Wikipedia

User talk:GamerPro64/Archive 8

< User talk:GamerPro64
Latest comment: 8 years ago by GamerPro64 in topic Discussion
Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 → Archive 15

Your RfA

Latest comment: 9 years ago22 comments10 people in discussion

Hi GamerPro64. I am sorry to report I have closed your RfA as "no consensus." I want to thank you for offering to help with the admin tasks, and I sincerely hope you will consider another try at some point in the future. Many admins (myself included) were not granted the tools when we first requested them. Whatever you decide to do, know that many editors appreciate the work you've done, and have been proud to say so publicly. If you have any questions, feel free to drop by my talk page. 28bytes (talk) 07:31, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

  • I would add that you have a lot of assets that add up to a good admin, just a couple of voids that need filling. The delete button comes with the admin tool kit, and a great many of us can't support unless someone has shown at least a basic understanding of the policies. The only way to do that is to rack up at least 100 or so CSD and AFD participations, with logging for CSD. I think DGG probably summed it up best, you just need enough experience we can see how well you understand the policy, and then get some experience helping new users and/or in dispute resolution. WP:DRN is a good place to do this (ANI is not). The Teahouse or help desk is also good. Closing some RFCs or other discussions is also good because it shows your ability to read consensus and handle the pressure, although those aren't required. Participating in AFDs is easy and we need the help. Just go to AFD, go to the pages that are 4 or 5 days old, find topics that you feel you can spend 5 or 10 minutes researching on google news/books/scholar, and offer 2 or 3 sentences that summarize your opinion. If you can save an article or two by fixing it up with references and some prose, all the better. I think you will find a great many of those that were opposing or were neutral (including myself) would support at that time. 6-9 months is a realistic time frame. Dennis 2¢ 12:58, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Crap, didn't realize you were at RfA, I would've definitely supported. Alas, I would have to ignore the "try again in six months" crowd, people always say that and I haven't seen that actually happen in years. Granted you're a good editor already, the tools aren't all that great to have. Wizardman 13:31, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
You mean the ones that say in six months and they would probably support you? I get it. I understand that you missed my RfA. But thanks for the words. GamerPro64 13:54, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi, GamerPro64. Look on the positive side of things: Your RfA was close and many people support you and many of the opposes were not against you but I would say cautious because they were unsure of you. I know it may not feel like it right now but don't forgot that those other people, even the ones whose opinions seem outlandish to you, are acting in good faith to make sure that all admins are properly vetted. Whenever a large community is involved, there will almost always be people who have opposing views and opinions. Don't take the criticism too personally and instead try to learn from it whatever you can. I took a wikibreak after my first (SNOWED) RfA. A little pause can bring perspective and if you are feeling agitated you might consider one. Plus, you wrote it's your mid-terms!!!! Way more important! (Ok, father mode off.  ) You have an excellent chance to be an admin in the future. Handling an almost passed RfA with poise and dignity will show your character and help show that you should succeed. If you really dive into admin work, you can expect to be involved in situations daily that are equally if not more difficult than a failed RfA. So all admins need to be able to deal with that kind of pressure. With time you may even come to understand some of the opposition's point of view even if you don't agree with it. I'm confident you'll eventually get "the bit". Best wishes, Jason Quinn (talk) 16:11, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Jason Quinn, thank you for this comment. While I may accept that people who opposed me were unsure of me, I still feel like if I do another RfA, people will find stuff about me and continue doing Character Assassinations. It's very disheartening how that is allowed. GamerPro64 16:58, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
The real character assassinations don't start until after you get the bit, so in a way, RFA steels an individual for what lies ahead. RFA is frustrating, even if you pass, as you feel like you are under a microscope, however, you are asking to be judged when you apply for the bit. Don't mistake the sincerely held concerns about experience in select areas with comments on your character. I can't speak for anyone else, but I was sincere in finding no fault, only voids. Voids are easy to fix, by filling them. Dennis 2¢ 17:18, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Fair enough. If I feel like going through RfA again, I go and do that. Not because people want me to. But because I feel like I have a chance. Don't know when that'll be. Thank you all for commenting. GamerPro64 17:26, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Hi GamerPro64. I just wanted to reach out to you personally about your recent RfA. While I stand by my !vote, I realize how RfA's can be a brutal process that take a serious toll on the candidate. I'm sorry you weren't better forewarned about that. I certainly hope you are not discouraged by what people had to say, and also that not everything should be taken to heart. Like the argument that you should have a userpage... people mean well with that recommendation, but I personally think that is preposterous. The editing history is how we should judge the candidate. I sympathize with your strong desire to not have a user page, and want you to know that if you would like it deleted and salted again I'm happy to do that for you. All the best — MusikAnimal talk 16:47, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Hello there, I wanted to say some words of encouragement like others have done above. I sincerely appreciate your content contributions, and I know from doing my own GA just how hard it can be, and to do FAs must be incredibly hard. Also I agree that the requirement to have a user page is bollocks. I want you to know that I would be happy to support you as soon as you show a track record in the admin area of interest, namely deletion, and that should never be contingent on a time period. If you don't want to, that's understandable, and thank you again for the good work you do here. BethNaught (talk) 18:58, 12 October 2014 (UTC)


