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.

I dont exactly know why I'm telling you this, but I found your page about Rfa stats...theres someone out there, user:Y, who started on the 22 February 2007 and claims to be an admin. Either he's lying, which is something against the rules, or you should update your RFA thing. Sorry if you dont care, I just wanted to let you know for some bizarre reason. Thanks, —ÅñôñÿMôús _{Dîššíd3nt} 23:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know why you're telling me either... what exactly do you want me to update? Majorly (hot!) 23:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Your Rfa page. The one proclaiming statistics - this either means that User:Y is the least inexpierienced user to be promoted - hes only been here for 2 months approx., or he's a poser - isnt there a rule against that? —ÅñôñÿMôús _{Dîššíd3nt} 05:25, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Of course he's an admin. The page tracks RfA promotions, not the rights log. If you knew the history, which I'm not in a position to tell you, you'd know why and how Y is an admin. Perhaps you should ask him yourself. Majorly (hot!) 09:15, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

oh ok. no worries then. just making sure, because 2 months would have been pretty much impossible id say. maybe i will ask him. do you think hed actually bother to reply though? —ÅñôñÿMôús _{Dîššíd3nt} 11:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Two months is impossible at the current time, but as I say he's a special case. I don't know whether he'll reply or not. Majorly (hot!) 11:17, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I would like to ask if you could protect User talk:Tellyaddict as it was declined at RFP and is becoming a target for vandalis and Mr Ompapa and his sockpuppets and new users vandalising, so I politely ask you if you could protect it. Thanks! Telly addict 13:42, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I think it'll be fine for now. I'll keep an eye on it. Majorly (hot!) 14:00, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll watch it too. · AO ^Talk 14:04, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello Majorly/Archives, thank you for supporting my RfA!
I was promoted with a final tally of 68/12/0.
Also, please wish a Happy Birthday to Her Majesty the Queen. Vivat Regina!

Because you are the wise admin who weighed in on the AfD discussion of Handbra, I'd like you to rap Valrith's knuckles (or hopefully something much more violent if you see fit) for erasing most of the article after the decision was keep. I think that Valrith and I are both guilty of taking ownership of the debate to delete or keep the article, but it's childish and extremely rude for him to butcher it after all the behind the scenes hard work I did to find references to satisfy him. He began the whole AfD after we went back and forth on adequate references.

After the AfD bout, the article shouldn't need further justification, but it does have a meaningful purpose. The point of this article isn't to define a fairly obvious term, but to establish a place to document the media a phenomena and a term that can be used as short-hand in other articles as it currently is widely used in the U.K. H Bruthzoo 02:51, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Can you explain the close at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blue Ball Manipulator? The people wanting to keep the article were citing pretty ridiculous reasons. --- RockMFR 19:19, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah sure. Well, I changed it to no consensus if that's OK? I wasn't too impressed with either side's view of it (particularly the keeps) but I decided not to delete. Why? In my view it is better to be safe than sorry in an unclear situation like this, and keeping it allows it to be worked on, improved, sourced etc. Basically recover from the concerns raised. If it fails to do this in a month or so, you should nominate it again. Or, if I made a mistake (which I do, I'm only human) try getting a deletion review. Majorly (hot!) 19:30, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for helping close the RfA. I agree with all the comments that you and other editors made, and I definitely need more experience before I attempt to become an administrator. I appreciate your advice, and I wish you best of luck! -- Ali 23:37, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I find your comment on RFA insulting, degrading, and insinutaing I don't have a brain or common sense. Rlevse 01:25, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I never said that, ever. Majorly (hot!) 01:36, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks to me like you did, certainly the common sense part and it certainly infers the rest...Why on earth would you want to know how it's going? Do some research and make your own mind up. This isn't an experiment, this is common sense. Rlevse 01:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

It's common sense not to have a tally on a discussion, yes. You surely don't look at the tally before you leave your opinion? That is why I want it removed. It is not an experiment of any kind. Majorly (hot!) 01:50, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

You're not even paying attention to what I'm saying. You insulted me and I want nothing more to do with you. Rlevse 02:31, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

You twisted my words to make them insult you. If you want nothing more to do with me, please don't reply. Majorly (hot!) 02:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

You put a little light into my day, so I decided to put some into yours :) Love, Phaedriel 09:35, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you =) Majorly (hot!) 10:41, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Well sir, you never mentioned you lived so close to Manchester! Any chance you can think of a few dates when your free around June so we can properly organise the meet up? We'll make it legit! Ryan Postlethwaite 10:32, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and by the way, where exactly is 10 miles from the city centre?! Ryan Postlethwaite 10:32, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I was surprised to see that Librarians in popular culture survived the deletion nomination. It may be that I am not altogether on top of the deletion process, but I was of the impression that it was not a question of votes, but of arguments. The people arguing against deleting all used arguments of a WP:ILIKEIT/ WP:USE character. Am i wrong?

Can you please explain the rationale behind keeping the article? Cheers. Dr bab 13:47, 23 April 2007 (UTC).

