User talk:Caulde/Archive/25
Tracy McGrady
Furthermore, I've left a tab at WP:ANI. Basketball110 My story/Tell me yours 16:32, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Rollback
Thanks for granting me rollback. I promise to try and use it wisely. Harland1 (t/c) 05:26, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Ping. -- Avi (talk) 16:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- Replied. Rudget 16:11, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
RfB
I didn't realize the high standard of longevity that most editors hold for RfB candidates..yikes. I find time to be important, but irrelevant after a 3 month period of trustworthy practices. Wisdom89 (T / C) 19:38, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I've gained a new power. I can see the future :) Rudget 20:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- Good try, I know some people want to see a year as admin, I'm probably closer to the 6 month range. That being said, I've watched your work and think you are going to make a great crat! MBisanz talk 20:06, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- How did I not even see this until after it was closed? Yikes Rudge! I thought you were about to go on an extended on agani/off again because of your exams? Are you back? (and please note, I'm a bit of a sucker for the Rudge, and would've likely supported...:-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I was, then I wasn't... you know what its like. :) Rudget 20:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I would have supported.... but I'm not sure this was wise. I mean... surely you knew this had no chance? I'm not saying that you aren't suitable, but there is no way the community would ever give an 85-90% backing of an admin of three months... but please, do try again sometime; uou have my support for next time. =] -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 23:36, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I was, then I wasn't... you know what its like. :) Rudget 20:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- How did I not even see this until after it was closed? Yikes Rudge! I thought you were about to go on an extended on agani/off again because of your exams? Are you back? (and please note, I'm a bit of a sucker for the Rudge, and would've likely supported...:-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- Good try, I know some people want to see a year as admin, I'm probably closer to the 6 month range. That being said, I've watched your work and think you are going to make a great crat! MBisanz talk 20:06, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
(<-)There is always {{Rfb-notice}} -- Avi (talk) 15:28, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- zOMG! Actively encouraging WP:CANVASSing. Grounds for immediate de-sysop. :) Rudget (Help?) 15:29, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Uhm, Ruget, my friend, may I quote WP:RFA?
While canvassing for support is frowned upon (to the extent that canvassing editors have had their RfBs fail), some users find it helpful to place {{Rfb-notice}} on their userpages. Such declarations are most definitely allowed.
And people complained I did not know enough about RfA's 
-- Avi (talk) 15:32, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes, but 19 months doesn't always cut it either :) -- Avi (talk) 15:49, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Harriet Tubman once again
Hello there. You said in March that if Harriet Tubman gets another wave of vandalism that I should contact you and you'd look into indefinite semi-protection. Well, in the one day it's been unprotected, it's been vandalized five times by four different IPs. Anything you can do to keep us from having to constantly repeat the cycle of applying for semi-protection would be greatly appreciated. – Scartol • Tok 00:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Done Rudget 14:53, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
There ya' go, everything done. Qst (talk) 16:23, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
NAC
Hey man. I actually had no idea on the guidelines over non-admin closure (in as much as I didn't realise there were, I probably should have looked more for it at the time), but since the addition of a CSD is permitted I presumed that would be the end of the discussion. This won't happen again - I tend to make a mistake once and not do it again. Also, on a lighter note, please do call me Chris. :) Regards, asenine t/c\r (fc: f2abr04) 20:23, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
It needs closing soon, but apparently both sides are divided on the issue of the length of the blurb in the article and biography section. Would you promote or not promote this portal? (Note: Personally, I would not promote it. We might need to get Dihydrogen monoxide to come and comment because it's an interpretation of the criteria and act as a tie-breaker if you support the promotion) OhanaUnitedTalk page 20:57, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- I'm opposing that one (though I had already done so...). Rudget; your close, it seems. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, and User:Rudget/help, stolen from somewhere...? ;) dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:29, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Lady Aleena's RfA
|
Rudget...Thank you for participating in my nomination for adminship. Your comments have shown me those areas in which I need improve my understanding. I hope that my future endevors on Wikipedia will lead to an even greater understanding of it. If you wish to further discuss the nomination, please use its talk page. Stop by my talk page anytime, even if it is just to say hello. Have a wonderful day! - LA @ 05:03, 30 April 2008 (UTC) |
Greetings - thanks for the support on this lists FLC. Could you add your resolved comments in to a {{resolved comments}} box for neatness? I'm willing to do it if you'd like me too. Qst (talk) 17:29, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Badgering
New Project
Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.
