User talk:Antandrus

From Wikiquote
Jump to navigation Jump to search

User Page Recommendation[edit]

On your Wikipedia User Page it lists quote, I think it would be appropriate to add those here too. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 16:10, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's a good idea, thanks. I'll probably use different ones though; I intended those to be about writing an encyclopedia, and this project is a bit different. The Marcus Aurelius applies everywhere, though, and I'm serious about what that wisest of all Roman Emperors said. Perspective is everything. As stressed-out as we can get in our little online lives, sometimes it's good to remember we're all but little bits of grit in the middle of the steppe. Oh wait, that was Samuel Beckett. Antandrus (talk) 19:20, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also, about the sockpuppet thing I said earlier, here is what I was referring to. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 19:34, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Mario's right, but I'm breaking my own rule in even talking about it. Ljupco (GRP) made "Antandrus" as one of his earliest accounts on the current incarnation of their site. After it got banhammered, he started making more and more, mostly named after us, i.e. Wikimedia project people. It doesn't hurt us in any way. Looked at with appropriate perspective, it's just wryly amusing. See number 49 on my list; their behavior is a perfect example. I would encourage Ljupco to make more. It might even keep him from getting arrested again for real-life harassment. Antandrus (talk) 19:41, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, I have an attack page there too. Also do you think you could explain this situation to Mario? – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 19:49, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Have you ever tried to reason with a cockroach infestation?
They exist for the purpose of hurting people. The more you ask, the more likely you are to get a page in their mainspace. "Nice" and "good faith" are not things they do. You gotta let it go. Antandrus (talk) 21:40, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maybe you/me could ask on Wikiquote or Meta since you can’t attack someone here. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 21:46, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Typo on Wikipedia[edit]

This section on Wikipedia should say "Sometimes it is desirable to make a template behave differently when substituted rather than when transcluded," could you fix this? I am blocked on Wikipedia. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 16:53, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Ilovemydoodle, I think either wording is grammatically ok. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:14, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rubbish computer: Could you change it anyway, I think it's far more clear. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 17:16, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Ilovemydoodle, sorry but I don't think that's a good idea. It could be argued by enwiki that you're participating in the community by proxy, which would make you less likely to be unblocked. It's also ok as it is. Thanks anyway, Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:18, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rubbish computer: Ok, I ran it through Grammarly and I appear to be correct. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 17:30, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ilovemydoodle I would leave it. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:40, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rubbish computer: Why? – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 17:41, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Ilovemydoodle, sorry I didn't see this sooner. It seems like an unnecessary edit, but more importantly I can't edit Wikipedia for you by proxy, and I may need to gain consensus to make such an edit. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 19:45, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rubbish computer: Could you go ask? – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 19:47, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Ilovemydoodle, I don't think I should because of the reasons I already outlined. Sorry. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 19:48, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rubbish computer: Also, I think I finally figured out why I was blocked, I originally made a few minor mistakes, but nothing really to get blocked for, but eventually I found a page called "Wikipedia:Village dump" (I don't remember how I found the page), the page was just a redirect to the Village Pump, but after checking the revision history, I noticed it used be a page that was actually used, I thought this was a cool idea, so I recreated it, but as it turns out this was commonly done by a group of vandals, the Admin must've thought I was one of them. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 19:57, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your feedback matters: Share your feedback in the Administratior accountability poll[edit]

Information.svg The Administratior accountability poll is open, vote here. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 01:30, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good news and bad news[edit]

The good news: I was unblocked from Wikipedia.

The bad news: Now I am blocked indefinitely from Wikipedia. Edit: Unblocked again!

Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus) (talk / e-mail) 14:17, 28 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Could you give feedback on this? – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 21:46, 13 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


May I nominate you for adminship? – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 12:27, 31 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, but not at present. Appreciate the thought though. Antandrus (talk) 13:52, 31 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why? (I mean me nominating you) – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 14:03, 31 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

strange error message[edit]

Hi Antandrus,

I was trying to add a category key when categorizing Queen using hotcat when I got the following message:

  • "This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and it has been disallowed. In addition, as a security measure, some privileges routinely granted to established accounts have been temporarily revoked from your account. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: GRP / Wikinger"

I have no idea why or what I am expected to do, but I remember vaguely that GRP is known to you, so thought you would be interested.

