User talk:Dicklyon

Please add new talk topics in new sections, at the bottom of the page, and sign with ~~~~ (four tildes will expand into your signature).

I will reply here, and expect you to be watching my user talk page, even if you are Nyttend.

Random style tip

Another styletip ...

Attribution

Name the author in the main text and not in a footnote if the quotation is a full sentence or more. However, attribution is unnecessary with quotations that are clearly from the person discussed in the article or section.

Barnstars and such

		The Original Barnstar
		I'm not sure why you haven't picked up a bevy of these already, but thanks for all your effort, particularly in tracking down good sources with diagrams, etc., on the photography- and color-related articles (not to mention fighting vandalism). Those areas of Wikipedia are much richer for your work. Cheers! —jacobolus (t) 02:05, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		To Dicklyon on the occasion of your photograph of Ivan Sutherland and his birthday! What a great gift. -User:SusanLesch 04:40, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		All Around Amazing Barnstar
		For your hard work in improving and watching over the Ohm's law article SpinningSpark 00:59, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		For your improvements to the Centrifugal force articles. Your common sense approach of creating a summary-style article at the simplified title, explaining the broad concepts in a way that is accessible to the general reader and linking to the disambiguated articles, has provided Wikipedia's readership with a desperately needed place to explain in simple terms the basic concepts involved in understanding these related phenomena. Wilhelm_meis (talk) 14:29, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Surreal Barnstar
		For your comment here which at once admits your own errors with humility yet focusses our attention upon the real villain Egg Centric (talk) 17:09, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		For your great contribution to Wikipedia in adding pictures and illustrations to articles improving the reader's experience by adding a visual idea to the written information.--Xaleman87 (talk) 05:57, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	The Special Barnstar
	I could not find a barnstar for standing up to an outrageously unjust block so you get a special one. Hang in there. В²C ☎ 23:25, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	The Resilient Barnstar
	For your work in standardising article titles in line with the now consistent MOS:JR guidance, I present you this accolade. Your continued work in this regard, and in others, has been appreciated. It may have taken years, but much was accomplished. RGloucester — ☎ 14:44, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For an eternity of super-gnoming at WP:Requested moves to rein in entire swathes of article-titling chaos and bring them into order. I'm sure it can seem thankless work at times, so thanks! — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ< 19:41, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

It is said by many that A picture is worth a thousand words. Wikipedia articles are vastly improved and enhanced by the use of images. Dicklyon's user page displays just some of the over 500 images he has added to Wikipedia articles making the articles more enjoyable and interesting for our most important commodity, our reader. WP:Photography. He is a long-time veteran editor with over 137000 edits (58% in mainspace) who always uses the edit summary to clarify his edits and communicate his intentions to following editors. He also participates in various timely and important WP:Manual of Style discussions to improve what and how we do things around here. A trusted, productive and helpful editor that deserves recognition as an Editor of the Week.

The Original Barnstar

I've started to note the many scholarly contributions of this author, beginning with editing of the Wikipedia Cintel pages. For images and vision, I've had a lifelong career in color grading for feature films, tv commercials, videos, etc. with telecine and other systems worldwide; as a musician, 'Human and Machine Hearing' will certainly be fascinating. Thank you to Richard F. Lyon for providing the PDF of this work to all.

Lingelbach (talk) 22:28, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

		Fighting the Good Fight Barnstar
		For resisting those who would like Wikipedia’s capitalization rules to resemble a corporate brochure or a government press release —Wallnot (talk) 02:49, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	This is for your really thorough clean up after the Armenian genocide move discussion. My watchlist is full of your edits since days. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 19:20, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
	Thank you! Biggerj1 (talk) 15:57, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

that's for these hacks:

	The Minor barnstar
	SO MANY MINOR EDITS! Thank you for your work. -ASHEIOU (THEY/THEM • TALK) 19:46, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There we go again, commenting on the quantity of my edits instead of the quality. But minor thanks anyway. Dicklyon (talk) 00:23, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New topics

Add new topics at the bottom please.

