User talk:Eric Corbett

"It was reading the ultimate paragraph of this post: [1] that finally convinced me it was time to go, yes, Hans is quite right, I am stuck in a vicious circle and there was no likelihood of things improving."

— Extract from Giano's retirement statement

The Man in the Moone - Poole edition

Hi - I hope you don't mind me starting a new section, but your worthy discussions with Drmies on this topic have been getting a bit too fragmented under other heads for me to listen in to!

I've just bought a copy of the Poole (Broadview) edition of TMitM - apparently the last one in stock at Amazon-uk. Very useful - includes the Nuncius Inanimatus (in English), and extracts from other relevant texts (eg Mark Ridley's A Short Treatise of Magneticall Bodies and Motions (1613) in case you decide on a 'scientific' section). It's probably now the best modern edition to refer to, and the introduction is very full and may supersede most of the other discussions. I gather it has been reviewed in Science Fiction Studies (38.2, July 2011) but the review doesn't seem to be accessible online.

A couple of things I spotted suggest it could have done with a bit of copyediting - placing St Helena among 'the Pacific islands off the west coast of Africa'(!) and some confusion over the date of the introduction of the Gregorian calendar - 1582 and 1572 on the same page. (I hadn't realised that if you calculate on the basis of the dates, astronomical data and journey times Gonsales gives, he was using the Julian calendar (as in use in England) at the start of his voyage, switching to the Gregorian calendar (as in Catholic countries) halfway.)

There's more on the Chinese episode than I'd seen before, and a section decoding the Lunar language. Nothing new on the Green Children - Poole seems as unaware of Clark's articles as apparently Clark was of Poole's earlier papers! So I still think Clark's suggestion of the Martin Marprelate connection is worth keeping in (like my old favourite Geoffrey of Monmouth, I'm pretty sure Godwin would enjoy merging two sources into one imaginative whole). And more of his contemporaries would have been aware of the Marprelate controversy than ever read William of Newburgh.

Poole believes Godwin used the 1587 printed edition of William of Newburgh - largely, it seems, because Godwin cites W of N in his Catalogue of the Bishops of England in 1601 when only the 1587 edition was available. But surely Godwin would have turned to the new Paris printing of 1610 once it became available? (Poole suggests the reference to the Green Children 'that fell from Heaven' in Robert Burton's Anatomy of melancholy (1621) inspired Godwin to read W of N again, so it's not as if he was relying on something he'd read back in 1601.) And it's not just Clark's view that Godwin had access to the 1610 edition - Clark cites Lawton (Rev Eng Stud 7 (1931)) - quote 'Godwin's citation of William's work as "de reb. Angl." indicates that he made use of the 1610 Paris printing of William's history, edited by Jean Picard, for, as Lawton points out (39 fn. 1), De rebus Anglicis ("Concerning English Affairs") is the title carried by Picard's edition...' (Clark 2006, 213). And since the 1610 edition included Ralph of Coggeshall's account alongside, that means that Godwin could have used elements from Ralph's slightly different version. Poole rather ignores Ralph - his footnote on Ralph is inaccurate (but that's down to the source he quotes - highly respected but in this case wrong!) (Sounds like a Wikipedia verifiable source!)

Keep up the good work - sorry to butt in. - John O'London (talk) 20:16, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Please feel free to butt in as much as you like, it's good to hear another view. Drmies has succeeded in blagging a free copy of Poole's book I think, so I'm sure he'll have a view as well. I'm leaning somewhat against the idea of a Science section, but what do you think? Malleus Fatuorum 20:34, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Just finished sending the previous message yesterday evening, switched on the television to find it was in the middle of a programme about Isaac Newton - just a reminder (if any were needed) that Godwin's science is pre-Newtonian (so there's no such thing as "gravity"). Gonsales himself attributes his faster journey back to earth either to his gansas' eagerness to get home or to the 'attraction' of the earth being greater than that of the moon (presumably because of its size?). - John O'London (talk) 08:41, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

I watched that programme myself last night, very enjoyable. I might extend the discussion on how Gonsales explained that his return trip was quicker than his outward journey. Malleus Fatuorum 12:52, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

John, thank you for that long and useful note, and Malleus, thanks for 14 helpful edits. I still haven't received my Poole but I'm about to email the rep. Yes, gravity: I think it's mentioned in the Pursuit Curve article, and made me raise an eyebrow. Drmies (talk) 01:44, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

The first chapter of Poole is available on Google books, and I've taken what's seems relevant from that. The pursuit curve material is interesting, I think, because it shows that Godwin was right but for the wrong reasons about the return journey being shorter that the outward journey. Gravity has nothing to do with the pursuit curve, but I've expanded the note slightly to reiterate that Gonsales explains the discrepancy by the Earth having a stronger magnetic attraction. I think we've done pretty much all we can with the book, what do you think? Malleus Fatuorum 11:18, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Here it is, the strange note from Simoson: "For the first few moonward miles, the birds strain at transporting Domingo. But thereafter, earth's pull of gravity vanishes." Anyway. Yes, I think we're good. Whatever else appears will not stand in the way of GAR, or significantly change the contents of the article. (I've emailed the Broadview rep again.) Go for it Malleus. Drmies (talk) 14:31, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Just tidied up a minor glitch in the references, that seemed to have Neville Davies in 1967 commenting on Poole's edition of 2009. John O'London (talk) 10:50, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

That's great, thanks very much. Malleus Fatuorum 10:55, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

• Malleus--forgive me for my forgetfulness, but have I sent you the Poole edition yet? I don't think I have. I'm looking at it right now and it's a good read so far. (I do like Broadview; I'm using their Beowulf version, translated by Roy Liuzza, this fall.) Drmies (talk) 04:54, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

  You have, yes, although I haven't read it yet. When we've got what we can from Poole I'm thinking we might as well go straight to FAC given the queue at GAN. Malleus Fatuorum 10:53, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

• I'd be happy to hand our essay in for marking at FAC now. What do you think? Malleus Fatuorum 21:17, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

your recent revert at "Moors murders"

Hello Malleus Fatuorum. With regards to this, what a very clever and kind fellow you are. If you object to the commas (I don't feel like arguing grammar with you, maybe someone else will, or you'll correct yourself), please at least have to decency and diligence to make things consistent (which will take considerably more time than jackleg reverts and glib comments), as there are still many instances of the kinds of commas I added from before my edit. Thanks, my apologies for the unworthy character that I am daring to disturb Your Highness and best regards – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 16:16, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Malleus wasn't incivil you. (But it's fun and self-satisfying, isn't it, to initiate hostilities and personal attacks, and then blame the other guy.) Tacky. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 17:56, 16 April 2013 (UTC) p.s. I suggest you take your feelings, pack 'em up into a neat little package, then take a long hike.

It's editors like you ὁ οἶστρος who make this place such a miserable environment. You know nothing and you're not prepared to learn anything, because you think you already know everything. Malleus Fatuorum 18:07, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

"ὑποκριτά, ἔκβαλε πρῶτον ἐκ τοῦ ὀφθαλμοῦ σοῦ τὴν δοκόν, καὶ τότε διαβλέψεις ἐκβαλεῖν τὸ κάρφος ἐκ τοῦ ὀφθαλμοῦ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ σου." (nah, that obviously ain't by me – which you are naturally aware of, as you're the erudite one here, while I'm just ole know-nuthin')

And way to transparently not address the issue at hand. All the best to you two lovers (if you really are two people) – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 18:33, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, to address the issue at hand, Malleus is correct about the commas. Please see MOS:COMMA. DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 19:03, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

• I looked – and yet I was unable to see (i.e., I can't spot anything that would advocate against the commas I added; did you check the changes?)

• Irrespective of that, whether commas were to be used or not wasn't the issue, consistency was – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 19:35, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

• Generally speaking, British articles will not use a comma after a date expression "In 1990 this happened", while American articles will often use one "In 1990, that happened". It's common for articles to be inconsistent since different editors will vary in whether they add them and it's easy for people to overlook them. But yes, consistency is the goal, you just have to be careful which way you standardize them (based on the subject of the article). Mark Arsten (talk) 20:05, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) In the article in question, if I remember correctly, there were more instances of with-comma before my edit, so you're saying that, when harmonizing, "national ties" (not so easy determinable in many cases, anyway) of a subject are still [and always] taking precedence, even if style was very lopsided (not the case here, though, if memory serves) towards "the other side"? Anyway, I get the feeling we're giving this way more thought than the guy smugly reverting me was (I doubt he was giving it any thought). Nice "talking" to you, take care – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 20:53, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

I suggest that you shut the fuck up before you make even more of a fool of yourself than you already have. You don't remember correctly, you have no idea what you're talking about and you're a fucking bore. Malleus Fatuorum 20:57, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

• Not to belabor the point, but your edit here introduces inconsistency even in the small portion of the article that the diff viewer shows. You add a comma to "In 1985, Brady..." in the first paragraph, yet the very next paragraph's "On 3 July 1985 Topping visited Brady..." is left without a comma. More generally, though, are we really fighting about commas four days after the edits happened? Can we not do that? It's rather silly. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:22, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

You could also say I didn't remove all the inconsistencies. But if one follows Mark Arsten's argument that this is wholly subject-dependent and this really is a BrE vs. AmE thing, then the article should've been harmonized in the other direction, anyway. Moreover, while the reverting user's tone / behavior irked me considerably, yes, I agree, let's move on. – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 20:55, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Making changes in the name of consistency is rather pointless if you're not going to fix all the inconsistencies, yeah? :) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:57, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, if I make something 90% consistent up from 60%, then that's progress. But, as I wrote, if Mark Arsten's right, I should've harmonized in the other direction anyway. – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 21:08, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

What you should do is to fuck off now, as I've seen just about as much from you as I'm about to take. Anything else you post here will be deleted. Malleus Fatuorum 21:15, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Removing commas from articles now counts as "anti-Americanism", apparently. I suppose that means I must be a self-loathing American? Mark Arsten (talk) 19:30, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, no, since, according to Malleus Fatuorum, Americans are "madly in love with commas", you can't be American in the first place... – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 19:41, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

No true... American would do such a thing? Mark Arsten (talk) 20:05, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, well, you know, Americans as a generic species aren't really in love with commas, but edit summaries are summaries. American teachers are taught to teach a plenitude of commas, that's a fact; it's part of "formal" writing, sometimes misunderstood as "grammatically correct writing". One of the things I'm grateful to Malleus for is making me realize that in US formal writing the comma is indeed (well, one might argue) overused. Inspiration, best to apologize for the sneers and sarcasm and move along. Drmies (talk) 14:51, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

When talking about commas the phrase drilled into us by one of my English teachers is often at the forefront of my mind: "When in doubt, leave it out". But of course there are many things we're taught in school that turn out to be over-simplifications or even downright untrue, such as the "'i' before 'e' except after 'c'" nonsense, or the exhortation not to begin a sentence with a conjunction; I've lost count of the number of times someone has tried to "correct" my grammar when I've started a sentence with "But ..." for instance. Some of us go through life learning, while others seem to want to eke out for as long as they can what little they learned in school, and the even less they understood. Malleus Fatuorum 15:17, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

I got into beaucoup trouble from a succession of English teachers for asking exactly WHY we could not begin sentences with conjunctions; none had a logical answer, of course. Many of these myths originated with a few Latin-obsessed shut-ins who were trying to make English grammar conform to that of Latin –- hence the veto on split infinitives -- and the ruling against stranding a preposition, which drives me particularly nuts, and up with which I will not put! DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 15:39, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes. I don't know if you can read this on GBooks; that's the subject matter for tomorrow's class. :) That "preposition" rule is no doubt based in part on the name (that English grammatical terminology is Latin-based and partly invented, partly promoted by those 18th-century grammarians: "pre" means "before", and prepositions are related to nouns one way or another, so there must be a noun following it. Never mind that ordinary language couldn't care less about such artificial rules. Malleus, my academic sentences haven't gotten much shorter, but they certainly have a lot less (fewer) commas than they did before. Drmies (talk) 16:03, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

You may have heard the story of the Aggie (that's a student at Texas A&M) who travels up to Harvard to visit a friend. They are supposed to meet at the library, so he stops a professor in the Yard: "Excuse me, sir, but can you please tell me where the library is at?" Disdainfully, the professor replies, "Obviously you are a visitor, because no Harvard student would EVER end a sentence with a preposition!" "Oh, I see," replies the Aggie, somewhat taken aback. "So," says the professor, "would you like to rephrase your question?" "Sure. Can you please tell me where the library is at, ASSHOLE?" DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 22:09, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

No, no, that's all wrong--it was a Southern Belle, from Georgia I presume, at a ball in Washington DC! Drmies (talk) 16:25, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I heard that it was a hillbilly at Harvard. Malleus Fatuorum 16:29, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Actually it was a student from Kansas State University attending a crumhorn recital at Pembroke College, Cambridge. This is very well-documented, if you know where to look. DBaK (talk) 17:07, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

1909 GIro

Hey there,

Thanks for reviewing the article! I've fixed all the errors that you have outlined, hopefully to your satisfaction. Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 23:40, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

OK, I'll take another look tomorrow and we can move on from there. Malleus Fatuorum 23:56, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

All right, so I've fixed the last of the errors you brought up as of now. Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 21:07, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

We're getting there then. Hopefully we can finish this soon. Malleus Fatuorum 21:10, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Karlheinz Oswald

Our "little palace" was well received on the Main page, I copy-edited the translation of Karlheinz Oswald a bit, could you improve and work your miracle on the lead? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:11, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

I've had a bit of a go at it, see what you think. Malleus Fatuorum 15:09, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I hadn't realised this was scheduled for the main page. I'd have got to it sooner if I'd known. Malleus Fatuorum 15:20, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

It came as quite a surprise for me, one day after nominating, with the stunning picture, then that was not taken ... - anyway, thanks for adding life to it! Did you know that the model for his sculpture Christus in the Mainz Cathedral is a ballet dancer with African roots? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:59, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I saw that, yes, but I thought it was probably a bit too much detail for the lead. Malleus Fatuorum 19:25, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I had a few external links in this older version, what do you think? The last one is in English, about dance movement in iron, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:20, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I think a comment in that last link is very interesting, and deserves to be in the article: "... his ballerinas seem to elude gravity, they appear to hover as if they have lost all contact with the floor". That seems to be an important feature of Oswald's work, and you could attribute it to the galleria, so no need for an external link. Malleus Fatuorum 19:42, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

You mean quote? I wasn't sure, because the galleria wants to sell, - but will try, please watch, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:55, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

It would obviously be better if you could find an independent critic making that point, but in the meantime a quote would do. Malleus Fatuorum 20:14, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

done, - I listened to several speeches at openings of his shows, but written art review is not too prominent here, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:32, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

You have to go with whatever sources you can find, but it seems like a very important point to make about his sculptures. Malleus Fatuorum 20:53, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, helped, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:00, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Osbert fitzHervey/GA1

Life finally got unbusy enough for me to actually tackle the review ... I've dealt with or replied to all your points (or at least I think I did... it's been a wild week here and I'm getting pretty frazzled and forgetful). Ealdgyth - Talk 21:25, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Just one small thing about the Count of Perche and then we're done I think. Malleus Fatuorum 21:31, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Great Eastern Hotel, London

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

• I know how much you love DYK. Regardless, many thanks to you and your talk page stalkers; it's much appreciated. Drmies (talk) 15:49, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

  I simply ignore DYK. In fact I pretty much ignore the entire main page. Malleus Fatuorum 16:27, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

  Then you miss excellent pics such as this TFP, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:24, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

  If the front page had more excellent pictures more prominently displayed then I might be more inclined to look at it from time to time. Tony1 had some good ideas for putting a bit of pazazz into the main page layout, but as with so many other proposals for changing anything here it came to naught. Malleus Fatuorum 19:33, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

  That pic is - as many others - from a banned/blocked user. - I put our little palace on top of my talk for today, replacing the usual. Did you know that I am quite proud of this edit? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:07, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

  I can't even tell what language that's written in. Hebrew? Malleus Fatuorum 11:18, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

  Indeed. - I didn't dare to do it without a friend from Israel on my side, to be honest. It's so strange to insert and see things move to the left. - Stunning pic. Not aceptable as FP here, remember? - Next person lacking a lead: Matthias Eisenberg. Die Evangelische ref has good details on him as a person, not yet in the article, just discovered, feel free to add, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:04, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

  It's difficult to take any language seriously in which you have to read the letters from right to left but the numbers from left to right. Crazy. Malleus Fatuorum 12:50, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Middle Ages (again) ....

