User talk:A Nobody/Archive 29
 | 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. |
Not heard from anyone
Hello! I have not heard from anyone in the Software project group. Please advise what do I do next.. How do I have someone from a similar background review it??PCJain (talk) 10:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry I missed your message. I have had incredibly discomforting pain in the area of my abdomen where I was previously admitted to the hospital due to diverticulitis throughout the day and we have been debating going back (not only does it hurt, but a red spot is forming on the skin near where the localized pain is, and I have no idea what if anything that means...). Your article appears notable enough that you could try it in mainspace. The advantage of doing that is that it will have a greater likelihood of attracting outside opinions and even in the worst case scenario that someone challenges it, you can always request it be reuserfified and in the process whoever challenges it might be able to provide good feedback as to what else needs to be done. Again, I apologize for not getting back to you sooner, but this has really been bothering me the past few hours. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 01:14, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Request
Please stop pestering admins to overturn the valid outcomes of AfD dicussions. If you think the closures were out of process, file reports at DRV (after discussing the matters with the closing admins and failing to persuade them that they closed against consensus); this, however, seems to be a back-door method of attempting to circumvent consensus at AfD. Deor (talk) 13:13, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Don't template the regulars
Please don't use a new-user warning template on an experienced user as you did here with the user Roux. Telling someone "Welcome to Wikipedia!" and suggesting they "take a look at the welcome page" is almost certainly going to turn a bad situation worse, particularly when you're involved. Fran Rogers❇ 04:57, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the coordinator academy course and in the responsibilities section on the coordinator page.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:52, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Get well soon!
Hope you are doing better ! PCJain (talk) 07:09, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you, but unfortunately I am about the same. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 16:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
I hope everything works out well for you Nobody. Take care. :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 07:23, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 March 2010
- Reference desk: Wikipedia Reference Desk quality analyzed
- News and notes: Usability, 15M articles, Vandalism research award, and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Severe Weather
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)
| |||
March, as you know, is an election month for our project, when we pick the coordinators for the next six months. We are seeking motivated individuals willing to devote some of their time and energy to the project so it continues to grow and prosper. Also, I am making a personal appeal to each of you, the members of this project, to come out and vote for the candidates that run. These users will be responsible for managing the assessment process, answering questions, and making sure that the project's other needs are met. We have approximately 1,000 users who identify as being a part of our project, yet on average only about one-tenth of that number participate in elections. Moreover, as we typically hold referendums on major issues affecting the project along with these election, those who do not vote miss the opportunity to give their opinion on matters affecting the project as a whole. Remember, one vote always makes a difference. For the coordinators, TomStar81 (Talk) 23:47, 6 February 2010 (UTC) |
New featured articles:
New featured lists: New featured pictures: New A-Class articles: | ||
| |||
| |||
| |||
Across Wikipedia, guidelines have been set up so that editors can vet sources for themselves. Links to some of these and a guide for checking if a source is reliable can be found in an excellent Signpost dispatch written by Ealdgyth (talk · contribs). However, for the majority of military history-related topics, we strive for more than just a basic reliable source. Specifically, we aim for peer-reviewed articles and books over, for example, most websites.[N 1] Contemporary news articles or accounts can and should be mixed in (if possible) to give a picture of the general view point of the time—were they calm, afraid, unsure of what was going on? Another major tenet is neutrality. If an editor rewrote the article Dieppe Raid using only the official Canadian history,[N 2] we would have a problem; while it does contain a thorough and in-depth overview, a point-of-view can still be read. For one, it gives an undue amount of focus to Canada's input in the planning of the landing, and it would probably give an undue focus to their troops if a majority of the landing forces hadn't been Canadian. Granted, this is a book written to document that country's role in the Second World War, so you would hope it focuses on them, but this same reason makes it unusable as the primary basis for an article. In this case, you would like to utilize a few recent, peer-reviewed books and journals, the official British, Canadian and German histories, possibly a few books written by historians from the aforementioned countries, and newspapers from that time period.[N 3] Obviously this is ideal, but you need to represent all three sides in this (the United States would be a fourth, but they played only a minor role in the planning and invading). This neutrality aspect applies especially for battles and to a lesser degree biographies, but it can be utilized in virtually every article in our scope. For example, it could be beneficial to obtain Japanese accounts of B-29 Superfortress bombing raids or non-Puerto Rican peer-reviewed sources for that insular area's role in the Second World War. —Ed (talk • majestic titan)
| |||
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. | |||
_in_camouflage_coat,_1918_edit.jpg){kind=link}
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:30, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Video game magazine query
Sabre mentioned that you may be able to help with my query at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Does anyone have EGM November 1991?. If you get a chance, please look at that discussion. Thanks! Anomie⚔ 13:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
The article List of characters in Tron has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Page is primarily about characters in Kingdom Hearts, not the franchise. No establishment of notability. Mostly fancruft and Original Research.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SpigotMap 14:49, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
- How about a compromise of the Kingdom Hearts text in this article. Perhaps cut it back to a single paragraph at the bottom of the article as it was when you originally split the article from the main article. As it stands now, the article should be "List of Tron Characters in Kingdom Hearts" and not an article on the characters of the Tron franchise. Tell me your thoughts. Thanks! SpigotMap 18:33, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hello! I think a good way of going about it is to expand it, revise it, to be about the franchise in a whole, particularly considering the upcoming sequel. I'll look at some sources for a general revision, which I will start today. As a quick note though, I have been in and out of doctor's offices and hospitals the past week and will go to yet another on Thursday, so please allow me a couple weeks or so to work on this when I have some free moments. Thanks and have a pleasant evening! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 21:24, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 March 2010
- News and notes: Financial statements, discussions, milestones
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Java
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Discussion of Kmweber's editing restriction
Since you commented in the sub-thread WP:ANI#Specific question growing out of User:Kmweber's recent edits to an AfD page and his subsequent block and unblock, i wish to draw your attention to WP:ANI#Proposed modification of restriction of Kmweber where I have proposed that his restriction be modified as discussed the the "specific question" sub thread. Your views would be welcome. DES (talk) 15:35, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
Do you really want to see an ArbCom case about yourself?