Redlinks

We have Rozelle Bay and White Bay (New South Wales), and Blackwattle Bay, but Johnstons Bay, between them, has no article. Need to fix...

And the new Me-Mel ferry could use an article. Me-Mel is also an alt name for Goat Island (Port Jackson) it says there. Dicklyon (talk) 10:21, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Contact

Hello, how may i contact you for a creation of a page? SilentNotmad (talk) 12:07, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically, the creation of a page for the artist Rudolf Burda. Thank you. SilentNotmad (talk) 12:08, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not my department. Try WP:AFC for advice. Or contact me here, any time, for further advice. Dicklyon (talk) 22:38, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

USFL Draft RM

Howdy. The positioning & indenting of your question, is confusing. Are you asking me or SmokeyJoe? GoodDay (talk) 19:48, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Without a link to the question, it's hard to say. Probably SmokeyJoe though. Dicklyon (talk) 22:39, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved my post, to avoid confusion. GoodDay (talk) 23:22, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see what I did. Sometimes it's hard to see an unindented new paragraph with no blank line, in the midst of indents. Dicklyon (talk) 11:40, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't nay or yayed this one, and lean towards lowercase as I'm not sure if it was a major event like the NFL Draft has become (increasingly commonly recognized as a proper name by fans and the general public). Randy Kryn (talk) 14:54, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You missed...

Dance On My Own, in which, hopefully, someone dances atop a dance floor formally named My Own. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:54, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andromeda Galaxy

Have you seen it from Australia? If so, envious. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:27, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, haven't looked. When does it rise or set? Dicklyon (talk) 22:21, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know. The page said dark skies make for better viewing. Ask the locals, unless some of them have never seen it. Binoculars may work in cities? I recall on a Paris visit I found that many Parisians had never visited the Louvre (on a similar note, watched a lunar eclipse occurring in Seattle on TV and the saddest thing was that there were cars still driving on a street in the background but had turned their lights on). Randy Kryn (talk) 23:20, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found "It's best to find Andromeda in fall in the Northern Hemisphere". It's toward the north, and wrong time of year, so I probably won't see it. But Crux is nice. Dicklyon (talk) 05:52, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As the fantasy star of the film Dumb and Dumber I sometimes take on too much of the character. I meant the Large Magellanic Cloud galaxy, which apparently isn't that much of a sight even when see in dark skies. I've never seen Andromeda under dark conditions but would like to. Crux, on the other hand, that must be nice viewing. Good photo, must have been thin clouds for stars to shine through like that. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:00, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here are more pix from down under. Dicklyon (talk) 10:35, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The LMC should be quite high in the evening this time of year. I'll try to get a view, maybe tomorrow. Dicklyon (talk) 11:02, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Your comment at RMTR is beyond the pale. Normally, it might land you a warning, but you were recently blocked for another personal attack against the same editor. So, to make this clear: it is okay to raise questions about another editor's conduct at an appropriate venue. It is okay to contact an admin, privately or on their talk page, to ask for an outside assessment of another editor's conduct. It is never okay to level personal attacks against another editor, no matter how vexatious or frustrating you may find their opinions or procedural actions. I implore you to consider whether you want to continue down this path, as further incivility may well result in an indefinite block or community ban. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 03:03, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(by talk reader) @Theleekycauldron: Saying someone is being obstructionist doesn't sound like a personal attack to me. I rebuke editors who think any voiced criticism is "beyond the pale". Your words do injustice to the phrase, itself. Please revert your block. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How is a comment on a user's behavior a personal attack? This is nonsense. Dicklyon (talk) 03:11, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A post at ANI that reads "[User] has been editing disruptively in this area, as evidenced by these diffs" is a legitimate comment on another user's behavior. Constructive criticism of other editors' behavior is indeed part and parcel of the system. Calling other editors "obstructionist" because they disagree with you is a personal attack, especially in the context of a grossly incivil comment on their talk page ~~that you never apologized for~~. @Chris troutman: I do not, in fact, think that any voiced criticism is "beyond the pale". But editors who raise concerns about the behavior of others are required to comply with our policy on decorum, no matter the venue. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 03:26, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Chris Troutman. Calling an editor obstructive is well short of an attack. Tony (talk) 03:27, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did apologize, and GoodDay accepted. Dicklyon (talk) 04:14, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

indeed you did :) I've updated my comment accordingly. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 04:18, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

