User talk:Balloonman/archive 19

Thanks...

That Donald Fink article started out, as I recall, as little more than an unsupported declarative sentence. I'm thrilled that the original poster did such a magnificent job on a redo, bringing it to DYK status. However, if I didn't immediately reply to your concerns, it wasn't because you were being ignored. I always reply to my messages, but I must not have been online at the time. I'm a bit miffed at the other user for his attitude, so I've gently set him straight. I hope this takes care of your concerns. BTW, I agree with you regarding hopping from page to page. I found the comments about a third of the way up from the bottom. :) Thanks again for the message. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:36, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I was a little surprised at his comment as well... there are some people (particularly those dedicated solely to CSD/NPP) who don't respond as well as one would like :( I did share the experience at CSD. I'm a firm believer in CSD, but I am also a firm advocate in CSD should only be used in obvious cases. I think we delete potential articles too rapidly around here, without giving them a chance to grow. Remember that being an unsupported declarative sentence is not grounds for CSD. A7 explicitly states that the claim does not have to be supported with a citation, it only has to make a claim of importance/significance---which Fink did. (My !voting pattern at AFD probably portrays me as a deletionist, while my belligerence at CSD has me as a strict inclusionist! My essay Why I Hate Speedy Deleters basically sums it up ;-) )---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 16:02, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great essay and one I will take the time to read and not merely skim. Believe it or not, I'm more of an inclusionist than a deletionist. I've had some articles I thought were of importance either speedily deleted or AfD'd. Not a pleasant feeling and since the credo around here is "Wikipedia is not paper," it made no sense to have the articles deleted. FWIW, they were articles on individual radio controlled model aircraft. I make it a point to whack the really obvious garbage, but believe me, if a future nanostub even hints at notability, I won't be the one to delete it. I'm relieved it all turned out well. I went into panic mode when I saw the messages! Oh nuts, what did I do now? :) Anyway, thank you for helping set this straight. I see why you supported and nominated SpiiningSpark for an adminship. He's one of the good ones and I failed to see that right away. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

cool, that is a hobby I want to get into, my wife got me a subscription to Fly RC magazine for Christmas and a cheap radio controlled airplane... which lasted a few flights before it crashed (and then was subsequently crushed under a 4 year old.)

As for my noming him, yeah, that is one of the reasons he came to me... was to seek my guidance. he wasn't sure what to do, but didn't want to get into a wheel war with ya.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 16:44, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Broken reference

In this edit you added a reference Korfman agreed to let Bennett win the bracelet, in exchange for splitting the money.<ref name = "bennet" />. Could you please provide the details of this reference. Thank you. Debresser (talk) 13:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you fixed it. I thought, this might be the fix. But I couldn't know. Thanks. Debresser (talk) 22:41, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thanks for bringing it to my attention.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 22:45, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

how do you become one of these people (i.e. you!) who get to delete pages??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Booyaabaybeeeee (talk • contribs) 18:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Admin#Becoming_an_administrator---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 18:53, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FL review

Hi Spartacus. I love the name, btw. I noticed that you recently nominated a list for featured status and have a degree in Chinese history and are interested in the subject. I too have a degree, and a list nominated for featured status! Small world. Lol. It's the List of Emperors of the Han Dynasty. Since you're interested in Chinese history, I thought you'd like to take a look. It will join a greater Han Dynasty featured topic sooner or later (that nomination is ongoing as well).--Pericles of Athens^Talk 20:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not interested?--Pericles of Athens^Talk 18:32, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to take a look this evening, last night I went to bed early...and right now with the WSOP going on, my attention has been diverted there.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 18:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)