If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 06:54, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Barn Star
|
The Special Barnstar | |
| Thanks for all of the great edits Mr.whiskers (talk) 11:25, 3 May 2008 (UTC) |
Rollback
Thanks for granting the rollback. As stated in my request will be on trial and open to revoke if any of the Administrators believe that I am using it incorrectly. Many thanks once again hope to be able to contribute to the wikipedia without the laborious task of having to use the undo feature. Christopher140691 (talk) 14:09, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Sceptre
You're right. While personally think that my comments serve a constructive purpose, I admit that they don't serve a purpose in building an encyclopedia, so if I feel the urge to make any more "Sceptre" comments I'll take it to Wikipedia Review or somewhere else outside of Wikipedia. I've said all that needs to be said anyway, and my comments aren't going to force him to make any changes about the way he spends his time, so continuing to make such comments would just be basically harassment.--Urban Rose 18:25, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
You've got an email. Malinaccier (talk) 22:05, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the semi-protection of my userpage. Actually, I was only asking for my userpage, not my user talk page. Just thought that I would mention that to clear it up. Cheers, Razorflame 14:03, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Adminship
I've had three previous ones (under the Davnel03 username, before I changed it to D.M.N.):
- Davnel03, 10 March 2007 - withdrawn by admin ReyBrujo at (0/12/0)
- Davnel03, 17 August 2007 - withdrawn per WP:SNOW by ST47 at (2/18/0)
- Davnel03, 10 December 2007 - withdrawn by candidate at (1/9/0)
The reason why the 2nd and 3rd failed was because of a block indef April last year (note, ignore 15th December, 2007 block on that block log, that was from banned user Cowboycaleb1. I changed usernames at the end of November, and my blocklog since is clean with no blocks. If you did think I could pass RFA, you may want to discuss it with Spartaz first. Thanks, D.M.N. (talk) 18:19, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
My RfA
Thank you for the meaningful words. I would like some advice. When do you suggest I try again, if ever? Did I screw up my chances with that socking? Basketball110 My story/Tell me yours 17:18, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Mary Seacole
Hi Rudget,
I've collated some journal articles into a 50-page Word file which I could e-mail to you if you want them:
The Legacy of Mary Seacole: It Wasn't until the Now Famous Nurse Garnered the Most Votes in a Poll to Discover the Top Black Briton That Mary Seacole Was Well Known. Yet, as Clayton Goodwin Reports, in Caribbean and African Heritage Communities, She Has Long Been Highly Revered and Venerated. Contributors: Clayton Goodwin - author. Magazine Title: New African. Issue: 437. Publication Date: February 2005. Page Number: 54+.
Fancies of Exclusive Possession: Validation and Dissociation in Mary Seacole's England and Caribbean. Contributors: Bernard Mckenna - author. Journal Title: Philological Quarterly. Volume: 76. Issue: 2. Publication Year: 1997. Page Number: 219+.
A Gallant Heart to the Empire. Autoethnography and Imperial Identity in Mary Seacole's Wonderful Adventures. Contributors: Sara Salih - author. Journal Title: Philological Quarterly. Volume: 83. Issue: 2. Publication Year: 2004. Page Number: 171+.
The Invitation That Never Came: Mary Seacole after the Crimea Helen Rappaport on Queen Victoria, Florence Nightingale and the Post-Crimean War Reputation of the Woman Recently Voted 'Greatest Black Briton': Mary Seacole. Contributors: Helen Rappaport - author. Magazine Title: History Today. Volume: 55. Issue: 2. Publication Date: February 2005. Page Number: 9+.
The Legacy of Mary Seacole: It Wasn't until the Now Famous Nurse Garnered the Most Votes in a Poll to Discover the Top Black Briton That Mary Seacole Was Well Known. Yet, as Clayton Goodwin Reports, in Caribbean and African Heritage Communities, She Has Long Been Highly Revered and Venerated. Contributors: Clayton Goodwin - author. Magazine Title: New African. Issue: 437. Publication Date: February 2005. Page Number: 54+.
