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.

{{subst:Horribly ugly RfA thanks}} -- Credit Cruncher ( talk) 19:28, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome, though I didn't support it. Majorly talk 19:29, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

You did, 36 times... Credit Cruncher ( talk) 19:37, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

OK OK. I also opposed you. Majorly talk 19:38, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

← For those who are wondering — Ched :  ?  23:47, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for looking after my user page. That guy hit all the arb pages. No doubt some Scientologist on a crusade. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

...for this. I guess I'll have to learn French to adequately fight vandalism :-\ See ya 'round Tide rolls 15:32, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the space pen. I will try to use it wisely. :-) Finetooth ( talk) 20:17, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 11:47, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Credit Cruncher's RfA exhibited a confused response, and has been placed on hold until such time as the bureaucrats can come to a reasonable and measured consensus. We appreciate your patience and your understanding as we implement wikipedia policies and guidelines in this area. Thank you. -- Avi ( talk) 18:20, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

It has been my experience that Lar usually prefers that he does his own clerking of his page; you may receive a (polite, of course) note from him saying so - if the ip is really adamant in putting that note up, it may just a well be that it stays this time. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 21:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Majorly for your support and help at my RfA. I know you pull a lot of weight around here, and I really appreciate your help and support. It honestly meant a LOT to me. Thanks.  ;) — Ched :  ?  20:43, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Pull a lot of weight? No, but he does drag a lot of weight behind him here. As do I, to be fair. ;-) -- Malleus Fatuorum 22:15, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi, User:Majorly, I have just filed a report on this user at WP:ABUSE. I am attempting to attack the problem of this user's constant IP-based recidivism by going to the source of the problem. I noticed that you had had some previous interactions with this vandal and I wanted to offer you the chance to participate in the proceedings. If you would like to add any specific comments, please do so in the appropriate section at the bottom of the report. The report can be found here. Thanks for all the help you've been so far. - Thibbs ( talk) 16:06, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

That little jibe at Timmeh's RFA was frankly totally pathetic Majorly. You come up with a load of well meaning bollocks about peeople being human in the support section, then when I reflect I'm less than perfect so abstain rather than oppose the RFA you give me some shit over it. You utter hypocrite. And I used to think you ought to be an admin again. Dear me, I was wrong there. Pedro :  Chat  22:06, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, your antics at WP:BN lately really haven't put you in a good light, have they? If you're no better than Timmeh is, why should you be allowed to continue adminship? It's simply not fair. I think it is clear the only hypocrite here is you. I am not the one opposing (or neutralling, whatever) for not meeting criteria that I don't even meet. He said he was offended? So the hell what. Do you really think that has anything to do with adminship? I'd have thought you would have known. And your remarks about me being an admin are totally irrelevant, but confirm my thoughts about you too. Majorly talk 22:17, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

And please don't reply to this either, I really can't be bothered to argue about something so utterly pointless. There's articles to work on. Majorly talk 22:21, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Poor effort Majorly. "It's simply not fair" - hmmmm..... My "antics" at BN "haven't put me in a good light" - that's the kind of rubbish I expect from games players who work the sad little wiki-career ladder - when we have poeple using closed mailing lists to make major decisions regarding this site? You think this is some game? That I'm doing it for a laugh? That I have nothing better to do with my time? That I don't make those comments because I believe they matter, and that someone needs to stand up and make them on occasion? As for your "thoughts" about me? When I've bent over backwards to support you numerous times? Well that's up to you mate. I didn't do it for gratitude - I did it because it was the right thing to do. You, sir, need to sort yourself out. I at least have the common decency to recognise when I might be wrong. You apparently do not. I'm going to bed. Pedro :  Chat  22:29, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry - I replied and got ec's by you. Pedro :  Chat  22:29, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Goodnight. Majorly talk 22:31, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

"Mind the bed bug's don't bite" as my mother says :) Pedro :  Chat  22:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 03:01, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

First you managed Stockport's first GA, and now its first FA. In case you hadn't noticed, Cheadle Hulme just got promoted :-) Great work. Nev1 ( talk) 22:53, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations! -- Malleus Fatuorum 22:53, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