The May 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Frankel

Hi Spartacus, no worries on the revert you did to my edit on the Martin Frankel article. Normally I would agree regarding the self identification, but in this case the editor in question User:Beganlocal is only inserting Jewish ethnicity in to articles, which seems worrisome. I've made a note on the BLP noticeboard and will let the cards fall as they may. Cheers ponyo (talk) 16:24, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Normally, I would have looked at your reversion and said, I agree, it is not necessary. The only time where one's religious beliefs (whether Catholic/Jewish/Muslim/etc) is if the person's religious beliefs are pertinent to the reason the person is notable. In this case, I think it is relevant as Frankel used his Jewish background (and social stereotypes about Jews) to his advantage while committing his frauds. I have a ton of concerns about this article... it is almost to the point that is a candidate for Speedy Deletion under G10 Attack/BLP Problem pages. The problem is that I did a research paper on Frankel's crimes in Grad School, thus, I know the subject a little better than most---and want to have others (namely from the BLP page) take a look at it. I almost want to scratch the entire article down to a stub and start over.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 16:35, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. I first approached the BLP noticeboard to bring the Frankel article to wider attention, but cancelled my report when I realized the user making the edits was the larger issue. I think that the article could definitely benefit from a good scrub or rewrite. The subject is certainly notable enough and there should be some great sources out there that would allow for an informative and interesting article. It's unfortunately virtually unreadable in its current state. ponyo (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My essay

Thank you for taking the time to address some of my concerns associated with WP:Ageism. Again, I found your essay quite insightful, but I just think a slightly quieter bias would have had a stronger effect. Regards, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to work some of your comments into my essay, I don't agree with all of them, but I am open to working on it.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 22:27, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Hal Lubarsky

On June 6, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hal Lubarsky, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Giants27 03:50, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for List of World Series of Poker Casino Employee Champions

On June 7, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of World Series of Poker Casino Employee Champions, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Royal broil 03:51, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of Emperors of the Han Dynasty

I removed the extra citations and provided explanations about the sources used for each cell in the remaining citations, as you suggested. Regards.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 23:40, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: AFD and notifying projects

Thanks for the note! I'll try my best to remember that next time I post something to a project. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 22:59, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem... it's not an issue if you notify the people at AFD, but if you forget to notify them, sometimes you'll see people crying "foul" because of "canvass". It is also best that when you notify a project to leave it as neutral terms as possible. Althought saying something along the lines of "An FL has been listed for deletion" would be acceptable. If a WSOP bracelet winner was placed for deletion, I would simply stated, "Joe Blow, a WSOP bracelet winner, has been nominated for deletion. If you would like to partake in the discussion here is the link.."---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:02, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Nomination

I'm pretty sure (correct me if I'm wrong), there is no written rule that says how long you have to be with the Wikipedia. -(By the way, you signature is clever & funny!) Sought | Knock Knock | Who's There? 23:10, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no written rule, but there are unwritten expectations. At 6 weeks there is zero chance of the RfA passing, I say that not to be mean, but as a point of fact.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 02:11, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

csdhelper

Hi
Since you asked about a CSD decline script a while ago and I'm slow to produce, I just stumbled across User:Ale jrb/Scripts/csdhelper.js which you might want to give a try.
Cheers, Amalthea 15:50, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apology

I'd like to apologize for this edit which you called a "blind revert." I hadn't taken a close enough look at the edit and thought it was just moved from one place to another. After taking a closer look, I realized there was more done to it. Anyway, I didn't mean any disrespect. Keep up the good work. --GHcool (talk) 20:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, hope that my comment wasn't too strong either... I had no problem with your moving the tridentine mass out of the SSPX section. I think it works there, but it also works on its own. I do, however, have concerns with saying that the Summorum reinstated the Latin Mass. There are some other glaring erros in that section, but I want to check the facts before I make any changes.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 20:56, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

---

up set

Hey there, I'm new to wikipedia editing and as I was trying to create a profile page for actor Remy Thorne it was deleted last night. I'm so I haven't got to really understand how things work on the editing controls. I'm sorry if it didn't look quite professional but I was wondering why it got deleted. Remiel-Winchester, Friday, June 12th 2009 at 6:41 pm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Remiel-Winchester (talk • contribs) 23:42, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at the links I provided you on your talk page. Namely those surrounding WP:notability and reliable sources. The key is that the article has to be A) about somebody who has some notability B) has encyclopedic content and C) has reliable sources backing it up. Articles that are written like the one you wrote appear to be cruft/vanity pages, and will typically be deleted on sight. Also, just so you know a lot of users, such as myself will watchlist pages where we participate in discussions---so I had been watching your talkpage. But once the conversation changes place, I shift where I respond. So I responded to your query here. I left you a talkback template so that you know to check my page. Normally I won't do that I'd assume you were watching my page, but as you are newbie, I wanted to make sure you were aware of it.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 13:03, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

