User talk:SebastianHelm

This user is taking an indefinite wikibreak. He is, however, still available by e-mail.

Welcome to my talk page!

I prefer to keep conversations together. Therefore, I usually will reply under your message. I may also move your message with my reply to a more appropriate place. (Usually that would be your talk page, if the discussion started there.) If I left a message on your talk page, I will watch it until you're back, or up to a week. So, in most cases, there's no need to notify me of your reply.

Archives
2009
general archive
Older
User talk:SebastianHelm/Conflict resolution User talk:SebastianHelm/Buddhism User talk:SebastianHelm/Sri Lanka other talks from 2008 User talk:SebastianHelm/ArbCom elections 2007 User talk:SebastianHelm/Pacific Northwest User talk:SebastianHelm/NVC User talk:SebastianHelm/RfA [[User talk:SebastianHelm/MedCab] other talks from 2007 even older ...

Deadline for WP:IECOLL

Please see my comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration#Status. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:19, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the notification. Your comment is right. I had taken some time off, and when I got back I felt indeed like the March Hare thinking it was time for the next step already. I am sorry about the confusion this caused. — Sebastian 15:34, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops!

Just to explain the double revert that I just did on your /principles page: I accidentally clicked on "rollback" on your last edit on my watchlist, and then had to put it back the way it was. Sorry about that! ::blush:: -- edi(talk) 17:50, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! I'm afraid of such errors myself. When I became an admin, I was afraid that I would accidentally click on any of the "block" links that appeared next to each user's name. Since then I realize that nothing bad actually happens when I click them, and I've learned to live with it, but still don't think it's a good idea to tempt admins into blocking so easily. — Sebastian 17:56, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to Meetup/Seattle6, a focus group

Hello. I'm part of a research group at the University of Washington (Seattle campus), and my group is reaching out to Wikipedians in the Puget Sound area. We're hosting a focus group designed to gather information on what Wikipedians would like to know about each other when interacting on Wikipedia. Our end goal is to create an embedded application that helps people quickly know more about others' history and activity on Wikipedia, and we feel our design will be much more useful if it's based on insights of users like you.

I'm hoping that the chance to help out local researchers, to engage in lively face-to-face discussion with other Seattle Wikipedians, and to contribute to Wikipedia in a new way will entice you to join us. The session lasts 2 hours and snacks are provided. Sessions will be held on UW Seattle campus - directions will be sent after registration. Your contribution will be greatly appreciated!

Willing and able to help us out? RSVP here. Want to know more? Visit our user talk page . Please help us contact other local Wikipedians, too! Commprac01 (talk) 01:05, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ireland collaboration

I wanted to make you aware that ArbCom has formally thanked you for your time and efforts with the Ireland collaboration project: Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Ireland collaboration. I also wanted to extend my personal thanks to all three of you for the hard work you put into it. If at some point I could be of any assistance to you, please feel free to contact me via my talk page or email. Thank you again and best wishes! --Vassyana (talk) 16:26, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redking7

Hi - Not sure if this is a good place to ask but as you are a moderator you might be able to help. Some one created the user page redking7. I would like for that to be deleted so that it appears "in red" again. This happened before and was fixed. I have never learned how I can do it technically. Thanks. Regards. Redking7 (talk) 16:22, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll on Ireland (xxx)

A poll is up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ireland_Collaboration/Poll on Ireland (xxx). This is a vote on what option or options could be added in the poll regarding the naming of the Ireland and Republic of Ireland and possibly the Ireland (disambiguation) pages. The order that the choices appear in the list has been generated randomly. Sanctions for canvassing, forum shopping, ballot stuffing, sock puppetry, meat puppetry will consist of a one-month ban, which will preclude the sanctioned from participating in the main poll which will take place after this one. Voting will end at 21:00 (UTC) of the evening of 1 July 2009 (that is 22:00 IST and BST). -- Evertype·✆ 18:15, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wp:link

