:::::::Well said. You certainly have the thoughtfulness needed to be a "good" admin. :-) There is currently an "Rfa review" happening [[WP:RREV|here]] to see if/what needs shakin. Right now, it's in the question phase, you can see the survey [[WP:RREV/Q|here]], feel free to add your input! [[User:Keeper76|<font color="#21421E" face="comic sans ms">Keeper</font>]] | [[User talk:Keeper76|<font color="#CC7722" face="Papyrus">76</font>]] | [[User:Keeper76#Origins of My Username|<font color="#ff0000"><small>Disclaimer</small></font>]] 15:07, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
:::::::Well said. You certainly have the thoughtfulness needed to be a "good" admin. :-) There is currently an "Rfa review" happening [[WP:RREV|here]] to see if/what needs shakin. Right now, it's in the question phase, you can see the survey [[WP:RREV/Q|here]], feel free to add your input! [[User:Keeper76|<font color="#21421E" face="comic sans ms">Keeper</font>]] | [[User talk:Keeper76|<font color="#CC7722" face="Papyrus">76</font>]] | [[User:Keeper76#Origins of My Username|<font color="#ff0000"><small>Disclaimer</small></font>]] 15:07, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
::::::::Somewhere in the mess of posts following RFA/DHMO3, I posted somewhere that the "hazing" element to RFA isn't necessarily a bad thing; the current process acts as a kind of [[LD50]] testing of prospective admins' tempers. If a prospective admin loses their temper at [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FBrownHairedGirl&diff=52209728&oldid=52207638 fruitloopery like this] (and yes, that was a genuine RFA comment), chances are they'll also lose their temper when they find [[User_talk:Iridescent/Archive_4#Re:my_adoptee|this kind of inanity]] cluttering their talkpage every morning, or the rambling explanations on WR of how they've "proved" you to be a sockpuppet of whoever their current [[Aunt Sally]] is.<font face="Trebuchet MS"> – [[User:Iridescent|<font color="#E45E05">''iride''</font>]][[User_talk:Iridescent|<font color="#C1118C">''scent''</font>]]</font> 17:59, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
::::::::Somewhere in the mess of posts following RFA/DHMO3, I posted somewhere that the "hazing" element to RFA isn't necessarily a bad thing; the current process acts as a kind of [[LD50]] testing of prospective admins' tempers. If a prospective admin loses their temper at [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FBrownHairedGirl&diff=52209728&oldid=52207638 fruitloopery like this] (and yes, that was a genuine RFA comment), chances are they'll also lose their temper when they find [[User_talk:Iridescent/Archive_4#Re:my_adoptee|this kind of inanity]] cluttering their talkpage every morning, or the rambling explanations on WR of how they've "proved" you to be a sockpuppet of whoever their current [[Aunt Sally]] is.<font face="Trebuchet MS"> – [[User:Iridescent|<font color="#E45E05">''iride''</font>]][[User_talk:Iridescent|<font color="#C1118C">''scent''</font>]]</font> 17:59, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
::::::::: Oh, ''that'' group of editors. I had to step away from trying to help them myself. I started reading that threat and just had to stop. Good luck with that, Irid. Just to add here, as a tack on, and probably one of the lesser considerate things I'll say... the whole program of "adoption" on wikipedia is so backwards and silly that on the whole I'd say it hurts the project more than it helps. Semi-related to that group, I guess. [[User:Gwynand|Gwynand]] | [[User_talk:Gwynand|Talk]]•[[Special:Contributions/Gwynand|Contribs]] 18:05, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
::::::::: Oh, ''that'' group of editors. I had to step away from trying to help them myself. I started reading that thread and just had to stop. Good luck with that, Irid. Just to add here, as a tack on, and probably one of the lesser considerate things I'll say... the whole program of "adoption" on wikipedia is so backwards and silly that on the whole I'd say it hurts the project more than it helps. Semi-related to that group, I guess. [[User:Gwynand|Gwynand]] | [[User_talk:Gwynand|Talk]]•[[Special:Contributions/Gwynand|Contribs]] 18:05, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
== Unprotect stuff ==
== Unprotect stuff ==
Revision as of 18:09, 17 June 2008
Wait! Are you here because your article was speedy deleted? Click here before leaving a message to find out why.
Instructions for using the Keeper-pedia/WikiKeeper
as written by TCari
Embrace the edit conflict, for happen it will.
Leaving a comment for Keeper doesn't mean that it will be Keeper who answers it, although he'll try. See #1. Make new friends you will.
Save the drama for your mama. Everyone (mostly) gets along here.
If American, you must be a baseball fan. Doesn't matter which team(s) as it's almost guaranteed someone will razz you on it. May apply for all sports[verification needed]
Now that he's (almost) an admin, how 'bout some fun?
Tan has !requested that we help improve his userspace by adding an "appropriate" caption to the picture in the upper right corner of his userpage. Please help Tan become a better editor, by offering suggestions here for his consideration, (keeping in mind that he'll be an administrator within hours, and will likely go block-crazy, batshit-insane with power, mouth foaming, and will be forgiven at ANI for his indef blocks under the banner of "it's my first day")
"What do you mean, handcheck?"
"Get the fuck off the outside of my car dude!"
"If you're taking that picture, which one of us is driving?"
"Tan, making a tearful return to the place he was conceived".
"Here I am, in the back of a cab on my way to Dulles Airport for a five hour flight. I am hungover as hell. I might puke all over this nice dress shirt. I bet all my coworkers totally noticed me and two other partners-in-crime were still drunk at the meeting this morning." Wait, these are supposed to be jokes?
