User talk:Useight

	HOME	TALK	E-MAIL	ALT. ACCOUNTS	CONTRIBS	DELETED CONTRIBS	STATS	WP:HAU	GUESTBOOK	SUBPAGES

Your name was mention...

... here. By the way, I asked User:Balloonman to admin coach me, and he said I didn't need it. So no admin coaching for me. :) -- RyRy (talk) 12:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much Useight. :) -- RyRy (talk) 20:42, 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.delanoy^gabs_adds 19:38, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

adopt?

I have known administrator Cailil for several months. He mentioned that I should consider getting a mentor. Later, he mentioned that the term is really "adopter". Would you be my adopter?

In more positive terms, I have interacted well with others and have not gotten into conflict. I do have a dialogue with a few editors. Will you be my adopter? Chergles (talk) 21:45, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

My reply here

Thank you. You've already read the background information so... As far as taking responsibility, of course you won't. If there is anything potentially controversial, I will probably discuss it with you so as not to embarass you or me! Thank you! Chergles (talk) 22:19, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Username Origin

Snowmen are not tied to Pokemon, or specifically Pikachu, in any way. I just always liked Pikachu and winter, so the name PikachuSnowman devloped. However, I have tried to use this name on other sites, but many other sites already have their own PikachuSnowman who is not me.PikachuSnowman (talk) 22:05, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

My reply here

RFA thank-you

Thank-you for your support of me at my recent RFA, which was successful. I have appreciated everyone's comments and encouragement there. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 03:20, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

RfB Thank You spam

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)

User 203.89.173.124

Can you give that user a blocking. This user had a final warning, and yet still vandalized Egyptian pyramids. Footballfan190 (talk) 00:16, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

My reply here

Speedy deletion of 1973 San Francisco 49ers season

A tag has been placed on 1973 San Francisco 49ers season requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. The Llama! (talk) 17:49, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Thanks

No prob. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 04:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm out here

And I need to ask you for two blocks. [1] [2]. Both fully justified and in need of indef blocks. Trust me. Enigma ^message 05:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

One more administrative favor to ask: Please delete Terry Brown (American football). It redirect to a different article, and it should be the other way around. You can delete and I can do the redirect, or you can do both! :) Enigma ^message 05:09, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

My reply here

Cheers! Sleep well. Enigma ^message 05:21, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Heh Enigma ^message 01:29, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I was too tired to find a sockpuppet template, so I just used that one. Useight (talk) 01:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Nah, you missed it. Tip reverted him. [3] It looked really interesting before that userbox was deleted. The unblock template was crammed into the left side of the page only. Also, we should ask him to tell us each time he makes a new sock. :) Enigma ^message 02:11, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, that was great. When I put the block template there, I checked the preview and it was inside the userbox. That's why I stuck it above the userbox. It was definitely weird-looking. Useight (talk) 02:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• I suppose I should inform you that the first block turned out to be a sockpuppet of DavidYork71, if you care. So sockpuppets all. Enigma ^message 05:56, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Good to know, thanks for the update. Useight (talk) 15:45, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

adopter

Hello, may I ask you my first question as adoptee? A few weeks ago, I saw a very poorly written section on the George W. Bush article on the 2000 primary. Are you familiar with the U.S. political process/are you American? If not, let me explain. The U.S. political parties select their candidate various ways in different states but commonly it is by a primary. This is an election where members of one party run against each other. Later, there is an election where each party's candidate runs for the political office.

The George W. Bush primary section was some disjointed sentences about church and Karl Rove. I then suggested a re-write and a few people agreed. I then rewrote to more comprehensively cover the historical events of the primary.

Now knowing some reasonable people (the people who agreed that a rewrite was a reasonable suggestion), I proposed a new idea which these same people agree is a good idea. Some U.S. politicians articles have a "cultural and political image" section. I think that is just some opinions. Furthermore, there is a danger that people who claim ownership of the article want only positive images (or only negative images). This is POV. The whole concept of an image section is shaky.

I think that there should not be such a section because it is just a section describing peoples' opinions. An alternative would be for a balanced section, trying to get all the common political images/opinions summarized. This alternative has far more potential for drama and arguments since it is hard to decide whose political opinion should be mentioned and whose political opinion should be not mentioned.

