User:Avriette/ArchiveZero

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] re:CSCWEM

I understand that he has been a wonderful editor and admin in the past, present and he will be in the future. But I opposed him for ArbCom because he is simply too new to Wikipedia in the area of making major decisions. I trust him too, but most of his work on Wikipedia is vandal-fighting and AFD votes, edits anyone can do, except he does at a fast-pace to clear out backlog. It just seems to me that he's not the right guy for ArbCom. I don't vote support unless I'm 100% sure that I know that person is right for the position (only exception to that is moral supports). semper fi — Moe 21:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for understanding :) semper fi — Moe 22:33, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding a user talk comment

This kind of edits are not really helpful. No matter what a vandal did, try not to sunk as much as they do. Thanks. -- ReyBrujo 21:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Civility is welcomed, even if you think it is not necessary. Thus, I suggest you to reword your comments when dealing with vandals. If necessary, use one of the warning templates instead of writing the comments yourself. Thanks. -- ReyBrujo 22:27, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
I was certainly civil to you, and to the vandal. And, if you'll notice, I use warning templates quite a lot (for somebody who doesn't go running around looking for vandalism). In this case, we weren't talking about a piece of self-serving graffiti. This "vandal," while they surely did "vandalize" the article, did it in such a way as to amuse at least a few of us. Clearly, as I also stated in my comment to that user, they aren't some casual vandal either. And so, I thanked them. It may not have occurred to yourself, but I frequently get it in my head to do that sort of thing. I generally have more self restraint than that, but I do admire the initiative and sense of humor in an individual who can pull that off. ... aa:talk 22:34, 9 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 20:09, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Random drive-by info

There was a previous ARBCOM case involving ED. Basically, it is considered an attack site, and no material from ED or links to ED are allowed. - Crockspot 00:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

That is correct. It is enforced. Please find something less dramatic. Fred Bauder 00:29, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tesla

Hey, maybe you Americans missed the anniversary, but here in Croatia, I doubt that there's a single person who doesn't know that "Godina je Tesle" (trns. "It's the year of Tesla"). There are posters and jumbo billboards all over Croatia. Documentaries on TV, special exhibits, etc... Oh, and the classic argument "is he Croatian or Serbian" has intensified, and has been brought into the limelight (again). Nothing new in that department though. We still think one thing, they think the other. Debates on TV talk shows, historians of both sides arguing... immature, I agree.

My fellow countrymen, heh... -- xompanthy 13:57, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WTF? request for foo

Hi (Alex is it?) you placed a talk on my talk page (i'm new, so bear with me), saying I have to type request for foo as my comments. I'm really confused. What is foo and why can't I just put a normal text message saying what the change was?

Really would appreciate a reply as i'm new here. Reillyd 09:44, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dysons

I think it should be a separate article because it large and has a lot of content (even more after I finish working on it). It would make the Commonwealth Saga page to large. user:culverin] 11:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I will refer you to this quote which appears when I go to edit nights dawn.

This page is 55 kilobytes long. It may be appropriate to split this article into smaller, more specific articles. See Wikipedia:Article size.

I don't want that happening to commonwealth saga. Please see WP:SIZE Culverin? Talk 11:41, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re: massoud

It seems you've removed a bunch of stuff from Ahmed Shah Massoud which wasn't replaced. Just wondering why. ... aa:talk 11:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually I did not purposely remove anything. What probably happened was that I reverted some vandalism and accidentally reverted to another wrong version. This article GETS ALOT of vandalism. If you look at the history, you'll see how many unregistered users edit this article and vandalize it. So it can get confusing keeping track of all this vandalism. I've asked the Admins to add a protection on this article but they didn't. Since you are an admin, can you please add some sort of protection on this article? I think it really needs it. Behnam 05:03, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:NXLogo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:NXLogo.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. MECU≈talk 01:20, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

You have at least 7 days, and with the backlog, maybe 14 or more. You may want to look into WP:DRV instead of pestering the deleting admin. I'll give you the advice that you should present your case in a more calm and civil manner than you did in the diff you redirected me to. You should link to the DRV post from the image which might buy you more time as well. But, even images can be undeleted now so if you get the article back after the image is deleted, you can get the image back too (or just reupload it). Good luck! --MECU≈talk 13:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Nitrous Express

I'm sorry you feel that way. I think it's important that I clear some things up, though. First off, we tend not to notify people when we speedy delete pages. The only way we will take a more closer look at pages that have the speedy deletion tag attached to them is if there is a {{hangon}} tag attached to the top of the article; in that case, we will review the talk page of the article, make another decision as to whether or not the article meets speedy deletion, and then proceed from there.

Looking at the tone of the article, I do feel that the context of it did sway over to advertising, and therefore it was marked as such by another editor. This speedy deletion criterion is a fairly new one; it states that we cannot allow advertising of non-notable companies onto Wikipedia. All this means for me is that I simply cannot change existing policies; I can only enforce them. If you'd like to change our polices, you can attempt to bring up a discussion at the Wikipedia:Village pump (policy).

I'm sorry you feel I was biased in the matter; all I can point to you are my logs, which show that I delete articles on all sorts of subjects, that meet our speedy deletion criterion, using NPWatcher. There have been few objections as to my editing and deletion patterns on Wikipedia, and I don't find seniority a factor on Wikipedia either. I invite you to bring up a discussion at WP:DRV if you'd like your article undeleted. Again, I regret your feelings on the matter, but appreciate your understanding. —Pilotguy (ptt) 16:07, 19 January 2007 (UTC)