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 removed a gramatically incorrect and barely conherent sentence which was obviously propoganda and did not cite its sources. how can you claim it wasn't constructive? we, the representatives of the organisation, have been meaning to post an article referenced to third party sources and are in the process of compiling such an article, but it seems that wikipedia is not the right place for this. as your editorial policy seems to be justifying the spread of misinformation, should i suggest to the members of dawat e islami (numbering over 20 million world wide) that they should undertake a pro-active boycott against wikipedia - spamming your pages and servers?
given that Dawat —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.192.44 ( talk) 19:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Darren Wyn Rees's edits and reversions (below) appear to be in breach of both Wikipedia's rules and the UK libel laws. First he has inserted material which challenges the subject's sincerity in supporting the Burberry workers. That suggests defamation - and malicious defamation at that. Second, he is clearly using the article to make a personal attack on the subect. Third, he is removing valid source references from respected sources, eg the BBC, and replacing them with a source from an obscure blog. Looking at both the blog and Darren Wyn Rees's page on Wikipedia, he is either the the blogger - whom he sought to quote on this article - or closely allied to him/her. If he is the blogger, then replacing legitimate sourced references to cite a quote from his own blog is, to say the least, narcissistic. It is certainly not objective Penpych ( talk) 17:01, 1 January 2008 (UTC) Penpych ( talk) 17:03, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the help reverting this article. It's been the subject of anonymous vandalistic edits on many occasions. I'm beginning to wonder if it's worth carrying on editing the article. Thanks. -- Darren Wyn Rees ( talk) 19:40, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
I've restored your sysop bit, per your request and my comment here Raul654 ( talk) 22:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Nice to see you back. :) ~ Riana ⁂ 02:26, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Congratulations on being re-sysopped, Majorly. I'm am very glad you are an admin again. :) Rest assured that had you had to re-run through RfA, I would have very strongly supported you. Regards. Acalamari 04:24, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
For the record, I'm glad you've got the tools back, even though I think you should have gone through an RfA (which I believe would have passed). You were (and are) a good admin and there was nothing personal in my stance on this issue. Walton One 13:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey Majorly, I've withdrew my neutral on Aqwis's RFA and changed back to support. I hope you acknowledge that the (!)vote wasn't in bad faith, but I just felt there was a lack of experience in key areas: CSD, user interaction etc. But seen as though Aqwis hadn't done anything wrong, I felt it partially necessary to restore my original support. Apologies for any inconvenience. Best, Rt . 16:08, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know about the meetup, i'll try to attend if i can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pi ( talk • contribs) 17:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh I'm so glad you got your bit back, I didn't find out about your reconfirmation RfA until it was over, but thought you were treated very randomly! Hope yoou enjoy being an admin again, and that we in the UK can have a new meet.:) Merkinsmum 17:57, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
The Real Life Barnstar | ||
For your organisation of off-wiki events— Phoenix - wiki 21:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC) |
Loved this edit summary. I'm surprised that didn't happen sooner. :) Acalamari 19:39, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Majorly,
As you are an admin, I thought I'd ask for your help. There appear to be duplicate articles here ( Zaiarna) and here ( Lilia Zaiarna). Additionally, this appears to be the primary source for everything in her article: http://nwsa.mdc.edu/hs_artdep_-_music/faculty/faculty.html
Thanks, and happy new year! -- MosheA ( talk) 21:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I noticed you used this phrase with a bureaucrat action on another project. I'm wondering if this is terminology creep from enwiki to other projects, or if that other project has a similar standard of resysopping based on controversy or the lack thereof. Really just an idle curiosity on my part as I have been thinking about how ArbCom standards and procedures on enwiki vary from ArbComs from other projects. Btw, I'm glad you are back and active again. Cheers, NoSeptember 19:52, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Welcome back! Good to see you around again. Majorly ( talk) 21:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Pursuant to your offer at WP:BN, could you help me get set up with IRC? Since I've never used it before, I have no idea what to do, and need step-by-step instructions. Walton One 22:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Why did you delete Image talk:Missionary Sex Position1.png? That talk page was related to Image:Missionary_Sex_Position1.png. Sarsaparilla ( talk) 23:35, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
... we're just starting to agree on things a bit too often!! :) Pedro : Chat 10:53, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
I noticed you on IRC, and I was wondering if you could do me a favor. I am seeking authorization for use of {{ commons ok}} and I noticed that you are authorized. To get authorization requires an endorsement of someone currently on the list. Would you mind endorsing me, at Wikipedia:MTC#current request? I have done some image moves before (5 total, before deciding that there must be a better way), and I believe that I know the criteria well enough. Thanks for your time, and thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!-- Vox Rationis ( Talk | contribs) 00:29, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Good Humour | ||
For continually lightening up Wikipedia with your excellent sense of humour. Acalamari 21:19, 10 January 2008 (UTC) |
As well as all the other humour I've seen from you, I definitely laughed at this. :) Acalamari 21:19, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
