User talk:Dr. Blofeld

---

Music venues

I'll take a look sometime. Working on WiR stuff at the moment. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 16:56, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much!

For the barnstar and the recognition! Well appreciated and a motivation to keep going with the improvements and expansions. All the best, Tisquesusa (talk) 21:54, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Rambling Ramblings

Hi Doc. Hope you are well. How are things with you? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:56, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

OK, thanks!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:24, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Happy to hear that Doc. Films like La La Land and Moonlight are setting the screens on fire. The former, esp., makes me believe that musicals are here to stay in Hollywood. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 17:35, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Clive Mantle as Dr Barrett.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Clive Mantle as Dr Barrett.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:25, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Tencreek deletion

I've put a delete request on the Tencreek page as I think you meant Trencreek. All maps I can find show it as Trencreek.

Speedy deletion nomination of Tencreek

A tag has been placed on Tencreek requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Smb1001 (talk) 14:38, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Category:Individual bikinis has been nominated for discussion

Category:Individual bikinis, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 03:48, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aika tappaa

Closing the discussion as Delete is bizarre. Recognizing that 'it is not a vote', the overwhelming consensus was plainly Keep. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:48, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it should never have been closed as a delete! Perhaps another admin can look into it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:56, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Hitomi Tanaka

I've created another Hitomi Tanaka page which was put up for deletion. I used sources from New York Daily News, Playboy, TV Tokyo and I don't see how it could really be deleted. You were involved in this discussion last time and I wanted to reach out.ChiefWahooMcDonalds (talk) 22:09, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Dr. Blofeld. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 23:00, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hitomi Tanaka (3rd nomination)

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hitomi Tanaka (3rd nomination). As you have participated in a previous AfD on this article, you may be interested in commenting on this third AfD. Thank you. Class455 (talk|stand clear of the doors!) 00:05, 17 February 2017 (UTC)Template:Z48

The 1000 Challenge (Indian cinema)

Are we supposed to list contributions only by members? Because Ssven has listed contributions by those who are not on the list like Editor 2050 and Shakthi Saba. But I hope they don't have anything against being listed as members there. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:25, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Ideally people put their own articles up, but adding entries by others is OK if they're OK with it. Might be better to invite them first though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:55, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Dead links

Getting to them between RL demands. :-) We hope (talk) 13:28, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. So many idiots about on here at the moment, difficult to want to write anything!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:29, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

That's why I'm doing maintenance type work. :-D We hope (talk) 14:44, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:FrancoGraziosi.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:FrancoGraziosi.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:23, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Hotel Panafrica

I see that Hotel Panafrica was Prodded but you were never notified. I thought I would let you know before actually deleting the article. - GB fan 15:08, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

If we can have 100 articles on hotels in the US or UK, you'd think just having two hotels for Equatorial guinea would be acceptable. Is there not two notable hotels in the country? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:01, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Baron Hill (house)

An article that you have been involved in editing—Baron Hill (house)—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 05:51, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for El Progreso, Jutiapa

On 25 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article El Progreso, Jutiapa, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that maize, cacao, and achiote were historically the main crops produced in El Progreso, Guatemala? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/El Progreso, Jutiapa. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, El Progreso, Jutiapa), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 12:02, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:JamesTienTheChase.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:JamesTienTheChase.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:50, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Category:Buildings and structures on the Isle of Mull

Howzat? --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 18:06, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Purrfect, thanks for that Ser Amantio di Nicolao♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:47, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Bill Paxton

RIP Bill Paxton. The last actor you'd expect to die aor have health issues. Died of a stroke following a heart op. A great actor and warm presence on screen.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:47, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Really a natural actor to watch. RIP Bill Paxton. My favourites are Twister and Titanic.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 13:23, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, though his role in True Lies was funny!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:41, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Haha, "I lie to people to get laid". So much for sex addiction, lol. And he pees after! It was funny but I kinda like him more in his dramatic roles. Apollo 13 is another one I liked. He held his own alongside Hanks and Bacon there.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 14:04, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Africa barnstars, again

