User talk:Ultraexactzz
Allan Berube
Thanks so much for creating the entry on my dear friend Allan Berube. I have added to it and asked other to keep adding, editing, and improving it, so that it becomes the most complete source of info on Allan's life and accomplishments. I am rather new at editing Wikipedia entries so I am learning on the job. Again, thanks. Jonathan Ned Katz jnkatz1@aol.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by jnkatz1 (talk • contribs) 17:51, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
RfA thanks
Dear Ultraexactzz, here is a little note to say thank you for your kind support on my request for adminship which succeeded with a final result of (72/19/6).
Now that I am a sysop, do not hesitate to contact me with any queries you have. I would be glad to help you along with the other group of kind and helpful administrators.
Thank you again and I look forward to editing alongside you in the future. — E talk 12:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ron Paul campaign 2008 appearances
I thought it was a pretty clear case of WP:SNOW; but didn't overtly cite that. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Apostrophical section titles
...like these mean that people can (if they feel the need!) refer to #Section 1 and #Section 1' distinctly. Otherwise, only the first Section 1 would be referencable in this way. Splash - tk 13:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- Got it - that makes perfect sense. I hadn't thought of that concern beyond "Support" and "Oppose"; with the sections split, that's really the only way to do it properly. I didn't catch that all four oppose sections had an ' until after I commented; before that, I figured someone hit the ' when they hit enter. Thanks for the heads up, UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 13:58, 4 January 2008 (UTC) Posted on user's talk
Apostrophes
You're right, that is why I added them. Just letting you know :) Equazcion •✗/C • 14:06, 4 Jan 2008 (UTC)
- I see someone else told you -- but hey, you get some credit anyway :) Equazcion •✗/C • 14:13, 4 Jan 2008 (UTC)
- I'm a quick study. Now I know, and knowing is half the battle! UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 14:21, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
The project spawned from Betacommand's thread
For your consideration: WP:TODAY. Lawrence Cohen 17:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
WP:ACE2008
Hey ZZ! I saw your comment. I think that Penwhale meant that the 2008 Elections page should be made in April 2008, but the elections still held in December. If the page is created in April, it gives us six months to organize, notify, and change the process, in time to start the nominations in October-November. What do you think? - Mtmelendez (Talk) 16:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- I agree wholeheartedly, and I think 6 months of discussion would solve any questions about whether the election rules had consensus. My timeline assumed a worst case scenario of an early midterm election, and the fact that - even with a shorter timeline - we'd still have enough time to do such an election properly. April works well for me, too, since I'm all kinds of busy right now. Welcome back, BTW. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 17:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Ultraexactzz, the following guidelines on the version I have constantly reverted to has been established by several, if not many, past discussions and by MoS guideline:
===================================================================== ===================================================================== =============== REPUBLIC OF CHINA ARTICLE GUIDELINES ================ ===================================================================== ===================================================================== Note 1: Simplified Chinese shall remain in the introductory sentence per [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (use of Chinese language)#Simplified and Traditional]] Note 2: Please do not add Simplified and Hanyu Pinyin to the infobox. Note 3: Please refrain from adding flags to the dablinks. Note 4: Please refrain from adding " (Taiwan) " everywhere, as it is misleading and is also poor form.
The anon. has been unresponsive in the past to the requests for discussion, as well as willing to act with the intent to disrupt and violate WP:NPOV. nat.utoronto 13:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Non-free book cover
A book cover cannot adequately be "describing the book's contents in the context of the author's life and career", as mentioned in the non-free use rationale for Image:AudacityofHope.jpg, it can only show the book's cover. Therefore the current non-free use rationale for the use of Image:AudacityofHope.jpg in the Barack Obama article is unsatisfactory. – Ilse@ 18:02, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, it was of course meant as a joke. The nominee has five times more talkspace edits than I have edits altogether! I would have thought it was obvious, but never mind. Thanks for moving it back! Lankiveil (talk) 08:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC).
It looks good, but...