World Series of Poker bracelet GAR notice

World Series of Poker bracelet has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:16, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you missed my GAR comment about the images.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:24, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

14 item DYK

For those talk page stalkers out there, I'm currently working on 14 articles related to the Super Bowl of Poker... and am hoping to get this in as a 14 item DYK. I need ideas on how best to work this DYK... if you have any ideas, please help me out at the DYK discussion---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 14:43, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for deleted article

Hi, could you please past a copy of this deleted article on my user page? Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy

Thanks. Dodge rambler (talk) 01:12, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you one better, I restored this article to the main space. It clearly makes a claim of importance/significance. The person who deleted it did so improperly. This isn't even a questionable case, IMO. So I'm simply restoring it.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 01:19, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi-Di-Ho, Mr. S. - I had a spell of insomnia last night, so I used my sleep-deprived time to spruce up the article in question with what I believe to be rock solid referencing. Hopefully, that will secure the article's place on the project! :) Pastor Theo (talk) 16:32, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I had noticed, but I didn't know if you saw it because of this request or how you stumbled upon it ;-) Anyways, it's back in the main space. I think it was a bad deletion, but that's water under the bridge.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 16:36, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I was just clicking around to see what the "interesting people" were up to, and that's how I came upon the article. I was unfamiliar with the subject and wanted to learn more about it. The subject is very interesting, too! Pastor Theo (talk) 16:57, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all for sorting this out. Dodge rambler (talk) 18:15, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, now that's better!

Welcome back Balloonman! :) – (**iMatthew** • talk) at 00:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't resist this whilst I was in the vicinity... Bencherlite ^Talk 00:11, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Identity crisis, eh? You'll always be b-man to me, anyway. –xeno^talk 00:12, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was B-Man to everybody... including myself.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 00:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature still suggests otherwise... Bencherlite ^Talk 00:32, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was just fixin that...---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 00:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have mail. Bencherlite ^Talk 00:34, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do we know you're not really Spartacus? --Malleus Fatuorum 00:35, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All is right in the universe again. Useight (talk) 00:37, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I particularly like my sig now... shows how convoluted I am.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 01:50, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Geez, can't make up your mind, eh? Frank | talk 02:59, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's just a lession in practical consensus finding: Everyone called him Balloonman even after he renamed, so he changed it back to conform that

So Why 08:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back. :) Amalthea 18:35, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was wondering what was with the Spartacus thing. But you were always Balloonman to everyone ^_^. Steve Crossin ^Talk/_{Help us mediate!} 22:14, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did I come to a wrong house? I was a looking for a someone named Spartacus! :) -- Tinu Cherian - 07:03, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TPS Help from somebody who uses tools?

Ok, this is going to be a nightmare if we have to do this manually... for those of you familiar with tools, is there anyway that we might be able to semi-automate this?---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 01:32, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it's the least I could do... –xeno^talk 01:51, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done I didn't notice Bencherlite did a handful of pages, so I made a bit of a mess - but I think everything's shiny now. –xeno^talk 02:11, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

National Recording Registry

Thanks for the prompt merge, but there was a lot of useful material from the old article that was lost when it was deleted. Could you recover it and userfy it for me? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 01:54, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User_talk:Dabomb87/Registry---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 02:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, you can delete it. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:12, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 02:15, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey...