Everyone. Thank you for your words of encouragement. I understand that RfAs can make editors go on Wikibreaks or even cause them to retire. I'm all right. Most of the people who opposed me, mainly the ones who opposed due to lack of XfD contributions, had a good reason to oppose. I still do believe that some of the others were ridiculous. That's all in the past now. I will continue working on Wikipedia. And if I want to, do another one of these and show the people who opposed me that I am more qualified the second time. I am not upset. I am okay. Once again, thank you. And I hope to see everyone again at the next RfA if it comes into fruition. Cheers. GamerPro64 19:06, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

GamerPro, if you don't mind I'd like to throw in my $0.02 for you here, though it looks like you have collected enough $0.02 here to have easily a few bucks in change... just a little side humor. I tend to check RFA frequently in order to gauge how well I would do with my current contributions if I wanted to make another run, and I was actually a little surprised to see your name there... given your professionalism and skillful care taking of the Video games project, as well as your WP:FTC coordinator role, I had thought you were one already. Naturally, I had to give you my support because I still feel you are one of the most professional editors I have worked with in my time on Wikipedia, and I have no such concerns about letting you have the tools because I know what kind of editor you are. I also wanted to offer you my support for helping to develop your skills in said voided areas if you'd like, and support for you trying again when you are ready, and would like to think that you would be willing to try again in a few months; you're more than capable of being the kind of administrator this project needs. I can't imagine what the Video games project would be like without you there, and can only think of what the encyclopedia would be like if it had your help as an admin, whether or not the community grants it now or later. I'm glad to see you seem to be taking the advice I wrote in my newsletter interview you gave me with the project a few months ago and you're not letting the drama get to you too much; I took mine a lot worse. Once this all blows over, you will be an even better editor for it and ready to take on the world, as they say. Thank you for all that you do for Wikipedia, and best of luck in the future. Red Phoenix let's talk... 01:04, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Funny thing about that, Red. A lot of people think I'm an admin just because I hold down the fort at FTC. As well as people saying how much of an impact I have on the Video Game project, which is flattering but hard to believe for myself. And yeah I'm not letting it get to me. I've been one this site for over six years. I have a feeling that something more radical would need to convince me to leave. GamerPro64 01:31, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 
How I felt during RFA

