User talk:CharlotteWebb: Difference between revisions
m →Nomination.: so true |
AnonEMouse (talk | contribs) →Nomination.: Keep cool and answer the question, please |
||
| Line 146: | Line 146: | ||
:{{tl|helpme}}! — [[User talk:CharlotteWebb|CharlotteWebb]] 17:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC) |
:{{tl|helpme}}! — [[User talk:CharlotteWebb|CharlotteWebb]] 17:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC) |
||
::Haha! [[User:GDonato|GDonato]] ('''[[User talk:GDonato|talk]]''') 22:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC) |
::Haha! [[User:GDonato|GDonato]] ('''[[User talk:GDonato|talk]]''') 22:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC) |
||
===[[Wikipedia:No open proxies|Tor proxies]] and [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/CharlotteWebb|your RfA]]=== |
|||
If you want to give a good argument for why Tor proxies are good in general, go ahead. You may well convince some people. Personally, I didn't know much about them or think much of them one way or the other, before your RfA. I suspect the same is true of lots of people. |
|||
If you want to explain why you personally need them, or use them, that's great, that's what the question was about. |
|||
But if you keep avoiding the question and instead try to turn this into an attack on Jayjg, you will turn a lot of people against you. |
|||
Think of how Acalamari nominated you. "CharlotteWebb is very civil, and she is also a very calm user, not one to get upset easily or anything like that." Keeping your [[WP:COOL|cool]] is an important part of being an admin, which is why Acalamari emphasized it so much. You're not doing that. |
|||
Think of what you, yourself wrote: "Yes, but first, can explain why you have invaded my privacy twice, first by obtaining this information, and again by publicly revealing it?" That could have been phrased a lot better, but in any case, Jayjg has now explained. Your turn. --[[User:AnonEMouse|AnonEMouse]] <sup>[[User_talk:AnonEMouse|(squeak)]]</sup> 21:08, 15 June 2007 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 21:08, 15 June 2007
|
This user is under the microscope of the cabal. For more information, try joining some mailing lists. | |
| F | This user has been rated as F-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | |
[09:20] <[redacted]> anyone knows how to get the "noteability" flag removed from a page?
[09:20] <CharlotteWebb> [redacted], see the link that says "edit this page"
[09:22] <[redacted]> CharlotteWebb: thanks! that worked
War on idiocy:
- "Notability": is not and never has been policy [1].
- "Consensus": please learn to spell it before claiming one exists [2].
- "Merge and delete": is not a valid result of an AFD debate [3].
 |
Archives |
I notice your comment on this RfA, which seems to re-iterate my and another's support, but you yourself have not voted. Is it because you are not in favour of the "popularity/conformity contest" which is the RfA, or simply waiting to vote once you've carefully considered all the pros and cons? It seems like few people actually take the time to make an in depth analysis of the actual user, and instead look at edit counts and summaries and then voting on that basis, without asking real questions which will indicate the user's character and intentions. To some, it seems, we the contributors are less important than protocols and systems. Forgetting that no contributors = no content = no encyclopedia, no matter how thorough the policies are.
Removal of vote on my RfA
I am saddened to see that you withdrew your vote on my RfA. What changed your mind, may I ask? Thanks for your time, and happy Wikying. hmwithtalk 20:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 4th, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 23 | 4 June 2007 | 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 07:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
COI Templates.
Hi, I'm sending you a message because of your involvement with the Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_May_18#Template:COI_and_Template:COI2 discussion. The result of the TfD was no-consensus, but there was a significant expressed consensus for editing the templates to bring them into line with good practice. Unfortunately this has not happened, and the templates have been left pretty much in the state they were before the TfD. Would you like to assist in bringing these templates in line with good practice? --Barberio 16:46, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Well done!