It seems you've deleted thousands of image talk pages of images that are on Commons as "orphaned talk pages." The CSD criterion is explicit that image talk pages of Commons images are clearly not speediable. What's going on? -- MZMcBride ( talk) 04:17, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
[I wrote this earlier, but am just now submitting it]
Is there a consensus to delete orphan talk pages, or are you just deleting ones that do not have any useful discussion? (Coming here after clicking on the discussion tab at Image:Timeline of web browsers.svg which was blue at the time and not coming to a page, due to server cache update lag)
Also, you might want to switch the "LOGS" link on your user page to LOGS. Now, it is "hard coded" to link to en.wikipedia.org and if you are using the secure server or some other type of access, it makes you leave it. See Wikipedia:Fullurl and Google. This would make it a relative link instead of an absolute link. Jason McHuff ( talk) 08:56, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
-- Wizardman 02:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Occasionally it misses someone (I think AWB noted that 1 user was skipped, but didn't say who). See below. Ral315 ( talk) 15:04, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 1 | 2 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 2 | 7 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
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. Ral315 ( talk) 15:04, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Replied. Sorry for the late response, I've only been online sporadically today as I had a three hour exam this morning. :( Walton One 18:23, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Are you going to close it, or are you waiting to see if he wants it reopened? I didn't realize it was un-transcluded when I added my most recent comments. Avruch talk 22:27, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your support in my RFA of last week. If you ever need assistance, let me know.
Archtransit (
talk) 15:59, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
|
...for your support in my recently closed Request for Adminship. I am more than a bit stunned by the outcome, which appears to have finished at 146 supports, no opposes, and one abstention. I am particularly grateful to Keilana and Kingboyk for their recent encouragement, and most specifically to Pastordavid, for having seen fit to nominate me. I also want to make it very clear to everyone that I have no intentions of changing my name again, so the servers should be safe for a while.
In the event you ever believe that I would ever able to assist in the future, I would be honored if you were to contact me regarding the matter. I can't guarantee results, unfortunately, but I will do what I can. Thank you again.
By the way, I know the image isn't necessarily appropriate, but I am rather fond of it, and it at least reflects the degree of honor I feel at the result. And it's hard to go wrong with a Picture of the Year candidate.
Now, off to a few last tasks before starting work in earnest on the various templates I promised I'd work on.
John Carter ( talk) 17:07, 15 January 2008 (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. |
i removed a gramatically incorrect and barely conherent sentence which was obviously propoganda and did not cite its sources. how can you claim it wasn't constructive? we, the representatives of the organisation, have been meaning to post an article referenced to third party sources and are in the process of compiling such an article, but it seems that wikipedia is not the right place for this. as your editorial policy seems to be justifying the spread of misinformation, should i suggest to the members of dawat e islami (numbering over 20 million world wide) that they should undertake a pro-active boycott against wikipedia - spamming your pages and servers?
given that Dawat —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.192.44 ( talk) 19:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Darren Wyn Rees's edits and reversions (below) appear to be in breach of both Wikipedia's rules and the UK libel laws. First he has inserted material which challenges the subject's sincerity in supporting the Burberry workers. That suggests defamation - and malicious defamation at that. Second, he is clearly using the article to make a personal attack on the subect. Third, he is removing valid source references from respected sources, eg the BBC, and replacing them with a source from an obscure blog. Looking at both the blog and Darren Wyn Rees's page on Wikipedia, he is either the the blogger - whom he sought to quote on this article - or closely allied to him/her. If he is the blogger, then replacing legitimate sourced references to cite a quote from his own blog is, to say the least, narcissistic. It is certainly not objective Penpych ( talk) 17:01, 1 January 2008 (UTC) Penpych ( talk) 17:03, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the help reverting this article. It's been the subject of anonymous vandalistic edits on many occasions. I'm beginning to wonder if it's worth carrying on editing the article. Thanks. -- Darren Wyn Rees ( talk) 19:40, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
I've restored your sysop bit, per your request and my comment here Raul654 ( talk) 22:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Nice to see you back. :) ~ Riana ⁂ 02:26, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Congratulations on being re-sysopped, Majorly. I'm am very glad you are an admin again. :) Rest assured that had you had to re-run through RfA, I would have very strongly supported you. Regards. Acalamari 04:24, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
For the record, I'm glad you've got the tools back, even though I think you should have gone through an RfA (which I believe would have passed). You were (and are) a good admin and there was nothing personal in my stance on this issue. Walton One 13:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey Majorly, I've withdrew my neutral on Aqwis's RFA and changed back to support. I hope you acknowledge that the (!)vote wasn't in bad faith, but I just felt there was a lack of experience in key areas: CSD, user interaction etc. But seen as though Aqwis hadn't done anything wrong, I felt it partially necessary to restore my original support. Apologies for any inconvenience. Best, Rt . 16:08, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know about the meetup, i'll try to attend if i can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pi ( talk • contribs) 17:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh I'm so glad you got your bit back, I didn't find out about your reconfirmation RfA until it was over, but thought you were treated very randomly! Hope yoou enjoy being an admin again, and that we in the UK can have a new meet.:) Merkinsmum 17:57, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
