This page 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. |
Any chance you could take a look at this unblock request? Just want to make sure I did the right thing in blocking for trolling and vandalism for 24 hours (The IP's blanked their warnings so you'll need to check the history) - much aprreciated Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/ talk 19:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for selecting my article for DYK! That is a totally unexpected honor. Tinlinkin 20:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Majorly. I'm glad I've earned your trust. Rest assured that I have heard every voice loud and clear during the discussion, and will strive to use the mop carefully and responsibly. Thank you for your support. Please don't hesitate to give me constructive criticism anytime. Xiner ( talk, email) 00:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
I have a signature contraction script installed in my monobook.js, but the script seems to decide when to work. ~ Step trip 02:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
I would suggest a change where it asks "Have you edited for six months?" because it makes it sound like that is the required amount. It may put users who are perfectly capable off requesting, when users like myself, Husond, Arjun01, Ryanpostlethwaite and Yandman had less than that amount (recent examples) and passed. Also not too sure about the featured article thing either, or the clean block log; it just seems like these are just set standards being advertised and people may take them seriously. Majorly (o rly?) 02:09, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Removing content from Wikipedia is only vandalism is the intent was vandalism. If the content itself needed to be removed as it was not encyclopedia in context, then it is not vandalism, it is editing. Antman -- chat 07:35, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
This is just a friendly reminder that Wikipedia Weekly has been released with a new episode..... 15!
The link to all versions of Wikipedia Weekly 14 is at
[1]
The OGG version is here The MP3 version (non free file format but it works on an iPod) is here
In this edition
This episode sees Liam, more commonly known as Witty Lama, catching up with Rama’s Arrow and Ragib to talk about contributing to Wikipedia from and Indian and Bangladeshi perspective. Topics include their growing collection of Featured Articles, the success of the Indian WikiProject, and the problem of Internet access on the Subcontinent.
As always you can download old episodes and more at
http://wikipediaweekly.com/!
Please spread the word about Wikipedia Weekly, we're trying to spread the word so that people know about the project, we've got some cool guests lined up and it makes it much more fun if people tune in!
For Tawker and the rest of the Wikipedia Weekly crew -- Tawkerbot 23:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery - if you do not wish to receive such notifications please remove yourself from the list.
Hi there, I'm contacting you because I was wondering why was "Statistics of Saturday Night Live hosts" deleted by you. That page has been up for a long time and it is based on pure statistical facts. I would like to know what can be done to restore it. ( Deej30)
Reason: the protection was request by Tar-Elenion, a confirmed sockpuppet of banned user:Afrika_paprika. He did mass reverts against my referencied edits, together User:Thewanderer and User:Jesuislafete. Another time I was right. I ask to prevent further mass reverts by the last two users. I did several edits, telling my reasons: they have to show where and why I am wrong: it's too easy to act mass reverts. Best regards and thank you for your work.-- Giovanni Giove 23:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Baseball Channel. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review.
Baseball Channel was recreated after both it and The Baseball Channel were deleted. I think they should both be locked until an official announcement from MLB. Milchama 13:50, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
My imported script, sigContract.js, is finally functioning (see here for proof). ~ Step trip 17:17, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Saber girl08 has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Saber girl08 04:53, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Majorly,
Sorry for the blatant spam, but you have yourself down as interested at WikiProject user warnings WP:UW. There is a discussion on going here that might be of interest to you about the future of this project. There are two strawpolls on the talk pages and the second one is about the future of the WP:UW project. Now we have the end in sight we are looking at wrapping up the project and merging it with Template messages/User talk namespace WP:UTM and creating a one stop shop for all userspace templates. As you have yourself down as interested in this project we thought you may have some input on this issue, and would like you to visit the discussion and give any thoughts you may have on the matter. Cheers Khu kri 10:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey see my proposals at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Actor and Filmmakers and the main WP Film and Biography talk page. Know anybody who is interested? Actors and all film people articles need a body on wikipedia to upkeep them asthey need more focus -it would be a part of Biogrpahy and Film. If you are interested or know somebody who would be, please let them know and whether you think it is a good progession for the project or not. Please leave your views at the council or biogrpahy main talk page. THanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "I've been expecting you" 14:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
[2] [3]Please don't use automatic reverting for non-vandalizing edits. My actions were based on RFCU procedure, and I would appreciate it if you could provide actual explanations when reverting.
