Jump to content

User talk:Just Step Sideways: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Sorry: missed a word
Thewinrat (talk | contribs)
Line 108: Line 108:
Sorry about that, I did not mean to cause any Trouble. --[[User:Thegooduser|<span style="color: teal">'''Thegooduser'''</span>]] [[User talk:Thegooduser|<span style="color: maroon">'''Life Begins With a Smile :)'''</span>]] <span style="color:red">🍁</span> 01:47, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Sorry about that, I did not mean to cause any Trouble. --[[User:Thegooduser|<span style="color: teal">'''Thegooduser'''</span>]] [[User talk:Thegooduser|<span style="color: maroon">'''Life Begins With a Smile :)'''</span>]] <span style="color:red">🍁</span> 01:47, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
:It's not a huge deal, and if there was something not immediately obvious such remarks can be helpful, but with such a low edit count it's pretty open-and-shut. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox#top|talk]]) 03:13, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
:It's not a huge deal, and if there was something not immediately obvious such remarks can be helpful, but with such a low edit count it's pretty open-and-shut. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox#top|talk]]) 03:13, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

==New message from Thewinrat==
{{talkback|Thewinrat|your rollback request, and...everything else you are doing|ts=16:10, 16 April 2019 (UTC)}}
[[User:Thewinrat|<span style="color: red">The</span><span style="color: blue">Win</span>]][[User talk:Thewinrat|<span style="color: green">Rat</span><span style="color: gold">Here!</span>]] 16:10, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:10, 16 April 2019

RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
Asilvering 0 0 0 09:15, 6 September 2024 5 days, 14 hoursno report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
please stay in the top three tiers

Comments about the RFC here Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion#Random_Small_City_Portals and [1] [2] Legacypac (talk) 01:46, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not change shortcuts to essays without discussing

Hello! Please refrain from removing established shortcuts to essays, like you did with WP:WEAK and the essay Wikipedia:A weak personal attack is still wrong. Shortcuts such as this one are used in discussions and referenced throughout Wikipedia. Changing or removing them would make links from existing discussions meaningless and confusing. Please discuss any such move and gain consensus before making a change of this kind.--Paul McDonald (talk) 01:44, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, except that I checked what linked to that essay and, as I noted at the time in my edit summary [3] that one was unused so there was no harm in just being bold and doing it, but I suppose we'll go the other route and use RFD instead. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

edits at Denali

Yes Anatoli Boukreev did do what it takes other 4 or 5 camps to complete he did it in ten and one half hours, that’s why Anatoli is the greatest alpinist that ever lived. Just look at his records on the worlds highest peaks e.g Lhotse. Curtainsider (talk) 08:03, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit made it look like he started not from the base camp but fromt he base of the entire mountain and summited in 10 hours. That's basically impossible. There is also the idea that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, so something more than his own autobiography to back that up would be nice. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:39, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Curtainsider:. It looks better now, but please realize this is entirely inappropriate commentary inside an article. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:55, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is not inappropriate considering the amazing feat/record. It is far more significant than failed attempts published in the same way. Curtainsider (talk) 07:48, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh, replied on your talk page, and by the way please learn how to use talk pages. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:11, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Camp

Hello. You've deleted an article Matthew Camp, I've started. I noticed that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Camp didn't have any discussion and no opinion was raised beside nominator. Unfortunately, I couldn't raise my opinion, since I was traveling without access to the internet and unfortunately didn't see the nomination. Would you please resurrect the article as the draft, so I can address the nominator's reservations? Thank you in advance. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 13:10, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:44, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
  • As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.

Notice of noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Concerns Regarding User:Bbb23 and Possible Misuse of Admin/CU Abilities". Thank you. Notifying you as I mentioned your name. Nil Einne (talk) 10:22, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mitsubishi F-3

Dear Administrator,

I would like to request the deleted article, Mitsubishi F-3, to be moved to my user page as a draft. The F-3 is a future Japanese stealth fighter currently in development. A while back I created the article but it was nominated for deletion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mitsubishi F-3, because there was a lack of information regarding its current development (namely the manufacturer, Mitsubishi is only speculated). The other editors declared the article WP:TOOSOON (which I also agree). However, I believe there is still potential for this topic in future when more information is available or if I could find more info from the Japanese Ministry of Defense website. I wish to make improvements and changes based on the other editors' feedback. In addition, some of the editors have stated that the information within the deleted article can be used for the existing Mitsubishi X-2 (a tech demonstrator designed to study and develop technologies for the F-3). Thus, I would also like to use the information from the Mitsubishi F-3 to expand upon the Mitsubishi X-2. Thank you for taking the time to read my request. I edit things that come to mind (talk) 21:51, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Normally suc requests go through the deleting admin, in this case @Premeditated Chaos:. Beeblebrox (talk) 06:29, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I'll go request it from the deleting admin (I didn't know it work like that). Thanks for your help. I edit things that come to mind (talk) 14:02, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Meant to reply to this earlier and forgot but I've now dealt with it on my talk page. ♠PMC(talk) 22:51, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Revision deletion of log summary

Hi Beeblebrox! I'm messaging you in regards to this log that you RD'd the summary from under RD2. First of all, I agree 100% that the summary meets the criterion under RD2 for revision deletion and should be redacted. However, since this log is currently the subject of evidence in an ArbCom case, shouldn't we restore the visibility settings for community visibility and review while the ArbCom case is open (like admins do sometimes to deleted pages or histories)? We can surely reinstate the redaction after it closes... what are your thoughts? Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:10, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I had the same concern so I punted. I went ahead and did it but also emailed arbcom to ask what they would prefer. Beeblebrox (talk) 06:25, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Own edit raising concerns that probable sockpuppet would be unblocked was undone by suspected sock. (banned user User:יניב הורון)

Per title I added the concern in the midst of a block review (about a month ago) to said talk page, and now, I'm unsure where to address this, So I will merely show you the edit where the user removed my concerns promptly after I posted them. I've also gone to the other involved admin that I tagged in the first post. (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%91_%D7%94%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%9F&diff=886037292&oldid=886033883&diffmode=source) - R9tgokunks 07:13, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not at all sure what it is you want addressed. Both the IP and the named account are blocked, so whether your comment is still visible on the page doesn't strike me as particualrly important, and even blocked users are given fairly wide latitude to remove posts from their talk page. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:07, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

three thousand, six hundred and thirty-five days later

I get 3637 days using this. You might have skipped the leap days in 2012 and 2016. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 01:26, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I used an online "how many days" calculator. You'd think they would account for that, but maybe not. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:12, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not that it matters, but {{age in days}} is accurate:
  • {{age in days|23 April 2009|8 April 2019}} → 3,637
Johnuniq (talk) 03:30, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's a handy trick to know, thanks! Beeblebrox (talk) 03:56, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Sorry about that, I did not mean to cause any Trouble. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:47, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a huge deal, and if there was something not immediately obvious such remarks can be helpful, but with such a low edit count it's pretty open-and-shut. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:13, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Thewinrat

Hello, Just Step Sideways. You have new messages at Thewinrat's talk page.
Message added 16:10, 16 April 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

TheWinRatHere! 16:10, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]