even if you lose a bit of your soul in the process. Instead, I advocate editing simply, staying away from controversial articles, assuming good faith, and attempting to be excellent in all endeavors.) The choice is yours. (Fun fact: The "New Messages" bar came up when I visited Truthiness. Crazy, huh?) - Corbin Be excellent 14:34, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This was more in the nature of a joke than an actual request for advice, that's all. I have a good idea of who linked you here too, and oddly enough, I'm going to take their advice to you rather than Bish's jesting advice - I will be true to myself, which involves editing controversial subjects, stating my own opinion on Rfas and community bans, assuming good faith where I feel there is any hope at all, and blocking according to policy not agenda. KillerChihuahua?!? 14:53, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

User:203.234.156.4 has requested unblock on his talk page. Informing you, as the blocking admin. His block has expired, and he is leaving odd posts on my talk page. KillerChihuahua?!? 10:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mhmh... eh? I blocked him (him? you really think so?) for 31 hours. That was eight hours ago or so, and nobody has unblocked, see log, so I don't reckon it has expired. The odd posts on you were made before the block, they were part of the reason for it. Oh, well, I think I'll unblock now. I suppose there is a 1 % of doubt at to whose sock this is. Not in my mind, but, well. Bishonen | talk 12:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]
As English does not have a non-gender-specific third person singular, I chose at random. Pre-coffee I apparantly cannot read time stamps, apologies for any confusion. KillerChihuahua?!? 12:18, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was just hinting, woofster. I think it's a she, a badass distant relative of yours. Bishonen | talk 12:21, 3 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]
I am not related to any massive, compact body of plasma in outer space of which I am aware. KillerChihuahua?!? 12:43, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence 2

Your EE evidence looks very well-put-together... nice job. One question though -- did Bcrowell really leave because of EE, like you say? User:Bcrowell2 doesn't seem to say that... —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:32, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto on the "good job, sista". this diff is hilariously outrageous; "You've really done it Bishonen. You are a huge fucking idiot and your blockings of all of the accounts without ANY EVIDENCE, REFERENCES, SOURCES, CITATIONS OR WHATEVER have led me to file a lawsuit against Wikipedia and even possibly yourself. I hope you get permanently blocked from this website because your behaviour, like your pathetic inexcusable behaviour is aboslute bullshit! This legal lawsuit will be commencing very soon, and I hope you pay with your account, you immense asshole. TwoDown 00:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)". I have to remember "immense asshole" for future use!! Oh, and your first external link is the same as the "RFC on me" link in the November-January section. — getcrunk what?! 20:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He he. You guys did good, too. I was trying for the Queen Elizabeth tone with just a dash of Mary Poppins. How's my block gonna get Featured if I don't CITE MY SOURCES, indeed? Bcrowell speaks a bit vaguely, I can't be sure, but I thought it was the direct reason, the last drop—obviously not the whole reason, he'd met, uh, ... troubled users before. But EE made him mess up his password and tear out all his hair. Anyway, with the link right there, everybody can interpret the thing for themselves, so it's not a big deal. You're supposed to click on User:Bcrowell too, and his post on Raul's page, they're somewhere in there as well. I tried to get in touch with Bcrowell back in March, but it seems he never came back. :-( Hey, are you saying there are only TWO links to my RFC? [/me runs to put in six more.] Don't want anybody missing that! Bishonen | talk 21:13, 3 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Copy-edit and reference your block or the legal lawsuit will be commencing very soon because your behaviour, like your pathetic inexcusable behaviour is aboslute bullshit. — getcrunk what?! 01:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is my very last word on the subject and stop talking about me or I'll get even with you and stop making jokes about me I know how you make jokes about me and this is my last word on the subject ever. I'll be back tomorrow from a new address in Outer Pottsylvania] to see goodbye! Really the last word ever

Andrew Skonick just started an edit war at Maharishi Mahesh Yogi

This has to stop.

Peterklutz 23:39, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked. Bishonen | talk 00:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Yet Andrew Skolnick isn't? Please. Sparaig 01:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peterklutz

Actually, a notice was put up on AN/I about Peter and his misbehavior. I'll take a look at the situation and see whether a longer block is warranted. At the very least, his talk page should be protected if he continues to use the page to attack you. --Woohookitty(meow) 13:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw, thanks. Since it's a blocked user's only outlet, and he may possibly decide to try to communicate constructively on it, I'm reluctant to protect a blocked user's talkpage except in the case of mere trolls. Bishonen | talk 14:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Yep. Well I gave him a warning that if he continues to attack, the block will be extended. You had mentioned that he continued editing after the block. With what IP? I can't find it in Transcendental Meditation and MMY. --Woohookitty(meow) 14:13, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
On the talkpage.[3]. I've blocked the IP for 24 hours. Bishonen | talk 14:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Ah ha! Yeah he signed it so I assumed it was with his username. My bad. --Woohookitty(meow) 14:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I extended his block to 96 hours for blanking his talk page. I know that you do alot of what I do, i.e. help out in disputes and all of that stuff. In all of that time, I've had exactly one user take his/her block without alot of guff. I can see requesting an unblock, but beyond that, I don't know why they do what they do once they get blocked. It does them no good. --Woohookitty(meow) 00:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Considering your block was a day after the 72-hour block, you just blocked someone two days for blanking their talk page. I don't understand that. What is so inflammatory about blanking one's own talk page? Who does it hurt? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:03, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Blanking one's talk page is a method that many use to erase warnings and such. It is a common tactic of people such as Peter as well as vandals. --Woohookitty(meow) 10:30, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit conflict.) Being blocked is a nasty experience and a bit of a shock, no doubt. It's human to lash out when blocked—at least, apparently it is, since nearly everyone does it. I generally look the other way. Bishonen | talk 01:07, 5 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]
I think you are being too tolerant, but I'll let the block stand. --Woohookitty(meow) 10:28, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ah-Hah! Caught in the act! I now have clear evidence that you are too tolerant. Vicious attack plush toy?!?14:40, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed versions

A Barnstar!
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar

For sorting out my History when others didn't seem to want to! BlueValour 20:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, cute star! Thank you! Bishonen | talk 20:27, 4 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]

An uneasy feeling!

The thought has just occurred to me, I can't think why if he [4] is the sock of anyone who edits here...............I don't think it is very funny!!! Giano | talk 20:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I dunno. He acts like a newbie all right—see how he posted at the top of your page? (Look in the history.) Anybody could pretend, I suppose... but that seems a bit elaborate, also pointless. Anyway, what's it any skin off your nose? Bishonen | talk 21:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]
  1. ^ Jones