Don't get me wrong here...I'm not mad. *Ed hugs Majorly* I'm a new clerk, so I would like some feedback on my "clerking". :) Ed ¿Cómo estás? 00:33, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I would like to sincerely ask you to stop vandalizing my subpage User:Twsx/Log. Thank you. ~ | twsx | talk cont | 04:06, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello Majorly,
I am unsure as to whether you have responded to my request for significant edits to a protected page, but I was wondering whether you would consider removing the two lines about Seleucus Nicator from the Yamuna page. Seleucus' campaigns had nothing to do with the Yamuna, but those two users insist on placing it there because they seek to reorient every indian page to greek topics. I have nothing against the greeks, but this is clearly irrelevant material. The individuals refuse to negotiate and are very close minded wherever they are challenged on such topics. Please consider the removal of those two lines ("The Yamuna was known to the ancient Greeks following the campaigns of Seleucus I in 305 BCE. It was called Ioames by the ancient Greeks, and Jomanes by the Romans.") in the ancient history section as the impasse will not be resolved. This way, we at least move back to the status quo ante. Thank you for your consideration.
Best Regards,
Devanampriya 04:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Majorly. The Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Jreferee almost is ready for transclusion. Per your request on my talk page, I would be honored if you would like to co-nominate the request. Please let me know how you would like to proceed. -- Jreferee 21:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
The subject AfD led to some exchanges between you and another user. I wanted to see the deletion debate, but on the Talk page for the article, your summary of the February 2007 AFD links to an April 2006 Speedy Deletion for the same article. Could you please add a link to the discussion page which leads to the most recent AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gianna Michaels (2nd nomination). Thanks!. Edison 21:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Red wings (Sexual Act). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- Y| yukichigai ( ramble argue check) 22:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 12 | 20 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
WikiWorld comic: "Wilhelm Scream" | News and notes: Bad sin, milestones |
Features and admins | Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News |
The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for s-protecting Şebinkarahisar :-) That IP (suspected sock of blocked User:Oguz1) has been trolling that article for weeks.-- Domitius 15:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm happy to say that thanks in part to your support,
my RfA passed with a unanimous score of 40/0/0. I solemnly swear to use these shiny new tools with honour and insanity integrity. --
Wafulz 15:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
FYI: User:Wikiusername123 is actually legal now, but Wikipediauser123 isn't. It's only when they try to mispresent themselves as an official at a Wikimedia-project that a violation has occurred, but since you've blocked already, it's up to you whether you want to AGF or not. -- Netsnipe ► 19:25, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Will this protect my talk page, too? HalfShadow 23:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Can you move-protect the article? It got moved to POS News Reporters and then the text was copied back to Lisa Daniels, so the history is all messed up. The ikiroid ( talk· desk· Advise me) 23:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I've finally gotten my signature problem 1/3 of the way solved!! ~ Step trip 01:31, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi. The way I read it, the proposal was to merge and redirect Eau Rouge corner to Circuit de Spa-Francorchamps. You seem to have carried out the redirect, but not the merge. Have I understood correctly? 4u1e 23 March 2007, 13:51
Hey, thank you very much for your semi-protect! It's really appreciated. I was just wondering though, can you make it a semiprotect2 so that it just has the lock at the upper right (the message at the top is kind of distracting)? This is how it was before. Thank you lots again! UberCryxic 17:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
A number of the administrators who were involved in the edit war that lead to the page being locked are continuing to remove the {{pageprotected}} notice. I have significant issues with the fact that the current notice supported by these editors in no way mentions that "protection is not an endorsement of the current revision". I'd appreaciate your (further) thoughts over at WT:ATT and/or WP:RFPP. -- Y| yukichigai ( ramble argue check) 21:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Would you be willing to put {{ Disputedpolicy}} or {{ Proposed}} on it? Just looking at Wikipedia talk:Attribution, Wikipedia talk:Attribution/Community discussion and Wikipedia talk:Attribution/Poll, there is clearly a dispute as to its status. I could do it myself but I am hardly neutral. -- Henrygb 02:21, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
You cannot do that, Majorly. See my comment below. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:03, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
WP:ATT is policy since Feb 15 2007. The challenge by Jimbo was not about its status as policy, but about the merger of other policies into it. ATT, V, RS and NOR have been protected while the community is discussing the level of consensus for the change in policy structure. If you want to challenge the protection, do so. But please do not edit pages that have been protected. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:02, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
FYI, Jimbo has explicitly indicated that for the time being, "WP:ATT is canonical, and WP:V and WP:NOR exist as separate pages to more fully describe those"
[4], and he personally tagged
WP:NOR and
WP:V to explain this
[5]/
[6]. —
David Levy 03:24, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Majorly, thank you for offering to nominate me for adminship, and I appreciate your confidence in my abilities. I did think it over, but ultimately feel it would be a bit premature given that I've been very active only since December. The general standards applied at RfA seem to expect candidates to have a little more experience and proven dedication. For now, I plan to continue contributing without sysop perms :-) - SpuriousQ ( talk) 14:44, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
This page 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. |
Any chance you could take a look at this unblock request? Just want to make sure I did the right thing in blocking for trolling and vandalism for 24 hours (The IP's blanked their warnings so you'll need to check the history) - much aprreciated Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/ talk 19:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for selecting my article for DYK! That is a totally unexpected honor. Tinlinkin 20:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Majorly. I'm glad I've earned your trust. Rest assured that I have heard every voice loud and clear during the discussion, and will strive to use the mop carefully and responsibly. Thank you for your support. Please don't hesitate to give me constructive criticism anytime. Xiner ( talk, email) 00:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
I have a signature contraction script installed in my monobook.js, but the script seems to decide when to work. ~ Step trip 02:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
I would suggest a change where it asks "Have you edited for six months?" because it makes it sound like that is the required amount. It may put users who are perfectly capable off requesting, when users like myself, Husond, Arjun01, Ryanpostlethwaite and Yandman had less than that amount (recent examples) and passed. Also not too sure about the featured article thing either, or the clean block log; it just seems like these are just set standards being advertised and people may take them seriously. Majorly (o rly?) 02:09, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Removing content from Wikipedia is only vandalism is the intent was vandalism. If the content itself needed to be removed as it was not encyclopedia in context, then it is not vandalism, it is editing. Antman -- chat 07:35, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
This is just a friendly reminder that Wikipedia Weekly has been released with a new episode..... 15!
