Guy Macon reiterates retirement requirements

[Giraffe Stapler]

A couple of people have appealed to Guy Macon to return to editing Wikipedia and he has responded.

"I'm not going to participate further in the conversation on Guy's talk page if the entry fee is having to pretend he is being honest."[3]

(For those unfamiliar with what we are talking about, see User talk:Guy Macon/Archive 4#Quitting Wikipedia.)

I have given this a lot of thought, and here is my conclusion.

[1] Floquenbeam invented a new rule ("avoiding personal pronouns entirely is not allowed") and blocked me for violating it (a much-criticized block; [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]) even though he knew that all he had to do was to ask me to stop.[18][19][20][21] I would have instantly stopped avoiding personal pronouns entirely if asked.[22] It seems that WP:BLOCKNOTPUNITIVE and WP:BLOCKPREVENTATIVE do not apply to me.

I really did try my best to do the right thing and avoid offending anybody. I really did think that avoiding personal pronouns entirely was a way to avoid offending someone who has a history of using personal pronouns as a club to beat other editors with.[23][24]

If I were to resume editing, I would instead use {{they}} and related templates, as I have in this reply.

[2] Floquenbeam warned me that the next time I violated a newly-invented rule that I was not aware of I would be blocked indefinitely.

[3] Floquenbeam called me a liar and a troll, making it clear that he has a personal animosity towards me.

[4] Floquenbeam declined to step back and allow other administrators to handle any future disruptive behavior on my part.

That last one is the killer.

Why would Floquenbeam refuse such a request?

He could do it without admitting fault.

He could even do it privately by email and I would not reveal that he had made such an agreement unless he violated it.

I can think of only one reason why Floquenbeam would refuse to let other administrators deal with me. It appears that he thinks that I am pulling the wool over other administrator's eyes and that he and only he is capable of dealing with what he is convinced is a lying, transphobic troll who has everybody else fooled.

Based upon past behavior, I have a reasonable belief that if I resume editing Wikipedia, Floquenbeam will invent some new rule and block me indefinitely without warning.

As I write this I wonder whether I will be blocked without warning for violating a newly-invented "you are not allowed to explain why you stopped contributing to Wikipedia articles on your talk page" rule. Of course Floquenbeam could just tell me to stop doing that and I would instantly comply.

Before I retired I actually tried to just put it behind me and had a couple of edits all composed and ready to go.

I found that I could not bring myself to hit the publish button.

I had no way of knowing if my edit violates some new rule that I never heard of.

After the third time that I found myself unable to publish an edit out of fear of breaking some rule I am not aware of, I gave up and retired.

At least this way I can still keep WP:1AM, WP:YWAB and WP:CANCER updated.

I will resume editing articles if Floquenbeam ever decides step back and allow other administrators to handle any future behavior on my part or in some other way is no longer in a position to block me without warning.

There is no point in anyone asking him to do that. He is already well aware of my feelings on this.[25][26]

There is also no point in escalating this to WP:ANI or WP:ARBCOM. This would just result in multiple comments saying "don't believe Guy! He is a lying, transphobic troll. I have read Guy Macon's mind over the Internet and know that he is lying."[27][28][29][30][31][32][33]

That's my final decision, and I am not going to change my mind. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:33, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Short version:

I will not be editing here anymore. I will, of course, still be editing some essays I wrote. And chatting daily with people here on my talk page. I am retired and that is final. Of course, I will be back in a minute if Floquenbeam agrees not to block me for trolling people by using the wrong pronouns or anything else. Final answer.

It sounds like Guy Macon is "not here to build an encyclopedia".

[Emptyeye]

[...] Of course, I will be back in a minute if Floquenbeam agrees not to block me for trolling people by using the wrong pronouns or anything else. Final answer.

I mean, the best way to not get blocked for trolling people by using the wrong pronouns or anything else might be...to not troll people by using the wrong pronouns or anything else.

