User talk:Keeper76

Wait! Are you here because your article was speedy deleted? Click here before leaving a message to find out why.

Thank you

Hello, and thank you for your comment and aid in my first Non-Admin Closure. As you may have gathered, it was my first time and I was trying to help the process. I've seen other Non-Admin Closures that ended in Delete, which is where my confusion came in. As per your advice, I will focus exclusively on Keep votes (which I prefer, actually). Sorry for the inconvenience, and thanks again for your support. Ecoleetage (talk) 18:42, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Again, sorry for goofing up. It was my first attempt at Non-Admin Closure -- I'll be much more careful going forward. Ecoleetage (talk) 18:44, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Holy cow, a reasonable, thought-out response to criticism from someone trying to learn the ropes. I like this guy. Tan | 39 18:45, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Me too! (Eco, I just replied on your talkpage) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:54, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, thank you! I accept PayPal donations, too (joking)! Yes, Keeper76, I will alert you before I go crashing into AfD-land. I appreciate your support and guidance. And please call me Eco -- everyone else does! Ecoleetage (talk) 18:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Eco it is! (and when did I offer you money? :-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:59, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Keeper, what's this I see? You're making financial contributions to other Wikipedians? Sign me up! ;-) Aleta ^Sing 19:02, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Making? No. Accepting? Yes ma'am! (where is everyone getting this idea anyway?)Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:03, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

LOL Aleta ^Sing 19:10, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

• Any way...would it be advisable to try my shaky Non-Admin Closure skills on this five-day old, all-Keep discussion: Pitambar Deva Goswami? (And, please, I prefer Euros or Swiss Francs!) Ecoleetage (talk)

I just closed the AfD -- can you please confirm I got it right this time? Thanks! Ecoleetage (talk) 19:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I have another one I need advice on for a Non-Admin Closure: Tyler Luellen - is this okay to keep? I voted in it and there is one delete vote, hence my asking. Thanks again. Ecoleetage (talk) 20:14, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Heads up, I did another Non-Admin Closure, as per your instructions (five days, unanimous Keep votes). Hope this one was okay: [[1]]. Thanks again! Ecoleetage (talk) 16:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

No prob, hence my asking. Nothing else appears to fit the criteria I should be looking for at the moment. I'll report back with further inquiries (I hope I don't wear out my welcome). Ecoleetage (talk) 20:34, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

• Splendid. I'll check back with you if I am in doubt on anything, but otherwise I'll just steam ahead. Be well. Ecoleetage (talk) 16:56, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:Checking In

Thanks for checking on me. I appreciate you always wanting to help me out. :) Did you see yet another DYK? Anyway, I only used rollback once since you granted me rollback rights. I'll dig up the diff in a second.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ Review) 23:32, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

This is my only use of rollback to this moment. The IP blanked the page and added nonsense to the article. Comments?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ Review) 23:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

replied on your talkpage Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Recent block?

Regarding your comment on Arcayne's page, I am more than a little baffled, to be honest. Eight months ago is anything but recent in general online, or Wikipedia, time. I had even completely forgotten that I had blocked him for edit warring back then. I also find the construct of an uninvolved admin being one who has never handled blocking/warning that user a bit ... broad, and contrary to how things have been generally perceived and handled. To my knowledge, involvement has not been measured in such a way. Anything you could do to help clear up that confusion would be earnestly appreciated. Vassyana (talk) 04:51, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Vassyana, thanks for your message. The message I left was really just a broad question, and I apologize if it came across as accustional (wasn't my intentions at all). I was looking at Arcayne's (and Viriditas') blocks, and talking with the blocking admin (East) to see if things could work out without a 3 day block. I noticed that you had blocked him 8 months prior and asked the question "are you confident that you are uninvolved". It was an honest question, because I honestly didn't know. Whether you remembered blocking Arcayne or not wasn't relevant to me at the time, as I was more certain that Arcayne remembered being blocked by you. Generally (on wiki/and in real life) the person impacted by a negative event will have a much stronger memory bank of it. I saw the potential for a situation to get overheated (through no purposeful action of you own, and unnecessarily). east718 had already said he would be ok with an unblock, and thought wider input might be needed. I didn't unblock Arcayne as there were 2 admins that had declined (you and Nick), and I didn't unblock Viriditas because he said he didn't want to be unblocked, and because I wasn't unblocking Arcayne at the same time. Again, my apologies if you felt I was overly accusational, not my intent. I was trying to add coolant to a couple of overheated, but otherwise, smooth running article building engines. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much for such a polite and detailed response (that makes perfect sense). Confused cleared! :) Since you're interested in adding coolant to the engine, if you would look over my talk page and help Arcayne with some advice and feedback, it would be appreciated. He's being very response and understanding, though another outside view/set of suggestions would not hurt at all! Vassyana (talk) 21:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Vassyana, I'll head there now. Not sure what if anything I can add, the blocks are both expired, and it feels very much like "time to move along" territory to me. But I'll head to your talkpage next...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Your 'explanation'

