User talk:Samir/Archive 20

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

User:Samir (The Scope)/Talk archive

WP:ACC

Hi! I notice you have created a few accounts on WP:ACC recently, and left a note saying that they were created. It would be very much appreciated if you could tag the accounts you create with :{{ACC|c}} ~~~~, which makes the bot realise that they have been created, and automatically archive them. Thanks a lot, :-) Stwalkerster talk 19:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Good idea -- Samir 02:20, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 3 September, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article electrocardiogram technician, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 00:24, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hee hee Thank you

Replied here. ^Ariel♥Gold 04:02, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note

... good to hear from you. Things are going OK - keeping busy with everything except writing articles! Also, it's that time of year when grant applications are coming due. By the way, User:Jfdwolff had expressed an interest in improving the pancreatic cancer article; I've been meaning to work on it. Do you happen to have any images that would be useful? Anyhow, thanks for dropping me a line... things are going OK, the usual occasional difficult interaction, but that's life. Hope things are going well with you. MastCell ^Talk 21:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Hi

Hey Samir! Nice to see you on my page... Am not very active these days. I have just changed roles in my job and so incredibly busy. Have also relocated.. Hope all is well with you... — Lost^(talk) 05:39, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

64.81.84.84

All righty, thanks for getting back to me. I appreciate it :) --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 23:10, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

Hello Samir, I'm posting again in regards to adminship.

OK being now at 24 000 edits+ including 1 800 Wikipedia articles/talk edits (including about 25-30 afd discussions, 150 AVI and 140 RFPP), editing 10 000+ articles, created something like 360 articles, 9 templates and 6 categories, and now having edit summaries in both minor and major at close or at 100% I believe now that giving some requests by other users to try out again at AFD So from now on I will accept any nomination of me at WP:RFA. I Still though have possibly some issues in regards to the sockpuppet and image policies (although the latter I can just stop adding images or do less so often even though I'm at 160+ image edits and close to 80 images downloaded). Thanks!--JForget 16:50, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jojimathews user page

Hi – long time no wiki, and I'm glad to see you're back. I just about chunked this whole project a few days ago out of sheer frustration, but I feel better now. Hope all is well with you.

Would you take a look at this user page? I came across it while working User:AlexNewArtBot's COI output. Jojimathews created a page called Mechanical Electrical Processing, which (until I deleted it under CSD#A1) consisted of three dictionary defs and "for more search [1], which was an EL to User:Jojimathews. That may not make sense - look at the article's deleted edits and all should be clear.

I don't know if he's trying to drum up engineering consulting business or what, but I thought I'd get a second opinion on his user page before I say anything to him. It looks like he's from India and may not be a native English speaker – I don't want to come down on him too hard or if it's not really necessary. I've just never seen a user page with a complete HVAC dictionary. Thanks - KrakatoaKatie 06:07, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:User clarification request

The relevant guideline on user pages is WP:UP#NOT and the relevant section IMO is "Material that can be construed as attacking other editors, including the recording of perceived flaws. An exception is made for evidence compiled within a reasonable time frame to prepare for a dispute resolution process." I was trying to be as reasonable and gentle as I could. WMC knew of the page. WMC tried to *add* to the page (it was an irrelevancy and I didn't want to widen the discussion out to Raymond Arritt's similar mistake on the issue). I explicitly said I would like WMC to simply hew to the rules and regs and not *force* mediation. I still got speedy deleted justified as it was an attack page. Could you please provide an example or point me to one of applying the above guideline in a way that wouldn't qualify for a delete? Or does the guideline offer false hope and is unimplementable? TMLutas 13:28, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFA Thanks!

Thanks for your participation for my RFA bid and for your support.--JForget 23:14, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re:article you protected

Sadly, Frikkers (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has reverted again on the boerboel article now that the protection is gone. To be perfectly honest, I think it's time to give a very serious block to this user. They are never going to get that they can't just revert at will when the community is opposed to their changes. VanTucky ^Talk 00:54, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the other problem with this fiasco is that it is presently only between me and Frikkers, it used to include others. I'll file an RFC and make a talk page note at WikiProject Dog. Maybe that will get a strong consensus, rather than this continuing nonsense. VanTucky ^Talk 04:02, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uh Samir, you protected the talk page too. :) VanTucky ^Talk 04:12, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh okay, as long as it was intentional. Thanks again for your help. VanTucky ^Talk 04:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm concerned that Frikkers is not going to participate at all. I think he feels that there has been unfair treatment here, and that I should be blocked as a "vandal". Obviously I disagree, but explaining to him why you took the action you took, and making clear that his right to participate is respected might be in order. Otherwise it's just going to be more reversions once the protection expires. VanTucky ^Talk 23:01, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My frustration shouldn't have an effect on the necessary due process in blocking, so it's really good you have the stance you do. I could be wrong about the absence, not everyone has time to be on-wiki as much as I do. I guess we'll just see what comes with time. VanTucky ^Talk 00:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MCOTW

Thank you for your support of the Medicine Collaboration of the Week.
This week Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was selected.
Hope you can help…

JFW | T@lk 15:29, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

I owe you a big thank you for supporting me in My RfA, which was successful with 67 supports and 20 opposes. - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 23:41, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

DYK is 4 hours overdue for update. --EncycloPetey 00:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1897 Sword

Thanks for the kind words and the edit Epeeist smudge 14:46, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PUD

Samir - Great to hear from you again, and thanks for the barnstar! I'm glad that list is helpful, I really enjoyed reading about that history. I was just thinking about you the other day, as I was adding your name to the acknowledgments in my dissertation. Soon, it might be done :) --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 05:36, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

mulling...

Hi Samir, thanks for the vote of confidence. I'm mulling it over (it's grad student NSERC application deadline very soon, so I'm spending all my brainsugar reading drafts and writing letters of support, should be back in regular service early Oct.) Pete.Hurd 15:00, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]