Seriously, Guy's "Oh, woe is me" act is getting old. Had it been anyone other than Fae he was doing it to (And I'm no fan of Fae), I might have been able to buy that he didn't know what he was doing/was honestly trying not to cause offense. But given that A. Floquenbeam warned him for doing this exact thing over a year ago (No, "But it was a YEAR ago!!" is not the defense Guy thinks it is; it means he knew he had been warned for this exact thing once before), B. He did the exact thing again, combined with C. His well-documented animosity toward Fae (Which multiple people brought up when he tried the "If you're gonna accuse me of things do it based on things I've actually said." defense, to which he basically replied "Hahaha WHOOPS not THOSE things please."), I'm not buying it. Despite what he thinks, it's not "mind-reading", it's a totally legit, simple explanation for what he did, much moreso than the mental gymnastics he's asking everyone to engage in now.

I don't know if he's homophobic/transphobic/whatever. I do know that he really doesn't like Fae (Which, hey, get in line) and absolutely think he took the opportunity to metaphorically tweak their nose, thinking nothing would happen. As I said earlier, he fucked around and found out, and is throwing a temper tantrum in response.

Is this more mind-reading on my part? Does it matter?

[Vigilant]

Diva.

"Beg me to come back...Waaaaah"

[jf1970]

He's not even being entirely honest in that very post. "a much-criticized block; [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]" ... those links don't all link to criticism of the block, and some are multiple comments from the same people. Meanwhile he's not linking to all the comments supporting the block. Makes it look like there is more criticism than there really is. I think he's so used to this kind of rhetorical BS working with his echo chamber that he is struggling with the reality that there is no face-saving way out of the hole he's dug himself. Watching someone meet reality for the first time like this is both gruesome and captivating. (Except one would think his RFA would have taught him that echo chamber lesson...)

[Poetlister]

He's not even being entirely honest in that very post. "a much-criticized block; [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]" ... those links don't all link to criticism of the block, and some are multiple comments from the same people. Meanwhile he's not linking to all the comments supporting the block. Makes it look like there is more criticism than there really is. I think he's so used to this kind of rhetorical BS working with his echo chamber that he is struggling with the reality that there is no face-saving way out of the hole he's dug himself. Watching someone meet reality for the first time like this is both gruesome and captivating. (Except one would think his RFA would have taught him that echo chamber lesson...)

As Rudy Giuliani is unable to do proper legal work now, maybe Guy could get him to argue that all the support of the block was due to electoral fraud.

[Vigilant]

He's not even being entirely honest in that very post. "a much-criticized block; [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]" ... those links don't all link to criticism of the block, and some are multiple comments from the same people. Meanwhile he's not linking to all the comments supporting the block. Makes it look like there is more criticism than there really is. I think he's so used to this kind of rhetorical BS working with his echo chamber that he is struggling with the reality that there is no face-saving way out of the hole he's dug himself. Watching someone meet reality for the first time like this is both gruesome and captivating. (Except one would think his RFA would have taught him that echo chamber lesson...)

I predict Teh Autism will resurface as a defense soon.

If there's one thing the wikipediots fall for decade after decade, it's an unsubstantiated claim of mental illness deployed in a timely manner.

[owl be it]

He's not even being entirely honest in that very post. "a much-criticized block; [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]" ... those links don't all link to criticism of the block, and some are multiple comments from the same people. Meanwhile he's not linking to all the comments supporting the block. Makes it look like there is more criticism than there really is. I think he's so used to this kind of rhetorical BS working with his echo chamber that he is struggling with the reality that there is no face-saving way out of the hole he's dug himself. Watching someone meet reality for the first time like this is both gruesome and captivating. (Except one would think his RFA would have taught him that echo chamber lesson...)

I predict Teh Autism will resurface as a defense soon.

If there's one thing the wikipediots fall for decade after decade, it's an unsubstantiated claim of mental illness deployed in a timely manner.

Autism doesn't make you be a prat online for years and years when people have told you specifically what things were off-limits. Autism makes you a good Wikipedia editor. We are talking about something else...

