User talk:Wizardman/Archive17
 | 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. |
RfC on Cebactokpatop
Hi,
I'm looking for the RfC on Cebactokpatop to be processed. It's an open-and-shut case. I've been waiting for a while for it to be processed. The reason that Cebactokpatop hasn't been editing is that he is an SPA who is only interested in editing the John Zizioulas article, and the article has been locked since the time of the RfC. The fact that he hasn't been making other edits doesn't mean that I'm not still looking for an RfC on his conduct.
Seminarist (talk) 22:36, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
- "If no additional complaints are registered for an extended period of time, and the dispute appears to have stopped", then we archive. It's more than likely that he's stopped editing. So until he recommences editing in the manner in which has concerned Seminarist (i.e. there's more recent evidence) I've kept it in the archives. I've told him that I'll be one of the people who'll look into it if it recommences. Ncmvocalist (talk) 02:43, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Biography C-Class articles
Just for the moment, could you please stop reassessing biography articles as C-Class? The project's assessment department appears to be in a state of disarray, with concerns raised by myself and others about the outdated assessment scale, lack of FL-Class, and the status of the A-Class review department. See relevant discussions at the bottom of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Assessment. As an admin and project member, your input would be most welcome. Cheers! PC78 (talk) 23:50, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
My RfA
Hi Wizardman. I followed the instructions, and have answered the questions. Let me know what you think, and if I should edit them in any way before it gets transcluded. Thanks again. Regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 03:14, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Adminship
Thanks so much for the kind words! To be honest, I've been thinking about going to RfA for a while now, but I've hesitated since my interests lie primarily in editing articles. I'm still somewhat unfamiliar with adminship (I suppose I've kind of avoided learning too much about it to not get tempted =) ), so I don't really know how or if I would use the tools. That said, from what I do know about adminship, it's no big deal, so having a larger tool set at my disposal certainly couldn't hurt. I'll tell you what: I'm going on vacation soon, so I'll have somewhat limited access to my computer until mid-August. Would you mind if I thought about it a bit until then and got back to you? Drewcifer (talk) 22:45, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
- In a somewhat related question, would you be able(/willing) to grant me rollback? I figured this one little tool might be a good way to ease into the possibility of an RfA. And unlike much of the admin toolset, I'm certain I'll use rollback every once and a while. Thanks either way. Drewcifer (talk) 21:05, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
- Cool, thanks man! And Wikipedia:Rollback feature says I can just ask somebody if I want to, or go to RFR. Figured this was just easier for everyone involved. Thanks again. Drewcifer (talk) 08:54, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Your question on Stephen's RfA
I like your question... I'm interested in seeing how Stephen answers it.---Balloonman PoppaBalloon 05:33, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for reconsidering. While we differ on the value of Coaching, the question shouldn't be "was the candidate coached" but is he ready. I appreciate your judging him on his merits, not on pre-conceived notions about coaching.---Balloonman PoppaBalloon 01:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Check your email Wizardman. Thanks, RyRy (talk) 06:47, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
- Hm, okay. I'll ask him too. I appreciate your help. By the way, what are baseball stockings? I need that info in the article. -- RyRy (talk) 05:31, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
WP:HAU, Status, and you!
As you may know, the StatusBot responsible for maintaining the status of the Highly Active Users was taken offline. We now have a replacement in the Qui status system. This semi-automatic system will allow you to easily update your status page found at Special:Mypage/Status which the HAU page code is now designed to read from. If you are already using Qui (or a compatible system) - great! - no action is needed (other than remembering to update your status as necessary). If not, consider installing Qui. You can also manually update this status by changing the page text to online, offline, or busy. While it is not mandatory, the nature of HAU is that people are often seeking a quick answer from someone who is online and keeping our statuses up-to-date will assist with this. Note if you were previously using your /Status page as something other than a one-word status indicator, your HAU entry may have been set to "status=n" to correct display issues. Please clear this parameter if you change things to be "HAU compatible". Further questions can be raised at WT:HAU. This message was delivered by xenobot 23:01, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Edit request for Template:WPBiography
I've made an edit request for this template with regards to the inclusion of FL-Class plus a couple of other issues. No doubt someone will get to it in due course, but since you recently edited the template to add C-Class, I thought you might be willing to take a look yourself. Kind regards. PC78 (talk) 01:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
WP Baseball newsletter
Hey, just wanted to let you know I started a rough draft for the newsletter, you can find it here. Feel free to add anything to it, or leave me a note about anything. Hopefully we can get a pretty good system going after the first few newsletters. I think we'll need to start an "outreach" department within the project, so if you have any ideas for that, that would be cool too. Thanks! Blackngold29 02:58, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
GA Review of Takanohana Koji
Hi Wizardman, you said on the GA nominations page on 4 July that Takanohana Kōji was being reviewed, but there's no review page as of yet. No immediate hurry but I just wondered if you could tell me roughly when it will start. Regards, Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:14, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
- Quite understand. That's great, thank you!Pawnkingthree (talk) 08:02, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks!
