User talk:A Nobody/Archive 13
 | This page 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. |
: 30 March 2009
- From the editor: Follow the Signpost with RSS and Twitter
- Special report: Community weighs license update
- News and notes: End of Encarta, flagged revisions poll, new image donation, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Censorship, social media in schools, and more
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:50, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
{{adminhelp}} Could someone please userfy List of wonders in Civilization for me? The deleting admin has not edited since March 5th, so I reckon he may have left the project. Thanks! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 06:03, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
- Done; it's at User:A Nobody/List of wonders in Civilization. -- Mentifisto 06:26, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Jimbo
Yes you're right, that one was probably a little over the top. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 15:07, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
DYK for List of fictional turtles
|
On April 4, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of fictional turtles, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Shubinator (talk) 04:18, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Preliminary suggestion to have an Article Rescue Squadron subpage which includes merges. Ikip (talk) 08:38, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
You Saved Ferris!
DYK nomination of Third-person shooter
Hello! Your submission of Third-person shooter at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! I'm sorry, if I'm wrong, but I think you only expanded the article by around 200 characters, or less than 10%. Thanks, Genius101Guestbook 20:13, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Re:Editor Review
Yes, technically. Take a look here. I simply lost the password and have never edited since. (With that account.) Thanks for the compliment. --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 02:27, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
WQA
I briefly mentioned you at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#User:Majorly. I hope you don't mind. ThemFromSpace 03:32, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
: 6 April 2009
- Special report: Interactive OpenStreetMap features in development
- News and notes: Statistics, Wikipedia research and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikia Search abandoned, university plagiarism, and more
- Dispatches: New FAC and FAR nomination process
- WikiProject report: WikiProject China
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Ferris Beuller's Day Off in popular culture merge discussion
Informing everyone who participated in the AFD for Ferris Beuller's Day Off in popular culture that a merge discussion is now underway concerning the same material. Please share your comments here Dream Focus 04:14, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
request for assistance
The third-person shooter article is completely unreferenced, so it currently fails WP:N. Of course, you and I would probably agree that it's ridiculous to think of 3PS as being a non-notable concept. The problem is it's been hard to find coverage in reliable third-party sources that would qualify as significant. I've done a pretty good job of researching tough concepts and turning them into great articles, like shoot 'em up or 4X (which someone even wanted to delete a long time ago). But I was curious to see what you would turn up, since your strategy for researching and reading is probably different from mine. Think you could find the time sometime this week to bring the article forward a few inches? Randomran (talk) 03:03, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- I am as always happy to help and hope to have some time later this week. At the moment, I am looking to make sure that personal attack based lists are protected from recreation (check my last few edits to the protection noticeboard). Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 03:14, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- That's some ugly stuff. I'm glad you took care of it. Thanks for taking me up on my offer -- when you find the time. Randomran (talk) 03:25, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, I have begun revising the article. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 18:11, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for getting things started. You can see why this one is so tough, though. Most of the information I could find out there takes the form of "X is a third-person shooter." Have your searches turned up anything more substantial? The comparison to the third-person camera view in Elephant is great, and we could use a handfull of references more like that. (Or one reference that goes in depth.) I figure you're as busy as I am, but let me know if and when your search bottoms out. Randomran (talk) 23:43, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, I have begun revising the article. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 18:11, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- That's some ugly stuff. I'm glad you took care of it. Thanks for taking me up on my offer -- when you find the time. Randomran (talk) 03:25, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- I figure you have a lot on your plate. But I was wondering if you had any hope of adding anything else to the 3PS article, or if you've exhausted your search for significant information? User:Bridies has been hard at work on this one, but I was hoping you might be able to find something he missed. Randomran (talk) 17:43, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- No, I'm not done yet. It's only midweek after all, but anyway, I wanted to go through some of my game magazines as I have subscriptions to Game Informer and PlayStation: The Official Magazine as well as issues lying around of now defunct Electronic Gaming Monthly and two other PlayStation specific magazines. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 17:59, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- Glad to hear it. Let me know when your search is over. Hope it goes well! Randomran (talk) 18:02, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- I am looking for additional sources now. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 19:25, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I noticed you've already started. Sounds good. Let me know how it goes. Randomran (talk) 20:50, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