[Vigilant]

He's not even being entirely honest in that very post. "a much-criticized block; [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]" ... those links don't all link to criticism of the block, and some are multiple comments from the same people. Meanwhile he's not linking to all the comments supporting the block. Makes it look like there is more criticism than there really is. I think he's so used to this kind of rhetorical BS working with his echo chamber that he is struggling with the reality that there is no face-saving way out of the hole he's dug himself. Watching someone meet reality for the first time like this is both gruesome and captivating. (Except one would think his RFA would have taught him that echo chamber lesson...)

I predict Teh Autism will resurface as a defense soon.

If there's one thing the wikipediots fall for decade after decade, it's an unsubstantiated claim of mental illness deployed in a timely manner.

Autism doesn't make you be a prat online for years and years when people have told you specifically what things were off-limits. Autism makes you a good Wikipedia editor. We are talking about something else...

I am predicting he will deploy Autism as a defense.
I am predicting it will work on the puddingheads at en.wp.

Guy Macon's underlying flaw is that he's an arrogant, narrow-minded bully.

[owl be it]

He's not even being entirely honest in that very post. "a much-criticized block; [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]" ... those links don't all link to criticism of the block, and some are multiple comments from the same people. Meanwhile he's not linking to all the comments supporting the block. Makes it look like there is more criticism than there really is. I think he's so used to this kind of rhetorical BS working with his echo chamber that he is struggling with the reality that there is no face-saving way out of the hole he's dug himself. Watching someone meet reality for the first time like this is both gruesome and captivating. (Except one would think his RFA would have taught him that echo chamber lesson...)

I predict Teh Autism will resurface as a defense soon.

If there's one thing the wikipediots fall for decade after decade, it's an unsubstantiated claim of mental illness deployed in a timely manner.

Autism doesn't make you be a prat online for years and years when people have told you specifically what things were off-limits. Autism makes you a good Wikipedia editor. We are talking about something else...

I am predicting he will deploy Autism as a defense.
I am predicting it will work on the puddingheads at en.wp.

Guy Macon's underlying flaw is that he's an arrogant, narrow-minded bully.

Many such cases... SAD!

[orangepi]

Guy Macon should be banned for trying to make people read through all that crap.

I mean, I didn't read through all that crap.

[AngelOne]

As I write this I wonder whether I will be blocked without warning for violating a newly-invented "you are not allowed to explain why you stopped contributing to Wikipedia articles on your talk page" rule. Of course Floquenbeam could just tell me to stop doing that and I would instantly comply.

It wouldn't be a newly-invented rule to block him for this iban violation in the same screed:

I really did think that avoiding personal pronouns entirely was a way to avoid offending someone who has a history of using personal pronouns as a club to beat other editors with.

He shouldn't have to be told to stop referring to the person he agreed to be ibanned from, as that's part of the iban.

His "no one told me I couldn't refer to Fæ only by their name" justification is bullshit. He was told to refer to Fæ with they/them, full stop. It shouldn't be necessary to enumerate all the different ways he's not allowed to refer to Fæ.

[Vigilant]

Guy is certain that en.wp will realize their massive mistake and come begging, hat in hand, to ask him to return and continue his great work.

How long will he wait?

[Giraffe Stapler]

He shouldn't have to be told to stop referring to the person he agreed to be ibanned from, as that's part of the iban.

But apparently someone emailed him and told him, so he has removed the violation of his interaction ban. Here it is for posterity, in case a friendly admin decides to protect him from himself and revision delete it.

Re: "Especially, as in this case, when they were specifically warned on this exact wording", please show me a diff where I was specifically warned against using the editor in question's username and avoiding personal pronouns altogether. It seemed at the time to be the best way to avoid offending them.
The editor in question made this request: "If you need a pronoun to refer to my account, I prefer the courtesy of a singular they rather than she, he or anything else." Saying "If you need a pronoun to refer to my account" clearly implies that not using a pronoun is acceptable.
Dozens of editors have referred to that editor by their username -- many choosing to only refer to them by their username -- and they never once complained about it.
Please keep in mind that the editor in question went off-wiki and tried (and in one case succeeded) in getting two individuals removed from their non-wikipedia positions. I specifically listed this as my main reason for avoiding personal pronouns entirely.
I was advised to use the username by David Eppstein[34] and multiple editors including Arthur Rubin[35] have purposely refrained from using personal pronouns to refer to the editor in question without being blocked or even warned over it.
I did my level best to follow Floquenbeam's orders exactly. Floquenbeam told me not to use the pronouns that I was advised to use by multiple LGBTQ+ organizations[36][37][38][39] so I stopped.
Floquenbeam told me that I was required to use the singular "they" and I immediately started doing so everywhere on Wikipedia. At the time I complied even though I disagreed. I later, due to some invaluable advice from Tamzin, came to agree with the use of the singular "they".[40]
This was indeed a new rule made up on the spot so that I could be blocked without warning for violating it. And I am convinced that if I resume editing articles yet another new rule will be invented and that I will be blocked indefinitely without warning for violating it. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:22, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Not here to build an encyclopedia.