Honouring Seacole. Contributors: Marika Sherwood - author, Glenn A. Christodoulou - author, Helen Rappaport - author. Magazine Title: History Today. Volume: 55. Issue: 3. Publication Date: March 2005. Page Number: 62.
Graham GrahamColmTalk 20:44, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi again Rudget, I can't/don't know how to send an attachment via Wiki email. I think you have to email me first? Graham. GrahamColmTalk 18:36, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rudget, I've sent these to your google email. Graham. GrahamColmTalk 14:42, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Probation
Hello Rudget. I would like to once again ask you to evaluate a user's participation in the Kosovo topic, and decide whether a temporary ban per the Arbcom probation would be in order for him. The user in question is User:Beamathan. He's been very active in discussions regarding Kosovo, sometimes productively, but lately not so much really. His incivility towards other users has been growing steadily and for weeks now he's behaving very bossily and many of his comments on this topic seem to display contempt, arrogance, or just plain incivility [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] (these diffs I dug up from the past few days and should be considered a mere sample). Beamathan's unsatisfactory record also includes several attempts to: alienate from the discussions users he doesn't agree with, either individually or an entire group (he even created once a talk section calling on "Kosovo experts" to improve the article, as if such call would actually summon Kosovo experts, and as if all the users already participating in the discussions counted for naught); play boss by telling users to work here or there [7]; and try to avert editing restrictions by associating himself with a non-existent circle of influences [8]. I have contacted this user several times whenever I identified disruption (latest here and here), but now the user views me as someone who's just picking on him. Or worse. But the fact is, Beamathan is not being beneficial for the Kosovo topic, and cannot be beneficial unless he behaves according to the required spirit of polite and constructive cooperation, something he's proven unable to. I am thus here to recommend a temporary topic ban, but will once again trust your judgment. Regards, Húsönd 02:05, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you Rudget. Hopefully Beamathan shall refrain from his latest behavior once the ban is lifted. Best regards, Húsönd 16:37, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
I should have known. I've contributed to that article more than most, following NPOV and Consensus the whole way. But because Husond has a personal problem with me, I get blocked? That's how it works around here? That's pretty disgusting. Beam 17:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
In my considered opinion, it is Husond who is trolling the Kosovo topic, and Beamathan, while meaning well, is merely naively taking Husond's bait. Husond's behaviour on Talk:Kosovo has been pure and blatant WP:POINT, while Beam has been making a bona fide effort to tackle the problems involved, although not always too diligently. I am not sure if you have actually reviewed the diffs Husond claims display "contempt, arrogance, or just plain incivility", but apart from a certain hysterical flavour, I find nothing wrong with them. They are exasperated reactions to exasperating behaviour. Review them in context. Seeing that this is a reaction to an obvious provocation, I would suggest you extend your topic ban to Husond as well. I am not sure why Husond comes to you directly for user conduct complaints, and since I consider your "resolution" in evident bad judgement, I find this suspicious. If you refuse to chastise Husond on equal terms with Beam, I would ask you to post the case on WP:AN for wider review. dab (𒁳) 17:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
- PS, I just note that Husond is an administrator. This makes the whole issue more poignant. Beamathan has next to no wiki experience compared to Husond, and Husond is simply playing his superior knowledge of the system to lure Beam into getting banned. That is despicable. In my opinion, the topic ban for blatant bad faith and WP:POINT on Husond should be rather longer than Beamathan's in the spirit of WP:BITE. dab (𒁳) 17:45, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Beamathan's reaction to the ban is a clear demonstration of the unrepentant and reprehensible behavior that led to it. I was expecting this user to turn to user Dbachmann, who has also been displaying a rather unorthodox and confrontational behavior when it comes to this topic (which I believe started back here). Quite a few times, Dbachmann has questioned my user conduct and ability to be an administrator simply for disagreeing with him. So I was thus expecting him to drop by and use my request as an opportunity to request a topic ban for me as well. Not that I'm any worried about it, my conduct is transparent and easy to be verified. I would accept a topic ban with no grudges whatsoever if an uninvolved administrator happened to find my conduct inadequate. Regards, Húsönd 22:49, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Excuse me? How the heck is that reprehensible? It's the truth. And you just keep insulting me, eventually people will notice. I have NEVER acted against consensus and always upheld NPOV. You continue to try to make me look like something I'm not. And Dab is right, you took advantage of your experience with Wikipedia to try to get me banned. You continue to insult me to try to get a reaction out of me. So that you can run and take that reaction out of context and get me banned. That's so strange that I can't believe you still are allowed to administrate.