So close... I still think several of the oppose votes should have been discounted. RFA is a pain in the ***, and as they mentioned above, even a successful one takes a lot out of you. I buried myself in article editing afterwards. Speaking of which, wonder if I could help you with "the Skittles game". — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:15, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the monkey, Crisco. Livens up the place. And I did notice had a bit of interest in Darkened Skye after I placed it on my list up top. Yeah you can help out. Anything about it interests you? GamerPro64 01:31, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
    • The novelty of it's why I bought the darn game (never finished it...). I'd do my best with online sources, but I'd have a heck of a time with offline ones. GameCube was never popular in Indonesia. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:21, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
      • I think I can ask around for some offline sources. I already have a PDF of the instructions manual on my computer so that might take care of some Gameplay information. GamerPro64 12:44, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
        • Excellent. These coming weeks are going to be busy, so I can't be sure when I'll be able to start. We might want to try HighBeam or even Jstor for further sources. I mean, it was a brilliant marketing gimmick. I'm sure someone's discussed it, besides Cracked. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:00, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
          • HighBeam and Jstor? Never heard nor tried them before. Might make looking for sources more interesting. GamerPro64 17:18, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
            • HighBeam is a newspaper archive, and Jstor has a collection of academic journal articles and book reviews. The first would be good for contemporary reviews, hopefully (I mean, we are talking about 2001) and the latter for discussion in an academic context. And, since I said I'd help, we have a review in the Australian PC World, a review in the Daily Record ("Enter Skye of Lynlora, shepherdess, heroine, battler against pure evil and as close a rival to Lara as I've seen in ages. ... Darkened Skye is a wake-up call to RPGs") and Knight Ridder Tribune (discussion of product placement in games). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:05, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

As another oppose !voter, I'd like to again encourage you to not be disheartened by the RfA, and I'd like to note that the "try again in six months" was meant honestly and earnestly from me. You do great work and seem clueful and reasonable. If you do get a bit more experience and come back in six months in the relevant areas of moppery you want to engage in, and you don't do anything frothing at the mouth bonkers (which I'm pretty sure you won't), I definitely will support a second RfA.   —Tom Morris (talk) 17:28, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

  • I remember your oppose. You, like a couple of other whose oppositions I understood, suggested that I get more experience at AfD. Which I am beginning to get into the groove of it. I am a bit more confidant that I would want to do another RfA in the future. Though hopefully the process would be improved by that point. Thanks for putting in your thoughts on the nomination. GamerPro64 17:39, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 October 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Airline Food

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:DO & CO Catering - 8968355090.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:59, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 October 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Sosa B page

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
  Sosa B page
I honestly was the one that created the Sosa B Article because I felt like that was what they was tryng to do with the user page as far as him being a musician I honestly dont think that hes making that page cause i have edited certain things ive found myself threw searching to help he has alot of things over the internet and has interacted with alot of establish people so I dont think the page actually needs deleting probally why it hasent been already by wiki Heseesall (talk) 05:15, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
I have no idea what you're saying but if you don't believe the page should be deleted, you should explain why at the MfD. GamerPro64 14:02, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
 
 
Happy Halloween!

Hello GamerPro64:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – Hafspajen (talk) 13:51, 27 October 2014 (UTC)



Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.
  • Cheers, Hafspajen. GamerPro64 17:11, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
HUUUUUUuuuuuuuu!!!   Hafspajen (talk) 17:59, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 October 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 05 November 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 12 November 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 26 November 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Stumbled on this

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Here's an idea for (your pref for) an empty user page: User:Zyxw

(Should you ever use it, be sure of course to thank/credit Zyxw.)

Cheers, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 12:16, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

An interesting idea. Thanks for the suggestion. GamerPro64 17:52, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Re:Checking up

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks; yeah, I'm fine. I've been trying to stay away from the GamerGate article in general, both because I'm very much on one side of the issue and because I don't like getting embroiled in drama. I added some evidence to the ArbCom case because Loganmac really bothers me with his willful misrepresentation of on-wiki details in his GG posts, and his only-just-technically-haha not saying that the Reddit account with the same name that he refers to in the first person is him, but I really should just step back before it upsets me. Since ArbCom has said that they can't spend time looking at off-wiki evidence, no matter how offensive, unless the users in question admit the account is theirs, then that's the end of that. Wikipedia is a hobby, so I shouldn't spend time on bits that are exhausting. --PresN 09:54, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 December 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Ralph H. Baer edits: December 6 of 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion

I realize I did not have a source for his death date I added, this was due to the fact that I am his grandson, Jonathan Baer, and had just received the call from my father, James Baer, who was with him when he died. As such, I had no source, but could reliably say what had happened. I'm relatively new to editing wikipedia, and unfortunately, did not know a good way to say that without making it obvious in the wikipedia page. I promised my grandfather yesteday, hours before he went, that I would watch his wikipedia page and help keep it accurate. Sorry for any trouble I may have caused, and if you request any proof of who I am, I am more than happy to provide. I look forward to working with you on keeping his page accurate. --KichiK — Preceding undated comment added 20:51, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 December 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Wikipedia:Featured topics/C and D-class destroyers