Okay, here's why I did what I did.

[2] - Pointless addition...

[3] - content was removed, so I put it back

[4] (#3 was okay, but left some vandalism there that I had to remove) - I wasnt aware of that, but thats fine. Would've fixed it if I knew.

[5] , - user added unverified content

[6] - removed content ,

[7] - advert like content added by single purpose account (look at the diff and look at the account name ,

[8] - Content removal.

But it's fine, if you're going to come on my talk page and start being like you are, I dont care much for being in this project any more. Porterjoh (talk) 09:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh and I've also just seen your comments above. Well, fine then. Obviously I'm no use to the project. Porterjoh (talk) 09:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Adding content relevant to he article is not vandalism (even if it's grossly misspelled, misplaced, or unverified. Removing content (unless blanking entire sections) is not vandalism, unless its done maliciously or during edit warring. Typing "poop" on several pages is vandalism. I looked at the diffs again I'm sorry we view these differently, but none of them are explicit vandalism (and a couple were actually very helpful edits). I wish you wouldn't overreact like you are on my talkpage. I'm not a big fan of "Well, I'm leaving then" and "I'm no use to this project". Too much drama. If that's how you honestly feel, then I apologize to you for contributing to your wiki-stress. This is, however, only an encyclopedia. We're all volunteers, including me, including you, and including the editors that you reverted incorrectly. I saw that Katana (from Jackie Collins is OK and that you apologied and everything seems to be cool with you both. Why the drama here? Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Because its clear I no longer have value to the project and you are making it clear with each new post you make. Porterjoh (talk) 22:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry you feel that way. I have no malice, or intentions of "driving you off", and in fact, I'm pretty close to actually restoring your rollback rights if you can show me (beyond those diffs) that you understand how rollback is intended to work. If you decide that this one little incident is enought to chase you away, that's your prerogative. You can do what you wish. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

If I may attempt to put this into perspective. I have not the slightest doubt that every active editor has encountered situations that make them question their commitment to wikipedia, and some continue to do so on an almost daily basis. That's of course compounded by the fact that you get no credit for the "good" things that you do, only crap for the "bad" things. But that's the territory, so no point in complaining about that. I'd suggest stepping away for a couple of days, and see how you feel then. If rollback is such a big deal to you - and I'll admit that unlike Keeper I do use it quite a bit and I do find it useful - then I'm sure you can bring him round. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 22:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh Gawd. I've just realised that Keepers's going to be looking back through how I've been using rollback now :-( --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:48, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll keep this short, but I would like to have my Rollback, uh, back. Haha. I realize I've made mistakes.