And your dedication to getting me banned is really the most reprehensible act that's related to this. If you have a personal problem with me and my neutrality, that's fine. Just avoid me. Don't take things I say out of context. Don't try to goad me into responding! Which is exactly what you did.
And you paint Dab as questioning you just because you disagree with him? That's a lie! How can you just straight out lie, again and again? It's sickening. I pray and hope that people see through your act. Beam 00:40, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
- And yet another evidence of why the ban was necessary. Beam, you weren't banned for NPOV or going against consensus, you were banned for persistent trolling and incivility, which are clear in your angry outburst above. This behavior is simply not allowed on Wikipedia, and it's particularly/strictly controlled in articles under probation. You don't seem to understand and instead have decided to attack me and drop strange accusations. I don't think that'll help your case, on the contrary. Húsönd 01:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
What are you talking about? How is that trolling? That's not an angry outburst Husond, that's the truth. You go all these lengths to get me banned when you're the one who is acting incorrectly. And you continue to say that I'm trolling! That's incredible. I haven't attacked you, how can you say I attack you? You don't seem to understand it at all. Just because I point out your lies and falsities doesn't make it trolling Husond. Just because I point out your manipulation, doesn't make it an attack. I think now it will be apparent to others as well. Perhaps the response you have just made will result in me being unblocked. Thank you for proving my case for me. Beam 02:16, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Your Recent Administrator Incident thing
I appreciate you asking for a second opinion, however I still refute that I have EVER trolled on the Kosovo article. Not once! I have done nothing but strive for NPOV and Consensus. And this strive for NPOV and Consensus led to Husond's dislike of me. I didn't think it would lead him to soliciting my banishment, but apparently it did. For the record, I have no problem with Husond other than his apparent dislike of me. Ok I guess that IS a problem, but stil... anyway I'd like to say again that I have never trolled the Kosovo page/article and in fact take the NPOV and Consensus of that article very seriously. This is the last word you'll hear from me regarding the issue as I see you have many, many things to do and my banishment isn't, and shouldn't be, a priority. Thanks for reading. Beam 19:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Lady Aleena's future
|
Rudget...Several people have expressed an interest in my next probable nomination for adminship. Messaging people when it happens would look a lot like canvassing, so I would prefer not doing that. If you are interested in it, you could add this to your watchlist. If it is created, you will know, maybe even before I do depending on how often you check your watchlist. If you wish to gush prior to it being officially up, have fun, but only when it happens please. I am in no particular rush. Have a very nice day! :) - LA @ 10:00, 6 May 2008 (UTC) |
Do you know about checkuser rules?
