User talk:Toby Bartels
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archived talk from:
- 2002: User talk:Toby Bartels/2002
- 2003 through June: User talk:Toby Bartels/2003 June
- 2003 remaining: User talk:Toby Bartels/2003
- 2004: User talk:Toby Bartels/2004
- 2005: User talk:Toby Bartels/2005
- 2006: User talk:Toby Bartels/2006
Contents |
[edit] RfD nomination of Wikipedia-Supported Software
I have nominated the discussion page. Thank you. —Remember the dot (talk) 02:00, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at[edit] thanks
Thanks for the notice. Don't know how I missed that. - Revolving Bugbear 20:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Accidental Speedy Deletion of ABCDE
You are correct, and thank you for pointing it out. The curious part is that I've warned other users for doing this same thing! Oh well, thanks again for keeping me straight. Tanthalas39 (talk) 00:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Unprotection of User talk:Dimension31
I disagree with this decision. Repeatedly adding the unblock template to one's talk page strikes me as disruptive and wasting admins' time. I am fairly certain also that my view is generally supported by the community (note that {{pp-usertalk}} includes as one reason for protection "abusing the unblock template"). I don't intend to undo this decision, but I would ask that you reconsider, especially since Dimension31 shows no sign of ceasing to add the unblock template. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 23:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Just to clarify, also, I'm not saying I want you to reprotect it now, but to consider doing so if he keeps adding that unblock template. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 00:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I reprotected the page. I believe I am correcting a mistake, as it is commonplace to protect a page due to persistent admin-shopping via repeated use of the unblock template. Indeed, this is normally done after a user has had two unblocks declined within the space of a year for the same block. Please note that I am not trying to wheel-war with you. If you unprotect that page again, I will absolutely not reprotect it. I just think you made a mistake because you are unaware that users are not permitted to an infinite number of unblock requests. --Yamla (talk) 01:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I see. I think that it's bad practice to treat requests for relief from punishment as themselves worthy of punishment; it's better to ignore them if they have no basis. But the practice is clear —except on Wikipedia:Protection policy, which is what I read (and interpreted for myself) before deciding that the protection was unwarranted. In the future, you (or whoever protects the page, Mike Rosoft originally) will probably have better luck (with interlopers like me, I mean) if you add {{pp-usertalk}}, which spells out the practice. —Toby Bartels (talk) 02:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] ''Kaiserlich und königlich'' at RfD
Just to let you know, I've put this page that you restored up for RfD again, at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2008_February_21#.27.27Kaiserlich_und_k.C3.B6niglich.27.27_.E2.86.92_Kaiserlich_und_k.C3.B6niglich. My reasons for doing so are listed at the linked discussion. If you wish to add to this discussion, please feel free to do so, of course. Due to the contentious history of this redirect, I've asked as strongly as possible that discussion not be closed early. — Gavia immer (talk) 15:47, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Town of whitby redirect
Please do not keep the redirect name "Town of whitby". Every city name that has it's proper name. The city should have been a capital "W". I don't want you to keep the redirect name, any of the city name should have been capitalized. Once again, please don not keep the rename. Steam5 (talk) 03:15, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
I know that the lowercase "w" is wrong, but redirects often contain misspellings. Don't worry, nobody will come to the wrong name unless they are deliberately looking for it or somebody else already created a link to it some time in the past two years. And in that case, the redirect will show them what the correct name is! —Toby Bartels (talk) 03:55, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Ottawa Panhandlers Union
I am trying to get this article re-created and need your help. The Panhandlers recently sued the city and are back in the news. This certainly makes them notable.MiltonP Ottawa (talk) 17:13, 9 June 2008 (UTC)