[Vigilant]

He was definitely there to build an encyclopedia, he's just an asshole, as well.

Shades of the ferret molester.

[AngelOne]

Jeebus fuck that last comment is an even an more obvious iban violation. What the fuck is wrong with him?

Here's a question: if, as Guy says, someone might "come after him" with "new, made-up rules" when he edits articles, why wouldn't they go after him when he edits anything else? Logic is not his forte, is it?

[Giraffe Stapler]

Also funny - Guy Macon has removed his "Final word on quitting Wikipedia" from his talk page archives.

I'm going to predict that within a week he will either be back editing or someone will ask for him to be blocked. Maybe both.

[ArmasRebane]

Also funny - Guy Macon has removed his "Final word on quitting Wikipedia" from his talk page archives.

I'm going to predict that within a week he will either be back editing or someone will ask for him to be blocked. Maybe both.

I'd be more generous and say two months, but yeah. There's no way he doesn't come back. It's a classic diva quit.

[Vigilant]

Opposite of Dead Pool time.

I've got July 27th.

[Poetlister]

Also funny - Guy Macon has removed his "Final word on quitting Wikipedia" from his talk page archives.

I'm going to predict that within a week he will either be back editing or someone will ask for him to be blocked. Maybe both.

I'd be more generous and say two months, but yeah. There's no way he doesn't come back. It's a classic diva quit.

After you've been a Wikipedia critic for a while, you understand "Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time".

[Midsize Jake]

After you've been a Wikipedia critic for a while, you understand "Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time".

Sure, but if you look at this from a long-term perspective, over the years we've actually been guilty of not giving proper credit to that (rather small) group of Wikipedia admins and well-established/invested users who one day just up and quit for a perfectly valid reason (other than just being threatened with some sort of "sanction"), and then don't come back at all. In our defense, it's not like we "track" these people, and once someone has been gone for a while it's easy to forget about them — which, to be fair, is probably best for all concerned. Still, it does happen, so it's really too bad that people who make the decision to save themselves and quit WP, and actually stick to it, don't get more kudos for that, even if they never actually see the kudos they've earned.

Of course, that won't really apply in this case — Mr. Macon will almost certainly be back within 2-3 weeks.

[orangepi]

At some point, someone will point out that WP:YWAB (T-H-L) is too smug and silly to be endorsed with a project-space redirect, and Mr. Macon will come back to respond to the attack on one of his magnum opuses (opii?).

[Poetlister]

At some point, someone will point out that WP:YWAB (T-H-L) is too smug and silly to be endorsed with a project-space redirect, and Mr. Macon will come back to respond to the attack on one of his magnum opuses (opii?).

I'm intrigued by Guy's quote from Jimbo: "If you can get your work published in respectable scientific journals – that is to say, if you can produce evidence through replicable scientific experiments..." That's a classic piece of Jimbo nonsense; it takes far more than producing evidence through replicable scientific experiments to get into a good journal, as anyone who's done peer reviewing could have told him.

[Emptyeye]

So, interesting thing about this whole drama.

From what I remember, Floquenbeam told Guy "Don't do that again" sometime in 2020 (I'm trying to find the diff and can't).

The offense that got him blocked, though, WASN'T actually the first time Guy did it again, and I'm wondering if this is why he was confused (Note that I still don't buy his explanation he thought he was doing the right thing, for all the reasons I've previously stated) when he got blocked this time around.