Hello Rudget. Recently a checkuser result has come up with yet another batch of socks relating to a previous indef-blocked editor, Jvolkblum, one that you have done some work on. This raises the question of when a sockpuppetteer has become notorious enough that admins can block his IP address directly? I read somewhere that the confidentiality of IPs expired at some point, after enough problems. Do you know when that point is reached? I notice a faint hint in a March 30 comment by Thatcher about what the IP might be, and I wonder if we are allowed to use that information. Please delete this question if it is inappropriate. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 21:15, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
- I don't understand; are you asking me for guidance with respect to CU or questioning an action? Rudget (Help?) 15:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
- I wrote to you since you seem to know about Jvolkblum's case. The question is what further admin action is reasonable to take, given that new socks are being created all the time. (Two of them tried to reason with me on my Talk page). Let's assume that a number of the socks blocked so far all used the same IP. It might be logical to block the underlying IP. I gather that confidentiality may prevent the underlying IP from being revealed, but I understand that this technicality does run out at some point. I'm asking if you think that the disruption due to the Jvolkblum socks has gone far enough that the rules at Wikipedia:CheckUser#IP_information_disclosure now apply, which eventually allow the underlying IP to be revealed. EdJohnston (talk) 17:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
- You're right, this is what his fourth (fifth?) sock case now. Ask Thatcher for more information regarding this, or just ask him to block it. Rudget (Help?) 15:25, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply. I'm not well-informed on the sockpuppet rules, and am trying to do the right thing. EdJohnston (talk) 20:14, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- You're right, this is what his fourth (fifth?) sock case now. Ask Thatcher for more information regarding this, or just ask him to block it. Rudget (Help?) 15:25, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- I wrote to you since you seem to know about Jvolkblum's case. The question is what further admin action is reasonable to take, given that new socks are being created all the time. (Two of them tried to reason with me on my Talk page). Let's assume that a number of the socks blocked so far all used the same IP. It might be logical to block the underlying IP. I gather that confidentiality may prevent the underlying IP from being revealed, but I understand that this technicality does run out at some point. I'm asking if you think that the disruption due to the Jvolkblum socks has gone far enough that the rules at Wikipedia:CheckUser#IP_information_disclosure now apply, which eventually allow the underlying IP to be revealed. EdJohnston (talk) 17:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
What's the plan with ADCO?
I am not asking because I am impatient about anything, I am asking because I genuinely have no idea. What is up next with ADCO? asenine say what? 17:42, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
RE: Coppertwig RfA
Apologies, didn't mean to cause any offence. It was simply my opinion on the matter. Anyway, it's been striked and replaced. Regards, CycloneNimrodTalk? 17:47, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
5/8 DYK
|
On 8 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dog type, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Bedford 19:02, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
German
I've noticed your contribs on the Rfa pages on German! Is it something that's allowed? You ought to add the 'German-speaking ubx' to your ubx section...your German must be quite good! Viele Grüße, = ) --Cameron (t|p|c) 20:56, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
My Topic Ban
You never answered me in the Administrative page section. What's up with that? You asked for outside opinions. Both Dab and BalkansFever said that I have never disrupted the Kosovo page, and Dab even confirmed Husond's personal bias against me, and his history of un-admin like behavior at the Kosovo article.
Yet I'm still banned. What's going on? Beam 00:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
BalkansFever Talk Page
Uh, me and BalkansFever are friends, that was a joke referring to his recent ANI thing. He was accused of refusing to use English. I defended him, if you didn't notice, on the ANI thing. lol that posting on his talk page was a joke! Ask him yourself.
Why do things I say get twisted around? Go ask him about it! Geez. Beam 15:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
I provided the link on my talk page but here it is again: here. Honestly, as I said on my talk page, I'm no bad guy. I honestly contribute in the manner of NPOV and Consensus. Always. Anyway, I appreciate your reconsiderations. Beam 15:30, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, it was a joke, and I don't see how that has anything to do with the topic ban anyway, since it's a different issue altogether. But if this has already been settled, whatever. BalkanFever 02:59, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Please consider taking the AGF Challenge
I would like to invite you to consider taking part in the AGF Challenge which has been proposed for use in the RfA process [9] by User: Kim Bruning. You can answer in multiple choice format, or using essay answers, or anonymously. You can of course skip any parts of the Challenge you find objectionable or inadvisable.--Filll (talk) 17:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks!
—Ashanda (talk) has given you a WikiCake! WikiCakes promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cake, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!