- I am finding LOTS of articles that use the phrase to describe games, which means, it's a valid categorization, but am coming up a bit short with regards to articles on the genre itself. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 01:32, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- Yes! Exactly. That's what I was finding too. There would be a lot to create a good list of third-person shooters, but not much to describe its history, or its content. If you're done, you're done. Let me know. Me and User:Bridies are trying to either get it to GA status, or perhaps merge it into an article on shooter games in general, or something like that. Randomran (talk) 01:38, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I still have lots of magazines to go through, but they're all at my parents house, so it might be more of a "if you want to merge for now okay", but new sources might exist and be used in the future for a split? Best, --A NobodyMy talk 01:41, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- Makes sense. Just curious, when do you think you might have a chance to look at those sources? No hurry, as you said we can always split it back out again. Randomran (talk) 01:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- That could be awhile as the Spring Quarter is underway. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 01:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- I understand. Things are busy for myself too, and I really shouldn't be poking around here as much as I am. If that's all you can contribute now, don't worry. You've already been helpful. Thanks again! Randomran (talk) 02:23, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- To be honest, I am in a constant state of whether or not and to what I extent I should continue editing. I feel an obligation to finish up all the userfied articles I have and given the good faith effort in my renaming, it just makes it hard to retire definitively, i.e. after all that to only stop after a few months or what have you, but yeah, I am nearing the end of my doctorate and as such my time should be focused on finishing the dissertation and really once I am totally done with graduate school, my priorities should be on my career (of course, I suppose if Wikipedia "succeeds", I could always return to it as a hobby in retirement!). So, yeah, it's just weird, because I edit largely because I feel a certain obligation to do so as courtesy to those who have been helpful to me, but I do think that my time on Wikipedia eats into my professional academic time more than it really should. After all, it's hard to get caught up in any significant discussion whether it be in an RfA or a rescue effort and just comment and leave, but I really think I may have to start that more. You know, I don't want to be rude and not reply to those who reply to me and all, but I should be concentrating more on getting this degree already! Regards, --A NobodyMy talk 02:29, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- I know exactly what you're talking about. I don't think anyone would fault you if you took more time to focus on your studies and your career. There's a balance, but it can be hard to find it when the community drops situations in your lap and you want to contribute. But also know that the community will roll on without you, or without me, for better or for worse. There's just too many editors for anything to ever truly fall through the cracks. Anyway, good luck, and thanks again. Randomran (talk) 04:12, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, I just tried Academic Search Complete as well, and got two hits: 1) "In this gorgeous but gory third-person shooter, you're a futuristic Marine who must destroy nightmarish creatures called Locusts." from Play it smart - and fun - with games for ... USA Today, 07347456, NOV 28, 2006; and 2)"Teamwork in a third-person shooter." from TOP 10 MOST POPULAR MICROSOFT XBOX 360 GAMES. PC Magazine, 08888507, 11/21/2006, Vol. 25, Issue 21. Anyway, both references are descriptions of I believe Gears of War, but the quoted text is the totality of the genre as it appears in the sources. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 21:43, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
- I know exactly what you're talking about. I don't think anyone would fault you if you took more time to focus on your studies and your career. There's a balance, but it can be hard to find it when the community drops situations in your lap and you want to contribute. But also know that the community will roll on without you, or without me, for better or for worse. There's just too many editors for anything to ever truly fall through the cracks. Anyway, good luck, and thanks again. Randomran (talk) 04:12, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- To be honest, I am in a constant state of whether or not and to what I extent I should continue editing. I feel an obligation to finish up all the userfied articles I have and given the good faith effort in my renaming, it just makes it hard to retire definitively, i.e. after all that to only stop after a few months or what have you, but yeah, I am nearing the end of my doctorate and as such my time should be focused on finishing the dissertation and really once I am totally done with graduate school, my priorities should be on my career (of course, I suppose if Wikipedia "succeeds", I could always return to it as a hobby in retirement!). So, yeah, it's just weird, because I edit largely because I feel a certain obligation to do so as courtesy to those who have been helpful to me, but I do think that my time on Wikipedia eats into my professional academic time more than it really should. After all, it's hard to get caught up in any significant discussion whether it be in an RfA or a rescue effort and just comment and leave, but I really think I may have to start that more. You know, I don't want to be rude and not reply to those who reply to me and all, but I should be concentrating more on getting this degree already! Regards, --A NobodyMy talk 02:29, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- I understand. Things are busy for myself too, and I really shouldn't be poking around here as much as I am. If that's all you can contribute now, don't worry. You've already been helpful. Thanks again! Randomran (talk) 02:23, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- That could be awhile as the Spring Quarter is underway. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 01:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- Makes sense. Just curious, when do you think you might have a chance to look at those sources? No hurry, as you said we can always split it back out again. Randomran (talk) 01:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I still have lots of magazines to go through, but they're all at my parents house, so it might be more of a "if you want to merge for now okay", but new sources might exist and be used in the future for a split? Best, --A NobodyMy talk 01:41, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- Yes! Exactly. That's what I was finding too. There would be a lot to create a good list of third-person shooters, but not much to describe its history, or its content. If you're done, you're done. Let me know. Me and User:Bridies are trying to either get it to GA status, or perhaps merge it into an article on shooter games in general, or something like that. Randomran (talk) 01:38, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- I am finding LOTS of articles that use the phrase to describe games, which means, it's a valid categorization, but am coming up a bit short with regards to articles on the genre itself. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 01:32, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I noticed you've already started. Sounds good. Let me know how it goes. Randomran (talk) 20:50, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
- I am looking for additional sources now. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 19:25, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
- Glad to hear it. Let me know when your search is over. Hope it goes well! Randomran (talk) 18:02, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- No, I'm not done yet. It's only midweek after all, but anyway, I wanted to go through some of my game magazines as I have subscriptions to Game Informer and PlayStation: The Official Magazine as well as issues lying around of now defunct Electronic Gaming Monthly and two other PlayStation specific magazines. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 17:59, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Will Kane
|
|
On April 7, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Will Kane, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Possibly unfree File:Super Nintendo light gun games.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Super Nintendo light gun games.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ryan4314 (talk) 17:31, 7 April 2009 (UTC) --Ryan4314 (talk) 17:31, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I am the photographer and I release my photograph to the public domain, but in any event, I have changed the licensing per what most of our video game cover pictures have as licensing and added a rationale consistent with other video game cover photographs. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 17:41, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Playstation light gun games.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Playstation light gun games.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ryan4314 (talk) 17:31, 7 April 2009 (UTC) --Ryan4314 (talk) 17:31, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I am the photographer and I release my photograph to the public domain, but in any event, I have changed the licensing per what most of our video game cover pictures have as licensing and added a rationale consistent with other video game cover photographs. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 17:41, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Light gun games for PS2.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Light gun games for PS2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ryan4314 (talk) 18:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC) --Ryan4314 (talk) 18:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I am the photographer and I release my photograph to the public domain, but in any event, I have changed the licensing per what most of our video game cover pictures have as licensing and added a rationale consistent with other video game cover photographs. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 18:53, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
File:Super Nintendo light gun games.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Super Nintendo light gun games.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ryan4314 (talk) 00:14, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
- File is already under discussion elsewhere, so this seems like venue shopping as indicated at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Venue_shopping.2C_retaliation.2C_etc._from_User:Ryan4314. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 00:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
File:Light gun games for PS2.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Light gun games for PS2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ryan4314 (talk) 00:14, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
- File is already under discussion elsewhere, so this seems like venue shopping as indicated at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Venue_shopping.2C_retaliation.2C_etc._from_User:Ryan4314. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 00:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
File:Playstation light gun games.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Playstation light gun games.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ryan4314 (talk) 00:14, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
- File is already under discussion elsewhere, so this seems like venue shopping as indicated at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Venue_shopping.2C_retaliation.2C_etc._from_User:Ryan4314. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 00:40, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
- Hi, I have removed the listings for these three images from WP:PUI, since they are listed at IFD. Black Kite 16:15, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
DYK for SingStar ABBA
|
|
On April 8, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SingStar ABBA, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Thanks!