Has finished it's Peer Review (such at it was and what there was of it) and is probably ready for a final polish... I've got an art festival this weekend, but will be free enough to work on it at FAC next week... 18:52, 18 April 2013 (UTC)Ealdgyth - Talk

I'll try and look through that monster you've created over the next few days. Bit of a disappointing peer review though. Malleus Fatuorum 19:30, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, it was. I welcome talk page stalkers to weigh in on the talk page... Ealdgyth - Talk 19:31, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:ANI#Talk:Margaret_Thatcher.23POV-section

Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 23:21, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

What exactly do you expect to achieve with that? Getting me blocked so that you can continue to wreck the article? Malleus Fatuorum 23:35, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Margaret Thatcher

[This edit summary] may be a little inappropriate. King of Nothing (talk) 23:34, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

And you posting here anonymously may be even more inappropriate. Malleus Fatuorum 23:33, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

My bad, I forgot the tildes (did not intentionally forget them), King of Nothing (talk) 23:34, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, Malleus, I was a bit taken aback to see that you somehow weren't able to compose a more universally palatable edit summary in that instance. (Was it 'writer's block'!? [Notice how we always apply AGF in instances like this.]) Let me try and help by offering some suggestions you might consider to use as alternative edit sums under similar conditions in the future (BTW these have all been carefully developed by WMF and thoroughly tested at The TeaHouse, so you can rest assured they are 100 percent pillar-compatible and will never let you down): 1) "Heavens to Betsy, what a confounding conglomeration I seem to have found here! Let me help." or 2) "Jiminy Crickets, what a chaotic chorus of constructions I seem to have discovered here! Let me help." or 3) "My word, what a hodgepodge of good-faith edits I seem to be finding here, that seems to possibly have gotten a little bit out of control. Let me help."

Please don't feel bad about this one particular incident; we (non-Admin) editors all experience slip-ups once in awhile. Just use this opportunity as a learning experience and I'm sure everything will turn out fine. And remember, if you have any questions at any time, don't be afraid to ask -- helping one another in a collaborative editing environment is what we do here. I'm sure in time these concepts will become second-nature, and your editorship will even become a model for others to follow. Happy editing! Ihardlythinkso (talk) 02:03, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Nevison & Jodosma

I don't believe there's any need for such language as you used when you rv'd me. If you really think that the reflist looks better now, perhaps you ought to go to Specsavers. Jodosma (talk) 07:08, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't care what you believe, as you're clearly a hypocrite coming here to complain about my alleged rudeness by being rude yourself. Now run along, there's a good chap. Malleus Fatuorum 11:03, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok, but I still think that the reflist in John Nevison looks better with two columns rather than three; the "orphan" at the top of the second column looks strange. Ciao :). Jodosma (talk) 12:04, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I only see two columns, not three. How wide is your display? Malleus Fatuorum 12:46, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

.....where angels fear to tread. It looks fine on my computer, no "orphans" here. J3Mrs (talk) 13:07, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I get three columns, with the middle one being the last part of reference 1: "University Press, retrieved 12 April 2013 (subscription or UK public library membership required)". If I make the text size larger, it goes to two columns. Try playing with the zoom on your browser and see what happens. Bencherlite^Talk 13:10, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

He's only trying to make some sort of point to save face, he's been on my page demanding respect. J3Mrs (talk) 13:13, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Strange how so many here seem to believe that they're automatically entitled to respect, another much abused word here on Wikipedia. Malleus Fatuorum 14:09, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

But that's a general point Bencherlite, nothing to do with this specific article. Jodosma's time would be better spent in expanding this underdeveloped article, and adding more citations, than wasting my time here. Malleus Fatuorum 14:09, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm overwhelmed with all the attention, so sorry I've been such a fool about the appearance of things. Don't know why, maybe I'm too old for all this stuff. But I won't give up. I'll take the very good advice offered by Malleus and spend my time on something more fruitful (within the Wiki of course, there's nowhere else for me). Jodosma (talk) 20:28, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Moors murders refs

I'm a simple person and don't understand {{sfnp}} and its friends. If I click on a reference that says "Staff (2007)", how do I stop it taking me to a 2007 Daily Mail article by him instead of his 2007 book? Bencherlite^Talk 10:13, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

There's probably a cleverer way than this, but I think I've fixed that problem, thanks for pointing it out. Parrot of Doom 10:33, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Clever fellow. Thanks. Bencherlite^Talk 10:47, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm perhaps being particularly dense, only just being on my second cup of tea of the day, but I don't see the problem. Which particular citation(s) are causing the problem you see? For me, PoD's change has made no difference at all that I can see. Malleus Fatuorum 11:15, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

If I clicked any Staff citation in the notes section, instead of taking me to the book, it took me to the Daily Mail citation. Parrot of Doom 11:18, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I just realised after I posted what was going on, more caffeine required. Seems like a strange bug to me, but your fix seems to work well. If there's a cleverer way to do it then I certainly don't know of it. Malleus Fatuorum 11:22, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Question

How do you properly put a link into a citation to show that the source is subscription only? I messed around with my monobook.js and now a script I'd forgotten about is warning me about minor errors in articles I've written. Some of those errors are because I've put {{subscription}} in the title field. Parrot of Doom 14:14, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

(watching) try {{subscription required}} after the cite template, before closing the ref, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:17, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

As Gerda said. Malleus Fatuorum 15:31, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok that works, thanks. I found a cool script that lets you auto-install scripts, it's here. I also have one that fixes ISO dates, so that's nice too. Plus one of those is highlighting citation errors too, which is useful. Parrot of Doom 15:38, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I've been using the one that highlights citation errors for a while now, very useful. Another useful one is the script that flags up whether someone's an admin or not. ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 15:42, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

NPOV at Margaret Thatcher

Interesting developments at the talk page there. I have changed my position; I now believe there is enough of a body of comment to make a brief mention of the negative reactions to her death acceptable. I've asked for suggestions towards drafting a suitable sentence. I would be interested to know your position. Of course, there are still people there arguing against my former position even after my concession, and I have been taken to AN/I again for un-Californian language. She was certainly a controversial and divisive character. See what you think, and of course feel free to disagree with me. --John (talk) 21:23, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I think a sentence or two summarising the reaction to her death would be justified. Malleus Fatuorum 21:26, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. --John (talk) 21:33, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I do resent this POV charge BTW. As I've said elsewhere, I'm no natural Tory, and I bent over backwards to try and be neutral, as I'm sure did you. Malleus Fatuorum 21:41, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

As we've discussed, the assertion that I am part of some pro-Thatcher cabal would be amusing if I wasn't being taken to AN/I twice a day for it. I think it's the fact that I worked so hard to treat the subject fairly and build balance and consensus into the article over a period of years that make these slurs so hurtful. I knew this would be difficult. We knew the risks when we did the work; she was always going to die some day, and this was always going to happen when she died. I still have no regrets and it remains one of my proudest bits of work on the project. --John (talk) 21:53, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

At least now you know how it feels to get dragged to ANI twice a day. You get somewhat immune to it after a bit though. As you may recall I was somewhat reluctant to get involved with Maggie's article as I knew it would be tough, and one day it was likely something like recent events would happen and cause it to be trashed. But like you, looking back on what is was like after it lost its GA blob and comparing even what's there today, I think we did bloody well. Especially in coming up with a structure that made sense, and seems to have survived recent events largely intact. Malleus Fatuorum 22:01, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

The structure was all your idea I think and it was an excellent one. I did a lot of work finding sources and quite a lot of writing and copy-editing. I reckon you did about 65% of the work and I did about 25%. GeometryGuy and Mr Stephen chipped in as well. Thanks for defending me at AN/I; I'm going to try to get through the rest of today without being mentioned at any of the noticeboards. Oh, and thanks for offering to look at Lecen's Uruguayan War article. I don't mean to sound paranoid, it's just a question I feel I have to ask. I don't have the historical knowledge to just look at it and say whether it is biased or fair, and I don't have access to the sources either. --John (talk) 17:02, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

John, please rewrite "GeometryGuy" as "Geometry guy", lest you get indefinitely blocked for harassment, outing, and disruptive editing. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 14:25, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

• Ha! Pardon me if you've seen this before. And pardon also the horrible ads and stuff on that busy page: [2]. Drmies (talk) 02:32, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

  We're not allowed to see that here in the UK. Malleus Fatuorum 14:51, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Since the "one or two sentences" that have been proposed, and to which no one seems to object, have not yet been added, may I humbly suggest the two sentences I added 10 days ago (seems like an eternity now) -- one from the current Prime Minister and one from the current opposition leader, which seemed like a neutral presentation to me:

David Cameron, the current Prime Minister, said: "It was with great sadness that I learned of Lady Thatcher's death. We've lost a great leader, a great Prime Minister and a great Briton." Current Labour leader Ed Miliband said, "The Labour Party disagreed with much of what she did and she will always remain a controversial figure. But we can disagree and also greatly respect her political achievements and her personal strength."

Is there any objection to my putting the above back into the article? DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 15:08, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

I've got no objection, but I can't speak for the crazies of course. Malleus Fatuorum 15:11, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

I find the some of the edits to that page quite incomprehensible. Were I Scottish, I would be shamed into silence by such edits as this [3]. One can only be thankful that her at times ruthless tenure of power prevented such low-lifes from running the UK into the mire and thus influencing Europe. Just imagine if the EEC were today having to bail out the UK as well as various other states. I remember studying the exploits of Arthur Scargill, had he won, once the Soviet block fell, I wonder where Britain would have been left - probably eating the rats spreading from the unemptied rubbish bins of the previous administration. One sometime has to take a greater and more aerial view, but 'what ifs' are always tempting. Best if I refrain from editing that page.  Giano  19:04, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Personally I find the taste of boot polish disgusting- but I suppose a thick enough skin on your tongue would make it palatable. Ning-ning (talk) 20:31, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

April 2013

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on The Man in the Moone. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This edit summary was an uncalled-for attack on a well-respected editor. For all you know, it was Drmies who put that comma in there. Please calm down. 01:08, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Oooh, I very nearly exploded then, which would have have been a disaster, as I'd probably have spilt my gin and tonic. Anyway, how do think we're doing? Malleus Fatuorum 01:23, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I think we're doing fine, antiChrist. "Simply" I added when I introduced the more specific "Renaissance" utopia; its removal is fine with me. Well, I'm going through Poole one step at a time, and the next paragraphs are on travel literature--for some reason that doesn't strike me as very exciting to summarize, but we need to pay it at least lip service. I've been adding little Poole references to articles all over Wikipedia, which is kind of fun, and along the way ran into this poem. Anyway, this will be done before too long. We do need to go through again for consistency. Since I brought the green children up earlier, so maybe note d. needs to be looked at. Same with Purchas, now mentioned and linked twice--I took care of the with an "aforementioned" (for some reason I'm reticent with self-reference in wiki-writing). Anyway, as I said on the talk page, FA is fine. I admire your ambition, Malleus, and your sympathy for the overworked GA reviewers. Drmies (talk) 01:50, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

It's not ambition, it's impatience. Patience has never been my strong suit. We've got the whole weekend before the ordeal by fire begins. Malleus Fatuorum 01:55, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Better late than never: "A loan that you had requested: Loan Title: Der fliegende Wandersmann nach dem Mond : Faksimile druck der ersten deutschen Übersetzung, Wolfenbüttel, 1659 / Loan Author: Godwin, Francis, 1562-1633. is now available for checkout." :) Drmies (talk) 22:15, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

• Does Dutch abuse commas as much as 'merican English? I can't image Malleus using an extra comma. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:54, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
  • The Dutch use commas to separate (really, not separate) independent clause. It's an abomination of God's creation, and I have disowned them for it. Drmies (talk) 04:20, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
    • Oh my. So the Dutch write like this, and you read it like this too, and then you disowned them, and yet the 'mericans love them some commas too? That's okay. I enjoy capitalising Nouns such as Cat and Dog. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:27, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

      So did Caxton, but times change. Except here on Wikipedia of course. Malleus Fatuorum 04:35, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

      "Except here on Wikipedia of course." - Yep. BTW, is it really necessary to mention that a book won an award when the book is just used as a reference? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:39, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

      Not usually, but in this specific instance I think it is, as it adds weight to what might otherwise be considered just another run of the mill opinion. Malleus Fatuorum 04:48, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

      Fair enough. May be a notable book if the award is a major one. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:16, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Holzhausen

Named after the Schlösschen, the Holzhausen-Quartett with baritone Berthold Possemeyer performed a parody chamber musical with the "durchtrieben" title "Ein Sommernachtstraum" Durchtriebenes Kammermusical nach William Shakespeare. Wanted: best translation of "durchtrieben", I get crafty, cunning, sly, scheming, - but they all seem not quite right, please elucidate --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:42, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Mischievous? Tongue-in-cheek? Nortonius (talk) 10:39, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I see the term used to describe P. D. Q. Bach's music is "gag"- the autonomic reflex suffered by the audience. Maybe "humourously laboured"? Ning-ning (talk) 12:06, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Try frolicsome, whimsical, vexatious. PumpkinSky talk 14:31, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

In this context, I'd agree with Nortonius' "tongue-in-cheek" as a good translation for "durchtrieben" title, but it's not quite right for the actual title "Ein Sommernachtstraum" Durchtriebenes Kammermusical nach William Shakespeare. Was the chamber music performed around Midsummer's Day, perhaps, (obviously drawing from A Midsummer Night's Dream)? Shakespeare of course left us no "chamber music" - it is possibly a similar 'gag' to P.D.Q. Bach - so the "Kammermusical nach William Shakespeare" would be 'durchtriebenes' in the sense of 'joke' or 'made-up' chamber music. --RexxS (talk) 16:08, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I think that the best translation might be "artful". Malleus Fatuorum 16:30, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for many good ideas, "artful" is too high class. It's hard to translate a pun, "durchtrieben" is literally "drive through", and the drive in it is pretty much the drive as in drive theory, it's also about thoughts behind the obvious, and not to think the whole thing is too serious, - more suggestions welcome, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:28, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

"Crafty"? --John (talk) 18:40, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

We'd need to understand the pun to come up with a good translation, which I frankly don't. But if "drive through" means what it means here I'd be inclined to use the word "convenience", as in "convenience food", or in this case "convenience chamber music". Nobody could take that description too seriously. Malleus Fatuorum 19:20, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Made me smile, but can we take it to an encyclopedic article? - I suggest to wait with a translation until it is requested, and then probably take crafty, thanks, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:06, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't like crafty. If it's a pun in German then it ought equally to be somewhat comical in English, even if the pun can't be translated directly. But it's your choice of course. Malleus Fatuorum 20:17, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Not crafty then - it's difficult for me who never heard that word before, - leave the title untranslated for the moment. Possemeyer is another article without a lead, btw, DYK in a few hours. Did you know that he sang Elijah with us and I don't find the date? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:28, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks to all, for the comical spirit, in German but pictured, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:51, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Durchtriebe or durchtreibe? (i.e. parodying by exaggeration).Ning-ning (talk) 06:47, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

"teacher" trying: "treiben" (verb) is to drive, like cattle, "Trieb" is a derived noun, one meaning: "(almost) instinct", "getrieben" would be "driven by ...", "durchtrieben" - I don't know. Anyway, I summarised (not translated) it as "parody", will be on the Main page for half an hour more, DYK, but I drove it also to project Opera (DYK that John Eliot Gardiner was 70 yesterday? DYK who cropped his picture?) and to my user, for you, Malleus, who hates opera, both temporarily, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:36, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Bit more workhouse.

If you search for 'George Catch workhouse' in Google Books, there's a lot of info on one of the most notorious members of staff and a book by Norman Longmate has a lot of detail. This book [4] links George to anatomy. :) J3Mrs (talk) 11:57, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll look that up. I've got a little bit to write on workhouse infirmaries first though – can't believe how long it's taken me to write this bloody article. I almost wish I'd never started it. Malleus Fatuorum 12:08, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

A quick question to you and the talk page stalkers

I know Wikipedia has changed since my time, but can you or anyone else here see any redeeming qualities in List of plain English words and phrases? As far as I can see it violates a shedload of policies—indiscriminate list of information? ✓; subjective personal opinion reported as fact? ✓; incorrect and misleading "facts"? ✓ (if anyone really thinks "not often" is a synonym of "rarely" they shouldn't be trusted with a Myspace page, let alone the Sixth Most Read Site On The Internet); misuse of inappropriate sources? ✓ (it seems to rely almost exclusively on Bryan A. Garner, whose writing guides are aimed specifically at American lawyers, are controversial even within their narrow target audience, and have very little relevance to real-world usage or to anyone outside the CMoS bubble…).