"Of course I care about your problems. I am after all, an admin".
Ya know, the best thing about being an admin isn't the "power" (ha, power) or even the use of the tools. It's not being some part of higher tier - that's a fallacy for sure. It's not having to act like a goddamn fairy anymore ;-) Tan | 3922:58, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I got a "new message" bar for this. Do you know how fucking long it took me to find this message? How 'bout using the "edit this section" buttons to the right instead of the "edit this page" on the top. Sheesh. Fairy. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer23:02, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I never use the "edit section" thing, maybe I should. I honestly thought you usually read the diffs. Anyway, I'm mostly joking, in the fact that I'll always have Wiki's best interests as my #1 priority and won't let you down. However, it means that I don't have to "be good" and please everyone simply so I can pass an RfA. This isn't a commentary on my actions; it's a commentary on how silly some opposes can be. But we already know this, right? Tan | 3923:08, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, so true. It applies the entire time, and especially when you're at the RfA. People can smear you, make bad faith opposes, etc. and you're not supposed to say a word. Enigmamessage03:00, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I knew what you meant. My "you best be joking" was joking as well. And you should use the edit section thing, at least, on talkpages that are f-ing ridiculously convolutedly long. I read the diff, but I wanted the context for it, so I was searching for it on the actual page. And doing an IE search for "Tanthalas" came up zilch because you sign "tan". And searching "tan" brought up too many. Sigh, I know you're not going rogue. And to top it off, I'm absolutely thrilled that Shapiros has decided that the addition that you made above is the most appropriate addition. Had a good laugh at that too. :-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer23:12, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for spending the time on the article! It was on my list, but I hadn't gotten to it yet. I spent some time on it and made it even better. Royalbroil04:04, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was surprised that a closing admin would be willing to spend time on writing an article about an auto racer. Most people don't find them rather dull the way that they drive around in circles. I didn't know that you don't do much article expanding. Royalbroil16:47, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No problem Sam. Go slow, and be careful. I won't stop another admin from taking rollback away if he/she thinks you're using it improperly. Good luck! Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer19:59, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Although I don't approve of 6th graders using language like "shit", I saw your messages to Tanthalas and Maxim. SLOW DOWN. BE CAREFUL. . You just happened to "warn" two users that are easy going. Slow down. Be careful. And watch your language. :-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer20:57, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As people in my class jokingly yell out, LANGUAGE CHECK!!!!! But, when you're scared, the whole "language thing" goes out the window. If I was blocked again, I would be banned. Thanks for sparing me, Sir Keeper. Shapiros10 WuzHere 21:00, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No reason to be scared. This is Wikipedia, not middle school (although some days, I wonder if there's really any difference... Friday, Iridescent, are you reading this?)... Just don't warn established editors, and admins, about vandalising things. Slow down. Be careful. And don't fucking swear, or I'll remove rollback, rendering huggle useless. Cheers! :-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer21:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All smiles. I going home from work pretty soon here. Work you say Keeper? What, you're an adult? That works? And has a mortgage, and a kid and a wife and a dog? Yes, work. Going home soon, to enjoy my leisurely weekend in the suburbs, maybe mow the lawn, maybe not. Probably have a whole list of responsible things to do courtesy of Mrs. Keeper though... Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer21:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If I make a "honey do" list, it means stuff I have to do -- so I prefer not. I did enough of that at work. So need to pack this weekend, can I tempt anyone into it? Pack for me and I'll gove you a barnstar? Interleague play here, shoud be interesting. Mow? No thanks, "I've got people" and it's one thinkg I'll happily pay people for. Happy weekend all, not that this is going to get seen come Monday morning. Might tell Iridescent that s/he has competition for a talk page s'plosion. :) TravellingCarithe Busy Bee22:55, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes hard to tell the difference: blocking=suspension. Banning=expulsion. I will "slow down be careful" and not ^&%(%^%$#&*(@&^@$*#@()%$^ swear. Or else. Shapiros10 WuzHere 21:05, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As long as I have your attention Sam, I would also like to point out to you that your signature is rather "distracting". Wikipedia is about making the encyclopedia better. Vandalism reversion is part of that, and I think you can be really good at that. Adding articles/improving articles is also part of that, and I hope you are intelligent enough to help us out (some 6th graders are and you may be one of them, most 6th graders in my experience as a 6th grade teacher, are blatantly not). Prove me wrong. Change your signature to be less distracting. Use the "basic signature", or at least something less distracting. Ignore what the other "middle schoolers" tell you is important and help build the encyclopedia. Did you know that we've actually promoted some 12-15 year olds to be admins, and even bureaucrats? Be one of those editors. All of them had plain signatures, to start with. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer21:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
First off, "Themz adiminez es all bicthez" from your quote page. Not exctly an example? And what do my friends have to do with this? And I know people with much more "distracting" signatures. Look at User:Ryan Taylor's sig history. If it's repulsing you to the point of vomit, I'll change it because I value your opinion. Shapiros10 WuzHere 21:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not vomiting, but I didn't know til just now that that second grayed-out area said something. It's pretty hard to read. And definitely not pretty. Tan | 3921:15, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