Thanks for your warm welcome! To tell the truth, how do you find your time welcoming new members of Wikipedia when you're so busy? Interesting, I say! Thanks again! ThunderXANA (talk) 10:16, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Thanks for supporting my section in the Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/JzG_3
RE: Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/JzG_3#Moved_from_the_main_page
Thanks for supporting my section, I moved that section to the talk page, along with your endorse, because the creator of the RfC, AbD advised me that it is not a good idea to focus on personal attacks in this RfC. Ikip (talk) 15:09, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Suggested as admin candidate
See WT:RFA#Candidate suggestions; I've suggested you and four other users as candidates at WP:RFA. Rather than responding here or on my talk page, please respond at the linked-to section at WT:RFA. --Dylan (chat, work, ping, sign) 20:24, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you, but I am not interested at this time. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 21:20, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry to intrude, but could I ask why? You have a superb knowledge of how this place works, especially deletion areas. —Cyclonenim | Chat 23:27, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
- Primarily for the reasons why I changed user names (see top of this talk page), but really I think of myself more as an editor. Would I be a good admin? Probably as I absolutely would, like DGG and Casliber, not close AFDs for which I would have a potential bias (I would probably only close snow deletes as hoaxes as neither under my current name or old username have I been wrong when I argued to delete at least) and I would probably use the tools to help transwiki. I absolutely would not block "rivals," as well. Anyway, though, at this time, I just think being an admin wold attract too much unwanted attention and possibly further hounding by certain accounts. Moreover, I think I should be able to show that since my username change on October 13, 2008, let's say I go at least one year without any legitimate blocks. I think I would need something like that to truly convince people that things have worked out since my rename. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 16:33, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- Sad to hear that, really. I'm watching Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/A Nobody anyway, just in case :) Happy editing. —Cyclonenim | Chat 19:27, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- I might set up something like User:Synergy/Durova just to see how much support I would actually potentially get. My biggest concerns would be socks or meats of certain now blocked editors showing up and disrupting and those whom I opposed in RfA trying to get "revenge" by mischaracterizing my edits. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 19:46, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- If that's your biggest concern, I'd really advise you go ahead with Synergy's idea and see how much support you'd get. There are loads of us who can observe the RfA arena for dodgy accounts (i.e. socks and meats) and report them accordingly. —Cyclonenim | Chat 20:12, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- I suspect some would oppose on the notion that I am strongly inclusionist, even if I outright declare as I am now, I would NOT close any AfDs as keep that are not SNOW keeps and would probably resist from closing AfDs that arne't SNOW deletes. As such, I think even with my asserting that some would still say, "too biased". Moreover, even though I believe I can explain my block log, some would still likely ignore it and mischaracterize my edit history. I had a checkuser done on me back in 2007 that confirmed my alternate account and was blocked for sockpuppetry. Please see this. You will note that that account and my main account never participated in any of the same AfDs. Nor did the other 2007 checkuser confirmed alternate also per here. And nor did they participate in the same AfDs as each other: [1]. A third account was declared likely, but not confirmed as me. Again, please see [2] as this account also did not edit in any of the same AfDs as my main account. Now despite that others tried to allege IPs and accounts as me, these are the only ones that came back as likely or confirmed in the four checkusers done on me. You'd think if I had others, they would have come up in one of these and I voluntarily passed along enough information about my university and place of residence and my family's IPs that pretty much it would be impossible for me to every "get away with" anything in the future and as such anyone trustworthy can checkuser me whenever they want to confirm as much. So, even with this and with the fact that the first admin to have blocked me unblocked me and is friendly with me, the second admin to do so hasn't edited since and his block was also overturned, the third is no longer an admin and my so-called edit warring was over an AN thread started while I was in the process of attempting a WP:RTV. The next three were also undone by the blocking admins relatively rapidly. Yet again, I think some would still just see the block log without scrutinizing it more carefully. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 20:23, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- Some people really do stick with grudges, and even more people look at a candidate and judge immediately as you've stated on things like block logs. Roux was a prime example, in my opinion, of a candidate who went through hell because of it. Even so, I hope someday in the future you're block log will be so far in the past even the most foolish of RfA observers will discount it, but that's probably an idealistic dream. Regards. —Cyclonenim | Chat 20:34, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I do at times wonder what I can do to reconcile with at least some of these editors. Those who are associated with sock farms that were actually used to vote stack or to harass other editors, I am not too concerned about, but there are some who continue unjustifiably to believe the distorted version of my edit history that I really wish I could come to terms with. And I just don't know what reasonably to do. Those who would attack me for being too inclusionist oddly enough "vote" to keep less frequently than I argue to delete. So, if they were to want me to argue to delete more, it would be a hypocritical request. Some don't like when I challenge multiple editors in an RfA or AfD, yet as my userpage list of editors who have agreed with me reveals, for others, that actually does convince them to change their stance, i.e. it annoys some while convinces others, so... and a lot of times I find with regards to those it annoys, it seems to be because they can't really defend their stance and because they can't, they'd rather take the ad hominem approach than try to debate about the issue. But I would say I can think of maybe a dozen accounts that would reflexively vote oppose and the question is would that be enough to paint a misleading enough viewpoint that would catch fire? On the plus side, for many of those likely opposers they have various examples of being incivil to myself (swearing, referring to me by my old username, that I could relatively easily show them as bullies, which could greatly diminish the effectiveness of their opposes, i.e. they can come out as vicious and vincdictive which would possibly win me support. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 21:33, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- Some people really do stick with grudges, and even more people look at a candidate and judge immediately as you've stated on things like block logs. Roux was a prime example, in my opinion, of a candidate who went through hell because of it. Even so, I hope someday in the future you're block log will be so far in the past even the most foolish of RfA observers will discount it, but that's probably an idealistic dream. Regards. —Cyclonenim | Chat 20:34, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- I suspect some would oppose on the notion that I am strongly inclusionist, even if I outright declare as I am now, I would NOT close any AfDs as keep that are not SNOW keeps and would probably resist from closing AfDs that arne't SNOW deletes. As such, I think even with my asserting that some would still say, "too biased". Moreover, even though I believe I can explain my block log, some would still likely ignore it and mischaracterize my edit history. I had a checkuser done on me back in 2007 that confirmed my alternate account and was blocked for sockpuppetry. Please see this. You will note that that account and my main account never participated in any of the same AfDs. Nor did the other 2007 checkuser confirmed alternate also per here. And nor did they participate in the same AfDs as each other: [1]. A third account was declared likely, but not confirmed as me. Again, please see [2] as this account also did not edit in any of the same AfDs as my main account. Now despite that others tried to allege IPs and accounts as me, these are the only ones that came back as likely or confirmed in the four checkusers done on me. You'd think if I had others, they would have come up in one of these and I voluntarily passed along enough information about my university and place of residence and my family's IPs that pretty much it would be impossible for me to every "get away with" anything in the future and as such anyone trustworthy can checkuser me whenever they want to confirm as much. So, even with this and with the fact that the first admin to have blocked me unblocked me and is friendly with me, the second admin to do so hasn't edited since and his block was also overturned, the third is no longer an admin and my so-called edit warring was over an AN thread started while I was in the process of attempting a WP:RTV. The next three were also undone by the blocking admins relatively rapidly. Yet again, I think some would still just see the block log without scrutinizing it more carefully. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 20:23, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- If that's your biggest concern, I'd really advise you go ahead with Synergy's idea and see how much support you'd get. There are loads of us who can observe the RfA arena for dodgy accounts (i.e. socks and meats) and report them accordingly. —Cyclonenim | Chat 20:12, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- I might set up something like User:Synergy/Durova just to see how much support I would actually potentially get. My biggest concerns would be socks or meats of certain now blocked editors showing up and disrupting and those whom I opposed in RfA trying to get "revenge" by mischaracterizing my edits. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 19:46, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- Sad to hear that, really. I'm watching Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/A Nobody anyway, just in case :) Happy editing. —Cyclonenim | Chat 19:27, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- Primarily for the reasons why I changed user names (see top of this talk page), but really I think of myself more as an editor. Would I be a good admin? Probably as I absolutely would, like DGG and Casliber, not close AFDs for which I would have a potential bias (I would probably only close snow deletes as hoaxes as neither under my current name or old username have I been wrong when I argued to delete at least) and I would probably use the tools to help transwiki. I absolutely would not block "rivals," as well. Anyway, though, at this time, I just think being an admin wold attract too much unwanted attention and possibly further hounding by certain accounts. Moreover, I think I should be able to show that since my username change on October 13, 2008, let's say I go at least one year without any legitimate blocks. I think I would need something like that to truly convince people that things have worked out since my rename. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 16:33, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry to intrude, but could I ask why? You have a superb knowledge of how this place works, especially deletion areas. —Cyclonenim | Chat 23:27, 9 April 2009 (UTC)