To me the whole thing looks more like Orwell's guide to Newspeak than a legitimate Wikipedia article, but since someone's obviously devoted a hell of a lot of time to it I don't really want to delete it if anyone can think of a reason to keep it. – iridescent 2 00:22, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I can't think of any reason to keep it. Malleus Fatuorum 00:39, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I'd delete it, but good luck getting a consensus to do so at AfD. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 00:40, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, it's less than a month old, with effectively a single author, who's only been editing just over a month. I really can't see any encyclopedic value in the article, and it would probably be kinder to Fluous (talk · contribs · logs) in the long run to explain what's wrong with the list and take it to AfD than to leave him/her to create other similar articles. --RexxS (talk) 03:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I am indifferent. It doesn't appear to be doing any harm. It provides a useful back reference when trying to figure out why User:another has trashed a piece of perfect prose. Could be of use to non native British English speakers trying to translate a technical article they need into their local language. It could form the basis of an impromptu lesson for year 8s, on register in English. Four weak reasons- do I win a prize? -- Clem Rutter (talk) 09:21, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Not from me you don't. Malleus Fatuorum 17:59, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Getting in a bit late, but we all know that three of the things that WP is not are a dictionary, a link farm, and a repository for lists. Since this is essentially a list of links to dictionary entries, is there any real reason to consider keeping it, other than guilt toward the well-meaning user who wasted a lot of time creating it? Just sayin'. DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 18:49, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

No reason at all. And guilt is only for lapsed Catholics like me. Malleus Fatuorum 18:59, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Oy! A recovering Catholic! You're seriously going to tell a Jew, with a Jewish mother, that Catholics have a monopoly on guilt?? DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 19:19, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

American automotive manufacturing in the 1950s

I've moved this to main space, although it is still quite rough around the edges. It is the fork from 1950s American automobile culture (which I'm debating yet another rename at the talk page). My time is still a bit limited, but I'm wanting to work this up to a GA quality article over time as well. No rush, it isn't nearly ready to submit, but thought you and some stalkers might be interested since you've already been involved in the previous material, and it was your wisdom that created the fork to begin with. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:44, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

• It is amazing what you can forget when you don't do something for a while. I'm trying to properly format the citations according to the lessons you taught me, and drew a complete blank. Had to go back to the other 50s article (and fix a few there as well) to remember the exact format. I'm only partially done, but will get the rest later as time allows. I should be editing more and admin'ing less I think, so this will become second nature. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 18:52, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

  Given that this is supposed to be a project to build an encyclopedia, rather than an online police state dedicated to making everyone be nicer to one another, everyone should be editing more and adminning less. Too many admins simply have no idea of what it takes to build a decent article; to take a current RfA example, ten DYKs simply don't cut it. I could write ten DYKs in my sleep. Malleus Fatuorum 19:19, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

  I've only got 4 DYKs, a mere naps worth. My article contribs have slid from 39% to 25% since getting the bit. I would prefer to work that up to 50%+ and keep it there, although that will be a huge challenge. I've actually focused on quality content much more since getting the bit. I did more gnoming pre-bit. Part of what drives me now is appreciation for those that are prolific, as well as a desire to better understand the challenges (as to become a better admin). Honestly, part of it is purely selfish desire to become a better writer. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 19:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

  I don't think that's selfish at all. Each of us needs to get something positive out of this venture, a point singularly missed by the banhammer-swinging admins. I learned quite a bit from Tony1 about the difference between writing an encyclopedia article and the kind of writing I'd been used to, and I've tried to pass that on by example, with varying degrees of success. Malleus Fatuorum 19:32, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

  I'm probably not your star pupil, but I do listen, take notes and try to not take your efforts for granted. Same reason I'm trying to fix the citations by myself. You showed me how last time, it's up to me to put those lessons to use. About to commute home and work more on those, as a matter of fact. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 19:59, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

  If you get stuck on something I'm always willing to help, but I'm a great believer in the "Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day ..." old saw. In my earlier days here I deliberately worked on a wide variety of articles, to try and establish some kind of template for those who wanted to write similar articles. It was a complete waste of time. Malleus Fatuorum 20:08, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

  You mean "Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. Teach him to fish and he'll lounge around all day in a boat"? --RexxS (talk) 22:04, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

  And I agree Malleus, I need to take this article to a much higher level than I did last time, and depend on others less. Even then, it will likely still be short of the mark in the way of prose, as that is something I'm better at, but hardly the best Wikipedia has to offer. Plus I know the inner motorhead in you likes the topic, so wanted you to be aware it was now live. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:23, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

  We each have different skills Dennis, and together we can do so much more than any one of us could do alone. You're great at the research, but if you'll forgive me you're crap at organising your material. I on the other hand am rather lazy, and prefer that others do my research for me, then I can just polish their prose and take the credit for a job well done. ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 22:35, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

  You've hit the nail on the head. :-) Years of gnoming around here has taught me a bit about digging up sources but little about organization. I'm actually very good about juggling lots of information in my head, but I'm wired differently (a bit ADHD, to be honest) and conveying that in two dimensions is a skill I'm still working on. That is why I really enjoyed working with you on the other article. I wasn't as concerned about the phrasing and organization and blindly trusted your judgement. I was more concerned about collecting the facts and citations. This time around, I'm trying to leave less work for you at the end, and I would be happy to split the GA paycheck with you. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:03, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

  Lots of people ask me to look at their articles Dennis, but to be honest I don't think I do anything more than they could have done themselves if they'd taken a proper read through. I just move a few commas around and ask "what did you mean by saying that"? Malleus Fatuorum 00:15, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

  And just remind me, half of nothing is still nothing, yeah? Malleus Fatuorum 00:25, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

  If I were you, I'd hold out for a 60/40 split this time. --RexxS (talk) 01:18, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm most of the way converting the refs into a proper format (and sprinkled in some new prose). I had no idea how much of a mind numbing pain in that ass that task actually is. If I ever make it onto your side of the pond, it appears I owe more than a pint, and might have to pick up your tab for the evening, for your efforts on the culture article. I've still a long way to go with the article, but I think the lessons I learned last time are paying off. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 18:55, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Going off the boil?

Hi Malleus, some weeks ago I remember you giving a memorably trenchant opinion of template bombing, so I wondered if I could tempt you to read User:WereSpielChequers/Going off the boil?. ϢereSpielChequers 17:48, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Without your cloak of invincibility I'm afraid I can't afford the luxury of giving an opinion. I'll just stay here down in the trenches, fighting the template bombers. Malleus Fatuorum 17:58, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

You're missing some good fun then. From User:WereSpielChequers/Going off the boil? #The greying of the pedia: "If its true that teenagers typically have an 18 month wiki-career whilst silver surfers stick around until death, senility or banning, then the community is transitioning rather than uniformly shrinking.". I'm going to aim for 'senility' as the least dramatic exit-route. --RexxS (talk) 19:20, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

According to Scott Martin (talk · contribs) elsewhere I'm already well past the stage of senility, apparently some kind of obsolete COBOL programmer. Malleus Fatuorum 19:24, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

"It would help to know why we are attracting fewer young editors..." Well, that's obvious: they're all down by the Corn Exchange, you know, on the bannister, the railing, you know, they jump up on there, and go 'wooh.' Keri (talk) 20:06, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

A couple of years ago I was teaching a course in the northeast of England. Towards the end of the second day I started to hear thumping noises from outside the classroom window. When I opened the blinds I founds kids jumping off the roof of the building onto the balcony outside, and then onto the roof of a nearby garage I think it was. I know there's a name for that kind of insanity, but it escapes me for the moment. Sadly none of them were seriously injured, although a few looked pretty sorry for themselves lying on the ground after missing the final jump. Malleus Fatuorum 20:15, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

The name for it is "evolution in action" - it's how natural selection deals with stupidity in the gene pool. --RexxS (talk) 22:04, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

The strange thing is, I can imagine myself doing something like that when I was a teenager. So it's hard to condemn the little shits. Malleus Fatuorum

I was the boring bookworm who didn't do that sort of stuff when I was young, and am now indulging my mid-life crisis by cycling in London traffic. Glad to hear that there are still some teenage rebels around, most of the teenagersscreenagers with damaged attention spans that I know would be very shocked if they discovered what teenagers used to do, including in some cases their own parents. ϢereSpielChequers 22:35, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Eric Corbett. You have new messages at [[User talk:Andrewman327#British Motor Syndicate|Andrewman327's talk page]].
Message added 20:52, 22 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Andrew³²⁷ 20:52, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm leaving this pointless template here because I hope that others will help in trying to straighten Andrew's hat. Malleus Fatuorum 21:37, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if he knows there is a page called Cunt? Or colour photographs at Vulva? Oh my, those 12 year olds! Helen Lovejoy 22:01, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

In the immortal words of Kinky Friedman, "I refuse to say 'fuck' in front of a C-H-I-L-D." DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 22:18, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

RFA

I know you'll probably never run for admin and I totally understand why. But just so you know, I'd vote for you. PumpkinSky talk 21:56, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't, he's a reet miserable get. The bit would just make him even more miserable than he already is. I prefer him as Albert Steptoe, not Harold. =) Keri (talk) 22:07, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't even vote for myself, there's far too much I don't agree with and I'd want to change. Fuck consensus. Malleus Fatuorum 22:14, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I'd support him being an admin, but not running for it. The hysteria surrounding that RFA would be so great that it would coalesce, possibly gain sentience (sorry, this is Wikipedia, there's no sentience here, that was silly) collapse in on itself, become a black hole, and destroy the entire Encyclopedia, and possibly the entire Internet. Patience, Malleus, when I become a Bureaucrat I'll just flip the switch myself, and there will of course be no drama at all. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:15, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

The hellhole that RFA is, which steadily gets worse, is why many qualified people like Mal don't run. Wiki is it's own worst enemy.PumpkinSky talk 22:19, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) That's a pretty persuasive argument as to why I might try again, to make Wikipedia implode. But maybe PumpkinSky doesn't know that I already tried twice? Malleus Fatuorum 22:21, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

<reverse psychology> As an admin on this site, I hereby forbid you to run for RFA again. </reverse psychology>. (mwahahaha, my evil plan to destroy the world has almost come to fruition!) --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:34, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Malleus already did run for admin. You opposed. – iridescent 2 22:19, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

He opposed did he? I'll add him to my list. One day, when I'm bored, I might go through and see how many of those opposers are still here. Malleus Fatuorum 22:22, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

That was 5 years ago. I changed my mind long ago. I have seen the light.PumpkinSky talk 22:26, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

My gods, that was five years ago... yikes. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:33, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Doesn't time fly when you're having fun. But it would be true to say that I feel as bitter about that today as I did then, and that will never change. I'm not a forgiving person. Malleus Fatuorum 22:41, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

That's fine. Your choice. I just think you'd do great things with the bit. I simply wanted you to know that.PumpkinSky talk 22:44, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

It's no choice at all. You know as well as I do that another RfA would result in the wildest RfA you've ever seen, and I'd just end up being reminded that 90 per cent of those who watch such things hate my guts, and would rather see me gibbeted outside my own house. Which I already know anyway. Malleus Fatuorum 22:51, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I meant your choice as to forgive or not. PumpkinSky talk 22:57, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I see. I never forgive, but I do sometimes forget. Malleus Fatuorum 23:00, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I think you're over optimistic on assuming the "wildest RFA ever" Malleus .... This would take some beating. Can't remember if you were editing back then, but ...well... wow. Probably the first RFA snowstorm Pedro :  Chat  22:45, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

I was, I remember it very well, and I'm quite sure I'd top that by miles. Malleus Fatuorum 22:47, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Small beer? Go on, I dare you (done deal, won't accept, yaaadahhhyaadah) I'd be happy to write the nom for extra lulz (this in the in phrase apparently). And as I'm no longer an admin you get extra kudos (probably for not selling out or some similar bizarre reasoning). Pedro :  Chat  22:53, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Won't ever happen. I didn't know you were no longer an admin; were you pushed or did you jump? Malleus Fatuorum 22:57, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Toys thrown from pram to be honest. I know your next RFA won't happen. I know I was a knob for opposing your first RFA . Pedro :  Chat  23:05, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Lots of other knobs opposed as well, so don't be too hard on yourself. You're in good company. Iridiscent was of the opinion that if I'd just let it run it may have ended up OK, but I was frankly so shocked by the opposition that wasn't an option as far as I was concerned. Malleus Fatuorum 23:12, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

• Idle rambling thoughts. I think the first time I every became aware of Malleus I thought wow ... what a bitter mean man. Then I looked at the RfA pages, and I understood why. Don't get me wrong, the first few folks I met on wiki were real jerks too - but I was really lucky - some guardian angle (Huntster) showed up out of who knows where, and encouraged me. I will say that I'm very glad that I screwed up enough courage to come to talk here. Mal and I have, and will often disagree - but I know I always get a fair shake. AND .. I don't think I have ever seen anyone ask for help that Malleus refused. I remember once I asked about one single sentence, and watched Malleus spend like 3 or 4 hours improving the article. Mal, one thing though - I think sometimes you really underestimate how highly you're thought of by SO many people. Syntax? Sentence structure? Formatting? References? The nuances of a particular word or phrase? .. geesh ... you may well be the very best writer on this project. There's a ton of folks that really do "get that", and appreciate what you do. It's very easy to feel "alone" and isolated on the Internet, and I've never met another wikipedian (as far as I know) .. but I saw a picture of a UK meetup, and damn, I would have loved to have been there. Anyway ... sorry for the wall of text .. just passing through. — Ched :  ?  00:19, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

  I think I may be at least one the best writers on the project, but what marks me out is that I'm undoubtedly one of the most helpful. Which is why I really find it so difficult to understand why so many, supported by ArbCom, are so keen to see the back of me. But am I bitter? You bet your ass I am, so you got that right. Malleus Fatuorum 00:32, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm just guessing here ... but if I had to put a "why" to everything. I'd say two things. One: If someone comes at you with something .. then you give as good as you get. And people will cherry-pick a diff or something and try to paint you in a corner. Two: Sometimes I think you just get really tired at the end of a long day - and you tend to just tell it like it is. Some folks don't like the bare facts thrown in their face ... it can hurt. Just IMO. — Ched :  ?  02:14, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Bzzzt ... The real "why" can be found in Geogre's hugely-missed perception from 2006 at User:Geogre/Comic - just read "Manchester Bulldog" for "Neapolitan Mastiff". It was written about how Giano was being harassed back then, but the vicious stupidity of some Wikipedians in baiting our most talented contributors has not altered one jot since then. --Famously Sharp (talk) 20:39, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Malleus, the problem with your "helpful" is you have a terrible habit of teaching them how to fish rather than doing all the work and quietly walking away. You make the mistake of thinking people want to learn, when they often want someone to just do the hard work, then debate them (or have you simply go away) when it comes to the finishing details. You are a good teacher, but only to a good student. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:11, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

I think there's some truth in what you say Dennis. My aim has always been to show people how to do it rather than have to do everything myself. Malleus Fatuorum 23:22, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Most good teachers are blunt and push you to figure things out on your own when you need to. Most editors at Wikipedia aren't good students, to be honest. Nice enough folks, but not good students. Coming here and saying "I'm not good enough at something and need to learn" to total strangers is difficult. Most people feel too vulnerable, and the desire to be accepted as an equal by their peers can make some people defensive and reactive. We that choose to be here are an odd lot to begin with, with no fewer hangups than the average person. Or I'm full of shit, you decide. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:57, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

"Knowledge is the only thing you can give away but still have". Malleus Fatuorum 00:24, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, knowledge and venereal diseases. MastCell ^Talk 16:15, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

• GBS is cited as saying (or writing) that, “If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange these apples then you and I will still each have one apple. But if you have an idea and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have two ideas.” Very beautiful, the WP ideal. But unfortunately (as Dennis suggests) there are people who let you provide all the ideas, and do all the hard work, and then grab the result and try to take credit for it. LittleBen (talk) 01:19, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