<--Signature is much better. In fact, I would recommend making it even simpler if you want to be taken seriously. Personalized sigs are fine, I use one, as does everyone else that has replied here. But at the same time, you haven't proven yourself yet...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer21:32, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't use one. Just thought I'd jump in and say that keeping it simple is best when using a personalized sig; keeps the focus on what is being said rather than who is saying it. Useight (talk) 21:38, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree. Most good editors, that are conscious of what we are here for, don't. Or if they do, they use a simple one. It seems to be prevalent that only those that are here to draw attention to themselves use INSANELY LARGE SIGNATURES. Sam, if you are still reading this, and if you'd like to be taken seriously, I strongly recommend that you use the basic, non altered signature. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer21:39, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody would have to be really out of line to harass a good faith editor out of Wikipedia soley because of their signature. Useight (talk) 21:45, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll think about it. But i think that you're coming off a little bit strong here. I am not creating a signature to be distracting. I am not creating a signature to make "wiki-friends". My Wikipedia career is not focused on this signature. Based on your reply, I will reply to you. Shapiros10Say "Hi"My work21:49, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry you feel I'm coming off "strong". Editors that are serious about making a better encyclopedia don't want to give much time to those that are here to be social. I'm saying this as an administrator that is notorious for being helpful, but also for not contributing a huge amoount to mainspace. Sleep on it, decide what you want to do, and then get back to me. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer21:52, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ack, I just wanted to jump in and say I had this "signature problem" once before. Remember, Keeper. So I changed to a more simpler one (RyRy5 (talk)). -- RyRy5 (talk) 21:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I remember RyRy, that's how I met you in the first place. You've grown leaps and bounds from where we first met, and I consider you to be an asset to Wikipedia. Shapiros/Sam, if you are looking for a good example for how to be a good editor, with the right goal in mind for improving Wikipedia, use RyRy for an example. He's had lots of troubles, but he has learned from all of them and continues to be helpful to building this place. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer21:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keeper. I think that the one point you fail to understand (oh god. I'm telling an adult that they don't understand something, except for the time when my mom asked what "vandalism" was) I am not using my signature for social purposes. I just like making colorful text. And you did come off rough. "Honestly type that sentance or I will ignore you."
You don't stink. The custom sig is minor. I have one, so does RyRy, I really could care less about your signature. What are you doing though to make Wikipedia better/more informative/more reliable/more comprehensive? RyRy has added whole articles. What are you doing? Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer21:57, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rollback - arbitrary section break 1
I think my signature is best; it's understated in a "don't mess with me" kind of a way. :lol: But there are times, Sam, when it's best just to zip up. (I can't believe I just said that, me, of all people!). --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:59, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(What? Like 5 edit conflicts! This is like AN!)Although I appreciate you saying that, but Sam, you can't blame yourself by saying "I stink because I have a custom sig". Most everyone has a custom sig, what make's you any different. We are all equals, but what the problem is, is that everyone has a different experience in editing. -- RyRy5 (talk) 22:01, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, besides obsessing over a signature, creating a sockfarm and getting on your nerves, nothing. Seriously, I am not an article writer. I am a (not so quiet) janitor who makes mistakes that every other non-bot makes. Oh, like the new signature. This proves I'm a bad, obsessive user. Shapiros10 was banned from havinga custom signature by Keeper7622:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That is a very immature response. Some middle schoolers are mature, some are not. Do you want to build Wikipedia, or do you want to pout? I haven't banned you from anything. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer22:06, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(2x edit conflict) Wow, everyone is make such a big deal over a font choice. Perhaps everyone should take a quick breather. Perhaps peruse the only essay I've ever written. On a side note, Keeper said, "I'm saying this as an administrator that is notorious for being helpful, but also for not contributing a huge amoount to mainspace." I just noticed that your User Talk edit count is about to surpass your Mainspace edit count. Tsk. Tsk. :P Useight (talk) 22:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry. But, in another response, you said that i needed the default sig or you would ignore me. That's like banning someone from help. And yes, I've decided to type that sentance if I can remember it. Whatever, I am here to build an encyclopedia, not build a sig. Shapiros10Talk22:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
← So many edit conflicts, what I was going to say isn't even relevant anymore. added arbitrary section break - a keeper talk first? xenocidic (talk) 22:10, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think the bottom line here that Keeper is moving towards is that if you want to be taken seriousley, use the default signature. If not, do something stupid, like putting a link to your religion. Wait...--Koji†Dude(C)22:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
First to Useight, I'm rather proud (or at least honest) of my main v. userspace count. Meh. I'm an admin. I don't have time to build the mainspace because everytime I try to add content/refs, I get a freekin orange message bar from someone that wants me to undelete something/explain something/argue something/etc... To Shapiros/sam: Prove it. Prove to me you are here to build an encyclopedia. Show me something, with links, that you've done to improve this place besides reverting vandalism. Do whatever the f*** you want with your signature, that is the least of my concerns. What I see, forgive me for being blunt, is a 12 year old that thknks that wikipedia is a cool place to meet people. When you were blocked, you made socks. I gave you rollback, but I'm starting to wonder about my decision to do so. Are you really here to improve the encyclopedia?????? I'm going offline, right now, see you tomorrow......... Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer22:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. The incessant orange bar will do that to a person. I wasn't trying to accuse you of ignoring the mainspace, (you've got 3000+ edits there), I was just pointing out an interesting tidbit. Useight (talk) 23:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. See you when I've created a featured article. No offense sir, you're hard to please. Maybe I might not want you to adopt me. Shapiros10Talk22:31, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And what am i doing showing that I'll I'm doing is trying to meet people? Prove it. Show me something with links. And you gave me rollback to revert vandalism, what I mainly do! Shapiros10Talk22:33, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