Idly curious, I went back through Fae's talk page. Around February of 2021, they tried to make an "unofficial-official" unblock request, and basically got smacked down and told "No, do it the proper way like everyone else."

The more interesting part is that, around that time, Guy made at least one post to Fae's talk page where he does the "Fae Fae Fae Fae Fae" thing, and faced no consequences for it from what I can tell. I don't know whether that's because Fae didn't/couldn't complain, Floquenbeam wasn't paying attention, or I had my timeline wrong and Guy actually hadn't been warned until after February 2021. If it's either of the first two, though, it does make Guy's bewilderment, if not sympathetic exactly, at least comprehensible (IE "Wait, why am I being blocked for this now and not when I did it back in February?").

[jf1970]

Well that's interesting. Not only does Guy do the no-prounoun "Fae" thing multiple times in February, but so do others in that thread, including an arb (WTT). https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1015799357
Nobody, including Fae, objected.

You'd think Guy would have led with that argument.

Maybe he didn't because in the comment that got him blocked in June he started with "The following purposely avoids pronouns" and links to previous ANIs and such, which he didn't do for his comments in February. That's a sign he was doing it on purpose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Diff/1031045993

[Beeblebrox]

I'd just like to express my appreciation for the alliteration in the thread title.

[Bezdomni]

magnum opuses (opii?).

māgna opera... not be confused with manga operas, or mango-pears or Mangoe's au pair, all of which would likely be quite different.

[turnedworm]

Well that's interesting. Not only does Guy do the no-prounoun "Fae" thing multiple times in February, but so do others in that thread, including an arb (WTT). https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1015799357
Nobody, including Fae, objected.

You'd think Guy would have led with that argument.

Maybe he didn't because in the comment that got him blocked in June he started with "The following purposely avoids pronouns" and links to previous ANIs and such, which he didn't do for his comments in February. That's a sign he was doing it on purpose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Diff/1031045993

Don't get me involved in this pronoun nonsense. (in case of miscronstrual, I am referring to the stupidity of Guy Vs Fae)

It wasn't so obvious on the single paragraph or two, most of the time he said Fae it was at the start of a sentence. Whereas his recent posts was far more blatant as to what he was doing.

It's all smoke and mirrors. The issue is the long term bad blood between the two.

[owl be it]

Well that's interesting. Not only does Guy do the no-prounoun "Fae" thing multiple times in February, but so do others in that thread, including an arb (WTT). https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1015799357
Nobody, including Fae, objected.

You'd think Guy would have led with that argument.

Maybe he didn't because in the comment that got him blocked in June he started with "The following purposely avoids pronouns" and links to previous ANIs and such, which he didn't do for his comments in February. That's a sign he was doing it on purpose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Diff/1031045993

Don't get me involved in this pronoun nonsense. (in case of miscronstrual, I am referring to the stupidity of Guy Vs Fae)

It wasn't so obvious on the single paragraph or two, most of the time he said Fae it was at the start of a sentence. Whereas his recent posts was far more blatant as to what he was doing.

It's all smoke and mirrors. The issue is the long term bad blood between the two.

owl be it would like to thank WTT for WTT's post. I felt that WTT explained WTT's position well, and gave owl be it some good insights.

[Vigilant]

Well that's interesting. Not only does Guy do the no-prounoun "Fae" thing multiple times in February, but so do others in that thread, including an arb (WTT). https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1015799357
Nobody, including Fae, objected.

You'd think Guy would have led with that argument.

Maybe he didn't because in the comment that got him blocked in June he started with "The following purposely avoids pronouns" and links to previous ANIs and such, which he didn't do for his comments in February. That's a sign he was doing it on purpose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Diff/1031045993

Don't get me involved in this pronoun nonsense. (in case of miscronstrual, I am referring to the stupidity of Guy Vs Fae)

It wasn't so obvious on the single paragraph or two, most of the time he said Fae it was at the start of a sentence. Whereas his recent posts was far more blatant as to what he was doing.

It's all smoke and mirrors. The issue is the long term bad blood between the two.

