User talk:Wisdom89/Archive 5

Request for help

Since I joined wikipedia a few months ago, there's been an editor who has constantly made sarcastic comments about everything I've done, repeatedly (without evidence and without responding to my request about what kind of evidence would make him go away) accused me of being associated with various companies, websites, and other users. How do I get this guy off my back? He's stalking me through everything I do and annoying the hell out of me. Please see my talk page to see who I'm talking about; I don't want this to trigger him any further, it's driving me nuts. Camera123456 (talk) 00:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

RfA

Is it too early to nominate you for adminship? I'll gladly nominate you... if you want, that is.--TBC!?! 07:19, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Never mind, it looks like your last RfA was a month ago. In the future perhaps?--TBC!?! 07:21, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

My RfB

I wanted to personally thank you, Wisdom, for your participation in my recent RfB. I have heard the community's voice that they require more of a presence at RfA's of prospective bureaucrats, and I will do my best over the near future to demonstrate such a presence and allow the community to see my philosophy and practices in action. I am thankful and appreciative that in general, the community feels that I am worthy of the trust it requires of its bureaucrats, and I hope to continue to behave in a way that maintains your trust in me and my actions. I hope that over the near future, you will become comfortable and satisfied with my understanding of the particulars and subtleties inherent in the RfA process, and that I may be able to count on your support when I decide to once again undergo an RfB. If you have any suggestions, comments, or constructive criticisms, please let me know via talkpage or e-mail. Thank you again. PS. That was more like common knowledge at WT:RFA so self-published sources were acceptable -- Avi (talk) 17:27, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Pedro/Admin Coaching

May be 48 hours before I can review properly. But it shall be done sir !! Pedro :  Chat  23:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Awesome, take your time man : ) Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 23:26, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Done - remember to re-read WP:SNOW per the above conversation though! Pedro :  Chat  10:32, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

So when do I get to steal Pedro's nom? (*evil laugh*) dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 07:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Signature

Howdy. Sorry to be persnickety, but I was wondering if you would consider changing your signature to only include a single subscript level? Using the double-subscript makes the leading inconsistent after all your comments, which is aesthetically frustrating to typography nuts (like me ;) and slightly confusing. (further semi-related info (more than necessary) at MediaWiki talk:Common.css#line-spacing with sub & sup, if you're curious :) Thanks. -- Quiddity (talk) 20:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I'm a little confused - I've looked at the spacing after numerous comments I've made, and haven't noticed any affect on the leading. Can you specifically show me where? Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 20:44, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

No prob. See Image:Wikipedia-signature-error-demo.png taken from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of films (sub/sup varies with browser/font choice, so may appear better or worse for different systems). -- Quiddity (talk) 21:00, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments on my RfA

I want to thank you for your comments on my RfA. I do feel that I gave the best possible answers to the questions based on the experience I have available, but perhaps the vagueness of my answers is a good indicator that my experience is not yet extensive enough. Thanks--you've given me a high standard to strive for, whether or not I decide to pursue adminship again at a later time. Justin Eiler (talk) 05:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

That's the attitude that I'd like to hear coming from a prospective admin. If you realize there are areas you need to work on, whether it be Wikipolicy, participation in other wikispaces, or just plain communication (such as answers to questions), that's a great start. Don't let the RfA process discourage you though. I've gone through two failed self-nominations so far, so I know that it can be frustrating. Just remember that everyone is trying to be constructive with their comments. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 05:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Irredentism

I ask you further input for page Irredentism. I think such comment unaccpetable[1] and this user keep removing sopurced information [2]--Dacy69 (talk) 18:45, 10 March 2008 (UTC) this user has been canvasing to various editors. and I have explained my reasoning to him and also to the other admin, he is cleatrly trying to canvas. please see talk and content., not editor. ZTTHANKS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.68.31.146 (talk) 18:09, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

You Found It!

You found my Secret Page, I think. Did you give yourself my barnstar for finding it because I didn't see it with the rest of your barnstars. If you don't know how to put it on my page, just ask me to put it on your talk page/userpage. Also, can you please sign my guestbook? It is on my userpage1.--RyRy5 (talk) 01:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

PROD/AfD collission

Whoops! I think I loaded the page, delayed and then hit AfD and in the interim, you PRODed it, sorry about that! TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 05:46, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem, overlapping like that happens all the time! : ) Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 05:48, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Zedla RFA

Just want to drop a quick note saying thank you for your support and comments in my RfA. I definitely have the points about wiki namespace in mind going forward. Regards – Zedla (talk) 08:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Good luck Zedla, and you are absolutely welcome! I look forward to your good deeds. Ciao! Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 21:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Greetings

I appreciate your view of things, as we are all allowed that, and I additionally definitely appreciate the bands you like. Howerver, I warn you to stop accusing me of things. You have thrice accused me of breaking two different wikipedia policies. Neither of which I have broken or violated in the least. I responded on the AfD page to your allegations and I urge you to not rush to judgement and accuse just anyone of breaking policy. I did not violate WP:CANVASS or WP:POINT in any way. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 21:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate you coming to my talk page and contacting me civilly. However, we are going to have to agree to disagree here. I usually assume good faith, I honestly do. But, twice I noticed you leaving a message on another metal fan's talk page soliciting their commentary on the AfD discussion. To me, that's borderline/pretty much WP:CANVASS. Secondly, by making the same comments several times repeatedly during a discussion, you are dancing on the the line of WP:POINT. I understand that you feel strongly about your nomination - that's fine. You have good reasons, and I respect that. However, there really is no reason to draw attention to your point again with a "important notice message. That's all I was getting at. Cheers and happy editing dude. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 21:35, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