...help me out here, would ya? Talk:Walter_Cronkite, User Talk:Frank, History... Frank | talk 20:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support :-) Frank | talk 14:19, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I checked out that page BEFORE looking here... I was keeping an eye on it from the ANI discussion, and saw that it had reached the point where it needed protected based upon dubious sources.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 17:29, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well I knew you were watching because of that discussion. Anyway...on to the next thing, I guess. :-) Frank | talk 20:06, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Hey there. I just sent you an email; do you think you could check it out and get back to me whenever you have free time? Thanks, NW (Talk) 22:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Super Bowl of Poker

On June 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Super Bowl of Poker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1979 Super Bowl of Poker

On June 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1979 Super Bowl of Poker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1980 Super Bowl of Poker

On June 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1980 Super Bowl of Poker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1981 Super Bowl of Poker

On June 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1981 Super Bowl of Poker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1982 Super Bowl of Poker

On June 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1982 Super Bowl of Poker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1983 Super Bowl of Poker

On June 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1983 Super Bowl of Poker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1984 Super Bowl of Poker

On June 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1984 Super Bowl of Poker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1985 Super Bowl of Poker

On June 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1985 Super Bowl of Poker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1986 Super Bowl of Poker

On June 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1986 Super Bowl of Poker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1987 Super Bowl of Poker

On June 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1987 Super Bowl of Poker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1987 Super Bowl of Poker

On June 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1987 Super Bowl of Poker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1988 Super Bowl of Poker

On June 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1988 Super Bowl of Poker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1989 Super Bowl of Poker

On June 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1989 Super Bowl of Poker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1990 Super Bowl of Poker

On June 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1990 Super Bowl of Poker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1991 Super Bowl of Poker

On June 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1991 Super Bowl of Poker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The DYK Medal

		The DYK Medal
		Congratulations on your 14 hook DYK on Super Bowl of Poker :) Keep up the good work ! -- *Tinu* *Cherian* - 07:08, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, my next goal for that is to create a 14 article Feature Topic on the SBOP. Have to clean those puppies up and send them to FL.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 07:09, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

:) Best of luck !-- Tinu Cherian - 10:37, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

missing sig

I think you forgot to sign this, and I also think it's nicer to let experienced editors do it, rather than using the unsigned signature template. Cheers, tedder (talk) 15:52, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

done---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 16:22, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please

Please tell me that you are not blind and that you can see here that there are big bold letters at the top screaming Irene and that Samuel Johnson is just a little note most of the way down the page. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:33, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One question - do you believe that Irene is a content fork of Johnson? If your answer is no, how can you begin to promote your outrageous claim? Ottava Rima (talk) 19:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on Malleus' talk page.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 20:22, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just FYI

I've floated your name as a possible nom for someone at User talk:Xeno#Question re: RFA. I think the lad would use the tools well as he's been here quite a while and is primarily a mainspace contributor. I think you'll find interesting the discussion I had with him, especially the comment I made about how I think him jumping through hoops to tick off a couple checkmarks on an RFA voters' checklist might actually have the opposite effect. –xeno^talk 19:35, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RFA Nomination

As you might already know, I am that lad who was mentioned above. I was wondering if you could nominate me for the administrative process, along with Xeno. I know that we have had positive run ins before, so I was also wondering if you could mention those in your nomination. Thanks a lot and have a splendid day. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:13, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I recognize the name, but I don't recall the "run ins" off the top of my head... could you remind me of them?---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 20:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go check. God, I hope I'm not confusing you for someone else. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:30, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I recognize the name, but I don't recall off the top of my head from where or what ;-) ---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 20:32, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, apparently we have never interacted before, or at least you never wrote on my talk page. I might have wanted to ask you to coach me as an administrator, but I think that you were full. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:34, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mean to sound harsh or demanding, but will you be able to nominate me? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:24, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

as my dad used to say, Patience is a virtue... I'd have to take a look at your edit history and I can't do that at work.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 21:29, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean to sound impatient there, but I was unsure if you ever would. Aren't there policies against using this at work? I thought I was daring when I edited this during school. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:32, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're still at school? Ooh, that might be a problem. ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum 01:49, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HS or College?---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 02:00, 27 June 2009 (UTC)Based upon your user page, it's college... which shouldn't be a problem. HS would have garnered some auto opposes. College will garner a closer look, but no auto opposes.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 02:37, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I could remove that information temporarily if you think that they might question the fact that I am too young when I just graduated high school. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:16, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you do that now, I can almost guarantee that some will oppose because they think you are trying to hide something. Regards So Why 21:34, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking only for myself, as one of the severest critics of child administrators, I'd agree with SoWhy's comment above. I'd also want to know what "graduating high school" actually means in your case. If you're about to enter tertiary education (undergraduate, that kind of stuff) then fine, I'd have no problem. But if, to give a specific UK example, you were leaving secondary school to enter a sixth-form college, then I would oppose on the grounds of your age. Nothing personal, just my own conviction. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:46, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

