User talk:Floquenbeam#Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/LaundryPizza03

{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1746043583}}

{{User QAIbox

| image = Meadow with dandelion near Lindenmühle, Lindenholzhausen.jpg

| image_upright = 1.3

| bold = story · music · places

}}

Remember Mirella Freni (last month)? - My story today is about a singer with more facts on what she did in the hook (more than none) ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:37, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

:She should have tried to sing the lead in an all-female operatic version of Fausta. Now *that* would have been a hook! Floquenbeam (talk) 19:53, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

:: Will you compose it? - Seriously: the hook was improved and is supposed to appear pictured. "Don't believe in miracles, rely on them." (same for Samuel Barber, btw) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:37, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

:::Hope you don't mind, I separated out your stuff so the ban closure discussion could archive. Probably won't be around much this week, swamped IRL. Stay well. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:06, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

:::: fine with me - Tout est lumière. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:23, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::Apparently, I spend more time on WP when I'm swamped in real life than when I'm not. It's such an excellent procrastination tool. Floquenbeam (talk) 19:46, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::: On top of two entries for Roberto among the recent deaths, brainstorming for Easter music is going on in the nom, at the end - ALT0e/f/g/h - if you have little time. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:24, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::Well, I commented there, although I'm not 100% you'll agree with what I said. That's the risk you take inviting me to a discussion! Floquenbeam (talk) 20:29, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::: Check out my talk: for a great woman's Johannes-Passion (listen!), our music in detail, and three people who recently died and are on the main page (where she isn't). My call for collaboration has the first "no", and the second - for the Easter Oratorio - seems inevitable. Not because of your comments ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:26, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::: What do you think of this Easter vs. 1 April discussion? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:26, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::I've commented there. I figure if I look at the DYK nomination page, I'm going to be disappointed, so I won't ask if that ended up failing... Floquenbeam (talk) 20:37, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::p.s. Happy Easter. Gerda! Floquenbeam (talk) 20:38, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::: Thank you, Easter arrived, with singing Hallelujah by Handel (no, not the famous one). Thanks for the comment, I replied there, mentioning two welcome side effects of bringing Bach's music to OTD. The third would be to make the DYK mute, because things with blurb in the news or on this day get ineligible (which would be such a relief. Just compare.) It needs an brave admin. Happy Easter, also to Mrs. Floquenbeam ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:29, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::: {{diff|Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors#Tomorrow's OTD|1286437417||Nothing happened in the OTD case.}} - My story is about the music that Bach and Picander gave the world 300 years (and 19 days) ago, - listen (on the conductor's birthday) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:37, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::: We still have Easter in Germany, and Mr. Bach wrote another cantata for Easter Monday, performed a day later than the oratorio-to-be, and - to make things more absurd - while the Sunday piece didn't appear because two people found that the only right date would be 1 April, although 20 April was explicitly described as "Easter (Christianity, 2025)", the Monday piece is now on the Main page, without anything point at Easter in the description. I won't fight that ;) Listen to the first movement, - I sang that cantata twice, with two different conductors, both my friends. One performance was just last year, so pictured in music. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:54, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::We had a very nice Easter; spring has finally arrived, and we celebrated with a large group of friends. Sorry the Easter Cantata ultimately didn't make it onto the main page, but glad Monday's did. Floquenbeam (talk) 15:33, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi. I'm not super enthusiastic about Skyerise's indef. I'm enthusiastic about a block, and about pulling talk page access, but the lack-of-duration is really "tough" here because of the total entrenchment regarding what was meant to be said, making an appeal really "hard", as in objectively unlikely to include the needed words. And it shouldn't be that hard in proportion to the severity of the incidents. Please see also this related conversation at User talk:Pppery#Skyerise, ban, appeal (the ANI topic referenced is here). What do you think about this? —Alalch E. 06:37, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

:This isn’t an indef block because of saying “GooFY”. It’s because they were using now-deleted personal information to continue a feud. TPA was revoked because their talk page is where they were doing it. —Floquenbeam (talk) 14:36, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