Bad mistakes. I've made a few. Man, I'm no Freddie Mercury. Anyway. Yeah. I realize I've made several huge errors (going to go re-do my userpage/sandbox/etc once I've done this) but I really want to help Wikipedia. I want to monitor new pages, I want to monitor recent changes, but most of all I dream of a world where a man can go into a 7-11 without an interpreter! (thank you, Leslie Nielsen). Anyway. Seriously, I'm sorry, genuinely, for the mistakes I've made, but with rollback, I can correct them and make the project far better. If you wish you may monitor my use of it (if indeed you give it me back) til such time you're satisfied I can use it appropriately. Porterjoh (talk) 12:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Excellent Leslie Nielsen quote. You sold me. :-) Glad to see you back in action and taking Malleus' advice. I trust that you'll be fine with rollback - it was your first day with it, mistakes were made, life goes on, time for us both to move on. Be cautious with your re-roll, best of luck to. I've restored your rollback. Don't worry about me "watching you", I believe you'll use it correctly. Besides, I apparently have some work to do digging in to Malleus' contribs.  :-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 15:22, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Nice one. You won't regret it. Porterjoh (talk) 20:26, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Format

Thank you for this. Ashton1983 (talk) 19:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

You're very welcome.  :-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For knowing stuff...and taking the time to tell others stuff, too. :D Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

How unexpected, and how sweet! Thanks MRG, you rock! I'll say again, you and I are in the same boat, I'm about as technologically ignorant as they come, which is why I love wiki (among other reasons), and when I see some cool shortcut/addition/customization, I'm happy to share! But I'll never start a bot. Back away slowly.....Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:49, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure. :) I suspect that we technologically clueless people are much more enthusiastic about sharing our discoveries. :) Feel free to pass on anything else wonderful you may stumble upon. Me, my wonderful discoveries tend to be blushingly elementary. I remember how shocked and delighted I was to discover that there was an ndash insertion under the "save page" part. And foreign letters! I used to copy/paste them from other articles. (blush) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

That makes me chuckle. When I first got going, I used to "copy paste" the | (pipe) from previous entries, because I couldn't find it on my keyboard. <smile> Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

*chuckle*

Thanks for the laugh. Happy Friday! _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 21:14, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Glad you liked that:-) Hopefully, they'll both get a clue that they are both being ridiculous. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Seriously need a clue bat in gadgets. I'd have wikilinked but it's a re-direct that doesn't explain it too well. _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 21:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Clue bat. Hilarious. Whack! Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:48, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

great context too. Was blocked from work, no idea why. Nothing remotely naughty about it _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 02:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I got a serious black eye (and probably concussion though I never got looked at) from a foam bat once. Of course, it was the handle end of a foam bat....Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 15:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Sometimes I worry about you, Keep :)

Editor review

Hello Keeper76, and thank you for your excellant comments at User:Pedro/Mentoring. I was wondering, could you tell me of any specific changes I should make of myself, specifically at my editor review? I am trying to be as good an editor as possible, and I sincerely want to reform myself to become better at "the wiki". I am not trying to spam you, just want some constructive criticism on my part. I know my conduct has been less than satisfactory in some cases, and I will wait about six months of decent editing before my RFA (that should be around August). Am I on theright track now? Editorofthewiki^{review my edits here!} 01:27, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

The fact that you are willing to be reviewed, possibly criticized, open to improvement, getting mentored, and not rushing into RfA means quite unilaterally that you are on the right track. I'll try to get over to your review page in the next few days, but like I just typed to RyRy, "no promises".  :-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 15:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 18	2 May 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Wikimedia Board to expand, restructure	Arbitrator leaves Wikipedia
Bot approvals group, checkuser nominations briefly held on RfA	WikiWorld: "World domination"
News and notes: Board elections, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Did You Know ...	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 19	9 May 2008	About the Signpost

Sister Projects Interview: Wikiversity	WikiWorld: "They Might Be Giants"
News and notes: Board elections, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Featured content from schools and universities	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

DYK and Review

Hello. I just recieved my 3rd DYK in one week. Also, when you get the chance, can you review me? Just click "Review" in my signature.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ Review) 15:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Congrats on DYK3! Nice work. You officially have three more DYKs than I do. :-) As for the review, I'll try to remember to take a look at it, but no promises. I'm offline most of this weekend. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 15:27, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