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I've updated a bunch of the numbers at FT, GT and FFT, but I can't figure out why this one is listed by the bot as FFT although it is a GT. It might have to do with being listed as "C and D-class destroyers" and "British C and D-class destroyers". Depending on where it should go, the GT or FFT count should go up by 1. Nergaal (talk) 01:07, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure. It must have been human error to cause that. But either way, it was nice to catch that. GamerPro64 02:59, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 December 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Season's Greetings!

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015 !!!

Hello GamerPro64! As we gather to celebrate the changing of years and reflect on the meaning of life, the universe, and everything, I would like to wish you and yours a merry Christmas and a happy New Year. Attached is a small snack which I hope will give you the energy to continue being an amazing person and editor in the coming year.


Happy editing,
 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:50, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Best wishes for a happy holiday season

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  Happy Holiday Cheer
Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys!Hafspajen (talk) 02:27, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 31 December 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 07 January 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 14 January 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 21 January 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Caligula (film)

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It's because I reviewed it and passed it, then someone else came along and took it down as if my review never happened, contributing unhelpful notes and then "failing" a nomination that I had already passed. If you have a problem with the issue I took with this unprofessional behavior, talk to the person who placed the exact same note on the GAN as I did. No, sorry, the review was not appropriate and I put it back up because it didn't get a proper review. If my passing of the article was not valid, neither is the "failing" from someone who made no attempt to actually improve the article. You should take issue with the fact that this is clearly a good article and should be listed as such, only the review passing it was wiped out by someone disagreeing with the good article criteria, which this article clearly fits. The lad searches the night for his newts (talk) 04:26, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Featured topic criteria/Retention

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, can I ask why you updated the retention period for .5: The Gray Chapter? The album was released last October, so shouldn't the retention period already have passed? Or is it that we allow 6 months for albums?--十八 01:34, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

I must have forgotten that the retention period was three months. I've done two this year already. Would you mind writing up the reassessment? GamerPro64 01:39, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

GamerGate Discretionary sanctions notice

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed., a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

Dreadstar ☥ 02:34, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

2014 Year In Review Awards

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  The WikiProject Barnstar
For your outstanding contributions for Featured Pictures in 2014 you are hereby award this WikiProject Barnstar. Congratulations! For the Military history Wikiproject Coordinators, TomStar81 (Talk) 08:41, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 January 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 04 February 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 11 February 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 18 February 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 04 March 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 11 March 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 18 March 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:34, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

.

The Signpost – Volume 11, Issue 12 – 25 March 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:25, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost, 1 April 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 01 April 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 08 April 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Keeping Wikipedia Expanding Not Shrinking

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Delete canvassing bullshit. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 04:54, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello User:GamerPro64 sorry for disturbing you. The reason I am writing you is we all love Wikipedia and we want it expanding. However there is a discussion going on to delete a notable game article because of biased opinions. I saw that you edited this article: Cyberfoot and let it stay for further expansion, update and keep growing Wikipedia. But I am also totally agree with you to let articles stay for improvements and expand Wikipedia. So I believe you are a neutral, professional, objective and who believes in expanding Wikipedia not shrinking it type of person. So I would like you to check out this discussion Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/MonsterMMORPG_(2nd_nomination) and make your comment based on references it has. References are here Talk:MonsterMMORPG. Please feel free to delete my message to you after you read it. Thank you very much have a nice day.176.233.41.152 (talk) 14:41, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 April 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 22 April 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

