User talk:Mark t young

Talk to Mark! Mark t young's talk page From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Follow-up from RfA Hi Mark, I've just noticed your comment at your RfA. I just thought you might like some reasoning behind it based on my own experience. The reason I ask for more experience in those areas is not because I don't think you'll be good at them (because I think you will be), but it just helps prevent mistakes that might arise. For example, when I first got into CSD'ing and AIV'ing, I made lots of mistakes (tagging a school for A7...reporting a vandal that had his last warning in 2007...to name a few :)). I'm not saying you'd do these things, but I had an admin to step in and decline the speedy, to decline the block etc. As an admin, there will be nobody to step in the way and decline it. That's why I believe experience in the admin-related areas you wish to work in is important, because I look at myself and think of all the mistakes I would have made without the experience I gathered. Again, I'm not saying you will make similar mistakes, but experience helps ensure that. Anyway, sorry for this long and rather repetitive post; I just wanted to explain my reasoning more fully. Great to see you're using edit summaries more. :) As for the AIV thing, that was more passing curiosity than a genuine concern; it just surprised me that such an active vandal-fighter can get away without making edits to AIV! :D If this RfA fails, then it will be purely because of experience in admin-related areas (no problems with civility, edits or anything like that). If it passes, and it may well do, I'd advise caution. Either way, I'm around if you need any assistance, and good luck! Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 19:09, 16 June 2008 (UTC) Mosasaurs Mark, If you mean this paper: Lingham-Soliar, T. 1992. The tylosaurine mosasaurs (Reptilia, Mosasauridae) from the upper Cretaceous of Europe and Africa. Bulletin de L’Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgique. Sciences de la Terre, 62:171-194. ... no, I'm sorry but I don't have a copy... I'll see if I can find one. Regards, Mike —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tylomike (talk • contribs) 01:21, 18 June 2008 (UTC) Apology Hi Mark, I feel that I owe you an apology for my recent RFA comments, They were cruel, heartless, degrading and inexcusable. I can understand why anyone would be offended, but especially you. It turns out I saw your RFA on what could only be described as a pretty crappy day, when my level of tolerance was low. You inherited the wrath intended for others, again for this I am sorry. I will do well not to let it happen in the future, to you or to anyone for that matter   «l| Ψrom3th3ăn ™|l»  (talk) 02:13, 21 June 2008 (UTC) Your RFA Hi Mark. I'm sorry to have to let you know that I've just closed your RFA as unsuccessful with no consensus to promote being reached. Despite this you had a good level of support and a few minor changes (such as edit summaries, longer, more consistent editing periods etc) would certainly improve your chances should you decide to run again in maybe three months time. My commiserations but don't be discouraged, and feel free to contact me should you wish to discuss this decision, or anything brought up at the RFA, with me. All the best. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:12, 22 June 2008 (UTC) Yes, I hope this doesn't get you down! You do great work....a few tweaks and you'll fly through next time! RxS (talk) 20:24, 22 June 2008 (UTC) I'm disappointed that your RfA didn't pass: you're an excellent editor, and have good knowledge of policy. Next time you run, however, your policy knowledge will be greater, and since this RfA was a close one, I'm sure you'll pass next time. Best wishes. Acalamari 20:28, 22 June 2008 (UTC) Sorry I miscalculated the community's will on this one, Mark. Not much more I can add to that. Firsfron of Ronchester 20:31, 22 June 2008 (UTC) My RfA I don't want to spam everyone's talk page, so I'll comment here. I want to thank all those who took part in my RfA. Although I am disappointed by the outcome I got lots of constructive criticism which I think will improve my editing and wiki-contributions. In a few months if I feel I've made enough of an improvement, who know maybe I'll try again! Cheers everyone, Mark t young (talk) 07:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC) Re:Rfa Remarks You are very welcome. Sure, if you take note of all the comments left for you, which I'm sure you will, all the negative points will be addressed, and in a few months, you can try again and hopefully, have a much better RfA. I'm sure you'll be successful, because it was similar for me over a year ago on my first attempt. Very best wishes, Lradrama 07:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC) Sorry to read that your RfA closed at 69%. I am sure that the community will benefit from your use of the admin buttons. So I hope I see you back at RfA when you have addressed some of the reasons for the opposes. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC) RFA Hey man. I'm really sorry about your RFA. I voted oppose, but was about to change it seeing that you had improved in many areas. Next time you run, I'll gladly support you. Shapiros10 contact meMy work 11:55, 23 June 2008 (UTC) Seconded. Good luck in the future, buddy. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 20:09, 23 June 2008 (UTC) Re:Conservation status for fossils Yeah, I clicked 'rollback AGF', then remembered that it shouldn't be done. Unfortunately it had gone through by the time I clicked cancel, and I didn't notice - sorry about that...... Dendodge .. TalkHelp 19:23, 23 June 2008 (UTC) Corsochelys. Is it any better now? There is lots of context, and everything which needs an inline citation has it now. The other sources have been gathered at the bottom in a "Further reading" list. I called the Warner sister "Dottie" and lived to tell the tale! (talk) 23:55, 26 June 2008 (UTC) Protection I have my doubts, that's certain. I've unlocked it to semi-protection for now. I would like to see how that goes first. Locking out unregistered users should give the article necessary breathing space, and if it's necessary to increase protection tomorrow, then that should be reviewed then. Hopefully it won't be; however, we'll see. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 22:48, 28 June 2008 (UTC) WP:PALAEO No worries - just a quick copy from WP:GEOLOGY. Hope the project takes off - I guess it's off to a reasonable start! Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 16:27, 30 June 2008 (UTC) Looks like a great start, Mark! :) Firsfron of Ronchester 03:23, 3 July 2008 (UTC) AIV Re "not sure if I filled this out correctly" : Don't add userlinks for your own name, just sign as normal. if you are using Firefox, twinkle has an ARV system for easily reporting people to AIV. cheers, –xenocidic (talk) 18:07, 1 July 2008 (UTC) No problem! –xenocidic (talk) 15:24, 4 July 2008 (UTC)