Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150 151, 152, 153, 154

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 15 days are automatically archived 5 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 10.

story · music · places

300 years ago, a Bach cantata was born: happy new year! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:04, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

... inviting you to check out "my" story (fun listen today, full of surprises), music (and memory), and places (pictured by me: the latest uploads) any day! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:44, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mozart music for today! - I reverted an IP twice today on Aaron Copland and would like more eyes there. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:19, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

20 January is the 100th birthday of David Tudor (see my story) and the 300th birthday of Bach's cantata Meine Seufzer, meine Tränen, BWV 13, if we go by date instead of occasion as he would have thought, so see my story for last Sunday, and celebrate ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:23, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Look for Wind of Change in music, and for vacation in places. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:55, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 72, November–December 2025

• Renewed partnerships
• Spotlight: Strengthening Wikimedia Collaborations with and for Open Science

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team – 12:43, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(This message was sent to User:Drmies and is being posted here due to a redirect.)

Hi Drmies and stalkers,

Would anyone be able to have a look at commons:Category:Hairball at Caesars Windsor, 2026-01-30 and identify which people are being impersonated? I got the easy ones - Kiss, Ozzy, Alice Cooper, Prince, Axl Rose, Brian Johnson, Freddie Mercury - but there's also the lead singers of Poison, Journey, etc. being impersonated and I'm not really familiar with their stage appearance. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 20:42, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Bro I saw pictures of that extravaganza on Facebook, but that's well outside my area of expertise, I'm sorry to say. Drmies (talk) 13:57, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Shucks. Thanks, though. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:07, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

hi Drmies

I'm pretty new to all of this so I'm amazed I even managed to find this box to contact you. I've only been doing wiki for a short time compared to someone like you and I'm learning as I go. I'm trying to get a number of pages to improve by doing better citations and looking for the notability that can be referred to, where appropriate. User 'Lightlie' and your good self recently edited one of the dozen or so pages I regularly update, and because of your intervention I realise that I've probably been doing things a little wrong. My background is in reviewing and writing So when I edit a wiki page what I think is factual and objective is probably not neutral enough. In other words, I have the instinct to 'write well' - a tendency to try to entertain a little bit or to put something in an interesting light. and it really doesn't help one bit that many of the author pages I'm looking at set a very poor example ... There's hardly any citations, a lot of those few there are primary anyway, and the tone's very much like a fan. before I started editing pages myself I did look at some fairly prominent authors and how their pages were set up. I really recommend you investigate some of the big names because a lot of them seem to be getting away with murder. I'm more interested in the middle range or stub writers Who tend to get ignored and might need a bit of help to become more mature pages - But because of your intervention, I now realise that Sometimes my tone is is not what Wikipedia wants and that's what you mean by editorial commentary and promotion. and when you say that word promotion someone like me who reads books all the time thinks of that way over the top kind of promotion that happens on the back of books. It's not that someone like me is actually trying to promote something, it's more of the way one thinks habitually. I'm keen to do better - so will it be alright with you if I go back to some of the pages I've been editing (including that most recently edited by Lightlie) and try to edit-add-reinstate only the notable content using only the bits that work with solid sources and in a completely neutral tone? that way I might become a semi useful member of wikipedia other than somebody merely adding future deletions! thanks so much for your help. Greenery1234 Greenery1234 (talk) 03:45, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Hey, thanks for the note. We all contribute in our own way so please keep doing that. A few brief pointers--the "Petrucci utilises poetry" bit is way too--well, what you said, or maybe "flowery". We write more boring stuff here. Plus, it's sourced to his own bio and that's not a good source esp. for unattributed positive material. The British Council link probably couldn't confirm the "all the channels" bit, and that is also a primary source, most likely, and certainly not something that was peer-reviewed or overseen by a news editor, and that's the kind of sourcing we need.
  So no I wouldn't say that it was terribly promotional, but it did veer from neutrality in a few ways, esp. given the sources. Does that make sense? I had to seriously adjust my own writing here--as an academic, I was taught to write argumentatively, and that doesn't fly here either. Take care, Drmies (talk) 14:03, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• PS yes, writer's pages often lack a lot of the sourcing necessary to write up a good biography. Same with academics and journalists. It's unfortunate but we can only write content based on neutral and reliable sources... Drmies (talk) 14:13, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  That's brilliant and so kind of you thank you. OK - so when I get a chance I'll have another look at some of those bits that came out and see if I can reinstate them in a simplified way but proper sources and trimmed back to objective facts and neutral tone. I might even use AI to check that I haven't slipped into anything even resembling a flower! I've got quite a few other pages that need looking at too - None of these pages are mine but they're adopted ones that seemed to need some bolstering, Like John Hegley or Jane Draycott, interesting people who seem to be a little bit on the sidelines? I hope things are going well for you and take care! Greenery1234 (talk) 19:24, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I noticed you stubified Amber Scorah back in 2020. The article has pretty much back to its previous state for 2 years now, unfortunately. I have my hands full with the logistics involved with moving lately, but I'd really appreciate if you or a talk page stalker trimmed it down again. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 14:48, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for cleaning it up. The only other thing that bothers me about it is a podcast being included in a book section. Maybe we could rename it to something else? Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 00:32, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I really do appreciate your recent help. I hope to return the favour someday if you ever need me to take a look at something when I'm less busy. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 17:57, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Hey, no problem. We're a community here, and I know you'd do the same for me. I appreciate the strawberries and they remind me that one day I'll learn all about y'all's double cream or Devon cream or clotted cream or whatever they are. Drmies (talk) 20:42, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  I think that's a British thing. I'm actually Canadian 😅. The only thing we steal from the British in a culinary sense is french fries with white vinegar. I'm sure we borrow more but I've never seen that specific pairing in an American restaurant. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 21:20, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  You won't believe how many things the British stole from India... it's a long list. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 21:26, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  Led by curry and khaki, no doubt. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 22:19, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Soyadı is Alakmarsaify. Please revoke TPA. SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 01:05, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Drmies! I'm writing to let you know about an edit war that's been ongoing with an aggressive unconfirmed user on the Black Eyed Peas page. I proposed a few weeks ago for the Atban Klann page to be merged with the BEP page since every article about the group refers to the BEP as a continuation of Atban Klann rather than a seperate group. I was met with no opposition during the week this proposal was up so I merged the pages while also including the former members of Atban Klann in the infobox. However, an unconfirmed user keeps erasing every former member except Fergie, claiming they have no relevance to the group since they didn't participate in any released material (which has never been criteria when it comes to determining a former member), and also that she's the only one relevant to mention since she made the group famous. Could you please step in and do something about this? There's enough sources to confirm BEP is a rebrand of the Atban Klann, and regardless of "relevance" the former members shouldn't be erased just cause they aren't on Fergie's level. The user's pretty much devolved to just calling me a crook and telling me to "make him" stop. - K-popguardian (talk) 18:59, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• You see how community works, right? Binksternet reverted and User:Ohnoitsjamie blocked--thank you both. Drmies (talk) 21:48, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• K-popguardian, one thing though. Next time you propose a merge, go the official route, outlined on Wikipedia:Merging. If you do that you get free templates and notifications, you have a bigger chance of getting other editors to look at it and agree with you, and in the case of disruption you have something official you can point at. Much safer. Drmies (talk) 21:50, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. I didn't realize I missed some steps, and I apologize. Regardless, thank you guys for your time and patience. - K-popguardian (talk) 21:58, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A "dedicated hobbyist" with a special interest in LGBTQ pages seem to have reappeared. You have dealt with Jacobkennedy and their tiresome chain (laundry basket? Sorry, I think this metaphor is getting away from me!) of successors many times. A user opened an SPI case for ~2026-15620-2 and Jjnoji as Jacobkennedy socks and asked for my input. I think the reporting user is right; these two are JKennedy et al. I added a few diffs there, but thought you might take a look if you have time and feel so inclined.

