Wackymacs |
My RfA |
||
Line 123: | Line 123: | ||
I must say I don't get your vote on Wackymacs' RFA. He uses edit summaries about 60% of the time, therefore... he'll abuse the tools? I understand not lending your support for those, but really, is opposing him necessary? I'm not sending this message to Xoloz as his opposition makes a lot more sense, but edit summary percentage seems to have absolutely no connection to being an admin, other than it may be understandable that you want admins to be of the highest quality, but then again, we really need as many as we can get, provided they don't abuse them, and as far as I know, sub-70 edit summaries doesn't indicate abuse. [[User:Redwolf24|<font color="darkblue">R</font>]][[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:Redwolf24|<font color="darkblue">dwolf24</font>]] ([[User talk:Redwolf24|talk]]) 04:59, 1 November 2005 (UTC) |
I must say I don't get your vote on Wackymacs' RFA. He uses edit summaries about 60% of the time, therefore... he'll abuse the tools? I understand not lending your support for those, but really, is opposing him necessary? I'm not sending this message to Xoloz as his opposition makes a lot more sense, but edit summary percentage seems to have absolutely no connection to being an admin, other than it may be understandable that you want admins to be of the highest quality, but then again, we really need as many as we can get, provided they don't abuse them, and as far as I know, sub-70 edit summaries doesn't indicate abuse. [[User:Redwolf24|<font color="darkblue">R</font>]][[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:Redwolf24|<font color="darkblue">dwolf24</font>]] ([[User talk:Redwolf24|talk]]) 04:59, 1 November 2005 (UTC) |
||
== My RfA == |
|||
I would appreciate it if you reconsider your vote at my RfA, based on concerns of the reason for your Oppose. [[WP:Point]] is in suspect, as one Supporter has noted. Another person has also voted Neutral with the same reason as yours. Please reconsider, and thanks! — [[User:Wackymacs|Wackymacs]] 06:54, 1 November 2005 (UTC) |
Revision as of 06:54, 1 November 2005
Please refrain from...
- thanking me for an RFA I voted on
- cruel and unusual punishment
- involvement in private conversations - if you aren't involved in the article or topic in question - dont jump in, start a new section
- personal attacks towards any user
Administrative responsibilities
What are the responsibilities of an admin? Im not sure I understand what they exactly can and cannot do?--Zereshk 13:20, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, I would be interested. Yet I must admit that I have clashed at times, with two editors in particular (Zora, and Roozbeh). So that may be brought up, if I'm put to vote. However, I do stand firmly on my ground and what I did. But that does not matter really, because I'm more interested in contributing, rather then housekeeping. It's why Im here. But being an admin would be beneficial, since we hardly have any admins watching over Iranian, Persian, Shia, Farsi, and related pages. So, I guess I could help there. But my interests are vastly more contributory in nature.--Zereshk 17:56, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
I'd much rather not be an admin, than have people dig out dirt from my past and lie about it, just as a way of getting back at me. I am a scholar and do not have time for such cheap fights. And how sad that "using the wiki code properly", is more important than actually contributing to the content. I really appreciate your suggesting me.
Thanx again.--Zereshk 02:25, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
Johntex
- I'm not sure how Blackcap came to that conclusion - but your oppose vote on Johntex's RFA seems somewhat pointless...he has like 69 support votes...without putting a reason, voting oppose is not gonna stop his rfa... freestylefrappe 02:50, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- I'm supporting Johntex. The Pikachu image is me being a snarky bastard, and is in response to Boothy, not a vote. Ëvilphoenix Burn! 02:54, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- From Snark:Snark also refers to a style of speech/writing that could loosely be described as "snidely derisive"; hence, 'snarkish', 'snarky', 'to snark at somebody'. (According to The Urban Dictionary, snark is a contraction of "snide remark".) Ëvilphoenix Burn! 03:00, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- I'm supporting Johntex. The Pikachu image is me being a snarky bastard, and is in response to Boothy, not a vote. Ëvilphoenix Burn! 02:54, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Tomf688 RFA vote
I'm trying to make sure that I take the time to thank everyone who voted in my RfA, and verify that they don't have any concerns over my experience, neutrality, etc. If you have a problem, please drop a line on my talk page and I will answer it as best as I can. Again, thank you. --tomf688{talk} 14:37, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
CBW RfA
Thanks for your vote on my RfA. If you have any concerns over my actions please let me know. CambridgeBayWeather 23:28, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Vandalism
Hey freestyle. 210.193.223.65 (talk · contribs) is repeatedly vandalizing the History of Islam article. Please block him/her, they have been warned many times. Thanks --a.n.o.n.y.m t 23:59, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks. Yes I will notify. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 00:03, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
No hard feelings?
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/19/Peace_dove.gif/70px-Peace_dove.gif)
Dear Freestyle, now that the issue over which we confronted is closed, I hope we can get over it and put the past behind us. I hope my motives were clear to you enough to understand them, as I also understood yours. I wish to congratulate you on your newly attained position, and I'm sure it'll be only for good to us all. I already offered you my friendship, and I'd be honored if you decide to accept it. Let's move on; life is too short and I don't want anyone to keep hard feelings when it's so easy to have peace between us. Sounds good to you?
