User talk:David D.: Difference between revisions
Shadowbot3 (talk | contribs) m Automated archival of 1 sections to User talk:David D./Archive8 |
Admin nomination? |
||
Line 125: | Line 125: | ||
:I asked on [[User:TenOfAllTrades|TenOfAllTrades's]] talk page for him to better explain his position. I think it's possible to have a real consensus on this, to change the tab to "Talk". There are new arguments on the thread, but there are still three users opposing (or maybe two, depending on Ten's answer). [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 19:56, 24 June 2007 (UTC) |
:I asked on [[User:TenOfAllTrades|TenOfAllTrades's]] talk page for him to better explain his position. I think it's possible to have a real consensus on this, to change the tab to "Talk". There are new arguments on the thread, but there are still three users opposing (or maybe two, depending on Ten's answer). [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 19:56, 24 June 2007 (UTC) |
||
== Admin nomination? == |
|||
Hi! I hope you are feeling great. I would like to inquire if this is the right time for me to be nominated as an admin. Your thoughts on this matter would be useful! --<font style="background:gold">[[WP:EA|<font color="green">S</font>]][[User:Siva1979|iva1979]]</font><sup><font style="background:yellow">[[User talk:Siva1979|Talk to me]]</font></sup> 07:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 07:16, 6 July 2007
| ||
Template:UWAYOR | ||
Replies
Just came to tell you I replied to your question. Reply
Disruptive user info
Response here
Not sure how it would help
As he's an admitted sock of a banned editor who exhausted the patience of the admin who'd been permitting him to edit, I don't see how bringing it to AN/I could possibly help him. Friday (talk) 20:05, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well, if the other admins were overwhelmingly supportive of the ban it would help him understand his situation more quickly. David D. (Talk) 20:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- True. Under the assumption that he doesn't understand his situation, it seems reasonable. He seems like a kook to me, so I doubt he can be reasoned with. But I suppose it doesn't hurt much to keep trying either. Friday (talk) 21:09, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Probably right about the reasoning. There are Loomis like qualities to the arguments being presented. Have you noticed how the ref deak really brings out some bizarre editing qualities in users? Its the Mystery Spot of wikipedia. David D. (Talk) 21:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- It is weird that way, yeah. I've often wondered if the apparent large number of kooks is really just one or two silly kids playing games. This guy has a history of using lots of socks, I noticed. Also just noticed that THB who I remember being problematic was blocked a while back for non-ref-desk-related sockpuppetry. It does surprise me when some of these people claim to be adults with jobs- if their real-life persona is anything like online, I don't see how that could be possible. Friday (talk) 21:33, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
RE: Admin
Yes, I feel you are right. I have been away for three months and if I run for admin right now, I would most likely fail in the nomination. --Siva1979Talk to me 01:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Carla Baron cover-up
I expect you are keeping an eye on my and her histories and talk pages User_talk:Psychic_profiler. She is notable enough for her own article.
BTW, this talk page is a nightmare for me to view since boxes cover large parts of it. I use 1024 x 768, which is quite common. -- Fyslee/talk 14:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- I totally agree, this is a misuse of BLP protection. See what I wrote on badlydrawnjeff's talk page. Are the boxes at the top a mess? It is fine on my browser but I know there are differences depending on which is used, which browser are you using? David D. (Talk) 15:09, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Like it or not, I use the most common one -- Windows Internet Explorer, and have Windows XP. The box that causes problems is the "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia" box. It covers the text on the top few comments. -- Fyslee/talk 18:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback. I'll try and fix it. David D. (Talk) 18:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Banned User and the Ref Desk
I note your "same old, same old" comment on the Ref desk Talk page. How does an editor tell if the questionner is a banned user? I would rather not waste time on banned users or trolls, but I am having some difficulty telling a bewildered question from a (possibly) young questionner whose first langusge is not English from a silly question from someone who just wants either to be noticed or to tie up resources, especially if I am to assume good faith and be polite. Any experience or "checking" mechanism you can share would be appreciated. Bielle 18:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Any user with a dynamic IP cannot be banned since they can switch IP numbers as they please. Nevertheless, their style of posting is often similar and the range of IP's they use is often relatively small. So, you can never be sure, but by combining the style and IP information it is possible to pick them out. With respect to the specific example you cite, for more information see this thread. Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Continual_anon_sockpuppetry_from_LC David D. (Talk) 18:37, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- So many of the questions sound like 14-year-olds giggling about their audacity that I just assumed that, for the most part, this was the case. I won't worry about it a lot. If you notice me getting sucked into a series of sillinesses, I'd appreciate a "word to the (not-so) wise". Thanks for responding. Bielle 02:29, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- A good rule of thumb, for this particular user, is that if the IP begins with 88.108... through 88.112... then its probably him. However, even comments within that range should be treated with good faith as long as they are constructive, as its always possible it is another user from the same range. However, the ratio of contructive edits to trolling is very small. Rockpocket 02:42, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Question about color use
Would you please direct me to the page that explains all of this to me? I really would appreciate it. Please post it to my talk page if you do not mind. Thank you very much for taking the time to explain what you did. ----CrohnieGalTalk/Contribs 14:08, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
The welcoming
How'd you git that Welcoming thing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikro (talk • contribs)
- I'm not sure I understand you? David D. (Talk) 00:04, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Surprised?