:) to you, too. Dicklyon (talk) 08:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In particular, GoodDay had said he'd stay out of the uppercase/lowercase question. Instead, he just reverts moves that change case, saying that an RM is needed. I'm always happy to open an RM if someone says they disagree with the result of my move, but that's not what's happening here. He doesn't disagree, just obstructs. So I said so. How is this incivil or an attack? See the discussion he started about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey#NHL Conference Finals moved to NHL conference finals. Nobody has given a reason to prefer uppercase, and several there have supported the move to lowercase. It's just obstruction, given the recent long discussion and clear consensus for a similar result in another league with no different issues. Dicklyon (talk) 03:50, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not a personal attack; it's critical of behavior ("being obstructionist" is an action taken, not a viewpoint, mental capacity, motivation, personality, protected class of any kind, political, religious or other indentity/association, etc., etc.). There may have been a better way to phrase it, but WP's actionable meaning of "personal attack" has a clear (albeit lengthy) definition at WP:WIAPA. Saying that an editor's action is "obstructionist" does not fit any aspect of that definition. The only clause of any potential relevance is "accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence"; however, after extensive discussion has already demonstrated that the upper-case cause on this is not supportable by relevant P&G (MOS:CAPS, WP:NCCAPS) and sourcing, then thwarting moves that bring them into compliance with the P&G would appear to be describable as obstruction[ist] self-evidently, i.e. by-definition, so no diffs would be needed. (And what would someone diff? That GoodDay made an unconstructive WP:RMTR request? We already know that, since Dicklyon's comment was a reply to it).

Other ways to phrase Dicklyon's objection are various, but someone is apt to take offense at their (or in this case someone else's) action being criticized no matter how it was phrased, and "someone was criticized", even "someone was offended", does not equate to "someone was personally attacked". If we were required to do a noticeboarding with diffs every time we objected to something an editor was doing/saying, WP productivity would totally grind to a halt, and 95% of our activity would consist of fighting at noticeboards. We routinely just hash things out informally in talk pages (or, this time, a talk-equivalent process page), with the understanding that various actions, statements, or patterns will sometimes be objected to.

Catching up a bit, I've read the wikiproject thread, and what stands out to me is that no one has presented evidence or other rationale in favor of capitalizing (despite being repeatedly asked to), simply insisting on RM process for its own sake, and not addressing the fact that related discussion has already happened at length and concluded in favor of lower-case. Several respondents there (the venue most likely to support capitalization despite MOS:SIGCAPS and MOS:SPORTCAPS) are firmly in favor of the lower-case moves and even of them being manual moves. So, there does not appear to be any actual "controversy" in WP:PCM terms, only an unshared argument to drag things out via lengthy process that consumes editors' time. This is not what we're here for. All of our P&G are applied by default; an exception is something for which a case must be made, and treating one's topic of interest as if the exact opposite applied is highly likely to turn disruptive.

PS: "Beyond the Pale" is indeed a phrase people need to stop throwing around; it has a long, contentious ethno-political history that is highly sensitive to a lot of people (not just one, already linked above, but two nationalities of them). — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 05:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm, per WP:NPA: Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence. Serious accusations require serious evidence, usually in the form of diffs and links would be considered a personal attack. While certain venues are preferrable, other venues are no excluded by the policy? Cinderella157 (talk) 06:25, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you're asking for evidence of the obstruction I was referring to, it's these:

[1] and [2] Reverting my changes, solely on the basis of no RM done, without opposing the substance of these case fixes.
[3] Reverting change to disambig page, leaving it in an inconsistent state
[4] Requests at WP:RMTR to revert my moves, without mentioning a reason to prefer the capitalized form (which is exactly where we were when I wrote the removed personal attack "GoodDay is just being obstructionist about progress that involves page moves", not as a personal attack, but as a characterization of these edits).