And I appreciate your response. I still did not violate WP:CANVASS. Show me an instance, back up what you say. I have already had a couple people on my talk page say I was not violating WP:CANVASS, including an admin (who said my edits were neutral). Yes I contacted metal fans. And? It's a metal article, yes? Plus I should point out that I in no way told those users how to vote. In fact most of them voted against me. Yes, I do contact users that are closer to me or that I have worked with in the past to help me with things, but I also know they have their own minds and will vote the way they want and I don't encourage them to vote one way or the other. Besides, even if I think they will vote with me, they may bring some interesting arguments to the table or lay out some new info that was unknown beforehand. I also understand what you are saying about WP:POINT and I admit my edits on that AfD page are a bit much, but I still did not break any rule on WP:POINT. I read the whole page. You cannot continually make arugments if policy is against you. Well in this case I did cite policies. However, I understand all that you said, I just wanted you to know to watch out before rushing to judgement and accusing people of breaking policy. Good luck and happy editing to you, too. I'm sure we will run into each other again. I've seen some of your edits (all good) and though i may disagree with you on this issue it is nothing against you as an editor or anything. That page is gonna need one serious overhaul, though, if it's kept. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 22:43, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Tanthalas

Wisdom, Please excuse this if it is out of step. I've read (and re-read) your oppose at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tanthalas39, and I have to admit I'm a bit confused. I am admittedly biased of course, as the nominator, but I just don't understand your oppose rationalem, specifically the comment of come back in 3 months and I'll support. Is there something lacking in Dan's contribs that is giving you pause?. Would you mind expanding a bit either here or on my talkpage? I consider you a fine contributor with a level head, and I've seen you around the RfA arena and usually agree with what you add and I respect your opinion. Pedro, another editor that I respect, has changed his !vote from oppose to support and he had similar hesitations as you do. That being said, and even if I wasn't the nominator, I would have issues with your oppose. Care to elaborate? (and in the interest of non-drama, I would prefer you replied away from the RfA itself). Thanks, Wisdom. Happy editing, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey Keeper, I surely will elaborate for you. The reason for my oppose is as follows. The Wiki contributions of Tanthalas are mainly confined to WP:AIV and WP:AFD. Mind you, this is good, but doesn't quite meet my criteria for experience in this realm of wikipedia. I like to see wider experience. Making vandalism reports rocks, but I like to see moderate activity at WP:CSD, WP:ANI, WP:RFPP etc..etc.. Since you've seen me around, you should also recall that my criteria for supporting an RfA is striking a good balance. The mainspace contributions are lacking I'm afriad, and I see minimal activity in the talkspace, which immediately got my attention. My comment about three months is simple. I feel that if the candidate were to continue his activity in the Wiki, linger more at WP:AN for instance, and improve/bulk up his mainspace contributions, there would be no hesitation on my part to support. I capped it at three months because I don't believe it should take longer as he is more or less on the right track. When I get a little time later, I'll take another look at the RfA as I see there are questions posed. There is definitely a possibility that I could change my mind. : ) Thanks for the message, Keeper. Happy editing! Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 22:52, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Chances of passing an RfA

Hello Wisdom89.
I am hoping you can give me some advice.
I was nominated for an RfA two weeks ago. I failed on the grounds that I had too little experience in non-vandalfighting areas.
Since then, I have not really changed my editing patterns. However, I have done a lot of vandal fighting since then.
This is a fairly hard-to-read text version of my wannabe kate summary at the start of my failed RfA
Here is my wannabe kate summary now.
Someone asked me today if they could nominate me for admin. I told them I would have to ask some experienced users what they thought about me trying again so soon after failing an RfA.
Based on what I have done in the interval, do you think there is any chance that I would pass an RfA? J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey J, here's the deal. From looking at your contributions then and now, I'd say you're making vast improvements, especially in the anti-vandalism area. However, it is my experience at RfA that many users like to see well-rounded users in regards to activity in the wikispace. In other words, there is more to being an admin than vandal fighting. Secondly, if you were to accept the nom now, it would most likely fail on the grounds that it is way to soon from your last RfA. Generally speaking, users should wait a minimum of three months before re-applying, or accepting a nomination. I think that would weigh heavily against you. My advice is to wait a bit longer, keep doing what you're doing (because from what I can see, you're doing fantastic work), hang out at WP:ANI and WP:AN, offer comments/notes at WP:RFPP, and participate (non mechanically) in WP:AFD. You should be absolutely fine the next run. Cheers! I hope that helps. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 17:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

It's interesting to see some of the other answers people gave to this question; thanks for doing it J. Now, Wisdom, when are you running? :) dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 10:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Keep your thieving aussie hands [off] of my nomination DHMO :) Pedro :  Chat  10:24, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow

In our posts here, we almost said exactly the same thing! :) Acalamari 17:19, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

haha, yeah I noticed that. What about our analysis/advice? That would be the real kicker. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 17:20, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

See here. We both reckoned that time would be the biggest factor, and that more experience outside vandal-fighting would be good, but regarding what sort of experience was needed, that was where we differed in our advice. :) Acalamari 17:27, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for your support. - J Greb (talk) 22:47, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for helping me. It is editors like you that make Wikipedia a great encyclopedia with a wonderful community. Thank you. Qaddosh (talk) 01:11, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Qaddosh (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

You are absolutely welcome! Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 01:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA - Discospinster

Thank you so much for your support in my RfA, which was successful with a final count of 70/1/1! ... discospinster _talk 23:20, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Winnecunnet/Winnecunnett

Winnecunnet/Winnecunnett is meant to be a disambiguation page. Any info you can share as to why it wouldn't be appropriate? I am probably going to have some more Winnecunnet/Winnecunnett things linked from here. Thanks for your help. -- House of Scandal (talk) 04:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

No, it's quite appropriate. I proposed the article for deletion before you added the disambiguation template, as it read like a dictionary definition. Happy editing. Cheers. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 04:18, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA - Toddst1

Hi, Wisdom89, thanks for supporting my RfA, which passed with 42 supports, 0 opposes, and 0 neutrals. I'm pleased that the Wikipedia community has trusted me with the mop. Of course, special thanks goes to my nominator Kakofonous. Please let me know if you need help, or just want to say hello. Cheers! Toddst1 (talk) 15:11, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank-you

I can has mop?