for the talk page help! I'll leave the semi on for tonight and think about it tomorrow. NawlinWiki (talk) 02:47, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
RE your most recent comment on ANI
I'd say the discussion is more WP:POINTy then point-LESS, but whaddaya know. :) SirFozzie (talk) 02:20, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 7, 2008.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 28 | 7 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
My RFA Thanks
Thank you for your support at my RFA, which closed as a success. I would also like to thank you for your extended participation in my RFA - I see from your status at the top of your page that you are busy, and to devote so much of your time to my RFA is greatly appreciated. And an additional thank you for switching to support - that was unexpected, but not unappreciated! When I went into the RFA, I was not aware how much of an issue Admin Coaching was. Seeing yours and others' arguments has made me wonder whether or not I should have waited another month before going for RFA.
Mind you, it didn't make too much of a difference in the long run, but I think people's concerns are probably valid. What might be an idea in the future is for anyone who has had coaching to do a couple of months of admin work (sans buttons) to prove that the lessons have sunk in. Anyway, all that is kind or irrelevant to this post, which is really just to say this: Thank you! StephenBuxton (talk) 16:29, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
DYK update
Actually, one more isn't necessarily needed. The UTC date changes in an hour, and at that time the current DYK next update will exactly balance the main page, even without another hook. That doesn't mean we can't have another one–just that another one isn't required. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Billy Pierce
The article Billy Pierce you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold.
It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Billy Pierce for things needed to be addressed. Gary King (talk) 02:35, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
My RFA
Hi Wizardman! My RFA recently closed as successful, but I'm sure you're already aware. I've left thank spam on my own talk page, and on my RFA talk page as I know many people don't like it. However, as my nominator, I felt it only right that I send you some thank spam!
I really appreciate the trust, support and confidence you had in me. Other than FLC, I assumed I was a bit of a Lone Ranger and my contributions were under the radar of most people, so it's nice to know that you, and 66 others agreed. I hope I can live up to their expectations, and that those who opposed will come around in time. Luckily there was really only those WP:UAA reports that brought any concern, although I still think they were pretty valid(!)
Again, thank you. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 05:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject Baseball Newsletter
The Baseball WikiProject Newsletter | |
This month's newsletter was designed and written by Wizardman, jj137, and Blackngold29. If you would like to contribute to future newsletters, please contact the Baseball WP outreach dept. |
Baseball has a history unlike any other sport. It has been played in countless countries throughout the decades, and it will undoubtedly continue play for many more. On this eve, some the finest players the sport has to offer will take the field at the Yankee Stadium. Four popes spoke there, Pelé scored goals there, "The Greatest [football] Game Ever Played" was battled out there, John Philip Sousa lead a band there, George Costanza worked there; but what do all these events have in common? They fail to reach the level of greatness that the baseball that was played there did. In 1923, a man named Babe Ruth decided to build a new house, and over the years, that house was a home to some of the greatest baseball ever played. If I were to list out all of these great moments, it would be longer than the bill for the New Yankee Stadium. So I'll sum it up by saying that we can remember these great moments by adding them to this place we've gathered at for future generations to read about, to learn about, to dream about; but more importantly we can watch tonight and we can remember how baseball is unlike anything else that we will encounter in our lives. — Blackngold29 |
-- jj137 (talk) 03:21, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct
Your edit says not properly created. Can you offer some more information? Tedickey (talk) 09:59, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Indonesian generals
Please note that Indonesian articles can be checked by Indonesian project - milhist does not have precedence by any means - cheers SatuSuro 01:04, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Category:Songs written by Leslie Satcher
Since you deleted Category:Songs written by Anthony Smith, you might want to take a look at Category:Songs written by Leslie Satcher, which I CFD'ed for the same reason as the Anthony Smith category. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Chirps•Clams•Chowder) 21:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
DYK
|
On 18 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Joe Boehling, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Gatoclass (talk) 07:48, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
CSCWEM to Missing Wikipedians
Hello, i saw that you added the Clown to the list of missing Wikipedians back on May 24. Just to let you know i have removed him from the list because technically hes not missing, he did some blocking 4 days after that and has started again today. As much as i wish like everybody else that he would start 'editing' again, i dont think he belongs on that list and i think we appreciate whatever work he does on here. Feel free to add it back if you so wish. Monster Under Your Bed (talk) 08:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Dragon695
Considering that not everyone agrees that this was a bad block, archiving the discussion at this point seems at best to be premature. JoshuaZ (talk) 16:24, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Considering that no one has posted any relevant difs of Dragon's comment until my comment it seems unreasonable to not give people time to look at them. JoshuaZ (talk) 16:34, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. JoshuaZ (talk) 16:47, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Request for clarification
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Florentino floro was deleted on "00:32, 20 July 2008 by Wizardman (Talk | contribs)-("Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Florentino floro" (two people have not certified basis for dispute within 48 hours).