Hope this makes sense (I'm a bit rusty in the WP routines). Thanks! AukusRuckus (talk) 12:10, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was wondering if you could offer opinion? I think the article Robert B. Silvers is overly hagiographic and I feel quotations of tributes from the article subjects colleagues and such are undue. Some other editors are saying it's not. Do you have a moment to share your thoughts on its talk page? Graywalls (talk) 07:22, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't have to look to say that quotes are probably undue, unless we're talking about Gandhi or Johan Cruyff. Drmies (talk) 14:51, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Talk:Robert_B._Silvers#COI_tag_(February_2026) soooo you didn't look? Graywalls (talk) 14:57, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think in general one shouldn't jump to conclusions. Drmies (talk) 15:08, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2026).

Administrator changes

Vacant0

• Crisco 1492

• Deepfriedokra
• Hbdragon88
• Karl Dickman
• Worm That Turned

CheckUser changes

Daniel Quinlan

Vanamonde93

Mkdw

Oversight changes

Daniel Quinlan

Arbitration

• Due to the result of a recent motion, a rough consensus of administrators at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard may impose an expanded topic ban on Israel, Israelis, Jews, Judaism, Palestine, Palestinians, Islam, and/or Arabs, if an editor's Arab-Israeli conflict topic ban is determined to be insufficient to prevent disruption. At least one diff per area expanded into should be cited.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2026 Steward elections started on 06 February 2026 at 14:00 (UTC) and will end on 27 February 2026 at 14:00 (UTC). The confirmation process for current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.

Just so you know, I removed your welcome message here. This was a troll, and I believe my removal was warranted per WP:DENY. Just wanted to let you know -- thank you for your help here. JeffSpaceman (talk) 21:22, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Of course they were--the welcome message was so I could remember them when looking at my edit history. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:52, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

story · music · places

Today some 1510 carving from St. Valentin. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:41, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Today something new: a 100th birthday of someone alive, György Kurtág! In 2004 I was there when he and his wife played for the Rheingau Musik Festival where he was the featured composer. They played as the 2019 DYK said, on an upright piano, - listen, the last piece was the same. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:43, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]