Hi Wisdom89! Thank-you for your support in my RfA (91/1/1). I take all the comments to heart and hope I can fulfil the role of being an admin to the high standard the community deserves. Seraphim♥ Whipp 15:55, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Why the specific chimpanzee edit?

Why would you remove the reference to the Lester E. Fisher Center for the Study and Conservation of Apes at Lincoln Park Zoo from the Chimpanzee entry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.125.167.229 (talk) 17:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

There's a discussion on the talk page about excessive external links. Before adding anything else, I'd propose it there. Cheers. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 18:25, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

With 10-12 external links already, who says how many are allowed and privledged this way? You? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.125.167.229 (talk) 12:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Closed discussions

You just don't like hearing the truth. Wikipedia puts itself in a box, putting the public interest behind pedantic rules. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Please don't use my talk page for a quasi-soapbox. I understand you're indignant about the article being deleted, but that was the consensus of the community. Cheers and happy editing.. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 18:59, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I will continue to push these points when the opportunity arises. I will continue to try to get others to think outside the box regarding what they think the limitations of wikipedia should be. Nothing personal intended towards you or anyone else. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:52, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Admin Coaching

Hey Wisdom, I came to this page to ask you why you weren't an admin yet, then noticed that you are going through admin coaching right now. If you are interested, I would be honored to co-nom you for Admin when you and your coach feel it is time.Balloonman (talk) 06:52, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey balloonman, thanks for the offer! I believe that Pedro and I discussed a mid april RfA. When the time comes, I can use all of the support I can get : ) Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 14:33, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your support!

Hello, and thanks for your support in my recent RFA! The final result was 61/0/3, so I've been issued the mop! I'm extremely grateful for your confidence in me and will strive to live up to it. Thanks again! —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 07:19, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

RFA thanks

		Thanks for the support
		Thanks for your support on my request for adminship, which passed 92/2/2. I'm quite glad you feel I have the experience, and I intend to live up to the community's expectations (when I'm not working on a new FA, that is). ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:44, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Heads up....

Hey, just FYI i guess User:Rgoodermote was not going to "open" his RfA for another week, and has untranscluded it *sigh*. He is planing on changing all the answers to the questions still....so... I told him a better place for that was probably his userspace..but whatev. Just letting you know that the answers to the questions are probably going to change. Tiptoety ^talk 01:45, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks dude. I noticed that you had removed it while I made my !vote. I'll take another look once it's transcluded. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 02:00, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually now he wants it deleted. I am not quite sure I should though, as it does a bit of content in it, do you know of any policy or un-written rule that says I cant? Tiptoety ^talk 02:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

New policy proposal that may be of interest

I'm tapping this message out to you because you were involved at the AfDs of Eve Carson or Lauren Burk. Following both of these heated debates, a new proposal has been made for a guideline to aid these contentious debates, which can be found at WP:N/CA. There is a page for comments at Wikipedia talk:Notability (criminal acts)/Opinions should you wish to make a comment. Thanks for your time, and apologies if this was not of interest! Fritzpoll (talk) 15:51, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

	Thanks!
So, yeah, you know how these work... »»»» Thank you very much for your support in my recent RfA, which closed with a final tally of (75/1/0). Your trust in me is greatly appreciated, and I can assure you it has not been misplaced. I shall use these tools to the best of my ability, and will do my best not to let you down. Thank you once again, and happy editing as always! Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:32, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Your progress

I just wanted to drop by and say that the amount you've progressed in the past few months since your RfA is tremendous. Keep up the fantastic work! Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 02:58, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment, MOP! I'm striving to do my best and will continue to do so. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 06:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:UAA

When posting reports on WP:UAA, please use {{user-uaa}}, not {{userlinks}}. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:06, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Is this a new preference at UAA? I've been using the same template for 6 months now. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 08:11, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

This is a new decision - I didn't make it, but it will things easier for the admins handling that page. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah ok, makes sense then. Thanks for the headsup. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 10:05, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Day of Spring!

Happy First Day of Spring!

A Beautiful Cherry Tree in Spring Bloom

Theres nothing like seeing a field full of spring flowers.

Just wishing you a wonderful First Day of Spring {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}! ~~~~

If you live in the Southern Hemisphere and are entering the season of Autumn not Spring then I wish you a happy First Day of Autumn {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}!
To spread this message to others, add {{subst:First Day Of Spring}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

ATAIAD

Have you read Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in adminship discussions? Angus McLellan (Talk) 19:37, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I have. Why do you ask? Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 19:38, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

You keep mentioning "balance": here, for example, but there are many more. Is there a reason why you think that editing wikispace imparts knowledge of policies? I have not edited the policies and guidelines which relate to WP:CFD or WP:CSD#I8 or any of the other admin stuff I work on. It hasn't - so far as I can tell, but I'm biased - made any difference at all. After two and half years, in which time I've seen a good many admins self-destruct, I'm not much the wiser about what makes a good admin, although I can assure you that editing in wikispace is not a significant factor. The elusive common sense, unfortunately not all that common, and good judgement, although both are very hard to quantify, seem to be the things that matter.