- I respectfully quote the rules: "In order to remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the same dispute with a single user, not different disputes or multiple users. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~~~~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: 21:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 23:19, 19 April 2024 (UTC)."
- The page, after having been deleted by the administrator was restored, with only ONE certification and endorsement:"Users certifying the basis for this disputeUsers who tried and failed to resolve the dispute.:#TheCoffee (talk) 08:35, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
- My question, please: Are not, 2 endorsers required, lest fatal deletion results? Since, after 48 hours, now, more than, per math computation, if I am not mistaken, no 2nd required certification was posted. So, must the Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Florentino floro remain or be deleted. Respectfully submitted, awaiting your kind comment. Thanks.--Florentino floro (talk) 10:49, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the message. Regards.--Florentino floro (talk) 14:36, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
- My question, please: Are not, 2 endorsers required, lest fatal deletion results? Since, after 48 hours, now, more than, per math computation, if I am not mistaken, no 2nd required certification was posted. So, must the Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Florentino floro remain or be deleted. Respectfully submitted, awaiting your kind comment. Thanks.--Florentino floro (talk) 10:49, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
- The page, after having been deleted by the administrator was restored, with only ONE certification and endorsement:"Users certifying the basis for this disputeUsers who tried and failed to resolve the dispute.:#TheCoffee (talk) 08:35, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Question
Thanks for the nom; I plan on accepting. I will be around WP between now and the 15th; however, beginning late on the 15th I won't be able to access the net until the 19th, so I'd have no access during the last couple days of the 7 day nomination if I accepted right away. In light of this, do you feel it would it be better for me to accept the nomination beginning on the 19th or right away; i.e., is it necessary for me to have access to the net during every day while the nomination is open in order to answer questions, etc.? Thanks, Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:16, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
- I'm back from my little holiday and have accepted and posted the nomination now; thanks again. Good Ol’factory (talk) 12:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
CFD/W
Curious what did you mean by this: We ‘’need’’ plenty of help at CFD now ever since non-admins couldn’t help at WP:CFD/W, and he will be an asset there.. Why can't non-admins help? –xeno (talk) 13:14, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
- Gotcha. I didn't notice when I was poking around there. I'm going to be retasking my bot to do some CFD work so hopefully I can lend a hand there as well. Thanks for explaining. –xeno (talk) 20:47, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
I see that the Greg Dalby page has been recreated. He was dropped by his Belgian club and has re-signed with the Colorado Rapids, but I don't see that he's played for them yet, doesn't that disqualify him based on the AfD? Even though I !voted keep. Corvus cornixtalk 17:03, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- Their season is under way, in fact, they're two days away from their all star game, which probably means that it's halfway through the season. Dalby signed on Aug 16, but I don't see that he's played yet. Corvus cornixtalk 23:15, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- OK, no prob. Corvus cornixtalk 23:31, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Lee Grissom DYK
|
|
On 23 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lee Grissom, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 21:20, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Your closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Cavlan
Good day, Wizardman. Although I am not familiar with the article, I am concerned by your closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Cavlan as delete. Of the three preferences expressed, one was an argument citing specifically why the article ought to be kept, the second was an irrelevant delete !vote that addressed a criteria that was neither necessary nor sufficient for non-notability ("getting 0.5% of the vote") and the third was WP:PERNOM delete. Given the poor quality of the delete arguments, the fact that delete preferences only outweighed keep by one !vote and the fact that only three editors replied, your decision that consensus had been reached to delete the article seems ill-founded. I think the debate would benefit from further discussion, to say the least. Would you consider relisting it? I prefer to avoid bureaucracy. Thanks in advance, Skomorokh 04:18, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
AfD closures
Are you sure that there is consensus to delete in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nur Amalina Che Bakri (2nd nomination) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zombina and The Skeletones? In the first case I can see that there are more delete opinions than keeps, but none of the delete comments made any substantial policy-based arguments. In the second one most of the delete comments came before sources were presented. I would have thought that the appropriate action for Nur Amalina Che Bakri would be a relist and for Zombina and The Skeletones a "no consensus" close. Are you willing to reconsider or shall we get more opinions at WP:DRV? Phil Bridger (talk) 08:01, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Nur Amalina Che Bakri
You relisted the afd but the article is deleted. Don't you think you should undelete the article if consensus hasn't truly been reached? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!) 22:31, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
1980s Mark Corey (pitcher)?
