This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 20 | ← | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 |
Since no one told me about the discussion, or gave me a chance to give input, I feel your unblocking was premature and wrong. You need to at least wait until I had a chance to give input. Guiom did not tell me about the AN discussion, nor has anyone even tried to address my concerns. I'm not about wheel warring, but this is ridiculous. pschemp | talk 11:05, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Neil. I've already asked him by email to try and find another username; I've also given him some advice regarding the POTD thing and asked him what the status of the discussions was regarding the removal of the watermarks. This is the second time I am involved in a wikidrama (the first time was about an emergency desysopping), I really should stay away from the AN :) Thanks again for your help. guillom 14:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Hey Neil, thanks for deleting the potential great powers section at the great power article. Hopefully this will stop the edit warring. None of the regular editors involved on the page could have removed without starting an edit war. -- Hobie Hunter ( talk) 11:56, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
it seems that "my" rfc is death so i want to know if i have recovered all my rights to edit whatever i want, like users Naval and Maurice do, or i still have your hidden block and your threatens to block me if i edit again. I want to hear from you to report it if i still have it, i think that or i am blocked or i have recovered all my rights but your hidden block it doesn't seem me legal and i will report it. thanks. -- Sclua ( talk) 13:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Neil, we can't be running around after a user who keeps uploading watermarked images, and remove the watermarks. Users outnumber admins by a long shot, so who is going to be following around all the watermark uploaders if we create a precedent that uploading watermarked images is entirely acceptable? It's clearly not acceptable - for instance, watermarked images are completely forbidden at WP:FPC. Papa Lima Whiskey ( talk) 14:17, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
I noticed you created this article, and that it's tagged for proposed deletion. Just thought you should know, in case you want to defend. WikiKingOfMishawaka ( talk) 15:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, would you take a second look at this close, please? I think that there was a misunderstanding - the science park is an integral part of the school and not a separate entity. Consequently, an article on just part of a school is not practical. Whether the coverage of the science park part is sufficient to give the school notability is what the debate was about and the views were evenly balanced. IMHO this should have been closed as 'no consensus'. TerriersFan ( talk) 15:31, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Neil. Is this talk page still being used? Regards, Rudget ( logs) 18:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
A little more explanation might be appreciated as part of any editorial decisions. "The result was delete." is needlessly brusque. If you can not find time to write opinions to support your decisions, you should not be passing them down. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.97.110.123 ( talk) 17:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Neil, greetings. You recently deleted an article that I have tried to rewrite and I wanted to check with you if I should re-submit. I have revision as my user page. Psychobot ( talk) 15:38, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Definitely not Neil - enforcing an arbcom is in no way haarrasment - don't listen to beta - he chucks a tantrum if he doesn't get his way. Viridae Talk 02:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
The nominator has just been determined by a checkuser to be a likely ban evading sock account. Could you please relist or close as no consensus? In neither of the above was there a "clear consensus". And we absolutely should not humor ban evading, single purpose socks. Therefore, I strongly urge you to either close as no consensus and let an untainted discussion occur or at least relist striking the sock account's comments or linking to the checkuser. Whether you feel the articles should be deleted or I think they should be kept, we absolutely cannot be okay with questionable nominations made by block evading accounts that should not have been making the nomination in the first place. Besides, don't we usually speedy close such discussions if it's apparent that it was made by a sock account? --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles Tally-ho! 18:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
<div style="border:solid '''green''' 1px; margin: 3px 1px;"> {| cellspacing="0" style="background:black;" | style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: black; text-align: center; font-size: 12pt;" | <big>[[User:Dtobias/Why BADSITES is bad policy|<span style="color:red">'''BAD'''</span>]]</big> | style="font-size: 8pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em; color: white;" | This user is a member of '''[[Wikipedia Review|<span style="color:white">Wikipedia Review</span>]]'''.</span> |}</div>
green should be switched red to produce the matching border for your box.
