`   == Van der Graaf Generator ==  Hi. How are you getting on with the GA review of this? I'm doing a bit of expansion on musical style, as suggested in the review, which will hopefully be done by this evening, at which point I think all existing comments in the review are accounted for.  As stated, I will be mostly off-wiki for about a fortnight starting next week, so if you've come across other problems or things that need improving / fixing, now would be a good time to suggest them!       :Sorry, that's been off my radar. I'll take a look today and let you know. ' '   == Desserts ==  Hey SilkTork, my name is Mary Kate and I'm a college student at Clemson University in Clemson, South Carolina.  For my freshman English class we must write/edit a Wikipedia page.  I chose to work on the Desserts page since Wikipedia suggested it needed some work.  I was looking at the history of the page and saw you had made changes in the past.  Since this is my very first experience editing a Wikipedia page my professor said it might be helpful to reach out to other more established editors.  What I have so far is in my sandbox [].  I plan on moving a good bit of content to the main article sometime today or tonight and hopefully the world of Wikipedia will approve.  If you have time or just feeling like helping a novice Wikipedia editor then please let me know any thoughts or suggestions you have.  Thank you so much!!     :hi Mary Kate. I took a quick look and  made a few notes which you can read in the edit summaries when you click on history. I am not actually a contributor to that article - I consulted that page for some information, and tidied up some formatting while I was there, but I have done no research on the topic. Research is key to writing articles for Wikipedia, and that's your starting point. You can research and make notes, and then edit after you have finished your research, or you can do as the majority of Wikipedians do and edit directly as you are researching, so other editors immediately get the benefit of your research and your sources, and can work collaboratively with you to improve the article. And you can also benefit from their research and amendments - they may tell you that your sources are inappropriate or out of date, etc. Your local library - your college library, and Google Books are a good resource - see history of desserts search result on Google Books. The main contributor on Dessert is , and it may be worth contacting him. I would suggest, given the embryonic state of Dessert, that you could start directly editing it. Don't worry about your additions not being perfect - it is understood that articles are not perfect, and that we are all working towards improving them. Be bold!. If you're uncertain about how to do something, or where to find a guideline or a rule, then you could try typing in a word or phrase in the search box that best fits your query, and put ``WP:`` in front of it. If you are not sure about the layout of an article - try WP:layout; if you're not sure about external links, try WP:external links; if you're not sure about punctuation, try WP:punctuation; etc. Have fun, and give me a ping if you have any other questions, or when you've made a bit more progress and want more feedback. Regards ' '   == Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Motion on Malleus Fatuorum ==  Hi SilkTork. I implore you to reconsider your support vote to ban Malleus Fatuorum at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Motion on Malleus Fatuorum. Malleus' intemperate comments have always stemmed from other editors being rude to him (comment from Malleus). I have been unable to find any instances of incivility from Malleus unprovoked by another editor attacking or baiting him.  At the Arbitration Requests case page, one arbitrator, AGK, called Malleus ``a net negative``; another, Jclemens, said ``Malleus has himself chosen to join those other groups in his self-selected banning; all we do here is acknowledge that Malleus has never been a Wikipedian, no matter how many otherwise constructive edits he has made.`` (He later revised the comment but his revision makes it no less hurtful.)  In my opinion, the two comments have been more uncivil than anything Malleus has ever said. These upsetting comments written by respected arbitrators are disappointing. Jclemens seems to be kicking Malleus while he is down. As  who supported the ban wrote, ``@Jclemens ... the fact that you can't see what you wrote as entirely unhelpful to the situation is quite worrying. Are you trying to piss Malleus off so he rejects Newyorkbrad's advice and so you can get him banned?``  They are but two examples of nastiness that Malleus faces on a daily basis from other editors. As a fallible human, Malleus replies in kind. But because he uses ``naughty words``, he is made the target of sanctions while those who bait and attack him are unsanctioned.  , who filed the initial request, asked for clarification about Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement#Malleus Fatuorum topic banned, which prevented Malleus from posting on RfA talk pages. Malleus has participated in several robust discussions at RfAs, as have I. There have been attempts to move these lengthy discussions to the talk page. Participating in lengthy discussions that are moved to the talk page is not disruptive. However, some of his intemperate language has been found to be problematic.  At a recent RfA, he called an editor a ``dishonest twat`` after the editor made a baiting remark. Malleus' response was too intemperate, however, and he was banned from the RfA by uninvolved administrator .  As  wrote (my bolding): ``Malleus made a personal attack, it was removed, it was not replaced, he was topic banned from the RFA, and made no more edits to the RFA. The motion below appears to be a response to the idea that the previous sanctions failed and the community can't handle this on its own... except the previous sanction did work, and the community handled it just fine on its own. If you were planning on sitebanning Malleus the first time he ``disrupted`` an RFA, why in the world did you go to the trouble of creating this remedy?``  I echo Floquenbeam's words: The previous sanction worked. A topic ban from RfA altogether or a siteban seems disproportionate and cruel to an editor who has devoted so many hours to helping other users with their articles.  Editors like , a non-native English speaker, who  during his featured article nomination. Editors like , another non-native English speaker, who  for .  Editors like high school biology teacher 's students; see ````  Feel the gratitude and glee in Mr. Butler's student, , as s