Jump to content

User talk:Promethean/Archives2009/June

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 1 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

ACI

Hi Prom3th3an, just a quick question for you. Is there any reason that you picked up a request of an account that I already created? I'm just curious. Thanks, t'shael mindmeld 06:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

We were going over some of your recent requests, evaluating whether or not you had done the correct action. For that request you did, however, for others you did not.   «l| ?romethean ™|l»  (talk) 07:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Please, if you can, elaborate. t'shael mindmeld 07:05, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Come on IRC and ping me (Prom_cat)   «l| ?romethean ™|l»  (talk) 07:12, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you :)

The Guidance Barnstar
For helping me out with ACI today. Your guidance is appreciated. :) t'shael mindmeld 08:05, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Haha, No problem, any time :)   «l| ?romethean ™|l»  (talk) 08:18, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Account creation

Can you please clarify why you felt this request was a username policy violation? Stifle (talk) 13:20, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Well you see, If you put the letters Pt and the word College together you get Ptcollege. Now I'm no expert such as yourself but I felt that Ptcollege was more than likely a reference to an organization (educational or otherwise) since not many users I know put the word college in their name. After marking it as a vio the user quickly requested a name that had no suggestion what so ever of affiliation with any college.   «l| ?romethean ™|l»  (talk) 13:47, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Seems fair. THanks for the quick reply. Stifle (talk) 13:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Promethean. You have new messages at T'Shael's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

t'shael mindmeld 01:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

RfA thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which succeeded with 56 in support, 12 in opposition and 3 neutral votes. I am truly honored by the trust that the community has placed in me. Whether you supported me, opposed me, or if you only posted questions or commented om my RfA, I thank you for your input and I will be looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas :). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). All the Best, Mifter (talk)

Mifter (talk) 23:49, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

User:Vicenarian

Stifle, I applaud you to re suspend Vicenarian for at least a day or two, Not only did he break the reservation of another user, but he also did it on a request where the IP was blocked as a massive vandal IP. The request concerned was one that was being left while NW contacted the checkuser who blocked the IP. This is not only a total disregard of the reservation system but also the fact that the IP behind the request was blocked. This user needs some time to read the guide, he is lucky not to be suspended for a month (if only it was Prodego). I note that in total he was only suspended for just over an hour by the time you unsuspended him, I doubt he has read the guide even.   «l| ?romethean ™|l»  (talk) 08:31, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll watch his logs for the next couple of weeks (I'm sure you will too). The suspension is supposed to be preventative and not punitive, so if he says he now knows what he's doing, I'll WP:AGF and accept that. OverlordQ specifically invited him to contact another tool admin to be reinstated; he could have suggested discussion with him first if he had not meant anyone to reverse the decision. Stifle (talk) 08:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
I see this is cross-posted. Promethean, please see my reply at Stifle's talk page. Thank you, Vicenarian (T · C) 11:25, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Engimaman's RFA Q16

I just saw Engimaman's RFA and noticed you were behind question 16. I wish to ask that you retract that question as it is not relevant to Engimaman's ability to be an admin or judgement and is without doubt an infringement on his privacy. I also think that you are well aware that if he doesn't answer that question that it will wreak of guilt and cover up, thus its not an optional question at all. Thankyou   «l| ?romethean ™|l»  (talk) 09:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure that it's any different from people asking about content contributions, previous usernames, or age. To me, it is genuinely an optional question (and that's why I placed what I did in the header), and if there is no answer I intend to support.
Because of your concern about the question, I have added a section at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Enigmaman 3 where if four more editors oppose than support the question, I will consider it inappropriate and immediately withdraw it or permit its withdrawal. Stifle (talk) 09:10, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

ACC Request #31173

Just wanted to let you know that while I had originally reserved this request, I decided not to act on it and instead defer it more experienced users, as I was uncertain as to the correct action. I hope this helps convince you of my intent to be careful with the tool and my desire to restore good faith. Thank you.

Vicenarian (T · C) 03:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Thats ok :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Promethean (talk • contribs)

WikiCup Newsletter XIX and XX

Delivered by The Helpful Bot at 22:00, 13 June 2009 (UTC) for the WikiCup. To report errors, please leave a message on the talk page.

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 15 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 12:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

User:Vicenarian

Stifle, I applaud you to re suspend Vicenarian for at least a day or two, Not only did he break the reservation of another user, but he also did it on a request where the IP was blocked as a massive vandal IP. The request concerned was one that was being left while NW contacted the checkuser who blocked the IP. This is not only a total disregard of the reservation system but also the fact that the IP behind the request was blocked. This user needs some time to read the guide, he is lucky not to be suspended for a month (if only it was Prodego). I note that in total he was only suspended for just over an hour by the time you unsuspended him, I doubt he has read the guide even.   «l| ?romethean ™|l»  (talk) 08:31, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll watch his logs for the next couple of weeks (I'm sure you will too). The suspension is supposed to be preventative and not punitive, so if he says he now knows what he's doing, I'll WP:AGF and accept that. OverlordQ specifically invited him to contact another tool admin to be reinstated; he could have suggested discussion with him first if he had not meant anyone to reverse the decision. Stifle (talk) 08:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
I see this is cross-posted. Promethean, please see my reply at Stifle's talk page. Thank you, Vicenarian (T · C) 11:25, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Engimaman's RFA Q16

I just saw Engimaman's RFA and noticed you were behind question 16. I wish to ask that you retract that question as it is not relevant to Engimaman's ability to be an admin or judgement and is without doubt an infringement on his privacy. I also think that you are well aware that if he doesn't answer that question that it will wreak of guilt and cover up, thus its not an optional question at all. Thankyou   «l| ?romethean ™|l»  (talk) 09:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure that it's any different from people asking about content contributions, previous usernames, or age. To me, it is genuinely an optional question (and that's why I placed what I did in the header), and if there is no answer I intend to support.
Because of your concern about the question, I have added a section at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Enigmaman 3 where if four more editors oppose than support the question, I will consider it inappropriate and immediately withdraw it or permit its withdrawal. Stifle (talk) 09:10, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

ACC Request #31173

Just wanted to let you know that while I had originally reserved this request, I decided not to act on it and instead defer it more experienced users, as I was uncertain as to the correct action. I hope this helps convince you of my intent to be careful with the tool and my desire to restore good faith. Thank you.

Vicenarian (T · C) 03:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Thats ok :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Promethean (talk • contribs)

WikiCup Newsletter XIX and XX

Delivered by The Helpful Bot at 22:00, 13 June 2009 (UTC) for the WikiCup. To report errors, please leave a message on the talk page.

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 15 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 12:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XXI

Delivered by The Helpful Bot at 22:32, 22 June 2009 (UTC) for the WikiCup. To report errors, please leave a message on the talk page.

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 22 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:13, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XXII

Delivered for the WikiCup by  ROBOTIC GARDEN  at 21:53, 28 June 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 29 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Promethean/Archives2009/June&oldid=1166515029"