ALLST✰R▼echo's Wikipedia talk page Currently, Allstarecho's Wikipedia online status is: - Also add this page to your watchlist for my status updates. Currently, Allstarecho's local time and date is: 6:37 AM on November 4, 2024 - Is my clock slow? Click here to wind it up!
Hello and welcome to my talk page. Please note that I will reply to you on this page unless you request otherwise. Please watch this page if you comment.
Further, please note:
Please take note of my status and the time where I live. If I'm not online, I'll reply when I am, but feel free to look at my contact page for other methods of contact.
Please use a ==descriptive header== and sign & date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message.
Please use [[wikilinks]] when mentioning users and pages.
I will not reply directly to attacks, innuendo or general incivility. You will be wasting your time if you're here for that. I may however reply via a warning on your own talk page or a report to the Administrators' incident noticeboard. Save your time and mine so that we can both use it to build a better Wikipedia.
Please note that I archive talk posts so if commenting on an old thread from the archives, consider starting a new thread.
Please note that I am a "regular". Do not template me as I will surely revert. For more info, refer to WP:DTTR.
With all that said, ask away and I'll try and help.
ALLST✰R▼echo's talk page archives - click 'show' to view and/or search them ------>
Want to see how a Wikipedia lynching works? Read this.
Steve McNair Links
Thanks for accept my edits my Friend!!! I will search for the videos in other site, Anyway thanks for be patient with me.--Zta (talk) July 5 2009 ♠Nastia
Matt Sanchez
Childofmidnight of accused you of pushing an agenda on this article at the BLP page ChildofMidnight is the most active conservative POV pushing editor on wiki that I've encountered. Scribner (talk) 23:01, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The editor in question is at it again, now with edit summaries intended to bait. I've reverted, but I wanted to give you a heads up. --StephenLaurie (talk) 21:13, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm trying to overhaul the male actors in gay porn list and reconcile it with Category:People appearing in gay pornography. Would you, could you help close an odd technical gap for me? I need the list of all those in the category - 238 on two pages - recollated and listed by first name instead of las name. This also brings up the question if the list is fine being listed by first name or not. I'm not bothered either way. Anyway that's the request. Thank you! -- Banjeboi09:49, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't do anything and they still seem to be sorted by last name. Do you have a word processing ability to alpha sort by first name? I could run it through an accountancy pragramme instead. -- Banjeboi00:52, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Odd that you're seeing them last name first and I'm seeing them first name first. Go look at User talk:Benjiboi/catsort where I have pasted them. That's how I see them and should be what you need. All of them first name first, last name second. So odd you're seeing something different. Anyway, go look at that page I created for you, you'll have to wikilink them. - ALLST✰R▼echowuz here03:14, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Lol. I explained it poorly but solved my own challenge. I wanted the list sorted by first name not listed first name first. So Adam, Alan, Alaine would be together instead of the cat list which bundles by last name. Thank you for looking at it though. -- Banjeboi03:27, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I saw that you were the one who set up the archive on the Skynyrd page. There are no links to the archive on the talk page, so I'm hoping you could just send me a link to the discussion where consensus was reached on setting up the archive. Thanks. — Bdb484 (talk) 14:43, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is a link near the top of the page, at the bottom of the first box. Do you object to the archiving? I think it's perfectly reasonable, given that it removed over 20 threads, some as much as 15 months old. Frank | talk 14:55, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ARCHIVE does require consensus for setting up an auto-archive, or any other archive. My concern arises from the fact that there appears to have been a dispute over how long to wait before archiving. I'm trying to get a link to the discussion that led to consensus, assuming it exists. If not, would you mind at least self-reverting to the 180-day wait until we get consensus for a shorter period. Thanks. — Bdb484 (talk) 20:43, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Require" is such a rigid word. Everything that happens on Wikipedia requires consensus; it's a given, but that's not all there is to it. Practically speaking, there's already a general overriding consensus that goes something like this: "when the talk page gets too long, start archiving it." If you have an objection to the archiving on that page, I think the appropriate place for discussion is there, not here. What's been implemented is a commonly accepted practice. I understand you've come here to the editor's talk page to question it, but I think the reality is that it shouldn't be a problem, and if you're looking to establish a consensus to change it, the appropriate place is there, not here. I'm not trying to divert (or subvert) your goal; it's just that I don't see the problem, and I'm trying to point you to the most likely place to give whatever your problem is the proper forum. The first thing I'd recommend is starting a thread over there and stating what your goal is regarding archiving. Frank | talk 22:48, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly, I don't care one way or the other. When I see article talk pages with old, stale conversations, I set up archiving - because what's the point of having old, stale conversations on a talk page? If it's that important to you that I didn't get a consensus for something so mundane, you can remove the archiving code or change the length in which old, stale conversations remain on the page before the bot archives them - yourself. - ALLST✰R▼echowuz here23:40, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No drama
Due to certain interaction restrictions placed upon me by the august body of the Arbitration Committee, it would be completely inappropriate for me to respond to your comment concerning the absolute fucking hypocrisy and extraordinary audacity and/or self-delusional madness of the dramamonger extraordinaire you may be referring to. -- Scjessey (talk) 14:24, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, didn't realize Arbcom was now telling user who they can and can't speak to/about. What a daft bunch. My apologies then. - ALLST✰R▼echowuz here17:21, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm exaggerating for the sake of amusement. ArbCom aren't going to restrict editors from talking about other editors; however, I have tried to avoid even thinking about our mutual friend for the sake of my own sanity. Of course, this conversation isn't really in the spirit of my pledge at WP:NODRAMA either. I am full of fail. -- Scjessey (talk) 17:52, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
