Hey, please hold off on editing those articles until the trade is actually announced. I know it's imminent and it's being reported as a done deal, but a trade isn't a trade until it's announced by the teams/league. -- Mosmof ( talk) 18:14, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Alright, thanks. I didn't know he had withdrawn when I cast my !vote. Have a nice day! ErikTheBikeMan ( talk) 16:05, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the notification. I didn't notice the withdrawal statement, but assumed the lack of archive tags meant it was still open.
Stwalkerster [
talk ]
17:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, apologies for removing it - but as you indicated, there was no indication of the purpose, and they were all appropriate candidates for deletion. Look, I appreciate that you might be frustrated (and I'm sorry for my part in that) but there is no reason whatsoever to say "...use a little more discretion than simply deleting without looking first." Please do not presume as to my intentions and actions without asking first; it only creates unnecessary tension. I would have been happy to discuss the matter. -- Ckatz chat spy 06:18, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
I've moved your general comment to the RfA talk. You might want to also post it to WT:RFA. -- Dweller ( talk) 11:22, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Balloonman, after thinking about it for a week or so, I've changed my mind, and am willing to accept your nomination whenever you feel ready to nominate me. I've been helping out at WP:RM lately, and it's getting really frustrating not being able to do my own db-moves! And there's so much stuff backlogged at CAT:ADMINBACKLOG. Let me know how you'd like to do this. Since I haven't really been hanging around Rfa for that long, so I'll follow your lead on stuff relating directly to the Rfa. Cheers,-- Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:19, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Once I caught wind of a shadowy cheerleading section on IRC that was hoping for my failure, or at least decided that it would be colorful to cast joke !votes in the neutral section, I had to withdraw, regardless of what my percentage/chances were. Wisdom89 ( T / C) 18:26, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
I've emailed you. Feel free to check it out. -- Happyme22 ( talk) 02:34, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
In my most recent nomination, you criticized my coaching as being a way to pass adminship rather than to be a better administrator. This made me look at my coaching strategy page, and I've been working on improving it and making sure it does not violate GAME. I would greatly appreciate it if you could review my work and give any suggestions for improvement you may have in your spare time. My strategy page is located at User:Malinaccier/The four phase system, and you may post any suggestions or comments on the talk page (or just edit them into the page if you wish). Any help you'd be willing to give would be greatly appreciated! Thank you, Malinaccier ( talk) 22:55, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Malinaccier, another thing that I've noted in the past about your coaching, you tend to recommend that your coachees get involved with RfA. I never make this recommendation. In fact, if asked, I would probably frown upon it. Watching RfA's to get an idea of what to expect is one thing, but participating as part of coaching---Never. IMO, by advising people to get active at RfA's it looks like you are encouraging them to ingratiate themselves with the people involved with the RfA process. This has two problems, first it looks bad and makes EVERYTHING they've done at RfA's questionable. Second, it doesn't seem to work. I've noticed that people who get involved with the RfA process a month or two before running for Admin seem to have more problems than those who never get involved. Heck, one of the criticisms of the RfA process is that the people at RfA tend to support their own. EG there is a notion that the people who are regulars at RfA will support other regulars. Which is possibly true. The problem is, that this creates distrust from those on the outside. The proof of this are the RfA's for regulars that take off like wildfire, 15-0. Then the non-RfA regulars start showing up with other comments/criticisms. Often with comments related to the RfA regulars and how they are trying push one of their own through. I've seen enough of these snide comments, that I've come to realize that participation in RfA is NOT a good training ground for admins. It may be necessary for 'crats, but not for admins.--- Balloonman PoppaBalloon 07:04, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Wow, thank you so much for your attention regarding my possible adminship. It isn't something I actively seek so I will accept your frank assessment that my process edits have been too controversial to survive the process and will remain happily mop-free for the foreseeable future. There is a lot to contribute and plenty of reward as a non-admin, both content edits and occasional article patrolling. If you have any insights from your four-hour review of my work regarding anything I can do to improve my work here as a non-admin I would value your insight there too. I'm learning a great deal all the time on how best to interact with people online... especially AGF, even the most aggressive editors often have a point and a sincere intention behind their objections and it is often best to listen and respond respectfully rather than show them the hand. Wikidemon ( talk) 07:14, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I did not intend to move the vote to the support section. By "moral support" I meant maybe next time, but I don't think the candidate has enough article writing experiance at the moment. ~the editorofthewiki ( talk/ contribs/ editor review)~ 00:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
I've replied. Have a nice day. :-) AdjustShift ( talk) 08:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your support in my RfA, which closed as successful a few hours ago. I'm incredibly flattered that anyone would spend four hours (admittedly interrupted by election results) to read through my contributions. This is especially the case given you were not originally intending to support and took the time to make certain of your view. Thaks also for the CSD question - it gave me the chance to reflect on the importance of correct tagging and the harm that can be done if an article is mistagged and then carelessly deleted. As a result of your question I will be taking additional care with any CSD's -- I would never want to be in a position to have driven away a potential good editor through carelessness or a poor reading of policy.
