User talk:Bunchofgrapes

This user is lost behind the couch cushions. The poor schlub has not edited Wikipedia since time immemorial. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Am I the dead guy or one of the dogs? Back, I'd just be a troublemaker. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can't be one of those dogs. They have legs. Bishonen | talk 23:32, 25 April 2008 (UTC).[reply]
My guess? The light of the dawn. - Banyan Tree 09:25, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
ooh, you're good. KillerChihuahua^?!? 22:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back[edit]

Welcome back all my friend to the show that never ends! We’re so glad you could attend - come inside, come inside. KillerChihuahua^?!? 23:30, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, man. Was just thinking about you. How're you holding up? DS (talk) 01:31, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

EddieSegoura Ban Appeal[edit]

For your information, a discussion has been opened at WP:AN#EddieSegoura Ban Appeal regarding an issue you may be involved in. Your comments are invited. Thank you! For the Arbitration Committee, Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:20, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Everyking's RFA[edit]

Hi Bunch, it was great to see you edit today, especially as It was a wise and great edit. Hope you are here to stay awhile. Giano (talk) 18:27, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon?[edit]

Responding to your message on my talk page: I have no idea what you're talking about. I changed my name from United Statesman weeks ago; I've sent no e-mails either. B R U N S W I C K I A N ^[talk] 23:46, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for help[edit]

I am will shortly be posting to WP:AN with the request below. Any support would be appreciated.

Request to WP:AN[edit]

"I would like to take the article History of logic to FA. I have already sought input from a number of contributors and have cleared up the issues raised (I am sure there are more). I wrote nearly all of the article using different accounts, as follows:

I would like to continue this work but I am frustrated by the zealous activity of User:Fram who keeps making significant reverts, and blocking accounts wherever he suspects the work of a 'banned user'. (Fram claims s/he doesn't understand "the people who feel that content is more important than anything else").

Can I please be left in peace with the present account to complete this work. 'History of logic' is a flagship article for Wikipedia, and is an argument against those enemies who claim that nothing serious can ever be accomplished by the project". Logic Historian (talk) 09:58, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FAR notice[edit]

I have nominated Simon Byrne for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Cirt (talk) 02:37, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bishzilla spin.gif listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bishzilla spin.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. FASTILY_s ^(TALK) 08:13, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Eventualists rule![edit]

Djembayz (talk) 04:42, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of change[edit]

Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through WP:RFA. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm gonna go ahead and game the system with this reply, then. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:26, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, good job. Funny man. MBisanz ^talk 14:31, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays..[edit]

…from the evil twin and her baby hooligan gang. darwinbish ^BITE ☠ 15:13, 25 December 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Kawai! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:19, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Global account[edit]

Hi Bunchofgrapes! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 11:15, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Eddie again[edit]

Bunchie, there's a new ban appeal by Eddie Segoura here on AN which looks to be going well. I'll wait for your opinion, if you have one, before I jump one way or the other. I was quite impressed by the stubborn disruptiveness of Eddie in the distant past, but they say people can change. Anyway, nobody knows more about it than you. Bishonen | talk 09:49, 18 May 2015 (UTC).[reply]

I guess my comments from the 2009 appeal (which I did not actually oppose) still stand. I'm willing to believe there's a decent chance he won't be malicious, and if the community wants to put up with what a pain-in-the-ass he can be is even when he's being good, there's little reason not to give him another shot. A quick look at his edits as WikiBaseballFan actually have me wondering if he hasn't grown up some in the last six years, even. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:35, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So you don't you want to say that on AN, little Bunch? Bishonen | talk 16:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC).[reply]

OK, OK :-) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:47, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Bishzilla hands the good little user some gingerbread.] Little Bunch welcome in pocket even though not editing! Feel free take up invisible residence! Discreet ingress and egress through catflap. bishzilla _ROARR!! 18:22, 18 May 2015 (UTC).[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Mona bisha.png[edit]

The file File:Mona bisha.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Out of project scope.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. XXN, 22:29, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Drury lane theatre map.svg[edit]

The file File:Drury lane theatre map.svg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned map.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 19:24, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please attribute or claim media you uploaded or restored: File:Tulipface spin.gif[edit]

You uploaded or restored , File:Tulipface spin.gif, but for various reasons did not add an {{information}} block, or indicate your (user) name on the file description page. Media uploaded to Wikipedia needs information on the SPECIFIC authorship and source of files, to ensure that it complies with copyright laws in various jurisdictions.

If it's entirely your own work, please include {{own}} in the relevant source field, amend the {{information}} added by a third party, ensuring that your user name (or name you want used for attribution) is clear in the author field, and change the license to an appropriate "self" variant (if such a license is not already used). You should also add an |author= parameter to the license tag, to assist reviews and image patrollers. You can also add |claimed=yes and an |author=to the {{media by uploader}} or {{presumed_self}} tag if it is present to indicate that you've acknowledged the image, and license shown (and updated the {{information}} where appropriate).

If it's not entirely your own work, then please update the source and authorship fields, so that they accurately reflect the source and authors of the original work(s), as well as the derivative you created. You should also not use a "self" license unless the work is entirely you own. Media that is incorrectly claimed as self or {{own}}, will eventually be listed at Files for Discussion or deleted, unless it's full status is entirely clear to other contributors, reviewers and image patrollers.

Whilst this notification, relates to a single media upload, it would also be appreciated if you could ensure that appropriate attribution exists for other media you uploaded, You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

It's okay to remove or strike this message once the issue has been resolved :).

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:54, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year[edit]

Hi BOG, I just thought I’d drop by to wish you a prosperous New Year and say it would be nice to see a little more of you around the place. Giano (talk) 21:36, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and thanks, Giano. Is everything all fixed around here, then, or are you all still slaving away for the glory of our "betters"? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:54, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, everything’s fixed. The place is a positive Utopia, never been better - Jimbo asks me in for a weekly beer to sound out my views for advice. Glad to see you are still looking in. Have a great 2020. Giano (talk) 00:24, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sicilian Baroque nominated for Featured Article Review[edit]

I have nominated Sicilian Baroque for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Beland (talk) 00:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article review for Restoration Spectacular[edit]

I have nominated Restoration Spectacular for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Beland (talk) 00:48, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FAR for Durian[edit]

I have nominated Durian for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 17:33, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]