User talk:Beyond My Ken

It is The Reader that we should consider on each and every edit we make to Wikipedia.

(Thanks to Alan Liefting)‎

     A HORSE
     (crowd-sourced)

(Life is too short!)

...

Articles that look like shit and need to be fixed

• Degenerate art
• Lock Haven, Pennsylvania

Collaboration: Need Help Expanding Article

Hey there is this article that has recently come to my attention called The Bat which is an adaption of a play of the same name. It is missing a lot of information on it and since it is an older film I was wondering if you would like to collaborate with me and help me expand it since it is very underdeveloped . Please let me know what you think.--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:31, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

I think I've contributed to that article in the past. I'll take a look, but I'm inthe middle of a few things. BMK (talk) 15:52, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

had to delete the IMDb references in it and add dome new things to to but it's still a tub. This is not a big priority so take your time.--Paleface Jack (talk) 20:18, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Done As a rule, I don't think it's a good idea to add multiple "expand this section" tags to articles. Articles will be expanded when editors are interested in expanding them, not because of nagging tags which simply make the article look busy and make it harder to read. BMK (talk) 18:37, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Camel

Agree with the sentiment behind the camel image. Chin up. Montanabw^(talk) 07:57, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup. BMK (talk) 08:00, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Need Help Expanding Article

Hello BMK, I was wondering if you would be willing to help me expand the article on the 1960 film Jigoku. It is a significant and influential film that is sadly underdeveloped and missing a lot of important information. I have posted stuff on it a year ago and added tags and it still remains underdeveloped and in need of expansion which is why I have decided to work on expanding it. The problem is that because of its major significance and the amount of information missing from it I cannot do it all myself which is why I am asking you to help me expand it since you do well with older films. Please let me know if you are able to help me.--Paleface Jack (talk) 15:59, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm going to pass on this one, sorry. BMK (talk) 19:06, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 4, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:18, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom expansion

I think it worth noting that both TH1980 and Curtis Naito have specifically requested of the drafting arb, GorillaWarfare, on her talk page that they be added as parties already. John Carter (talk) 15:34, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. BMK (talk) 16:56, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

I really appreciate your work on Benjamin Genocchio. Also, I really like your above note to self. I second that. Penelope1114 (talk) 17:51, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I just wish I could manage to follow it more often. BMK (talk) 22:59, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

The Pierre

As a result of your two reverts to my edits, the crappy look of the article reflects badly on you, so now you get to fix it. — Quicksilver^{T @} 18:44, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Actually, the article looks just fine -- in point of fact, it looks exactly the same.

If you have an argument to make as to why metric units should be primary on an article about an American building, written in American English, with American dates, please go to this discussion on the talk page. BMK (talk) 18:47, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

If you are so lacking in perception, discussion is obviously hopeless. My suggestion is that get familiar with the metric system and the fact that it has been legal in the United States since 1866, opinions of Luddites notwithstanding. — Quicksilver^{T @} 18:57, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

And my advice to you is to take a hike and not to post here again. BMK (talk) 19:06, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Reaching out

Hi BMK. My requested edit is not generating any discussion on Genocchio's talk page. If you have a moment, would you please take a look at it? That would be awesome. Really appreciate your input and time. Penelope1114 (talk) 00:17, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

• Done Sorry it too me so long to get to it. BMK (talk) 21:43, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

FYI - maybe?

Hi BMK. Thanks for tracking this new problematic editor Kk. Based on some of the articles being edited and the snarky edit summaries it is just possible that this is a return of FrozenFan2. I don't know if you saw it last week but someone did some investigating and FF2 (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/FrozenFan2) goes back farther to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bigshowandkane64. Of course Kk could be another person but at least this gives me the opportunity to update you about things. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 21:30, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I do think that it's not a new editor, but was unsure if they were one of the various problematic editors who work in the cartoon/voice actor subject area. This one is much more aggressive then I remember FF2 being, but I may be confusing FF2 with one of the others. In any case, I didn't mention the possible sockiness of the editor in my AN/I report because I've been taken to task for "ABF" before, and I didn't want to muddy the ground. I did see the folding of FF2 into Bigshow a couple of days ago, and I'll keep an eye on this new one, as I'm sure you will too. I just hope we get an admin to take a look, or, better yet, pique the curiosity of a CU. BMK (talk) 21:35, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi again. Between you and LjL a whole batch of socks were uncovered. Thanks for your vigilance. MarnetteD|Talk 01:54, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

