User talk:RyanGerbil10/Archive 16
 | This page 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. |
Please imagine a different catchy song:
- Believe it or not, this page is archived,
- Please leave a meesage at this page
- Scream all you want, but I'll never hear,
- 'cause I'm not here-
- Believe it or not, it's archived!
responsibility
You said you didn't appreciate what you regarded as a patronizing tone.
Well, I don't know how I can write about this without risking hurting your feelings.
I set my mind to working from an existing template, to create one that I think met your two most concrete objections.
I did my test in User: space. Tranclusion doesn't work across namespaces. I believe that a template like the one I tested here would work fine in Template: space.
You didn't take the time to clarify your two concrete objections
- doesn't mention the articles it is intended to be used.
- isn't customizable.
It seems to me User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/TalibanBounty fully satisfies the concerns you mentioned.
I wrote before that I think it is extremely important that those who administer policy should be scrupulous to follow policy.
I continue to think it was a mistake for you to close the nomination for deletion discussion as delete based on novel arguments -- that had not been mentioned in the nomination -- or by any of those who chose to comment on it. I continue to think that you should either have voiced your concern as just a regular discussion participant, or you should have let someone else close the discussion, then initiated a new discussion based on your concern.
As you know the nomination for deletion discussion provides a period of time when articles with problems get fixed. When you choose to close a discussion as delete, based on novel arguments, that were not mentioned during the discussion, you preclude any opportunity for a fix being tried.
I know you thought, based on your experience closing 2000 earlier {{tfd}}s, that a fix was not possible. I am sure this was an honestly uttered statement. But doesn't my experiment shows your notion this was unfixable was mistaken?
Even if you were correct, and the template was unfixable, I still think it would have been better if you had made a different choice which would have allowed an opportunity to try a fix, prior to the template being deleted. It is not like you were erasing slander -- something that had to be done right away.
I've moved this information from the beginning of this note, to the end.
- Taking an existing template, and modifying it to suit this purpose, was not difficult.
- It was just as trivial as I anticipated.
Candidly Geo Swan 10:39, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
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 23:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Template:Republic of Korea armed forces
Please do not delete Template:Republic of Korea armed forces. A Navbox template seems to be a common element for the military of a country article. The template has replaced the old South Korean army template.--Bin2k1 09:10, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 24th, 2007.
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 39 | 24 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 02:34, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
No consensus?
I proposed that Template:911tm be deleted. You stated that there was no consensus. Why not? I see 18 "deletes" and 6 "keep" votes. 75% seems like a consensus to me!
Thanks. Timneu22 19:10, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- Apologies. I see the current TfD proposal is out there. I thought you closed this current one. Have a nice day. Timneu22 19:36, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Pitt Userbox
Thanks again for answering my question about the Main Page's In The News candidates. I saw that you are attending the University of Pittsburgh. I happened to go to Pitt for college. There's a Pitt userbox available on Wikipedia here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Userboxes/Education/United_States#Pennsylvania Enjoy! Synesthetic 06:34, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
- Heh, I was just looking at your edit milestones and saw an article on the Litchfield Towers mentioned. It was pretty cool seeing an article on them. I lived in towers B and C my first two years at Pitt. Keep up the good work. :-) Synesthetic 06:42, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi Ryan Gerbil.
First, I appreciate the consideration you put into the decision of Template:User en-6 (Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_June_19#Template:User_en-6). However, I'd appreciate if you consider:
- There where 8 votes for deletion, 1 "migrate", and 4 keep
- The argumets for keep were:
- Keep as author. The command of the English language exhibited by some of the so-called "professionals" sporting Category:User en-5 is sorely lacking. — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 18:33, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - No pressing reason for deletion, and IMHO, it is worthy of retention. After all, if Bulbasaur can be an FA then, the way I see it, there can be a -6 level for Babel. Check-Six 06:50, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - There's no harm in allowing users to claim a higher level of language snobbery. -- Bigwyrm 10:26, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep, Babel templates are a completely subjective self-assessment without meaningful performance criteria anyway, no harm in having a little fun with them. -- Visviva 11:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
- I would say that none of these are compelling arguments.