The first part is called non-rivalry. The second is non-excludability.Volunteer Marek 01:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

• Here's the conundrum I have. I very often come across FA or GA nominations that really need lots of work. I could just list all the work required or I could do it myself, but what I often do is to fix some of it myself as a guide to how the rest ought to be fixed. And sometimes I even end up adding the material I complained was missing, as with the GA for Team Bath F.C. for instance. But I rarely get any thanks for that, whereas user:BDD is being sanctified at RfA for presiding over the idiotically named Guild of Copyeditors, many of whom can't even spell correctly. I really don't think that's acceptable. Malleus Fatuorum 01:12, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

  I'm not sure I agree he is being sanctified, but in general, he is an agreeable sort and not the type of fellow that would block someone for 12 seconds to prove a point. That counts for a lot. Today is the one year anniversary of my RfA completion, and I would like to think that I've learned more about editing in the last year than I did in the first six, so getting the bit doesn't mean you stop learning how to edit. I'm not particularly brilliant, so I'm guessing he can continue to learn and become a better editor as well, and I'm actually convinced he will do a better job at it than I have. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 02:05, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

  While I hear what you're saying, bear in mind you're talking to someone who was once blocked for a second, just to make a point. What's changed since then? Nothing. Malleus Fatuorum 02:18, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

  That is actually part of the reason I look at demeanor so closely. I want admins that aren't quick to block or highly volatile, even if they aren't our finest writers. Since BDD is a academic librarian (really), I have high hopes in the future in the way of editing. If a marketing schmuck like me can learn to write, surely a librarian can. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 18:28, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

  I seriously doubt that Wikipedia pays much regard to good writing, else so many of its finest writers wouldn't have been driven away. Geogre is an oft-cited example, but how much more abuse are writers such as Giano expected to tolerate without occasionally blowing up? Only a few minutes ago an anonymous IP told me on my talk page what a pompous git I am, which is quite typical of the environment here; if you're good at something you'll have it thrown in your face as being worthless, and the only thing you're capable of doing. Malleus Fatuorum 18:39, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

  The problem boils down to two issue: Admin who see themselves as the bosses of the community, and civility police. That is my criteria, people whom I think won't take those attitudes and try to force their singular version of civility over the rest of us. I don't sweat their authoring skills as long as they have reasonable experience, empathy and clue. This is how we change the environment. I like admin candidates who understand that editors and articles should be left alone unless there is overwhelming need to get involved, ie: who will use the tools as a last resort, not just because they have them. Sometimes I'm puzzled at your opposing, understanding how you feel about editing experience, but knowing they are the kind of people you would prefer to have the block button. As for the insults, I get plenty of that but I easily dismiss them after considering the source. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:53, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Is it just me?

It seems a waste of time to respond at RfA. An isolated negation of "intelligent and honest" as "not intelligent and not honest" could have been dismissed as a brain fart, but the last days' dragon teeth of "stupid and dishonest" makes me wonder if these kids passed fourth grade.

And the comparisons of Catholicism to Communism....

Would that ArbCom had topic-banned people from replying to me at this terminal but interminable RfA. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:39, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Oops

Didn't spot that you were editing at Pulteney Bridge when I closed that link. Hope I didn't cause a conflict. Keri (talk) 17:54, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

If you did, I didn't notice. I'm just doing the GA review there, so feel free to chip in. Malleus Fatuorum 18:01, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Here's a conundrum then....

See Wikipedia:The_Core_Contest/Entries#Sea and how we use the word "sea". I wasn't expecting this....all literal-minded folks welcome.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:18, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

My opinion of these "vital articles" is that rather few of them are are even marginally interesting beyond a brief dictionary entry. Malleus Fatuorum 01:16, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Thatcher

This may be of interest. No comments as to where I stand on it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:56, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Interesting article. Wikipedia doesn't seem to come out of it too badly, perhaps surprisingly. Malleus Fatuorum 18:56, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata

We spoke a while ago about using Wikidata as a single back-end for facts across all Wikipedias, so I thought you might be interested to see an example edit where I've replaced a hard-coded name (Ma Ying-jeou = the President of ROC) with a Wikidata link that can be maintained from a single place. Eventually, this could perhaps be incorporated into {{Infobox country}} so that would be one less parameter to deal with in the text that an editor sees. It's still some way off, but your technological solution to the infobox problem is getting closer. --RexxS (talk) 21:13, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Since being called a technological dinosaur by administrator user:Scott Martin on another site that must not be named, because I tried to put his hat on straight about QR codes, I think it's best that I leave any further developments to the ignorant children like him. Malleus Fatuorum 21:28, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

I have to ask

I do have to ask, where do I apply for the Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free Say-FUCK-With-Impunity Card? VєсrumЬа ►TALK 01:58, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

I think you get it when you grow up, so I guess you'll just have to wait. Malleus Fatuorum 01:59, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Only adults should use 'adult language'. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 02:43, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Since when could anyone NOT say "fuck" with impunity? Did I miss that memo? In New York City, where I've lived far too long, "fuck" isn't even a word — it's a comma. And we all know Mal's position on commas... :-) DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 03:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Ah, my error. I thought WP was a collegial spot. Apparently not. I've growed up several times over, so, sadly, fucking on WP is, by elimination, just being childish and churlish and reveling in one's don't give a crap except for my stuff attitude. Look at me, I said fuck! Me iz is all growed up! And we wonder why WP is withering at the vine. A sad and puerile display, children. Next you'll be stomping your feet in the sandbox. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 19:32, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and DoctorJoeE, I expect I've been living in NYC a lot longer than you have. But apparently in a nicer neighborhood. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 19:41, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

A more sheltered neighborhood, perhaps -- longer than 31 years? DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 19:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

No answer; I thought not. Funny how these guys take their shots and then flee. I always chuckle when somebody says "Wikipedia isn't censored" -- because there are always people trying their best to censor it to their own concepts of "collegial" behavior. DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 13:13, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I always had the impression that New Yorkers were a more robust lot than Vercrumba appears to be, but I think what these censoring freaks mean is "I'm the only one who's allowed to censor Wikipedia". Malleus Fatuorum 13:19, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Yep. In the immortal words of the greatest New Yorker, George Carlin, "Censorship assumes about people an inability to make reasoned choices." DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 14:41, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Pulteney Bridge

Thanks for your review of Pulteney Bridge which has definitely helped to improve the article.— Rod ^talk 06:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

FAC

Malleus, do you still plan to review Uruguayan War? --Lecen (talk) 16:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh bugger, I forgot all about it. Sorry Lecen, I'll look at it later. Malleus Fatuorum 16:11, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

If you're not in the mood it's not a problem. I came to ask because John left his review unfinished and you didn't show up. So I was going to tell the delegaste that he should close the FAC. --Lecen (talk) 16:17, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

No, no, don't do that. I promise I'll look at it later. Malleus Fatuorum 16:19, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Please don't be despondent about my oppose Lecen. I think the article is ever so close and just needs a final polishing, which would be better done out of the limelight given how long the nomination has been open. I was quite sincere in offering to help, and I'm pretty sure that you could have your FA in a few weeks time. Malleus Fatuorum 20:10, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry. It's all fine. I'll nominate it again later. --Lecen (talk) 13:09, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

hung or hanged, drawn and quartered

An IP user has changed "hung, drawn and quartered" to "hanged, drawn and quartered" in the lead of Glastonbury Abbey. I am not confident enough of my grammar to revert - any thoughts?— Rod ^talk 16:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) While both are technically correct, I have never seen "hung" used in that context in print. The applicable WP article is entitled Hanged, drawn and quartered, so for consistency, I would vote for going with "hanged". DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 17:00, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

"Hung" is just plain wrong, it's "hanged", without any shadow of doubt. Malleus Fatuorum 17:08, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

yes, and 'drawn' meant disembowelling - none of this namby'pamby drawn on a stretcher to a place of execution. 17:23, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about anonymous person on the Internet. Malleus Fatuorum 18:02, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

I do and it t'was me who forgot to sign!  Giano  18:03, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Giano, I assumed I was replying to the IP whose edit initiated this thread. Malleus Fatuorum 18:04, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Not to worry; it's an interesting subject though.  Giano  19:16, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Parrot of Doom has a morbid obsession with stuff like that, as do I if truth be known. But moving on, how do you think we're doing with Montacute House? I think it's starting to look pretty cool. Malleus Fatuorum 19:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Yerse, at the risk of mutual back-slapping, I was thinking it was rather like a miniature FA - the new interior images are terrific, but I'm not sure I can be bothered with the fuss of an FA; GA is quite stressful enough.  Giano  19:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Is there a better photo of the entrance? that blown out sky offends the photographer in me.... Ealdgyth - Talk 19:42, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

We've debated that on the article's talk page, and I agree with you. Malleus Fatuorum 19:45, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

It's especially annoying as the rest of the photos are quite stunning...Ealdgyth - Talk 19:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Hmph, sulk and with extreme bad grace! [5].  Giano  20:40, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Giano, please remember you're talking to a lady. We Europeans surely know how to treat ladies. ("What are you doing out of the kitchen? I thought I told you to clean my shoes before you could go to bed. And don't forget you've got a big job on tomorrow, cleaning the whole house on your hands and knees.") Malleus Fatuorum 20:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

It's already at GAN, so that's for Rod to worry about, not us, although I'll keep an eye on it nevertheless as I'm sure you will. I sometimes think that FAC is a good example of the law of diminishing returns, but having said that I've just nominated The Man in the Moone to what I hope will be rapturous applause. We'll see. Malleus Fatuorum 19:49, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

I rather thought the disembowling, sometimes live, was apart from the hanging, drawing, and quartering. But perhaps that's just in the Bronx. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 19:53, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Then you thought wrong. Malleus Fatuorum 19:58, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

I always jog my memory with: "Curtains are hung but criminals are hanged." Keri (talk) 21:01, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

What are you doing out of the kitchen Keri? Has your partner given you permission to be on the Internet? Malleus Fatuorum 21:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

@Keri, Consider this counter-example. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 09:11, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Took me a good ten seconds to cotton on, Kiefer. Hehe. Keri (talk) 10:44, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

You're quicker on the uptake than I am Keri, took me hours to realise what Kiefer was getting at. Malleus Fatuorum 11:25, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Four-fifths of ...

Hey Malleus, apropos of just spending a couple of hours browsing through numerous articles relating to apparently minor Bollywood starlets etc and despairing of improving any of them, my thoughts have turned to Ray Winstone's comment on Have I Got News For You last night. He said of the recent laudatory comments concerning the UK's 0.3 per cent growth figures that, "0.3 per cent is four-fifths of fuck all". He's paraphrasing an old rugby song that would probably be too rude to reproduce even on this page and which itself most likely has older origins, but with all these articles about minor sports stars, actors etc I am increasingly of the opinion that Wikipedia's content is four-fifths fuck all. Yes, storage is allegedly cheap and there is no compulsion to read such articles but the task of maintaining a spiralling number of poor, mostly trivial articles becomes more problematic with each one that is added, especially since many are BLPs. Was it you who suggested a few months ago that it may not be a bad idea to fork a "core" Wikipedia, with more strict controls regarding notability etc? How would such controls work? - Sitush (talk) 11:10, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

It may have been me, I've expressed similar opinions before, as I think have others. Most recently though I suggested (can't remember if it was here or on a site that can't be mentioned) that almost all of Wikipedia's BLPs ought to be deleted. Poof, 90% of problems solved. My forking idea is to move all of Wikipedia's audited content (GAs and FAs) to a separate site with stricter rules about who can edit. No more of the "anyone can edit" bullshit. Malleus Fatuorum 11:20, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Ah, it was a suggestion to move the audited content somewhere with tighter controls. I guess the question then becomes one of how the auditors are audited or how the selection process for edit rights would operate. Assuming the fork was contained within the WMF structure then an article on en-WP would contain a redirect to the forked site? Or would you prefer to see something completely separate and let en-WP go to the dogs?

Deleting a lot of BLPs makes sense but, again, the issue of criteria would arise. I wouldn't mind deleting a lot of the stuff about dead people unless they comply with more strict notability requirements, eg: their death was formally obituarised in a journal or a "serious" national newspaper. Of course, the likes of DGG would likely be spitting feathers if this was mooted but as things stand our notability and RS requirements seem to be something of a moveable feast, ie: the standards vary according to the context. - Sitush (talk) 11:57, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

It would be seamless, simply that there would be tighter controls on who could mess with the audited content. As for who would choose the auditors, well I would of course, but as a first cut only those who have produced audited content themselves would have the right to edit. Malleus Fatuorum 12:04, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Both the only include assessed articles and the only allow approved people to edit quality articles models have been tried, and both failed miserably. You need to remember that what has historically driven Wikipedia is the froth of minor editors and people with a single obscure interest. The former are the growth medium from which the "major" article writers (and photographers, bot-scripters etc) sprout, and it's very hard to guess which are going to develop into someone worth keeping other than by letting them loose in the grey goo and seeing what transpires. (You presumably remember the editor I once described as "the most slack-jawed and drooling of the current crop of wannabees" who later quit the social-networking and revealed a remarkable knowledge of early submarine warfare, for instance, as well as the editor whose early edits demonstrated a great knowledge and writing ability but over time revealed themselves to be an outright lunatic with a propensity for fabricating sources.) The latter provide the little-read but necessary articles on minor topics, which is what separates Wikipedia from Britannica and co.

What really needs to happen to rein Wikipedia in to a manageable size isn't mass deletion or elitism, but mass-merging. Far too many of Wikipedia's articles are pointless Blo-jobs which exist just for the sake of existing; something like Çäçe or G. T. Marsh and Sons (the first two pages that came up on hitting Special:Random) would be much more useful as entries in List of towns in Ahal Province and List of landmarks in Monterey where they could be compared-and-contrasted at a glance. (Unless someone's deleted it recently, my proof-of-concept Infrastructure of the Brill Tramway page still exists; the every-grain-of-sand-on-the-beach brigade insist that every railway station needs an independent article, even though this page is far more useful to anyone wanting to know about Wotton railway station.)