I found the keep comments more justified overall. The deleting commments didn't really tell me much. Majorly (hot!) 14:14, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I just felt that this article have no place on wikipedia per WP:NOT#IINFO, and that no counterarguments were made other than WP:USE and WP:ILIKEIT. I guess we disagree, but such is life. Shame though, the article really is a mess. Have a nice day! Dr bab 16:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC).

I note that you took off my speedy tag to Image:Andrewvandecamp.jpg. Could I ask you to delete it? I recently redeemed Image:Andrewvandekamp.jpg from IfD on the explicit basis that it would be uploaded as a jpg, have a fair use tag and rationale and be added to Andrew Van De Kamp - the image is now a jpg, has all the appropriate tags and rationales, but Matthew keeps trying to edit war with me over the image. Both images are fair use images, so one needs to be deleted, and I don't want to edit war over an image which was kept on the basis it would be added to Andrew's article but is being shunted out by one person determined to add a different one. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 15:27, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Looking at the DRV it appears there was a very borderline consensus to undelete the image, that doesn't mean use though. Matthew has attempted to converse with you to reach a consensus, you must reciporcate. I myself can not see a consensus to use your image. Majorly (hot!) 15:56, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I would be grateful if you could confirm the reasons for deletion of all references to Nick Langston: specifically the Nick Langston wikipedia entry and the references on Tantric Jazz, East Bristol Jazz Club and Supergrass.

I refer to the following entry I made on the discussion page:

With reference to notability (music), amongst other things it states: "contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable" and, "has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city". Notable musicians are mentioned and an internet search for individuals such as Andy Kinsman and Dennis Rollins (who are referred to) and John Paul Gard (who is not referred to) will confirm their notability, as would a search amongst the local media of Bristol. With respect to "the most prominent representative of a notable style", I would make no such claims to Nick Langston being the "most prominent", but perhaps "a prominent". I would also point to the Regional Youth Music Awards http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=107007375 which refers to Nick Langston as an "established artist" along with a range of other established artists including Lemar, Massive Attack and Roni Size and also http://www.thornburyfm.org/html/pres-nickl.html . The references to Nick Langston on entries for Tantric Jazz and East Bristol Jazz Club are clearly verifiable from those institutions' own websites and others. The Supergrass website is backed by a huge fanbase and the demo at Stargoat Studios is generally known by hardcore Supergrass fans. However, as I said earlier, I clearly have less knowledge on this process than others and wish only to include information that is appropriate for wikipedia users. NLAcreative 14:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks. NLAcreative 17:40, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I think a deletion review would be a good idea here, since you added your comment at the end and people may not have noticed them. Majorly (hot!) 17:53, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

It's juvenile for Valrith to keep bawdlerizing this article after 28 people have weighed in on two AfD discussions. His stated reason for erasing 80% of the article you just restored is that it isn't cited. The citation's are in the text, namely the source (Rolling Stone and Saturday Night Live and the publication or air date) as well as the image itself. Obviously his true motivation is vindication. Not only is WP not the place for that but it disrespects the 28 people who spent the time to vote and comment (even though several of them may agree with Valrith). This has gone way beyong 3 reverts. Thanks for your help. H Bruthzoo 18:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello there. I hate it when people harass the closing admin about an AfD they disagree with, but I did want to ask you about the AfD on No-Grain Diet, which you closed as keep. I know the discussion itself didn't go very far in terms of generating consensus, but I was wondering about the rationale for keeping it. My feeling was that the sources provided didn't meet the bar of "multiple non-trivial independent sources", and that the NY Times best-seller rank was not really relevant but just a WP:BIGNUMBER. The reason I ask is that I'm still stuck, going back to the article, with not much that I can use to improve it from its current unsourced, promotional state. Anyhoo, just wanted to hear your thoughts. If you don't feel like revisiting it, feel free to ignore this and I won't bother you further. Thanks. MastCell ^Talk 20:25, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

It was a hard close. Essentially there were two delete opinions, yours and another. Whilst it may not sufficiently pass WP:N, it is cited. There are sources available, and if in doubt, it's best not to delete. Someone might find the relevant sources; if not, renominate it again at some point. Majorly (hot!) 20:44, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks for your response. MastCell ^Talk 21:09, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey Majorly. Thanks for supporting my unsuccessful RFA this week under my old name, TeckWiz. I'm now known simply as User:R. I hope to keep helping and improving Wikipedia alongside you. --TeckWiz is now R ^Parlate Contribs _@(Let's go Yankees!) 23:29, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Would you like to make a co-nomination? ~  Magnus animum _{( aka Steptrip)} 01:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

No I really think they are a waste of time. Majorly (hot!) 08:53, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

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 06:49, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Please unblock this article. There is not an edit war taking place as you have asserted. Please see here. 163.167.129.124 14:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, something seems to have happened to the page formatting as a result of the block. Pictures are enormous and flagicons have disappeared. Can you please have a look..? 163.167.129.124 14:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

That's a problem Wikipedia is having with images at the moment. Majorly (hot!) 14:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Okay, cheers anyway. 163.167.129.124 14:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