snort* I ♥ Acalamari's "block" notice. I think if we had that in connection with someone I saw earlier who's blocking period was "cow" the world would end. Truly. Love it. TravellingCarithe Busy Bee01:21, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I know I said I was offline, but I'm not. :-) .. Shapiros/Sam, I like your new signature. Simple, unassuming, and plain. It proves to me at least that you're serious about helping Wikipedia. I'm looking forward to your featured article (and I never ever said I was going to "adopt" you.) Once you have a featured article, I'll be the first to grant you a barnstar, a silver medal, and an apology. I'm actually really easy to please, you think I'm not, but you are entitled to your opinion. That said, Giggy, you're not helping (but I did get a good laugh). Everyone else - go find something to do! :-) !!!! ---- Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer01:24, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
bah, I've been engaged in important adminly business all night! i even went so far as to modify some javascript! take that! xenocidic (talk) 01:30, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ugliest park?!?!?! Ugliest park!?!?!? I'll have you know that a relative of mine (no kidding!) is the head grounds keeper of minute maid park. Head grounds keeper. He decides everything as far as appearances go, and he does a damn fine job. I don't like the Astros, never will, but damn, my cousin knows how to mow the grass....Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer01:36, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was speaking architecturally. It's too modern. Looks like a space station, not a baseball stadium. Almost as strange as Kansai International Airport and Kyoto Station. Also New Museum of Contemporary Art. Can you tell I'm not a fan of modern. The grass is beautiful, I assure you... and your cousin. Oh and your edit summ scared the bejebus out of me. Was wondering what I'd done :o — Preceding unsigned comment added by Travellingcari (talk • contribs)
Okay Mr. Keeper. I have changed my signature not to include a "say hi". that might've been seen from an experienced wikipedian's point of view as social. If there are any more objections, take it up with my adopter LaraLove. Shapiros10contact meMy work17:39, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
O, hai. I changed my sig a day or so ago... good timing, good times. So check it, mad love to Keeper for convincing Sharpiros to change that previous sig. That was going to be my first thing with the adoption. As for Best Sig Evar! I choose Ryan Postlethwaite's when he had it huge, rainbow-colored and flashing. That was epic. LaraLove|Talk18:06, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm old, but not that old:-) I did read this, a couple of days ago. I didn't think you necessarily required a response though. I disagreed with you in some places, agreed with you in others, and overall thought your answers were just fine. (If I had a big problem with any of them, don't you think I woulda bugged you about it? :-) Cheers, going away til tomorrow...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer01:26, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My quote page is part of the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Feel free to add it. Keep in mind though that this is also the encylopedia that anyone can revert. And then revert/warn/revert/warn2/revert/warn3/revert/warn4/revert/AIV/revert/block editor indef...:-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer01:29, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nice. :) I have often had something similar to that go through my mind when I revert foolsvandals who add "Don't trust Wikipedia cuz anyone can changa evertyhing, like I jus did heer" to pages.
Also, while I know that "[By clicking submit,] you agree to license your contributions under the GFDL", I tend to view userspace (other than their talk page, which is fair game <thunderous evil laughter/>) as the sacred property of the user in question. Setting foot on that sacred place (for any reason other than reverting vandalism) without great deference (especially to an admin...) is approximately equivilent to begging for a slow and painful death. (or at least an indef-block — There goes 50000 contribs *sigh* :P ) J.delanoygabsadds01:46, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Not really, but I still don't like editing other people's user pages.
I think it's rather funny if I'm being honest. Of course, I obviously canvassed all those fine folks with my non-email, non-IRC self. :-) I can't stop someone from saying "per nom", I've done it myself. The 'crats can weight them as much or as little as they'd like. The only reason it's a good nom is because its a good candidate that I'm rather enthusiastic about and found no issues with (I clicked on nearly every diff, including n00b edits). Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer15:08, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll also add that everyone that is opposing or neutral has said "per Giggy". Support per keeper. Oppose per Giggy. Great fun! I honestly hope it doesn't bother you, it certainly doesn't bother me. Life/short | encyclopedia/lacking... Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer16:01, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, my point was (and this is a general RfA thing, not specific to you) people supporting just because of who the nominator is. As opposed to the candidate's merits. giggy(:O)01:50, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If the nominator has already pointed out the candidate's merits in a way that is agreeable to your own opinion of "what makes a good admin", then what's inherently wrong with "per nom"? I think it could be better worded though, to avoid the drama. It should be "Per the nominator's statement and research", not "per nominator, who never makes mistakes". That I agree. I hope you didn't take my poke there as accusational, I respect your opinion (at least, on that RfA I respect your opinion :-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer01:31, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On hold: This article is currently awaiting improvements before pass/fail.
I have carried out an assessment of this talkpage as per the criteria at WP:Poor Talkpage Candidates. While this page generally meets the Poor Talkpage Criteria, there are certain issues that need to be addressed before I would feel comfortable passing it:
Accusation of ageism?
Accusation of picking on user due to their custom sig?
Accusation of misuse of admin tools?
Faint insinuations that you're somehow part of a conspiracy?
At least three posts about you in ALL CAPS to WP:ANI?
So many different fonts used in a single section thanks to all the signatures that it crashes the page's cascading style sheet?
"If this continues I will remove your access to Huggle"?
"If this continues I will remove your access to rollback"?
"If this continues I will remove your access to Twinkle"?
"If this continues I will have no alternative but to block you"?
At least one person referring to a conversation that took place on another page over two weeks ago, with no link to said conversation, expecting you to know what they're talking about?
At least one conversation involving six or more editors, at least three of which are arguing over a petty point of trivia?