My thanks go to Bbb23, a very good admin and CU. BMK (talk) 02:09, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Absolutely. When I think of the number of socks Bbb23 (and Ponyo and a couple others) deal with weekly I am amazed. MarnetteD|Talk 02:23, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Virginia City, Nevada may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• [[list of reportedly haunted locations|haunted]] locations in Virginia City for their 2006 [TV series ''[[Ghost Adventures]]''. They returned in 2009 and 2011 to film other locations in

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:39, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Done BMK (talk) 23:40, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Notice for HiltonWorldwide (now renamed)

You left a notice for User talk:HiltonWorldwide (who I recently renamed to a more appropriate username) warning them about their username. I find your message to not only be WP:BITEY and harsh, but it was also vague for the user, as they didn't seem to understand what part of the policy they violated. In the future, please use a nicer, less harsh tone with WP:AGF in mind, or if you cba to do so, you may use {{Uw-username}} (which Twinkle has in its library). --I am k6ka ^{Talk to me!} _{See what I have done} 17:12, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

• Bullshit. You seem to think that your obvious hat collecting and being a "global renamer" gives you some kind of status here, but it ain't so - at least not with me. Don't post here again. BMK (talk) 19:11, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

OHNY photo contest and WikiWednesday meeting tomorrow evening

I'd like to invite you to join myself and User:Jim.henderson et al at the tomorrow evening's WikiWednesday at our froendly local art gallery / video game collective on 14th Street. We can strategize on Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/OHNY and future plans!--Pharos (talk) 17:43, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks very much, but I've got something scheduled for tomorrow evening. Have fun! BMK (talk) 19:12, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Comments at AN/I

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit food war. To resolve the kumquat content dispute, please do not add further foodstuffs. samtar ^{t} 22:03, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Oh, pistachio the penguin. BMK (talk) 22:04, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Theophilus P. Chandler, Jr.

Hey, BMK. I can get rid of the interference with a { {clear} }. What I was trying to do was line up the images of churches, houses, and other buildings with their subheadings. I had lunch yesterday with the woman who curated the Chandler exhibit in Phila 5 years ago, which is why he was on my mind. == BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 20:04, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey. I'm afraid I'm not a big believer in aligning pictures with sections. If we can read books in which all the pictures are gathered together into one or two separate sections, and magazine articles in which images may appear before or after the connected paragraph, depending on the restrictions of layout, I don't see why it is imperative for us to have an image within a section if it's going to wreck havoc with the the article's overall look.

That being said, why don't you try using the clear and we'll see what it looks like. Despite my reputation, I have no desire to be unreasonable, especially with reasonable editors such as yourself. Go for it! BMK (talk) 01:14, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Actually, I fiddled with it myself. Is the result OK with you? BMK (talk) 01:45, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

That's nice of you, I appreciate it. I should have checked the article myself and noticed the interference. BTW, I've been organizing a lot of Commons images, and noticed the ledes that you've added to a large number of the category pages (especially in architecture). Thank you, it greatly adds to their usefulness. == BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 14:15, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Sigh

And people wonder why Wikipedia has a difficult time getting good editors to stick around. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 20:03, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Good editors provide sources for their claims when asked to, they don't instead attempt to remove a sourced claim in a fit of pique.

Good luck in your future endeavors. BMK (talk) 20:32, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

And wise editors recognize when a source is not reliable enough, and a claim needs to be scaled back or qualified. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 21:10, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Wisdom is the lot of few people, the most the rest of us can hope for is to be smart and judicious. BMK (talk) 21:16, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Puck Building

• "An historic" is grammatically incorrect. More information: http://grammarist.com/usage/an-historic/
• The verb 'sports' is not encyclopedic.
• The word both in "the building contains both office space as well as ballrooms" is extraneous.
• Typesetters is all one word.
• "Notable amongst the firms' salesmen" is too sibilant and flows better if you knock the 'st' off amongst.
• 'Assistant Secretary of State' is a proper noun and begins with a capital letter.
• BUT... I will concede that 'northwestern' may be acceptable.

Regards, a writer. Firebrace (talk) 04:59, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Article already says "a historic"; "sports" meh; changed the sentence with "both"; fixed "typsetters"; dropped the "st", not because of "sibilance", but because it's just a silly word, more used by the Brits, and this is an American article; capped the "A", "northwestern" is correct. BMK (talk) 05:07, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

5 million!

