User talk:Eric Corbett

There are many aspects of wikipedia's governance that seem to me to be at best ill-considered and at worst corrupt, and little recognition that some things need to change. I appreciate that there are many good, talented, and honest people here, but there are far too many who are none of those things, concerned only with the status they acquire by doing whatever is required to climb up some greasy pole or other. I'm out of step with the way things are run here, and at best grudgingly tolerated by the children who run this site. I see that as a good thing, although I appreciate that there are others who see it as an excuse to look for any reason to block me, as my log amply demonstrates.

According to...

this we have each written one of the two most viewed TFAs this year. It must be something in the water around here. Parrot of Doom 23:22, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Or something missing from the water elsewhere. I'm glad the fairies did so well, it's a nice gentle story from another age. Malleus Fatuorum 23:41, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Holy shit, 222,200?? But I'll top that once National Academic Library is longer than two sentences and gets promoted to FA, no doubt. Congratulations! Drmies (talk) 20:15, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Prose pliers

Not motorsport history I'm afraid, but a similar Boy's Own topic. If you find a minute, air-tractor sledge could use a copyedit (and will hopefully be vaguely interesting too!) Apterygial ^talk 13:04, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Done. Good luck at FAC. Malleus Fatuorum 17:20, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I really appreciate it. Apterygial ^talk 23:44, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Hygberht....

I know you gave me a list of things to work on for him, did we put it on my talk pages? I have misplaced it... He's not "next" as the Equine project's looking at Appaloosa next, but he'll be my next one up. No more carousels, they are as bad as medieval taxes for my blood pressure and sanity, I think. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:46, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

It's here I think. Malleus Fatuorum 20:34, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

rm fullstops

Sorry, I didn't see your earlier edit saying the same thing. (FWIW, I think notes without periods are ugly! and I'm sure you noticed that some of the references have closing periods, but not all of them.) For the purpose of verification, check your email. This whole "explanations" section needs, I think reorganizing one way or another--the attempts at historical explanation are of a different category than Cohen's literary and possibly anthropological argument, but I can't rightly figure out what would be most fruitful. But you can, no doubt--that's why they pay you the big bucks. Drmies (talk) 20:12, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I apply the same rule to notes and citations as in the article body, which is that only full sentences end in fullstops. I agree that the Explanations section needs some reorganisation; it was really just a holding bay, waiting for some attention. Malleus Fatuorum 20:25, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

PS. Got the email, thanks. Malleus Fatuorum 20:28, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Ha, I fought over that same issue with someone in the FL review for Kronos Quartet discography, but I won't rehash that here. Yes, I figured it was a holding pen of sorts. BTW, Cohen's note 18, I wonder if those books mention our children--haven't checked my library yet. Also BTW, I don't think there's an English translation of Chronicon Anglicanum, is there? And tt seems that the bibliography of the article in its current state is pretty exhaustive. I'll keep looking, nonetheless. Drmies (talk) 20:44, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Which Chronicon? I.e. who's the chronicler? Ealdgyth - Talk 21:09, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, Ralph of Coggeshall. Drmies (talk) 21:32, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Does not appear to be, at least according to World Cat. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:38, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, get to translating! I gotta go make dinner. Thanks anyway, Drmies (talk) 21:48, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

FAC

You kindly contributed to the recent peer review of Thomas Beecham, following which I have nominated the article at FAC (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Thomas Beecham/archive1). Any views you might perhaps wish to add there would be gratefully received. Tim riley (talk) 10:17, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Good luck with that. If you keep on top of the reviewers comments I'm sure you won't have too many problems. Malleus Fatuorum 16:47, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Green

Left some bibliographic notes at Talk:Green children of Woolpit. Drmies (talk) 17:13, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Bullying in IT