The admin reading list also makes clear there's a million foolish errors to avoid, and if (when) I make any mistakes feel free to stop by with a gentle push in the right direction. Thanks again. Euryalus ( talk) 11:02, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey, you forgot to add your sig to your comments there. I was going to add the "preceeding unsiged comments added by Balloonman", but then I didn't. Useight ( talk) 17:38, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your note. I'm also curious as to how this one will close. I made my first edit at 05:51, 30 August 2008. This RFA has already taught me many things about the RFA process. In future RFAs, I'll focus on many factors rather than just focusing on article work. Aervanath's RFA will close at 12:35, 15 November 2008. I may change my mind. Let's see. Have a nice day. :-) AdjustShift ( talk) 20:53, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
The
October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
23:26, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
B-man, Aervanath's RFA has passed. At one point, his RFA had less than 70% support. You changed the momentum. It is a classic example of how a nominator can change the outcome of an RFA. Nice job. :-) AdjustShift ( talk) 13:56, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Balloonman, you did an absolutely heroic job on my nomination. I'm especially flattered by this since I don't believe we had ever interacted before I posted asking you for coaching. The thoroughness of your evaluation, and the diplomacy which you displayed when dealing with opposing editors during my Rfa show that you are a real credit to the encyclopedia. I'm really honored to have been helped by you, and I truly consider myself in your debt.
Yours,
--
Aervanath
lives
in
the Orphanage
17:01, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for seeing that. I think the server had a lag or something, or I totally messed up big time. Thanks again. ^^ G ! B B i 3 I4m 733t0rz 01:46, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Let me know what you think! And tell me to how to best go about what I mentioned if I decide that's what I want to do. Nja247 ( talk • contribs) 21:55, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Done
Balloonman,
Iridescent suggested that I seek out you as a potential RfA nominator. You've probably got the best handle on my conduct during the Sarah Palin wars, and I'd like your honest input on whether you think my conduct in those disputes is consistent with what you'd expect to see in a potential admin candidate. Jclemens ( talk) 22:54, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Done
...and I'd like your advice on whether it will rub people the wrong way if I put a notice of that on my talk page starting now. I know it's not canvassing per
WP:CANVASS, but is it considered rude or arrogant? Foolish maybe, but that's okay, I'd be happier if people who know my work drop by my RfA, regardless of what they say when they get there. (Feel free to reply here.) - Dan
Dank55 (
send/receive)
23:48, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Done
I received an email from somebody whose name begins with an H(?) asking me for a potential RfA nom... I read the message and must have deleted it by acceident... I can't find it. Could you resend it to me.---
Balloonman
PoppaBalloon
03:25, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey Balloonman, you seem like a very intelligent admin that (as best as I can remember) I haven't been involved with in the past. When you come across some free time, would you perhaps consider stopping by my review. Thanks in advance, Grsz 11 →Review! 04:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Done
Finally caught it Enigma message 04:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Please vote in the poll at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Scouting#Project_logo which closes on November 20 Chris (クリス • フィッチ) ( talk) 08:49, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
[1] Fair point! Pedro : Chat 20:45, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Done
Hi Balloonman,
Sorry about not waiting for your nom, thanks for the comment about the Editor Review, I've removed it from my signature.
The Helpful One 19:17, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Balloonman! I just came to leave a quick thanks, after I saw this comment you made [2] - I'm quite touched really. :D Stwalkerster [ talk ] 19:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey Balloonman, I'd like to take a run at RfA in a couple of months and was wondering if you'd be willing to coach me. My primary area of involvement has been CSD/ new page patrolling, though I am starting to branch out again, and even if you can't take me on for full-time coaching, any guidance or assistance you can give at this point would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Mister Senseless™ ( Speak - Contributions) 21:09, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
User:I'm Spartacus!/archive 12 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, Peace, A record of your Day will always be kept here. |
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:EVula/Userboxes/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:19, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
-- Efe ( talk) 06:00, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. - Bobet 15:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
"The fact that he worked in a stressful area where people are prone to throw labels and epitaths around should be grounds for failing an RfA"
... If there's not a missing "not", then I'm screwed, am I not? :-) Jclemens ( talk) 17:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Balloonman.