miranda 04:01, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
{{ wikibreak}}
I am off to the Dominican Republic, because that's how I roll. Back in 2 weeks. Neıl ☄ 18:29, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
You have previously participated in discussions on use of English in currency names at Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Numismatics/Style. If you care, please discuss a resolution of related titleing issue at Talk:Chinese wén. — AjaxSmack 01:50, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I know it's in the public domain, but do you know about a valid version of it that is available online? I found versions that are described as unreliable in the respective Wikipedia article. Squash Racket ( talk) 04:16, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
You were the last vote in my RfA, so I didn't have time to properly prep your thankspam! I usually take great care with my spam. Normally I would have seen the notice and adjusted accordingly. Hope you're feeling whimsical. Mr. IP 《 Defender of Open Editing》 15:57, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I always am! Neıl ☄ 16:06, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi Neil - thanks for responding to my request at WP:AN. If you don't mind, could you add Compu-toon to the list? I thought things had died down there, but there was another vandalistic edit to it today, and I think I'm the only one watching it these days. That one's also complicated by the fact that it's a little owned by the comic's creator. Sarcasticidealist ( talk) 14:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Not my intention to troll or disrupt at all. Sceptre ( talk) 15:08, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I could unprotect it myself, but the last time I tried that a bunch of people ended up mad at me (it actually ended up on AN/I if you can believe that). People complained that I wasn't notifying admins, so this time I did. - Royalguard11( T) 17:15, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi Neil,
Thanks for your message on my talk page and for starting the section on the Fair Use Project. I'm happy to talk more about what we're doing over the pilot. Paul Bevan ( talk) 08:40, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Tighten your seat belt if user 'TheTruthWillDoFine' returns with multiple anonymous accounts as he did with the History of hang gliding article some time ago. Expect persistent use of insults and legal threats from that user, as well as regular blanking the page --and other vandalistic actions-- if his unsourced edits are not left INTACT. Please keep that page in your watchlist for a while. Thank you BatteryIncluded ( talk) 13:12, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
As you deleted this article back in April (I believe) I wanted to ask if you would mind placing it here for me to work on a bit. I've found a couple of reliable sources that, combined with his White House profile may be enough notability to at least maintain a stubby article on him. Could you place that in the empty userpage above for me to work on? Regards, S. D. Jameson 16:51, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Re:
[1], I think the rule you need is \bbbuk9.com
rather than \bbuk9.com
.
x42bn6
Talk
Mess
17:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Was wondering why it was moved to the bottom of "Wikipedia:Ethnic and cultural conflicts noticeboard". Please delete this after answering on my talk page. And, realize I'm not a wikipro... at all. Thanks. PlanetCeres ( talk) 17:58, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your work on this article, unfortunately one user seems to be rather posessive about it and reverts the majority of the changes anyone makes. I have tried discussing it with him but he simply doesn't listen. Would appreciate your input on this as an admin! Thaf ( talk) 09:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I've proposed a method of getting to 28 arbs on two year terms with no arb serving two consecutive terms at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2008#Terms_and_seats. Since this was initially your proposal, I'd appreciate your input. Hiding T 11:46, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Putting my nose where it doesn't belong, probably, but this guy was warned before about disruption and seems to be doing it again. [2] Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 15:50, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
I think this deserves a separate page, so I removed your redirect. - Cwenger ( talk) 00:35, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
I just wanted to thank you for your stellar work on MyWikiBiz,
Wikipedia Review,
Encyclopedia Dramatica et al. It's fantastic to see cabalists administrators take brave and proactive measures towards making Wikipedia more of an encyclopaedia and less of a defensive, insular power-thirsty cult. Sincerely,
Skomorokh
13:43, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I have a question about MyWikiBiz. In the last section, you write, "When Centiare’s owner opted to pull the plug on the site, Kohs negotiated a transfer of the entire contents of Centiare.com to MyWikiBiz.com." However, I don't see anything about this in the Philadelphia Inquirer article. Am I missing something...? Zagalejo ^^^ 19:08, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Erm, Neil, this template is protected because people were edit warring over which places to include, mind reverting yourself and going to the talk page? MBisanz talk 08:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
N;
Here's a quick random poke: running again? I'm stumping for a wide field of reasonable candidates who've demonstrated common sense and patience, and you as well.
