User talk:Nae'blis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For older messages, please see User talk:Nae'blis/Archive.

I will generally respond to users on their talk page (and watch for replies there), and respond to article discussions on article talk pages. Please add new topics to the bottom of this page in a new section, like this.

One Plenary Indulgence awarded by Essjay in recognition of your great work!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar, for being nice and kind and saying sorry in an oppose vote :) Tawker 07:50, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your RfA

I am pleased to let you know that, consensus reached, you are now an Administrator. You should find the following forums useful:

Congratulations on your promotion and the best of luck with your new charge! Redux 16:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Congrats. Don't let the zero opposition go to your head! :) - crz crztalk 16:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RfA Congratulations

The final tally was 104/0/0. Congrats from:

Doc Tropics 16:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Kafziel ^Talk 16:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Congrats, good numbers! HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Welcome to the cabal. You'll receive your special decoder ring in the mail. Congrats :) --Durin 17:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
See...even three months ago you would have been a shoe-in. Congrats!--MONGO 21:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Well done! Please ask if you have any questions! (aeropagitica) 22:05, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
You majorly deserved all that support :P Well done, and put the new buttons to good use! --Majorly 22:13, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Congratulations Nae'blis! Have fun with your new admin tools, and if you have any admin-related questions, feel free to contact me. Nishkid 64 22:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Congratulations on your new mop and bucket! :) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 23:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Congrats from me too (and thanks for the kind words!) You'll be a great admin. If you ever need any help, you know where my talk page is :) Grutness...wha? 23:59, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Aye, congratulations from me too. You deserved it. :) Tito xd^(?!?) 01:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Enjoy this day! You were not given the mop, you earned it. JungleCat Shiny!/Oohhh! 02:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Unanimous Support @ 104 with no additional questions to boot, I'll forgot to ask how you felt about WP:WOOT! , maybe i'll ask at your RfB ;-) Congrats! ▪◦▪≡Ѕirex98≡ 03:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
yeah, may the mop be with you. those goats need you. as i said, very pleased to see your thinking on/in the project and i look forward to seeing you around. and, thanks for sending me a non-boilerplate thanks for the rfa support. ttfn, ... aa:talk 04:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Congrats! I couldn't not vote for you (may have to read that a couple of times for it to make sense :P) given my love for the WoT :) May I ask, out of interest, what's your favourite? Personally, I like FoH closely followed by tEotW. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 07:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
And me! I remember thinking at one point 'I'll be pissed if he doesn't reach 100.' Congratulations, and all the best with it :) riana_dzasta 08:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
104. Unaninmous. Gotta be great. Congratulations and good luck with your new mop. ← ANAS ^Talk? 12:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Strong support for this effort at congratulation. Well-deserved, and we actually need the help. Enjoy! Antandrus (talk) 01:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

The mop

Congratulations on becoming an admin!

Enjoy your new-found powers, and remember to use them only for good, and not for evil. If you would like to try out your new mop, here are some spots that always need loving care:

All the best! - Quadell

The flamethrower

If I had the chance I would vote against as I have already seen this user abuse his status (see a few items down). Osomec 18:23, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Lets keep this thread going with a belated congratulations. Enjoy your decoder ring! Can't sleep, clown will eat me 10:38, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Long Island Music Hall of Fame

Can you please undelete Long Island Music Hall of Fame (DRV here) or if that's not possible put a copy of the deleted article in my namespace so I can rewrite it with references? The admin who deleted it has been unresponsive in the DRV and his talk page. Thanks for your help. *Spark* 23:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Kansas City

Thanks for setting this up. I can't find it at the moment though and would definitely contribute (so please give a formal link). Since I'm a bit cranky, probably my main contributions would be a wish list/todo for articles/photos. I'm plowing ahead on what I think defines the city. Thanks again. I always appreciate what you do and your enthusiasm. I think it has mightily contributed to the KC article rising above the standard wiki boosterism article. Americasroof 05:07, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

Oh, the humanity!

I had my doubts about accepting a nomination for a second RfA, but even I couldn't have predicted the stir it caused as it drifted to the ground in flames! Still, it was as educational as ever. Thanks for your input, and for being willing to reconsider your opposition. Your comments will be on my mind as I continue to edit Wikipedia, and perhaps I will have earned your support if another nomination comes around. While I'm here, congrats on your own RfA. I would have supported along with all the rest, but it seemed like a conflict of interest to !vote while my own was still pending. Kafziel ^Talk 15:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How long is...