There was no edit war, only a very minor wrangle over how best to format one particular reference, now amicably resolved. It could perhaps have been done more tidily, but there was never an edit war, as I think the anon will be happy to confirm. The article has had a large number of references added to it today as part of a push to get it to Good Article status, which has almost been achieved, but which is obviously impossible whilst protection is in place. The user requesting permission made no attempt to make his concerns known to us, but simply jumped to conclusions and rushed to ask for protection, which by my understanding should only be applied as a last resort. Please reconsider. David Underdown 14:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Unprotected then... Majorly (hot!) 14:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

In my defense, everything I saw pointed to nothing other than an edit war. One user would make an edit, the other would revert. Lather, rinse, repeat. There was also no discussion occuring on the article's talk page to indicate they were working through it. Even their minimal interaction on their user talk pages did not show they were coming to an agreement. I was given no reason to assume they were working through it until they left a message on my talk page after the page was protected. -- pIrish 14:51, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter. Perhaps you can discuss any problems now? Majorly (hot!) 15:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting it so quickly, any issue had literally just been resolved when the protection request was actioned. In hindsight it looked a mess, but WP:EW does suggest that some attempt should be made to defuse the issue before requesting protection. I'm perfectly happy to learn fromt eh experience. David Underdown 15:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Majorly and flame away... -- W.marsh 15:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

By worse, I meant the major changes implemented in Matt Britt and the other guy's (whose name I have forgotten) RfAs. I believe you only tried to remove the counter and the # signs (correct me if I'm wrong), which I do not consider nearly as disruptive as the other changes. · AndonicO ^Talk 16:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

That's OK then :) I didn't agree with the format of Matt Britt's RfA either... Majorly (hot!) 16:06, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for not being too clear initially (especially because the post was in a section accusing your changes). · AndonicO ^Talk 16:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

It's alright dude :) Majorly (hot!) 16:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The Ann Althouse page is in need of someone to step in and help mediate a dispute between Simon Dodd and myself. But it really isn't in need of protection, so I am curious why you protected it and if possible, I would like you to unprotect it.

Near as I can tell, there is little to almost no vandalism done to the page. There are edits that I think that are being made in good faith by people with differing viewpoints. I am not sure how protecting the page accomplishes much.

Was the page protected because I requested the mediation cabal to come and help us?

Or was the page protected for other reasons, and if so may I ask what those reasons are?

Thank you.

71.39.78.68 18:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

It should encourage you to talk to one another instead of editing back and forth. Majorly (hot!) 21:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Pardon my ignorance, but if the page is protected from editing, how does that encourage anyone to talk to one another? 130.76.64.16 23:52, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

It encourages you to leave the article and discuss it elsewhere, either its talk page, or your own. Majorly (hot!) 23:57, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The April 2007 issue of the WikiProject Biography 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 BetacommandBot 19:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The admin Yamla has locked his talk page. By the way - I don´t think he is the right dude for that article - or any other professional wrestling article he has locked beacuse of the same thing when even if he has a beef with an user - no edit has been identified as vandalism. Please grant my particular request for unprotection on this particular article - Verdict and Yamla have ruined for everyone to edit beacuse of their ridicolous dispute. Thanks - Notorious

This is an abusive sockpuppet of banned vandal, Verdict ( talk · contribs). -- Yamla 17:07, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Yay, thanks for keeping the Terrapist. Please do not nullify it. 129.2.151.202 06:53, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello Majorly. I noticed your reaction to my oppose. I am truly sorry that I caused disappointment. I cannot bear the feeling that I did not meet someone else's expectations. I am ashamed and I shall immediately review my decision by making a thorough scrutiny of this candidate before rejoining the discussion. Please forgive any stupid misstep that I might have made, this is not the best week of my life [1] and a few outside issues might be affecting my judgement. Hopefully not too often. Most sincere regards, Hús ö nd 21:48, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, and I'm sorry to see you're feeling stressed :( Majorly (hot!) 22:02, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not really sure whether i should leave it as neutral or change to support... Simply south 22:11, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

It really is up to you, but he's stated what he intends to do, so that's fine with me :) Majorly (hot!) 22:13, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I saw your interest on Wikipedia:Meetup/Manchester ... another is being organised at Wikipedia:Meetup/Manchester 2, hope you aren't too busy and can come! :) Majorly (hot!) 00:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I sadly have exams at this time, and then back into lessons. Ian¹³ /t 17:31, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Mwah! :) - Phaedriel - 00:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

High, Majorly. You may be interested in something I have just added to the Reference Desk discussion page, the item headed 'RFAs and the Big Zap.' You are a patient person; but even the most patient have limits! Regards. Clio the Muse 01:50, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Now moved to my talk page. Clio the Muse 02:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

How about a nice cup of tea and a sit down?

I'm sure you've already gathered that arguing with A.Z. is both pointless and exactly what he wants from you. Getting all hot and bothered doesn't help anyone. By responding, you're just becoming part of A.Z.'s performance art. TenOfAllTrades( talk) 01:54, 29 April 2007 (UTC)