The link to all versions of Wikipedia Weekly 14 is at
[1]
The OGG version is here The MP3 version (non free file format but it works on an iPod) is here
In this edition
This episode sees Liam, more commonly known as Witty Lama, catching up with Rama’s Arrow and Ragib to talk about contributing to Wikipedia from and Indian and Bangladeshi perspective. Topics include their growing collection of Featured Articles, the success of the Indian WikiProject, and the problem of Internet access on the Subcontinent.
As always you can download old episodes and more at
http://wikipediaweekly.com/!
Please spread the word about Wikipedia Weekly, we're trying to spread the word so that people know about the project, we've got some cool guests lined up and it makes it much more fun if people tune in!
For Tawker and the rest of the Wikipedia Weekly crew -- Tawkerbot 23:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery - if you do not wish to receive such notifications please remove yourself from the list.
Hi there, I'm contacting you because I was wondering why was "Statistics of Saturday Night Live hosts" deleted by you. That page has been up for a long time and it is based on pure statistical facts. I would like to know what can be done to restore it. ( Deej30)
Reason: the protection was request by Tar-Elenion, a confirmed sockpuppet of banned user:Afrika_paprika. He did mass reverts against my referencied edits, together User:Thewanderer and User:Jesuislafete. Another time I was right. I ask to prevent further mass reverts by the last two users. I did several edits, telling my reasons: they have to show where and why I am wrong: it's too easy to act mass reverts. Best regards and thank you for your work.-- Giovanni Giove 23:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Baseball Channel. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review.
Baseball Channel was recreated after both it and The Baseball Channel were deleted. I think they should both be locked until an official announcement from MLB. Milchama 13:50, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
My imported script, sigContract.js, is finally functioning (see here for proof). ~ Step trip 17:17, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Saber girl08 has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Saber girl08 04:53, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Majorly,
Sorry for the blatant spam, but you have yourself down as interested at WikiProject user warnings WP:UW. There is a discussion on going here that might be of interest to you about the future of this project. There are two strawpolls on the talk pages and the second one is about the future of the WP:UW project. Now we have the end in sight we are looking at wrapping up the project and merging it with Template messages/User talk namespace WP:UTM and creating a one stop shop for all userspace templates. As you have yourself down as interested in this project we thought you may have some input on this issue, and would like you to visit the discussion and give any thoughts you may have on the matter. Cheers Khu kri 10:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey see my proposals at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Actor and Filmmakers and the main WP Film and Biography talk page. Know anybody who is interested? Actors and all film people articles need a body on wikipedia to upkeep them asthey need more focus -it would be a part of Biogrpahy and Film. If you are interested or know somebody who would be, please let them know and whether you think it is a good progession for the project or not. Please leave your views at the council or biogrpahy main talk page. THanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "I've been expecting you" 14:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
[2] [3]Please don't use automatic reverting for non-vandalizing edits. My actions were based on RFCU procedure, and I would appreciate it if you could provide actual explanations when reverting.