All of the elements currently lacking are fairly easily addressed, and overall the general quality of this talkpage is easily poor enough to meet Wikipedia's standards. If the issues raised above are addressed within a week of this review, I will have no hesitation in passing this as a Poor Quality Talkpage. If you are having trouble in raising the number of flames on this page, you may wish to consider asking some of the editors posting here or here to assist. – iridescent14:26, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Damn, I thought fer shur I'd pass. Iridescent was obviously canvassed behind my back to fail my PTA. It's all a conspiracy. I should get points for stifling someone's free speech. Apparently I did that yesterday by asking them to change their signature. Here's hoping he brings it all the wayTO THE TOP! Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer15:21, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural oppose - reviewer failed to ignore the guidelines posted at Poor Talk Page Assesment, particularly criertion 1.c, 4.d and 22.lima/pappa/foxtrot/fiveGazimoffWriteRead16:25, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, I just about hit undo for vandalism, thought I should first check the history...and reading above, I'm pretty sure it's been "EONS" since you've been called an SPA..hee. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer00:50, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well two problems here. One, I'm no kid (but I did enjoy father's day today with me son and me old man). Two, I "grue up" in a technophobic house. Never heard of Zork. Me folks still have never owned a computer, and only recently figgered out the DVD player I bought them, what with the "magic disks" and all...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer01:03, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Happy Fathers' Day, Keep. As for the kiddy detector. I'm *barely* under 30 and I know that message well. I'm good with computers but TVs, tivos and DVRs scare me. What magic discs? :) TravellingCarithe Busy Bee01:33, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, "barely under 30". I remember those days like they were _______ years ago....back when I was asked for identification to purchase my vices, instead of offered the senior discount on liquor....Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer01:35, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I got IDed for Barq's rootbeer last weekend. Root Beer! Took me 10 minutes to explain to the clerk why my lack of ID shouldn't have mattered. Yes it's a silver can but is reading totally optional in training courses these days? TravellingCarithe Busy Bee02:06, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair to the cashier, Barq's is the only rootbeer in mass US market production that is caffeinated. You musta been looking kinda jittery and shifty-eyed...:-) I was carded once a few years back for lottery tickets. I was appalled. My basic comment was "Ok, you wanna see my id, but I can take my dollar bill, walk over to the unsupervised, self-serve lottery ticket vending machine right over there, and buy a "scratch ticket", but you won't sell me a powerball?" Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer14:30, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't know that re: Barq's. Lotto has always befuddled me. I never once got IDed for cigs until well after I was 18. I did get IDed for an R-rated movie when I was ~20. I didn't have ID because I'd gone with my family and wasn't paying. Was so lame. TravellingCarithe Busy Bee16:04, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(to Keeper) Some places force their employees to embarrass themselves by asking people who are clearly of age for ID. I'm 18, and I work at a grocery store. They make us ID everyone who buys beer. (not root beer, thank God) If you don't, and they catch you, you get just one warning... I once ID-ed someone who was born in 1918, and the computer thought I was lying, so it wouldn't take it. What a pain. J.delanoygabsadds16:11, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've put many shops out of business for selling alcohol or knives to minors; once you've seenit happen once I imagine you're more careful from then on. Was the shopkeeper who asked for rootbeer ID a recent immigrant? Remember, rootbeer doesn't exist outside the US so if they saw the "beer" on the label, they'd jump to conclusions. – iridescent16:32, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've lived overseas so I don't always hear accents but if memory serves me right, there was none. Plus this is a busy NYC grocery kiosk so it should not have been a novel sale. FWIW, rootbeer exists in Japan -- it's Australia and Europe that are lacking, something I noticed all too often while there. TravellingCarithe Busy Bee16:35, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I can picture TC in a back alley, somewhere in the heart of London, saying "come on, man, just give me the 6 pack. You know I'm good for it. I'll pay you back I swear - I need my A-dubs!" Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer16:40, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There are three shops in England that sell root beer & Mountain Dew on a regular basis (aside from on the bases); Cybercandy in central London, Panzer's Deli near Abbey Road Studios, and a shop in Chester for some reason. And yes, people do make special trips for them (and Cheerios, the other part of the holy trinity of American Things You Can't Buy in Europe). The European MD is different to the US version (which is still technically illegal here). – iridescent16:48, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I rather like Dad's although it's not easy to find, with Barq's a close second. A&W is my old-time favorite but I don't like the new "recipe" for lack of a better word. Mountain Dew I can "dew" without, but I missed Dr. Pepper while overseas. And I miss Diet Fanta, which I've never found here in New York or Apple Soda, which I only found in Japan. TravellingCarithe Busy Bee16:59, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you wanna try something a bit different, try Jones Soda's "Crushed Melon". It's hard to come by (even where they sell Jones en masse, they don't carry the "canteloupe flavored soda". But it's extrememly good. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer17:06, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Section break