That's sad to hear. :( Most users these days are busy. Oh, may I have a link to your RFA(s)? I would just like to see how you did. But I think that the community was correct to give you the tools.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ Review) 15:31, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I think so too! My link is Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Keeper76. If you are ever wanting to look anyone up though, just click here for a list of successful RfAs, and here for unsuccesful ones. Cheers, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 15:34, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I think I've decided to only use rolback on page blanking as it is the easiest vandalism to spot. What do you think? I'v been doing that all day just to let you know.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ Review) 17:01, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Sounds fine RyRy. Let me know if you run into any troubles with it. I'm going offline in a minute or two (I know, I know, I said that 2 hours ago), but this time I really mean it. I won't be back until Monday, US Central 9 am.) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 17:04, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

This is an example of what I wil normally revert. Looks good?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ Review) 17:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

What, Eli Whitney doesn't fart? Just kidding, that was obviously a good revert. See you Monday (I just left you a really mean message on your talkpage by the way...hee hee) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 17:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I won't let that happen. :) Cheers.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ Review) 17:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

(Not that I want you to leave but) When are you going to be offline?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ Review) 18:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

You caught me. Still here. Very soon though, very soon....Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I caught you on RC. Why are you going to be offline soon anyway? :P -- RyRy5 (talk ♠ Review) 18:56, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

This is my last post. And I never do "RC". And I'm really going offline. Why? Because I have a life, a wife, a son, and a mother. See you Monday. :-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:59, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Alrighty then. See you Monday.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ Review) 19:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Moving you back to the mainspace

[9] = Fail! ;) Luckily for you, I could use a copyedit if you have the time and aren't sick of me yet. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 01:48, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm almost tempted to break that link, DHMO. I have a reputation to protect! (heh. If that were only true...I freely admit I'm not a writer...but I do need to get away from pages that start with User and end with Keeper) I'll visit your little picture box shortly :-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks; replied at the FAC. And, erm...thanks for the picture box. It was an interesting read. :) dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 10:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Your input requested regarding reliable sources

Any insights you might offer to this discussion would be helpful and appreciated.  : ) --MPerel 03:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Just to say hai

Tinucherian has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend or a possibly new friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Have a great day ! -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 10:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, you too - Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

RE: Rollback

Thanks :) This'll make life a lot easier when on IE. Happy editing. Regards, CycloneNimrod^Talk? 16:55, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Rfb participation thanks

Hello, Malinaccier Keeper.

I wanted to personally thank you for taking part in the project-wide discussions regarding my candidacy for bureaucratship. After bureaucratic discussion, the bureaucrats decided that there was sufficient significant and varied opposition to my candidacy, and thus no consensus to promote. Although personally disappointed, I both understand and respect their decision, especially in light of historical conservatism the project has had when selecting its bureaucrats. I wanted to especially thank you for taking the time to craft a detailed support rationale, as well as the kind words of support and help you have given me since the first RfB; they are truly appreciated. If you have any further suggestions or comments as to how you think I could help the project, please let me know. Once again, thank you for your support. -- Avi (talk) 17:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Malinaccier?  :-). I checked your contribs, Avi. Easy mistake to make, and made me laugh out loud....:-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 17:09, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, Keeper. I have about 138 of these to do, and I try to personalize each one, if only in some small way. I guess I messed up on yours (although you do have the personalization, if you read carefully :D ) -- Avi (talk) 17:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I know you meant well, and I read the message and found it to be a very nice message indeed - but I just had to laugh at that though! I hope your not too disheartened by the results of the RfB, you made a very dignified and courageous stand as the most recent Deer in the Headlights, and hung in there beautifully till the end. I had my fingers crossed when the cratchat opened, as I (obviously) believe you would make a great 'crat. Que sera, sera my friend, hope to see you around. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 17:23, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Jerry, etc.

