User talk:Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles/Archive 18

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive 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.

Contents

Just to say hai

Tinucherian has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend or a possibly new friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Have a great day ! -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 10:20, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!  :) How nice of you! Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 16:49, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Rfb participation thanks

Hello, Ο μεγάλος βασιλιάς των κολοκυθών (I take no blame if babelfish got it wrong :-P ).

I wanted to personally thank you for taking part in the project-wide discussions regarding my candidacy for bureaucratship. After bureaucratic discussion, the bureaucrats decided that there was sufficient significant and varied opposition to my candidacy, and thus no consensus to promote. Although personally disappointed, I both understand and respect their decision, especially in light of historical conservatism the project has had when selecting its bureaucrats. If you have any further suggestions or comments as to how you think I could help the project, please let me know. I appreciate that you were going to switch your opinion, and the trust that it meant you were showing in me. Once again, thank you for your participation. -- Avi (talk) 19:38, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome and again, had it continued today, I would have likely changed from neutral to support, which means that should you run again, there's a good chance I would support. Best wishes! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 20:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

You deserve this

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thank you for welcoming me to the Wikipedia community and showing me how to be a better Wikipedian. Prepsear (talk) 20:32, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
The above is kind of you as well! Happy editing! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 21:00, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Edit summaries

GR, I'd like to suggest that you pay a little more attention to making your edit summaries accurate and informative. This edit, for example, has nothing to do with "grammar," nor does this one. And whatever bee is in your bonnet about the word however, it too is unrelated to any question of grammar. It's important that edit summaries give a clear indication of the nature of the edits that were made, and yours very often fail to do so. Deor (talk) 00:42, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

In the first instance, I corrected some spacing, which is grammar related, in the second, I indicated who was saying the quotation, which is again, grammar related. As regards the frequent misuse I see of "however," I base my grammar edits always on published style guides, i.e. "Avoid starting a sentence with however when the meaning is 'nevertheless.' The word usually serves better when not in first position. . . . When however comes first, it means 'in whatever way' or 'to whatever extent.'"[1] Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 00:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

WBOSITG's RfA

Hello Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles, I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you for your participation in my RfA which was passed with a final tally of 114/10/4. I'm both shocked and honoured to gain so much support from users whom I admire and trust, and I hope I can avoid breaking that backing by being the best administrator I possibly can. I will take on board the opposition's comments and I hope to improve over the coming months and years. Once again, thank you! weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 20:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Your're welcome and conratulations! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 00:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi LGRdC; I wanted to say thank you for supporting my request for adminship, which passed with 100 supports, 0 opposes and 1 neutral. I wanted to get round everybody individually, even though it's considered by some to be spam (which... I suppose it is! but anyway. :)). It means a lot to me that the community has placed its trust in my ability to use the extra buttons, and I only hope I can live up to its expectations. If you need anything, or notice something that bothers you, don't hesitate to let me know. Thanks again, PeterSymonds | talk 22:36, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome and congratulations! By the way, I do not consider "thank yous" as spam, because thank you messages are a sign of respect, humbleness, courtesy, and friendliness. As a member of the kindness campaign, I think it is important that whenever we have a chance to say or do something nice, it is a good thing. So, kudos to you! Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 00:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Avatar: The Last Airbender major secondary characters (2nd nomination)

Could you please review your comments on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Avatar: The Last Airbender major secondary characters (2nd nomination). I replied to your Keep "vote", but you have not responded. Keep in mind that the article has no secondary sources, so it cannot satisfy certain policies. — Parent5446 (t n e l) 11:49, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I've responded there. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 15:32, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks!

RfA: Many thanks
Many thanks for your participation in my recent request for adminship. I am impressed by the amount of thought that goes into people's contribution to the RfA process, and humbled that so many have chosen to trust me with this new responsibility. I step into this new role cautiously, but will do my very best to live up to your kind words and expectations, and to further the project of the encyclopedia. Again, thank you. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 05:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome and congratulations! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 16:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks again! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:13, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Best wishes! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 23:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/M41A pulse rifle

Hello - seeing that you commented on this AfD, could I have you give it another look?

I have two main problems with the process in this case. First off, the nominator removed/redirected all the links to these articles in the AfD BEFORE the AfD was decided. I think this is problematic.

Secondly, he lumped all of them together in one AfD, even though many of the articles have quite a bit of content in them, which makes me feel this, again, is inappropriate. This also causes an associated problem, because I have now been doing quite a bit of work on Sulaco (spaceship) in response to noticing the AfD, and feel that it has enough references and shows enough notability to stand on its own.

So as above, could you be so kind and look at the discussion again? Ingolfson (talk) 12:15, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello! I have made an additional comment there. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 02:48, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

A little unfair?

Hi LGRdC,

In my opinion, you're being rather unfair in this comment, particularly when you say 'many instances in which the articles nominated or argued to be deleted were in fact kept does not really looke like "good AfD participation"'.

To show you why, I had a brief look through your own recent contributions, in order to compare outcomes with your !votes. Before I became too bored to continue, I found the following AfDs:

Of these eleven AfDs, your position differed from the final outcome in six cases, or 55% of the total. Does that mean that your own participation in AfDs is not good? Not worthwhile? I don't think so. I think your participation is a valuable part of the consensus-building process, whether or not consensus eventually agrees with you. But applying your own argument, it isn't valuable.

