User talk:DHeyward/Archive 23

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

2017 Military Historian of the Year and Newcomer of the Year nominations and voting

As we approach the end of the year, the Military History project is looking to recognise editors who have made a real difference. Each year we do this by bestowing two awards: the Military Historian of the Year and the Military History Newcomer of the Year. The co-ordinators invite all project members to get involved by nominating any editor they feel merits recognition for their contributions to the project. Nominations for both awards are open between 00:01 on 2 December 2017 and 23:59 on 15 December 2017. After this, a 14-day voting period will follow commencing at 00:01 on 16 December 2017. Nominations and voting will take place on the main project talkpage: here and here. Thank you for your time. For the co-ordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

AE

[1]

Nomination of Kris Paronto for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kris Paronto is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kris Paronto until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. – Sabbatino (talk) 18:28, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

AE filing

I've filed this request at AE. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:01, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

I withdrew this. Sorry if you felt personally attacked: that was not my intent. I thought I had been clear in my wording, and in my mind a person involved in the Benghazi scandal is a related topic. If that wasn't clear to others, then I worded it poorly and that mistake is on me. I have no ill will towards you, and despite what our interactions have been, I honestly hate AE and don't at all want to be the young admin who is a holy terror. My sincere apologies for any stress this caused you. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:58, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! No worries. Wikipedia is not stressful. --DHeyward (talk) 02:12, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Comment at WT:AE

Please do not refer to MShabazz as "shaby" or other derivatives going forward. He has noted his distaste for it on his user talk page. Thank you. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 18:56, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Your revert

I'm not sure what you intended by that; but please do not refactor other users' comments, even if you consider it an improvement. If you are unsure as to the nature of the comment, please ask on the editor's talk page. Thank you. >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 09:27, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Then I will remove my comment. Don't restore my comment. I will not be a party to obvious trolling. Go away. --DHeyward (talk) 09:39, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

User group for Military Historians

Greetings,

"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:29, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

TBAN lifted

I've lifted your TBAN. As I stated at ARCA, I try only to act with consensus, and there was one at AE to impose the ban, but there is also one forming at the committee to lift it. The committee is of the view that you should be extended good faith, and I respect their judgement. Despite what you might think, I have no agenda or vendetta against you, and am only trying to do my best to help Wikipedia. We have left a very poor impression on each other, which is unfortunate. I wish our first coming into contact would have been under better circumstances, and I apologize to you for anything I might have done that was wrong. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:10, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

I also went ahead and closed the AE that had been filed with no action. All the best, TonyBallioni (talk) 16:15, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Smart move. I sincerely look forward to more human-thinking rather than process-wonkery, this is a good step in the right direction. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:22, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

​Like I said, I only try to act with consensus, and I appreciate the review process and feel very strongly about admin accountability: I was only acting in what I thought was Wikipedia's best interest, but it reached the point in that appeal that the best interest of the encyclopedia was for the process to be ended because it was causing more disruption than it could possibly prevent. When that happens, no matter how right I might have felt I was, there is no point in standing on pride or principle. We're here to build an encyclopedia, not build our egos. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:34, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, we're building an encyclopedia, and that needs content builders, and we're all (mostly) humans behind the user names, let's try to move forward assuring that we apply common sense to these scenarios, rather than just adhere to the letter of the law. After all, we're volunteers, not employees. Why do some insist on treating us like WMF are doing us a favour letting us edit? It should be all tipped in favour of content contributors, the project needs articles, not police or lawyers. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:42, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Support this sentiment. Glad to see the ban lifted. Mr Ernie (talk) 17:56, 12 January 2018 (UTC)