There should be barnstars given out for excessive posting to Keeper's talk. I have more edits to this talk page than any other user talk besides my own. Oh, and it's my birthday! Woohooo! Enigmamessage17:22, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Beats me. I heard an explanation that supposedly the editors offering money to bring things to featured status aren't necessarily biased, whereas a company paying MyWikiBiz is definitely biased. I would not care to try to explain the distinctions, because I don't understand them fully myself. On another note, my father travels a lot. Keep, guess what state he's in this week? Enigmamessage17:35, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
problem is the company is brazilian, and therefore not known by the administrators (understandably)
however, some of the sources cited (FOLHA DE SÂO PAULO for example) are VERY known newspapers in Brazil
that means that the company DOES have notability
I´d suggest just editing maybe some parts like "At the end of 2007 the company opened its first physical store and started a franchise system", which is kinda pointless
Thank you for your message. I guess I'm not too sure why you are posting it here on my talkpage, the only thing that I did at the deletion debate was relist it. I can certainly help you out though, and for your convenience, I will copy and paste your message that you've left here to the debate. Feel free to edit the debate directly from now on if you wish. I will post this entire message on your talkpage as well. Cheers, happy editing, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer00:43, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
RFA recommendation
Hi, Keeper76, I come to bring recommendations for RFA because you seem to be active in recruiting qualified candidates. I dont' know any procedure regarding the nomination, but I think The Evil Spartan (talk·contribs) could be a good admin. Kintetsubuffalo (talk·contribs) and CaliforniaAliBaba (talk·contribs) are also possible candidate who're working for Japan or Korea or other East Asia related articles, and they are editing from neutral point of view. But they seem to be inactive these days, but can you look at their contributions and judge whether all three are qualified for RFA? If you take a look at them, I would very appreciate that. Thanks.--Caspian blue (talk) 00:31, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Caspian, I'm afraid I won't have time to look for 12-24 hours, but I appreciate you thinking of me. I've recently added a small note on the bottom of my "RFA" page, located here. Generally, I like to search out a candidate myself, and have decried that if someone asks me for a nomination, I'll most certainly say "No thanks" in as polite of words as I can muster, especially if I'm personally unfamiliar with the candidate. That said, I have seen "The Evil Spartan" around, and have a generally good vibe about him. I've never heard of/worked with that I recall Kintetsbuffalo (although it is an excellent username) or CaliforniaAliBaba, so I would likely not nominate either of them. That doesn't mean they are bad candidates or that I wouldn't support a nomination, I just feel that a nominator should have a least a passing knowledge, or past experience with a candidate. I'll do some research in the AM about TES though, as I have heard of him at least, and see. I did notice on his talkpage that you are already discussing this with him, I'll watchlist that discussion to see how he answers your most recent question. Cheers, have a nice evening, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer00:55, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
GEO
Ha, I was just writing up a decline for the GeodeSilva (or whatever) csd when you popped in and did it first. GET OUT OF MY HEAD Tan | 3902:04, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've sorted my talkpage by editor on this list, If you are in the double digits (>10), (45 of you) you are a talkpage stalker. If you are above 40 (egads, there are 17 of you), you need to reflect a bit on your purpose here...If you are in the triple digits (>100), you need a therapist. Congratulations to Dusti, the only one so far to break WP:200, (at least, until TCari replies to this, and she will :-) she's at 199...) That all said, and with this many contributors across so many continents/time zones, I fully expect this page to reach featured status shortly...as long as Iridescent doesn't turn the cabal that is perfectly under Iridescent's complete control against me, thus failing my nomination above...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer17:43, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(e/cX2) Who's that disreputable editor Keeper76 in the list? That person really needs a therapist for stalking you as avidly as it appears they do. DDStretch (talk)17:56, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Careful there DD, you're closing in on double digits :-). I've tried to shake that Keeper guy for months, I finally gave up. He is relentless and has worn me down into a babbling, quivering, spineless mass... Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer17:58, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For all your largely unsung efforts to turn Wikipedia into Myspace by such subtly little steps that nobody really notices until it's too late, the Barnstar of Social Networking is hereby awarded to everyone on this page. Now, all of you go out and welcome 100 vandals good faith new users! (I have a horrible feeling I'm going to start seeing this barnstar on pages for real, now) – iridescent18:00, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So Keeper, does that mean that I get a prize? "I would like to thank the Wikipedia foundation......" Already working on my speech. :) DustiSPEAK!!18:17, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hee hee. So we go from a "Poor Talkpage Assessment" to root beer to playing around with one of Daniel's toys. I love this page.
So Iridescent, am I a troll, vandal, or loon? Or am I all three? ;) (I have twice as many posts on your talk page as some of the people I think you would classify as a troll and/or a loon) J.delanoygabsadds18:31, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you're not a troll, vandal or loon, I guess you must be a bot.