::I'm aware of that, and am not criticizing TPA revocation, but IMO the duration of the block as a whole did not need to be changed to indefinite. S now needs to commit not to behave stupidly with regard to personal information, and that is easy, but to get a good chance at appeal she also needs to admit that GooFY means x and y. That is not easy. It actually feels implausible that we will get this admission. So she was not indeffed for GooFY but she might stay indefinitely blocked because of it.—Alalch E. 14:53, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

:::But they're completely separate issues. If Skyerise convinces a UTRS admin that they'll stop with the outing, I assume the original 3 month block will resume. So they can theoretically sit that out if they don't want to admit that GooFY means x or y. I have not somehow turned the GooFY block into an indef block.

:::I'm not sure what your problem is with my block. I've never heard of a time-limited block for outing-type issues. If your issue is with the 3 month block, then if/when the indef block is rescinded, that would be a good time to discuss that. As you know, I had nothing to do with that block, and (while I have an opinion) neither oppose it nor support it. Floquenbeam (talk) 15:30, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

::::It's a single block now. From an average admin's view an editor with a filthy block log was blocked for serial rulebreaking. The kind of sensitivity to all the dimensions of the situation on the part of a UTRS admin you describe would be great, but is that how it works in the real world? Essentially, most likely, you have turned the GooFY block into an indef block. Skyerise now can't sit out the GooFY block, and needs to submit a full appeal with both arms and legs committing not to repeat the behaviors that led to The Block. —Alalch E. 15:38, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::I really disagree that anyone on UTRS would think Skyrise has to apologize for saying "GooFY" in order for the indef block to be undone, but out of an abundance of caution, I've commented on this specifically at their talk page. Floquenbeam (talk) 15:48, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::Thank a lot. I appreciate you hearing this out. —Alalch E. 15:50, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::{{ec}} You really need to drop this and go do something more useful.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:50, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::I hear what you're saying, and thanks for the caution. —Alalch E. 15:51, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

"[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrative_action_review&diff=prev&oldid=1286867036 anybody want to guess (without checking first!) how many words are in this thread so far]" Oooh, about 487 too many, as a finger in the air guestimate. (Will this thread have a raffle?) Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:16, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

:It's 3170* and counting (11.7% of Old Man and the Sea). So I'd have said 3170 too many. (* = really lazy cut and paste into Word; so that's (probably unfairly) counting signatures, etc.) Wikipedians sure do talk a lot about the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin. Floquenbeam (talk) 16:23, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

::Is 3170 words a lot? I never seem to be able to tell... —Alalch E. 17:05, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

:::a quarter of them are yours! :) Floquenbeam (talk) 17:06, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

::::The ability to meaningfully review use of rollback at XRV is a perennial interest of mine :) —Alalch E. 17:13, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

::You can close the thread with my blessing and apologies for wasting everyone's time. Andre🚐 17:08, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

:::There is plenty of blame for wasting time to go around! It has taken on a life of its own; I fear if I close it, I'll anger many people who do not feel they've had the opportunity to say all the important things they want to say. (I'm always the last to know; when did you change your username?) Floquenbeam (talk) 17:13, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

::::It's practically a SNOW close at this point, plus I do not think that particular page is so drama-prone as some other boards, which was partly figuring in my decision to file it there, but no good deed goes unpunished I guess. Anyway, I will bet you 35 widgets that if you close it up now, you won't be reverted. And thanks for noticing my new moniker, but that is 2024 news already. The old name dates to the mid-90s and has not been accurate for a long time. If you're just awakening from your winter hibernation, there were also some exciting happenings elsewhere to catch up on. I managed to change my name before it got splashed in all the news coverage, too. Andre🚐 17:17, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::OK, I've closed it, so my 35 widgets are on the line. What is the current quatloo/widget exchange rate? Floquenbeam (talk) 17:23, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::I will check my electron microscope and get back to you on the current exchange rate. The markets have been pretty turbulent as you know. Andre🚐 17:28, 22 April 2025 (UTC)