However, the WMF is obsessed with size over quality (that the article count appears above TFA on the main page is not a coincidence), so there will be no enforcement from above in this direction, and as long as DYK acts as a perverse incentive to create rather than improve, nothing is going to change. Unless and until you can persuade Google or Microsoft to subsidize and publicize a rival, or persuade the major chapters to shit or get off the pot and actually secede from WMF rather than sit on the sidelines bitching, then the WMF with all its dysfunction, grey goo and social-network games is what you're stuck with. – iridescent 2 16:29, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

You're quite right, of course, but perhaps I see the problem slightly differently. To take just one example, a few days ago I came across Borley Rectory, once known as Britain's most haunted house. It was littered with {{cn}} tags, and it took me a couple of days to find reliable sources for what I could. But where's the glory in that? I didn't create the article, I didn't nominate it for DYK and it's not even a GA. What encouragement does anyone have to improve any article? None? Malleus Fatuorum 17:10, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

The requisite cultural change could be enacted with two mouseclicks and one keystroke; delete section 1 here and the ethos of the MMORPGers who act as Wikipedia's cultural drivers would instantly change from "newness" to "interesting or important". (As DYK won't accept anything with maintenance tags, people would presumably work on fixing the issues on articles they find interesting, once the perverse incentive to create-at-all-costs was gone.) Since too many people would lose their high-scores, it won't happen. – iridescent 2 17:32, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I've long been a critic of TonyTheTiger's Four Award, but it seems that baubles are where it's at. Without the promise of a bauble why should anyone do anything? I created the number of articles I've done really to make a point to those gullible fools who believe that Wikipedia is in some sense complete, and therefore it's perfectly natural to expect that the emphasis switches from creation to guardianship. But the real switch needs to be from creation to improvement, and as that's seriously hard work it'll never happen. Much easier to wander around tagging articles in preparation for your upcoming RfA, to demonstrate that you have some understanding of policy. Malleus Fatuorum 17:50, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm never adverse from baubles - I am female, after all - but they don't drive all my actions. I enjoy the Core Contest - it spurs me to improve important articles. And once I get my teeth into a subject, I generally can't stop until I've driven it as far as I can... But the chances of me ever passing RfA would be very very slim. I don't do the political thing well. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:41, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I think you might be surprised to find that you'd walk it. You've really only blotted your copybook by consorting with me. Malleus Fatuorum 19:59, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Found my way here when hit "what links here" for an NRHP article that has been pretty savagely disparaged here. The commenter wishes to eliminate short Wikipedia articles, in favor of including the same short text in one suitable list-article. However, the reasoning is flawed, because the commenter misses that there would be multiple suitable list-articles and other articles that could depend upon it. The same item should possibly be mentioned in several articles and included in several/many list-articles, e.g. perhaps List of notable Chinese-American stores in the United States, Examples of Szechuan architecture in the U.S., National Register of Historic Places listings in Monterey County, California, Visitor attractions in city of Monterey, California. For many NRHP items, it should be included in corresponding "Architect" or "List of works by Architect" article. It simply doesn't make sense to avoid creating one central, core article on the place. The core article should include more, and probably will, such as multiple photos and more detail. The list-articles that include an item on the place, should link to that, and include one photo and a summary drawn from it. But it would be foolhardy to try to keep separate, parallel summaries up-to-date in multiple list-articles with no central core location. So, a central core article for any item that could possibly be referenced in different ways (i.e. for practically every registered historic site) is needed.... --doncram 18:06, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

((US patent|12345))

Picking your brain a bit on something I haven't found an answer to. The US patent templates produce an inline external link to Google's (incomplete but adequate) patent service. Is this something I should avoid, instead using a standard citation for? It is handy, and looking at the GA criteria doesn't really tell me much. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 20:41, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Depends on your reviewer I guess, and as that's likely to be me I'll say that I don't like external links in the body of an article. I've made a small change to show you what I'd do. Malleus Fatuorum 20:51, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Regardless of reviewer, that looks much better and would appear to be the better way. I didn't think to use a template inside a citation, and didn't know you could, to be honest. I don't like the look of inline external links either, which is why I asked. Embedding the template in the citation is more than easy enough. I've fixed the others. You probably noticed that I went overboard in formatting the citations section, but they were getting to be a chore to maintain and read. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:10, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

• We are at the point of no return on American automotive manufacturing in the 1950s, with all the facts sourced, and the overall structure and organization more or less complete, and all the content and citation pretty much in place. This is the point at which you would either jump in and pretty it up if you were going to, or hold back and I would do that if you prefer to be eligible to review it for GA. It isn't ready for submission yet, but could be within a week. I know you have a certain affinity for the topic and I'm completely fine with any decision you make. Much of this was started with your trimming of the other article, so you may feel a bit invested and want to help finish it, understandably. I think we both agree that whatever is best for the article, thus Wikipedia, is paramount. It is the biggest undertaking I've attempted as an editor here and I completely trust your judgement as to the best uses of your talents for the article. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:20, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

  I'm fine with leaving it to you Dennis and jumping in when it comes to review time. Malleus Fatuorum 08:11, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

  I will take that as a compliment of sorts, that it isn't completely disorganized or out of scope. I've submitted the request for a GA review now. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:00, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

  I haven't actually looked at the article yet to be honest Dennis, but be sure I'll be all over it like a swarm of locusts quite shortly. I've always thought that GA reviews are collaborative ventures, so I'm sure it will end up just fine. Fingers crossed. Malleus Fatuorum 16:10, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

  As I told someone else, I expect no favors (if anything, I figure you will be tougher on me). My goal isn't the pip, it's the experience. I appreciate your participation here. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:22, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

  I tend to be a little tougher where the article is already at a good level (or I hate the nominator), to try and push it along a little further, but I like to think I'm always fair. It takes an hour or two before new nominations show up in the list, so I probably won't be able to pick up the review until later this evening. Unless someone else picks it up before I do, in which I'll climb over the barricade and help you. Malleus Fatuorum 16:35, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Query...

Could I rephrase "What non-local goods that appear in the archaeological record are usually luxury goods." to "Non-local goods appearing in the archaeological record are usually luxury goods."? I'm trying to learn this whole "brevity" is the spice of writing thing... Ealdgyth - Talk 18:14, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

That seems fine to me. Malleus Fatuorum 18:16, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! If I disturb something you feel strongly about, feel free to revert. I'm mainly adding explanatory footnotes and culling stray "the"s. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:21, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Just one thing Ealdgyth: "The political structure of western Europe changed with the end of the empire. Although the activity of the barbarians is usually described as "invasions", they were not just military expeditions but migrations of entire peoples into the Empire". Are we going with "empire" or "Empire"? I'd lean towards "empire", but we obviously need to be consistent. Malleus Fatuorum 22:46, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Careful with "the"s. I find American editors use fewer than are found in British English and American academic published English. In particular sentences beginning say "The historian Bill Sykes ..." need the "the". Johnbod (talk) 12:48, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

In American publications, only The New Yorker is truly anal about including the "the" on a consistent basis. Whichever you choose, as Mal says, you have to be consistent. DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 13:21, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'd agree Johnbod. I'm quite accustomed to seeing sentences start "Historian Bill Sykes ..." Doesn't send me into a swoon at all, unlike the misuse of "due to" or "however". Malleus Fatuorum 15:27, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm very accustomed to seeing them on WP, & changing them if I can be bothered, but not in books published by Yale UP etc, or the top US journals, who sub-edit it away. It's a key marker of journalese, & accepted in The New York, but not London, Times. Johnbod (talk) 15:33, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I've just looked a few of my own contributions, and it's a construction I seem to use fairly regularly, as in the Green Children of Woolpit: "Historian Derek Brewer's explanation is even more prosaic: ...". To stick a "The" in front of that sentence would seem entirely artificial to me. Malleus Fatuorum 15:45, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Besides, in this particular case I've let Ealdgyth keep all her "In the 13th century, mendicant orders ..." commas, as it's not a uniquely English subject. But these are minor matters that shouldn't distract from what is a truly magnificent effort on Ealdgyth's part, on a topic I think very few would have dared to touch. I'm full of admiration for what's she's done. Malleus Fatuorum 16:04, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll second that. The one that really gets me is a sentence beginning "French artist Paul Gaugin..." which we get a lot of. Does an adjective make any difference to you? Johnbod (talk) 17:43, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I think it does, not sure why. Malleus Fatuorum 19:46, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Got the sentence you suggested, Malleus. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:22, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

BTW, I changed the dates for Otto II, but there's maybe something you know and I don't that makes 967 correct as the date he became Holy Roman Emperor. Malleus Fatuorum 15:30, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, Otto II was crowned emperor while his dad was alive - and was for all practical purposes co-emperor for those years. Germans were tricky that way. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:52, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps the Otto II article needs to be corrected then, but that's not your problem I know. Malleus Fatuorum 16:06, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I've finished my "last comb over" ... hunting for anything I forgot or needed explicated or that looked odd. I've double checked the images for licenses and sources. I've cited all the captions where information not in the image description is included. I've gone through the citations and references and made sure every citation has a corresponding bibliographic entry. I've made sure that the short citations are all consistent. I've checked for DAB links. I've checked for duplicate links (there are some, but most are at the bottom of the article where the original link was in the lead... 10,000 words between should allow a dup link!). Anything that I've forgotten? Ealdgyth - Talk 18:41, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't think so. Time for a deep breath and go for it. Malleus Fatuorum 19:48, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Salon article

Anyone else notice this this misguided response in Salon to the misguided NYT op-ed by the thoroughly unknown writer Amanda Filipacchi that was discussed here some time ago? Nothing to be done about it, I suppose, except try to educate this Andrew Leonard guy — but if he couldn't be bothered to take the few minutes it would have taken to try to understand the category system, I doubt that he's educable... DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 20:32, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Are we reading the same article? Leonard's position seems quite reasonable to me. And as for categories, what a gigantic PITA they are even at the best of times. Malleus Fatuorum 21:21, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

The title is "Wikipedia's Shame", with a subtitle including "the lust for revenge". He describes the issue (which was a tempest in a teapot), the overreaction (by a single editor), and the fact that by the end of the week, all was essentially resolved. The system worked. Where's the "shame"? DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 22:36, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

The shame is that he's undoubtedly correct in suggesting that the lust for revenge motivates a good many editors, as RfA teaches you. Malleus Fatuorum 22:41, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

By our nature, one editor can say silly things and it is forever in the history, but Andrew seems to spend most of the article painting us all with the same brush, to then offer a crumb at the end. I'm not saying that criticism of many things here isn't warranted (we each criticize enwp ourselves, regularly), but like most of the media, he seems oblivious with how wikis work. He spent a lot of (unnecessary) effort seemingly defending the NYT. I wouldn't call it stellar journalism. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 02:08, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Malleus that Leonard's position is more nuanced than most of you admit, and that Leonard is correct that agenda-driven angry editors control many articles. Revenge is an important animus at RfA and ANI.

The original NYT article was written by somebody having trouble with the notion of set inclusion. However, the NYT is one of the world's best newspapers. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 07:03, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Maybe I've just been lucky (or naive), but I don't run into many of those "agenda-driven angry editors"; perhaps I'm editing the wrong stuff! And yes, NYT loves to remind us (and itself) of its best-ness on an annoyingly constant basis. My regard for the Gray Lady has decreased steadily over the years — as has its quality, IMHO. But New York is the only US city left with 4 daily newspapers (I can't think of more than a couple that have even two), so we take what we can get. DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 13:32, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I'd say you've been lucky, or don't edit on issues such as 9/11 or Irish Republicanism. Malleus Fatuorum 13:38, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Filipacchi isn't as unknown as you claim, and a lot of the backlash was along the lines of "but they just don't understand". "Blaming the reader" is not a fruitful way to answer this, it was pointed at the CfD for the American women novelists (or whichever one it was). Our category system is a mess, and it also appears to be skewed. On top of that, yesterday it became clear to me that there is indeed the appearance of a kind of revenge. That doesn't make the Filipacchi articles or the Salon piece all that great and well-balanced, but still. Drmies (talk) 17:24, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I never thought I'd say this, but I agree with MF; the Good Doctor has been lucky. But the NYT columnist is confused. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:34, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

"I never thought I'd say this, but I agree with MF". You might be surprised how many people eventually find themselves saying that. Malleus Fatuorum

Malleus Maleficarum ....

Did I mention I picked up a copy of this? I had to ... thought of you when I got it. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:55, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Strangely enough I've never read it. A little like you with your Normans I guess, I don't find witchcraft particularly interesting until the 17th century, when the essence of its religious roots start to become evident and people began to think more clearly about what is after all an impossible crime. Malleus Fatuorum 18:14, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

See, I'm the other way around: whenever I see Malleus's username, I think of that book. Well, that and The Metal Opera. MALLEUS MALEFICARUM--THE LAW!!! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:03, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I've sometimes thought of changing my username, but then I wake up. Malleus Fatuorum 18:16, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

No, you shouldn't, it's a good username. I always thought it meant "hammer of fools", but I don't really know Latin, so I have no idea if that's right or not. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:24, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

That's exactly right. In fact I was forced to change it fairly on in my "career" to a non-sexist version, having originally chosen Malleus Fatuaram, which some took to mean a hammer of female fools. Malleus Fatuorum 18:30, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

What are the odds--I walked into the copy room just now and on top of a stack of papers, apparently used by our College Bowl team, is the question "What is Malleus Maleficarum?" Drmies (talk) 18:40, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Now you can tell them it's a fucking book they all ought to have been familiar with if they're over the age of 14. Or words to that effect anyway. Malleus Fatuorum 19:51, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Now the Karma Sutra is a fucking book.....not this one. (sorry, couldn't help myself) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:53, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

malus malus malus non est magnum, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:10, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

It isn't, but it can be fun nevertheless. Malleus Fatuorum 21:17, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

"Parenthetical commas"??

Hi, I need some advice -- I have a guy adding "parenthetical commas" to D. B. Cooper. Example: "...hijacked a Boeing 727 aircraft in the airspace between Portland, Oregon, and Seattle, Washington, on November 24, 1971..." He claims that commas after state names are "necessary" because the state names are parenthetical; that is, the commas function as brackets. I say they serve only to obfuscate -- and I've never heard of such a rule anyway; it's certainly not in WP:MOS. (Discussion on his talk page is here.) Edit warring over commas seems absurd, but what else can I do, other than reverting him, and telling him it's ridiculous, both of which I already tried? Any help appreciated. DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 15:57, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I think he's right, the commas should be there. Malleus Fatuorum 16:13, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, you're no help at all! :-) I thought you, of all people, might favor less commas over more; but I stand (sit) corrected. DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 17:28, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Commas have their place, and they're sometimes necessary to avoid ambiguity. Sorry to have disappointed you. Malleus Fatuorum 20:05, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Agreed; I just don't think that routinely putting them after state names is one of those times. One, between city & state, should be plenty. But I've moved on. DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 20:33, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I hope that my friend Malleus would agree that a look at Apposition will clarify that non-restrictive appositives, single nouns included, are normally set off with commas. --RexxS (talk) 23:07, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I might, if I had any idea what an appositive is. Is it something you stick up your bum? I leave all that technical stuff to my good friend Drmies; I just go with what feels right to me. Malleus Fatuorum 23:13, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I pulled an appositive out of a patient's bum once, when I was working ERs. I think that's what he called it... DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 00:50, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

When Malleus says you need more commas rather than less fewer, then you need more commas. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 19:24, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Rather like Malleus, I'm not intimately familiar with grammatical rules and go by what sounds right, but I'd say you definitely need the commas after the state names. The MoS (MOS:COMMA) also seems to agree. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:43, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

In the US it's certainly mandatory (it's really that strong and widespread) to put commas after states (and, in the date format used in the example, after the year). BE may vary. Appositives are--no, I can't make that butt analogy work. They're beautiful, though, unlike...well, I'll stop there. Drmies (talk) 20:00, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Split infinitives? Dyson vacuum hoses? My mind is rampant with possibilities given the variety in this thread. - Sitush (talk) 23:40, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I've pulled both of those out of butts too. Well, it was a split something...

BUT ... not to belabor the point (or the grotesque metaphor) ... I couldn't pull anything like this supposed rule out of MOS:COMMA ... and I looked pretty carefully ...