I see you're back to your normal prolific editing again, so I was wondering if you could finish off the Africa Destubathon and award the national barnstars as promised. I do appreciate the work you've done in setting it up - I think it was very helpful to the project. I just don't think these sort of projects should be left hanging at the end. StAnselm (talk) 20:12, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

It would mean having to make a ton of barnstars because not every country has a barnstar. Sorry, I currently don't have the time or energy. Weren't the Amazon prizes sufficient enough? I thought I thanked everybody for their effort and that people acknowledged that. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:22, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Firstly, thanks for the lovely barnstar you gave me. Secondly, I guess it was the fact that it was promised that makes it important to follow through on it. Thirdly, perhaps you could recruit someone to help you in those sorts of things? (I know absolutely nothing about designing barnstars, but there must be editors who do!) Maybe for the next big event line up someone to do that sort of hackwork. StAnselm (talk) 19:39, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

It wasn't my idea to "promise" barnstars. Somebody said that they'd prefer a barnstar than a financial prize that's all. I didn't think many people were bothered whether they had a barnstar or not. I often reward people, and a lot of people don't even say thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:53, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Well, it doesn't matter whose idea it was - it was announced on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon/Prizes and bonuses page: "Barnstars will be rewarded to the most prolific editors. A National Barnstar will be awarded to the winner of each country..." StAnselm (talk) 20:48, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Well do barnstars really matter either? Let's move onto something constructive, people got their prizes and wikipedia was 2041 articles better off, as far as I'm concerned the contest was a major success and I more than did my part to reward and take care of the contestants. Expecting me to make dozens of barnstars several months down the line is not on. Why don't you make them and reward the contestants if you think they're important? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:01, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Promising "rewards" and not delivering on them is not on either. I see you are contemplating similar events in the future - you may need to take care what you promise then, too. As far as the "several months down the line" thing goes, you had gone into semi-retirement: I had, in fact, mentioned it on the Destubathon talk page and on your talk page. And as I mentioned above, I don't know how to make barnstars, and YOU were the one who promised them.[1] StAnselm (talk) 22:07, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Listifying red links in navboxes

I don't know where to ask, but I am sure it would be possible for someone to generate lists of red links from navbox templates like the ones in Category:Buildings and structures navigational boxes (and subcategories). This would greatly help in creating missing article directories for the Challenges. 103.6.159.71 (talk) 06:28, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Maria Eugenia Bozzoli

On 27 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Maria Eugenia Bozzoli, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Maria Eugenia Bozzoli was one of the founders of anthropology in Costa Rica? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Maria Eugenia Bozzoli. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Maria Eugenia Bozzoli), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 12:02, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Country houses

I can try working on them county by county as time permits. We hope (talk)

Speedy deletion nomination of Timo Puustinen

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Timo Puustinen requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. FriyMan ^talk 16:58, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Timo Puustinen for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Timo Puustinen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timo Puustinen until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. FriyMan ^talk 17:36, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

TFL notification

Hi, Dr. Blofeld. I'm just posting to let you know that Meryl Streep on screen and stage – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for March 24. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 23:29, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Dr. Blofeld

I hope you have an excellent day. I saw your contribution in a discussion of 7 years ago about the mass removal of microstubs about German politicians and I was pleased to read your opposition to mass destructions and voiced very strong arguments against that behaviour. No matter that I do not think that microstubs have any value, but I wanted to share mine on a minor point/page but with similar character; people who are destructionists and not expansionists here on this project, please see Talk:Fucha if you're interested. All the best, Tisquesusa (talk) 13:20, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Things I might have cared about 7 years ago no longer do I'm afraid. I'd rather have a good article on Helmut Kohl now than several hundred "microstubs". There are hundreds of thousands of decent articles which can be translated from other wikipedias using sourcing though. We need more people translating from German in particular.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey!