A user, Scheinwerfermann ( talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log), asked me if I would consider nominating him for adminship. I'm n ot really sure if he could pass or not. Here are a few links to a summary of his edits on various tools. wannabekate, SQLbot, wikichecker, "original" edit counter. He has around 4500 edits, so it won't take too long
Most of my thoughts about it, as well as a (very detailed) self-appraisal are on my talk page here. If you do decide to give your opinion on it, can you put it on my talk page, just to keep the discussion in the same place?
Thanks! J.delanoy gabs adds 17:21, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello. 125.239.172.106 vandalised my page here [3] and here [4]. I was hoping you could do something about it. Thank you. America69 ( talk) 21:18, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Balloonman. Earlier today I ran across this and this. To my eye, both of these seem to violate WP:NOT#STATS, go against several provisions described in WP:LISTCRUFT, and — perhaps of greatest concern — appear to be nothing more or less than a wholesale grab-and-partially-formatted-dump of the information at www.fueleconomy.gov (without the nicety of alphabetic listing or vehicle categorisation sections). Both of these articles have been deleted, both deletions have been contested, both articles have been restored, and one of the articles has been re-nommed for deletion with a result of keep. It looks to me as if most of the arguments put forth by pro-keep !voters boil down to "I like it", and many of the !vote justifications evince little or no understanding of Wikipedia protocol and policy (e.g. "it's not "listcruft", whatever that means").
What might be the appropriate action to take, if any? I don't believe these articles belong, I don't think they can be brought into line with policy and protocol; I think they ought to be deleted. But I don't know if there's much good to be done by reopening a closed debate, even if the standing conclusion seems to have been based on very shaky ground. I would appreciate your thoughts; I'm asking one or two other admins, as well. Thanks! — Scheinwerfermann T· C 20:23, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey. He looks like a good candidate and if you are right that he is probably the strongest admin candidates you've ever nominated, then I'm sure he'll be brave enough. ;) Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk) 07:53, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks!-- otherl left I can take the heat 17:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Balloonman,
I opened up my editor review from August, and was wondering if you'd be able to give me a good review. I feel I've changed a lot since then, and I know how thorough you are when checking over people's contribs, so I know you'll give a good review. I'm in no hurry whatsoever though, take as much time as you need. Thanks, and best wishes, – How do you turn this on ( talk) 17:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
You once wrote somewhere you had been contacted by an 8 year old who wanted admin coaching. Well, what do you expect with a username like yours ;-) I'm not interested in coaching, nor in opening up an official editor review. However, if you're really bored I would appreciate it if you could tell me what you think of my work every now and again. Nothing major, just an opinion or two to give me an idea how I'm doing. I've still got you in the back of my mind after my "Majorly episode" and I value your opinion. If you don't have the time or energy, no problem, this is just an informal request. Nothing more. Thanks and happy editing,
SIS
00:34, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Of course, nominator would be one affecting factor to voters on RfA, but this ABF is really funny. From your nom statement, I got very bad image on the candidate; You're attacking one of disputers in the public place, with whom the candidate conflicted . The first thing for me to do was to check the candidate's and the mentioned user's block log, ANI/AN3 report, RFC etc. There was almost none. He is not a vandal, nor indefinitely blocked, but why you linked and labeled the editor as POV pusher as antagonizing him? The US election campaign made moderate editors easily turn into POV pushers in my observation. On the other hand, I know you're admin-coaching Ling.lut and if he comes down for his RFA, I would definitely "strongly support" for him regardless of the unpleasant experience with you and whatever you would say for him because I know his great contributions in some of my editing areas. Honestly speaking, I've been always uncomfortable with your nom statements and voting comments: there has been "you" more than candidates. Besides, you're relying on "numbers" in the diff. Well, you know Wikipedia is not a democracy. I said only "one" person said a very good and calm advice unlike others' illogical threats.-- Caspian blue 00:47, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
I've transcluded. - Dan Dank55 ( send/receive) 20:20, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Salutations, I see you are the nominator of Dank55's request for adminship. I have been looking through the editor's contributions and found them oddly scarce in deletion discussions; a handful of comments in the past six months. Before asking the candidate in the RfA I wanted to check the nominator in case I have missed something. Any insight appreciated. Danke, the skomorokh 20:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
The RfA Barnstar | |