brenneman
01:22, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Re: your comment on WR: Most of the people trying to get WMUK 1.0 to be more open and to accept membership applications etc. are involved in WMUK 2.0. As are all the people involved in the 2010 Oxford bid. (Me = Cfp = Tom Holden, Tango = Thomas Dalton, (Joe) Seddon, Majorly, Skenmy, Smoddy, Geni etc etc. It's not "just an IRC thing", we've just been using that as a convenient communication channel. Anyway we'd certainly like all the help we can get, so please consider getting involved. As for the "there's no purpose" criticism that was raised, we are starting to discuss things WMUK could do and it will certainly be an issue in the first board election in a fortnight. -- cfp ( talk) 17:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi Neil, I've sent you an E-mail. Best wishes. Acalamari 15:53, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Neil! I am requesting the protection on Template:Collapsible option be reduced to semi-protection. My logic is: The vandalism was 2+ months ago, this template is not used on articles (it is noincluded onto other templates as documentation) and "After all, this is a wiki". Also, while you are at it, {{ Collapsible sections option}} is a similar template and could also be semi'd. Rgrds. -- Tombstone ( talk) 09:13, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:Tambayan_Philippines#Capitol_Medical_Center_Colleges_was_put_up_for_deletion_here.... Make of it what you will. - Richfife ( talk) 17:46, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Michael Baxter. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. RMHED ( talk) 19:43, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for your help sorting out issues with the Shanaze Reade article last time. Unfortunatley I'm having the same issues with Cheri Elliott and Jill Kintner. Same user... I've left an explanation of my edits (most seem to have been reverted) on the talk pages hoping to get a sensible response. Thaf ( talk) 13:39, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, I've been on wikipedia for around a month (mostly reverting vandalism and welcoming new users), and I've been finding reversion of vandalism particularly frustrating, because I'm required to make 2 or 3 edits (even with Twinkle) to undo vandalism and notify the user (which is a pain and a half). I was wondering if you could grant me the ability? I would be happy to answer any questions you have, of course. (I picked you randomly from the category of admins who are happy to consider such requests) Cheers -- Fatal!ty (T☠LK) 07:05, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
I am not sure that if you took the time to read through the whole debate. The issue was not whether Indian occupied Kashmir is a legally correct position. It may very well be wrong. The purpose of the article is to detail the Indian viewpoints (even if it is believed to be wrong by others). I thought we all know that WP do know hold articles only on facts.
Redirection is not the same as a separate article. Would it be appropriate to redirect flat earth article to Spherical earth????
Your decision to redirect was taken despite clear non-consensus (thus default result keep) pointed out and suggested by an uninvolved non-admin closure editor. Docku Hi 12:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi Neil, please see my answer to you on my talk. Speaking of broken things {{talkback}} appears semi functional at the moment. TravellingCari 12:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Matt Lee (musician). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. - Nard 20:40, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
While I well understand the fundamental motivation, the article does assert importance. Nominate it for AfD if you like, but it passes speedy A7. DGG ( talk) 20:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
I've dropped a note on ANI to ask that the pages deleted for the above users are undeleted for the time being, at least. Because this might be a matter where others have a view, I have posted the request at ANI rather than here - hopefully that's okay.
It would be very helpful for the moment if you'd be okay with undeletion for the while, while the case evidence is still being reviewed and diffs looked up by others.