It's a great article. Nice one. Acalamari 23:03, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm fairly amazed at how smoothly it went, but happy all the same. Thanks Nev1 and Malleus for your really helpful work on it too, it wouldn't have passed first time had I ignored your advice. Majorly talk 23:29, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Just stopping by to congratulate you on your efforts; it's heartening to see someone who has been around for so long combat namespace drift—and, if you'll forgive my saying so—for someone with such an illustrious past as yourself to confound expectations. I hope you keep up the great work. Mahalo,  Skomorokh  17:02, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 02:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

The Greater Manchester WikiProject Newsletter

The WikiProject Greater Manchester Newsletter Issue XVII - July 2009 June issue Got any suggestions? — Add them here Project News Promoted articles: Cheadle Hulme is a suburb of Stockport that formed from several small hamlets, rather than growing around a church which was usual for medieval villages, although there is evidence of activity dating back to the Bronze Age. The Cheadle Hulme railway station was opened in 1845 and was the second railway station in the settlement. June's DYK?: Did you know that after the collapse of the Broughton Suspension Bridge in 1831, the British military introduced the order to "break step" when soldiers were crossing a bridge? Featured on the Did you know? section on 6 June 2009. Other news: Recently Salford was turned into a disambiguation page with the article on the settlement moved to Salford, Greater Manchester. This will hopefully make it clearer to the reader that Salford, Greater Manchester, and the City of Salford are not the same thing. Just remember to specify which Salford next time you're adding a wikilink to an article! Although it wasn't technically this month, list of people from Wigan was created on 2 July, and any help populating the list with sourced names would be great. It's one of nine such list for the boroughs in Greater Manchester (Bury doesn't have a list yet) and they all need populating. There is currently a discussion on our project's importance scale which has been adopted by WP:YORKS, and what it should cover. Please feel free to join in, the more people are involved the better! Remember to be careful about editors claiming places are still in Lancashire, today I had to revert someone insisting that Leigh isn't in Greater Manchester and recently the Friends of Real Lancashire voiced their dislike of the Lancashire article so this issue isn't going to go away. Just remember that the project watchlist can help us catch vandalism and is worth checking from time to time. WT:GM: The project's talk page is a forum for discussion and to keep up to date with the latest project developments and initiatives put it on your watchlist! Recently there have been discussions on articles to be deleted, the congestion charge, how to get members involved and working together, and plenty of other stuff. Aims Our extant short-term project aims: Obtain GA status for Salford. Obtain GA status for Stockport Obtain GA status for Kersal Moor. Obtain GA status for Manchester city centre. Obtain GA status for Congestion charging in Greater Manchester and Greater Manchester Transport Innovation Fund (TiF). Get a lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county. Recently another aim was added: bringing Stockport to GA standard. It's currently C-class and has some well developed sections. It will be a difficult task, but worthwhile considering it's Greater Manchester's third largest settlement. Also, the importance of bringing Salford to GA has been emphasised; it's currently B-class and should be the easiest of our aims to accomplish, although it's been there for a long time. Let's see if we can put this one to rest soon. Member News No new members joined the project in June and there are 45 active members of WikiProject Greater Manchester (with a further 20 members inactive since 1 January 2009). The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Manchester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}. The project compared In June, WP:LON has a massive upsurge in the number of FAs, with some great work by Iridescent in promoting a swathe of bridge articles to FA. WP:YORKS has over taken WP:GM in terms of GAs, and for the first time since June 2008 (when WP:LON had the lead), WP:GM is not the project with most GAs. In June, the Derwent Valley Mills became a GA and is WP:DERBY's first GA although there are more likely candidates in the pipeline. WP:CHES continues to perform strongly considering it has few active editors, and in June John Douglas (architect) was promoted to FA and there is currently a FLC. In June, there was discussion at WT:MERSEY about how to generate more audited content (ie: GAs and FAs) and since then one article has been promoted to GA, there is one GAC and other articles being prepared for GAC.   GTRM LOND YORK MRSY CHES DERB FA 39 32 24 8 5 0 A 0 1 0 0 1 0 GA 44 32 45 12 23 1 B 106 230 191 32 88 37 C 115 59 246 108 71 71 Start 740 1823 2211 605 528 485 Stub 771 1236 3688 498 454 707 List 52 80 132 23 29 25 Unassessed 0 2825 1 305 0 1 Total 1867 6318 6538 1591 1199 1327 Reminders... Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images. Articles needing attention Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion and the list of articles needing cleanup are in permanent need of attention. Written by Nev1, based on a template by Jza84 | Single-Page View Would you like to write the next newsletter for WP:GM?? Please nominate yourself at WT:GM! New editors are always welcome!