Took a look. Fix me where I've got this wrong: You reverted "vandalism", templated someone for it on a talkpage. The reversion you did was apparently not vandalism, and has been re-reverted, and someone templated you for your incorrect use of a template, to which you cited "WP:AGF and don't template me. The blanking of the page was explained as proper (usually it is vandalism, in this case it wasn't, and I agree that an edit summary woulda cleared the whole thing up). Did I miss anything? Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer21:08, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And you do realize what the last line of the essay that you've cited is right? It reads:
"Having said this [don't template the regulars], those [regulars] who receive a template message should not assume bad faith regarding the user of said template. They may not be aware how familiar the user is with policy, or may not consider it rude themselves. They may also simply be trying to save time by avoiding writing out a lengthy message that basically says the same thing as the template, which is, after all, the purpose of a template" Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer21:11, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And re to both of you - I'm sure you know already but it always bears repeating: WP:DTTR (along with WP:ATA, WP:MOS, WP:DENY, WP:FAIRUSE and many other bits of ALLCAPS that get thrown around all the time) is not a policy. WP:DTTR in particular isn't even a guideline, just a personal essay with no more policy significance than WP:TTR. – iridescent21:22, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Eman, you do realize you've cited the same thing as Iridescent :-)? I hate templates. Rarely use them outside of clearcut blockwarnings/vandwarnings, maybe a welcome tag once and a while (you know, to get a barnstar "someday"). I much prefer manual typing. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer21:26, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Did not! Originally, Iridescent linked to the redlinked essay which used to contain Giggy's version of it. Seeing the redlink, I added a link to a different, yet similar essay. Enigmamessage21:28, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There's no battle. I would recommend though Dusti taking a second to apologize to Udonknome, you came off rather harsh. It's the right thing to do (and I'm pretty sure it's the last thing in the world you want to do, which should serve as proof that it's the right thing to do). And E-Man, Iridescent typed WP:TTR, which is an 8 month old redirect to DESeigel's essay that you linked. So, to end the battle of wits victoriously, Did too!!!. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer21:32, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think I'll ever get tired of that sound clip. Like a the soundtrack from a modern-day updating of In the Mouth of Madness. – iridescent22:26, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The irony of course being that I had no problem listening to the soundclip on my corporate computer (Ok, I had a problem personally, but no firewall problem), but I'm not allowed to view the accompanying article, which is blocked as "pornography". I can see ridiculously bad images, and listen to ridiculously bad soundfiles, but I can't actually read/improve the articles. It's only a matter of time before the corporate IT-wonks catch on and block all of Wikipedia...que sera. If Keeper ever goes silent for more than a day or two, you'll know what happened...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer22:52, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Be careful what you say! You've got a paranoid stalking this page. Now you've got me boarding up my windows and locking my doors. I hope that you are statisfied. --Koji†Dude(C)23:16, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Did you see there was an RfA page (although never transcluded) and deleted by Balloonman on May 16 at request? Point of interest. Enigmamessage00:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(3/c)Saw it yes. Dont' care. Moni is already an admin, only she doesn't have access to the extra tools. The nom should never have been "withdrawn/deleted", because it woulda passed. Meh, it's up to Moni at this point I suppose. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer00:59, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I ran mine right after his went down in flames on purpose. I figured everyone was sick of drama and would just stick to the basics. Tan | 3901:07, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. I have seen you around as well, though never interacted with you to my knowledge (which is dubious). I'm actually a bit surprised that you've seen me around, since I tend to stick to the FAC page and the few articles I edit. I always think I'm transparent... An RfA for me was bandied about a few weeks ago. Since then I've been watching the ANI page and trying to think how I could assist. I would only take an admin position if I could help the quality of articles. Right now, I write and improve ones I find interesting and review others that editors have worked on. I wouldn't stop writing and reviewing them, but I think there must be something admins do that I can't see. I would like to be able to point out exactly what I might do as an admin, but I am as yet unable to say, "That's what I would do". Otherwise, if I'm doing everything I can within my wikipowers to improve articles, I would still continue doing that. At any rate, Balloonman investigated my edit history and gave me his expert analysis. You should ask him his thoughts on it. Thanks for your interest, though. --Moni3 (talk) 01:01, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there Moni, I think Balloonman's talkpage/contribs is where I first saw your name (I'm a stalker of course :-). There are lots of things that "admins" can do/see that "editors" cannot; the easiest example being "deleted pages". The fact that I, one of the most incompetent article writers, can see deleted pages, becausse by some fluke I passed an RfA, and you as a content writer haven't, is a disgrace. If you want to be an admin, I'll nominate you, and you'll pass. Keep in mind though, that you'll get opposes too, and they are stressful. As long as you keep your composure, and let your editing/contributions speak for themselves, you'll pass. I knew that when Balloonman (who is even more careful about nominations than I am) offered to nominate you. If you want the buttons, let me know. If you don't, let me know. What I will say, as an admin, is that the buttons are rather ridiculous in their triviality. They cause more problems than they solve, and lead to more drama than they cure. That said, Wikipedia needs more admins if only for page moves, redirects, and blocking socks. Moni, if you want it, I'll nominate. If you don't I won't. I'll watchlist your talkpage even though I fully expect that you'll reply here. Cheers, and happy editing, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer01:09, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
<serious mode>I'd suggest looking at the nom I wrote for Karanacs, as pretty much everything I said applies to you too. There are admin fields that don't involve RBI vandalblocking and thankless deletion — aside from a spike when I was beta-testing Huggle, I average only one or two blocks a month — and there are lots of times it comes in handy (there's more use in being able to restore deleted revisions than you'd think, for starters). Don't approach it as "Do I want to spend all my time protecting and unprotecting pages and having my talkpage mysteriously double in size when I'm asleep each night" — look through Wikipedia:Administrators/Tools and ask yourself "is there anything there that would potentially be useful in doing what I do anyway".</serious> – iridescent01:12, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Further point to the pair of you — after Recent Unfortunate Developments, Balloonman may not want to nominate anyone (although I think a joint Giggy/Balloonman nom would work well). I won't offer myself as I'm not particularly familiar with you, but you could do a lot worse than Keeper as a nom. – iridescent01:15, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Irid for your perspective. B-man made one error, but other than that, his nominations have been stellar, and I would hope that any future noms from him are considered on their own merits outside of the "mistake" he made at DHMO#3. Moni, let me know if/when you want a nom. You are a terrific editor, dedicated to Wikipedia. The extra tools are no biggie, they are rather silly in all honesty, and I personally think you've been here long enough/contributed enough to be able to do the things that I've personally been able to do since January. I don't have email enabled, I don't do IRC (which I find to be evil incarnate), so you'll have to post to my/your talkpage publicly. You'll pass RfA. I wouldn't say so unless I was confident in my typing, and I have an excellent track record as a nominator. I'm going offline here any second, I look forward to your reply in the AM...