If you would be ok with it, I'd like to have a grown-up conversation with Jerry. I'm not a whining deletee, or anything and I'm certainly not after any 'dispute resolution'. I'll be disappointed if Jerry doesn't take on board my comments at all, and would probably return to the question later, but I'm not about to be mean to him about it. Your interjections are only a minor distraction to my talk with him, but I'd like it if you'd just sort of step out of it and leave a pair of generally capable admins to have a quiet chat. Not all talk page threads need quite as much input as others, after all, and this is not WT:RFA, where everybody joins in everything! Splash - tk 22:33, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I saw another editor being challenged (and civilly, yes) about doing something that in general I find to be the right approach at DRV. While agreeing, Splash, that DRV is a new forum for some editors, often new editors, that doesn't excuse not reading instructions, IMHO, and being told that they are out of process will always come across "harshly", but I strongly agree with Jerry that it is necessary. Truth be told, I think a DRV is actually one of the most stressful situations to find yourself in as an XfD closer, as I'm sure you may be able to attest if one or two of your own closes has been brought there. I find that the closer of the XfD is often quite abused by "group discussion" where he/she is blamed for even causing the DRV by some sort of inadequacy on his/her part, when all they did is attempt to intepret consensus. It's brutal, it has chased off many good admins from closing XfDs, creating backlogs, and it has chased them off Wikipedia altogether. And the whole thing can be avoided by doing what you did. Going to UserTalk. I meant no offense to you, I meant no offense to Jerry (he's perfectly capable of defending his actions), and I certainly don't mean to be a "distraction". I am, however, also a grown-up (but thanks for the insinuation) adding my unsolicited defense of an editor's practice where I see fit. I'll step out of it now. I would personally like to see DRV brought to MFD as a fatally flawed system of review, and start over. The irony of course, is that if an MFD actually worked, it would just be brought to DRV anyway as a "bad close". Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, "grown up" was prone to misreading; I just meant that I wanted to have a conversation that was nice and straightforward. On the question of DRV, I guess I have to take a lot of the blame for that, since I largely invented the process, and moved it away from Votes for Undeletion (VfU). But originally, and after quite some contemplation, we wrote the rules on a majoritarian basis (50%+1 to overturn → overturn; 50%+1 to endorse → endorse; neither → relist) and that was in order to make DRV a 'clean cut' and thus remove the question of re-running AfDs on DRV. Majority was also the basis of the more narrowly-scoped, and long-standing, VfU. Of course, people eventually got hung up on using the word "consensus" all over the place, not recognising the damage that would cause nor the reasons for the original choice. And also not realising that the use of a majority to evaluate whether a consensus can be found or not does not necessarily imply a non-consensual process, particularly when the majority-based system was constructed on the back of a broad consensus to do so! Anyway, people must live with their mistakes and so we now find DRV too often re-running AfDs, in exchange for people being able to kneel at the linguistic altar. Splash - tk 16:37, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I apologize Splash, I did not realize that you were the "inventor" of the process, and had I know that, I wouldn't obviously lecture you about its merits and detractions as you are most certainly, completely aware of them. I meant no disrespect to what must have been extremely time consuming efforts on your part to fix a broken system that you did before my time here. I apologize for any disrespect you may have perceived in my post, especially calling it "fatally flawed". I do however, believe DRV has been grossly abused in the past, and has become, for lack of better terminology "AfD#2" when someone (usually a participator in a debate) didn't get their way. I hope your discourse with Jerry goes well. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

No, no. I agree, in fact, that DRV has become too much AfD2 although I think I might take the view that the cause of this is the tactics employed by a relatively small number of individuals, coupled with the mistaken move to mushy language. Which was the cause of my (uninvited) history lesson - as I think things were broken by a well-intentioned accident. I wonder if there is a path of un-reforming it, but I don't really have the motivation to pursue it at present. (Certainly, VfU was significantly weaker than DRV is or was, but the change had the good fortune to be carried out in contextually-helpful circumstances which don't seem really to prevail at present). Splash - tk 23:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

A rollback by RyRy5

Hey Keeper76, since you said you'd personally take RyRy5's rollback away if you see an issue, I'd like you to look at this revert. It's not vandalism, but I don't know for sure if it should be taken away based on it. If he had taken 5 seconds he would have seen it wasn't, so yeah, I'll leave it up to you. Metros (talk) 02:34, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

looking into this, thanks Metros. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:20, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about it now. Metros (talk) 14:26, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