Have a nice day, Shauri smile! 00:39, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you very much for you know what. I know we've had our small differences. :) --a.n.o.n.y.m t 02:41, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
Re: OS
Yes, I know. It's getting tiresome and it has been going on all day. Please check his contribs and the edit history of the rfa. It will keep you updated on more such attacks. Also an arbitration has been started by him and another against SlimVirgin. Thanks. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 01:24, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
- Okay he is making attacks against me right here [1]. This is after your warning to him. Please remove this attack too. Thanks, --a.n.o.n.y.m t 01:35, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. :)--a.n.o.n.y.m t 01:46, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
- Oh can you please revert his changes on the rfa page since it is a personal attack. Thanks --a.n.o.n.y.m t 01:47, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
- Btw, you probably want to read the comment he left for you on his talk page. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 01:52, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Strap-on dildo comment?
I would like to address any concerns you had, but I'm not sure which strap-on dildo comment you're referring to? Thanks in advance, Bushytails 01:58, 25 October 2005 (UTC).
I dont know whats happening, but somebody is trying to vandalise the page and submitted it for deletion! I removed the tag but then later on realised that there is a very active discussion going on here to decide whether the article should be deleted or not! I need some help! --Deepak|वार्ता 02:53, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Titoxd's RfA
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c0/Close_up_yellow_rose.jpg/90px-Close_up_yellow_rose.jpg)
Thank you for supporting me in my RfA. I never thought I would get so much support! Thanks to your help, my nomination was the 10th most supported RfA in Wikipedia history. Now, please keep an eye out on me while I learn the new tools, ok? Thanks again! Titoxd(?!?) 17:54, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
RFA nom
I'll gladly accept, thank you. This ought be a fairly efficient way to find out how many people I've managed to annoy at one time or another, I imagine... I'll complete the on-form acceptance and questions either this evening or tomorrow (or so), depending on brain-power. Alai 22:16, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Hrm. Just noticed an oddity with this: your message on my talk page is signed and dated as "13 October 2005". Transclusion problem? Alai 23:34, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- OK, accepted, and questions answered. Would you care to 'list'? Thanks again. Alai 01:46, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
The Muslim Guild
I thought you might be interested in joining The Muslim Guild.--JuanMuslim 06:38, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Great to have you on-board. :) --a.n.o.n.y.m t 20:57, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
Thank you for your vote on my RFA
Now that the voting has officially closed, I would like to thank you very much for supporting my candidacy for adminstrator and as of 18:36, 28 October 2005 (UTC) I am an administrator. I will make sure to use the additional power judiciously and I welcome any comments you may have. --Reflex Reaction 19:00, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
RfA
I am not strongly opposing that he request comments from editors that choosed not to support his RfA, however I sure didn't appriciate the way he did it. Another thing that I don't think is fair, is that he accuse the candidate of doing something "bad" by allegedly trying to gather opposition against him. At the same time he, himself, leave this comment at BYT's talkpage: [2] which is most likely an attempt to do just that... -- Karl Meier 21:34, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Re: Your message - Exactly and that is what I tried to explain to Karl. I did that for people who voted oppose but had no idea what was going on and failed to comment. However, unlike Babajobu's action, going around and asking user's who vote in support to change their votes on another person's rfa (mine) is very bad faith. Thanks and see Wikipedia talk:Requests_for_adminship/Babajobu. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 21:39, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
Tomf688's RfA
Well, it seems I'm now an administrator. I wanted to thank you for your vote of confidence, and, as always, feel free to drop me a line at any time. --tomf688{talk} 01:05, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
You put a PoV flag on this page but didn't explain why. Can you identify the issues at Talk:Arthur Henderson? TIA FRS 23:05, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
XYZ
From: Title: The lives and times of the chief justices of the Supreme court of the United States. By Henry Flanders. Author: Flanders, Henry, 1826-1911. Collection: Making of America Books
"Col. Pickering, the Secretary of State, had substituted the initials X. Y. Z. XYZ Affair for the names of M. Hottinguer, M. Bellamy, and M. Hautval, in consequence of a promise by the Envoys that they should, in no event, be made public. "
I copied a huge section into: User:Jengod/John_Marshall/Flanders before I realized I was never going to boil down that much material. :) jengod 04:34, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
- I googled them, and Y! has it too. I'll put their full names in the article: http://education.yahoo.com/reference/encyclopedia/entry/XYZAffair
I suspect it was something of an open secret. All the insiders knew the deal, but the general public was kept in the dark. jengod 21:45, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for contribution at 29 October 2005 New Delhi bombings. |
Comment?
What's your comment on this page [3] about? Are you referring to reverts that occurred a month ago? I also don't see vandalism. Please clarify. Thanks --a.n.o.n.y.m t 00:48, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
RfA voting
I must say I don't get your vote on Wackymacs' RFA. He uses edit summaries about 60% of the time, therefore... he'll abuse the tools? I understand not lending your support for those, but really, is opposing him necessary? I'm not sending this message to Xoloz as his opposition makes a lot more sense, but edit summary percentage seems to have absolutely no connection to being an admin, other than it may be understandable that you want admins to be of the highest quality, but then again, we really need as many as we can get, provided they don't abuse them, and as far as I know, sub-70 edit summaries doesn't indicate abuse. Redwolf24 (talk) 04:59, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
My RfA
I would appreciate it if you reconsider your vote at my RfA, based on concerns of the reason for your Oppose. WP:Point is in suspect, as one Supporter has noted. Another person has also voted Neutral with the same reason as yours. Please reconsider, and thanks! — Wackymacs 06:54, 1 November 2005 (UTC)