Best,
FT2 ( Talk | email) 22:27, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello! :) Last year, Dire animal (Dungeons & Dragons) was nominated for deletion. At the time, there was no suitable page for this article to be redirected to, so based on the consensus, you deleted the article. I have created a new page, List of Dungeons & Dragons 3.0 edition monsters, which would be a proper destination to merge and/or redirect the article to. I'm wondering if it's possible to restore the original article, and turn it into a redirect, thus preserving the edit history? BOZ ( talk) 16:50, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey Neil, this is just an update on User:Pigsonthewing. You were probably not familiar with his long, extremely checkered past with that section. He has continually edit warred that section, calling another user a stalker, on his page, and has been blocked multiple times for it in the past, going back to June 2007. Since he is just coming back from a year long ArbCom ban Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pigsonthewing 2. and immediately went back to readding that section, despite the ArbCom comment that 1) Evidence has shown that Pigsonthewing (talk · contribs) disregards the Wikipedia way of doing things and is unable or unwilling to improve his pattern of participation. Passed 7-0 at 18:03, 19 August 2007 (UTC) (with that section of userpage being part of the evidence against him.. there is NO reason that section should be added. I have informed him if he does so again, he will be blocked. SirFozzie ( talk) 23:16, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 20 | ← | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 |
Since no one told me about the discussion, or gave me a chance to give input, I feel your unblocking was premature and wrong. You need to at least wait until I had a chance to give input. Guiom did not tell me about the AN discussion, nor has anyone even tried to address my concerns. I'm not about wheel warring, but this is ridiculous. pschemp | talk 11:05, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Neil. I've already asked him by email to try and find another username; I've also given him some advice regarding the POTD thing and asked him what the status of the discussions was regarding the removal of the watermarks. This is the second time I am involved in a wikidrama (the first time was about an emergency desysopping), I really should stay away from the AN :) Thanks again for your help. guillom 14:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Hey Neil, thanks for deleting the potential great powers section at the great power article. Hopefully this will stop the edit warring. None of the regular editors involved on the page could have removed without starting an edit war. -- Hobie Hunter ( talk) 11:56, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
it seems that "my" rfc is death so i want to know if i have recovered all my rights to edit whatever i want, like users Naval and Maurice do, or i still have your hidden block and your threatens to block me if i edit again. I want to hear from you to report it if i still have it, i think that or i am blocked or i have recovered all my rights but your hidden block it doesn't seem me legal and i will report it. thanks. -- Sclua ( talk) 13:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Neil, we can't be running around after a user who keeps uploading watermarked images, and remove the watermarks. Users outnumber admins by a long shot, so who is going to be following around all the watermark uploaders if we create a precedent that uploading watermarked images is entirely acceptable? It's clearly not acceptable - for instance, watermarked images are completely forbidden at WP:FPC. Papa Lima Whiskey ( talk) 14:17, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
I noticed you created this article, and that it's tagged for proposed deletion. Just thought you should know, in case you want to defend. WikiKingOfMishawaka ( talk) 15:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, would you take a second look at this close, please? I think that there was a misunderstanding - the science park is an integral part of the school and not a separate entity. Consequently, an article on just part of a school is not practical. Whether the coverage of the science park part is sufficient to give the school notability is what the debate was about and the views were evenly balanced. IMHO this should have been closed as 'no consensus'. TerriersFan ( talk) 15:31, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Neil. Is this talk page still being used? Regards, Rudget ( logs) 18:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
A little more explanation might be appreciated as part of any editorial decisions. "The result was delete." is needlessly brusque. If you can not find time to write opinions to support your decisions, you should not be passing them down. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.97.110.123 ( talk) 17:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Neil, greetings. You recently deleted an article that I have tried to rewrite and I wanted to check with you if I should re-submit. I have revision as my user page. Psychobot ( talk) 15:38, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Definitely not Neil - enforcing an arbcom is in no way haarrasment - don't listen to beta - he chucks a tantrum if he doesn't get his way. Viridae Talk 02:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
The nominator has just been determined by a checkuser to be a likely ban evading sock account. Could you please relist or close as no consensus? In neither of the above was there a "clear consensus". And we absolutely should not humor ban evading, single purpose socks. Therefore, I strongly urge you to either close as no consensus and let an untainted discussion occur or at least relist striking the sock account's comments or linking to the checkuser. Whether you feel the articles should be deleted or I think they should be kept, we absolutely cannot be okay with questionable nominations made by block evading accounts that should not have been making the nomination in the first place. Besides, don't we usually speedy close such discussions if it's apparent that it was made by a sock account? --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles Tally-ho! 18:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
<div style="border:solid '''green''' 1px; margin: 3px 1px;"> {| cellspacing="0" style="background:black;" | style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: black; text-align: center; font-size: 12pt;" | <big>[[User:Dtobias/Why BADSITES is bad policy|<span style="color:red">'''BAD'''</span>]]</big> | style="font-size: 8pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em; color: white;" | This user is a member of '''[[Wikipedia Review|<span style="color:white">Wikipedia Review</span>]]'''.</span> |}</div>
green should be switched red to produce the matching border for your box.
