Jump to content

User talk:Seraphimblade: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Shimeru (talk | contribs)
My RfA
Line 89: Line 89:
:::Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the process, but from my point of view we've been left with an article that says "Large pathetic galaxy is the informal designation for a large, dim clump of primarily red giant stars in proximity to our own galaxy." which is just not true, and I don't know what to do about that. Could you bear to explain on my talk page (or WJB's) what the options are? Thanks [[User:Chrislintott|Chrislintott]] 17:24, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
:::Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the process, but from my point of view we've been left with an article that says "Large pathetic galaxy is the informal designation for a large, dim clump of primarily red giant stars in proximity to our own galaxy." which is just not true, and I don't know what to do about that. Could you bear to explain on my talk page (or WJB's) what the options are? Thanks [[User:Chrislintott|Chrislintott]] 17:24, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review#{{{2|Large pathetic galaxy}}}|deletion review]] of [[:Large pathetic galaxy]]. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 18:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review#{{{2|Large pathetic galaxy}}}|deletion review]] of [[:Large pathetic galaxy]]. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 18:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
:Absolutely no problem- got to that outcome in the end. And we're all learning around here- I don't regret supporting your RfA, I think you're doing a great job! I've listed the AfD in the appropriate Delsort so that there might be more comments this time and we can actually get a result :-). <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|''scribe'']]</span> 16:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)


== 3RR followup ==
== 3RR followup ==

Revision as of 16:55, 17 March 2007

Template:AMA alerts

Archive
Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6

Please read before posting!

I don't always post a full rationale for everything I do, since doing this would take an inordinate amount of time. I do always have one, though, and will be happy to tell you why I did anything if you ask.

PLEASE READ HERE FIRST before asking deletion-related questions.

Please feel free to post suggestions/comments/flames/whatever.

If you haven't posted a comment already, please put it under a new section at the bottom of the page using markup:


==Section header==
Your comment ~~~~

or click here.

If you have, please post it under the section you started. Responses will be made on your talk page unless you request otherwise.

This page will be archived regularly, generally by an automated process, but that doesn't mean I consider the discussion closed if you have more to say. If your old comments are archived please start a new section on this page for further comment. Please remember to sign your comments using ~~~~.

If I contacted you on your talk page, I'll keep it on watch. Please feel free to reply either there or on this page, whichever's easier for you.

Please refrain from personal attacks. Personal attacks made against me made on this page will be left on it, but this in no way indicates that I approve of them or will not report them if they are severe or continuous. Personal attacks against other editors will be removed or reverted.

Thanks for the explanation!

Thanks for the explanation/clarification on my talk page. Appreciate it! Pink collar girl 03:10, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Just unclear on why you removed User:Reader contributor from WP:AIV as a "content dispute." S/he has been spamming links to commercial websites with objectionable amounts of advertising that s/he is the marketing director for. The links have been removed multiple times by multiple independent editors. If this isn't the textbook definition of spamming, as well as a violation of WP:COI, and WP:EL, I don't know what is. Per WP:AN persistent spammers should be reported to WP:AIV. This spammer has been given appropriate warnings, and persists past {{spam4}} which indicates that blocking is appropriate for continuing to spam after the warning. Just unclear as to why preventing this user from continuing to spam WP is a bad thing. Leuko 05:20, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The "disputed edits" are not being "discussed." Everyone is just telling the repeat spammer why his spam links keep getting removed. And the contributor is placing his link on a number of different articles. I still see it as spamming and vandalism... Leuko 05:34, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ultimate X-Men (story arcs): Peer Review

Greetings! In December of 2006, you participated in the discussion for the 2nd deletion nomination of Ultimate X-Men (story arcs). After two months of rewriting, reorganizing, and referencing, the article is now undergoing a WikiProject Comics peer review. Your editorial opinion would be most welcome to help us improve the article to A-class status. Thanks for your time! - fmmarianicolon | Talk 06:23, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing of AIV names

Why are you removing AIV names when the names clearly violate the username policy? Real96 07:28, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to be blatant with you, but this conversation is continued on this thread. (For your records) :-) Real96 07:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, yeah! Congrats on your successful RFA! Real96 07:51, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seraphimblade, you closed this AfD as delete and deleted the article, but I think you forgot the other nominated articles. As nominator, it would be improper if I deleted them, but as a closed discussion, these could easily be forgotten. Could you please delete them or (if you want them kept) remove the AfD notices and add the decision to the talk pages? Thank you! Fram 10:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clearing that up, enjoy your coffee :-) 20:28, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

i didnt delete anything...

i got a message tht said i deleted stuff about kent hovind...i havent been on here for about 2 weeks...