Dr. Blofeld! How you have been? I hope you are doing well. BTW, would you like to take a look at my second solo FAC? I would appreciate your kind gesture.Krish | Talk 16:00, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't feel like reviewing (or editing) at the moment.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:05, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:TheManWhoHauntedHimself.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TheManWhoHauntedHimself.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:04, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Google Street View

You know what else is on Street View? Pitcairn Island. Incredible. (Saves me trying to get there myself some day, although of course I'd love to...) --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 18:53, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Genealogy - newsletter No.2

Newsletter Nr 2 for WikiProject Genealogy (and Wikimedia genealogy project on Meta) Participation: This is the second newsletter sent by mass mail to members in Wikipedia:WikiProject Genealogy, to everyone who voted a support for establishing a potential Wikimedia genealogy project on meta, and anyone who during the years showed an interest in genealogy on talk pages and likewise. (To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please see below) Progress report: In order to improve communication between genealogy interested wikipedians, as well talking in chat mode about the potential new wiki, a new irc channel has been setup, and you are welcome to visit and try it out at: #wikimedia-genealogy connect (In case you are not familiar with IRC, or would prefer some info and intro, please see Wikipedias IRC tutorial) At m:Talk:Wikimedia_genealogy_project#Wikimedia_user_group is discussed the possibility of creating a genealogy-related Wikimedia user group: please submit comments and suggestions, and whether you would like to be a member in such a group. Prime goal for the group is the creation of a new, free, genealogy wiki, but there is also a discussion weather we should propose a new project or support the adoption of an existing project? Read more at Meta; Wikimedia genealogy project where you also can support the creation with your vote, in case you haven't done so already. Future: The future of the Genealogy project, and creation of a new Wikimedia Genealogy Project, is something where you can make a an input. You can discuss on the projects talk page how the project should be developed sign as member or supporter at the projects member list put the User box on your user page by inserting the Template:User WikiProject Genealogy with the following code: {{User WikiProject Genealogy}}. develop or update the Portal:Genealogy? in case you haven't read Wikimedia genealogy project take a look support that project with your vote. Don't want newsletters? If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page. Cheers from your WikiProject Genealogy coordinator Dan Koehl. To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

Monnow Bridge

Dear Dr B, Many thanks and I'm glad you like it. The bridge certainly merited more than a C. I'm pushing it along to Peer Review, hopefully on its way to FA, and any comments at either stage, or both, would be much appreciated. But I quite understand if you're not in a Wiki phase just at present. Nevertheless, I hope that you're keeping well. Best regards. KJP1 (talk)

Torben

Hi. When you google "torben chris comedian" you get over 50,000 returns. When you google the title in Danish you get even more. All those Google returns in my opinion suggest notability. I myself am Danish so I know that he is notable since he's pretty well known. Could you please move Draft:Torben Chris to mainspace please? Thank you. 92.13.139.173 (talk) 11:59, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Alturas del Yapacaní River

The article Alturas del Yapacaní River has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Gamebuster19901 (Talk║Contributions) 14:26, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Re:Tiffany Club

http://jazzwestcoastresearch.blogspot.com/2014/03/tiffany-club-surf-club-james-a.html Check this out. ;) We hope (talk) 15:48, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Very cool We hope but a RS?♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:40, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

FWIW, outside of some very much copyrighted photos at Flickr, this is the most information I've found thus far about the place. We hope (talk) 16:47, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Now in newspapers, getting more. ;) We hope (talk) 16:58, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

More pics are available via a 1954 Jet magazine. We hope (talk) 18:24, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

The Haig Club also notable. Perhaps Yoninah is interested? There's some missing old LA jazz clubs.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:05, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Teatro Oficina

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Teatro Oficina requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a club, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Launchballer 18:41, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Contested the deletion. Another waste of time. If we had someone who read Portuguese this could easily be expanded. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:48, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, yes this deletionism exhibited this year is getting tiresome. And the worrying thing is that it's a lot of different editors!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:15, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Agree, if only they had a kitten to cuddle .... Coolabahapple (talk) 00:25, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Came across this and I have expanded and fixed the article a little bit. I'm Brazilian so I can find Portuguese sources to properly expand the article. Teatro Oficina is well known here in São Paulo, particularly among actors and other theater artists, and there's definitely room for more content here. I'll see what I can do. Cheers, κατάσταση 06:42, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:33, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Ruth Young (singer) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Let's Get Lost and Bruce Weber

