 | This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
Signpost updated for July 7, 2008.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 28 | 7 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:13, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Recall
Can you turn my recall links blue? (undelete). Very best, NonvocalScream (talk) 19:14, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Reply to help
I don't need the help. I've got my monobook in place. It works fine.
- I am helping a friend. How do I tell him how to create a monobook. If possible please write me back on my talk page. Thanks and Happy Editing Tm93 (TALK) 02:41, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- Lol. That's the problem. Whoever created MY monobook, created it then gave me the link without telling me how he created it. By the way, thank you for your help. If possible please write me back on my talk page. Thanks and Happy Editing Tm93 (TALK) 02:47, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. A little something special for you.
|
The Guidance Barnstar | |
| I award you this barnstar for helping me with the subject of a monobook. Tm93TALK |
Tm93TALK —Preceding undated comment was added at 03:02, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
User talk:Dreamweaverjack page
Please can you send a message to user PeeJay2K3 to tell him to stop reverting my usertalk page,as I have already finished the conversation with him on another page, and he keeps adding messages to my talk-page as he wishes to keep going-on about an old conversation which I considered to be finished as I had replied to his comment on his talk-page.
He now is trying to keep this conversation going when I consider it to be finished!, so please can you warn him about keeping reverting my user-talkpage with the same old messages over-and-over again.
The reason why I am removing his messages is because I consider them harassment, as he keeps pestering me about the same thing despite me telling him that I have read what he posted, and have accepted his point of view - even though I don't fully agree with him. Thanks - Dreamweaverjack (talk) 00:18, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Your abuse of administrative tools on the acc tool
Prodego,
I am writing to inform you of my displeasure of your use of the acc tool. You have just demoted me from an administrator on the tool for reasons pertaining to the unblock-en-l mailing list. You have also unsubscribed me from that mailing list. I am asking you to formally explain your actions. On the ACC tool we do not demote administrators for hypothetical reasons. Your log entry when demoting me was "Per discussion with unblock-en-l moderators, and anyone not trusted enough to join that list probably shouldn't be administrating this one, particularly if we combine the two in the future. Sorry." I was promoted to tool administrator by a developer, developers hold higher status on this tool than administrators. I am also writing as a courtesy to inform you that I am requesting withdrawal of your access to the tool untill your actions are explained and the WP:AN/I thread I am about to create.
Mww113 (Talk) (Review me!) (Sign!) 13:27, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
- That is simply a ridiculous request, Mww113. I'm sure that Prodego has their reasons for the actions, and rather than running to AN/I, you should have talked with them. - Rjd0060 (talk) 14:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
- Did not notice that you were a dev. I have been nothing but trustworthy with the tools, and another dev promoted me in the first place. I am sorry about the AN/I Thread (which has been closed). I ask that you repromote me on the grounds that ACC and UNBLOCK are not merged and I have done nothing to abuse the tools. Thank you. Mww113 (Talk) (Review me!) (Sign!) 15:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
- I prefer to keep off-wiki matters off-wiki and on-wiki matters on-wiki, so it would be great if you could contact me through IRC or email, and I would be happy to discuss this. I don't think it is appropriate to go to WP:AN/I for an off-wiki tool, I would understand asking another tool admin, but WP:AN/I is a bit unrelated. Prodego talk 17:19, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
OK
Although I do need to restore Newspaper first. Email me if you want to discuss further. NawlinWiki (talk) 04:07, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 14 and 21, 2008.
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 29 | 14 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| From the editor: Transparency | ||
| WikiWorld: "Goregrind" | Dispatches: Interview with botmaster Rick Block | |
| Features and admins | Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News | |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation | ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 30 | 21 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:05, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Re:Account creation tool
Yes. I was the one who requested that name for the acc tool. Hmrox (talk) 21:46, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Someone vandalized my user page. I don't know how you caught it but you did and you fixed it. Thanks. Readin (talk) 02:48, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Removal of questions from L'Aquatique's RfA
Regarding your removal of these questions, I agree that at least the first one was likely inappropriate; however, the second one seemed innocuous enough. I'm also not sure that the removal should have been done unilaterally, without any discussion. GlassCobra 05:03, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
- As I said, I agree that the questions asking for personal info are inappropriate, but the other ones, like asking for opinions on law enforcement agents becoming admins, strike me as decent. What in this user's edit history makes you assume that his questions are not intended positively? GlassCobra 05:13, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
RfB Thank You spam
.svg){kind=logo}
|
Thank you for participating in my RfB! I am very grateful for the confidence of the community shown at my RfB, which passed by a count of 154/7/2 (95.65%). I have read every word of the RfB and taken it all to heart. I truly appreciate everyone's input: supports, opposes, neutrals, and comments. Of course, I plan to conduct my cratship in service of the community. If you have any advice, questions, concerns, or need help, please let me know. Again, Thanks! — Rlevse • Talk • 08:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC) |
Re: Account creation
Not sure where I should do this... Yes, I did request the account. I may never use it, but I figured since I'm an admin now, I may as well sign up in case I get the inclination. Thanks, J.delanoygabsadds 19:45, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
thankspam
|
Thanks to everyone who participated in my RfA, regardless of their !vote. I have withdrawn the nomination as a failure at 19 supports, 45 opposes, and 9 neutral statements. As has been written and sung, you can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you get what you need — and what I need is to go back to working on our shared project. Not everyone has to be an admin; there is a role for each of us. After reflection, I feel I don't have the temperament to secure community consensus as an admin at any point, and I will not be applying again in the future — and hey, that's all right, 'cause I stay true to the philosophy that adminship is no big deal: I tried, I failed, and now I'll return to doing what I've always done. I have an extremely strong belief in the consensus process, and the consensus was clear. I will be devoting my energies to volunteering at MedCab and working up a complete series of articles on the short stories of Ernest Hemingway, among lord knows what else. Thanks again to everyone who spared the time to weigh in on this one. It was made in better faith than it probably seemed. Mr. IP 《Defender of Open Editing》 14:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC) |
Thanks for participating in my RfA, Prodego. In the end, I am disappointed that things didn't work out, but I should have been more open about my past accounts and experiences, and cannot blame anyone for opposing! Anyway, best of luck, and hope to work with ya positively in the future, Mr. IP 《Defender of Open Editing》 14:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
The Fundamental Elements of Southtown
hey, i merged the limited edition ep with The Fundamental Elements of Southtown, so theres no need to revert my edit —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.9.51.95 (talk) 00:32, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Memeo
I am confused as to why you restored Memeo. "To allow Ron to review the content"? You mean Ron Ritzman (talk · contribs) who tagged it for deletion? Why should he review the content again? --ZimZalaBim talk 04:07, 6 August 2008 (UTC)