We've reached five million!!                                                   The English Wikipedia now has over 5,000,000 articles! Woo-hoo! Feel free to pass this message on! You can never celebrate too much. Eman235/talk 17:50, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

My language

Wow, your language. Article link was created, and that ref link is no longer live. Thanks for advice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andazuma (talk • contribs) 07:42, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

You mean "damn"? Please, be an adult. And while you're at it, instead of deleting my comments from your talk page, how about answering the questions I put to you: do you have a COi in relation to Rubin & Chapelle, or are you a paid editor for them? Ignoring the question will not make them go away. BMK (talk) 07:46, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Though familiar with them personally, the answer is no. And do you know anything about fashion or design techniques? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andazuma (talk • contribs) 00:34, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it happens I do know a little -- not much, and not in depth, but a little -- however that's irrelevant to editing Wikipedia, whereas a WP:COI is very relevant. BMK (talk) 03:38, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

You're My Only Hope

Hi BMK. If you have a moment to review a new proposed update to Benjamin Genocchio, I'd be grateful. Hope all is well. Penelope1114 (talk) 14:24, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

I will take a look, but probably not until tomorrow evening EST. BMK (talk) 06:56, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I just took a quick look, but it's going to take longer than I thought, since, at first glance, it doesn't appear to me that some of the references provided support the claims being made -- which means I'm going to have to examine the refs pretty closely. Unfortunately I can't do that tonight for personal reasons, so I'm going to have to try to get to it tomorrow. BMK (talk) 01:46, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Completely understand. I look forward to hearing from you when you have time. Penelope1114 (talk) 03:03, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Reorg Rfc

Hi, I restored the previous format of the RfC because it was confusing to split them when they weren't from the start. It made conditional support cases fall under oppose, which is pretty odd. CFCF 💌 📧 06:50, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

OK, I just thought it was odd to have been set up that way, but I'm not particularly invested in my change. I assume you preserved my comments when you restored? BMK (talk) 06:53, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Speaking of language

You may wish to be aware of this. Montanabw^(talk) 06:50, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I did see it. Of course, it's been obvious from the beginning that he wasn't a new editor. I just wish that CUs would investigate based on such blatamcy (if that's a word). The privacy issue is, in my view, completely overblown. BMK (talk) 06:56, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Indeffed by Bbb23 as a block-evading sock. BMK (talk) 14:15, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Today's drahmah: [1] Montanabw^(talk) 21:14, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rubin & Chapelle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Elle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

• Done (I think) BMK (talk) 14:16, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Patrick Leigh Fermor

I see you have removed the photograph of his grave. I went to Dumbleton specifically to get imagery of his grave so I could contribute that to Wikipedia. Any suggestions where else a photo of his grave should be used if not in Patrick Leigh Fermor's biography? PicturePrince (talk) 23:16, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Actually, it was your movement of the other images into a gallery that I thought didn't work -- frankly, I didn't see the grave image. I've now restored it. BMK (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated. PicturePrince (talk) 14:48, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Irvington, New York

Please do not use styles that are unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Irvington, New York. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ɱ (talk • contribs) 03:03, 6 November 2015‎ (UTC)

A bolded word is a bolded word, wherever it appeaars, dipshit. BMK (talk) 08:11, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

<redacted bullshit>

BTW don't post on this page again. I don't accept comments from people who don't have the brains that god gave a gopher. BMK (talk) 08:14, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

<redacted bullshit>

In the words of the poet: fuck you and the horse you rode in on. You're an idiot with not the least bit of a conception whatsoever of what makes an article good. All you can do is follow rules, with no thoughts of your own, or independent judgement. Fuck off, don't post here again. I look forward to the day you find another interest -- bottle cap collecting, ant farms, snow globes of the world, upskirts photography, whatever -- which will take you away from Wikipedia, where your baleful influence is detrimental to the project. BMK (talk) 09:59, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

My WP:Sockpuppet catching record

I'm stopping by to personally thank you for this comment. It's always nice see that an editor recognizes that I do not make sock accusations lightly. I would reply to this silliness, but you and various others (including Montanabw) know that it isn't true since I only directly accuse people of being socks when I know they are socks. I've also recently already went over this with a lying/bluffing sock. Cebr1979 commenting in that thread is simply sour grapes, as seen by all of the times he's posted on my talk page, and by this and this recent matter. I'm not going to take the WP:Bait. I'm also not going to participate in that thread since I get tired of dealing with the same types of disruptive editors time and time again, especially the ones who get blocked or banned only to return under a new account.