Chet Baker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Bruce Weber

List of jazz standards (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to You're My Everything

Terence Stamp (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Bruce Weber

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:33, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:JohnLawMa.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:JohnLawMa.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:30, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Fire on the film set of The Shining

You've been mentioned on Jimbo's talk page.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 11:31, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks ianmacm. Peter bringing that "issue" up at such a time is in as bad taste as DM publishing that attack article!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:16, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

The irony of journalists—especially journalists writing in British tabloids—complaining about self-appointed busybodies with time on their hands who chip in with their views and judgments on people they probably do not know is impressive. ‑ Iridescent 13:32, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it's laughable. As is the fact that McCann claimed to be "concerned" about the invasion of privacy yet again manipulates the media to suit his own ends and not worry about it when he benefits from it. No doubt he's used to getting his own way, and because he didn't he's behaved like an insufferable spoiled brat. Amazed that a writer considered so "reputable" could be like this as a person, but I guess a lot of them have huge egos.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:35, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

The ambiguity in The Shining (film) could have been cleared up with a quick edit. WP:SOFIXIT, as the saying goes.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:53, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

March 2017

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 14 days for your persistent pattern of abuse and insult against the article subject Graham McCann. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:04, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

This user is asking that his block be reviewed:

Dr. Blofeld (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Unbelievable. I get wrongly targetted in a childish DM wiki attack article and I state my case on his talk page to clear up what actually happened. I removed the "pompous oaf" comment earlier in the day anyway. With such an attack article, was it not in my right to state the case at what happened and to be initially a little annoyed with what he did? As for McCann being badly treated, I suggest you look further into it. I was the one who suggested that he contact the OTRS team if he was serious about wanting it deleted and I made an effort to get him to identify the apparent errors with the article [2]. If I was initially rude it was because User:Collect, who had trolled me on the Cary Grant article, had tried hard to get the McCann article deleted and it was kept. When the IP turned up I assumed it was Collect too. I concluded that Collect had emailed McCann and was trying to game the system in getting it deleted. How many of us actually 100% believe all IPs who claim to be somebody on here anyway?? Once I realized that it actually was McCann I was pretty reasonable and tried to sort something out with him but he's a disagreeable person and continued to insult me and wikipedia in general and issue legal threats. I spoke to several OTRS ticketeers about McCann offwiki via email and explained the situation and they agreed that his behaviour and threats were out of order. This is a gross injustice. I'm absolutely appalled with this article and the lack of understanding shown here. The fact is that several of us persuaded McCann to contact wiki and request the article to be deleted. He refused to do so. The community voted to keep the article twice. I merely explained to him that this was the case. This block pretty much gives the DM article the nod. Great going guys. In addition I believe the blocking admin has a vendetta against myself, SchroCat and several others whom he views as a "tag team" withan anti infobox stance so relished the opportinty to issue a block. If must be I will remove the remainder of my "answer" to the attack article but I know what happened and this block and response is very poor indeed.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:37, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Unbelievable. I get wrongly targetted in a childish DM wiki attack article and I state my case on his talk page to clear up what actually happened. I removed the "[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Graham_McCann&diff=prev&oldid=770106600 pompous oaf]" comment earlier in the day anyway. With such an attack article, was it not in my right to state the case at what happened and to be initially a little annoyed with what he did? As for McCann being badly treated, I suggest you look further into it. ''I'' was the one who suggested that he contact the OTRS team if he was serious about wanting it deleted and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AGraham_McCann&type=revision&diff=732944107&oldid=732916038 I made an effort to get him to identify the apparent errors with the article] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AGraham_McCann&type=revision&diff=732802985&oldid=732799390]. If I was initially rude it was because User:Collect, who had trolled me on the Cary Grant article, had tried hard to get the McCann article deleted and it was kept. When the IP turned up I assumed it was Collect too. I concluded that Collect had emailed McCann and was trying to game the system in getting it deleted. How many of us actually 100% believe all IPs who claim to be somebody on here anyway?? Once I realized that it actually was McCann I was pretty reasonable and tried to sort something out with him but he's a disagreeable person and continued to insult me and wikipedia in general and issue legal threats. I spoke to several OTRS ticketeers about McCann offwiki via email and explained the situation and they agreed that his behaviour and threats were out of order. This is a gross injustice. I'm absolutely appalled with this article and the lack of understanding shown here. The fact is that several of us persuaded McCann to contact wiki and request the article to be deleted. He refused to do so. The community voted to keep the article twice. I merely explained to him that this was the case. This block pretty much gives the DM article the nod. Great going guys. In addition I believe the blocking admin has a vendetta against [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AJimbo_Wales&type=revision&diff=770149390&oldid=770147332 myself, SchroCat and several others] whom he views as a "tag team" withan anti infobox stance so relished the opportinty to issue a block. If must be I will remove the remainder of my "answer" to the attack article but I know what happened and this block and response is very poor indeed.