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer01:38, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) [sigh] She's not going to accept, let's face it. My only nomination for adminship was rejected by Moni because she though she didn't have enough contributions in the admin-related areas. I'd be happy to do a co nom, and I know she would pass, but will she attempt? It has the potential for a WP:100. I'm an Editorofthewiki[citation needed]01:51, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps this is not an admirable trait in an admin, though I think more people in general could use it: I tend to ponder things before making quick decisions. I watch a lot and make up my own mind without being unduly influenced by popular opinion. It's tempting to enter the love fest that my RfA would seem to warrant, but I watch the RfA pages as well. I see that they're often unnecessarily brutal, and I see the drama on the ANI page. That's not something I want to immerse myself in. I edit Wikipedia to pursue my interests and feed my passions. To become involved in disagreements that are truly more drama than they are worth would drain me, and this would cease to be interesting. I appreciate your consideration for sure, Keeper. I did tell Balloonman and SandyGeorgia, however, that as soon as I thought I could answer the question, "What do you plan to do with the tools", I would let them know. --Moni3 (talk) 02:01, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That sums up much of my feelings, Moni. I find myself much more comfortable at AN and ANI than I currently do at RfA. ANI, despite the drama, really seems to be working... there is a method to its madness and I see day after day problems getting solved there, even if the occasional thread turns into a massive morass. Watching RfAs the last few months, I think I could pass if unqualified, or fail even if I am qualified, based totally on various whims, momentum, etc. Very little to do with reviewing me, and that concerns me. Moni, the way you handle yourself indicates something beyond becoming an admin... perhaps that ultimate realization that you can do more and be happier without it. A novel idea indeed. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs14:02, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
<--Yeah, what he said. If you want it, get it. If you don't, don't. True IRL, and true on-wiki. RFA is like hellweek, but once you get past it, the extra buttons may prove to be valuable. If you are enjoying Wikipedia for what it is and what you contribute and don't feel that the buttons will make your work more enjoyable/easier/more fruitful, then I'll refuse to nominate or support your nomination. That said, if you ever need any "admin work" done, please know that you have my buttons when you need them, just let me know what you need done and where. Cheers, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer14:06, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly... the other point is that the buttons may indeed be quite useful, enabling an editor to help the project more. Might very well be worth going through RfA... my ultimate dilemma. I have to say, I generally find problems in nominations where the candidate finds the need to make the point that they don't know why they are there, or are unconvinced they need/want adminship. However, I think many editors go through that state before running... some make it out and realize they need the tools, others don't. I think its important to know exactly why you are entering--as Keeper calls it-- Hell Week, before entering. Done right, it actually should be a good amount of work for the community to review someone, they should know why they are there and confident in being there. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs14:11, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The idea that you can do more and be happier without being an admin is certainly one that I've come to terms with. I think that Moni3 has been very sensible, and her criterion for accepting a nomination – what do I plan to do with the tools – is beyond sensible. Hopefully with further unbundling of the anally retentive administrator tools more good editors will be able to do even more than they can now.--Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 14:15, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't know that tools could be anally retentive...:-) I'm sure what you meant there, Mr. GA reviewer, is "unbundling the tools that are firmly in the grasp of anally retentive administrators that would have you pry them out of their cold, dead hands". I would support a proper unbundling so the real editors don't have to bother with us silly ones when then need to get something moved/protected/deleted. Sigh, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer14:20, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose I have to concede that tools can't be anally retentive, fair enough. What I meant to say was that the present set of administrator tools looks like it was designed by an anally retentive monkey. Better? :-) --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 14:31, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your point about hellweek is well-taken. I wonder if it's something that should change. Because it can be comparable to hazing, it rather has the same effect, doesn't it? People who should see the job for what it is: a sideline to make the site neater and to clear out the riffraff of vandals and drama queens, actually see it as a challenge to get through the hazing process. Rather like getting married for the wedding instead of for the lifelong responsibility and commitment. So instead of screening out the drama queens, as I posted recently on someone's talk page (maybe mine, I can't remember) after watching the ANI page, I can't decide if I'm needed or horrified. And much like hazing, those who are accepted embrace and reinforce that culture. I see a lot of comments about needing more sensible admins. Maybe it needs a shake-up. --Moni3 (talk) 14:40, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well said. You certainly have the thoughtfulness needed to be a "good" admin. :-) There is currently an "Rfa review" happening here to see if/what needs shakin. Right now, it's in the question phase, you can see the survey here, feel free to add your input! Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer15:07, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Somewhere in the mess of posts following RFA/DHMO3, I posted somewhere that the "hazing" element to RFA isn't necessarily a bad thing; the current process acts as a kind of LD50 testing of prospective admins' tempers. If a prospective admin loses their temper at fruitloopery like this (and yes, that was a genuine RFA comment), chances are they'll also lose their temper when they find this kind of inanity cluttering their talkpage every morning, or the rambling explanations on WR of how they've "proved" you to be a sockpuppet of whoever their current Aunt Sally is. – iridescent17:59, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, that group of editors. I had to step away from trying to help them myself. I started reading that thread and just had to stop. Good luck with that, Irid. Just to add here, as a tack on, and probably one of the lesser considerate things I'll say... the whole program of "adoption" on wikipedia is so backwards and silly that on the whole I'd say it hurts the project more than it helps. Semi-related to that group, I guess. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs18:05, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wait! Are you here because your article was speedy deleted? Click here before leaving a message to find out why.
On hold: This article is currently awaiting improvements before pass/fail.
Done Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 13:54, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
![[1]](http://www.123celebs.net/g/george-michael/george-michael3.jpg){kind=link}