I'm Spartacus!, I would like to thank you for your participation in my recent Request for Adminship, which passed with 112 supports, 4 opposes and 5 neutrals. A special mention goes out to Stwalkerster and Pedro for nominating me, thanks a lot for having trust in me! In response to the neutrals, I will try to double check articles that have been tagged for speedy deletion before I CSD them and will start off slowly with the drama boards of ANI and AN to ensure that I get used to them. In response to the oppose !votes on my RfA, I will check that any images I use meet the non-free content criteria and will attempt to handle any disputes or queries as well as I can. If you need my help at all, feel free to simply ask at my talk page and I'll see if I can help. Once again, thank you for your participation, and have a great day! :) The Helpful One 22:12, 25 November 2008 (UTC) |
design by neurolysis | to add this barnstar to your awards page, simply copy and paste {{subst:User:Neurolysis/THOBS}} and remove this bottom text | if you don't like thankspam, please accept my sincere apologies
You seemed to have had great luck finding (and nominating) great RfA candidates recently (not that you hadn't in the past, only more so now). *Prods* What's your secret ;) (JK). Good work though. RockManQ (talk) 02:46, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Dear Balloonman
Thank you for your moderation in dealing with me a few days ago. If you've forgotten the incident, which you may have, it's in your November archive under the heading "Vandalism." I just wanted to clear a few things up. Firstly, there is only one person at this IP. If you want to understand why I've focused on America69's page, go to User talk:Justin Herbert where I explain my reasoning. Incidently, I think your user page, with a single political userbox stating your position, is a model of how things should be done, as opposed to what America69 or Justin Herbert do. Thanks again for your fairness. 125.239.172.106 ( talk) 08:02, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
I admire your restraint and politeness further when I compare your response to that of Justin Herbert. I realise he was annoyed by what he did, but he doesn't need to go around calling me scum, especially since it seems to be motivated less by the fact that I vandalised than the fact that I disagree with his views. If I had been a Republican vandalising a pro-Democrat userbox, would he have described me as scum in his reversion? MAC475 ( talk) 08:18, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
It wasn't me that put the reply up. I found my brother using my account. I've changed the password to something stronger. I'd say he was trying to embarrass me. He doesn't think much of the wiki. I'll keep an eye on our IP to make sure he doesn't vandalise any more userboxes. I can understand his frustration, but he shouldn't have done that. MAC475 ( talk) 08:30, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I was in an edit conflict with you, so I didn't see your reply. On reflection, my user page is an example of what my brother's complaining about. I'll change it. About America69's userboxes - they're some of my bro's handiwork that Justin didn't pick up. They should all be the other way round. I'll go and fix it. MAC475 ( talk) 08:34, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Someone else beat me to it. Hopefully, that's the end of it. I hope you have a good sleep - it must be very late where you are. MAC475 ( talk) 08:51, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback on my Admin coaching page. I've posted a few replies, but most importantly I wanted to say: Have a safe trip to wherever you're going. Have a good Thanksgiving and I'll talk with you next week. Nja247 ( talk • contribs) 08:11, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm on a mission these days to recruit copyeditors for FAC and GAN, where copyediting is loosely defined as being able to make some kind of improvement: some people know professional style guides and/or Wikipedia's guidelines, some people have a good feel for Wikipedian article layout, some people are good writers, some people are willing to check spelling and grammar. It's all good. If people are looking to pass their RfA ... and especially if they're already under the wing of an experienced coach ... I'll be happy to look over their shoulder if they want to make themselves useful at, and learn the ropes at, FAC and/or GAN. - Dan Dank55 ( send/receive) 01:22, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Mr Balloonman! It's an honor to finally meet you. Would you be willing to give me admin coaching lessons? I really want to and I can't find anybody who is taking students or is even giving lessons all together. If you could let me know it would really be appreciated. Thanks SteelersFan- 9 4 17:50, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
JClemens' RfA Thanks | |
Thank you for participating in my Request for Adminship, which passed with 77 supporting and 2 opposing. Regardless of your position, I thank you for the time you took to examine my record and formulate your response. Jclemens ( talk) 02:26, 29 November 2008 (UTC) |
Hey, please hold off on editing those articles until the trade is actually announced. I know it's imminent and it's being reported as a done deal, but a trade isn't a trade until it's announced by the teams/league. -- Mosmof ( talk) 18:14, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Alright, thanks. I didn't know he had withdrawn when I cast my !vote. Have a nice day! ErikTheBikeMan ( talk) 16:05, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the notification. I didn't notice the withdrawal statement, but assumed the lack of archive tags meant it was still open.