IMO your reasoning for deleting the link to bullying in IT doesnt stack up. Your comments "incredible" and "irrelevant" are inappropriate. (you can reply here i have this talk page on watch).--Penbat (talk) 17:49, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I think you're being ridiculous, and in fact I have a mind to take your new article to AfD. In any event it's utterly and completely irrelevant to the information technology article, which is in a poor enough state as it is without adding this kind of nonsense. Malleus Fatuorum 17:53, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

My Life on Trulia

Set of copyvios from trulia.com - possibly spam in intention. I've speedied it and closed the discussion as there's nothing there to discuss now... Peridon (talk) 19:19, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I suspected a copyvio, but couldn't immediately confirm it so I started to open an AfD, which I thought I'd deleted after another editor applied a CSD tag. Malleus Fatuorum 19:25, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks...

As always for the copyediting... obviously I got diverted into Appaloosa today, rather than getting to Hygeberht like I'd planned... Ealdgyth - Talk 21:34, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

No worries. I noticed the comma pepper-pot being deployed and while I was sorting that I noticed a few other things that had crept in. Four supports now though, game over? Malleus Fatuorum 21:37, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Five I think... and you know I love commas! I think we're just waiting on Sandy or Andy here... Ealdgyth - Talk 21:43, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I know how all Americans seem to love commas, but there comes a point when an article has enough of them. Malleus Fatuorum 21:46, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I sometimes have to transcibe articles from English provincial newspapers of the early twentieth century. The compositors must have been paid by the comma, and then there's the weird habit of starting a sentence with a hyphen. -Must have changed sometime in the '40s. Ning-ning (talk) 22:31, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh hell,

Don't tell me you're still hangin around this joint? ... haha .. how ya doin Mal? — Ched :  ?  22:53, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

They haven't managed to get rid of me yet, but that doesn't stop them trying from time to time though. So far I think I'm winning on points, largely because I'm usually right. Malleus Fatuorum 22:56, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, good to still see you're here. There's a few with a touch of clue, but they need you to run around with that sanity stick and beat em once in a while. — Ched :  ?  23:01, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Q

Malleus, you know style and Englishnesses. Can you weigh in at ANI? I couldn't find a guideline in the MoS, but I know I've seen discussion on how (and where, and when) to use English vs. British. (I'm not asking you to jump in the dispute, and if you want to stay away, I'd appreciate your answer nonetheless, here in the privacy of your talk page.) Thanks, Drmies (talk) 01:22, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're asking me, but if it's what someone born in England would call themselves then that's English. Hardly anyone living here would call themselves "British": English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish, but not British. Malleus Fatuorum 02:00, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, I was wondering if Wikipedia has guidelines for what to call a person born in a certain part of those islands up there, even regardless of what they would call themselves. Drmies (talk) 02:03, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

None that I'm aware of, but anyone born in England would call themselves English. Malleus Fatuorum 02:12, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

• This essay may be of interest. --John (talk) 00:58, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Hang on, every person mentioned in that essay is white (and I include John Brown in that category). Where's the rest of us? Ning-ning (talk) 06:36, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

what?

What is your major malfunction? Try a little harder to be civil. --rogerd (talk) 01:58, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Please try to keep a civil tongue in your head. As far as I'm concerned you have once again proved me right. You administrators are becoming a laughing stock. You were presented with clear evidence that the candidate fundamentally misunderstood one of the basic admin tasks, and was therefore inevitably going to "abuse the tools", yet you chose to ignore that fact. Why? Malleus Fatuorum 02:02, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Now that you have asked a question, instead of an insult, I will be happy to address it. I believe in assuming good faith. He may (or may not) have misunderstood the policy a little, but that doesn't mean he would purposefully abuse admin tools. I didn't ignore anything. I personally feel that any user with a few good months of solid contributions and no history of any malfeasance should be trusted to be an admin, if he/she wants to. I see that you have had some issues in your own RFAs, and that may color your judgment some, but I noticed in your second RFA, your third supporter used almost the same language that I used in the RFA in question. I didn't participate in either of your RFAs, but if I had, I probably would have been supportive. I hope this clears things up a little. --rogerd (talk) 03:02, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

It was a rhetorical question; I'm not interested in what you think. Malleus Fatuorum 03:05, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Interesting to look back on that RfA almost three years ago now, and to be reminded of who my enemies are, so thanks for that. ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 03:16, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Just checking

If you have any objection to this, I'll add a disclaimer ... I assume you value your role as RFA curmudgeon and enjoy the show, but people can't hear tone online so I'll understand if you want me to not to make jokes.