Hi. Per your edit, who is a 1980s pitcher named Mark Corey? I couldn't find such a person. Thanks. —Wknight94 (talk) 05:11, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Muhammad al-Durrah dispute
Hello Wizardman, I was wondering if you near reaching a decision on the point I raised here - which is a matter of some controversy? [1] as it seems to be getting out of hand and we can't seem to come to any agreement. It is perhaps a small point but I believe the ramifications are important. Thanks Tundrabuggy (talk) 13:35, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Nobody wants to refute my argument, or even touch the CfD. I think the CfD for Satcher has gone on way too long, and should be put out of its misery as an overly narrow category just like the Anthony Smith one that you deleted. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!) 19:16, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Alastair
Wizard -- I appreciate your input and work when it came to Alastair. What consideration did you give to my own points that:
1) It is impossible to edit war by yourself, and the other party should be equally liable, and 2) Alastair's CONSIDERATION of taking mediation action cannot be worse than the other party TAKING such action.
Were both sides warned?
Thanks.
Tim (talk) 03:16, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 14 and 21, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 29 | 14 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| From the editor: Transparency | ||
| WikiWorld: "Goregrind" | Dispatches: Interview with botmaster Rick Block | |
| Features and admins | Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News | |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation | ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 30 | 21 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:42, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Bedford at ANi
What the heck is that Apology thread for? It makes Bedford feel like shit and it only creates drama. The only person it could benefit is you: you either want attention or you really feel guilty over it. And you shouldn't feel guilty because that's retarded. Delete that thread, it's pointless and petty. Beam 04:14, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Starting to look like? That's what it is! What else could it be? What else will that accomplish? DO you want to hear "You don't need to apologize" from 10 different people? Create some socks. If you want to make Bedford feel like shit, you already did. Beam 04:24, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
I hope you don't think I'm a jerk, but I was blunt only because I thought it could only hurt you and others. Beam 04:30, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
- For the record, it did not make me feel like shit; if anything, it told me which people I am definitely better than. And deep down, those people realize that too that I am better than them.--Bedford Pray 04:33, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
- lol Beam 04:35, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Wizardman, are you sure it was wise to delete this thread?[2] It would seem directly applicable to the ban discussion that was going on. --Elonka 17:17, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
RFA thankspam
Thanks for your support in my RFA, which passed with 140 supporting, 11 opposing, and 4 neutral. I will do my best to live up to the trust that you have given to me. If I can ever assist you with anything, just ask.
Cheers!