The purpose of RfA is to demonstrate whether the community, or rather that subset which turns up, trusts the candidate with the extra tools. If you, or anyone else, were willing to extend trust on the basis of some checklist, I would not be able to trust your judgement. The one sort of wikispace edits that do matter, I suspect, are those made at RfA. Since it's the usual suspects most of the time, people will remember your previous opinions. They will be held against you if they are badly founded or poorly expressed. I'd recommend that you consider each case on its merits rather than measuring candidates against some arbitrary standard. And as far as ThinkBlue goes, I think you are right to oppose but the method you used to reach the decision was the wrong one. Best regards, Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:41, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Without being longwinded - I'll just state for the record that I never simply look at an edit count when making my decision. You see my reference to "balance" often because...well..that's my primary criteria, although there have been exceptions. An individual who has a project space contribution history of 400 with virtually no participation in any administrator-related area will most likely not receive a support vote from me. You can learn things in theory, like science (I am a scientist), but until you apply these things practically, they are meaningless. I hope that clarifies for you. I wasn't anticipating having to explain my rationale behind my opposes, but I feel there is sufficient reasoning behind them, which does not require much expounding, and I feel there is a reasonable amount of disparity between my objections in RfAs. Cheers man. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 23:01, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I still think you're overestimating the difficulty of learning adminstuff by doing it. As they say, it's not rocket science (or any other sort). Most of it is nothing like as difficult as getting all the MoS stuff sorted out for a featured article, or any more stressful than fielding the questions at FAC. I expect you'll find that out for yourself soon enough. All the best, Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

RE: WP;ANI

Hey, I noticed that you recently responded to a bizarre complaint about my removal of some POV form the Islamic Music article. You said that I had violated the three revert rule on it but when I reviewed it, I haven't even come close to three reverts within a 24 hour period. I am a bit confused, could you clarify this for me? MezzoMezzo (talk) 07:22, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

my RFA

Thank you for your comments in my RFA. It passed with a final count of (73/3/1), so I am now an administrator. I have listened to the comments, and will try to improve in all areas. Please let me know if at any stage you need help, or if you have comments on how I am doing as an admin. Have a nice day! :) Aleta Sing 19:40, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Lee romao

The reason I tagged it is because the same user had created two inappropriate (and thus deleted) pages right before his/her creation of Lee romao. A quick Google search brings up nothing on the name being attached. And really, is a some random developer for a software company notable? Just curious... CiTrusD (talk) 21:35, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

A7 is a tricky criteria..even the slightest hint of notability..that the developer helped program a successful game is enough to get by SD, generally speaking. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 21:37, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. He didn't specifically state that helped create it, just that he works there. And like I was saying, there were two pages put up by him just a few minutes prior that were deleted within seconds. I'll leave it alone. Thanks! CiTrusD (talk) 21:41, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

You could always propose it for deletion. Cheers! Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 21:42, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

oops

Sorry about that. I thought Huggle had already finished reverting it. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 21:40, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA

Hi Wisdom. Just a note of thanks for your support in my recent unsuccessful RfA. I'm really glad you gave the time to re-evaluate your stance based on my answers to the optional questions and to subsequently support me, albeit weakly. I'll be back in a few months with more experience and more coaching, and I hope I still have your support then. Thanks again - Tanthalas39 (talk) 23:16, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Happy easter!

Open your card >> >> >>

Happy easter you guys! Sorry if the picture looked crappy, but it's the best I could do on such short notice. Sincerely, BoL (Talk) 04:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC) Credits: This card was inspired by BoL, an administrator/bureaucrat and head designer of Codesnippets. Join the community today!

Rollback

Are you an admin? If you are, can I have rollback rights?--RyRy5 talk 06:37, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not an administrator, but you can request it at WP:ROLLBACK. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 06:41, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I added a request and I got rollback in less than 5 minutes. The user who gave me rollback was going to ask me for rollback directly, but I beat him. Thanks anyway, you should request for adminship soon. Your a great vandal fighter. I always see you vote on RFA's and your always active.--RyRy5 talk 04:38, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. RfA soon, but I'm still gaining some experience since my last one. Cheers! Keep editing! Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 04:41, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Jedi = martial arts is complete POV

That's funny considering the fact that Yoda is listed in Category:Fictional martial artists. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 09:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

One mistake does not justify more..if you get my meaning. It's kinda like WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 13:56, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

If it's a mistake, why have you not removed the category from the page yet? You might as well remove him from Category:Fictional swordsmen since a light sabre is not really a sword. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 18:09, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

AMISH SUPER SQUAD

Apparently I beat you to it. ;-) - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 19:04, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

hehe, I noticed that. I was fixing a link in the AfD and then boom..it was red. : ) Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 19:05, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Why did you remove the speedy tag here when the article clearly meets G3 (the label didn't exist in '04, the album cover is an obvious fake, the artist was speedied as a hoax as well)? There's no reason to remove a speedy tag just because the article's also listed at AfD -- after all, it does meet G3 quite clearly. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 21:52, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I like to allow AfDs to run its course. There are musicians with said name, so it's not always clear. If you feel very strongly about it, you can re-add the hoax template. However, I was being bold. Nothing against your judgment. Cheers dude. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 21:56, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi-C (rapper)

Thanks for the heads up. I have closed the AfD and opened a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review#Hi-C (rapper). ... discospinster _talk 00:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Low C

You may want to rethink your Low C AFD opinion after what I just wrote.Nrswanson (talk) 23:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I have replied on the AfD discussion page. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 00:04, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I made some further comments on Low C and Deep C since your comments.Nrswanson (talk) 00:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Re Adoption

Actually there is a policy that says you cant. Ya think there can be an ecxeption? Nothing444 00:51, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: AFD

Thanks for the compliments. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 22:31, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

		The AFD Barnstar
		For taking the challenge and voting in 50 (probably more) AFD's I - Milk's Favorite Cookie hereby award you this Barnstar. Congrats! - Milk's Favorite Cookie 22:31, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Ted Daffan

Likewise, I'd appreciate it if you didn't condescend by templating the regulars or prodding a formatted, sourced article by a regular editor who was highly unlikely to just sit five days and watch his article disappear. Prods are for "uncontroversial deletions"; I fail to see how this ever qualified as such. Chubbles (talk) 02:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Nominating an article for deletion has absolutely nothing to do with who authored it. It's about content and guideline. There is categorically nothing illegitimate or condescending about prod tagging an article. Also, that link you provided above is not a guideline or a policy. It is, more or less, a controversial and elitist essay, that I, and many others, would never cite it to another editor. Just a word to the wise. However, there is patronization when an edit summary tells me to read up on several policies/guidelines, especially one which implies I am acting biased. Thanks. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 02:41, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

If you feel the content of the article is unworthy of inclusion in this encyclopedia, then by all means we may continue this discussion at AfD. Otherwise, I'm done here. Good day. Chubbles (talk) 03:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Rose quotes

I don't think the rose quotes were trivia. The place of roses in western (and probably eastern) culture ought to be shown. Some of the quotes were trivial, but this just means a clean-up was needed. The only one that looked like a possible copyright violation was the Le Petit Prince. I'll look it over again and then decide what to do. Please respond on the rose talk page if you disagree.