Kai81123, apart from the period you blocked Owie123 for? Or maybe I missed something. Yomangani ^talk 17:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see what you're saying; my first block and I wasn't sure of the parameters of the template. Block was for 15 minutes; have fixed the talk page comment. Thanks for the catch. -- nae'blis 17:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Friendly Porpoise subpages

Hey, just to let you know, I undeleted the subpages User:Friendly Porpoise/New game ideas and User:Friendly Porpoise/New game ideas/Example1 because they were being referred to in the current RfA Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Gray Porpoise. They can be deleted once the RfA closes. Just wanted to let you know—it wouldn't do to have two of the newest admins end up in a wheel war. ‎ —Doug Bell ^talk 22:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for letting me know. I usually don't check incoming links on self-requests, but I guess I'll start... -- nae'blis 22:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your RFA thanks

Not spare me in Mafia? That is cruel! I haven't seen you play anywhere. Is there any chance I ran across you playing somewhere online? - Mgm|^(talk) 22:11, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Could you take a look at this?

Hi there,

You seem like a decent editor. You may remember me from last week as I was posting images to wikipedia. Would you mind look at this deletion discussion? This started last week with posting of editors. My former company that we are now competing with jumped in there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2006_November_22#Bryan_Brandenburg

Here's what I mean:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Zygote_Media_Group - Zygote is Dallbin

I'll live with your input, one way or another.

Thanks,

Bryan

[edit] Congratulations! ...and possible work

Kudos on your well-deserved adminship, unanimously bestowed (everybody loves you!), and your cute RfA thank-yous! :) You are welcome to help out at DRV whenever you like, perhaps starting today! ;) There is a listing for Nov. 19, in which both Trialsanderrors and I have commented -- somebody else has got to close it, so this is a gentle prod. Thanks and congrats again!, Xoloz 17:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Category:Stub templates

That's fine with me - my only concern is that the original CfD debate was not referenced in the DRV from the start, but to due the apparent mixed consensus at DRV, I agree with what you've done (and the fact that consensus can change. Thanks -- M a rtinp23 19:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Oh dear...

Thanks very much for the compliment ("I closed out the 19th in what I feel is a very Xoloz-like manner (and that's a good thing in my world"), but I fear that you live in a very strange and disturbing world! ;) Better that the rest of us should try to imitate you, since I can't think of any more shining example! :) Best wishes, Xoloz 21:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Abuse of the "speedy deletion" criteria

It is simply not acceptable to use "speedy delete" on a controversial category that was last deleted a year ago. There was already a keep vote from a regular visitor to categories for discussion and I wished to add another. Category:LGBT criminals is a necessary counterbalance to all the positive LGBT categories introduced for propaganda purposes, and deletion of it shows Wikipedia's systemic bias towards imposing the agenda of American liberals on a supposedly global project. It seems most likely to me that you deleted the category because you disapprove of it yourself, not because of any desire to implement consensus as you made sure that there was insufficient time for that to be established. Overuse of speedy deletion is an unacceptable way of enforcing establishment orthodoxy, used to create inertia in Wikipedia's develpopment by administrators who find that the current approach suits their own point of view. Osomec 18:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of the category was established through discussion at Categories for deletion/discussion in February of this year. If you believe that decision is no longer valid or feel it was handled inappropriately, the place to debate that is deletion review. Until a change of consensus can be established, recreation of the category is not permitted. -- nae'blis 18:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't accept that line of argument at all as it is grossly skewed towards maintenance of the status quo. Deletion review should be for review immediately after deletion and speedy deletion should be for categories recreated promptly or in bad faith by the same user. If a category is recreated by a different user after a long gap it should be given a fair hearing. When it has been repeatedly deleted it can be marked as a protected category. Your approach uses the wrong tools for the job and suppresses free speech. Also it seems to me that deletion review is largely under control of admins who are over-protective of admin power and does not offer non-admins a fair hearing. Osomec 18:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you don't agree with that line of argument, but "status quo" is another word for Wikipedia:Consensus; we do/don't-do things because editors agree they are good things to do/not-do, acknowledging that that opinion may change sometime in the future. Once a deletion decision has been rendered on the topic of a page, usually deletion review is the way to try to show that consensus has changed (as opposed to when it is deleted for copyright violations, or not having sources, or something else "fixable"). In the case of a category, it either is or isn't appropriate; that's why criterion G4 exists. I'm not exactly sure why you feel DRV is controlled by admins; does the title of the category not give you enough information to render an informed decision in this case? The category description page was blank in this case, so you're not 'not seeing' anything that I can see.