And none of the several medical publications that I write for take me to task for omitting commas after states, not that that means much of anything... DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 23:50, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

My problem is that I don't know the names of American states, so "Portland, Oregon, and Seattle, Washington," sounds like four different places with a misplaced "and", no matter how many commas you use. Why not use ( )? - John O'London (talk) 08:04, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Please feel free to contribute to the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Commas in geographical names. Malleus, you may have better luck convincing them than I have. —sroc (talk) 10:26, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Tyntesfield

Would you be king enough to take a peek at Tyntesfield, with a view to improving my grammar before a possible GA nomination?— Rod ^talk 19:15, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm no king Rod, but nominate it and I'll do the copyedit and review in one fell swoop. Malleus Fatuorum 20:03, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Subtle but real

Took me awhile, but I finally discovered the difference between '''x''' and ;x in Refs section. (Thanks!) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 04:51, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Orange bar

Given the furore that seems to be developing, I think it best to let you know that I mentioned this talk page in this edit. - Sitush (talk) 23:34, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I noticed; the new system isn't all bad. But it's bloody ridiculous that it doesn't link to the posting, as the orange bar used to do. Malleus Fatuorum 00:10, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Funny but I get a pop up with all the last posting linked in a pop up window? Haven't tried to click them though. I hate that damn orange bar though....--Amadscientist (talk) 00:14, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Not in the social loop I guess. As I note this talk page is used for discussions of favorite beers and meet ups but When I am mentioned in your post Sitush...you feel that letting Malleus know about the mention of his talk page is more important to you but not that you were actually responding to me? A little insulting but then I am not in the social circle here.--Amadscientist (talk) 00:20, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

You should try hard not to feel insulted. Perhaps you can forgive Sitush not directly notifying you? After all he replied to you in the same thread that you were posting in, with the edit summary "cmt to Amadscientist" and the opening line "Eh? Amadscientist, you have seen ...". Anyway the snag that Malleus describes is apparent when you do click on the notification drop-down, expecting to be taken to the comment on your talk page that triggered the notification. No such luck - and if anybody replies to a earlier post on a busy talk page, you end up having to do a search (or going to page history) just to find where it is. Today's programme is brought to you by the word "retrograde". --RexxS (talk) 01:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Are we reading the same talk page Amadscientist? Right above this section I see a discussion of parenthetical commas, a request to look at the article on Tyntesfield, a discussion about the final tidying up of the Middle Ages article before FAC, another on the American automobile industry in the 1950s article pre-GAN, ... I could go on and on, but my point is that if anyone has the right to feel insulted it most certainly isn't you. Malleus Fatuorum 01:23, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

You should see my talk page, Amadscientist. It's like a pub where a bunch of deaf guys are yelling at each other and they ran out of beer hours ago. It's not a social circle anymore, just a bunch of anti-social dots. Malleus, I'm trying to teach Sippi how to play "Paperback Writer" on the guitar. I'm afraid I won't be retiring on her talent. And I feel the same way about the orange bar and its clickability. BTW, I had someone's revert of an edit of mine show up in the little notification thing. I hope it doesn't keep track of everything on my watchlist--that's thousands of articles, and a coordinated set of changes could bring OKeyes down in a heartbeat. Drmies (talk) 01:31, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps her talent lies elsewhere. How is she with fixing household appliances, or car electricals? I'm currently stripping down my dishwasher to try and discover why the water isn't heating up, could she help with that? Malleus Fatuorum 01:40, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I just read Wikipedia:Notifications, and now I actually know what I was guessing at earlier. She does like messing with tools, Malleus. Your heating element must be either malfunctioning, or a connection to it is broken (there wouldn't be a separate fuse for it, I suppose). I learned the hard way, today, that wires do break. Drmies (talk) 02:28, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

There was some fun in here. Not a lot of traffic in the FA review. Silence = consent? Drmies (talk) 02:45, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

It's a Bosch, and I've learned from looking around the Internet that there's a common fault with the soldering in the control block, so that's the first thing I need to look at. The FA review is indeed disappointingly quiet, obviously not much interest in ancient science fiction. Malleus Fatuorum 15:23, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Malleus, I left a note on the article talk page, "FAC review is now go". Drmies (talk) 22:16, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I've only just noticed that notifications thing. What does it do and if I don't like it, how do I get rid of it? Parrot of Doom 16:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Per this comment there is a script that brings the orange bar back, which can be seen here. Useight's Public Sock (talk) 20:31, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Orange popups

When I was a kid at a pool on a hot summer day, with the sunlight shimmering on the waves, the orange creamsicle was a treat. It is a pity that the article has no revealing image. blah Kiefer.Wolfowitz 20:59, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

When I was a kid at the pool on a hot day it was the swimsuits that became almost transparent when they got wet that caught my attention ... I've said enough. Malleus Fatuorum 23:06, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Someone find me a hook ...

For DYK in William de Warenne (justice). I'm at a loss. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:49, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

If you could explain in the article what a justice for the Jews was I think that might do it. Malleus Fatuorum 23:03, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

That might work. We'll see if I have any motivation after I finish my dinner (Which I just put on the stove). If not, there is always tomorrow. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

If I told you that my supper is going to be chicken jalfrezi with curried chickpeas and nan bread, where would you think I lived? Malleus Fatuorum 23:41, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I know better (grins). I'd avoid the curried anything, sorry. I'm not a fan of curry ... I don't eat spicy stuff as a general rule. (I quite honestly find black pepper to be too hot to have on my food most of the time). Mine was clam chowder with oyster crackers. Yum! Ealdgyth - Talk 23:44, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I love curries. The irony is that when I worked in Pakistan I wasn't allowed to eat them, except in my hotel, so I had to survive on pizzas and burgers during the day. Malleus Fatuorum 23:50, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK that although the Baron of Wormegay served under King John, he didn't quite fit in. Ning-ning (talk) 06:31, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK that William de Warenne, bla bla, was the son of a monk? Johnbod (talk) 18:14, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

…that it cost William de Warenne 500 marks to take his wife from Stansted to Wormegay? This will completely baffle Americans, but every European will get it; it relies on the fact that "Stansted" is to Europe as "O'Hare" is to the US, as the hub for virtually every cheap airline in Europe.

Is "Stanstead in Essex" a correct-but-archaic spelling and contraction, or a typo? The town in Essex which was the seat of the Mountfitchet family (and still houses Mountfitchet Castle—Nev1, why is that still red?) is Stansted Mountfitchet, and AFAIK has been since Domesday. "St Mary Overy" also looks odd to me, as I've never seen it spelled any way other than "Overie". (It shouldn't redirect to Southwark Cathedral either, as SMO is the area and not just one building in the area, but that's by the by.) – iridescent 19:11, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

My source very specifically states "Stanstead" - I double checked the spelling. However, the source it's referecing does use "Stansted". I've fixed the link. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:21, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

How about the slightly ambiguous "Did you know that from 1194 to 1196 William de Warenne was responsible for the honour of Gloucester?" I'm sure many readers would be a little intrigued by that. Richerman (talk) 20:00, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Iridescent, either you overestimate Europeans, or you think they're like you lot. I'd never heard of Stansted. I like Richerman's intrigue. Drmies (talk) 00:10, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Stanstead's the gateway to Belarus (like Balham is the gateway to the South), and Belarus is the home of the foot-long gherkin. Ning-ning (talk) 05:11, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

American automobile industry in the 1950s

Thanks again for all your help in reviewing and instructing. Knowing when to tell me where I made a mistake, when to only show me part of the answer, and when to just tweak it yourself made it a very educational and painless experience. I've really enjoyed working with you on the two auto related articles and hope we can do more in the future. My Sunbeam Tiger book just came in the mail, so I would say that is very good timing. Actually, it is a collection of articles from 37 different sources over the years, properly cited. A Wikipedian's dream. Too bad you don't live nearby, I would loan it to you, although I might never get it back. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:48, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

You probably wouldn't. I haven't had a look around yet to see what I can find on the Tiger, but I'm optimistic we'll be able to do something with it. I've got a couple of other things I need to finish off first though. Malleus Fatuorum 00:36, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

No hurry, this is your baby, I'm just along for the ride. I'm still recovering from respiratory issues, so a bit sluggish. About to have a tea, curl up with dogs and the wife, and call it a night. I will dig in to the book tomorrow. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:50, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Sunbeam Tiger

I noticed both you and User:Dennis Brown working on this. I'm going only on memory here, so I could be wrong on both of these:

1. There was a series of young-teen books that I read years ago called "Black Tiger", and I think the Sunbeam may have been featured in a couple of those. Author's last name may have been O'Conner, but I think that was just a pen name.
2. IIRC there was an Elvis Presley movie with one of these in it as well.

I'm not sure either is relevant to the article you're both building, just thought I'd mention it. (may fall into the WP:NOTTRIVIA area, idk) — Ched :  ?  19:24, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• I have a link to all the movies it was in on the original talk page, and some other links. We are now working on it in user space here, which allows us to be a bit sloppier in the building process, something I'm known for ;-). I will just do a history merge when we are done. Thanks for the these tips as well, it all helps. This is a bit more challenging to source than most, but I'm confident we can create a very nice article that is worthy of a GA when we are done. I was ignorant of the car when we started, but already developing an affinity for the little beasty. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 19:55, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

• I have a morbid hatred for all the "in popular culture" stuff. My bottom line is that if the material can't be integrated into the article then it has no place in the article. In other words, what does telling me that Maxwell Smart drove a Tiger tell me about the Tiger? It could be integrated by relating that he didn't actually drive a Tiger at all, as with the space occupied by the V8 engine there would have been no space available for his under-bonnet machine gun. Malleus Fatuorum 20:06, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Uxbridge

Thanks for your review of the article and for the improvements you made. Harrison49 (talk) 21:40, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I hope you didn't find the experience too stressful. It's a nice article. Malleus Fatuorum 21:48, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Well....

Middle Ages isn't doing too badly. But I find I'm having a lot less enthusiasm for Crusades and working it up to GA or FA status. I think I'll go back to the Normans and stick there... I've never really liked the Crusades. Eventually Norman conquest of England will finish up at A-class Mil-hist review and be able to go to FAC. And I've got to get back to Battle of Hastings. If I can just get motivated on Harold Godwinson, I'd have a nice little good topic going... Ealdgyth - Talk 19:31, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and I've got another bad-boy cleric coming along ... Roger Norreis. He's a "fun" guy... should be fun to dig up some of the quotes about his behavior for the FA workup! Ealdgyth - Talk 19:32, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

To be honest Ealdgyth it's going far better than I'd imagined possible. Oh, and I've been watching a re-run of that BBC TV series on the Normans. Fascinating subject. Malleus Fatuorum 19:37, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

And in the meantime I'm working on some really important stuff, the Sunbeam Tiger. I've got an itch to try and get a car article up to FAC, but reliable sourcing is proving strangely problematic. I've done witch trials, novels, hoaxes, settlements, peat bogs and God knows what else, so a car would be good to add to that. I think workhouse might be the next one up though, once I've integrated the material PoD has dug up on the treatment of the dead. For some reason I've struggled with the structure of that article right from the off. Malleus Fatuorum 19:43, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I know the feeling on structure - I've got issues with it on Crusades. So much easier to deal with a biography - they sorta structure themselves. What I know about fine cars is pretty slim - first hubby wanted a Lotus so I had to go to the dealership a couple million times to drool. I prefer pickups, myself. More practical. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:59, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Hopefully he didn't buy one, as they spend more time in the garage than they do on the road. Or as he's your ex-hubby maybe you take some quiet satisfaction in knowing that. Malleus Fatuorum 20:06, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

No, we didn't buy one. (And he's only an ex in that he died.... lesson from that .. don't smoke. Lung cancer is not pretty and it's not fun to die before your child is 12). Ealdgyth - Talk 20:13, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh gosh, I feel like a schmuk now for having assumed you were divorced. I've never smoked, and I hate it and all its paraphernalia, but my my wife smokes far more than is good for her. We once had a deal that I'd become vegetarian if she'd stop smoking, she was that convinced I couldn't live without meat. I actually found it quite easy, but she cracked after three days. Malleus Fatuorum 20:20, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

It's been long enough (and I've remarried, obviously) that it's not a big gaping wound, so don't worry. Not to say I don't miss him, but... time does at least heal over all wounds. Jack could never have quit. He was still smoking the day he actually died. However, the first thing I insisted on with hubby #2 when we started getting serious was that he quit. And he's been quit for 9 years. I don't think I could give up meat - I like the occasional steak too much, but we have cut back our meat eating a good bit. My weakness is carbs - I could never go on a paleo diet... ugh! Ealdgyth - Talk 20:41, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I've just seen an American TV news report about lots of schools in the southern states of America having separate white and black proms, as apparently the law doesn't prohibit that kind of racist bollocks. What the fuck is that all about? Does middle America still live in the Middle Ages? Malleus Fatuorum 01:01, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Having lived in the south for 19 years, I think that's bullshit. I've never heard of that.. it's always possible that there are a few weird spots, but ... it's also possible that they are privately organized. Keep in mind the media likes to exaggerate as well as assume that some aberation is the "normal". That would hardly be "normal" is the vast majority of the US. For that matter, I live in the Bible Belt and my son just had a speech in his high school from an openly lesbian fellow student about being lesbian. So it's not nearly so neanderthal around here as is sometimes protrayed overseas. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:12, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

I haven't seen that, although we do have all black colleges and dorms, but it is only legal if the black students request it. It is an odd situation, as that still sounds like racism to me, just of a different type. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:14, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

You simply wouldn't be allowed to do anything like that here. Weird that it's allowed in the US. Malleus Fatuorum 01:55, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

The one I heard about a few months ago was a prom segregated in a practical manner (don't know if that's the same one linked below; the transcript didn't make that clear) and apparently there were others like it: the white parents and students organize a private prom, in some hotel or restaurant, and don't go to the school prom. A lot of segregation is self-segregation, I suppose, certainly on the white side. Ealdgyth, there's bible belt and Bible Belt; I think I live in the latter--or, at best, that latter starts just outside city limits. Or, to cite an example of historical/geographical segregation, compare the statistics (population and income) between Lowndesboro, Alabama with White Hall, Alabama, which is just up the road from Lowndesboro. In Montgomery, it's a set of statistics combined with historical developments (including desegregation and the attendant rise in private schools with, most recently, white flight, coupled with a tax system heavily skewed toward sales tax) that keeps black schools and neighborhoods black. The recent economic downturn hasn't helped either. Drmies (talk) 05:04, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

The report is on BBC News right now Ealdgyth, but maybe you can't get that in the US? The story was actually about two students, one black one white, who raised money on the Internet to put on the first racially integrated prom their school had ever had. It happened in Georgia, and was reported by ABC News.[6] Malleus Fatuorum 01:53, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Don't get the BBC here and it isn't on their website, I will have to look that up tomorrow. I live between Greensboro (Greensboro sit-ins) and Charlotte (Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education), so it is safe to say that this part of the country is integrated, and I believe that forcing separate proms for blacks and whites goes against a whole slew of laws, literally dozens of them, including the 1964 Civil Rights Act, so pardon if I'm a little skeptical until I hear more. There has to be more to that story, or that city would be full of protestors and lawyers. Now, if you want to discriminate against gays and lesbians, well that is perfectly legal most places here, except the military (finally). Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 02:09, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I read about that a couple of weeks ago. Apparently they had their integrated prom, and it went well. I agree that it is sad that something like race would still be an issue...Go Phightins! 02:13, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

It's a damn sight more than "sad". It's offensive in the extreme that US law apparently allows racially segregated proms. Malleus Fatuorum 02:17, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

I've always been under the impression that proms aren't officially sponsored by the school, and as such are private gatherings with guests determined by whomever the host is...I imagine that this was one of those things that has been one way for so long and no one ever bothered to change it, but good for the kids who did. Go Phightins! 02:20, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

I was labouring under the illusion that this was 2013, but maybe it's 1913 in the US? Malleus Fatuorum 02:36, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

No country is perfect! There is love everywhere! Segregated prom is an old tradition that is dying off now....just a latent oddity that no longer makes any sense, but has held on in a few isolated spots due more to tradition than actual bigotry. Some things on both sides of the pond don't makes sense to us...United States Census of 1890 lists 3,273 African Americans who claimed to be Confederate veterans.--MONGO 03:18, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

It is on the BBC's web site Dennis, just do a search on "proms". Malleus Fatuorum 02:15, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Heard about that and I certainly was amazed that such a thing still happens. Doubt it was motivated out of racism, though. More likely it was just continuing the classic American tradition of laziness. For us ignunt 'Murricans wanting to know more, here's what dem liberal commies at the New York Times reported about it.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 03:57, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

It's been in the article Wilcox County High School for a while - I remember being amazed at it while stub-sorting the article early in April. 2013 and that sort of thing still happens (well, happened till this year) in the "land of the free". Wow. PamD 07:57, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Another for the TPSs....

William of Blois (poet) - DYK hook out of that? And thank you to User:Wadewitz who got me two articles that fleshed this poor obscure guy out a bit more... Ealdgyth - Talk 20:43, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Kind of leaps out I think: "... that the major themes represented in the 12-century dramas written by William of Blois are guile, deception, lust and sexual scheming?" Malleus Fatuorum 20:50, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm so pure and innocent that those sorts of thoughts would never leap out at me... (tries to keep a straight face). Ealdgyth - Talk 21:00, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

...that he wrote a poem about a sexual encounter between a transvestite and a brick wall? (according to the article) Ning-ning (talk) 07:32, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I hate hyphens...