Spread the tastiness of cakes by adding {{subst:GiveCake}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Thanks for trusting me with the user rights upgrade! —Ashanda (talk) 16:05, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Duplicate Image:Jubilee Tower 6331.jpg
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Jubilee Tower 6331.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Jubilee Tower 6331.jpg is a duplicate of an already existing article, category or image.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Jubilee Tower 6331.jpg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 01:30, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
The COOKIE MONSTER ate the cow
Fattyjwoods Push my button has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hi, just to make sure you’re not too hungry, I gave you a cookie! I would’ve given you milk – but the cow just died and I tried to milk the bull but it kicked me in the face. *sob*. Anyway, enjoy the cookie!! Fattyjwoods Push my button 05:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Re. Beamathan
Hello Rudget and thank you for asking my opinion on an eventual reduction of this user's ban. Personally, I wouldn't reduce it. Comparing Beamathan with Kosova2008, another recently banned user per the Arbcom probation: Kosova2008 after being banned understood and acknowledged what was wrong with his behavior, justified it with the fact that he was a new editor, and vowed to behave differently in the future. This kind of reaction merits a ban reduction; Whereas Beamathan after being banned has failed to acknowledge his negative behavior as the reason of his ban, instead claiming to be victim of a vendetta, launching absurd accusations against me, and resorting to trolling and incivility which were the very reasons for his ban. Beamathan's reaction to the ban both at ANI and your talk page made it clear that this user will not learn from his mistakes and will instead stand by them with a vast array of far-fetched excuses such as WP:COOL, WP:BITE, and the quite worrisome support provided by admin dab. I should also add that I once blocked Beamathan for persistent incivility, but later decided to lift the block as I believed this user would change his behavior. I was obviously wrong as Beamathan still does not understand how to communicate with other users in a peaceful manner. Likewise, reducing this ban could send the wrong message. The ban was adequate and should in my opinion last the entire sanctioned period. In fact, I doubt that Beamathan's behavior will change after the ban is lifted, and further/longer bans could follow. Anyway the ban is entirely within your discretion, I would have no problem whatsoever if you decide to reduce it. Best regards, Húsönd 21:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
I can't even believe I just read that. Rudget, Kosova2008 is a blatant POV pusher. I'm not condemning K2k8, there's nothing wrong with patriotism. But to compare me with him is a huge lie. It is truly pushing any shred of WP:AGF I had left regarding Husond.
In fact Rudget, this whole post by Husond is just further evidence of his detailed manipulation to further his vendetta against me. If any neutral editor familiar with the Kosovo article read this they would tell you the same thing. It's almost laughable. I'm shocked that he has taken it this far.
I didn't before, but now I stress that you investigate further and ban Husond for going against the whole spirit of Wikipedia. I'm not joking, that's pretty bad.Husond says "worrisome support by admin dab", can't you see that's even more proof of this being really outlandish behavior on Husond's part? This is really bad Rudget. After everything I've explained to you, as well as Dab has explained, and the example on my talk page I hope you can see through his charade. Beam 05:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank you Rudget, I will most certainly report any further incivility by Beamathan, although I find his latest accusations against me more amusing than offensive. I also read your comments at his talk page. I should reiterate that I don't view Beamathan as an unproductive user, I called for his ban merely for his persistently rude and inadequate interaction with other users. Which is something he clearly hasn't grasped. I will keep monitoring him and report any instances of incivility/trolling, which I expect might occur soon. If they don't occur, then that would be quite a relief. Regards, Húsönd 14:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Just to say hai
Tinucherian has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend or a new friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Have a nice day ! -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 09:36, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Rfb participation thanks
Hello, Rudget.
I wanted to personally thank you for taking part in the project-wide discussions regarding my candidacy for bureaucratship. After bureaucratic discussion, the bureaucrats decided that there was sufficient significant and varied opposition to my candidacy, and thus no consensus to promote. Although personally disappointed, I both understand and respect their decision, especially in light of historical conservatism the project has had when selecting its bureaucrats. I also very much appreciate the time you took to craft your support rationale, and I would be honored (and look forward) to collaborating with you on more RfA candidates. -- Avi (talk) 16:27, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
RE: Congrats
Hm... Better, or worse? =P weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 17:56, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello there!
Hello there Rudget! I hope all is well,
Our paths haven't crossed for a while it seems, but thought I'd update you on a rather large leap and bound I'm undertaking. I've initiated a discussion at User:Pedro/Mentoring#User:Jza84 in honour of a rather important discussion we had a few months back. I hope it's the kind of step you were hoping to see one day. Hope everything's going good with you. Regards, --Jza84 | Talk 20:38, 13 May 2008 (UTC)