Stwalkerster [
talk ]
17:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, apologies for removing it - but as you indicated, there was no indication of the purpose, and they were all appropriate candidates for deletion. Look, I appreciate that you might be frustrated (and I'm sorry for my part in that) but there is no reason whatsoever to say "...use a little more discretion than simply deleting without looking first." Please do not presume as to my intentions and actions without asking first; it only creates unnecessary tension. I would have been happy to discuss the matter. -- Ckatz chat spy 06:18, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
I've moved your general comment to the RfA talk. You might want to also post it to WT:RFA. -- Dweller ( talk) 11:22, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Balloonman, after thinking about it for a week or so, I've changed my mind, and am willing to accept your nomination whenever you feel ready to nominate me. I've been helping out at WP:RM lately, and it's getting really frustrating not being able to do my own db-moves! And there's so much stuff backlogged at CAT:ADMINBACKLOG. Let me know how you'd like to do this. Since I haven't really been hanging around Rfa for that long, so I'll follow your lead on stuff relating directly to the Rfa. Cheers,-- Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:19, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Once I caught wind of a shadowy cheerleading section on IRC that was hoping for my failure, or at least decided that it would be colorful to cast joke !votes in the neutral section, I had to withdraw, regardless of what my percentage/chances were. Wisdom89 ( T / C) 18:26, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
I've emailed you. Feel free to check it out. -- Happyme22 ( talk) 02:34, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
In my most recent nomination, you criticized my coaching as being a way to pass adminship rather than to be a better administrator. This made me look at my coaching strategy page, and I've been working on improving it and making sure it does not violate GAME. I would greatly appreciate it if you could review my work and give any suggestions for improvement you may have in your spare time. My strategy page is located at User:Malinaccier/The four phase system, and you may post any suggestions or comments on the talk page (or just edit them into the page if you wish). Any help you'd be willing to give would be greatly appreciated! Thank you, Malinaccier ( talk) 22:55, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Malinaccier, another thing that I've noted in the past about your coaching, you tend to recommend that your coachees get involved with RfA. I never make this recommendation. In fact, if asked, I would probably frown upon it. Watching RfA's to get an idea of what to expect is one thing, but participating as part of coaching---Never. IMO, by advising people to get active at RfA's it looks like you are encouraging them to ingratiate themselves with the people involved with the RfA process. This has two problems, first it looks bad and makes EVERYTHING they've done at RfA's questionable. Second, it doesn't seem to work. I've noticed that people who get involved with the RfA process a month or two before running for Admin seem to have more problems than those who never get involved. Heck, one of the criticisms of the RfA process is that the people at RfA tend to support their own. EG there is a notion that the people who are regulars at RfA will support other regulars. Which is possibly true. The problem is, that this creates distrust from those on the outside. The proof of this are the RfA's for regulars that take off like wildfire, 15-0. Then the non-RfA regulars start showing up with other comments/criticisms. Often with comments related to the RfA regulars and how they are trying push one of their own through. I've seen enough of these snide comments, that I've come to realize that participation in RfA is NOT a good training ground for admins. It may be necessary for 'crats, but not for admins.--- Balloonman PoppaBalloon 07:04, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Wow, thank you so much for your attention regarding my possible adminship. It isn't something I actively seek so I will accept your frank assessment that my process edits have been too controversial to survive the process and will remain happily mop-free for the foreseeable future. There is a lot to contribute and plenty of reward as a non-admin, both content edits and occasional article patrolling. If you have any insights from your four-hour review of my work regarding anything I can do to improve my work here as a non-admin I would value your insight there too. I'm learning a great deal all the time on how best to interact with people online... especially AGF, even the most aggressive editors often have a point and a sincere intention behind their objections and it is often best to listen and respond respectfully rather than show them the hand. Wikidemon ( talk) 07:14, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I did not intend to move the vote to the support section. By "moral support" I meant maybe next time, but I don't think the candidate has enough article writing experiance at the moment. ~the editorofthewiki ( talk/ contribs/ editor review)~ 00:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
I've replied. Have a nice day. :-) AdjustShift ( talk) 08:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your support in my RfA, which closed as successful a few hours ago. I'm incredibly flattered that anyone would spend four hours (admittedly interrupted by election results) to read through my contributions. This is especially the case given you were not originally intending to support and took the time to make certain of your view. Thaks also for the CSD question - it gave me the chance to reflect on the importance of correct tagging and the harm that can be done if an article is mistagged and then carelessly deleted. As a result of your question I will be taking additional care with any CSD's -- I would never want to be in a position to have driven away a potential good editor through carelessness or a poor reading of policy.
