→[[WP:BLPADMIN|Biography of living persons adminship]]: Thanks for letting me know. |
Wikipedia: where no good deed goes unpunished... |
||
Line 208: | Line 208: | ||
|} |
|} |
||
<small>You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Tools/Spamlist|''Signpost'' spamlist]]. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. [[User:Ralbot|Ralbot]] 05:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC) |
<small>You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Tools/Spamlist|''Signpost'' spamlist]]. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. [[User:Ralbot|Ralbot]] 05:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC) |
||
== Wikipedia: where no good deed goes unpunished... == |
|||
Hey WJB! |
|||
I've been poking around your edits and am ''shocked'' to discover you've only been here a couple of months. Your edits are very good and you are very reasonable in your interaction with others. Please [[Special:Emailuser/Redvers|shout me]] when, in due course, you feel a need for the keys for the [[WP:ADMIN|janitor's cupboard]]. If you continue to edit in this fashion, I'll be happy to nominate you for that particular [[WP:RfA|punishment]]. '''〈<font color="red">[[User:Redvers|RED]]</font><font color="red">[[User_talk:Redvers|VEЯS]]</font>〉''' 20:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:55, 6 February 2007
|
Block of British SunHey! THanks for bringing that to my attention. First off, it was my first block ever ad an admin. They only had 7 edits or so. I probably should have blocked indef but erred on the side of caution. Once I get into the swing of things, I am sure I will get better at it! Hope it was not too much of an issue. Thanks -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 00:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC) Your idea
ThanksThanks for that. It was the first time I had attempted such a thing. I was spurred on by the vandal who wiped out the entire page as I was reading it. --Candlewicke Consortiums Limited 16:26, 1 February 2007 (UTC) Co-ordinatorI am deeply flattered and honoured by your proposal, and am willing to take on the role. However, I am uncomfortable with the idea of just proclaiming me Co-ordinator, and would much rather hold an election, even I'm the only one to stand and it's just to provide a mandate. It might also be a good idea to have assistant co-ordinators for when the main one is unwell, away, or overwhelmed, but I'll leave that for you to consider. :) BTW, I just built this new userbox for our watchlist! Isn't it pretty? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 17:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Err, why? We're not speaking for them, so it doesn't really matter. AFAIK, anyway. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I had. Thanks for letting me know. :) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 08:23, 2 February 2007 (UTC) ThanksThanks for your help on the translation! I couldn't figure out how to put accents on the names that need them; could you do that or explain how? Thanks, Rachel88 21:59, 1 February 2007 (UTC) Thanks for the kind note of support. I agree with everything you wrote. The block is only for 1 week, so he does have another chance, but it is only one more. Best, Gwernol 02:27, 2 February 2007 (UTC) UsernameDiscussion TemplateSure. Go for it. Regards, --Asteriontalk 03:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC) Admin requestDear WJBscribe, I guess you have not seen my explanation about edit count. About "NPOV", I only said he is categorized as racist, which is true. I have seen that there was a long discussion about that and the conclusion was that he is now categorized as anti-semitic. Then I argued that we can use our exprience there to judge whether a statement by a politician may be considered racist view or not in Anti-Iranianism article. Non of my arguments reflect my personal POV about Ahmadinejad or anybody else. Sangak 16:51, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
WikiCookie.Thank you for the WikiCookie. Do you mind if I move it to my barnstars subpage? I'd like it to be there so I don't lose it when the talk page gets archived. Anyway, in future with RfC I'll inform the users I report there about the discussion. I'll also be careful about what names I report there as well. Don't worry about me, I'm not upset. At least the problems have been cleared up. Acalamari 21:38, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Christiane Desroches NoblecourtThank you for improving this article! :) – Alensha talk 23:44, 3 February 2007 (UTC) UsurpationThanks for that. I have thought before about asking to usurp that name. I didn't realise that it had become possible to do so now. Thanks again. :) Cheers, Sarah 00:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC) It helps to know some HTMLi'm finding the entire process a bit daunting. do they do this on purpose to keep us neophytes aaway? I just wanted to do a little translating. fortunately i worked in a Web start up and spent days staring at little characters on pages. i did try to go through the process of translating as laid out in the translation home page instructions but didn't get very far. do let me know what is the best way to get some hands on guidance (perhaps open a chat window at the same time as I start a new translation page) gratefully, Greg Liloleme 00:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC) Marriage (Judeo-Christian)Marriage that adheres to Jewish and Christian religious doctrine is separate and distinct from secular Marriage and Same sex marriage. If you consider that Marriage (Judeo-Christian) is a POV fork, then you should be prepared to issue an AfD against Same-sex marriage. If not, leave the article intact and go on editing elsewhere. Nkras 02:04, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