Nev1 ( talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for picking up on my deliberate typo designed to make sure people are reading ;-) Nev1 ( talk) 19:14, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey there :-)

I noticed that you've edited Marco Polo quite a lot, and that article is being worked on via IRC, as the current spotlight project. Please come to the IRC channel and help us to improve it :-) We're trying to get the 'spotlight' thing working again. Cheers!  Chzz   ►  22:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Since you're working on a wikipedia article, why not discuss it on the article page? That way everyone interested or associated with the article is able to participate in improving it without feeling disenfranchised or excluded if they are not on IRC. Nev1 ( talk) 23:13, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

It's easier and faster to discuss things in real time, in my experience. I often ask for help on articles over IRC. And since IRC is so incredibly easy to setup and use, I don't think anyone is going to be excluded. Majorly talk 23:08, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

To Chzz: most, if not all my edits to Marco Polo are reversions, not adding actual content. Majorly talk 23:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Majorly - fair enough; I admit I 'spammed' people based upon stats checks without examining edits themselves - well, that's not entirely true; mostly I checked validity, but in your case - as I 'knew you' a bit from IRC - I left the note anyway.

Nev1, I am concerned about any disenfranchisement, and therefore encourage all spotlight contributors to make entensive use of the talk page to document the reasoning and to discuss tricky issues; in addition, all changes can of course be reverted or altered by any editor. It is merely a mechanism for timely discussion and 'putting our heads together' with a view to improve the article, and does not exclude other contributors in any way; check the talk page of Marco Polo at the moment, for example. We aim to encourage any improvements. In addition, anyone capable of accessing Wikipedia is able to access IRC.  Chzz   ►  18:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot ( talk) at 03:00, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

But I wanted to make sure you saw this discussion--- Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:31, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

The idea of myself, Peter Damian, Malleus and Friday being among "Majorly's too-ardent followers" is a – erm – unique perspective on events. –  iridescent 2 15:34, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

You three are such sheep.--- Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 15:35, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Great. Well I long stopped watching that page. I only went neutral because my opposes in the past have been misconstrued as retaliation - check out my RFA for examples of that. So to be on the safe side, so people didn't get the chance to attack and bully me about their misinterpretation, I went neutral, bringing up the concerns anyway but not taking a position. I really couldn't care less if Pastor Theo is an admin, but thought I'd let everyone else deal with the issue I brought up. Majorly talk 16:48, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I think it was a wise move on your part, Majorly. The only reason I decided to vote neutral rather than oppose was because Pastor Theo stated that he will mainly be involved in deletions etc and so should not be touching the block button; had that not been the case I would have opposed. I hope that he won't use the button at all. Unfortunately my perception that he is too touchy about what is acceptable was not helped by his comment on WT:RfA regarding the opposes after he passed. Nev1 ( talk) 16:55, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

And this is just a general note: I wish people would stop using me in examples to make a point about something. I wish people would stop making a point when we happen to agree on something, like it's the most amazing thing ever. I'm tired of it. I wish people would stop bringing up the past and move on. The only reason I am still here is... I don't know why, I just am. I would have left some time ago if I could. I'm slowly but surely starting to tire of this place, and the people in it's antics. I wish people would leave me alone and stop making me out to be some horrible bad person. Majorly talk 16:56, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Marjorly, my comment regarding you at the BNI was unnecessary, uncalled for, and downright rude and I regret having made it, I have struck it, and hope that helps, sorry. ( Off2riorob ( talk) 23:05, 11 July 2009 (UTC))

Majorly, see this diff. AdjustShift ( talk) 00:29, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I've removed that page from my list. I've simply lost interest in what is simply going to be a circular argument of disagreement. It's frankly unbearable. Majorly talk 00:33, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

See my talk page. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 19:11, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

On July 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Albert Midlane, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page ( here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wizardman 18:00, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

hi Majorly, noticed your query to Magnus Manske re the ODNB. What exactly did you have in mind? I have a file of ODNB bios, with (from recollection) 16K or so of them matched to wikipages. Dsp13 ( talk) 21:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Basically, articles on the ODNB that have no article here. There seems to be several (thousand) missing... he emailed me the relevant pages. The one above is such an example, which I created. Majorly talk 16:14, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 11:37, 28 July 2009 (UTC)