The admin reading list also makes clear there's a million foolish errors to avoid, and if (when) I make any mistakes feel free to stop by with a gentle push in the right direction. Thanks again. Euryalus ( talk) 11:02, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey, you forgot to add your sig to your comments there. I was going to add the "preceeding unsiged comments added by Balloonman", but then I didn't. Useight ( talk) 17:38, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your note. I'm also curious as to how this one will close. I made my first edit at 05:51, 30 August 2008. This RFA has already taught me many things about the RFA process. In future RFAs, I'll focus on many factors rather than just focusing on article work. Aervanath's RFA will close at 12:35, 15 November 2008. I may change my mind. Let's see. Have a nice day. :-) AdjustShift ( talk) 20:53, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
The
October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
23:26, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
B-man, Aervanath's RFA has passed. At one point, his RFA had less than 70% support. You changed the momentum. It is a classic example of how a nominator can change the outcome of an RFA. Nice job. :-) AdjustShift ( talk) 13:56, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Balloonman, you did an absolutely heroic job on my nomination. I'm especially flattered by this since I don't believe we had ever interacted before I posted asking you for coaching. The thoroughness of your evaluation, and the diplomacy which you displayed when dealing with opposing editors during my Rfa show that you are a real credit to the encyclopedia. I'm really honored to have been helped by you, and I truly consider myself in your debt.
Yours,
--
Aervanath
lives
in
the Orphanage
17:01, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for seeing that. I think the server had a lag or something, or I totally messed up big time. Thanks again. ^^ G ! B B i 3 I4m 733t0rz 01:46, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Let me know what you think! And tell me to how to best go about what I mentioned if I decide that's what I want to do. Nja247 ( talk • contribs) 21:55, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Done
Balloonman,
Iridescent suggested that I seek out you as a potential RfA nominator. You've probably got the best handle on my conduct during the Sarah Palin wars, and I'd like your honest input on whether you think my conduct in those disputes is consistent with what you'd expect to see in a potential admin candidate. Jclemens ( talk) 22:54, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Done
...and I'd like your advice on whether it will rub people the wrong way if I put a notice of that on my talk page starting now. I know it's not canvassing per
WP:CANVASS, but is it considered rude or arrogant? Foolish maybe, but that's okay, I'd be happier if people who know my work drop by my RfA, regardless of what they say when they get there. (Feel free to reply here.) - Dan
Dank55 (
send/receive)
23:48, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Done
I received an email from somebody whose name begins with an H(?) asking me for a potential RfA nom... I read the message and must have deleted it by acceident... I can't find it. Could you resend it to me.---
Balloonman
PoppaBalloon
03:25, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey Balloonman, you seem like a very intelligent admin that (as best as I can remember) I haven't been involved with in the past. When you come across some free time, would you perhaps consider stopping by my review. Thanks in advance, Grsz 11 →Review! 04:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Done
Finally caught it Enigma message 04:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Please vote in the poll at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Scouting#Project_logo which closes on November 20 Chris (クリス • フィッチ) ( talk) 08:49, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
[1] Fair point! Pedro : Chat 20:45, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Done
Hi Balloonman,
Sorry about not waiting for your nom, thanks for the comment about the Editor Review, I've removed it from my signature.
The Helpful One 19:17, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Balloonman! I just came to leave a quick thanks, after I saw this comment you made [2] - I'm quite touched really. :D Stwalkerster [ talk ] 19:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey Balloonman, I'd like to take a run at RfA in a couple of months and was wondering if you'd be willing to coach me. My primary area of involvement has been CSD/ new page patrolling, though I am starting to branch out again, and even if you can't take me on for full-time coaching, any guidance or assistance you can give at this point would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Mister Senseless™ ( Speak - Contributions) 21:09, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
User:I'm Spartacus!/archive 12 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, Peace, A record of your Day will always be kept here. |
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:EVula/Userboxes/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:19, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
-- Efe ( talk) 06:00, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. - Bobet 15:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
"The fact that he worked in a stressful area where people are prone to throw labels and epitaths around should be grounds for failing an RfA"
... If there's not a missing "not", then I'm screwed, am I not? :-) Jclemens ( talk) 17:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Balloonman.