The Real Life Barnstar | ||
For your organisation of off-wiki events— Phoenix - wiki 21:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC) |
Loved this edit summary. I'm surprised that didn't happen sooner. :) Acalamari 19:39, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Majorly,
As you are an admin, I thought I'd ask for your help. There appear to be duplicate articles here ( Zaiarna) and here ( Lilia Zaiarna). Additionally, this appears to be the primary source for everything in her article: http://nwsa.mdc.edu/hs_artdep_-_music/faculty/faculty.html
Thanks, and happy new year! -- MosheA ( talk) 21:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I noticed you used this phrase with a bureaucrat action on another project. I'm wondering if this is terminology creep from enwiki to other projects, or if that other project has a similar standard of resysopping based on controversy or the lack thereof. Really just an idle curiosity on my part as I have been thinking about how ArbCom standards and procedures on enwiki vary from ArbComs from other projects. Btw, I'm glad you are back and active again. Cheers, NoSeptember 19:52, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Welcome back! Good to see you around again. Majorly ( talk) 21:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Pursuant to your offer at WP:BN, could you help me get set up with IRC? Since I've never used it before, I have no idea what to do, and need step-by-step instructions. Walton One 22:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Why did you delete Image talk:Missionary Sex Position1.png? That talk page was related to Image:Missionary_Sex_Position1.png. Sarsaparilla ( talk) 23:35, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
... we're just starting to agree on things a bit too often!! :) Pedro : Chat 10:53, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
I noticed you on IRC, and I was wondering if you could do me a favor. I am seeking authorization for use of {{ commons ok}} and I noticed that you are authorized. To get authorization requires an endorsement of someone currently on the list. Would you mind endorsing me, at Wikipedia:MTC#current request? I have done some image moves before (5 total, before deciding that there must be a better way), and I believe that I know the criteria well enough. Thanks for your time, and thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!-- Vox Rationis ( Talk | contribs) 00:29, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Good Humour | ||
For continually lightening up Wikipedia with your excellent sense of humour. Acalamari 21:19, 10 January 2008 (UTC) |
As well as all the other humour I've seen from you, I definitely laughed at this. :) Acalamari 21:19, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
It seems you've deleted thousands of image talk pages of images that are on Commons as "orphaned talk pages." The CSD criterion is explicit that image talk pages of Commons images are clearly not speediable. What's going on? -- MZMcBride ( talk) 04:17, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
[I wrote this earlier, but am just now submitting it]
Is there a consensus to delete orphan talk pages, or are you just deleting ones that do not have any useful discussion? (Coming here after clicking on the discussion tab at Image:Timeline of web browsers.svg which was blue at the time and not coming to a page, due to server cache update lag)
Also, you might want to switch the "LOGS" link on your user page to LOGS. Now, it is "hard coded" to link to en.wikipedia.org and if you are using the secure server or some other type of access, it makes you leave it. See Wikipedia:Fullurl and Google. This would make it a relative link instead of an absolute link. Jason McHuff ( talk) 08:56, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
-- Wizardman 02:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Occasionally it misses someone (I think AWB noted that 1 user was skipped, but didn't say who). See below. Ral315 ( talk) 15:04, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 1 | 2 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 2 | 7 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
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. Ral315 ( talk) 15:04, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Replied. Sorry for the late response, I've only been online sporadically today as I had a three hour exam this morning. :( Walton One 18:23, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Are you going to close it, or are you waiting to see if he wants it reopened? I didn't realize it was un-transcluded when I added my most recent comments. Avruch talk 22:27, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your support in my RFA of last week. If you ever need assistance, let me know.
Archtransit (
talk) 15:59, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
|
...for your support in my recently closed Request for Adminship. I am more than a bit stunned by the outcome, which appears to have finished at 146 supports, no opposes, and one abstention. I am particularly grateful to Keilana and Kingboyk for their recent encouragement, and most specifically to Pastordavid, for having seen fit to nominate me. I also want to make it very clear to everyone that I have no intentions of changing my name again, so the servers should be safe for a while.
In the event you ever believe that I would ever able to assist in the future, I would be honored if you were to contact me regarding the matter. I can't guarantee results, unfortunately, but I will do what I can. Thank you again.
By the way, I know the image isn't necessarily appropriate, but I am rather fond of it, and it at least reflects the degree of honor I feel at the result. And it's hard to go wrong with a Picture of the Year candidate.
Now, off to a few last tasks before starting work in earnest on the various templates I promised I'd work on.
John Carter ( talk) 17:07, 15 January 2008 (UTC)