BTW I have been listening with enjoyment to Hungarian Rhapsody nr 2 on youtube and was surprised that it sounded very familiar. Ottawahitech (talk) 17:44, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ottawahitech, sorry about that. I've temporarily disabled that filter while I look for a solution. Try making the edit again. --Ferien (talk) 18:59, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ferien: Looks like there is still a problem. Please see: Wikiquote:Village_pump#Filter_again. Thanks, Ottawahitech (talk) 13:14, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Ottawahitech for letting me know. Disabled filter 33 temporarily too. There are two GRP related filters, 33 and 34. I didn't get around to looking at 34, the one you were having problems with, so it is still disabled but it looks like 33 is causing problems now. Will be looking at them later today and reenable when I'm confident there are no false positives left. Ferien (talk) 13:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ottawahitech - hi there! Good to see you editing again. And Ferien, thank you for answering - I can't see the filter, and looking at the edit had no idea how adding that category could possibly trigger it. Regarding the Liszt, that's a very exciting piece. I wish I could play it but I would need to practice a whole lot more than I actually do. Antandrus (talk) 20:03, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, not going to say too much about the filter onwiki obviously, but it's a different one to 33 that I added here in early March and it's quite new so still some things to improve. Hope you are doing well as for some reason it seems like I haven't seen you around as much recently. --Ferien (talk) 21:10, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I've been busy in that other place ("real life", "meatspace", ...), with various projects :) Antandrus (talk) 21:24, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Refugees from Wikipedia's sound, fury, and political squabbles are starting to appear at other Wikimedia projects."[edit]

Hi Antandrus,

I have just noticed three wikipedians with over 200k edits on enwiki who have exponentially increased their contributions on WQ in the last year or so. Don't know if I should mention their user-id? At least one is blocked on enwiki, another is an admin there. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:29, 3 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, I'm not surprised. It's hard to write there now, unless you are principally active in obscurities and arcana. I do maintenance work these days, answer questions, do copyediting, try to shield people from abusive trolls, and a few other things, but it's years since I've written an article. Here there's lots of content still to add, and at least for me that's what I initially found attractive about Wikipedia (back in 2004! Redlinks still on major topics...)
The culture here is different. I could write an essay on it, and started drafting one in my head. Wikiquote seems a lot more laissez-faire: someone can add quotes all on one side of an issue, e.g. an anti-Semite can cherry-pick the Talmud to make Jews look like perverts and creeps, and it seems no one really cares because someone else, some day, will come along and add the rest, the grand wisdom tradition that evolved from thousands of years of struggle in a hostile landscape. Maybe Wikipedia is over-managed. Different philosophies. Antandrus (talk) 15:56, 3 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Having an essay here about the culture differences between enwp and wq would be lovely. I know the essay you write will be more easily digested than w:The Sound and the Fury:-) I wish I had a clue on how to write such an essay, but I have no idea where to start. Just reading what you wrote above I can see many areas where we may not agree.
[No] Redlinks still on major topics [left on enwiki]: to my mind there are still many major areas on enwp that are not properly covered, not just obscurities and arcana. It is a shame that enwp drives away exactly the type of people who would be best at filling in those blanks IMIO. Ottawahitech (talk) 01:54, 4 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just to add: I checked Talmud briefly and gosh it sure looks busy editing-wise, and has been viewed 4500 times in September alone. However it has “Fewer than 30 watchers’ and only one IP user is responsible for all additions since the beginning of Sept 2022.
Not helpful is the sockpuppeting-phobia at enwp. For example: w:Mosaic (magazine) which is used as a ref for a talmud quote was started on enwp in 2017 by a user who is now blocked as a sockuppet. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:51, 5 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"editing in late was free, open, welcoming, friendly"
My birthday is coming up soon and this time I would like to celebrate it. I have lasted here this long (probably thanks to you), so I hope WQ will become my permanent WMF-home.
One of the things I want to do at my WQ-birthday-party, Is compare my experience here with my experience at other WMF-sites.
For starters I stated collecting this:
1 year of usertalkpage msgs on wq end with Note
2-years of usertalkpage msgs on wq end with Whoops Ottawahitech (talk) 19:01, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: If you argue with a f...[edit]

I was recently reading Meta:What is a troll? because I had been accused of being a troll on an enwq-UTP a long time ago, but let it go instead of getting into a heated exchange. I didn’t know it at the time but I was following the advice provided under back away (yey !)