(e/c)On first appearance, I'm not convinced RyRy actually even used rollback for this edit. It looks like he used "undo" as it was a single IP editor's single contribution that he reverted. (reverted incorrectly, yes I agree - that material should not be in the article). Did he use rollback to do this? I need to look more closely I think, hmm. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, not that it's an issue now since Friday's taken it away, but yes that's a rollback. An undo would say "Undid reversion by..." A revert with pop-ups is "Revert to reversion #####..." A rollback is "Reverted edits by..." Metros (talk) 14:33, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah. *slaps forehead*. I did actually know that, just looked too fast. I've already responded on RyRy's page. The irony is that he didn't need to use rollback, could've used "undo". To me, that strengthens Friday's actions, not RyRys. Bummer. Thanks Metros. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:35, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

He shouldn't have undid it in that case either. It wasn't vandalism, so there was no need to revert it at all, regardless of the method used to revert. That's the big issue here, that he doesn't take the few seconds to read and recognize edits. Metros (talk) 14:40, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I completely agree with you, as I stated above. Should not have done anything at all. I was just pointing out the irony that he used a granted "extra tool" in a situation where he would be able to make the exact same error as if he didn't have the "extra tool". And now he, rightfully, doesn't have the extra tool. Which means he could conceivably make the same mistake again. Which means we take away "undo"...:-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I've commented here (permalink) Although not necessary, I'd have liked to be told about the revoking, not to see it on my watchlist, but never mind, I found out anyway. And, well, if he's given rollback again in the near future, I'd be highly concerned. Wouldn't it be fair to wait until I think he's ready for it? Merely as I've adopted him, and I plan to do an intense teaching with him about vandalism. And I feel I know what I'm doing in that area, but, anyway commented on his talk page. Feel free to reply to this on mine. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 14:42, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Not sure why we didn't edit conflict there...hmmm. Anywho, absolutely Steve. I will not grant it again, you were correct in the ANI thread previously, and I should've not granted rollback so soon. I was reviewing his edits, and he appeared to be working with rollback fairly well, very conservatively, limiting himself to page blankings. This one was a mistake unfortunately. I am stepping back from this to heed your better judgment. Cheers, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:46, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much. When I can see, from what I will have taught him, and when I feel he's ready, I'll give the nod. Not that I override an admin, I just feel I'm kinda the best one to judge that sorta thing. I hope you understand. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 14:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Just a friendly note to Steve: Adoption is highly informal, and while your requests are in good faith, admins (or anyone) having to make seperate posts on the adopters pages would create a lot of extra work. It's assumed that the adopter is already keeping an eye on his adoptee (which clearly you are). I think your advice should have been heeded earlier on in the A/NI, although Keeper saw a reasonable request from RyRy and acted on it. Ryan is clearing doing good stuff in the project... but maybe a suggestion for him: Ask him to remove some of the user boxes about edit counts, to encourage him to not worry about such a trivial thing and focus on his strong points. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 15:35, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know adoption is informal, was just a comment that since I've seen the effects of the rollback, and how he did on the Vandalism Assignment, that he wasn't ready. I know that if an admin wants to do something, they will do it. Already mentioned the userboxes, I didn't tell him to remove them altoghether (I have one for count too), but I rarely if ever update it. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 16:41, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Please try to avoid...

interjecting yourself into an editor's attempt to dialog with another editor. Splash was trying to open a dialog with Jerry, and that attempt seemed stymied by your intervention. It may be more healthy in the future to let two people work out their differences on their own.