♦ [[User:Dr. Blofeld|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#aba67e">''Dr. Blofeld''</span>]] 19:37, 13 March 2017 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Unbelievable. I get wrongly targetted in a childish DM wiki attack article and I state my case on his talk page to clear up what actually happened. I removed the "[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Graham_McCann&diff=prev&oldid=770106600 pompous oaf]" comment earlier in the day anyway. With such an attack article, was it not in my right to state the case at what happened and to be initially a little annoyed with what he did? As for McCann being badly treated, I suggest you look further into it. ''I'' was the one who suggested that he contact the OTRS team if he was serious about wanting it deleted and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AGraham_McCann&type=revision&diff=732944107&oldid=732916038 I made an effort to get him to identify the apparent errors with the article] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AGraham_McCann&type=revision&diff=732802985&oldid=732799390]. If I was initially rude it was because User:Collect, who had trolled me on the Cary Grant article, had tried hard to get the McCann article deleted and it was kept. When the IP turned up I assumed it was Collect too. I concluded that Collect had emailed McCann and was trying to game the system in getting it deleted. How many of us actually 100% believe all IPs who claim to be somebody on here anyway?? Once I realized that it actually was McCann I was pretty reasonable and tried to sort something out with him but he's a disagreeable person and continued to insult me and wikipedia in general and issue legal threats. I spoke to several OTRS ticketeers about McCann offwiki via email and explained the situation and they agreed that his behaviour and threats were out of order. This is a gross injustice. I'm absolutely appalled with this article and the lack of understanding shown here. The fact is that several of us persuaded McCann to contact wiki and request the article to be deleted. He refused to do so. The community voted to keep the article twice. I merely explained to him that this was the case. This block pretty much gives the DM article the nod. Great going guys. In addition I believe the blocking admin has a vendetta against [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AJimbo_Wales&type=revision&diff=770149390&oldid=770147332 myself, SchroCat and several others] whom he views as a "tag team" withan anti infobox stance so relished the opportinty to issue a block. If must be I will remove the remainder of my "answer" to the attack article but I know what happened and this block and response is very poor indeed.♦ [[User:Dr. Blofeld|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#aba67e">''Dr. Blofeld''</span>]] 19:37, 13 March 2017 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Unbelievable. I get wrongly targetted in a childish DM wiki attack article and I state my case on his talk page to clear up what actually happened. I removed the "[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Graham_McCann&diff=prev&oldid=770106600 pompous oaf]" comment earlier in the day anyway. With such an attack article, was it not in my right to state the case at what happened and to be initially a little annoyed with what he did? As for McCann being badly treated, I suggest you look further into it. ''I'' was the one who suggested that he contact the OTRS team if he was serious about wanting it deleted and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AGraham_McCann&type=revision&diff=732944107&oldid=732916038 I made an effort to get him to identify the apparent errors with the article] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AGraham_McCann&type=revision&diff=732802985&oldid=732799390]. If I was initially rude it was because User:Collect, who had trolled me on the Cary Grant article, had tried hard to get the McCann article deleted and it was kept. When the IP turned up I assumed it was Collect too. I concluded that Collect had emailed McCann and was trying to game the system in getting it deleted. How many of us actually 100% believe all IPs who claim to be somebody on here anyway?? Once I realized that it actually was McCann I was pretty reasonable and tried to sort something out with him but he's a disagreeable person and continued to insult me and wikipedia in general and issue legal threats. I spoke to several OTRS ticketeers about McCann offwiki via email and explained the situation and they agreed that his behaviour and threats were out of order. This is a gross injustice. I'm absolutely appalled with this article and the lack of understanding shown here. The fact is that several of us persuaded McCann to contact wiki and request the article to be deleted. He refused to do so. The community voted to keep the article twice. I merely explained to him that this was the case. This block pretty much gives the DM article the nod. Great going guys. In addition I believe the blocking admin has a vendetta against [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AJimbo_Wales&type=revision&diff=770149390&oldid=770147332 myself, SchroCat and several others] whom he views as a "tag team" withan anti infobox stance so relished the opportinty to issue a block. If must be I will remove the remainder of my "answer" to the attack article but I know what happened and this block and response is very poor indeed.♦ [[User:Dr. Blofeld|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#aba67e">''Dr. Blofeld''</span>]] 19:37, 13 March 2017 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