Thanks for your understanding

Smallbones (talk) 15:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, I still view the section as complete trivia (really not needed for that article to be honest) and a possible violation of WP:COPYRIGHT since we are using quotations without attribution. However, I do not have a problem with your changes as you've trimmed it down. Cheers and happy editing to you. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 20:40, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

BirgitteSB

I've responded to your comment to me at the RfA. Your opinion is valid, and even if I don't necessarily agree, I respect it. What bothers me is that your opinion appears, based on the comments of users there, to be a minority one; most are opposing simply because Birgitte won't be that active. I particularly found the "suggest a withdraw" comment made by SynergeticMaggot to be, frankly, offensive (even at 0/2/0, an experienced user shouldn't be asked to withdraw, particularly with two co-nominators yet to support). Ral315 (talk) 17:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I felt that comment was a bit odd actually. I would never suggest a withdraw unless it looked like a blizzard - not because of an answer to a question that I disliked. Thanks for the comment, it's cool if we don't agree, and of course I respect your opinion as well. After looking over most of the opposition a little more closely, it does appear as though most of them simply want a more active admin. Sigh, can't change that though. The crats will know what to do perhaps? Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 17:15, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

• What exactly do mean by "project space" in your oppose? I personally think I have a lot of expierence with issues in "Wikipedia" spaces so I am a bit confused.--BirgitteSB 18:09, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey Birgitte, by "project space", I mean the wikipedia namespace, specifically in admin-related areas where most of your admin tasks would be required. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 20:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Alphaman11

The user keeps creating empty list articles. Is there a less-than-snippy way to catch this person's attention and get them to respond to our concerns? - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 20:17, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Um, that was not the "less-than-snippy" communication I had in mind... :P - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 20:19, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

heh, I know. But they were already warned. I was in the process of writing this to you when you replied ":Looks like they were warned at one time. I gave them a final warning as creating inappropriate pages constitutes vandalism. They can be reported to WP:AIV if it continues." Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 20:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the user understands the error of his/her ways. They are creating pages with content now. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 20:33, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Scratch that. An admin has blocked them. I guess they didn't learn their lesson? Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 20:37, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Eh..he continued to create articles with no content after final warn, along with some other questionable edits. I think a 3 hour block was in place. If you think I might have made a mistake let me know. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 21:33, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Nope, you and I are usually on the same page - as we are here. : ) Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 22:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Great, I hold your opinion very highly and could always use a second opinion on things. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 22:41, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Opera Deleware

You did not give me time to respond to you. Less than one minute. That was very unkind. Now I have to recreate the article.Nrswanson (talk) 20:20, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I didn't delete the article. I simply nominated it for WP:CSD A7 because it did not meet the criteria for inclusion. You had every right to place a hangon template. Just remember to create the article again so that it doesn't meet the speedy deletion criteria. That's all. No reason to impugn me as unkind. Cheers and happy editing. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 20:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

I appreciate your revert. I admit I prefer line breaks, but users came to consensus (and most follow it) to not change genre delimiters anymore, and I don't. I only change them if someone else did. But I keep them in the form they were when we made the consensus, whter that be line break or comma break. However, 156 IP man gets a little antsy once in a while and changes some of them. Like he did today, changing Symphony X, Megadeth and Voivod (band). We usually end up arguing (as we did today). I just want to keep the peace and leave everything the way it is but he would prefer to change everything to comma breaks apparently and thinks I'm an idiot. But I appreciate you reverting that page. Not just because of the rv, but because it means something knowing I'm not alone in defying the 156 IP man in his own somewhat-edit-war-agenda-thingy. I don't want people to go back to fighting about the genre delimiters. I do admit I prefer line breaks, though. I don't see what's wrong with them when they have been used for years on wikipedia until more recently when comma breaks were introduced. Anyways, thanks. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 22:46, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Not to mention, it pisses me off that the 156 IP man encouraged 142.166.250.98 to revert me when he knows the IP is a sockpuppet. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 22:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm NOT 142.166. He's a completely different person.

142.162.196.92 (talk) 23:09, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I doubt that. And you are still almost DEFINITELY a sockpuppet. Not to mention you are still going around and changing genre delimiters for no reason and with no explanation. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 23:22, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I don't really have a preference when it comes to line breaks - I suppose it looks cleaner and neaty in a list, but then if it grows to long it extends the info box downward. Both are acceptable in my book. It's just circumstantial. You're welcome for the revert. I don't think it's fair to you to have your edits categorically reverted/undone by the same SPA user. Frustrating indeed. Cheers dude. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 19:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Another Anime Convention

I would like to thank you for starting an AFD for the Another_Anime_Conevention entry instead of using a speedy deletion. The second time it was deleted seemed to be that nobody had written about it in depth. I created the entry at the beginning of this year, citing the newly-created, third party review about the convention, incorrectly assuming it met the criteria for notability.

At that time, a speedy deletion was applied to the entry, and I had just assumed the editor who marked it never checked the additional source I added. With the recent deletion discussion, I now have a much better understanding that the sources I cited were unreliable and thus does not qualify for notability.

When creating the Another_Anime_Convention article, I used PortConMaine as an example. At that time, I did not see the SINGLE newspaper article linked in the discussion page, which made all the difference.

Thank you for taking your time to help explain the problems with the entry, and not just assuming it was the same entry that had been posted in the past.