I always learn something when you copyedit after I do, please keep it up. - Dank (push to talk) 20:29, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

RfA curmudgeon eh? I prefer to think that I'm playing some small part in drawing attention to the absurdity of the process. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 22:53, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Some copy editor ... I didn't realize the word meant "ill-tempered", I was going more for "gruff, no-nonsense". As I said ... keep it up. - Dank (push to talk) 00:23, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

And if you're interested in copyediting, Malleus ;-) Apterygial ^talk 00:30, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll try and take a proper look through tomorrow. Malleus Fatuorum 00:57, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I figured you'd seen it, but I thought I'd just make sure. Apterygial ^talk 00:59, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Dank, increasingly I think that I'm being too hard on a generation let down by their teachers and seduced by predictive texting. My understanding of Cnut's legendary stand against the sea is that it wasn't to prove to his subjects that he could, but to prove to them that he couldn't, and I feel much the same. No doubt one day we'll all be speaking and writing baby-talk. But until then ... Malleus Fatuorum 05:15, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm watching a series of lectures by Jennifer Paxton on the Anglo-Saxons so I get what you're saying. Btw, you might enjoy Idiocracy. - Dank (push to talk) 12:29, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

OOOH! You used Cnut! Yay you! Ealdgyth - Talk 15:08, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I know stuff. ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 15:38, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

People in Britain know how to cook with them? Must be all the curry.... Lambanog (talk) 16:08, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

For the benefit of the tape…

For the record, this isn't true. It's vanishingly rare for arbs to be blocked, but that's because it's hard for someone seriously problematic to reach Arbcom (and if they do, they're so high profile that problems are likely to be nipped in the bud quickly and never reach the warn-block-ban stage), rather than because the position grants some kind of immunity. As Bishonen can tell you, if an arb is acting in a way that's seen as problematic they can be blocked just the same as anyone else. – iridescent 20:56, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough, but I still believe that's it's naive to claim that there's no hierarchy of power, as it's undoubtedly true that I can't block you. Not that I want to of course, or anyone else for that matter. Malleus Fatuorum 22:56, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

There's a hierarchy, but it's more nuanced than an arb/crat/admin/non-admin pyramid. Blocking is only a small part of influence; Sandy or Tony, for instance, undoubtedly have more say in how Wikipedia operates than most of the admins, and even you and Giano have more influence than I think you realise. In the Wikipedia context, "ability to get things done" isn't so much a matter of technical abilities, but of how many people will listen to what you have to say. – iridescent 23:06, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

"... even you and Giano". Now that's damning with faint praise if ever I saw it. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 23:10, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

There's no doubt a hierarchy of authority, but I doubt one of power. The philosophical debate of "authority vs. power" is a well-known one, and I'm of the opinion that the concept of administration on a website hardly constitutes "power" in the sense that we harbor a cohesive sequence along the lines of admin→arb→crat. I could block you if I wanted, but someone will surely object and see to it that you be unblocked – leaving me powerless in the situation. Juliancolton (talk) 23:12, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

But I couldn't block you, hence the hierarchy; two levels is enough for a hierarchy. I could paraphrase your argument thus: "I [a doctor] could wound you, but another doctor could cure you, so no harm done", which I don't find very convincing. Malleus Fatuorum 05:24, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Giano a bum chum I gather?♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:12, 11 April 2011 (UTC)