It looks like the threat of deletion motivates people to find sources. Looks like someone cares about the article after all! (messedrocker • talk) 21:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'd like you a lot more if you had chosen to do so yourself. Please don't blindly assume that nobody will be ignorant enough to delete an article rather than fixing it, or you'll be disappointed more often than not. — CharlotteWebb 22:00, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi
I do not quite understand your comment on my talk page. I am very well known on Wikipedia and I am certainly not a official Duran Duran Wikipedian. I haven't made serious announcements on the DD page, only about what was confirmed by Billboard.com. I apologize but I did not know that my user name would cause confusion. It would be greatly appreciated if you could please elaborate, as I am a little slow =) to what the problem is. If there has been ANY complaints, please do not hesitate to let me know! Regards. ˉˉDuranDuran╦╩ 18:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
With me there's always a more graceful way to handle something. Usually a technically more proficient way, too. Thanks. KP Botany 22:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry
I don't want to be an admin at the moment. You're making me feel terrible here. You put so much work into that nom and everything. Let me just tell you it's greatly appreciated and I'm touched at the effort you put in. You know it's kind of funny, because I've been meaning to thank you ever since you put all the dates in the refs during the Jordan FAC. So thanks for both things. Quadzilla99 01:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, what is FNORD! btw? You can respond here or on my page whichever. Quadzilla99 01:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Ah okay. Sorries all around. I did start and get Matthew Cox to GA too and its not a sports article but yeah I spend 90% of my time on sports stuff. I'll let you know if I change my mind. Quadzilla99 02:39, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Vandal warnings
Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Rabbit Don't Come Easy, you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit was inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. It is more difficult to discourage a vandal and/or block a persistent vandal when other editors fail to place warnings on the user's talk page. Thanks. Skeezix1000 16:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
My RFA
 |
Hello, CharlotteWebb, and thank you so much for your support in my recent RFA, which passed 59/0/0! I will try very hard to live up to your expectations – please let me know if I can help you in any way, but first take your cookie! Thanks again! KrakatoaKatie 00:37, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
NOTE: I'm not very creative, so I adopted this from RyanGerbil10 who swiped it from Misza13, from whom I have swiped many, many things. Chocolate chip cookies sold separately. Batteries not included. Offer not valid with other coupons or promotions. May contain peanuts, strawberries, or eggs. Keep out of the reach of small children, may present a choking hazard to children under the age of 3 and an electrical hazard to small farm animals. Do not take with alcohol or grapefruit juice. This notice has a blue background and may disappear into thin air. The recipient of this message, hereafter referred to as "Barnum's latest sucker", relinquishes all rights and abilities to file a lawsuit, to jump on a pogostick while standing on his head, and to leap out in front of moving trains. KrakatoaKatie, Jimbo Wales, and the states of Arkansas, Wisconsin, and Oklahoma are not liable for any lost or stolen items or damage from errant shopping carts or unlicensed drivers such as Paris Hilton. |
 |
Signpost updated for June 11th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 24 | 11 June 2007 | 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 02:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
My E-mail.
Thanks, I've replied back. Acalamari 16:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Nomination.
- {{helpme}}! — CharlotteWebb 17:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Haha! GDonato (talk) 22:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Tor proxies and your RfA
If you want to give a good argument for why Tor proxies are good in general, go ahead. You may well convince some people. Personally, I didn't know much about them or think much of them one way or the other, before your RfA. I suspect the same is true of lots of people.
If you want to explain why you personally need them, or use them, that's great, that's what the question was about. But if you keep avoiding the question and instead try to turn this into an attack on Jayjg, you will turn a lot of people against you.
Think of how Acalamari nominated you. "CharlotteWebb is very civil, and she is also a very calm user, not one to get upset easily or anything like that." Keeping your cool is an important part of being an admin, which is why Acalamari emphasized it so much. You're not doing that.
Think of what you, yourself wrote: "Yes, but first, can explain why you have invaded my privacy twice, first by obtaining this information, and again by publicly revealing it?" That could have been phrased a lot better, but in any case, Jayjg has now explained. Your turn. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 21:08, 15 June 2007 (UTC)