Have you read this document? At the risk of being wiki-charged with contravening Meta's version of editing-by-proxism, I am bringing this paragraph to your attention so you do not get on the wrong side of wiki-law

Unlike trolls who vandalize articles, the majority of the damage caused by those misusing process is fairly indirect. Generally it is best to simply state your opposition etc etc DFTT<

(Disclosure: I am not saying you are a troll, just saying hi. Just miss talking to you :) Reply-to ability to add edit summary is gone? Ottawahitech (talk) 21:25, 15 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh hi! - no worries, I would never infer you were suggesting I was a troll - I am secure in the knowledge that I am not (as secure as it is possible to be in any aspect of self-knowledge, I should caveat, for most people overestimate their own). You have an ability to ask bold questions, and that is something to celebrate not suppress. It's not trolling, and I say this as an enwiki admin with almost 18 years of experience. It only becomes trolling if the followup is incoherent, abusive, didn't-hear-that, etc. The ability to see beyond the confines of a habitual conformism, of the kind that developed and maintains the more rubber-stampy parts of the wiki bureaucracies, is a marker of intelligence. It is through such action that wikis -- and indeed civilization itself -- develops rather than ossifies.
Looking at that meta piece on Meta:What is a troll?, I see right away a big one missing: people who extremely destructive, in issuing threats, carrying on stalking and harassment campaigns, not because they are trolling and trying to get a reaction, but because they have mental illnesses so severe that they think what they are doing is Right and Good. The guy I revert every other day or so is one of those, as far as I can ferret out from his own writings elsewhere and from court records. He's actually not a troll, he's just ill. But he needs to be quietly shut down for the good of the project - he takes time away from good faith contributors, and maybe I'm being a bit of a w:Catcher in the Rye here, but I want to keep our enthusiastic 12-year-olds who want to help fight vandalism from colliding with a 45-year-old maniac with a prison record. Anyway. -- Also, that part you quoted seems to be missing something, right before "generally it is best to simply state your opposition..." -- it needs a context. Are we talking about someone who nominates an article for deletion, one that is almost universally considered worthy of keeping? I remember a troll from back in 2005 or so who had extraordinary run by doing this -- he'd nominate, for example, an article on a minority ethnic group in an Asian country, claiming it was "racist", and the discussion would go on and on and on and on. That's an obvious abuse of process. He'd find edge cases and then hammer away at them to get people to start fighting each other over their prejudices. Now that's a troll. Questioning a process, asking why something was done, -- that is neither wrong nor trolling, if done in good faith, and if we don't practice our own assume-good-faith policies, then what are we but hypocrites?
Anyway this is juicy stuff. :) You do good work here. Carry on. Antandrus (talk) 23:07, 15 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you so much, your confidence in me is refreshing. I sincerely hope, I will never disappoint you. Cheers, Ottawahitech (talk) 21:46, 17 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: Music question[edit]

It's me again. Hope you are not getting tired of me flooding your talk all the time? Assuming the answer is in the negative(?) I have another question on the same topic. I have recently created Category: Women singers as a subcat of Category:Women musicians and Category:Singers. Things went on swimmingly, until I happened to post something totally unrelated on a user-talk page, where I discovered another WQuotient posting something related to the topic.

I hope I have not lost you so far? My posts always turn out so convoluted, don't know why that is. Cheers, Ottawahitech (talk) 18:54, 23 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hm. I see a comment about some musicians not being singers and some singers not being musicians, but that is odd. Is not a musician someone who makes music, in any form, and is not song - what a singer does - necessarily a form of music? I remember getting a question loosely related to this on my doctoral orals, but I don't remember it exactly, but all homing in on "what is music?" - which is non-trivial anyway. And you end up at "what is art?" And here I am, also convoluted. - I think women singers is a subcat of women musicians, and also a subcat of singers, as you have it. (I remember when I was growing up someone, like a grand-dad, would hear something awful on the radio and say "that's not music!!" - but I did not, at the time, have a doctorate in the topic, and declined to argue. It would not have gone well anyway.) Antandrus (talk) 21:18, 23 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]