Sorry. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:13, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

First commas -- now hyphens . . . were I a semicolon I'd be pretty nervous right now... DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 22:20, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

If you're a semicolon then you ought to be looking over your shoulder, although I'm generally quite fond of them when used correctly. Malleus Fatuorum 22:22, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Yep, that's what they told the Jews...DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 22:32, 8 May 2013 (UTC) (Relax, I'm Jewish)

My father-in-law has a semi-colon, I don't recommend them. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:33, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Those Zs had better watch out too ;-) notice I slipped in a semicolon and a hyphen there? Richerman (talk) 22:36, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

• I take objection to the BE spelling in that article. Where I'm from, we're still in the middle ages. Richerman, TWSS. Drmies (talk) 01:47, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Mount Vernon

I have been thinking you might like to join me in a small project. A month or so ago I rewrote and expanded Mount Vernon and now seems to have settled down. It has some references, but needs an interior section, which I can do - with that added, I don't think it would be far from a GA. It need carefully checking for copyvio, although I have rewritten most of it, some might be there. Its always a worry when a page is dependent on online sources because of the ability to copy and paste. The page has 600 hits a day, so is quite important to our American friends, so it would be nice to bring it up to standard for them. However, I need your GA skills; the problem will be keeping the rubbish and tat out (eg: The place's shop sells "The George Washington crystal cube - shaped paperweight hand-etched with George Washington’s profile and his distinctive signature. The polished planes of the 3” cube are beveled at the edges. This work of art stands at an angle, catching the light from all sides." It could perhaps be the start of a series of American landmarks - perhaps the White House next - that's an over-imaged mess too. I would be prepared to accept a collapsed info box for this page, as they are growing on me - I have already removed an oversized box from the page and nobody objected.  Giano  07:17, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I'd be happy to help out Giano, but my time may be limited until after the weekend. Malleus Fatuorum 07:58, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

well I am failrly limited until the weekend, but there's no hurry, it's been waiting a couple of hundred years already.  Giano 

I checked, but the history does not yet validate semi-protection, even with a lowered threshold given that it's such a high-visibility article. Nice work, by the way. Drmies (talk) 21:31, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll give the refs a preliminary clean up, but your copyediting skills will be needed: "Congress passed a joint resolution to construct a marble monument in the United States Capitol for his body, supported by Martha." - she was a lot stronger than she looked. --RexxS (talk) 21:32, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I see Drmies has been collecting all those orphaned commas Malleus has cast aside so brutally ready to give them a home. Richerman (talk) 21:56, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Richerman, that was an awkward sentence. Not all commas are evil, not always. Drmies (talk) 23:07, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I know, just trying to redress the balance a little. Richerman (talk) 23:31, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

If only our cousins across the pond had discovered the semi-demi-colon, he could have used up those commas two at a time. --RexxS (talk) 22:21, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Or the hemi-demi-semi-colon - oh! the unbridled joy of all those hyphens. Richerman (talk) 22:29, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, crap! 99% of humanity can't even use apostrophes correctly. Do you want to see the world burn? DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 22:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I just use lots, and lots, of commas, and poor grammar, which drives Malleus crazy, and compels him, literally, to go in, and fix it. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:51, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I sometimes feel like a lone voice in the wilderness; "for Christ's sake no more fucking commas, Wikipedia has way more than enough of them already". Malleus Fatuorum 23:31, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Except for "parenthetical commas", n'est-ce pas? DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 10:55, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Do fucking commas usually start off with a 69? Richerman (talk) 23:36, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm shocked at you Richerman; let's hope that Ealdgyth doesn't see this. Malleus Fatuorum 23:57, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

She's far too pure and innocent to understand it (now I'm struggling to keep a straight face) Richerman (talk) 00:07, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to have seemed to dumped this on you Malleus and then disappeared. Lucrative, but essential RL matters suddenly arose and time has been limited. Hope to have an hour or two tomorrow to write an interiors section. You seem to be doing OK though without me.  Giano  18:00, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm plodding through it, bit by bit. I'm conscious though it might seem to some like two Americans working on the Glastonbury or Stonehenge articles, so I'm trying to tread carefully. Malleus Fatuorum 18:10, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Not much different than me working on William the Conqueror or Norman conquest of England. I can always go through and fix your spelling "mistakes" for you (laughs). Ealdgyth - Talk 18:13, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Quite right Ealdgyth, but I know what you mean Malleus. I would try to write something tonight, but am too tired and a glass of dodgy Australian Shiraz has not helped (they should ban that nation from producing wine). I would not worry too much about our American cousins, it was pretty hopeless when they had it on their own [7] and initially I trod pretty carefully too, but I don't think they are that interested - strange. Anyhow, they will see you as the cavalry riding into the Aramo or wherever it was their cavalry rode so splendidly.  Giano  18:22, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

So far as I recall the Americans were pretty much wiped out by the Mexicans at the Alamo, although Yul Brynner got his own back in The Magnificent Seven. Anyway, I have to pick you up on your opinion of Australian wine. I have a glass of Australian red in front of me now. It's on special offer at Asda at three bottle for £10, a little on the expensive side perhaps, but very tasty nevertheless. Malleus Fatuorum 18:54, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Ealdgyth, please feel free to fix my spelling mistakes. I don't really fully understand some American spelling and grammar conventions, so I just muddle through as best I can. Malleus Fatuorum 18:46, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Forgot

1684 German edition

1659 German edition

...to put in an edit summary. What do you think? Someone at the graphics lab made this for me. I'm not happy with the placement, though. Drmies (talk) 03:03, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

• What if we move the cover of the second edition down to the "Dating evidence" section? Drmies (talk) 03:06, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

  Good idea, I've just done that. Malleus Fatuorum 03:42, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

• Excellent. Now, can you write up Louis Davids? Aren't you shocked we don't have an article on him yet? And isn't it six AM where you're at? What's for breakfast? Drmies (talk) 03:50, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

  No, it's just coming up to 5 am. And breakfast is bacon, sausage, eggs and baked beans. I'm getting ready to take off for the weekend, so I probably won't be back to help until Sunday evening at the earliest. Look after the shop while I'm gone. Malleus Fatuorum 03:57, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, that does look good. It would be fun to have a good picture of him and his gansas. We could cut from the title page and enlarge. You know, there's a different image in that German facsimile, very odd. I've taken pictures. Baked beans? For breakfast? Sheesh. Drmies (talk) 04:07, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
• My iPhone distorts straight lines, obviously, and I don't know why the image is rotated. Maybe Crisco, who thinks he's so smart and must be in a bad mood tonight, can take care of it. Anyway, I could scan these flatter and better--but I wanted you to see how different these images are. I suppose that engravings were freely copied and redone. Drmies (talk) 04:35, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

  I like the second of those images in particular, and we could surely find a place for that. Maybe you're unfamiliar with one of the staples of our diet here in the UK, baked beans in tomato sauce? Anyway, I must leave you now, toodle pip. Malleus Fatuorum 06:49, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

  Drmies, did you need a crop? Let's see... 11 May... I was expanding Lie Kim Hok. Not particularly angry. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:15, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

• I fixed (sort of) the first one although much information has been lost due to the non-flat page and light washing out some of the image. Let me know if you'd like me to do the same with the second one. Parrot of Doom 08:21, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

  If you could do the same with the second one that would be great, thanks. Malleus Fatuorum

  • And I just realised that had my mother kept her maiden name, I'd share the same name as Godwin's father. How odd. Parrot of Doom 08:24, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
    • PoD, thanks, but don't waste your time: I'll scan it properly on Monday. I might even try and do it today, if I make it to the office. Drmies (talk) 13:24, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
      • This proved a lot more difficult than I thought. I may not even get it done today--I have one poor scan, and one of the opposite page. Drmies (talk) 14:24, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
      • OK, I got it done anyway: higher quality image are uploaded to Commons, though I don't yet see that higher quality here. Drmies (talk) 14:55, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Tri-Five

I had one just like this as a teen, but in rough condition. It didn't make me cool, sadly. -db

Just got in a really good book to finally source this, thinking about trying to work it up to GA quality after we get done on the Sunbeam Tiger, and wanted to ask a silly question. The article now has three galleries, which makes it fun and interesting, but I'm guessing galleries are frowned upon for GA? I am guessing I can expand the prose by at least 3 or 4 times (might even try for a DYK just for fun), but there still might not be room for all the images I would like without a gallery. I'm more concerned about making it a fun, well illustrated and high quality article than I am getting the GA pip itself, but if I can do both, all the better. It would help if I know ahead of time what the expectations would be. I figured either you or some of your stalkers could educate me on this point. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 00:41, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

There's no doubt in my mind that there are way too many images in that article, galleries or no, and that too many of them look almost identical. If I was doing a GA review of that I wouldn't pass it, as failing GA criterion 6b, but that's arguably a matter of interpretation of WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE#Pertinence and encyclopedic nature and to a lesser extent WP:GALLERIES. Galleries really only work for me when they're illustrating an essential aspect of a subject, the classic example being a collection of an artist's work. The images in this article just look like nerdy fancruft. ("A gallery is not a tool to shoehorn images into an article".) What does a close up of a 1956 headlamp show me, or a car in police livery? Especially as we aren't even told that the police used the Chevy. Some of the claims in this article have me shaking my head as well, such as "Even now, the 1957 Chevrolet Bel Air is one of the most sought after collector cars ever produced." Apart from the fact that it wasn't produced as a "collector car", "most sought after" where? Certainly not in Europe. Malleus Fatuorum 11:55, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

A lesser man might take offense. (nerdy fancruft indeed!) The article was was admittedly an amateur effort to fix a red-link, which is why I'm trying to de-fluff it in user space. I purchased a book that covers the Tri-Five well, including all the background, engineering, stats, etc. From an engineering perspective, they stand alone when compared to the years before and after. I expect to use a lot of illustration (and better grammar) but in a more effective manner in the final product, so I take it that a gallery is a definite no-no, and I need to discriminate much more. I did so much research on the 1950s culture article, it seems a waste to not improve or create the articles around it, which are admittedly American biased in a manner equal to the sources. Thanks for the honest observations. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 13:32, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

You ought to know by now Dennis that anyone who doesn't honestly want to know what I think really ought not to ask me, 'cos I'll tell 'em, in words of one syllable if necessary ;-) Back on the subject of galleries though, depending on your GA reviewer I think you might get away with a reasonably sized one at the end of the article, if it was clearly serving a purpose such as demonstrating some significant differences between the model years for instance. But honestly, what does a picture of an engine beside a hot rod tell me? The gallery is a no-no if it's simply decorative in other words. Malleus Fatuorum 13:43, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

And that honesty is what keeps me coming back, as it saves time that flattery wastes. I think you nailed the idea I had originally, showing the differences, although my first effort was sloppy and perhaps a bit crufty. I'm going to slowly hammer away with it in my spare time, and may ping you later in the process. I don't expect it to be a huge article, but I think the popularity of the cars justifies adding context to complete the story. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 14:13, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Your evident enthusiasm for American metal is beginning to reawaken my own for old British classic cars. Malleus Fatuorum 14:39, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

The quality of car articles is often lacking yet they have the potential of presenting an interesting snapshot of recent human history and culture, so I would think that is a good thing. I've always been fascinated by how cars have shaped our history and how people in different countries have radically different tastes in autos, showing they play a part in the culture of those societies. In some ways, we are faced with the Chicken or the egg conundrum as 1950s American automobile culture showed us: did we change the car, or did the car change us? That, and fast cars are just cool. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 15:03, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

They are. The last time I took my Jag out a bunch of kids stopped to look as I was driving it gingerly across a narrow bridge over the ship canal (the XJ-S is monstrous compared to most other British cars; a German friend who visited refused to believe that it wasn't American because of its size), and I heard one of them say to his friends "Now, that's a top car". So the appeal is cross-generational. Malleus Fatuorum 18:36, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Not lecturing or being pissy...

Just wanted to put the reasons out plainly on the talk page for all the other editors, readers, etc. Didn't want you taking offence. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:27, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

That's fine Ealdgyth, makes sense. Malleus Fatuorum 11:26, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I need a bit of help or an admin

Can you suggest an admin who might look over the contributions to George Marsh (martyr)? I don't know anyone to ask? Thanks J3Mrs (talk) 12:51, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Either Dennis Brown or Drmies might by willing to help, and both of them are very reasonable people. In the meantime I'll take a look myself; don't want you getting yourself blocked over a silly 3RR. Malleus Fatuorum 12:55, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, I contacted Dennis Brown but I see you have been tidying up. J3Mrs (talk) 13:15, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I have, I just can't help myself. No doubt we'll get accused of "tag teaming" now, but what the Hell. Whatever you do here there's always someone who objects, so all you can do is what seems right to you. Malleus Fatuorum 13:47, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

This dispute seems to have quieted for now (see the other disputant's talkpage), but I've watchlisted the page. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 13:51, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Let's hope that's the end of it now. Malleus Fatuorum 13:55, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Editors like me who avoid dramaboards and who are not known to admins are at the mercy of pov pushers. I put up with it yesterday so I am grateful that Malleus helped. I know I shouldn't and no, it's not the first time but there must be an easier way of summoning assistance. J3Mrs (talk) 14:09, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

.... and while you were tidying up you left another lesson in referencing. :) J3Mrs (talk) 14:22, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

There are so many referencing options it's sometimes hard to pick the right one to be consistent. As for the pov problem, there's always ANI of course, but I tend to try and avoid that like the plague, as I've never had a good outcome there that I can recall. And when you're into content issues such as the relevance of Marsh's brother-in-law also being arrested as a Protestant there's a limit to what even admins can do, which is why you'll see so many spouting that "bright line" nonsense about 3RR. Which I didn't want you to fall foul of. People have got this idea that I'm anti-admin, but it's difficult to reconcile that with the fact that Drmies and I worked together on The Man in the Moone, which is currently at FAC, and Dennis and I are trying to prepare Sunbeam Tiger for a shot at GA. It's not the individuals I'm against, it's the institution. But in the meantime there's no reason why we can't try and help each other, as in this case, because if we don't, nobody else will. Malleus Fatuorum 14:28, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

You can always drop a note on my page if you have a concern with an editor. I would always prefer to try to talk with someone and work out a solution rather than going to ANI, if it is possible. Often times, it is just a matter of educating the editor of our guidelines on content and steering them in the right direction. That isn't even an "admin duty" really. It is just one editor talking to another, with the goal of not using the admin tools. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 15:10, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I would never go to the drama boards, I prefer to just plough on. Unfortunately I seem to irritate the pov pushers, especially those of a religious bent.....who seem to be the least open to reason. There are others but that's another story. What I need is a "rescue me" button because I am hopeless at quoting all those policies and if I vaguely remember one I can't remember how to find it. That's because I'm not the slightest bit interested in that sort of thing, I just have a sense of what's right and what's not. Nearly four years and still a novice. J3Mrs (talk) 15:53, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I find myself citing acronyms less and less. Common sense should prevail, but there can't be much common sense regarding policy unless one knows policy, more or less. There's lots of different kinds of context, and sometimes the alphabet soup is useful for rhetorical purposes. Dennis is much better at handling user conduct in a productive manner than I am, that's for sure. ANI should be a last resort. But a post on Malleus's talk page is a good alternative, given that there's 552 editors listed as watching it. On my shortlist of helpful admins, DGG and Favonian rank high, and for technical stuff Bbb23 and Writ Keeper. Drmies (talk) 17:30, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Jimmy Wales has 2873 watchers, so I'm pretty small beer. Malleus Fatuorum 18:31, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Still, you're a men among boys. Or, a woman among girls. A giraffe in a crowd of mongooses. Speaking of small beer, I bought a big bottle of Samuel Smith apricot ale. Summer's here, after all. What's your all-time favorite beer? Cheers, Drmies (talk) 18:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

When you say "beer", do you mean bitter, mild, lager? I've never liked any mild beer, and I rarely drink bitter these days, only on occasions to be polite. My current favourite beer is Amstel, but perhaps my all-time favourite would be Dunkel beer, which I don't think I've ever seen in the UK. The company I used to work for had its HQ in Munich, so I got to try out a few brands over there. Malleus Fatuorum 19:11, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be nice one day to be able to link to a decent article? Malleus Fatuorum 19:13, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Not only can you buy dunkel in the UK, a brewer of the stuff is just up the road from you. Waitrose do a surprisingly good own-brand as well. – iridescent 2 19:44, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

...and have a very nice pub that sometimes sells brews from other local brewers. Oh and nice food and a really interesting sloping floor. J3Mrs (talk) 19:53, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll have to look into that. A field trip may be in order. Malleus Fatuorum 19:55, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

OK, so bitter = pale ale. Yes, that's what I like, though not the India variety--too bitter for me. I drink the Belgian ales. In the possibly close to Dunkel category, I buy Einbecker whenever it's on sale (under $3 a bottle), and they have a dark variety as well. Theirs were the first bocks I ever liked. Here we have Shiner bock, which is kind of like smoking banana peel, if the college kids are right--the first one was real good, everyone after that a disappointment. I like the idea of a field trip; consider asking the WMF for a grant. I'm sure you know how to write the request for funding. Drmies (talk) 04:37, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

India Pale Ale here bears no resemblance to the similarly-named product in the former colonies; here, it's generally weaker than usual, while over there it's generally stronger. Like many things, I much prefer it here. Besides Dunkel, which I agree is amazing, a New World product worth a mention is Negra Modelo from Mexico. I always thought of it as Mexican Guinness. Unusual but rather nice. --John (talk) 05:25, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm having a Michelob Ultra right now (which probably just set off your gag reflex). I am looking forward to going to the Yadkin Valley Wine Festival and the North Carolina Wine Festival in the coming weeks, however. I've already fixed the one red link, hoping my visit will be enough to spark my interest in fixing the other. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 21:33, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm having a Polish beer, Tyskie, which is a nice everyday lager, in an effort to drown my sorrows after the bitter disappointment of discovering earlier that our opus could never qualify for DYK. Malleus Fatuorum 21:50, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

"It was a woman who drove me to drink, and I never had the courtesy to thank her for it." - W. C. Fields [8]

As wordy as I tend to be, had I handled the prose it would have qualified but been a lesser article for the experience. Worthwhile trade. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER

We could probably pump it up to a five-times expansion over the next five days if we really wanted to, as it's only about 7 kB short right now and there's still quite a bit to say, but the game's not really worth the candle. Malleus Fatuorum 23:08, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

We will see, if we get close, I may file it anyway, knowing we will meet the minimum by the time someone reviews it a few days later. Do commas count towards the prose limit? ;-) Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 23:25, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

As excellent a choice as Tyskie is, the psychological impact of having a colour scheme so similar to that of Red Stripe is enough to put me off. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 22:34, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Its growing, boss. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 00:18, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Up to 13 kB already, only another 7 kB to go. Malleus Fatuorum 00:34, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

That's what you needed, more American influence. Big and bloated (like our cars), with too much to say. :) Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 00:56, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

You know, several sources like "hemmings" [9] make comparisons to the Cobra, which was also a shelby design, putting a big motor in a UK frame. That should be worth two sentences. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 01:04, 15 May 2013 (UTC)nm, I see the one sentence, although more could be said if you were so inclined.

