User talk:Soap/Archive 12

I view my own contributions page frequently, and thus don't usually need to be alerted when someone's replied to me with a {{talkback}} notice.

Please let me know if something on this page appears strangely; it's mostly customized and I only have one computer to test its appearance on.

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Filter 17

Hello Soap. Thanks for looking at this, however, I'm not convinced that[1] is the cause, as there's already a word boundary at the start. No? Anyway, don't worry too much about stuff slipping through this filter - it often does anyway. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:21, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia

Wikipedia is indeed a place of freedom of expression. Well, anyway the talk page should be archived it is over 130 kb long. --Justausern1 (talk) 12:27, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding standard procedures at AfD when Merge is proposed

I'm not an experienced ICQ user, so I'm not even sure what is happening in the exchange we were having - I posted a couple more comments and nothing is happening. However, my goal was to talk to a knowledgeable sysop who happens to be online, and that sounds like you. (no opposes, eh, you must be good).

After suggesting to an editor at Editor Review that he should spend a little more time at AfD, I decided I should take my own advice.

I had seen User talk:Geo Swan after checking out an ANI posting, so I thought I would check out some of the AfD's mentioned on that talk page.

As I posed on his talk page, I think the limited material could be merged, so I'm prepared to !vote Merge, but I want to understand the consequences of my !vote. I do realize that there is no ownership of articles, so in general, we can't direct "the" editor to do anything. However, in this case, while there are multiple editors contributing, there's really only one contributing content, the others are mainly gnomish activities.

If the rule is that the Sysop is expected to do the merge, then I would argue our policy is encouraging suboptimal activity, as a lazy editor could simply create an article with a reference, and then expect some sysop to clean up after him or her.

My preference is that the conclusion should be - you can merge it. If it isn't merged in n days, it will be deleted. My concern is that my preferred approach may be contrary to policy, or established procedures, however, I've searched and I cannot even confirm what the standard procedure is. Can you help me out?--SPhilbrick T 14:19, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answer - this place is a such a process geeks heaven, I thought sure there would be more definitive rules on how to handle a merge. (I have this page watchlisted, if there's anything more to be said.)--SPhilbrick T 15:13, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Offensive edit

No worries. I don't mind either way if the edit appears in my talk page history. Thanks though :) -- Jack?! 23:49, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RFA Thank spam

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which failed with 10 support, 26 oppose, and 13 neutral. Your comments were much appreciated.

On a personal note, thanks for supporting me Soap. That comment that you made about me really did mean a lot to me, coming from an editor like you :)--White Shadows ^{There goes another day} 16:17, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If we protect Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard

If we protect Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard like that, we basically no longer allow any IP address to bring issues forward for discussion. I believe that is too restrictive for an infinite period, and would like for you to consider a different approach. Options are : 1) leave it as it is, and revert the dull edits, 2) put in place revision review, 3) put in the higher level restrictions for a shorter period, 4)stop watching the board if it is too annoying for you. billinghurst sDrewth 03:13, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Fastily/Sandbox/RfA Notice

Hi Soap! Hope all is well. I must admit I received a pleasant surprise to see my own template well used here. If it helps, I want you to know that you're welcome to utilize my delete-day-list at User:Fastily/Sandbox#Rfa Notice too. Thanks for helping out :) Cheers, FASTILY ^(TALK) 07:28, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Filter 279

I saw your comment here. What about adding the condition "user name appears in last ten users to contribute"? Sole Soul (talk) 10:22, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Soap. You have new messages at Sole Soul's talk page.
Message added 11:49, 10 July 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Sole Soul (talk) 11:49, 10 July 2010 (UTC) Sole Soul (talk) 11:49, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Soap. You have new messages at Airplaneman's talk page.
Message added 01:28, 14 July 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

WP:Articles for deletion/Mass killings under Communist regimes (3rd nomination)#Mass killings under Communist regimes exists

neutral notification Collect (talk) 12:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

*hug*. Thank you [2]. Tim1357 ^talk 23:44, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, I hit genfixes accidentally. Tim1357 ^talk 23:45, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: False positive report

I've seen the explanation, thanks a lot for your work! ;) --WikiKiwi (talk) 23:50, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks from me too. JamesBWatson (talk) 06:25, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Soap. You have new messages at Sole Soul's talk page.
Message added 12:08, 16 July 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Talkback

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

Unprotect please?

Because you told me to post somewhere on the Wiki for my userpage to be unprotected, can you unprotect it please? Pilif12p : Yo 22:32, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]