User talk:Valtoras

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

dispruptive, in your opinion.

[edit] Neferka

Hi Valtoras, Thank you for your message. I will send to you info about Neferka asap. Regards Samsam22 (talk) 20:23, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Hello, Valtoras. You have new messages at Scetoaux's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} template.

[edit] User talk notification templates?

You mean the warning templates and the like? I had them on my talk page, but deleted my copy because it was out of date. However, I use a script called Twinkle for a lot of the anti-vandalism stuff. Justin Eiler (talk) 03:33, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:ScreenShot580.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:ScreenShot580.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:24, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RfA Thanks

	Thanks!
So, yeah, you know how these work... »»»» Thank you very much for your support in my recent RfA, which closed with a final tally of (75/1/0). Your trust in me is greatly appreciated, and I can assure you it has not been misplaced. I shall use these tools to the best of my ability, and will do my best not to let you down. Thank you once again, and happy editing as always! Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:29, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] My rfa thanks

Oh snap, the DEA is an admin

I would like to thank you for your participation in my recent RfA, which I'm very glad to say was successful at 81/7/0. Some of the very best that Wikipedia has to offer came out to support or oppose me and the kind words from all the editors has really given me confidence to be an admin and I can't wait to start. I will take the advice of the opposes and not jump into any content disputes immediately. As well, I will try to add more content myself. Anyways, in thanks for participating in my RfA, here's your very own personal humanoid robot. Enjoy! --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk - Contribs) 13:54, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

:D Cheers :) Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 17:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RfA Thanks

A message from WarthogDemon.

I would like to thank you for your participation in my recent RfA, was unsuccessful with 61 support, 25 oppose, and 4 neutral. I've been taking the advice of the Opposes into practice and hopefully I can improve myself. Once again, thank you. ^_^

[edit] Awarding Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		Aprils fools day was a blast. Loads of users lightened up to have good old fashion fun. I want to thank you for taking part in editing this page in particular and even though I may not know you, embrace the same talk pages, or even edit with you in the near future, I'd like to award you this Barnstar for making Wikipedia a fun environment in which to contribute. Until next year. :) SynergeticMaggot (talk) 13:54, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Gary_King#Oppose

responded at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Gary_King#Oppose Gary King (talk) 09:39, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RFA thanks

Thanks for your support in my RFA, that didn't quite make it and ended at 120/47/13. There was a ton of great advice there, that I'm going to go on. Maybe someday. If not, there are articles to write! Thanks for your support. Lawrence § t/e 17:42, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RFA Thanks

Thank you for your comments on my RFA. Even though it failed with 28 supports, 42 opposes, and 15 neutrals, I am grateful for the suggestions and advice I have received and I do hope to improve as a Wikipedian. If you ever need my help in any endeavor, feel free to drop me a line. --Sharkface217 19:51, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Wall

Hello, I am Valtoras, a fellow Wikipedian editor. Not to sound rude or anything, but I was wondering if you could explain why you reverted 3 of my edits a few days ago.[1] I'm certain you have a good reason, but I myself am somewhat unfamiliar with Wikipedia basic editorial style. Oh, by the way, for a newcomer you're certainly doing very well. Valtoras (talk) 22:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello Valtoras. The revert had this edit summary, which tried to explain my reasons in the tiny space allowed: "this was duplicating info which was ok where it was, also lacks refs, also had typos". I don't mind explaining it, and hope you aren't offended.

My biggest concern is that opening paragraphs of articles are supposed to be a very brief summary of the article's subject, i.e. "explain what it is", while saving details for the article's sections, of which this article has many. In the first paragraph you changed "concept/rock opera double album" to just "double album", which seems to take away from the basic description of what it is.

You followed with information about its popularity and sales in comparison to other Pink Floyd albums, and 1980s albums in general, which belongs in the section titled Reception, and doesn't contain much factual information that is not covered in that section. The album's ranking among fans of the group is something that is certain to be debatable, and an opening paragraph is not the best place to weigh in with an opinion.

You also used the opening paragraph to mention Richard Wright's firing and an alleged reason for it, which are already covered in the Recording history section, and which also disputes the reason you repeated, giving other explanations. Considering that this is a strongly negative assertion about a living person, I don't see why it should be included except where it's essential to understand points made in the article, and I'm not sure it belongs in this article at all. It is duplicated in the Pink Floyd and Richard Wright pages. By the way, Richard Wright's page is not called "Rick Wright", which is a redirect page, but "Richard Wright (musician)".