That's almost the Tu Quoque fallacy in that Ashley has had bad relations with an enormous number of people over the years and shamelessly used his sexuality as both a shield and a sword in these disputes.

AGF isn't a suicide pact and all that.

[turnedworm]

That's almost the Tu Quoque fallacy in that Ashley has had bad relations with an enormous number of people over the years and shamelessly used his sexuality as both a shield and a sword in these disputes.

AGF isn't a suicide pact and all that.

I don't disagree, but my point still stands. This isn't about pronouns, it's about a long term disagreement between Guy and Fae.

I have opinions on what we should do with respect to pronouns, both in general and specifically here, but I'd rather not have anything to do with it, because that would mean siding with an individual.

[Boing! said Zebedee]

I have opinions on what we should do with respect to pronouns, both in general and specifically here, but I'd rather not have anything to do with it, because that would mean siding with an individual.

Male/female pronouns when you know that's what the subject prefers, otherwise singular they. And no "xe" (or whatever) bollocks. Simple.

[Poetlister]

I have opinions on what we should do with respect to pronouns, both in general and specifically here, but I'd rather not have anything to do with it, because that would mean siding with an individual.

Male/female pronouns when you know that's what the subject prefers, otherwise singular they. And no "xe" (or whatever) bollocks. Simple.

What if the person in question specifically requests "xe"?

[Zoloft]

I refer folks to this gender pronoun guide: link

As a lead web developer for the DoD, I created a style guide for pronouns, titles, extensions, removing the "Sex__" field, patronyms and matronyms, and special characters in names that focused on inclusion and diversity.

[Boing! said Zebedee]

I have opinions on what we should do with respect to pronouns, both in general and specifically here, but I'd rather not have anything to do with it, because that would mean siding with an individual.

Male/female pronouns when you know that's what the subject prefers, otherwise singular they. And no "xe" (or whatever) bollocks. Simple.

What if the person in question specifically requests "xe"?

They get called "They". Singular "they" is perfectly acceptable, gender-neutral, and non-discriminatory English usage. And anyone who claims they're offended by it is faking it just for the sake of drama.

[rhindle]

I used the word "they" as a neutral singular pronoun before it was cool. However, I had a grammar-nazi college English professor who did not see it that way but acknowledged using the words "he/him/his" as sexist so we had to use "his or her" as a compromise. This was of course before the notion of non-binary individuals. I wonder how he addresses it now?

On to the other issue. Fae is Fae, but has there ever been a bigger busy body on enwp than Mr. Macon?

[Giraffe Stapler]

Someone asked Guy Macon why he retired.

I have been ordered to not discuss the reasons why I stopped contributing to Wikipedia.
If User talk:Guy Macon/Archive 4#Quitting Wikipedia does not explain my thinking well enough, feel free to email me at Special:EmailUser/Guy_Macon. --Guy Macon (talk) 02:07, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Translation:

I have been told that if I keep violating the terms of my interaction ban by discussing Fae, I will be blocked.

[Vigilant]

Why won't anyone beg me to come back??

[orangepi]

Some obvious sock named Pack My Box (T-C-L) is trying to litigate this at Jimbo-talk.

[Poetlister]

Some obvious sock named Pack My Box (T-C-L) is trying to litigate this at Jimbo-talk.

The account was quickly blocked, with the traditional explanation "not here to build an encyclopedia".

[Giraffe Stapler]

This is late, and I apologize for the oversight, but I would like to congratulate Guy Macon on going 50 days without making a mainspace edit! The winner of the pool will be announced shortly!

29 June:

This user is no longer active on Wikipedia as of 29 June 2021.
I will no longer be contributing to Wikipedia other than maintaining certain essays that some users have told me they find useful.

18 August:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1039394402

[el84]

This is late, and I apologize for the oversight, but I would like to congratulate Guy Macon on going 50 days without making a mainspace edit! The winner of the pool will be announced shortly!

29 June:

This user is no longer active on Wikipedia as of 29 June 2021.
I will no longer be contributing to Wikipedia other than maintaining certain essays that some users have told me they find useful.

18 August:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1039394402

His terms have been updated now to allow refdesk questions:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1031158695