Thanks

But most of time food article doesn't cite any reference. I think the contents aren't likely to be challenged. Right.--NAHID 08:09, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seraphimblade, hope adminship is treating you well. Fraid I'm here to complain though :-) (heh, you wanted the job...). I'm really not sure about your close of this AfD as no concensus. There were no keep opinions in it and a difference of opinion as to whether outright deletion or a conversion into a redirect was appropriate. As I see the breakdown of comments:

  • 4 delete opinions - all well argued
  • 2 redirect opinions - one well argued, the other just saying "potentially useful" as redirect
  • 1 move opinion - well rebutted, with the proposnent then showing confusion as to the proper fate of the article

There seemed to be agreement that there should no longer be an article at Large pathetic galaxy. If you weren't sure whether to delete outright or change into a redirect surely you could have relisted the debate for further discussion? I am presently minded to take the close to DRV but wanted to discuss it with you first... WjBscribe 15:23, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The talkpage is not going to be a productive venue for discussion on an article that so few people visit. And a delete concensus ona talkpage is of no validity anyway. Why did you not just relist the debate in todays AfDs so concensus could be reached? WjBscribe 16:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My problem is that all I can do is start a new AfD, whereas you can relist the present discussion in todays debates adding the {{relist}} tag to the end of the present discussion, so that the debate continues from the point it had reached. I really think its important to get an actual outcome on this one. WjBscribe 16:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the process, but from my point of view we've been left with an article that says "Large pathetic galaxy is the informal designation for a large, dim clump of primarily red giant stars in proximity to our own galaxy." which is just not true, and I don't know what to do about that. Could you bear to explain on my talk page (or WJB's) what the options are? Thanks Chrislintott 17:24, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Large pathetic galaxy. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. WjBscribe 18:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely no problem- got to that outcome in the end. And we're all learning around here- I don't regret supporting your RfA, I think you're doing a great job! I've listed the AfD in the appropriate Delsort so that there might be more comments this time and we can actually get a result :-). WjBscribe 16:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR followup

A checkuser revealed that editor Davkal used a sockpuppet/meatpuppet to evade his 3RR block and make an additional revert: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Davkal. Just giving you a heads up since you were the admin who gave him the 3RR block (Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR#User:Davkal reported by User:Milo H Minderbinder (Result: 24 hours)). --Minderbinder 18:17, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking into it. --Minderbinder 12:38, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

help out

can you help get the false "vandalism" warnings off my talk page? one editor put 12 or so of them there even though there was no vandalism and others keep re-inserting them, and i just am not sure how things work here, if i remove them is that 3RR or is it OK? if others keep putting them on there is that harrassment? it seems that when people see the warnings they just assume they are true. --71.112.7.212 06:09, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks a million seraphimblade 71.112.7.212 06:32, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does that mean I have to let him insult me?

Does that mean I have to let him insult me? Can I at least archive the talk page? He is clearly doing this to me (and others, btw) to avoid having his pr-text edited. Answer on this page, please.--DorisH 13:29, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly does not. If an editor is being insulting, ask them to stop. If they refuse to do so, there are processes for dispute resolution, and you may also make an informal complaint on the incident noticeboard. However, the fact that one editor is behaving inappropriately does not mean that any other editor is excused from doing so. Seraphimblade Talk to me 13:34, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am not planning on feeding the trolls. The practice of smear-campaigning is what they employ throughout, as can be seen in the edit histories - so it would be kind of braindead of me to assume that they would stop if I ask them to. It just gives them more opportunity to smear-campaign, that's why you should not feed the trolls. --DorisH 13:56, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thanks for your support during my recent RfA. I'm quite honored, and I hope I can live up to your words. (And I'll take all the support I can get. ^_-) Shimeru 16:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]