User_talk:Forenholm

You are certainly welcome - just using my better judgment : ) Take care and happy editing dude. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 19:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedies and time

Hi Wisdom. Thanks for your note. I think you mean this thread. I for myself don't have a problem with supposedly hasty taggings per se. When I RCPatrol, I don't say, "Oh, my-- that's only been up for 2 minutes. I'll come back to it." I do try to search for some shred of information that would help gauge the subject's encyclopedic value via Google and other resources. Sometimes by the time I've finished looking, someone else has tagged. So my advice would be to just do at least a Google search before tagging. I have other resources through Largo Public Library that get's me past some pay walls. I agree that Michael Hardy was over the top, but he was probably just venting his frustration. I would not take it personally.

I share his frustration. Admins are not checking potentially notable subjects either. So the non admin RCPatrollers have no way of knowing when they tagged something for deletion that could be kept. It just got deleted despite being encyclopedic. I have despeedied an article about a genus of warm that was tagged as an attack page. My particular venting on the CSD talk page was about a db-attack that had been placed on an article about a fictional character. The article said the subject was a Cyclops. Well, when did that become a disparaging remark and besides it was true! The deleting admin salted it, becuase there were several deletions on not very good versions of the article.

So, like I say, the only thing you can do is check as thouroughly as possible. We need better tools for determining notability. Maybe tag as a PROD instead of a CSD. That may give someone time to fix the thing. If not, out it can go. Most of us are stressed out part of the time. I'm sorry if I've added to your Wikistress. Don't let other people's venting or frustration cause you too much distress. We all make mistakes. Just do the best you can and take care of yourself-- you are the only "you" you have. I will try to review your contribs next week. I'm at work now, and my people here are starting to annoy me. Hope that helps, Cheers, Dlohcierekim 23:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

OOO! Looks it is a shiny!

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		I Tiptoety talk award you this barnstar for you diligent contributions to project space, keep up the great work! Tiptoety talk 14:41, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

It IS quite shiny. Thank you, sir for the recognition! Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 14:45, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome, it is much deserved. Now get back to doing all that great work I gave you this for ;) Tiptoety ^talk 14:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

WTF man

I saw someone vandalizing an article and searched "report abuse" to find Wikipedia:Abuse_reports and entered their IP in the "Report Abuse" field. You then edit MY page with some snooty message telling me my entry is marked for "speedy deletion" and blah blah blah. You could have at least verified the report yourself, seen the obvious vandalizm and blocked the user. What's the big deal? I'm trying to help wikipedia and YOU and you act like I'm the one who's wasting time! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryles (talk • contribs) 00:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I think you're misunderstanding what happened. I don't see your name in the history at abuse reports. It's great that you want to revert and fight vandalism. However, instead, you actually created an article with the IP address as the title. It was speedy deleted per WP:CSD as a test page. I am not an administrator, so I did not delete the article myself, however, I tagged it. No more, no less. You can warn vandals with the proper templates located at WP:WARN and report abuse at administrators intervention against vandalism. Cheers. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 01:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Well that page is very misleading. It has a button "Report IP" with a text box above it which one would naturally expect to be an entry field for the IP they wish to report. I recommend removing that feature from the page. --Ryles (talk) 03:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Awards Center Newsletter

I'm pleased to announce that the Awards Center will be getting its own newsletter shortly. If you want to receive the WP:AWC newsletter, put your name here. --Sharkface217 19:44, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

I can has mop?

Hi Wisdom89/Archive 5! Thank you for your support in my RfA (87/3/3). I truely appreciate the many votes of confidence, and I will exert myself to live up to those expectations. Thanks again! - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 17:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks. I never even knew that barnsatr existed! A great one!! Pedro :  Chat  21:23, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

You are most welcome. I came across it just before and I immediately thought of you - always presenting great arguments. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 21:27, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For welcoming 1000 new members. Congrats! Luksuh 22:36, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For your great work in the projectspace. Happy editing, Malinaccier (talk) 03:06, 2 April 2008 (UTC).

Thank you sir! Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 03:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Awarding Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		Aprils fools day was a blast. Loads of users lightened up to have good old fashion fun. I want to thank you for taking part in editing this page in particular and even though I may not know you, embrace the same talk pages, or even edit with you in the near future, I'd like to award you this Barnstar for making Wikipedia a fun environment in which to contribute. Until next year. :) SynergeticMaggot (talk) 12:57, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Award Center Newsletter, Edition 1

The Wikipedia Awards Center Newsletter
Volume 1, Issue 1 • April 02, 2008 • About the Newsletter
Useful Links In case you ever get lost: Award Center AWC Collaboration of the Fortnight	New sponsored challenges New challenges include: Princess Mononoke Gene Wilder Checklist Aberdeen Grammar School Nominate some articles for AWC! News: WP:ACCOTF, the Award Center Collaboration of the Fortnight, is launched officially. Sign up for this fortnight's collaboration here. This newsletter is officially launched. I hope everyone likes it. If you have any ideas for future issues, talk to the editor. Completed challenges have been removed from the Award Center in the interest of space, as navigating the page can be arduous.	Collaboration of the Fortnight United States-Australia Relations
Archives • Random Challenge

- Newsletter Bot Talk 23:15, 2 April 2008 (UTC) The above newsletter was delivered by Newsletterbot. If you would not like to receive the newsletter, please add your name here

I've...

probably already asked this before, but I'll ask again anyway. When are you next going for RFA, I know Pedro is nomming you, is anyone else? Rudget (review) 16:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey there Wisdom, at this time I would most defiantly support you if you went for it, and would even be happy to co-nom. Tiptoety ^talk 22:41, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

+1 - Milks Favorite Cookie 23:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Scientoligy IS crap

Perhaps we should introduce a section in the username policy for usernames which "would be offensive to one or more persons or organisations if only the user creating the account could actually spell properly"...! I see Rudget (my nom) and Pedro are lining you up for an RfA - you can count on my support then, so you'll be at least at (3/0/0) when you get started...! _GB^T/C 07:03, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

heh, despite the spelling, still can be quite offensive. Good call though. Thanks for the "preemptive" support : ). Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 07:05, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Indeed - perhaps I should have said "would be offensive to one or more persons or organisations if only the despte the user creating the account couldnot being able to actually spell properly"! _GB^T/C 07:11, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Gregory House