Hi, I see you made some good edits to the guideline. I've created a stub of a show-and-tell tutorial on linking that received such a slamming from one regular user (on his talk page) that I've been frightened off. I do accept that the exercises could be less wordy, but ... I wonder whether you think it's useful? User:Tony1/Build_your_linking_skills Tony (talk) 02:27, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your thoughtful feedback, Sebastian. It won't be a quick job, but I'll let you know if/when it's more advanced. Tony (talk) 10:47, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poll on Ireland article names

Re:Time to run

Hi, Sebastian! It's good to see you here again; I thought you had retired. Thanks for your offer to nominate me for adminship. As you said, I was just joking. I didn't intend to run anytime soon for adminship, but four editors have suggested that I go for it after this. If I do run, it will be mid-september at the earliest; I'm a bit busy right now. I will inform you if and when I decide to run, and it would be an honour if I had a nomination from you. ≈ Chamal ^talk 05:15, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm only active now because I have a little bit of time on my hand; I don't know if I'll be active here in September. But what's the problem with running now? You don't have to commit to doing a lot - I didn't either in my RfA. My long absences bothered only one voter, who eventually supported me, too. The only reason I can see not to run is if you're afraid it might make you into a Wikoholic. — Sebastian 05:33, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not like that. I'm working on something in real life right now, and I might have to turn my attention completely to that anytime. It wouldn't do if I disappeared in the middle of my RFA :) Shall I email you when I'm ready? ≈ Chamal ^talk 02:23, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see! Yes, the RFA process takes some attention. Please do email me. — Sebastian 14:17, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Linking

Hi Sebastian,

When you get time, I'm still very interested in your thoughts about how one can effectively deal with piped links that introduces subtext that is controversial or does not follow NPOV as was discussed here. Thanks. Ward20 (talk) 19:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding. I left some comments at the Linking talk page. Ward20 (talk) 06:52, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thanks a lot for your efforts to improve this guideline. However, some editors are concerned about the pace at which the text is being changed, and the large changes that are being made. Could you discuss it, please? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 13:49, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After almost a week of fruitful and constructive discussion with several editors there, I am quite surprised at this sudden outbreak of resistance against change. But maybe I shouldn't be surprised: That page is probably not the best candidate for change, anyway: It is almost five years old, and if people could use it to write links then, they can use it today, too. So, in the bigger scheme of things, it's good that the page is watched by people who oppose change. It is also good for me: It reminds me that I still have the "wikibreak" banner on top of this page, and it's better if I spend less time here; I've already become Wikiholic again. I will again be more frugal with the time I spend here, and I apologize for any inconvenience I caused. — Sebastian 21:56, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) Sebastian, it's not that everyone who asked for a slow-down "oppose[s] change" - we just wanted a chance to discuss the proposed changes before they got implemented. but anyway: have a good break! Sssoul (talk) 08:57, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message; this is indeed an important distinction. I realize my use of the words "resistance" and "oppose" can be seen to mean "block" or "prevent"; that's not what I meant. I just meant it in the same sense as you would say "friction opposes motion": I know that it can be overcome, and in the past I would often have been happy to do so by taking the time to understand people's needs; we often were able to find a solution that works for everybody. But that takes a lot of time. The reason why I started this was not because I feel strongly about internal links, but because I saw that there was a page that was in a mess, and it seemed like there was a team of editors who agreed that it needs to be cleaned up, and I thought it would be a breeze to work on it together. — Sebastian 15:14, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, thanks for discussing with me the finer points of linking on the talk page. I learned quite a bit and you are very cordial and easy to work with. Ward20 (talk) 20:50, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind words! It has been a pleasure working with you, too! — Sebastian 22:40, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Chamal N

He told me you would like to co-nom him for adminship; there's a slot open for you at User:Dylan620/Chamal/RfA. Cheers, Dylan 620 (contribs, logs)^{help us!} 23:47, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]