Contents
Fwiw
I strongly believe you're owed an apology. You've been editing here for years, are an incredibly strong editor, and you are a person. You are your own person and for this community to condone that insult toward is beyond anything I can accept. I could say a lot more, but wanted to post to your page tonight. I am so very sorry this happened to you. When Maria (Yllosubmarine) got fed up and I left a pic of a strong drink on her page, so consider yourself owed the same. I'm more than a little upset to see the black tag on your page, but do understand. Take care and best. Victoria (tk) 00:43, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
I have no idea what happened but this is terrible. Kafka Liz, precious: I miss you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:15, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
- I'm surprised to see this, too; like Gerda above, I have no idea what's happened and it is both saddening and terrible to see a "Retired" banner here. I hope everything's okay. Acalamari 11:36, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
-
-
- +1 Heimstern Läufer (talk) 05:21, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
-
- I think it was related to the ANI here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Cloisters#In_Popular_Culture here] and here. The sexist bullying around this place is getting out of hand. Montanabw(talk) 02:27, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
- Better late than never. Here's a nice Merlot (with two glasses for two editors). If your ears are ringing it's because I mentioned you on my talk - I know, I know, I did the pingie thingie, but it's nice and polite to stop by. Plus I wanted to deliver the promised drink. Take care. Victoria (tk) 23:29, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
- Very sorry if this is the case! I missed any row. All the best, Johnbod (talk) 03:38, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Liz, I want to add my name to say that you'll be badly missed. This is a difficult place to spend time on, so I won't say that I hope you return, but I do hope you stay away only if you want to, not because you feel you've been driven off. All the best, SarahSV (talk) 22:13, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
![]() |
|
visual arts | |
---|---|
... you were recipient no. 440 of Precious, a prize of QAI! |
Thank you for the agreement to have music instead of visual this Easter, that was so kind. I was music written about in memory of those who lay in death's bonds, and in collaboration with Thoughtfortheday. Weekends here will be drier without your ping-pong-chats ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:57, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
I finally pick up your message from last year
And find you have retired. Quite right, it's boring here. Yomanganitalk 17:14, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you
I'd be lying if I claimed not to have checked in here. I do want to thank all of you who have left kind words - it means a lot to me, and I appreciate it. I've met some amazing people here, for which I am grateful. Thank you all again; your support means more then you know. Best, Kafka Liz (talk) 21:37, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry, I didn't chime in Liz. More than likely I would have said something rather unacceptable to Admin ears. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:17, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Family editing
Per [1], your spouse has edits to 8,801 pages. Let's call it 10,000 for round numbers, and assume those are all articles. That means there are, in fact, 5,115,675 articles you can independently edit and comment in without the provisions of WP:FAMILY applying. No one is denying your value to the project, nor the value of your opinions in dispute resolution; I'm simply saying it would be best if you operate independently of your spouse, or, if you chose not to, accept that your position will not be considered as an entirely independent one for the purposes of determing consensus. NE Ent 21:53, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
- NE Ent, I am not at all sure that consensus supports your opinion on this. Regarding your remark (the one about "spouse") that began the recent upsets, I don't recall seeing any editor saying they found your remark appropriate. I could be wrong.MPS1992 (talk) 22:11, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
- Please see discussion Wikipedia_talk:Sock_puppetry#Sexist.2C_discriminatory_language_in_WP:FAMILY. NE Ent 22:19, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
@NE Ent: do you hav any idea how incredibly patronising and offensive this sounds? It comes across as both demeaning to (a) any spouses/partners editing who may actually enjoy each others' interests and take genuine pleasure interacting with their partners and (b) the likes of you dictating to content editors like some sort of servant about what and how they should be editing. Seriously. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:10, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Furthermore as per that policy, I supremely doubt that anyone would have considered The Cloisters a controversial topic, nor infact about 97% of what Kafka Liz or Ceoil edit. If you had some empathy, you might have noted that three content editors are feeling pretty angry and upset at the moment, so inflaming the situation with "observations" such as above come over as....not really conducive to dispute resolution...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:15, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
- Unbelievable that we are having this conversation in 2016. The only thing that needs to happen is that people who edit from the same IP need to disclose that fact so they don't get wrongly accused of sockpuppetry. Anything more is ridiculous; people who live in the same house are no more or less likely to agree on a particular WP article than relatives who live on opposite ends of the country —or two users who simply share a common interest and have never met at all save on-wiki. To say that spouses are "one voice" or "one entity" is medieval. I am stunned that we even have to have this discussion: Wikipedia_talk:Sock_puppetry#Sexist.2C_discriminatory_language_in_WP:FAMILY Montanabw(talk) 05:21, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
- Agreed with both Montanabw and Casliber. The sole reason the provision about treating family members as one even exists is to stop people from making up little brothers to bolster their arguments and be able to get away with it because oh, of COURSE they share my IP! that's my little brother! It's not to make independent contributors who happen to be related into second class editors who have to split Wikipedia's articles and say "this is my half, this is yours" so the powers that be won't decide their voices mean nothing. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 05:33, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
New RFC dealing with WP:FAMILY section of WP:SOCK
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20160411100250im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/31/Imbox_notice.png/20px-Imbox_notice.png)
Views are wanted at Wikipedia talk:Sock puppetry#RfC: Should WP:FAMILY be deleted from WP:SOCK? Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 09:02, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
- I'm genuinely uncertain as to whether I ought weigh in there. Let me think on it. Kafka Liz (talk) 12:24, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Apology
I was hasty. I was wrong. I apologize for applying an overly literal interpretative of Wikipedia policy to a context where it didn't apply. NE Ent 09:38, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
- Apology accepted. I am sorry things spiralled this way. I think there is much to be gained by remembering that there are actual human beings behind the words on a screen, and that talking to them helps. That's all. Kafka Liz (talk) 14:41, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
- We-ell, now yer back, some folks with some musical pedigree are needed at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Courtney Love/archive3 - I was never a big Love/Hole fan and am not familiar enough with her to be confident we ain't missing something....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 15:02, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Notice
My laptop has the dead. Tablet editing...is not easy. Stay tuned, superheroes. Kafka Liz (talk) 21:10, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Ground control to Kafka Liz, checking laptop and may gods love be with you. chugchugchugchugchug. This is Ground control to Major Liz, youve really made the grade, but your laptop's bangaxed, can you hear me...Major...Liz....<pop> Ceoil (talk) 23:32, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rosary Bead (The Cloisters), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gothic script (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) 09:59, 10 April 2016 (UTC)