A user, Scheinwerfermann ( talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log), asked me if I would consider nominating him for adminship. I'm n ot really sure if he could pass or not. Here are a few links to a summary of his edits on various tools. wannabekate, SQLbot, wikichecker, "original" edit counter. He has around 4500 edits, so it won't take too long
Most of my thoughts about it, as well as a (very detailed) self-appraisal are on my talk page here. If you do decide to give your opinion on it, can you put it on my talk page, just to keep the discussion in the same place?
Thanks! J.delanoy gabs adds 17:21, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello. 125.239.172.106 vandalised my page here [3] and here [4]. I was hoping you could do something about it. Thank you. America69 ( talk) 21:18, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Balloonman. Earlier today I ran across this and this. To my eye, both of these seem to violate WP:NOT#STATS, go against several provisions described in WP:LISTCRUFT, and — perhaps of greatest concern — appear to be nothing more or less than a wholesale grab-and-partially-formatted-dump of the information at www.fueleconomy.gov (without the nicety of alphabetic listing or vehicle categorisation sections). Both of these articles have been deleted, both deletions have been contested, both articles have been restored, and one of the articles has been re-nommed for deletion with a result of keep. It looks to me as if most of the arguments put forth by pro-keep !voters boil down to "I like it", and many of the !vote justifications evince little or no understanding of Wikipedia protocol and policy (e.g. "it's not "listcruft", whatever that means").
What might be the appropriate action to take, if any? I don't believe these articles belong, I don't think they can be brought into line with policy and protocol; I think they ought to be deleted. But I don't know if there's much good to be done by reopening a closed debate, even if the standing conclusion seems to have been based on very shaky ground. I would appreciate your thoughts; I'm asking one or two other admins, as well. Thanks! — Scheinwerfermann T· C 20:23, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey. He looks like a good candidate and if you are right that he is probably the strongest admin candidates you've ever nominated, then I'm sure he'll be brave enough. ;) Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk) 07:53, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks!-- otherl left I can take the heat 17:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Balloonman,
I opened up my editor review from August, and was wondering if you'd be able to give me a good review. I feel I've changed a lot since then, and I know how thorough you are when checking over people's contribs, so I know you'll give a good review. I'm in no hurry whatsoever though, take as much time as you need. Thanks, and best wishes, – How do you turn this on ( talk) 17:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
You once wrote somewhere you had been contacted by an 8 year old who wanted admin coaching. Well, what do you expect with a username like yours ;-) I'm not interested in coaching, nor in opening up an official editor review. However, if you're really bored I would appreciate it if you could tell me what you think of my work every now and again. Nothing major, just an opinion or two to give me an idea how I'm doing. I've still got you in the back of my mind after my "Majorly episode" and I value your opinion. If you don't have the time or energy, no problem, this is just an informal request. Nothing more. Thanks and happy editing,
SIS
00:34, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Of course, nominator would be one affecting factor to voters on RfA, but this ABF is really funny. From your nom statement, I got very bad image on the candidate; You're attacking one of disputers in the public place, with whom the candidate conflicted . The first thing for me to do was to check the candidate's and the mentioned user's block log, ANI/AN3 report, RFC etc. There was almost none. He is not a vandal, nor indefinitely blocked, but why you linked and labeled the editor as POV pusher as antagonizing him? The US election campaign made moderate editors easily turn into POV pushers in my observation. On the other hand, I know you're admin-coaching Ling.lut and if he comes down for his RFA, I would definitely "strongly support" for him regardless of the unpleasant experience with you and whatever you would say for him because I know his great contributions in some of my editing areas. Honestly speaking, I've been always uncomfortable with your nom statements and voting comments: there has been "you" more than candidates. Besides, you're relying on "numbers" in the diff. Well, you know Wikipedia is not a democracy. I said only "one" person said a very good and calm advice unlike others' illogical threats.-- Caspian blue 00:47, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
I've transcluded. - Dan Dank55 ( send/receive) 20:20, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Salutations, I see you are the nominator of Dank55's request for adminship. I have been looking through the editor's contributions and found them oddly scarce in deletion discussions; a handful of comments in the past six months. Before asking the candidate in the RfA I wanted to check the nominator in case I have missed something. Any insight appreciated. Danke, the skomorokh 20:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