Just food for thought. And happy editing. Cheers, Kingturtle (talk) 12:00, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

As it turns out, the dialog was not stymied. Cheers again, Kingturtle (talk) 13:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The irony of this post has not escaped me, Kingturtle. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:20, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The Diorama FAC

Okay...I don't want you to think anyone is being anal here; just keep in mind that SandyGeorgia has to review 4 dozen of these pages at least once a day. Could you please put your support right at the front of your sentence? She only asks it because, with so much to read, she knows she's missed support/oppose votes from time to time, and that just makes everyone cranky. Incidentally, nice copy editing work there, I always feel better when someone else goes through too. Risker (talk) 20:54, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Risker, for the copy edit compliment! Much appreciated. I'll go there next and fix my "stabs" at helpfulness for SG.  :-) Cheers, and thanks for the headsup...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi Keeper76; I wanted to say thank you for supporting my request for adminship, which passed with 100 supports, 0 opposes and 1 neutral. I wanted to get round everybody individually, even though it's considered by some to be spam (which... I suppose it is! but anyway. :)). It means a lot to me that the community has placed its trust in my ability to use the extra buttons, and I only hope I can live up to its expectations. If you need anything, or notice something that bothers you, don't hesitate to let me know. Thanks again, PeterSymonds | talk 21:48, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

You're very welcome. Don't break anything :-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 23:04, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: What do you think?

I think I'm a lucky guy! I'm a bit stunned at the pace of development, but there's no time like the present, and nothing to be lost from going for it! Thank you. No matter which way it goes, I won't let you down. --Jza84 |  Talk  23:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

That's an accept btw (!) --Jza84 |  Talk  23:09, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, my preference was always that Malleus (and a fellow editor User:Ddstretch) get the mop first, before me, but they are each reluctant, and c'est la vie. I'll probably hang back for an hour or so, then transclude. That is, if you're also OK with that? --Jza84 |  Talk  23:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I think you're better off waiting for a Pedro co-nom, and from his talkpage, I believe he's gone to bed for the day. I'd waitng 8-10 hours before transcluding, minimum, so he can add his co. But that's just me and my own insecurities. BTW, I also think that Malleus needs to try RfA#2, but he seems rather stubborn about it (who knew?) :-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 23:15, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

And, now that I think about it, I thought Dd was an admin, or at least, I assumed so (never checked logs). What gives? Ddstrech isn't an admin? Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 23:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm trying to find the message he left me about it once. I offered to (co-)nominate him for RFA, but, respectfully, he declined, putting content building first. We're a good team in the north west, even if I say so myself! As for Malleus, I suspect (and hope) that my own RFA may make him rethink his position. It's mad that we all seem to want him to have it, but he does not. :) --Jza84 |  Talk  00:15, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Um

Why'd you revert Gurch's check marks to the Highly active page? SynergeticMaggot (talk) 23:10, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure. Wait, what did I do? Was it wrong? Revert me if it was, it won't hurt my feelings.... Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 23:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Someone else did it. No worries. It was being discussed on the main talk. :D SynergeticMaggot (talk) 23:14, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Link me baby - whaddya mean, "main talk?" Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 23:15, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[10] Enigma ^message 23:18, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

It was actually SimsFan, although I left a note on MBisanz's talk that I think it's a sock of SimpsonsFan08. Enigma ^message 23:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

LOL! I assumed, perhaps with bad faith, that Simsfan was Simsponfan08. LOL. Let me know how the SSP case goes, if one is ever opened...:-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 23:25, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Thomas Calcagni

Hi. You deleted this article per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Calcagni. This is just a courtesy note, since User:Tcalcagni has requested some sort of review via this edit [11] to a category I watch. I've answered their question in this edit, [12], so I just thought I would give you a heads up. Hiding T 23:40, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the headsup, Hiding. I'll watchlist User:Tcalcagni with the assumptionthat he/she may post there instead of here. Cheers, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 23:44, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry for not putting all the postings in the correct places. I was seeking advice on how to have the deletion of the article reviewed. I understand the reluctance to post biographies written by the individual, however, after the article was up for deletion changes and references were added by other users, after some of the voting took place. I did not make changes after being told I should not. Can you please let me know if you are willing to reconsider your decision. Thank you --Tcalcagni (talk) 00:38, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

i'm blushing

LOL. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 00:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)