I was not aware that the FUR had to be templated. I know that makes it easier on the bots, but is that a requirement of the policy? Other than that question, it looks fine to me. Bellwether BC 18:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, when the image was "commented out", I did some investigating at the talk page for the image. That's where I found the discussion as to fair use. I moved the relevant portion of it to the main page of the image to support reinserting it into the article. Bellwether BC 18:18, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- Well, thanks for the notes, and I apologize if my edit summary seemed snarky at all. We've been having some relatively spirited discussions at both the Obama and Clinton pages, and I'm afraid I may have come across too strong in my summary. Regards, Bellwether BC 18:29, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
RFA
Your interested in a RFA, you do great work around the project, and would make an excellent admin. Thanks Secret account 04:11, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
OK, have racked my brains, but can't see the link between the acronym above and the Show Preview button...what am I missing? Giles Bennett (Talk, Contribs) 14:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ah. At least I wasn't being thick, then, and missing something obvious! Thanks for clearing that up. Giles Bennett (Talk, Contribs) 14:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Rollback
Heh, heh. :) I'm glad you're putting the rollback tool to its proper use. Good luck. Acalamari 17:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Ricxster
Well, I am sorry if I feel insulted when my integrity and career is attacked when it has been my raison d'etre for the last 11 years. I wager you would be to. Is it unreasonable to demand apology when such rampant untruth and hypocrisy is in play? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricxster (talk • contribs) 22:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
When all that is required to rectify and forget this defamation is an apology. I think I am entitled to such when the attack was so direct, core and monumentally insulting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricxster (talk • contribs) 22:10, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 2nd and 7th, 2008.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 1 | 2 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 2 | 7 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
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) 09:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
RfA thanks (2)
|
Thank you for voting in my RfA, which I withdrew with 5 support, 14 oppose, and 9 neutral. Thank you for your comments! Whether it was a support, oppose, or neutral, I likely got some good feedback from you. I will probably do another RfA in the future, but not until I work out the issues brought up. |
Soxπed Ninety Three | tcdb 17:10, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Ohmpandya's RFA
Hello. Thanks for the comment of "oppose" on my RFA. However, I have already gone threw admin coaching. Would you like a link to it? Ohmpandya (Talk to Me...) 17:36, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks :) (Yes JJ was very nice and cooperative) Ohmpandya (Talk to Me...) 17:47, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hello again. Thought I should ask you this question. Someone on my RFA wrote, that I could promote burnout, because I'm doing over 5000 edits a month?! Is that a reason for anything (support;oppose or neutral)? Ohmpandya (Talk to Me...) 19:11, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- I don't think it would have made much of a difference anyway. I hope you will support when I run on the Ides of March! Ohmpandya (Talk to Me...) 00:21, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- Quite probably. I'd hope that two months would work where two weeks did not... As I said, you'll be a good admin. Best, UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 03:26, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
RfA Thanks (3)
Hi Ultraexactzz - thanks for your participation in my request for adminship. It passed 52/0/0, and I'm now in possession of a shiny new mop. If I can ever help you with anything, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 09:23, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 3 | 14 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
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) 09:12, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Admin coaching
Hey Ultraexactzz, I see you request the help of an admin coach/experienced user on WP:ADMINCOACH. Would I be able to do that? I've seen you around quite a few times and your profile is excellent. If you have any queries about me, just ask. :) Regards, Rudget. 20:08, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sure thing. Create a page in your userspace (example: User:Ultraexactzz/Admin coaching) and we'll proceed from there. I'll start the questions tomorrow! :) Regards, Rudget. 20:57, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, one more thing before tomorrow, could you give a history of time here on the wiki? Like here for example? Be great if you could. :) Thanks. Rudget. 21:07, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry about Rudget, who was a friend to both of us. Would you mind if I took up his reins to continue your admin coaching? bibliomaniac15 02:12, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- I added to the page. Your answers to the questions were very good, and I feel quite confident in your skills as an editor. bibliomaniac15 03:13, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
So...without Rudget, what's gonna happen here? *hopes to here a "you nom me now!"* Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 04:17, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- oh, btw. replied on my talk page if you're still online. Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 05:42, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Don't worry.
Don't worry about Rudget -- You probably already know this, but apparently it was just his cousin playing a joke with his account when he left his computer on. See AN and his talk page. --Coppertwig (talk) 17:45, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 21st, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 4 | 21 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
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) 00:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Re: Your RfA's formatting
Sounds good to me, thanks for the heads up -- pb30<talk> 04:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Nom?
I think it's fairly obvious that you are well-fitted for the job. I think we can cut this short, as I did before with User:Malinaccier. Would you like to be nommed now? bibliomaniac15 05:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- In that case, I'm ready. Yes, I would indeed like to be nominated at this time.UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 13:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- Can't help but intrude, but I think you'll make a great admin. You'll have my support at your RFA. Good luck! Malinaccier Public (talk) 13:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- Alrighty. Please answer the questions and transclude into the main page when you are done. Good luck! bibliomaniac15 21:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, I would have to say that Biblio knows what he's doing. ;D Malinaccier (talk) 22:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
RfA thank-spam
RfD question
Could you please explain this deletion: Reserved people rules. As it was in AfD and the nomination was a mess and there was no clear agreement I think closing it early was not the best call. I can't know because I can't see the article but I'd like it relisted. Hobit (talk) 04:14, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. Hobit (talk) 04:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
C. Vernon Mason
Are you planning to return to the discussion that you started at Talk:C. Vernon Mason? I'm not surprised at all that the Bloomfield anon has failed to pay any attention to the talk page, but I am disappointed that you would use the threat of page protection in order to get people onto the talk page and then not follow up with those people who actually do want a meaningful resolution. -- 209.6.177.176 (talk) 02:10, 26 January 2008 (UTC)