Such a strong condemnation of Wright should at least be followed a reference, which is present in the place where this information was previously, but is missing from your duplication of it. This is what I meant by "lacks refs".

Your edit also removed a large sentence that begins with "Largely based on Waters' life..." (see edit summary), possibly in error.

As to the typo, I see "almum" in place of "album" in the opening sentence. I could have fixed that, but considering my other concerns, I thought it best to revert and let you try again if you feel there is something about this article that really needs to be changed. Looking at the revert again, and the article as a whole, I don't really see what these changes are trying to improve (content or style?), or what's wrong with the article as it stands.

Please don't let this discourage you from editing the article again. If you still feel there is something that needs to be done, by all means do it. Best wishes! --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 00:31, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

P.S., I added this section using "new section", but it got stuck in the big blue box that is part of the "thank spam" reply below. It seems that the box is missing its closing tags. I tried to fix it, but couldn't (after 2 quick tries). This is going to happen again to the next person who tries to post on your talk page. I'll leave it to you to fix it, since it's your page, and I don't want to fiddle with it too much. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 00:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] thank spam

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 194 supporting, 9 opposing, and 4 neutral. Your kindness and constructive criticism is very much appreciated. I look forward to using the tools you have granted me to aid the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers, Anthony and Acalamari for their nominations. Thank you again, VanTucky

[edit] Rfa thanks

Thanks for supporting my recent request for adminship which was successful with 89 supports, 0 opposes, and 2 neutrals. Unfortunately all I can offer is this lame text thanks rather than some fancy-smancy thank-you spam template thingy. I was very pleased to receive such strong support and to hear so many nice comments from editors whom I respect. I’ll do my best with the tools, and if you ever see me going astray don’t hesitate to drop a note on my talk page. Thanks again for your support!--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 03:56, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Requesting an Editor Review

Hi, you opposed my last RFA at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Gary King a few weeks ago. I have decided to open an Editor Review at Wikipedia:Editor review/Gary King so I could receive a new assessment for my recent activity on Wikipedia. I would greatly appreciate it if you could take the time to look over my recent contributions and point out areas where I could improve. Thanks in advance! Gary King (talk) 04:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RfA thank-spam

Valtoras, just a note of appreciation for your recent support of my request for adminship, which ended successfully with 112 supports, 2 opposes, and 1 neutral. If there's something I've realized during my RFA process this last week, it's that adminship is primarily about trust. I will strive to honour that trust in my future interactions with the community. Many thanks! Gatoclass (talk) 06:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 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) 06:13, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 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 06:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RfAs

Hey Valtoras. I would like to thank you for your support in my RfA and the confidence expressed thereby. I appreciate your trust. :) Best wishes, —αἰτίας •discussion• 18:31, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

And from me too. I really appreciate your long and detailed affirmation... nice to hear these things sometime, you know! Anyway I hope to live up to your confidence. --Slp1 (talk) 00:10, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] my RfA - Ta!

Gwen gleans, wending keen by the wikirindle.

Thanks for supporting my RfA, which went through 93/12/5. I'll be steadfast in this trust the en.Wikipedia community has given me. Cheers! Gwen Gale (talk) 01:11, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Question regarding possible sockpuppetry

Excuse me, Stifle. I found a discussion on Talk:Alternative Metal where an editor (Specifically Prophaniti) is pushing an agenda, attempting to get the article merged with alternative rock. I know this is likely of no interest to you, but I suspect he may have been using sockpuppets to influence the ultimate outcome. See, these edits were made within 8 minutes of each other, and that IP has only ever made 1 edit. What should I do? Valtoras (talk) 09:14, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

While I'm happy to answer questions, it looks like your question could have been answered and resolved more quickly if you had used my message wizard. It's linked as "Talk" after my name and at the top of my talk page. Why not try it next time?

Talk:Alternative Metal does not exist. If you have issues with possible sock puppets, you should make a listing at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser or Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets. I am sorry, but I am not in a position to investigate or intervene in user conduct disputes. Stifle (talk) 09:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the helpful response. Haha, regarding the wizard, I checked but didn't find anything that could help me on that entire page, at least regarding this issue (maybe he's invisible XD). The reason I brought this to you is because I wanted to bring this to somebody's attention, but the user in question seems to be somewhat combative and agenda-pushy. If I were to request a checkuser or a SSP case against him, it would be necessary and proper to inform him of such. Valtoras (talk) 01:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Indeed it would. Stifle (talk) 08:33, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the wizard, I was thinking of User talk:Stifle/wizard/dispute. Stifle (talk) 08:33, 28 May 2008 (UTC)