J.delanoygabsadds 19:28, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
RFA
Thanks again, Wizardman, for your nomination of me as an admin. As you probably saw, it was successful, no doubt due to your enthusiastic nomination statement. If you ever see me screw something up, please tell me. Thx! Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:59, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
RfB Thank You spam
.svg){kind=logo}
|
Thank you for participating in my RfB! I am very grateful for the confidence of the community shown at my RfB, which passed by a count of 154/7/2 (95.65%). I have read every word of the RfB and taken it all to heart. I truly appreciate everyone's input: supports, opposes, neutrals, and comments. Of course, I plan to conduct my cratship in service of the community. If you have any advice, questions, concerns, or need help, please let me know. Again, Thanks! — Rlevse • Talk • 08:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC) |
Dhyanyogi Madhusudandas
I have to say I was surprised by this deletion; the sources seemed rather better to me than others in the same area which have recently been kept. I also note that after I brought up several sources, including much of a chapter in a book, the only new vote was to keep. So I was wondering if you could explain. Cheers,John Z (talk) 22:37, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
- There was no new delete vote after more sources were provided. That was the nominator, Ism Schism, saying "delete" once again. Maybe relisting, if possible, to get other opinions might be easier? Otherwise I guess I will take it to DRV. There were so many Hinduism AfD's recently, 40 simultaneous ones at one point, that I think people were overwhelmed. I know I was, so it was hard to find and post sources in a timely fashion. Thanks,John Z (talk) 23:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Article credits done
I did the article talk page credits; I'll let you do the people credits. Besides, considering who one of the people to be credited is, propriety says I don't do those credits.--Bedford Pray 02:18, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Request for help
Greetings, I would like to inset a photograph in my overview of a contemporary Italian composer but the task is daunting. I received the picture electronically from the composer himself. I see that you are an experienced Wizardman, can you, please, help?Cote d'Azur (talk) 18:26, 22 July 2008 (UTC) Thank you
I DID upload the picture but then I got stuck. Would it be possible for you to send me an email so that I can send you the photo and a longer message? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cote d'Azur (talk • contribs) 02:21, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
To Wizardman, an imaginary Gold Medal for his competent, invaluable help.
Thank you,Cote d'Azur (talk) 05:24, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Alastair Haines still causing problems
Hi, you recently cautioned Alastair Haines (talk · contribs) as a result of an RfC/U on him. Unfortunately, his behaviour has not changed:
- In his reply to you, he denies any failings in his editing.
- On Talk:Gender of God he is continuing to make threats ([3], [4]).
- He is being incivil and attacking editors ([5]).
- He is being territorial regarding the article ("subhead stays until ...").
- He is immediately reverting any edits he disagrees with ([6], [7], [8]), operating with a double standard - changes he disagrees with must be justified on the talk page before inclusion, while changes he approves of must stand on the page until he has been personally convinced that they are bad. In the former case, the material he is strongarming into the article is material that was supposed to be discussed in mediation, which he rejected.
I'm hoping you can help me take this further, as I've been unable to find documentation on the proper recourse after an ineffective RfC/U. Ilkali (talk) 11:15, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Proof
User_talk:Elonka/Archive_21#I_will_submit_to_0RR_if_everyone_else_does_too. Like ChrisO, I tried to extend as much good faith to Elonka as possible. However, she unevenly has singled me out for retribution for reasons I cannot fathom [9]. I have written her an e-mail explaining to her that I am very clear on my talkpage how I'm dealing with my arbcom restrictions. She has not responded. ScienceApologist (talk) 01:01, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
- To my knowledge, there is no overlap between ScienceApologist and ChrisO. It is true that I have dealt with both users, but it's on different articles, and in relation to completely separate ArbCom cases. Awhile ago, I issued a one-week page ban on ScienceApologist, but it was for the Atropa Belladonna article, a completely different topic area from Muhammad al-Durrah. I would also point out that ScienceApologist already appealed that ban at ANI, and the community upheld my restriction.[10] So again, no overlap. --Elonka 01:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
- I have to agree with Elonka, this connection is too shaky and ScienceApologist should not certify this. Sumoeagle179 (talk) 02:09, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Spec Shea DYK
|
|
On 2 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Spec Shea, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Daniel Case (talk) 04:01, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
You closed this as a Delete with no comment, but it was far from a consensus; there was just a bare majority for Delete, and most of the Delete voters ignored (at least one purposefully) WP:BIO's unambiguous language specifically qualifying any "fully" professional athlete, which anyone playing AAA baseball certainly is. Would you mind elaborating on your rationale? RGTraynor 07:59, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
I came here to learn the same thing. I think on this one you really need to provide an explanation as a part of the close. Thanks! Hobit (talk) 17:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Brian Edgar
Was it you who deleted Brian Edgar? Because if it was you, do you mind at all if I have a copy of the deleted page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.74.34.151 (talk) 09:23, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Miracle
Your decision to mass delete all the entries I did on Miracle ballplayers was BS. There were far too many opinions in the debate to save several of these ball players. That didn't matter to you at all; you completely ignored the debate and imposed your will. Regardless of who is and who is not on the 40 man roster, there were several good ball players on that list who deserve separate consideration. Deolis Guerra, as it stated in his now deleted Wikipedia entry, was one of the players included in the Johann Santana trade between the Mets and Twins. I would think that fact alone would make him note worthy enough to save. Don't you think that the occassional Twins fan might be interested in reading about this player they picked up in this blockbuster trade? Likewise, don't you think a Mets fan might be interested in learning more about the minor leaguers they gave up? Forget the fact that he was in the All Star futures game.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 15:45, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Deletion review for Kelley Gulledge
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Kelley Gulledge. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. RGTraynor 14:14, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
How deeply did you investigate the copyright concern I raised in my opinion? (And to which my attention was drawn by DGG's edit summary in declining the prior A7 speedy deletion request.) If not for the copyright concern, I'd have opined keep myself. But my understanding is that a valid copyright issue is dispositive, it outweighs any and all keep opinions. So I want to know if you really looked at the copyright issue here. GRBerry 14:51, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Kansas Avenue AFD
Hi there, you closed this as delete. Any real objections to a re-direct. The content is already at the list article (likely via c/p) and I'd like to preserve the history. Just let me know, thanks. TravellingCari 18:50, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
- Done, thanks. TravellingCari 18:55, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
My Demeanor
Regardless of whether or not you liked my demeanor, my opinion remains. I don't believe that you gave any consideration to the debate. Anyway, thanks for the restoration. Robert Delaney, Anthony Slama and several other players on the Miracle also deserve restoration. I wish you would read some of the articles you deleted.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 18:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Many thanks!