Don't get me wrong here...I'm not mad. *Ed hugs Majorly* I'm a new clerk, so I would like some feedback on my "clerking". :) Ed ¿Cómo estás? 00:33, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I would like to sincerely ask you to stop vandalizing my subpage User:Twsx/Log. Thank you. ~ | twsx | talk cont | 04:06, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello Majorly,
I am unsure as to whether you have responded to my request for significant edits to a protected page, but I was wondering whether you would consider removing the two lines about Seleucus Nicator from the Yamuna page. Seleucus' campaigns had nothing to do with the Yamuna, but those two users insist on placing it there because they seek to reorient every indian page to greek topics. I have nothing against the greeks, but this is clearly irrelevant material. The individuals refuse to negotiate and are very close minded wherever they are challenged on such topics. Please consider the removal of those two lines ("The Yamuna was known to the ancient Greeks following the campaigns of Seleucus I in 305 BCE. It was called Ioames by the ancient Greeks, and Jomanes by the Romans.") in the ancient history section as the impasse will not be resolved. This way, we at least move back to the status quo ante. Thank you for your consideration.
Best Regards,
Devanampriya 04:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Majorly. The Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Jreferee almost is ready for transclusion. Per your request on my talk page, I would be honored if you would like to co-nominate the request. Please let me know how you would like to proceed. -- Jreferee 21:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
The subject AfD led to some exchanges between you and another user. I wanted to see the deletion debate, but on the Talk page for the article, your summary of the February 2007 AFD links to an April 2006 Speedy Deletion for the same article. Could you please add a link to the discussion page which leads to the most recent AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gianna Michaels (2nd nomination). Thanks!. Edison 21:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Red wings (Sexual Act). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- Y| yukichigai ( ramble argue check) 22:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 12 | 20 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
WikiWorld comic: "Wilhelm Scream" | News and notes: Bad sin, milestones |
Features and admins | Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News |
The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for s-protecting Şebinkarahisar :-) That IP (suspected sock of blocked User:Oguz1) has been trolling that article for weeks.-- Domitius 15:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm happy to say that thanks in part to your support,
my RfA passed with a unanimous score of 40/0/0. I solemnly swear to use these shiny new tools with honour and insanity integrity. --
Wafulz 15:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
FYI: User:Wikiusername123 is actually legal now, but Wikipediauser123 isn't. It's only when they try to mispresent themselves as an official at a Wikimedia-project that a violation has occurred, but since you've blocked already, it's up to you whether you want to AGF or not. -- Netsnipe ► 19:25, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Will this protect my talk page, too? HalfShadow 23:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Can you move-protect the article? It got moved to POS News Reporters and then the text was copied back to Lisa Daniels, so the history is all messed up. The ikiroid ( talk· desk· Advise me) 23:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I've finally gotten my signature problem 1/3 of the way solved!! ~ Step trip 01:31, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi. The way I read it, the proposal was to merge and redirect Eau Rouge corner to Circuit de Spa-Francorchamps. You seem to have carried out the redirect, but not the merge. Have I understood correctly? 4u1e 23 March 2007, 13:51
Hey, thank you very much for your semi-protect! It's really appreciated. I was just wondering though, can you make it a semiprotect2 so that it just has the lock at the upper right (the message at the top is kind of distracting)? This is how it was before. Thank you lots again! UberCryxic 17:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
A number of the administrators who were involved in the edit war that lead to the page being locked are continuing to remove the {{pageprotected}} notice. I have significant issues with the fact that the current notice supported by these editors in no way mentions that "protection is not an endorsement of the current revision". I'd appreaciate your (further) thoughts over at WT:ATT and/or WP:RFPP. -- Y| yukichigai ( ramble argue check) 21:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Would you be willing to put {{ Disputedpolicy}} or {{ Proposed}} on it? Just looking at Wikipedia talk:Attribution, Wikipedia talk:Attribution/Community discussion and Wikipedia talk:Attribution/Poll, there is clearly a dispute as to its status. I could do it myself but I am hardly neutral. -- Henrygb 02:21, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
You cannot do that, Majorly. See my comment below. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:03, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
WP:ATT is policy since Feb 15 2007. The challenge by Jimbo was not about its status as policy, but about the merger of other policies into it. ATT, V, RS and NOR have been protected while the community is discussing the level of consensus for the change in policy structure. If you want to challenge the protection, do so. But please do not edit pages that have been protected. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:02, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
FYI, Jimbo has explicitly indicated that for the time being, "WP:ATT is canonical, and WP:V and WP:NOR exist as separate pages to more fully describe those"
[4], and he personally tagged
WP:NOR and
WP:V to explain this
[5]/
[6]. —
David Levy 03:24, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Majorly, thank you for offering to nominate me for adminship, and I appreciate your confidence in my abilities. I did think it over, but ultimately feel it would be a bit premature given that I've been very active only since December. The general standards applied at RfA seem to expect candidates to have a little more experience and proven dedication. For now, I plan to continue contributing without sysop perms :-) - SpuriousQ ( talk) 14:44, 24 March 2007 (UTC)