User talk:Seresin/Archive 36

This page is an archive of User Talk:Seresin (or perhaps something else). If you wish to discuss something here, feel free to bring it up again. The history for this page is here, not on the main talk page. Thanks.

Archives

Until August 2007 — September 2007
October 2007 — November 2007
December 2007 — January 2008
February 2008 — March 2008
April 2008 — May 2008
June 2008 — July 2008
August 2008 — September 2008
October 2008 — November 2008
December 2008 — January 2009
February 2009 — March 2009
April 2009 — May 2009
June 2009 — July 2009
August 2009 — September 2009
October 2009 — November 2009 December 2009 — January 2010
February 2010 — March 2010
April 2010 — May 2010
June 2010 — to June 2013
to November 2014

Connexion.org deletion

Hi Seresin. You deleted a page for Connexion.org 2.5 years ago. I wanted to ask that you review that decision as the site has grown to over 164,000 members. I feel that the site is making a significant contribution to the social networking realm and has earned the notability to have a page on Wikipedia. I'm a new wikipedia user, so I hope I'm doing this right! Laddbosworth (talk) 15:13, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

re: Tech report

Hey Seresin. Firstly, about bot approvals, it's obviously something more suited to Tech than anything else. I just worry about myself. My interest for various tasks here on WP tends to flit rapidly and I worry that if I pick up bots, two weeks later I might not feel motivated to write BRION any more and we'd have to move them back again pro tem; whereas you've always been so reliable. I don't mind though, whatever you think really.

Regarding revisions: unfortunately (I apologise for patronising if you already knew this) it's become a lot more complicated to say what revision WP is running. The "trunk" might be at r68506, which is the figure we showed off before, but now, the typical WMF "branch" will be at r"[1-]65856, 66600-66622, 66819, 66825, 67213, 67914-67915, 68412". It's a lot more difficult to understand when things are going to happen - both for the reader, and quite frankly, for me - as it no longer runs in sequential order (important changes get prioritised). Indeed, 67213 could really be 67173 in disguise... it's tricky. I'm torn, and my present think is that the whole process of specifying may create more trouble than it's worth. Just my thoughts, - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 16:16, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I haven't written the bots report in a while. If you are willing to write the bots now, I recommend that you go ahead and dive in. If you change your mind and lose interest in the report all together, it's no harm no foul WRT to the bots. As for the revisions, I had no idea. If it's not as clear as I had indicated, then don't worry about putting it in at all—it does sound confusing. My only thought would be that you could make a note of what you just said in the next report you do. I imagine others remember the system used before, and so might appreciate knowing it's more complicated now. ÷seresin 20:13, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 20:24, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See also this comment by Simetrical when I tried to take up the previous Tech Report style of mentioning MediaWiki revision numbers and {{CURRENTVERSION}}. Regards, HaeB (talk) 21:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. Well then it's pretty clearly not a good idea anymore. Thanks for the further note. ÷seresin 15:42, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hilarious

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		Really, this was great. I found it very funny. Hilarious, really. Barnstar worthy, actually. Swarm^Talk 09:06, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Features and admins

Hi seresin, I stood in for you this week at The Signpost, and took the opportunity to experiment with a few changes. What do you think? Tony (talk) 04:32, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic we're all bad admins. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 01:29, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trouted

Hello M.SERESIN/ADMIN, Having a lot of troubles concerning my article in the Categorie:User:LINKELS Josy and perhaps if permission is given Category:Painter from Luxembourg.Would You please have the goodness and the kindness to support me knowing that all my furnished items and topics are true and a deletion request is involved reproaching me self propagation (I am sorry but I DON'T find the exact indication).Please have a look at: lb.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Josy_LINKELS and fr.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Josy_LINKELS or simply enter:Linkels Josy or Josy LINKELS and You will find a lot of informations of mine.

Hoping that You will agree and support me on the en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Josy_LINKELS I make free that my English is no longer the best.

BEST REGARDS HOPING TO HAVE SOME NEWS FROM YOU. THANK YOU INDEED.LINKELS Josy 22:34, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

My E-mail: jlinkels493@hotmail.com--LINKELS Josy 22:34, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Trouted

Hello M.SERESIN/ADMIN, Having a lot of troubles concerning my article in the Categorie:User:LINKELS Josy and perhaps if permission is given Category:Painter from Luxembourg.Would You please have the goodness and the kindness to support me knowing that all my furnished items and topics are true and a deletion request is involved reproaching me self propagation (I am sorry but I DON'T find the exact indication).Please have a look at: lb.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Josy_LINKELS and fr.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Josy_LINKELS or simply enter:Linkels Josy or Josy LINKELS and You will find a lot of informations of mine.

Hoping that You will agree and support me on the en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Josy_LINKELS I make free that my English is no longer the best.

BEST REGARDS HOPING TO HAVE SOME NEWS FROM YOU. THANK YOU INDEED.LINKELS Josy 22:34, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

My E-mail: jlinkels493@hotmail.com--LINKELS Josy 22:34, 24 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by LINKELS Josy (talk • contribs)

Trouted

PLEASE HELP ME TO RESTORE Bold text MY ARTICLE IN and perhaps AND TRY TO KEEP IT UNDELETED KNOWING THAT I HAVE NO PERSONAL HOMEPAGE, THAT I AM NO LONGER ABLE TO PAINT AND THAT IT IS NOT MONEY INTEREST I AM SEEKING BUT HEALTH. INDEED, HAVING GOOD RELATIONS TO THE U.K., I WOULD BE VERY GLAD IF YOU WOULD BE SO KIND TO SUPPORT ME HAVING AN ARTICLE IN THE ENGLISH WIKIPEDIA AREA. THANK YOU FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING. TILL SOON AND BEST REGARDS.--LINKELS Josy 22:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Missing Wikipedians

I've added Seresin to the list of missing Wikipedians, as he has not edited since July 11, 2010. Just thought I'd drop a notice, just in case Seresin returns sometime in the future. — ξ ^xplicit 07:30, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Xeno (talk) at 16:52, 9 August 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Xeno (talk) at 14:02, 4 September 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

See also: Wikipedia:Inactive administrators/2011#September 2011

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. –xeno^talk 00:12, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back!

I saw your post at WP:BN and I wanted to welcome you back to the project! Ryan Vesey Review me! 23:47, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. ÷seresin 00:06, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And from me too! It's been too long since we've seen the italicised division symbol. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 01:52, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto! I don't know that we interacted much before, but it's always happy to see someone come back. :) Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 06:55, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back ;)

Br'erRabbit 01:08, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous (Culture)

Greetings Seresin, Do you support Capitalismojo's continuance of misinformation about Anonymous Culture? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Anonymous_(group)#Anonymous_.28Culture.29 --ARKBG1 (talk) 20:15, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know

You have been mentioned at Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians Ottawahitech (talk) 15:00, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Frère Jacques may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:44, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]