- I looked at some users in Category:User en-6, and I found no evidence that the template was used truthfully, by its 86 users. Do 86 users on Wikipedia have professorial understanding of the English language?
Is this template used to make fun of the language templates? If so, I don't think it needs to be here.
That's all, thanks for your consideration (which I am sure you will take). / Fred-J 18:42, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 03, 2007
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 40 | 1 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Thanks! :D
|
Thanks RyanGerbil10/Archive 16 |
| I would like to thank you for your participation in my successful RfA, which passed with a tally of (44/10/5)[1]. Whether you supported, opposed or were neutral in my RfA, I appreciate your participation and I hope that we can continue to work together to build a stronger and better Wikipedia. | |
Regards, nattang 04:09, 3 October 2007 (UTC) |
RE:Your RfA
Thanks for the question. I hope I answered it satisfactorily. Happy editing! --Agüeybaná 19:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
My recent RfA
Thank you for supporting my RfA, which unfortunately didn't succeed. The majority of the opposes stated that I needed more experience in the main namespace and Wikipedia namespace, so that is what I will do. I will go for another RfA in two month's time and I hope you will be able to support me then as well. If you have any other comments for me or wish to be notified when I go for another RfA, please leave them on my talk page. If you wish to nominate me for my next RfA, please wait until it has been two months. Thanks again for participating in my RfA! -- Cobi(t|c|b|cn) 01:56, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
RFA Thank You Note from Jehochman
|
Ready to swab the deck! | |
| Another motley scallawag has joined the crew. Thanks for your comments at my RFA. Arrrgh! - - Jehochman Talk 03:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC) |
Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 42 | 15 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 10:08, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Re: Sockpuppet case
BSDB was not blocked, however, I believe it should be blocked indef. since the account was only created to revert a few edits and blank his talk page disruptively after being warned. As Caribbean~H.Q. said on that sock case, Ken shoryuken (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) has the same editing pattern as BSDB, but does that warrant a block? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 00:07, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- I'm aware, but it is a sockpuppet correct? Or is it a single purpose account to your eyes? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:46, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
CSD of The Light (Tatyana Ali album)?
Hi, I notice that you removed the CSD tag from this article. I'm just wondering why you don't think that this article is a clear WP:CSD#G5? It was created by a (now banned) sock puppet of the banned User:JJonathan, a known hoaxer and adder of misinformation. --Kurt Shaped Box 18:53, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Survival Unit
Hey man, just wondering why you deleted this page? I'm not arguing, but I just happened to be looking for info on the band, and couldn't find it! --John Lunney 22:11, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Dearest Supporter,
Infobox...
you need a copy, you say... by that you mean a translation, or one which has been reconstructed to meet en. wiki coding? ThuranX 21:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not great either ,but I've made a couple templates, and the coding can't be too far apart. I'll noodle with it, but by no means should you rely upon my skills, if a better editor comes along, go for it. ThuranX 21:43, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much for translating the article of my hometown into Englisch :) de:Benutzer:Jodo --217.94.222.175 22:00, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 43 | 22 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:46, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Your block of Hi246
Good call. Acalamari 03:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, you're welcome. It was a good decision. :) Acalamari 16:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
TfD for CSD-DB-Notice
Sure. Azatoth has already stated that he will update Twinkle as soon as he can. I'll let you know. Thanks.--Fuhghettaboutit 11:01, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you
|
My RFA | |
| Thanks for your support in my recent request for adminship, which was successful. I'll do my best to justify the confidence you've placed in me! Dppowell 23:17, 31 October 2007 (UTC) |
Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 44 | 29 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Click "show" to see my message.
|
My recent RfA
Thank you for participating in my recent RfA. Although the voting ended at 36/22/5, there was no consensus to promote, and the RfA was unsuccessful. I would like the thank you nonetheless for supporting me during the RfA, and hope that any future RfA’s proceed better than this one did. Again, I thank you for your support. ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 02:28, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
GlassCobra's RfA
|
|
My RFA | |
| Hey Ryan! Thanks for your support in my request for adminship, which ended with 61 supports, 3 opposes, and 1 neutral. I hope your confidence in me proves to be justified, and please feel free to call on me if you ever need any backup or second opinions! GlassCobra 01:46, 5 November 2007 (UTC) |