The RfA Barnstar | |
I'm Spartacus!, I would like to thank you for your participation in my recent Request for Adminship, which passed with 112 supports, 4 opposes and 5 neutrals. A special mention goes out to Stwalkerster and Pedro for nominating me, thanks a lot for having trust in me! In response to the neutrals, I will try to double check articles that have been tagged for speedy deletion before I CSD them and will start off slowly with the drama boards of ANI and AN to ensure that I get used to them. In response to the oppose !votes on my RfA, I will check that any images I use meet the non-free content criteria and will attempt to handle any disputes or queries as well as I can. If you need my help at all, feel free to simply ask at my talk page and I'll see if I can help. Once again, thank you for your participation, and have a great day! :) The Helpful One 22:12, 25 November 2008 (UTC) |
design by neurolysis | to add this barnstar to your awards page, simply copy and paste {{subst:User:Neurolysis/THOBS}} and remove this bottom text | if you don't like thankspam, please accept my sincere apologies
You seemed to have had great luck finding (and nominating) great RfA candidates recently (not that you hadn't in the past, only more so now). *Prods* What's your secret ;) (JK). Good work though. RockManQ (talk) 02:46, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Dear Balloonman
Thank you for your moderation in dealing with me a few days ago. If you've forgotten the incident, which you may have, it's in your November archive under the heading "Vandalism." I just wanted to clear a few things up. Firstly, there is only one person at this IP. If you want to understand why I've focused on America69's page, go to User talk:Justin Herbert where I explain my reasoning. Incidently, I think your user page, with a single political userbox stating your position, is a model of how things should be done, as opposed to what America69 or Justin Herbert do. Thanks again for your fairness. 125.239.172.106 ( talk) 08:02, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
I admire your restraint and politeness further when I compare your response to that of Justin Herbert. I realise he was annoyed by what he did, but he doesn't need to go around calling me scum, especially since it seems to be motivated less by the fact that I vandalised than the fact that I disagree with his views. If I had been a Republican vandalising a pro-Democrat userbox, would he have described me as scum in his reversion? MAC475 ( talk) 08:18, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
It wasn't me that put the reply up. I found my brother using my account. I've changed the password to something stronger. I'd say he was trying to embarrass me. He doesn't think much of the wiki. I'll keep an eye on our IP to make sure he doesn't vandalise any more userboxes. I can understand his frustration, but he shouldn't have done that. MAC475 ( talk) 08:30, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I was in an edit conflict with you, so I didn't see your reply. On reflection, my user page is an example of what my brother's complaining about. I'll change it. About America69's userboxes - they're some of my bro's handiwork that Justin didn't pick up. They should all be the other way round. I'll go and fix it. MAC475 ( talk) 08:34, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Someone else beat me to it. Hopefully, that's the end of it. I hope you have a good sleep - it must be very late where you are. MAC475 ( talk) 08:51, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback on my Admin coaching page. I've posted a few replies, but most importantly I wanted to say: Have a safe trip to wherever you're going. Have a good Thanksgiving and I'll talk with you next week. Nja247 ( talk • contribs) 08:11, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm on a mission these days to recruit copyeditors for FAC and GAN, where copyediting is loosely defined as being able to make some kind of improvement: some people know professional style guides and/or Wikipedia's guidelines, some people have a good feel for Wikipedian article layout, some people are good writers, some people are willing to check spelling and grammar. It's all good. If people are looking to pass their RfA ... and especially if they're already under the wing of an experienced coach ... I'll be happy to look over their shoulder if they want to make themselves useful at, and learn the ropes at, FAC and/or GAN. - Dan Dank55 ( send/receive) 01:22, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Mr Balloonman! It's an honor to finally meet you. Would you be willing to give me admin coaching lessons? I really want to and I can't find anybody who is taking students or is even giving lessons all together. If you could let me know it would really be appreciated. Thanks SteelersFan- 9 4 17:50, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
JClemens' RfA Thanks | |
Thank you for participating in my Request for Adminship, which passed with 77 supporting and 2 opposing. Regardless of your position, I thank you for the time you took to examine my record and formulate your response. Jclemens ( talk) 02:26, 29 November 2008 (UTC) |