You stated "I will however make sure that Marriage (Judeo-Christian) includes all relevant information and that it isn't used to put forward the view that the only acceptable form of religious marriage is between a man and a woman". That is the case in marriages based upon Judeo-Christian tradition. You, nor any other editor, has any authority to enforce prior restraint. Nkras 02:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
My reading of WP:POVFORK shows this fits pretty clearly, considering both the circumstances of the article's birth and considering that there's nothing there that can't reasonably be covered in the main article, Marriage. I made my full argument at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marriage (Judeo-Christian). — coelacan talk — 09:44, 4 February 2007 (UTC) Hey, when you vote on articles like the one on Homosexualist, would you mind adding them to our deletion sorting subpage? I'm not a daily regular on AfD, so it would be helpful if you could add them as and when you see them. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:25, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you WJBHello Sir. Just wanted to let you know the problems on the "Anesthesia" article have started all over again with our detractors removing and editing to their personal opinions. (68.11.82.15) is their IP. Again,Sorry for the inconvienceMmackinnon 03:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC) WP:BLP againSomething very similar to your earlier suggestions is being discussed on Wikipedia_talk:Biographies_of_living_persons, in case you want to weigh in. Artw 04:24, 5 February 2007 (UTC) Re: Jayden54Bot suggestionI think you're right with your suggestion, and the bot will now check the discussion page to see if the user has already responded. Thanks for the input! Cheers, Jayden54 10:16, 5 February 2007 (UTC) Re: Amada templeI'm not exactly sure about how it was transported, either. I know that it was put on rails, but I'm not sure exactly how it was done... – Alensha talk 12:48, 5 February 2007 (UTC) Warning templatesI was guided in my use of Uw-own2 by Template_talk:Uw-own1#When_to_use_this_template which says, "If the user is expierienced, use Uw-own2." If (as you suggested on my talk page) it is uncivil to use templated warnings for experienced users, you might want to change the advice given there. Sdsds 17:15, 5 February 2007 (UTC) Advice on user warning templatesWhat advice would you give regarding the comment at Talk:Marriage#Close_relationships_and_Family_law_infoboxes, You are all utterly incompetent? Is a warning template inappropriate for this? If so, what kind of response do you think is appropriate? Thanks! Sdsds 18:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC) mehWell, besides the fact that what I said is utterly true, if tactless, I do not intend to ever stand for admin again, so I don't really care any more. I'm civil because I'm a decent person, I'm incivil because I'm not interested in being subtle to fuckwits who have no understanding that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not arena to play out their petty frustrations with life. Marriage is off my watchlist, case closed. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Please see new combined deletion debate. ~ trialsanderrors 20:13, 5 February 2007 (UTC) WP:LGBT/Jac review?So are we all ready? I suggest (since this was a challenge thing) we each review the other three articles on the talk pages and consense to the new ratings - any objections? The four articles are:
-- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 21:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC) List of bisexual peopleThanks for your support and timely insertion of a citation for Oscar Wilde on List of bisexual people. I noticed that you said “Every entry in this list must be reliably sourced per WP:BLP.” We should also have a WP:BDP guide. (Somewhat ironic remark—I’m sure you can figure it out.) ●DanMS 01:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
"Biography of Living Persons Administrators ("BLP Admins") carry out a specialized, narrowly tailored administrative role within Wikipedia." Please see WP:BLPADMIN to offer your thoughts on this proposal. CyberAnth 03:40, 6 February 2007 (UTC) He won't listen. He's convinced if he repeats something long enough about people will listen to him, but it's only a matter of time before an admin finds a reason to block him. He's proposing the destruction of thousands of hours of work for no good reason, as well as trying a power grab, and that is never going to go down well. If he doesn't change his ways it's going to reach the point where people will oppose an idea simply because he proposed it. And it'll be his own fault. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 09:47, 6 February 2007 (UTC) Hi WJBThanks for your comment on the marriage article - i'm taking this conversation over there if that's ok - i'll respond to your points... cheers, Petesmiles 03:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for February 5th, 2007.
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 05:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC) Wikipedia: where no good deed goes unpunished...Hey WJB! I've been poking around your edits and am shocked to discover you've only been here a couple of months. Your edits are very good and you are very reasonable in your interaction with others. Please shout me when, in due course, you feel a need for the keys for the janitor's cupboard. If you continue to edit in this fashion, I'll be happy to nominate you for that particular punishment. 〈REDVEЯS〉 20:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC) |