If he had said "I think these should be capped, because ..." or something like that, then we'd have something to discuss at an RM discussion. But neither he nor anyone at the discussion he started at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey#NHL Conference Finals moved to NHL conference finals has given a reason to prefer caps. It's all just procedural obstruction: "Not without going the RM route." After a month of discussion at the RM at Talk:NBA conference finals, I thought we had hashed out all the relevant issues and arguments, though we would point out different data of course. That discussion seemed to me like it served to make these others clearly within the consensus to follow MOS:CAPS. So why does he want to discuss all that yet again? There's no remaining controversy. I don't get it. Also note that at that wikiproject discussion, several editors (Hockey project members, I presume) defended my moves as correct and appropriate. I'm wondering if that's why the RMTR revert requests have not been done yet. Dicklyon (talk) 08:04, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was not specifically asking for diffs etc but providing them only proves the point I was making. Cinderella157 (talk) 13:21, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GoodDay: did you think my complaint about your obstruction of move-related progress was intended as a personal attack? Did you take it as such? Dicklyon (talk) 10:13, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a reasonable block IMO. I have asked Theleekycauldron on their page to undo it. Bishonen | tålk 10:48, 26 February 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks. Dicklyon (talk) 11:03, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. This was a very reasonable block, particularly given that Dick has already been blocked in the past for personal attacks against this very same editor. Making personalised comment such as labelling someone you disagree with "obstructionist", in a venue which isn't specifically intended for discussing user conduct (i.e. WP:AN/I), counts as casting WP:ASPERSIONS in my book, and has no place in conversations that should be focused solely on the content questions at hand. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I generally agree with you Dicklyon on capitalisation questions, and I think you really do good work on the project, but as per the advice I offered last week, you're rapidly running out of rope here. This latest incident, coupled with yet another move of draft pages that had previously been controversial (Talk:NHL conference finals) just leaves me tearing my hair out. You need to do better, otherwise an indefinite block really is just around the corner, sorry to be blunt. — Amakuru (talk) 11:48, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not an admin, but I have the blocked user plugin on, wondered what Dicklyon had done to get blocked, was surprised it was related to the ongoing capitalisation issue, and concur with others that this block was quite unreasonable and needs to be vacated. SportingFlyer T·C 14:06, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Dicklyon, I was annoyed that you called me an obstructionist & are describing me as such, again on your own talkpage. An apology from you, would likely help shorten your block, IMHO & also, I'm not seeing any consensus for your unilateral page moves, at WP:HOCKEY. PS - That being said. I recommend in future, you go the RM route. The NBA is not the NHL or KHL. GoodDay (talk) 15:32, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the fourth time you've been blocked this year, and we're not even three months in. How do you not realize that your efforts to lowercase sports articles are controversial?! BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:11, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The block has nothing to do with page moves. Don't let that stop you grandstanding a bit, though. Primergrey (talk) 16:21, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Its from personal attacks which he made due to opposition to his undiscussed page moves, which is the reason of several of the previous blocks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:24, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only one of the blocks was directly for page moves, but two were for personal attacks while discussing page moves based on capitalization, and the last was for edit warring at WP:CENT to add a listing for a RfC concerning capitalization and proposing page moves. "Nothing to do with page moves" would be too much of a stretch, page moves for capitalization seems to be the locus of this entire dispute. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 16:40, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Getting blocked for a PA indicates exactly nothing about the issue being discussed when the (supposed) PA occurred. Obviously. Primergrey (talk) 17:33, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think if you were to open an RM at Conference Finals, an RM at NHL Conference Finals and an RM at KHL Conference Finals? There should be no problems or complaints, from anyone. GoodDay (talk) 21:28, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GoodDay, please give Dicklyon some space. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 21:32, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]