Is my analysis in the above paragraph reasonable? To avoid the appearance of favortism, I plan to apply my logic to only 2 articles, one of each major party (so as not to pick on one party). My question to you is not to make a decision but to confirm that my thought process seems rational and not completely unreasonable and POV pushing. Chergles (talk) 17:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

My reply here

Asher196

He won't see that message on my talk page if he doesn't visit. could you post it on his talk page to? thank you. Yami (talk) 17:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

He is still arguing about the 3RR warning Yami (talk) 19:16, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:

I would like to withdraw. How do I do that?--Islaammaged126 (talk) 22:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Even I'm not sure. How do you Useight? Also, LETS CONTINUE COACHING!! Gears of War 2 22:49, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

My reply here

Gears of War, are you an Admin Coach? If so, could I be coached by you? Thank you.--Islaammaged126 (talk) 22:50, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Heh, Gears of War isn't an admin, nor a coach. I think Useight here is the coach. -- RyRy (talk) 22:52, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Lol, yeah. Ive only been here for 4 months. I have left you a message though. Gears of War 2 22:53, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok, Useight, will you coach me? I would really appreciate it. thanks.--Islaammaged126 (talk) 22:56, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

My reply here

IMHO, I think you should try adoption first. I think you need more mentoring than coaching now. But that's only my opinion. -- RyRy (talk) 22:57, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Also Useight just went to the bank so he wont be responding for a bit. Gears of War 2 23:00, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I used that as a joke:P. I gues it's not working. :( Gears of War 2 23:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks!--Islaammaged126 (talk) 11:29, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Comment

He actually has a girlfriend. User:Deaaaa I guess he's having fun with my userpage the past few days. *shrugs* Enigma ^message 19:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

The Register

Hi, can you tell if The Register is RS or not? I am a bit confused over this. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 02:21, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

My reply here

Thanks. One thing, do you know if there is any tool by which I can view one particular reference is used in which articles. For example I want to know how many articles in wikipedia use BBC News as reference. Is there any tool by which I can know this? Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 02:32, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

My reply here

Editor Coaching

I have replied to your question at my editor coaching. Gears of War 2 02:58, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which did not succeed with 30 in support, 28 in opposition and 6 neutral votes. Thanks again for the support!

re: Hello

My reply hereYami (talk) 02:31, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

My reply here

I think we're on not the same page but different books i mean people are not allowing other to be bold and they focus on the editors who try to help by being bold and tell them they need consensus to even put a period in a article and the users are getting violent on that article. Yami (talk) 04:07, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

My reply here

they're avoiding the subject Yami (talk) 04:20, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

They forced a Survey despite me not agreeing to it and the User won't acknowledge his accusing me of censorship.

a link to the survey it ends the 18th survey Yami (talk) 08:01, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

My reply here

I have added your !vote to the discussion. Artichoker[talk] 16:34, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I have added your !vote to the discussion. Artichoker[talk] 19:27, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I think this is directed at you

1)Then perhaps the image should be removed, not the video; 2) the inclusion or exclusion of media from other articles is not necessarily an indication of whether or not we should include or exclude that media. 3) Or because no one has through to include video footage of such, and some articles like Pi include animate gifs which doubtlessly take up a bit of space themselves. Plus, the video doesn't seem load unless you click on it.--Honeymane_{Heghlu meH QaQ jajvam} 01:19, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

1) Who's to say which one should go then? Sounds like you'd be up for either one. In that case, I say remove the video because it's more strain on the server; 2) You refute my argument by saying other articles aren't evidence, yet in 3) You use another article as your evidence. Also, is the video from a legitimate source, like a medical journal? Or did some Wikipedian record it themselves? If so, that could be original research or a conflict of interest if that individual is trying to keep the video up. Talk page stalkers, feel free to move this comment to the article's talk page. Useight (talk) 02:59, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

how can a simple concept of removing a video get so hard? Yami (talk) 02:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