I am. So much so, I think its still worth keeping an eye on. Rockpocket 08:25, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my user page, much appreciated. â¦Tangerines BFC â¦Â·Talk 19:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
white text
- Thanks for the heads up. No one else has mentioned it. What browser do you use (so I can check myself)? ॐ Metta Bubble puff 23:21, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- Safari with a mac running OS10.3.9. I looked at other pages and the problem seems to be on Barratt talk page alone. Very strange. Clearly the others did not have an issue since they responded to your points. David D. (Talk) 01:48, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up. No one else has mentioned it. What browser do you use (so I can check myself)? ॐ Metta Bubble puff 23:21, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks again. I'll cross my fingers for now. Please let me know if you see it on other pages, if perchance we meet again. ॐ Metta Bubble puff 02:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I saw your messages on the user's page and my observation on the user behaviour suggests that they are a bunch of children at play and have stopped worrying about them since they are restricting themselves now to userspace. I see they are not doing anything useful to wikipedia, but do not have the heart to do anything about it. Shyamal 05:04, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Mission - How can you be sure
You on a mission ATM to rv all posts you think may be LC? How can you be sure its me him?
- Good point may be there are other 88 IP's that post with your exact style. Now I'm confused, maybe you're really not you but one of them? They should make a new show called the 88. Files. Who will play you? Or them? Is Friday the smoking man? David D. (Talk) 02:17, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Article on Fubra
Hi David,
Regarding this article that you have moved: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Paulmaunders/Fubra
I created the Fubra Limited article as I noticed there were some other existing pages on wikipedia about sites we (Fubra) own, and so I thought it would make sense to create a page about our company and link these articles in.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSx86 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Price_Crash
I thought it would be useful to readers to be able to follow the link where our name was mentioned to get some background information on us.
I have read the relevant wikipedia policies but I still think the creation of a page on Fubra by me is justified.
Self-promotion. It can be tempting to write about yourself or projects you have a strong personal involvement in. However, do remember that the standards for encyclopedic articles apply to such pages just like any other, including the requirement to maintain a neutral point of view, which is difficult when writing about yourself. Creating overly abundant links and references to autobiographical articles is unacceptable. See Wikipedia:Autobiography, Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.
Articles about companies and products are acceptable if they are written in an objective and unbiased style. Furthermore, all article topics must be third-party verifiable, so articles about very small "garage" or local companies are not likely to be acceptable.
- Although it was written about a company I am involved with, I think I have written the article from a neutral point of view.
- I have tried to be "encyclopedic" in the sense that I have writtnm about Fubra as broadly as possible, but I must stress that it is very much a work in progress.
- The majority of the facts are 3rd party verifiable, but certain historical details are only known to Brendan and myself personally (such as how we came up with the idea for a particular site). I included these details as I thought they made the article more interesting, and I have seen similar references in other wikipedia articles permitted.
I am happy to go through the article and make sure that any Material that is challenged or likely to be challenged has a reliable source, as per the Wikipedia policies.
Sources
- BBC Radio 1 Case Study on Fubra
- BBC News article on OurProperty.co.uk
- Guardian article on PetrolPrices.com
More on the Fubra article - proof reading
Hi David, I have added in some references. Could you have a look over what I have done so far and offer your opinion on which specific bits you would keep and which bits you removed. Thanks in advance! Paul
"Discussion" to "Talk"
Hello, David D.: Several days ago you commented on the proposal to change the label "Discussion" to "Talk" for greater newbie friendliness at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Talk Pages. You were opposed to the change on the grounds that it might encourage "chat" rather than content discussion on the talk pages. A.Z. has summarized the discussion to date on the point, and amended his summary after a call for a correction by Qiddity. Do you have anything more to add before we request a view on whether we have consensus, or would you like to comment on consensus? Bielle 19:28, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- I asked on TenOfAllTrades's talk page for him to better explain his position. I think it's possible to have a real consensus on this, to change the tab to "Talk". There are new arguments on the thread, but there are still three users opposing (or maybe two, depending on Ten's answer). A.Z. 19:56, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Admin nomination?
Hi! I hope you are feeling great. I would like to inquire if this is the right time for me to be nominated as an admin. Your thoughts on this matter would be useful! --Siva1979Talk to me 07:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)