With regard to your recent reversion on the Holmes reference in "Whac-A-Mole", there are many other citations in the article that simply comprise the "cite episode" template, so how come they're acceptable and mine isn't? Or are you saying that you need proof that it is one of Holmes' popular sayings? If so, a quick Google reveals many of them, including books that have been titled after the phrase. (Incidentally, the allusion is also mentioned in the IMDb's trivia section for the episode.) Chris 42 (talk) 10:24, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I've now added two additional citations. Hope it's okay. :-) Chris 42 (talk) 10:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Completed The Deletionist Challenge

I completed the above challenge. My contributions log [3] shows 68 redlinks and several bluelinks still underway between signing up and making this post. By the way, nice challenge; It are those little things that add some extra spicing to Wikipedia maintenance :) Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 19:19, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

redfarmer rfa

• Reply to you is included in the reply to (Le.... Can 't remember the french, and don't want to back out of the screen.)--Cube lurker (talk) 22:52, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
  • In fact let me ask this off the RFA. Are you really trying to say that a question can't even be asked when some one links a diff to their support vote that says "If you go to RFA i'll support you"? If so AGF is hopelessly broken.--Cube lurker (talk) 23:04, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

That's not really what I'm saying. I was just surprised by your question - I mean, the user offered a diff to the reason for his change to support. It was a little risky linking to it, I'll admit that, but at the same time I felt that your question was juuuust on the border of an allegation. You know what I mean? It's all good though. All questions are valid dude. Just want everyone to have a smooth time during discussion. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 00:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

No hard feelings here. Just one of those things where i clicked on the diff and the last sentence really hit me wrong in the context of switching votes. But I'm not going to hold anything against anyone. Best wishes,--Cube lurker (talk) 02:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

undermining my opinion

Well hello Mr. Wisdom89. I just wanted to drop you a quick note and say, I did not view your comments as any way undermining my opinion! In fact, I think we have seen enough of each other lately, that I have always respected your opinion, and hopefully, and I have always felt, that I had earned a small amount of your respect. My comments were not so much addressing the candidate but the support editors that were answering the questions for the candidate. In my opinion, the questions are getting out of hand. However, when you either nominate yourself or accept a nomination for the position, you are also accepting the BS that goes along with the process. The editors by answering the questions proposed by the well-intentioned individuals, not only circumvented the process but also, in my opinion, showed little or no respect to the editor forwarding the questions. Is this a reflection of the candidate, of course not! Will it effect my opinion of the candidates suitability for the role, after I review again in the next day or two, again no. Does it influence my view of the two editors involved, sorry to say yes it does. Hope this explains a little more of the thought process I used in my opinion. Thanks. ShoesssS ^Talk 02:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Don't recommend blocks on "hacker" names

The word "hacker" has many connotations. The one used in geek culture is positive.

I've just had to berate two admins who blocked users solely because they had the word "hacker" in their names. I think you should stop recommending these blocks. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 04:26, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Surely. I will take your recommendation of course, as I've come to respect you and your judgment. However, I will say that use of the term "hacker" on the internet will always remain suspect. I highly doubt these individuals were using the "Greek" connotation. Cheers mate. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 01:18, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Greek? Did you misread me or are you being facetious? I'm talking about geeks, something you'll find a lot of on the Internet. The word "hacker", especially when used as a self-description, can refer to someone who is skilled at making computers do cool things. Illegal activities aren't implied. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 04:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Haha, yes I misread - Sorry about that. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 04:06, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, dont worry. I got a talking too about it as well for blocking them. Learn something new every day. Tiptoety ^talk 00:09, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Lists of businesses in city article Dindigul

Greetings. I pulled your name off the Editor assistance list, because I'm looking for some information regarding Wikipedia policies regarding content. In particular, these changes in the article about the city of Dindigul. It appears that the additions are mostly lists of individual businesses. My gut feeling is that this content should not be in the article - especially since for a city this large, a complete list would be prohibitively long. What I can't find is a Wikipedia policy that specifically addresses this. The closest I can find is WP:NOT#DIR. What is your opinion? What policies apply? Thank you. -- Tcncv (talk) 00:44, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey there, glad to help out. I took a look at the article in question, and what immediately struck me about the section was its ambiguity and obtrusiveness. I'm not sure it's even up to WP:MOS guidelines. Nevertheless, WP:LIST provides a detailed run down on how to deal with embedded or stand-alone lists, their organization and their applicability. They operate just like any other piece of information in an article, whether prose or otherwise. With that said, there are no citations, no lead-in/introductory sentence, and questionable/dubious relevance to the article as a whole. You were right to cite WP:NOT#DIR. Even though it is generally applied to individual articles, it can also be applied to the content therein. I would suggest bringing it up on the talk page of the article - and if no one objects, be WP:BOLD and simply remove it. I hope that helps. Cheers, and feel free to come back and ask for anything else you may need aid with. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 00:57, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll initiated a discussion in the talk page as you suggested. -- Tcncv (talk) 02:37, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Gary King

Oppose or neutral chap? Pedro :  Chat  07:48, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

It was an oppose. It's formatted now. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 07:49, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

No worries! Pedro :  Chat  07:51, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Gary_King#Neutral I've responded :) Gary King (talk) 07:55, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

responded! I'm running after two discussions on the page! :) Gary King (talk) 08:09, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

heh, one thing is for sure, I do like your attitude. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 08:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :) I think the main point that I'm trying to make is that I am aware that there is a clear distinction between warning a user and outright blocking them, which is why I would be much more conservative if I have a block button than if I have a warning sticker. Gary King (talk) 08:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Good response Gary. Pedro :  Chat  08:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Let me sleep on this a bit..it's 4 am right now : ) I'll revisit the discussion tomorrow and see if I still feel the same. Cheers mate. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 08:17, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

RfA - Nick Savoy and Love Systems

Hi! I was told to come here. Thanks in advance for your time.