thankspam

Thanks to everyone who participated in my RfA, regardless of their !vote. I have withdrawn the nomination as a failure at 19 supports, 45 opposes, and 9 neutral statements. As has been written and sung, you can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you get what you need — and what I need is to go back to working on our shared project. Not everyone has to be an admin; there is a role for each of us. After reflection, I feel I don't have the temperament to secure community consensus as an admin at any point, and I will not be applying again in the future — and hey, that's all right, 'cause I stay true to the philosophy that adminship is no big deal: I tried, I failed, and now I'll return to doing what I've always done. I have an extremely strong belief in the consensus process, and the consensus was clear. I will be devoting my energies to volunteering at MedCab and working up a complete series of articles on the short stories of Ernest Hemingway, among lord knows what else. Thanks again to everyone who spared the time to weigh in on this one. It was made in better faith than it probably seemed. Mr. IP 《Defender of Open Editing》 14:16, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for !voting in my RfA, and also for your stated willingness to give a guy a second chance. As it works out, I have decided not to go in for an RfA again, as it may not be the best way for me to serve the project, but I do appreciate it and hope to be seeing you around in the future. Thanks! Mr. IP 《Defender of Open Editing》 14:16, 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 21:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for signing my Guestbook!

Thanks for signing my Guestbook! To futher thank you, this is one free bootleg German ticket to see The Dark Knight at any bootleg movie theater neer you! Gears of War 2

Gears of War 2 01:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Asher keeps reverting his talk page

Asher196 keeps reverting his talk page removing anything i place there. I am trying to respond to another editor who asked a question and he is disrupting it. Yami (talk) 04:15, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

My reply here

well more or less it was a whole group discussion against me behind my back. Go check it out if you'd like its very funny how people talk when they think they're behind your back or you won't look for them.Yami (talk) 04:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Coach?

Hi Useight, I know we have had a difficult history but I was wondering if you would be open to couching me one day. As you can see from the bottom of my user page I do have an interest in becoming an Admin. I probably won't be you easiest student, I have a controversial history on wikipedia as you can see from my block log (I have 3 blocks and one block extension). A lot of the blocks were unfair/questionable (I can provide diffs/explanations) for these. In the past I have rubbed a few people up the wrong way, I speak my mind. However, I have done a lot of good too, with a bit of work and time, who knows. Well, if not that's OK, I fully expect sharpened knives so would understand if you would rather not be involved. — Realist² (Speak) 22:45, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

My reply here

Yeah, that looks good! Could we begin it anytime after August 20th? I'm going to be a little busy in the real world for the next few weeks. — Realist² (Speak) 23:16, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

My reply here

Cheers, I'll get back to you soon. — Realist² (Speak) 23:40, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

<-- Just a note, Realist2, your asking for "couching", not "coaching". :P -- RyRy Public (talk) 00:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Cheers. :-) — Realist² (Speak) 00:08, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Ginoo

Magandang tanghali ginoong Useight. =) --Efe (talk) 04:07, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

My reply here, translation available upon request.

Hapon pa po dito. Yes, its still hot in here. --Efe (talk) 07:22, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Phoenix

Useight, my good man, of course, I have no problem with you coming to my talk page at all :-) Thank you very much for that support, by the way. You're good at predicting things :-) - I have reduced Phoenix's block to 24 hours (which shaves off about 13 hours from the 48 hour block). I've asked him to thank you to you when he returns. And thank you again for leaving me a note :-) Take care mate! Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 23:40, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Attempts at Dispute Resolution going nowhere

Hello. I'd hate for you to think that I'm trying to take a shortcut in anyway, but I have to go ahead and ask for your authoritive opinion. You see, I have (what I assume to be) an authoritive "case". I have references from the NY Times (courteousy of Richard Powers), a semi-big website, and another from a lower-grade website. You might ask yourself why these do not qualify and I can tell you that the reason behind this lies in a much more complex arena. I just was reminded of the Wiki-clause, entitled "easy verifiability" and I just thought that my arguement is easily verifiable. That leaves some other, more negative parameters:

Indeed, I wouldn't ask you for help unless of course I felt I could end this for ther greater-good. I made many compromises (I left out 2 of my contributions for the history of the telescope article and the optical telescope article), and I just want to be seen as a contributer that has the right to edit freely on Wikipedia (with references of course). I think the problem also resides in them thinking I'm not assuming [[WikipediaAssume good faith|good faith]: 1, 2, and 3.

If you feel that you can reasonably help me—whether it be through a consensus or the mere weight of your opinion—please feel obliged to add a short discussion on this page. Thanks for your time. InternetHero (talk) 09:52, 8 August 2008 (UTC)