|
Thank you...
...for participating in my RfA, which closed with 119 in support, 4 neutral and 5 opposes. I'm honestly overwhelmed at the level of support that I've received from the community, and will do my best to maintain the trust placed in me. I 'm also thankful to those who opposed or expressed a neutral position, for providing clear rationales and superb feedback for me to build on. I've set up a space for you to provide any further feedback or thoughts, should you feel inclined to. However you voted, thanks for taking the time out to contribute to the process, it's much appreciated. Kind regards, Gazimoff 22:17, 4 August 2008 (UTC) |
Deletion review for Anthony Slama
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Anthony Slama. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. lifebaka++ 11:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Question on RfCs
Hi Wizardman, I see you've been clerking Elonka's RfC. Well, I want to ask something. On Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct, it says in the "Use of administrator privileges" section the following:
"This section is only for discussions specifically related to the use of sysop rights by Wikipedia:Administrators. This includes the actions of protecting or unprotecting pages, deleting or undeleting pages, and blocking or unblocking users. If the dispute is over an admin's actions as an editor, it should be listed under the General user conduct section above."
This means that RfCs of admins where an admin has abused the tools should be listed there, but if it's just editing concerns about an admin, it should be listed in the "General user conduct" section. In Elonka's RfC, it mainly appears to me to be concerns over her editing and handling of disputes, not actual use of the tools. As such, shouldn't her RfC be listed in the "General user conduct" section of that page rather than the section on admin abuse, or am I missing something? Thanks. Acalamari 16:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
- I did use tools in "editing a protected page", which was to log cautions on WP:ARBPIA. And issuing warnings is only to be done by "an uninvolved admin". Also, the Talk:Muhammad al-Durrah#Conditions for editing that I placed on the page, were "in my authority as an uninvolved administrator". So I think that the admin section of the RfC page is appropriate. However, on the flip side, ChrisO's RfC is more formatted as a "general editing" RfC. For example, most admin RfCs have a section for "Powers misused", but I don't think he listed anything like that. Mostly he seems to be arguing that I'm not enforcing the conditions in the proper way, or in other words, he feels that I should be giving him more leeway (since he is more experienced) than I should give to editors with opposing views.
- So yes, things are a bit muddled. But to be clear: I don't think I actually used tools anywhere on the Muhammad al-Durrah article or related editors. No protection, deletion, or blocks. All of my actions were to place conditions and warnings. And a very very few brief bans: Talk:Muhammad al-Durrah#Admin log. Which I'm actually fairly proud of, since I feel I offered fairly minor guidance, but had a major impact in stabilizing the article. :) --Elonka 16:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, Wizardman, for your response. That helped a lot. Best wishes. Acalamari 23:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Administrators open to recall
I couldn't help but notice your name on this list...
My experience with you is limited, but based upon the one rash decision I watched you make without any real explanation, I believe you should step down.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 21:30, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
- Could you please elaborate on which decision makes you think Wizardman should stand down? John Vandenberg (chat) 22:19, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
- Not going to happen - just because you're a little pissed Johnny Spasm. This is bordering on disruption to the project and you are strongly warned not to engage is such farcical requests in future. Nick (talk) 22:47, 5 August 2008 (UTC)