The offensive edit [3] was on 2 August, before all that. Peter Damian (talk) 19:43, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

No, that's not a blockable offense Peter. That happened six months ago. If you and others knew the context of my approach to the IP after Cary Grant and the initial McCann AFD by User:Collect who was fighting to the burger to get the McCann article deleted you would understand the rudeness and unwillingness to believe it wasn't Collect but McCann himself. Don't you see the hypocrisy of a man who complains about publicity then published an article in a national newspaper drawing attention to him? I advised McCann to prove it was him and contact OTRS and ask for it to be deleted. He refused to do so.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:51, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

So, believing the IP was collect, you accuse them of making a whole load of money. Shortly after, you make the 'hooray henry' remark. Was that about Collect? Doesn't stack up. Peter Damian (talk) 19:54, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, because I believe Collect emailed McCann and this is what prompted the complaint. McCann immediately began throwing his weight around, insulting me and acting like a superior diva. If you read later comments I tried to resurrect the situation and even complimented his work.

"Well, I'm glad at least you can see that I am one "who takes pride in researching and writing entries in a thorough and disciplined way" . I didn't start picking on you, I stated the case as to why it was considered acceptable content. It was the tone of your comments which prompted that response. I have family who studied at Cambridge and Oxford, as well as people I know and respect on here, but I was starting to picture a lordly professor thinking he was speaking to vermin. Perhaps I was a little harsh with telling you to shut up, but we often get people ranting on about articles on talk pages here and attacking the editors and we're sick of it, given that we're all volunteers here. And to me it looks like you were put up to this by an editor who has been campaigning to get this deleted... It's not so much sticking up for wikipedia as a community, as defending articles which we believe meet notability requirements. Graham McCann in my opinion is a notable author, who has written some excellent biographies which are staples in research on people like Grant and John Le Mesurier (which we promoted to Featured Article status). We're trying to build a comprehensive encyclopedia so to not have an article on McCann, we see it as poorer off. Biographical coverage of McCann is sketchy, that's not our fault, but reflective of what is covered in sources. This article stems from the Cary Grant article which I researched from a very poor state months ago into something which I think is a reasonable summary. The McCann book was one of the more decent biographies used for that and was a surprising red link in the article, and somebody thought it worth starting, and I agree with it. It came from "Grant's biographer Graham McCann mentions that Maureen Donaldson, a lover of Grant in the 1970s, claimed in her book that his mother "did not know how to give affection and did not know how to receive it either." at the beginning of the Grant article. Geoffrey Wansell is still a red link and I would guess that he would also likely meet requirements.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:38, 3 August 2016 (UTC)" ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:57, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Whatever happens with this, blocked or unblocked it's going to make no difference. The Daily Mail will continue to publish such articles about wikipedia. As I posted on Jimbo's talk page, we need to think about whether this ban on DM as a source is worth all this as no doubt they'll continue to come up with more stories and more good editors will be blocked without being able to actually explain what happened. If you want to delete Graham McCann's article then do so, and prove the DM right.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:18, 13 March 2017 (UTC)