Since you've replied here, I'll continue the discussion here to avoid fragmenting things between two talk pages, if that's alright with you. -- nae'blis 18:46, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signature

I just starting doing that recently, use it to easily track my recent talk page postings. Not certain if it's worth it or not. *Spark* 13:07, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] LI Hall of Fame Image

Can you undelete Image:limhof.jpg? It was orphaned when the article was speedied, and the note in the image description said it would be deleted if no article referenced it. Well, and article *is* referencing it, and it was still deleted. *Spark* 14:15, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I found who deleted it and requested they restore it as well. Seems to be restored. Question - when an image is deleted, links to it are converted to Special:Upload&wpDestFile=imageName, which doesn't let you check history. Wouldn't it be better if it linked to the image page which has a note with "please upload", which I get if I type in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SomeUnknownImage.jpg in my address bar, but not if I link to Image:SomeUnknownImage.jpg ? *Spark* 14:29, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Optional unnamed parameter

I could not figure out how to use your Authoronlinesource2006 template optional unnamed parameter. Would you please provide an example here? Thanks. Also, if you know how to provide multiple tags, please provide an example.-- Jreferee 17:41, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I was able to provide the example of the unnamed parameter in use, but I'm not sure how to do the other thing, sorry. -- nae'blis 18:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] minor change to template:RfA

No, there is no reason. In fact, my bot does already support the last few versions of Template:RfA. (WP:BN, the page you cite, is updated by my bot, btw ;) ) The reason why I added that notice to the top of Template talk:RfA is because there have been numerous occasions on which someone changed the template, breaking the operation of the bots, yet did not think of notifying the operators. I did ask people to notify operators in case of any updates a few months back at WT:RFA, but since that has gone into the archives, nobody seems to bother to tell us anymore. - Tangot a ngo 04:24, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyrights

There's a discussion of copyrighted lists at Talk:101 People Who Are Really Screwing America. If you have a chance, your input would be appreciated. Cheers, -Will Beback · † · 08:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How can I gain respect

Can you tell me how to gain resect from the community. --Sir james paul 19:36, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Apologies and Question regarding Missouri Project

I hope you didn't take the bad joke personally at the KC Project page; I have a weakness for bad jokes. And congratulations on the appointment I was joking about. I also have a serious question. If you look at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Missouri page, you might get the definite impression that the leaders of the project think (or thought) that projects gets "assigned" featured articles for some reason other than on the basis of quality review. This may well have been an impediment to the project to date. If you think you would have any interest in the project, given your generally broad and well-informed background in wikipedia, I think the project would be greatly enhanced by your membership. Your success in putting together the Kansas City Project page would also make you a person who the other members would look up to. Just a thought, anyway. Badbilltucker 23:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Needed pages:

Template:Guam legislature election, 2006
Template:Guam governor election, 2006

Thanx, 68.39.174.238 00:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you for voting

Thank you for voting in my RfA which at 51/20/6 unfortunately did not achieve consensus. In closing the nomination, Essjay remarked that it was one of the better discussed RfAs seen recently and I would like to thank you and all others who chose to vote for making it as such. It was extremely humbling to see the large number of support votes, and the number of oppose votes and comments will help me to become stronger. I hope to run again for adminship soon. Thank you all once more. Wikiwoohoo 20:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CallMe Communications

Hiya, since CallMe Communications has been speedy-deleted (a deletion with which I heartily concur), do you think we should also delete User:Callmeau/temp, which essentially duplicates the information? I'm not entirely clear on what the procedures are for deleting commercial content that is being maintained in userspace. Does it need a formal AfD, or what should the next step be? --El on ka 21:44, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. :) --El on ka 19:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

I appreciate the kind thoughts about our impending addition! Andrwsc 00:05, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: ArbCom tally

Nae'blis wrote:

Argh. This is stupid and provincial, but can you make your bot spell out the month when they do timestamps? I seriously read 11/12/2006 as November 12th, and couldn't figure out why it was so backlogged... -- nae'blis 17:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Done – Gurch 03:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reply to thank you note

Congrats on getting over 100 support votes. Sorry it took me so long to reply to your question but I tend to get irresponsive at times.

Having spent a few years of my life working in a call centre handling escalated issues and irate customers, I have found that dispute resolution is an art, a natural skill very hard to acquire and implement consciously in the middle of heated arguments.

Browsing through your edits to form my opinion for your vote, I found that you were handling conflict very well, knew how to progress issues and avoid neverending arguments. Personally, I enjoy following the arbitration and to a lesser extend the mediation page and could see you into one of those roles in the future... though I am thinking more informal coaching and help might well be more rewarding.

I replied here due to my tardiness and since I archived that note already. Feel free to move my reply back to my talk page at your preference. Lost Kiwi^(talk)08:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your comment at MoS talk

Dear Nae'blis

Thanks for your input. In a bid to keep the request as simple as possible and to forestall destructive tension on BugZilla, I've not included specific suggestions for mark-up, and intend to exclude issues such as the comma and anything that would have back-compatibility ramifications.

However, I'm concerned about the matter you raised of the need to put it on a silver plate for them—make it as easy as possible. This is why I wonder whether the addition of a simple sentence such as the following might satisfy your concern and mine:

"Some supporters have suggested <<date>> for the new syntax."

That seems to be the only one that brought up no problems in the discussion. I definitely don't want to cause problems with back-compatibility.

Tony —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tony1 (talk • contribs) 02:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC).

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../n/a/e/User_talk%7ENae%27blis_9b41.html"