miranda 04:01, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
{{ wikibreak}}
I am off to the Dominican Republic, because that's how I roll. Back in 2 weeks. Neıl ☄ 18:29, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
You have previously participated in discussions on use of English in currency names at Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Numismatics/Style. If you care, please discuss a resolution of related titleing issue at Talk:Chinese wén. — AjaxSmack 01:50, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I know it's in the public domain, but do you know about a valid version of it that is available online? I found versions that are described as unreliable in the respective Wikipedia article. Squash Racket ( talk) 04:16, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
You were the last vote in my RfA, so I didn't have time to properly prep your thankspam! I usually take great care with my spam. Normally I would have seen the notice and adjusted accordingly. Hope you're feeling whimsical. Mr. IP 《 Defender of Open Editing》 15:57, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I always am! Neıl ☄ 16:06, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi Neil - thanks for responding to my request at WP:AN. If you don't mind, could you add Compu-toon to the list? I thought things had died down there, but there was another vandalistic edit to it today, and I think I'm the only one watching it these days. That one's also complicated by the fact that it's a little owned by the comic's creator. Sarcasticidealist ( talk) 14:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Not my intention to troll or disrupt at all. Sceptre ( talk) 15:08, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I could unprotect it myself, but the last time I tried that a bunch of people ended up mad at me (it actually ended up on AN/I if you can believe that). People complained that I wasn't notifying admins, so this time I did. - Royalguard11( T) 17:15, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi Neil,
Thanks for your message on my talk page and for starting the section on the Fair Use Project. I'm happy to talk more about what we're doing over the pilot. Paul Bevan ( talk) 08:40, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Tighten your seat belt if user 'TheTruthWillDoFine' returns with multiple anonymous accounts as he did with the History of hang gliding article some time ago. Expect persistent use of insults and legal threats from that user, as well as regular blanking the page --and other vandalistic actions-- if his unsourced edits are not left INTACT. Please keep that page in your watchlist for a while. Thank you BatteryIncluded ( talk) 13:12, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
As you deleted this article back in April (I believe) I wanted to ask if you would mind placing it here for me to work on a bit. I've found a couple of reliable sources that, combined with his White House profile may be enough notability to at least maintain a stubby article on him. Could you place that in the empty userpage above for me to work on? Regards, S. D. Jameson 16:51, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Re:
[1], I think the rule you need is \bbbuk9.com
rather than \bbuk9.com
.
x42bn6
Talk
Mess
17:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Was wondering why it was moved to the bottom of "Wikipedia:Ethnic and cultural conflicts noticeboard". Please delete this after answering on my talk page. And, realize I'm not a wikipro... at all. Thanks. PlanetCeres ( talk) 17:58, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your work on this article, unfortunately one user seems to be rather posessive about it and reverts the majority of the changes anyone makes. I have tried discussing it with him but he simply doesn't listen. Would appreciate your input on this as an admin! Thaf ( talk) 09:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I've proposed a method of getting to 28 arbs on two year terms with no arb serving two consecutive terms at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2008#Terms_and_seats. Since this was initially your proposal, I'd appreciate your input. Hiding T 11:46, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Putting my nose where it doesn't belong, probably, but this guy was warned before about disruption and seems to be doing it again. [2] Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 15:50, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
I think this deserves a separate page, so I removed your redirect. - Cwenger ( talk) 00:35, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
I just wanted to thank you for your stellar work on MyWikiBiz,
Wikipedia Review,
Encyclopedia Dramatica et al. It's fantastic to see cabalists administrators take brave and proactive measures towards making Wikipedia more of an encyclopaedia and less of a defensive, insular power-thirsty cult. Sincerely,
Skomorokh
13:43, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I have a question about MyWikiBiz. In the last section, you write, "When Centiare’s owner opted to pull the plug on the site, Kohs negotiated a transfer of the entire contents of Centiare.com to MyWikiBiz.com." However, I don't see anything about this in the Philadelphia Inquirer article. Am I missing something...? Zagalejo ^^^ 19:08, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Erm, Neil, this template is protected because people were edit warring over which places to include, mind reverting yourself and going to the talk page? MBisanz talk 08:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
N;
Here's a quick random poke: running again? I'm stumping for a wide field of reasonable candidates who've demonstrated common sense and patience, and you as well.