To be very quick - I edited (extensively) two very recently pre-existing but horrid pages on a couple of subjects I know alot about - Nick Savoy and Love Systems (they are connected). They were both deleted, which is fine, based on not being notable, which is also fine.

However, after writing the article I realized there were many more sources than I was able to track down at the time for notability. For example, Nick Savoy appeared today (April 11) on the Dr Phil show. (www.drphil.com/shows). The guy has been on my TV in commercials all week for this show and most of the show was about him. He's also been on National CBS radio, interviewed as anexpert in the Globe and Mail, a feature piece in Brink magazine, appearances on playboy TV and fox news, etc.

I realize I didn't organize and present this the right way the first time around and I would be grateful for any assistance in doing so this time!

Thanks!

Camera123456 (talk) 22:09, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Award Center:The Deletionist's Challenge

 Done. Thanks, and I'll be waiting for the barnstar.--RyRy5 ^{Talk to RyRy} 00:37, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I see. I thought that you get a barnstar before or after you sign up. Thanks for telling me. I will give you a notice if I do tag 50 articles again. Cheers.--RyRy5 ^{Talk to RyRy} 01:22, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello again. I think I tagged 50+ articles for deletion. Feel free to check my my contributions.--RyRy5 ^{Got something to say?} 15:32, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes I am slowing down on the tagging. I have to be careful of what I tag an article with. I'll give you another notice when I think I have tagged 50. Thanks.--RyRy5 ^{Got something to say?} 18:36, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

 DoneI am pretty sure I did it. I'll be waiting.--RyRy5 ^{Got something to say?} 07:09, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

My RFA has closed

My RFA that you weighed in on earlier has closed as no consensus to promote, at a final tally of 120/47/13. I thank you for your feedback and comments there, and I'm going to be considering all the various advice and comments presented. I might end up at RFA again some day, or not. If you see me there again in the future, perhaps you might consider a Support !vote. If not, not, and no hard feelings. The pen is still mightier than the mop! See you around, and thanks again. Lawrence § t/e 18:20, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

Thank you for your comments on my RFA. Even though it failed with 28 supports, 42 opposes, and 15 neutrals, I am grateful for the suggestions and advice I have received and I do hope to improve as a Wikipedian. If you ever need my help in any endeavor, feel free to drop me a line. --Sharkface217 19:30, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Jibum Choi deletion objections?

Greetings. I see you deleted the prod tag on the Jibum Choi article. Why did you do this and then nominate it under AfD? There were no objections raised to the deletion so far, and prods cast as wide a net as AfDs, since there's a category for pages proposed for deletion. —C.Fred (talk) 01:56, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey there, yes I realize that. However, my experience with prod nominations for articles where obvious thought and preparation went into them is the templates are removed fairly quickly, or at least, before the five day time period has lapsed. The article had some notability concerns and I decided to just be WP:BOLD and remove it before the creator did, which was very probable. Just took a chance. That's all. Cheers dude. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 03:07, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

My RfA...

Thank you...

...for your participation in my RFA, which closed with 85 supports, 2 neutrals and 1 oppose. I'm extremely grateful for all the the kind comments from so many brilliant Wikipedians I've come to respect and admire, as well as many others I've not yet had the pleasure of working with, and I'll do my best to put my shiny new mop and bucket to good use! Once again, thank you ;)
EyeSerene^talk 16:32, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

RE:

I went ahead and started a thread here about it if you are interested. Tiptoety ^talk 22:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

AN may be a good place to let other admins know that this glitch is happening, and notify them of the thread over at VP. I don't really see a need for a thread on WT:AIV since it really does not have much to do with that page. I have also been noticing recently that the server/database has been freezing up lately, locking everyone out from editing, maybe that has something to do with it. Tiptoety ^talk 22:37, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Review

Hey, just like to say thanks again regarding the RfA and you're swift and sound advice. Also, just to let you know i've placed myself up for Editor Review and administrator coaching. Regards, CycloneNimrod^talk? 19:53, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Award Center:Deletionist's Challenge

 Done I'm pretty confident that I completed the task. But you may check whatever you have to check to do so.--RyRy5 (talk) 02:25, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm still not counting 50...perhaps I'm missing some. Are there speedy deletions that you didn't add to the author's talk page? Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 03:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think so. But to make things easier, how many articles did I tag so far(I aslo tageed about 5 a few minutes ago)?--RyRy5 (talk) 02:56, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

According to [4] and highlighting the "Subst" string in my browser, I count 32 or so. However, you recently tagged a school as unimportant under A7. Schools are not valid for speedy deletion, unless it's a completely blank article or lacks context (but even then it's tricky)..and has been for some time. They are usually taken to WP:AFD to determine notability. Keep going. Almost there. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 03:01, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I will continue to tag articles with the right tags. I'll tell you when I have made arond 18 more.RyRy5 (talk) 03:37, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

RfA?

I had someone offer to nominate me for admin, and I was wondering what you thought of my chances of succeeding. My reason for asking this is that I don't want to waste the community's time with a dead-on-arrival RfA and possibly take a blow to my wikimood. I greatly appreciate your advice on this and I await your response. Thanks. Thingg^⊕⊗ 19:08, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words, I really appreciate them. I've seen you around WP:RfA quite a bit and I've always been impressed by the reasons you give when you !vote. Coming from you, those words mean a lot to me and I really appreciate your support. So far, the responses from the people I have queried about my RfA prospects have all been positive, so I have accepted User:Xenocidic's nomination. (He's not online right now, so it may be a little bit before the nomination is put up on WP:RfA) Thank you very much for taking the time to look over my contributions and give me your opinion on them. Regards. Thingg^⊕⊗ 12:40, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Jackie Robinson

Cab you check if the article meets the Good Article criteria? I nominated it for GA but I just wanted to double check.--RyRy5 (talk) 04:30, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

When I get some time, I'll happily give it a review. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 13:28, 19 April 2008 (UTC)