I just thought I'd share my thoughts, and hope you won't be offended. Jakew (talk) 19:39, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

No, I am not offended as I welcome honest criticism and suggestions. The difference is that I have argued to delete a bit more regularly, even though I am an inclusionist and in many instances where I argued to keep and the article was deleted, I am not necessarily convinced that the closing decision was correct. Two others argued convincingly to keep in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Derelict (Alien). The reasons for deleting ranged from the "per nom" argument to avoid to saying it fails the consensus lacking fiction shortcut that says "references or links to this page should not describe it as 'policy'." As ofr the Avatar Characters one, it's under review. Two others argued to keep the list of songs article. User:TallNapoleon, a deletionist, said to redirect the energy ball. An editor wanted to keep the Watercraft article per my reasoning (in fact, no one argued to delete after I posted there, so no one actually discounted my argument). The claims to delete there were not really policy based either, calling it "fancruft", "per above," not interesting, and unencyclopedic are all subjective. Same thing for the Star Ocean locations. Two others argued to merge and the deletes were essentially "per nom" and "it's cruft." In any event, EVERY article that I have ever argued to delete was in fact deleted as seen at User:Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles/Deletion discussions (those redirected were redirections created after the deletions). My concern as indicated in my statement in the RfA deals a lot with the mass nominations of articles. Fictional characters and other topics vary considerably in regards to their notability and coverage in sources. Mario is a bit different from say random villain in one game. And I saw in some of those mass nominations that linked to in the RfA problematic mass nominations. I also saw limited instances in which the candidate argued to keep. Sure I argue to keep more than I argue to delete, but I have argued to delete and even nominated to delete over two dozen times. I could not find anywhere near as many keeps from the candidate (I looked through practically every edit to check). While we may not have a quota, I think admins need to demonstrate more objectivity. I am not running as an admin. Several editors offered to nominate me, but I declined these offers. Nor do I really see myself closing discussions. So, it's not so much about how he or I argues in the discussions, but about how he is likely to close discussions and delete articles. The only thing we can really go on is looking at what he nominates and how he argues. If there seems to be a bias against lists and fiction related articles or an unbalanced focus on deletion, I am concerned that editors will be able to with good reason challenge and question controversial closures. It would be one thing if he wants to be an admin to block vandals and there I would probably not oppose, but he says in his first sentence in response to the first question that he wants to close AfDs. Now take Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wade Load. Overwhelming consensus to keep or merge. The deletes came from an editor who has a request for comment on aggresive deletionism and another who said it's his "mission" and "goal" to delete articles and after being blocked declared that he would NEVER argue to keep. In any event, just consider the characters nominated. You go from Kim Possible's main rivals Dr. Drakken and Shego who appear in video games, toys, etc. to far less notable characters. Why consider all at once? Another mass nomination with overwhelming consensus to keep is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2008. He very well may be acting in good faith and attempts to back up his rationales with links to policy pages, but again, look at the shear weight of the keep arguments in the discussion. In those you linked to above in which I participated and they closed a different way than I argued, there were hardly that decisive amount of deletes. In any event, I think there is a tremendous difference in say me arguing to keep some articles that ended up deleted versus starting the actual discussions in which editors overwhelmingly argued to keep. I see a lot of time that could have been spent improving those or other articles per User:Fresheneesz/Don't Destroy. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 20:08, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply, LGRdC. It's true that you're not running for adminship, and obviously you must apply your own RfA standards. I don't think it would be appropriate for me to argue with your standards, though I respectfully disagree. I had hoped that you might consider rephrasing one of your comments in order to be less unkind to the candidate, but obviously this is your decision, not mine. I appreciate your clarification of your position. Best wishes, Jakew (talk) 20:39, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I am always happy to clarify my positions and you are welcome to link to our discussion on my talk page at the RfA in an appropriate place should you think that anyone else find our discussion here helpful. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 23:00, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

Delivered: 19:42, 19 May 2008 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

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 and talk space, so that is what I will do. I have made a list and I hope I will be able to get through it. I will go for another RfA in about three 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 about three months. I will not be checking back to this page so if you would like to comment or reply please use my talk page. Thanks again for participating in my RfA! ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 06:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome, congratulations, and best of luck! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 02:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Per your request for merging

I have userfied Cassie Keller. It can be found at the link User:Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles/Cassie Keller. Have a great day, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:05, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 02:08, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Pie Chart

Sure, I'll gladly create a pie chart for you. Just provide me with the data. Or if you prefer, I can show you how I made it in the first place.   — C M B J   03:55, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, if you're willing, perhaps something that uses the information from that page I linked to that indicates percentages of my keep versus delete versus merge arguments in AfDs and/or of the ratio of my arguments versus closures. Incidentally, while on one hand the pie chart to some extent focuses on the AfD as if it were a vote, which it is not, but I still thought that cool that you took the time to make such an extra effort in the discussion. By the way, had I noticed that AfD, I would have argued to keep. Anyway, thanks!  :) Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 03:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

RFA

I would like to nominate you for adminship. It's been a little less than a year since your unblock, and I am sure that you're ready. I saw from your "Account history" section that you have received nomination offers and turned them down, but I had to ask anyway. Malinaccier (talk) 00:57, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind, flattering, and encouraging offer. While I may reconsider in the future, I still must regretfully decline at this time. Others have suggested that I wait at least a year since being unblocked, which would mean sometime in July, although maybe a symbolic time in October (my user name means that I am the Great Pumpkin King) might bode well. In any event, it is probably best that I respect their advice. Thank you, though. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 01:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Alright, I look forward to your RFA in the future! Malinaccier Public (talk) 12:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks and have a great week! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 16:19, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Online

Are you available now? I need to speak to you about something. Rudget (Help?) 18:29, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I am. What's up? If you'd rather not say on-wiki with regards to whatever it may be, please don't hesitate to send me an email. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 20:26, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Sure thing. I'll send an email. Rudget (Help?) 10:29, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I'll check momemntarily. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 15:45, 24 May 2008 (UTC)