brenneman
01:22, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Re: your comment on WR: Most of the people trying to get WMUK 1.0 to be more open and to accept membership applications etc. are involved in WMUK 2.0. As are all the people involved in the 2010 Oxford bid. (Me = Cfp = Tom Holden, Tango = Thomas Dalton, (Joe) Seddon, Majorly, Skenmy, Smoddy, Geni etc etc. It's not "just an IRC thing", we've just been using that as a convenient communication channel. Anyway we'd certainly like all the help we can get, so please consider getting involved. As for the "there's no purpose" criticism that was raised, we are starting to discuss things WMUK could do and it will certainly be an issue in the first board election in a fortnight. -- cfp ( talk) 17:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi Neil, I've sent you an E-mail. Best wishes. Acalamari 15:53, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Neil! I am requesting the protection on Template:Collapsible option be reduced to semi-protection. My logic is: The vandalism was 2+ months ago, this template is not used on articles (it is noincluded onto other templates as documentation) and "After all, this is a wiki". Also, while you are at it, {{ Collapsible sections option}} is a similar template and could also be semi'd. Rgrds. -- Tombstone ( talk) 09:13, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:Tambayan_Philippines#Capitol_Medical_Center_Colleges_was_put_up_for_deletion_here.... Make of it what you will. - Richfife ( talk) 17:46, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Michael Baxter. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. RMHED ( talk) 19:43, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for your help sorting out issues with the Shanaze Reade article last time. Unfortunatley I'm having the same issues with Cheri Elliott and Jill Kintner. Same user... I've left an explanation of my edits (most seem to have been reverted) on the talk pages hoping to get a sensible response. Thaf ( talk) 13:39, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, I've been on wikipedia for around a month (mostly reverting vandalism and welcoming new users), and I've been finding reversion of vandalism particularly frustrating, because I'm required to make 2 or 3 edits (even with Twinkle) to undo vandalism and notify the user (which is a pain and a half). I was wondering if you could grant me the ability? I would be happy to answer any questions you have, of course. (I picked you randomly from the category of admins who are happy to consider such requests) Cheers -- Fatal!ty (T☠LK) 07:05, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
I am not sure that if you took the time to read through the whole debate. The issue was not whether Indian occupied Kashmir is a legally correct position. It may very well be wrong. The purpose of the article is to detail the Indian viewpoints (even if it is believed to be wrong by others). I thought we all know that WP do know hold articles only on facts.
Redirection is not the same as a separate article. Would it be appropriate to redirect flat earth article to Spherical earth????
Your decision to redirect was taken despite clear non-consensus (thus default result keep) pointed out and suggested by an uninvolved non-admin closure editor. Docku Hi 12:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi Neil, please see my answer to you on my talk. Speaking of broken things {{talkback}} appears semi functional at the moment. TravellingCari 12:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Matt Lee (musician). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. - Nard 20:40, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
While I well understand the fundamental motivation, the article does assert importance. Nominate it for AfD if you like, but it passes speedy A7. DGG ( talk) 20:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
I've dropped a note on ANI to ask that the pages deleted for the above users are undeleted for the time being, at least. Because this might be a matter where others have a view, I have posted the request at ANI rather than here - hopefully that's okay.
It would be very helpful for the moment if you'd be okay with undeletion for the while, while the case evidence is still being reviewed and diffs looked up by others.
Best,
FT2 ( Talk | email) 22:27, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello! :) Last year, Dire animal (Dungeons & Dragons) was nominated for deletion. At the time, there was no suitable page for this article to be redirected to, so based on the consensus, you deleted the article. I have created a new page, List of Dungeons & Dragons 3.0 edition monsters, which would be a proper destination to merge and/or redirect the article to. I'm wondering if it's possible to restore the original article, and turn it into a redirect, thus preserving the edit history? BOZ ( talk) 16:50, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey Neil, this is just an update on User:Pigsonthewing. You were probably not familiar with his long, extremely checkered past with that section. He has continually edit warred that section, calling another user a stalker, on his page, and has been blocked multiple times for it in the past, going back to June 2007. Since he is just coming back from a year long ArbCom ban Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pigsonthewing 2. and immediately went back to readding that section, despite the ArbCom comment that 1) Evidence has shown that Pigsonthewing (talk · contribs) disregards the Wikipedia way of doing things and is unable or unwilling to improve his pattern of participation. Passed 7-0 at 18:03, 19 August 2007 (UTC) (with that section of userpage being part of the evidence against him.. there is NO reason that section should be added. I have informed him if he does so again, he will be blocked. SirFozzie ( talk) 23:16, 10 September 2008 (UTC)