I recently asked you not to do this sort of thing. Please stop it. You can ask for userfication or take an AfD closure you don't like to DRV, but this is not acceptable. Your tactic of going into hiding will not work with ArbCom. Deor (talk) 17:40, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
- No and please do not leave any more bogus messages on my page as I am not likely to read or respond to them per WP:DENY as I do not humor those who actually make fun of other users' usernames. Per Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Instructions: "Before listing a review request: discuss the matter with the deleting administrator and try to resolve it with him or her first. If you and the admin cannot work out a satisfactory solution, only then should you bring the matter before Deletion review." I am therefore not going to just start deletion reviews without discussing with admins first per the actual instructions on the Deletion review page. What is great about this particular example is that the admin responded politely, fairly, and maturely to my request and granted it. We had a civil discussion and the project is none the worse as a result. That is exactly how these discussions are supposed to go and how they go when two reasonable people interact. No need to play games with a deletion review, nor userfication. A fair request for a resasonable compromise is politely made and a reasonable admin offers an acceptable solution. Just as we are instructed and encourage to do. Please do not invent fake problems or order other users to not actually follow the guidelines provided. I am not interested in hearing from you until/unless you offer a formal and sincere apology for various slights. If not, then do not post on my talk page ever again as it will most likely not even be read. I do not know why you still stalk my edits, especially as I do not concern myself with your edits, but instead I encourage you to help improve articles rather than badger people over good faith and constructive editing. No further posts on my talk page are welcome from your other than an apology. If that is not forthcoming then it has to be good bye between us. If you persist, you will just demonstrate to neutral observers that you are indeed hounding me. --A NobodyMy talk 18:13, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
March 2010
Please do not attack other editors, as you did here: Talk:List of Resident Evil characters#Rebecca Chambers merge. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Explodicle (T/C) 23:09, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
- What exactly did he state which you consider a personal attack? Was it the bit about him using common sense, as one should, instead of mindlessly following the suggested guidelines no one takes seriously? Dream Focus 05:28, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- These are the two diffs in question, you can read more about it on my talk page. Invoking WP:COMMON is sometimes taken as insulting but I don't think that was his intent - it seemed like common sense to me too.
- Then again, so did these warnings. :-P --Explodicle (T/C) 16:27, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
Arbcom notice
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#A Nobody and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Talkback
Message added 17:18, 14 March 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
CivilityAward
|
Civility Award | |
| Wishing you all the best with your offline life. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 21:21, 14 March 2010 (UTC) |
I'll second that! Thanks for the much-needed kindness and civility you brought to Wikipedia. Hope to see you here again someday, if your health and circumstances allow. Best wishes.--JayJasper (talk) 16:05, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Retirement
It appears that you're slowing moving into retirement for various reasons. Best of luck whatever you decide.--~TPW 13:07, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
:O
noooooooooooooo
Well, I hope you have fun in real life. you've obviously helped a lot of people on here, and won't be forgotten. -eSTeMSHORN (T/C) 10:47, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
All the best
We never talked, but I did notice your presence and your efforts. So when I incidentially and regretfully learned that you have retired, I thought I should let you know, that you will be missed. Great loss for wikipedia. Thanks for the civility, you brought to wikipedia. I wish you all the best in whatever you may pursue. You are a good person and don't ever change. Take care. Fragma08 (talk) 10:23, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 March 2010
- News and notes: A Wikiversity controversy, Wikimedian-in-Residence, image donation, editing contest, WMF jobs
- Dispatches: GA Sweeps end
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Ireland
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Coordinator elections have opened!
Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:18, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Arbitration motion regarding Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/A Nobody
Per a motion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case:
This case is accepted, but will not be opened unless and until A Nobody (talk · contribs) returns to Wikipedia. If A Nobody does so under any account or I.P., he/she is required to notify the Committee.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, ~ Amory (u • t • c) 23:22, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Notified via email as well ~ Amory (u • t • c) 23:48, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 March 2010
- Wikipedia-Books: Wikipedia-Books: Proposed deletion process extended, cleanup efforts
- News and notes: Explicit image featured on Wikipedia's main page
- WikiProject report: Percy Jackson Task Force
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The Wikipedia Signpost: 29 March 2010
- Sister projects: A handful of happenings
- WikiProject report: The WikiProject Bulletin: news roundup and WikiProject Chicago feature
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Have you notified ArbCom of your return?
See the motion... your next edit ought to be acknowledging you've returned and are prepared to proceed with the case. As a convenience, I did mention your return Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard#returned? here. Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 22:27, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
- dude, I hope you are ready for the arbcom. Your comments were not that needed, but thanks. :/ Okip 22:29, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
- Welcome back from your Wikibreak/retirement. I agree with Lar that your very next edit to Wikipedia needs to be dealing with the ArbCom case--once that's kicked off, of course, then you're free to go about the rest your business here. If you take any other action, I would expect that an administrator will block you for failing to comply with that expectation. Welcome back to just about where you left off. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 03:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
- Agreed with Jclemens - you will probably be blocked anyway if you ignore ArbCom, perhaps indefinitely. It's best to just proceed with the case. BOZ (talk) 05:15, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hmm, which User:SirFozzie did just a few minutes ago. BOZ (talk) 05:16, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 April 2010
- News and notes: New board member, rights elections, April 1st activities, videos
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Baseball and news roundup
- Features and admins: This week in approvals
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News