User talk:Macboots

Review

No problem. I'm glad if it was helpful. :) Regarding adopting pages, in the sense that the adoption policy is described, it seems harmless and useful. Nurturing a page, committing to doing research & even watching out for vandalism are good ideas in my opinion as long as users remember that articles can't be owned, as you note, and don't obstruct other editors from contributing. As far as Template:Maintained is concerned, the template has been contested before (in 2005 and in March of this year), and though it has survived both times it's obviously not universally appreciated. When people have questions about an article, they tend to leave them on the talk page. If you're watching it, you'll see them. :) That said, as long as you follow the guidelines at the template page, you're well within policy. The current wording seems much more clear than some earlier versions. And, as you can see at Category:Maintained articles, there are quite a few articles that do carry the template. --Moonriddengirl 00:40, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sock puppets

I've received your note and am checking over the policies. Though an administrator, I have never been personally involved with a sock puppet. :) Let's see if we can puzzle this out together. If not, I'll find someone with more experience in this area to help you out. --Moonriddengirl 19:04, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I think you did the right thing, removing the tag from the user's page, since there's been no official report filed. As you note, Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets only wants to hear about socks that have been active within the past week. This is likely because blocks are preventative, not punitive, and if the editor is not currently violating WP policy, there is no reason to block him. I say likely, because I'm not sure. :) It's also possible that there are just so many active sock puppets that they don't have resources to devote to investigating inactive cases. (I didn't read through talk pages to see if this was explained.) If I were in your position, I would keep an eye on the articles that this editor has visited before to see if he returns. If he does, then I would make my case at WP:SSP. As for the images the user has uploaded, this is where a look at Wikipedia:Speedy_deletions#Images_and_media is probably helpful. :) I'm gathering that most of this editor's images will fall under i9, blatant copyright infringement. If copyright infringement is less clear, they may need to be proposed for deletion at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. (This latter guideline, by the way, is also useful reading for images that do qualify for speedy deletion, since it offers the templates to be used there.) Let me know if you feel like I haven't answered you fully or well, and we'll start looking for further assistance. :) Unless, of course, I've just phrased myself badly, in which case I'll try to clarify. --Moonriddengirl 19:23, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RNA Vandal

See [1]. There are appropriate warnings that you can give users (starts at uw-vandalism1, and progresses with each vandalism edit). Once a user vandalizes after receiving a uw-vandalism3 or uw-vandalism 4 warning, you can report the user to AIV. I suggest you check out TWINKLE. It's really useful for vandal-fighters. Hope that helps, Nishkid64 (talk) 04:13, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Umm...

On the Kalahari Meerkat Project article, what do you mean references are needed on "*here*"? They are in the article in the fomr of links, which is where you are supposed to get them...right? Cruise meerkat 06:30, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

St. John Bosco Interparish School

I wasn't very familiar with deletions at the time, though I'm still not sure if it qualifies. You may want to ask the person who removed the tag why they did so. It may require an AFD discussion. Richard001 07:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion tags

Looking into it. Be right back. :) --Moonriddengirl 02:38, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I haven't gotten involved in IfD, so I don't know how this is usually handled. I can only advise what I would do. With AfD, there are templates. I would modify these and use them as appropriate. So, for a first offense, I would use Template:Uw-afd1, replacing AfD with IfD. If the behavior persists, I'd move on to Template:Uw-afd2 (substituting) and so on. If it runs through the whole group of them, I'd either report the user at WP:AIV or WP:ANI. (I'd probably go with AIV.) An alternative would be to locate an administrator who does routinely work IfD and check with him or her to see how these things are usually handled over there. I'd be happy to help you find one, if you'd rather go that route. Just let me know. :) --Moonriddengirl 02:48, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poker Player Notability

The WP:POKER is discussing what we believe constitutes notability for poker players. We have a proposal on our talk page, if you'd like to chime in, please do so here.Balloonman (talk) 10:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

Hello there! Just wanted to buy you a pint for all your hard work editing dog breed articles! Cheers! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:27, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jawad Nabulsi has been accepted

Jawad Nabulsi, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Cheers, Thanks, L235-Talk Ping when replying 03:09, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 16:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Macboots. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Macboots. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Joseph Sakran has been accepted

Joseph Sakran, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

~Kvng (talk) 15:53, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]