And I thank you too, Cullen328. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 08:29, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

I only said what I know to be true. BMK (talk) 00:24, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Anyone else notice that the more vehemently a sock denies being a sock the more likely it is they ARE a sock? Montanabw^(talk) 01:47, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a pretty good rule of thumb. Editors who aren't socks generally react with something on the order of "Sorry, but you're wrong, I'm not a sock. If you can put together enough evidence to convince a checkuser to run a check, I welcome hard evidence of that." (OK, maybe I'm exagerrating a bit.) It's generally the socks who yell and scream and get abusive and protest vehemently, so much so that's it's almost a guarantee of their being a sock. Legit editors are generally too secure in their position to do that. BMK (talk) 02:12, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

I've seen all types. For example, as you know, editors are convinced that this one is a sock or at least a returning editor who never had sanctions or never socked, but you see how cool and collected that editor has remained. On the returning editor front, nothing can be done about him or her...yet. And since that editor is currently improving Wikipedia, a lot of people don't care anyway about what sketchy past is likely there. As I've noted, I'm also sure that editor is aiming for WP:Adminship. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 09:35, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 7 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the IAC (company) page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Done BMK (talk) 00:24, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Historic districts on NRHP

Since you previously commented on this subject, please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#Category:Historic Districts on the National Register of Historic Places by state. Thanks Hmains (talk) 18:25, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

I've asked for clarification at ARCA regarding the AE report

You are involved in a recently-filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Clarification request: Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.

Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:37, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification, I've posted a comment there. BMK (talk) 07:51, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Glenn Miller

Hello, Beyond my Ken. In 1923, the institution was called the University of Colorado, not the University of Colorado at Boulder. The latter is presentist. I put in the town name a moment ago, is that okay? Thanks. Snowfalcon cu (talk) 16:46, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Sure. BMK (talk) 20:06, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 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.

German declaration of war against the United States (1941) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Reichstag

Irvington, New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Chris Evans

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:50, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Done BMK (talk) 21:44, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Please do not edit disruptively

Noting your prior declaration of intention to disrupt editing at Murder of Anni Dewani, I'm hereby giving you one last warning to not engage in such behaviour. Discuss edits on the talk page or be prepared to have a good reason for reverting. Reverting "just because" will not be tolerated. You hereby understand that such disruption will be treated as a blockable offence. Samsara 15:12, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

I was quite clear on the talk page as to what I would do, and what the policy basis of my proposed action was. Dewanifacts is an SPA editor with an acknowledged COI concerning the subject of the article and has no business editing it.

On the other hand, I note that you have been an active participant in discussions on Talk:Murder of Anni Dewani about changes to be made to the article, and as such, I deem that you are WP:INVOLVED and should not take any admin actions in connection with it. I shall place a warning to that extent on your talk page. BMK (talk) 15:14, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

So I see you're quite civil when admins tell you you're doing something wrong. However when I do, I receive nasty uncivil text worthy of banning you from Wikipedia.--ɱ (talk · vbm · coi) 18:13, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesman and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do ... Speak what you think in hard words and tomorrow speak what tomorrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict everything you said today." Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self Reliance (1841)

BMK (talk) 21:39, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

"Our only elected representatives"

Regarding this edit, since you apparently saw the need to use extra emphasis, it seems prudent to point out that you're wrong when you write "ArbCom must realize that they are our only elected representatives" (emphasis omitted). Both local project administrators and bureaucrats are elected serve as community representatives.

Broadly, you seem to be arguing for the ad hoc creation of a community de-sysop procedure and you're asking the Arbitration Committee to inappropriately fill that role whenever the mob demands it. You may sincerely hold these beliefs, but they're still anathema to many contributors here. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:36, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Your use of the word "mob" says volumes about your point of view, which makes it just that much easier to ignore you.

BTW, admins may be "elected" -- although it's debateble if that is the most apropos word to use -- but they're not elected to "represent" us, they're elected to do a job, to clean up around the joint. That's not the same thing as being elected to ArbCom, as a moment's serious consideration would tell you -- but, then the judgment of a de-frocked admin such as yourself isn't all that great, or you wouldn't have lost the bit in the first place.

The next time you feel the urge to share one of your wonderful ideas with me, please bite your tongue and let the urge pass. BMK (talk) 21:35, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration case accepted

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Neelix. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Neelix/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 17, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Neelix/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

For the Arbitration Committee, Amortias (T)(C) 20:47, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Removing the Film template

OK, do I have to manually revert what I have done? —ALittleQuenhi (talk to me) 04:52, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm doing it now. BMK (talk) 04:53, 11 November 2015 (UTC)