His user page clearly indicates that he is going to University of Massachusetts Lowell, thus in pursuit of an undergraduate degree. Just as an FYI, I am looking over your edit history right now. I do think that it was a good decision to wait a full year after your first two RfA's. If you had run earlier, it would have looked like you were looking for a trophy/title, by waiting a full year, you will alleviate some of the opposes that might have stemmed from your first two RfA's.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:06, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the lookover. When you're ready, I have already completed the questions and am ready to start the whole process when you are. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:35, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you're active in the Military History Project, but you could include in my whole nomination that I proposed an overhaul of the naming convention, but it lost after a heated discussion, see: here, and here. I also indirectly restarted the debate for C-Class on the project, after it was determined that it wasn't advertised that well. See this to see what I started. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:46, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Detailed review provided on KTR's talk page.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 13:53, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So do you think I should wait a month while working in the meta spaces like Xeno suggested? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:43, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would definitely wait. The one area that I didn't look at was your contributions to XfD... which might have changed my perception. But right now, what people are going to see is a person who has a very troubled past (for the most part a year plus) and some isolated issues that have popped up. While your past and the isolated issues wouldn't hurt you by themselves, together I suspect they might kill a run right now. One of the big concerns I had was that you like to write articles that are derived from your HS... the band, the former drum major, the skating rink where they practiced, etc. These articles leave me wondering how well you know the minimum requirements for wikipedia---and they are easily found in your deleted content. You need a few months of clean editing with solid contributions.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 16:57, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The reason that I did some of those things is that I have looked at other high school websites here and they've created things along the lines of their sports teams and the like. I haven't created one for my school yet, and probably never will because that would involve research with time that I don't have. I do agree that the drum major thing was a bit out there, but when I revamped it, I had it removed. Thanks for also indirectly helping me remove vandalism on that page. Just so you know, I have tried to steer clear of XFDs lately because of the fact that Xeno said that that might piss off people who would think that I was trying to fit things in before I was nominated. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:40, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well my point when saying that was that I jumped through hoops (WP:NPP) work before my RFA but it had the opposite effect, i.e., some people saw I was mis-using A1 and opposed as a result. As I mentioned, if B-man were to provide some coaching that is your best bet. –xeno^talk 18:43, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with what a lot of people do is they jump through hoops getting a token exposure in areas. I don't think this helps and it actually hinders because people make drive by edits without really understanding what is going on. For example, I know that one Admin Coach used to tell people to go participate in FAC's. The coachee would go make a post and never revisit the page often creating more controversy than they solved. I prefer to see people develop footprints in several areas that they like to work. If a person likes to work at FAC, then by all means get involved, but don't do so to say I did that.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 18:57, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You don't want to work in areas specifically to "check the box." That is always a bad idea, similarly editing with the focus of passing an RfA is a poor motivation. In your case, I would actually suggest working some in XFD. I make this suggestion not because it might help with an RfA, but rather because it would help you understand the communities expectations concerning some key policies/guidelines. By working with XfD's you can see how other interpret the policies and guidelines and get a better sense of what you need to do when you create an article. All you need to do is participate in a few XfD's a day and after a month or two, you'll have a much better understanding of what is expected. When you !vote, always give a rationale for your !vote, and revisit it. You'll be surprised how many times people will agree or disagree with your rationale... when they disagree, take note of the reasoning/policy/guideline.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 18:53, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your criticism. I will return in a month or so to see what you think of me, and we can go from there. I told Xeno that he would get some type of award, and after what you have said and sone for me, I'll be sure to give you one now too. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:28, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Balloonman. You have new messages at Dabomb87's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dabomb87 (talk) 16:46, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]