I want to say more about the project being done behind Lord Rootes' back, about Chrysler's decision to pull the plug on the Tiger, and about its competition history in the US, which you may be able to find some info on. Shelby was apparently sent one of the Jensen prototypes to race, but did he actually race it? Malleus Fatuorum 01:47, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm off to bed, but wanted to drop this link I found [10] simply for the images, which I think you will appreciate. The most detailed I've found although it is far from stock. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 02:26, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

• More on beer: I'm drinking a Duvel to the health of IP99's wife, who is recovering from surgery. We drank the Samuel Smith apricot ale today, which was very tasty with a surprisingly full body. For fruity beer I'll take a lambic any day, but this was a nice deviation from the usual Belgian path. Drmies (talk) 05:38, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Middle Ages

Hi Malleus Fatuorum,

Very promt response to my comment on Petrarca. Saw your extensive list of publications, very nice, but I really feel that this piece has room for improvement.

With a name, like such a blurred and often misused name as Middle Ages, a piece can not be clear enough. Should you not introduce it properly as you should introduce yourself? Put the name earlier in the article and place it in the right context.

You write extensively, but in this case can build a better piece in my opinion. Maybe reshuffle and rewrite. Your piece, so far, can be improved.

Cheers,

--Mivest (talk) 14:15, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

If you'd read a bit further in the article, you'd have noticed the information was already there. Properly referenced (as an aside it wasn't Petrarch who came up with the term - it was Bruni.) Ealdgyth - Talk 14:17, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

It's very far from my piece Mivest, Ealdgyth simply very kindly invited me along for the ride. Malleus Fatuorum 14:32, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Cotswold Olimpick Games

This is a note to let the main editors of Cotswold Olimpick Games know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on May 31, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or one of his delegates (Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), and Bencherlite (talk · contribs)), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 31, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

The Cotswold Olimpick Games is an annual public celebration of games and sports held near Chipping Campden, in the Cotswolds of England. They probably began in 1612, and have continued on and off since (1636 depiction shown). They were started by a local lawyer, Robert Dover, with the approval of King James. Events included horse-racing, coursing with hounds, running, dancing, sledgehammer throwing, fighting with swords, and wrestling. By the time of James's death in 1625, many Puritan landowners had forbidden their workers to attend, and the outbreak of the English Civil War in 1642 brought the Games to an end. Revived after the Restoration of 1660, they gradually degenerated into a drunk and disorderly country festival. They ended again in 1852, when the common land on which they had been staged was partitioned and enclosed. Since 1966 the Games have been held each year on the Friday after Spring Bank Holiday. Events have included the tug of war, gymkhana, shin-kicking, dwile flonking, motor cycle scrambling, judo, piano smashing, and morris dancing. The British Olympic Association has recognised the Cotswold Olimpick Games as "the first stirrings of Britain's Olympic beginnings". (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:05, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

My condolences. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:17, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh bugger. I don't keep count of these things, but from memory I think I've been blocked three times so far on TFA day for 3RR violations. I doubt 31 May will be any different, so if there's anything urgent you'd like me to look at best ask soon. Malleus Fatuorum 23:29, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll give you a 48hr block on the 30th to save everyone from grief. No more comments on TMitM. Drmies (talk) 04:26, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Actually, the thing to do is to organize a bunch of IP vandal edits, at least a dozen or so from all over the place, and it'll be semi-protected. If you could come up with some fake socks of legit master puppeteers, you might get full protection out of it. Or, pretend to set up an edit war with Wehwalt--both of you break 3RR, I'll fully protect and leave stern warnings for the both of you, and we'll survive the day that way. Drmies (talk) 04:29, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

My apologies, as usual, for picking one of your excellent articles. Raul should have run it last summer, really, but instead we marked the opening ceremony with an American baseball pitcher.... I thought 31st May would be as good (or as bad) a day as any, as this will at least mark the 2013 event. If you have different ideas, I'm all ears. Bencherlite^Talk 09:34, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I was rather disappointed that it didn't run on the opening day last year, as that was a large part of the motivation in writing it. But better late than never I suppose. Malleus Fatuorum 12:38, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Mustela putorius furo rex

"Dad, are we there yet?"

For all your hard work — and not just on WP it would seem...

I'm simultaneously greatly impressed and highly amused.

Hillbillyholiday ^talk 08:33, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Cute picture. Which I guess means you know I do a lot of work for ferret welfare? So you know who I am in real life? Malleus Fatuorum 00:28, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

On Kahaani FAC

Hi! Thanks for the comments in FAC. Yes, unfortunately, Indian editors (and may be other non-native English speaker editors) tend to incorporate unidiomatic usage of English. As you have suggested, the article would certianly improve if some native English speaker does a copyedit. As I have commented in FAC, finding someone to do copyedit is a problem. Since you have read parts of the article already (I presume), would you be kind enough to do a copyedit? (No, not the reactive copyedit that you told in the FAC, a proper copyedit). If you have time, and interest, this would immensely help the article. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:15, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I cannot express my gratitude! I expected that the article would be withdrawn from FAC, and then we'll have to wait for someone to copyedit. I thank you for your kind help, and would like to assist in case you need (for example, elucidation of something difficult to understand, or, some sourcing issues etc). If you have any comments or observations, please list them in the article talk page, or in the FAC, or user talk page. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 20:53, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Will do. It'll probably take me a day or two to read through the whole thing, but hopefully you won't have any more impatient reviewers like me come along before we're done. Malleus Fatuorum 21:54, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I've replied to your second query ( on the use of thwarted) in the talk page of the article. Thanks a ton.--Dwaipayan (talk) 02:35, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Sharpe, Paley and Austin

Hi Malleus Fatuorum, I gather that you don't like my new comma. Pyrotec (talk) 17:50, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

No, but I hadn't noticed you'd undertaken the review, so rest assured I won't be interfering again. Malleus Fatuorum 18:02, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh "Interfere" as much as you like, its not going to upset my review. I thought I was right about the comma, but I know better than to argue with you over grammar. Its not my strong topic, but it does interest me, as I'm somewhat half-heartedly learning Latin and Castilian Spanish (I prefer Catalan), I tried Norwegian several decades ago, and I see common roots (and "false friends"). Pyrotec (talk) 18:38, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Blimey, I just scanned through that article and thought of the fabled transport cafe menus. You know the ones:

• Sausage, egg and chips
• Sausage and egg
• Sausage and chips
• Egg and chips
• Sausage
• Egg
• Chips

Etc. - Sitush (talk) 21:30, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I could take you to a transport cafe in Wigan that serves a great curry for £3.95, probably more than even you could eat. Malleus Fatuorum 21:44, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Gibbet of Montfaucon

This, which I've just expanded a bit, might be up your street. You'll see the medieval French didn't leave their ex-chancellors hanging around to make nuisances of themselves on Newsnight, just hanging around. There's tons more in the French article. Johnbod (talk) 20:42, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

A device for industrial-scale executions, very nice. Malleus Fatuorum 20:49, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

RFC on TFA images

Dear Malleus Fatuorum, you may be interested in a discussion that I've started at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article#Request for comment - images in TFA blurbs. All views welcome. Bencherlite^Talk 16:32, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Middle Ages ... err.. help.

Can you copy edit the newly added section in the High Middle Ages in the Political States section? I'm not sure why it's hard to understand that you add sources when you add information, but apparantly this isn't something that admins have to bother with. They can just drop unsourced information (including some that duplicated information elsewhere in the article) into articles that are at FAC and I guess it's my job to figure out where they got the information from. Also add images that lack source information and duplicate images already there... Oh, yeah, let me know if there are things in the latest additions to the FAC page that I need to deal with... I looked and they mostly looked like grammar issues - which you really don't want me messing with. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:27, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

This is turning out to be a bit of a marathon – I hope nobody else comes along with a long list of things that need attention. Most of the issues outstanding do seem to be with grammar or phrasing though, so I'm working through those. Malleus Fatuorum 22:25, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I always put "the" in front of Magna Carta--am I doing so against common usage? Drmies (talk) 17:31, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

That's a question I will most definitely leave to Ealdgyth to answer definitively, but my own uninformed opinion is that there should be no "the" in front of Magna Carta. In part at least because it's Latin, and there's no "the" in Latin, it's implied. Malleus Fatuorum 18:40, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Msg for you

Hey Malleus, left you and G a joint msg at User_talk:Giano#Barrington_Court. Also the offer I made at User_talk:Giano#Tyntesfield goes for you too. Cheers, Russavia (talk) 03:08, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Gentlemen, start your engines...

I just picked up this little jewel [11] and a number of other books that you would find interesting. We have a liquidator here that sells these kinds of books dirt cheap, but their stock varies wildly. While most of my collection is about American iron, this covers a lot of sweet rides from the 60s on, like the Maserati Bora, Ferrari Boxer, Lamborghini Countach, Jaguar XJ220 and a couple dozen more recent supercars. A bit fluffy but informative stuff. Lots to choose from, going to be a fun summer. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 02:16, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

We have much to do. Malleus Fatuorum 02:19, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I've jumped on Maserati Bora just to format the refs, and I will add some info later tonight from the book. Not committing to take it to GA yet, but it is simple and small enough, as well as infrequently edited, that at least some good could come of a little attention. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 15:35, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

That's a worthy choice, but the article seems very lightweight and is going to need some considerable expansion I think. Who knows, you may even make the fabled five-times expansion with it. I was thinking about the Lamborghini Miura myself, but there are still a few things I need to finish off with the Tiger before I go looking for another car article. Malleus Fatuorum 17:28, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

It's just something to do, no commitment. Worse case scenario, we play with it a few days in our spare time and make it better that it was. I did get a laugh from your "tut tut" summary, not something I hear very often. Give me a break, I'm at work dealing with customers on the phone all day, plus dealing with ANI issues. It's a wonder I'm making complete sentences with all the distractions I have going on. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 19:26, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I've been toying with the idea of getting every car I've owned up to GA; I bet my list would a lot different from yours, as the only American car I've ever owned is a Jeep Grand Cherokee, which is in the drive right now next to the Jag. I'm led to believe that some Americans don't like the Jeeps, but ours has been great, although official Jeep parts are ferociously expensive over here in the UK. Malleus Fatuorum 19:32, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

The old jeeps were exceptional, unbeatable as utility vehicles and almost indestructable. The new ones are...ok. Back then, no one else hardly made vehicles like that, except the Toyota Land Cruiser and Rover, both of which were somewhat rare here. Then they made them "pretty". Now there are many to choose from in that category. Oh, and part of what I liked about the Maserati article was its sparseness. It is easier to dig from scratch than fix what is broken and possibly wrong. At least for me. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 19:50, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

We were very impressed with the Jeep after we hired one in LA to drive up to Lake Tahoe to go skiing, so when I wrote off our Toyota Rav it seemed like a good choice. Malleus Fatuorum 20:58, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

• A 1974 Ford Pinto was one of my favorite cars. I street raced it a great deal, as silly as that sounds, and thrashed that car to no end until I finally totaled it. You could jerk the steering wheel to the side, jerk up on the emergency brake while holding the lock button in, and 180° the car on a dime. Rev it, pop the clutch and go. With some practice, this can be done in one fluid motion using all four limbs, a task that was mastered with a degree of pride, I might add. A teenager's version of the Big Wheel [12], it was (almost) indestructible. The ugly little beasty will always have a special place in my heart. As I said before, cars were so cheap they were disposable, and we treated them as such. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 20:18, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Health and Morals of Apprentices Act 1802

Hallo,

I have been informed that you are the person to go to for help when improving the grammar of articles? I've done as much as I can on this article and would appreciate as much help as possible. I would also like to know if it meets the good criteria and what improvements are needed to get it there?

I have noticed on this talk page that you get a lot of requests like this so if you are too busy on your own projects I won't be offended if you don't respond.

Thanks very much =) Staceydolxx (talk) 08:29, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I couldn't resist, it's very interesting (at least to me) but I'm sure MF will be a better guide than I am. J3Mrs (talk) 11:54, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Interesting indeed. Malleus Fatuorum 12:11, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll have a proper read through later, but I've got four initial observations given you're looking to take this article to GA.

• The lead is a little on the short side to adequately summarise the article.
• You're using "act" throughout the article except for in the "Contents of the Act" section heading. My slight preference is to use "Act" throughout, but you need to be consistent. In this case though I think that the section header perhaps ought to simply say "Contents" or "Provisions" would be better, as what else would you be talking about other than the contents of the act?
• I'd like to see some kind of explanation of what malignant fever was, or was thought to be.
• "In 1800 there were 20,000 apprentices working in cotton mills and the enclosed conditions and close contact within factories allowed diseases to spread rapidly leading public opinion to suggest that working conditions needed to improve for children." That sentence is too long without some kind of punctuation, and it's a bit puzzling why it starts off talking about cotton mills but then switches to factories.

Other than that it looks pretty close to meeting the GA criteria to me on a first quick read through. Malleus Fatuorum 12:11, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I probably haven't done it in the best way, but I've added a note to state that the malignant fever was apparently the same as "jail fever" or "ship fever", i.e. typhus. If anyone thinks it could be better written or cleverly incorporated into the article, please do go ahead and do so! Worm^TT(talk) 12:43, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

• One more before I shoot off; the authors listed in ref #19 don't look right to me. Malleus Fatuorum 13:15, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

• Indeed--and the way it's cited suggests that the section by the judge and the other person should be cited as a chapter in a book: in the "cite book" template is a heading for "chapter", which should have the title of that section; the page numbers should be given for that section as well. This format does not allow to (easily) cite the page number for the specific citation, though. No version that I could see on Google Books has a chapter listing so I can't fix it. 16:53, 17 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drmies (talk • contribs)

Curious as why this is in the WP:WikiProject Greater Manchester. This was a national act of parliamrnt that affect the entire country? thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.153.215.147 (talk) 17:55, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I imagine because the outbreak that triggered the investigation that resulted in the Act of Parliament occurred in Peel's factory in Radcliffe. But why are you asking me? Malleus Fatuorum 18:35, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that's why I put a GM banner on it. :) J3Mrs (talk) 18:40, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Maybe I own the GM project now, and someone forgot to tell me. BTW, someone was asking after you on the Chorlton-cum-Hardy talk page. Malleus Fatuorum 18:45, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Gosh, I'm a redlink, what could I have been up to at Chorlton-cum-Hardy?

That'll remain our little secret. Mum's the word. Malleus Fatuorum 19:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)