User talk:Tim Q. Wells

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

meta

/archive 1

[edit] AfD nomination of Saskatchewan Highway 703‎

An article that you have been involved in editing, Saskatchewan Highway 703‎, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saskatchewan Highway 703‎. Thank you. --B. Wolterding 11:33, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

[edit] Re:Picture Gallery Arctic, Antarctica and Sub-Antarctic Islands

Hi, Tim. Thank you for pointing out my mistake to me. Sorry about this. All pictures in the gallery were taken by me and I believed it was OK to do it as I did. I see I was wrong. Please delete this page. I would have done it myself, but I'm not sure how. Thank you for your time--Mbz1 (talk) 17:29, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I simply did not realize that, if I created a gallery without my user name, it becomes Wikipedia page. It was absolutely not my intention. Thank you again for catching this mistake so early. Great job!Best regards. --Mbz1 (talk) 17:38, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Tim, can I ask a question please. I am not going to transfer the images to Commons. Can I live this gallery in my userspace at English Wikipedia as it is or it is not allowed. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:41, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Great success!

[edit] AfDs and merging

It is fine to merge after an AfD, and the ones that you're reverting even suggested it. There was a separate discussion afterwards, so please leave them be. TTN (talk) 22:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Follow the merge tag placed on the articles to the merge target. There was also a further discussion at the video game project if you need me to dig it up. TTN (talk) 23:06, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Neither of us are in a position to absolutely say what or what is not consensus from this point of view. Instead of claiming that you're absolutely right, try using the talk page to explain why you do not think a consensus was reached. TTN (talk) 15:25, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

There is *clearly* no consensus from that little discussion. Wait until there is a consensus to merge them. Tim Q. Wells (talk) 19:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

You do understand that consensus is not found within the number of editors that comment on something, correct? None of the comments in that discussion have anything to do with establishing real world information to satisfy WP:N, so they are outweighed by it (see the fourth paragraph under the nutshell in WP:CON for reference). And actions like this are also backed by the video game wikiproject, so there is your higher consensus. TTN (talk) 19:40, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:FritzReiner.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:FritzReiner.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:32, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Support

Hi Tim! Good to see that you're also still busy in the holiday season. I was wondering if I could have your support for a merge proposal. It concerns this discussion. I've already tried reasoning with the party responsible for the status quo (and admin), but that conversation went nowhere. I would like to see the previous situation restored, but I don't want to make this into another big fight, so I'm hoping to keep this as civilized as possible. Therefore, assuming your agree with my merge proposal, a simple word of support from you will suffice. Cheers, --Jwinius (talk) 19:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support, Tim. I think many people are on vacation now, so we'll have to wait and see how things go after they all get back. Cheers, --Jwinius (talk) 23:19, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] reknowned --> renowned

Hi, I reverted your edit again to List of Parkinson's disease patients. Whether it is misspelled or not, it is the original name of the source article. See [1]. Garion96 (talk) 19:44, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] seriously

what you did was not funny. you should let a few things slip. go away. i want to do what i want to do. let me do it.

PS is that your real name?

Csywhl (talk) 07:21, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Try editing WP:SANDBOX. No, it's not my real name. Tim Q. Wells (talk) 07:25, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My steward election

Thank you for supporting my steward election having passed with 72-1-4-99%.--Jusjih (talk) 23:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RfA Thanks

Dear Tim Q. Wells, Thank you for voting in my RfA, which closed successfully with 34 support, 2 oppose, and 0 neutral. I appreciate your support! I promise I will wield the mop wisely, and do my best to improve Wikipedia.

-- AKeen (talk) 15:22, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RFAR

As you have unilaterally reverted all the episodes of Scrubs to individual articles while a Request for arbitration is proceeding, I have added your name to the list of involved parties. Please comment there. Thankyou. BLACKKITE 01:29, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 21:47, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] My RFA

Wizardman (talk · contribs) has commented on your !vote on my RFA. Please see the comment below the !vote, I think it provides a reasonable explanation for Q3. STORMTRACKER 94 13:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

The last edit I made when you wrote this was to your RfA, so, give me time. Tim Q. Wells (talk) 17:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] My Rfa

Well, not this time anyway it seems...my effort to regain my adminship was unsuccessful, but your support was still very much appreciated. Let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Thank you!--MONGO 06:57, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] No. 17 article

It would be best if you stopped warring on the No. 17 article. You've already bordered WP:3RR, consider this a "light" warning. You should begin a discussion at WP:WPDBZ if you find that the character deserves a page. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:08, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. This is truly inspiring. Tim Q. Wells (talk) 06:00, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notification of injunction relating to episodes and characters

The Arbitration Committee, in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2, have voted to implement a temporary injunction. It can be viewed on the case page by following this link. The injunction is as follows:

For the duration of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2, no editor shall redirect or delete any currently existing article regarding a television series episode or character; nor un-redirect or un-delete any currently redirected or deleted article on such a topic, nor apply or remove a tag related to notability to such an article. Administrators are authorized to revert such changes on sight, and to block any editors that persist in making them after being warned of this injunction.

As noted in the text of the injunction, this restriction is in effect until the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2 case is officially closed by a clerk, following a successful motion to close by the arbitrators. Please note that, for the purposes of enforcement (c.f. the final line of the text of the injunction), all parties in this case at the time of this message (link) have been notified of this injunction.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 02:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. TTN (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) is prohibited for six months from making any edit to an article or project page related to a television episode or character that substantially amounts to a merge, redirect, deletion, or request for any of the preceding, to be interpreted broadly. However, he is free to contribute on the talk pages or to comment on any AfD, RfD, DRV, or similar discussion initiated by another editor, as appropriate. Enforcement of this remedy is specified here.

Furthermore, the parties are instructed to cease engaging in editorial conflict and to work collaboratively to develop a generally accepted and applicable approach to the articles in question, and are warned that the Committee will look very unfavorably on anyone attempting to further spread or inflame this dispute. Please also note that the temporary injunction enacted by the Committee on February 3 in relation to this case now ceases to be in effect.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 23:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edit of Narthecium ossifragum

"elf fire" is a disease characterised by swelling in the face and sensitivity to light. It is not synonymous with Will-o'-the-wisp, which is why I reverted your edit. EverGreg (talk) 06:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Erm

A tag has been placed on Erm, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you.  Chzz  ►  12:38, 3 June 2008 (UTC)