CSD G13's ambit

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hey GamerPro64. I just wanted to let you know about why I declined your nominations of Draft:Bad Rats and Draft:5 Arcade Gems for deletion under CSD G13 (and please don't for a second let this note discourage you from continuing to tag pages for deletion, it is a vital service). The issue is that that criterion only covers drafts that were actually part of the articles for creation process, whether submitted for review or not. It does not cover drafts in general. Unless another criteria applies (I checked for copyvios and came up blank), they would have to be taken to MfD (instructions for nominating there). I personally think this is unsustainable: at some point we will need to have a separate speedy criterion for other abandoned drafts, or expand G13, but that's neither here nor there. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:30, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Well that's the first time I've ever heard that be a thing. Could've sworn I submitted drafts to G13 that weren't under the AFC process. But I guess using MfD is a fair enough alternative. GamerPro64 17:47, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
You may have, and they may have been deleted, but the criterion itself does not mince words. I do IAR delete when it's clear a deletion is within the spirit of the rules and applying the criteria strictly is truly bureaucracy for bureaucracy's sake, but here we have MfD to fill the gap.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:54, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

New Editor on Silent Hills

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion

Gamer Why don't you accept that Silent Hills is cancelled? Guillerme del Toro Just now confirmed that it is cancelled.ScantraxX26 (talk) 19:35, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Gamer Thanks for the Welcome :D. I hope I am doing this message thing right hahaha. It is Just confirmed on several dutch game websites such as psx-sense.nl. They are a reliable source when it comes to gaming.ScantraxX26 (talk) 19:35, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

I will keep watching the news around Silent Hills. As soon as Konami confirms and I am still awake, I will try to link al source to the cancellation. And another time thanks for being so nice after I kind of snobbed at you. ScantraxX26 (talk) 19:37, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Re: Cancellation

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

It's unclear. What if Konami does not even officially announce a cancellation and just let it fade away? Two major members of the game's staff (a director and the star voice actor) have suggested that it has been cancelled. Could we just leave it alone? ViperSnake151  Talk  03:15, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

We need to at least reword it to not jump the gun at least. Maybe change the title to "Rumors of Cancellation" or something. Silent Hill is a big property for Konami. How could they ignore something like this? GamerPro64 03:18, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Re: Delegation

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Good sir, the facts can never be rude- your own WP:FTC clearly states "The delegates—GamerPro64 and Juhachi". Imagine not knowing your own title! That's just the sort of haphazardness I'd expect from the younger projects—not even 10 years old! WP:FL, of course, is quite the senior project, proposed a full 3 months prior. (And it took you a year to get more than one topic! Tut tut.) Well, if the truth is worth a duel to you, so be it- as your shame was public, so shall your shaming be: at first light at WT:VG! --PresN 00:54, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 April 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 06 May 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 26, 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. I had to squeeze the summary down to around 1200 characters; was there anything I left out you'd like to see put back in? I'd appreciate it if you could check the article one more time before its day on the Main Page. - Dank (push to talk) 21:15, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 May 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 20 May 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Ping

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hey, could you give a hand to this guy: User_talk:Nergaal#Help. I can't really do anything by myself. Nergaal (talk) 16:12, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Discussion

Latest comment: 8 years ago12 comments4 people in discussion

Hey! I saw your post on my talkpage. So, it all goes like this. Since I worked on the topic and was still two more articles left before I would have nominated it for FT, one user nominated it. But, he did not consulted any of the main contributors. He only notified me after nominating it. There is a rule that non-contributors should consult/notify before nominatibg a topic. That's why I was so frustrated about it. I wanted nothing but deletion of that page because I wanted to make it a FT in its first attempt. It felt like a lost battle and that too without any participation. I tried to reach him saying to ask for self deletion or author.... I have/had no problems with that user. In fact he is very helpful. But, my outburst may have looked like I wanted the credit and seemed that I should have nominated...Which is not true because I had posted on that user's page notifying him that still two more articles are left to work on and only then it will be eligible for FT. That's it. I just wanted to delete that nomination page. —Prashant 02:54, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Well I must say that the chances of it being deleted is almost impossible due to how many hands were in the cookie jar by the time I got around to closing the page. But I must say that I was very disappointed by how uncivil you were in the nomination. Outside and inside the page, you came off as angry and hostile. But that's water under the bridge. I'm going to ping @PresN: who is an admin here to see if there is some type of grounds to delete the page. I expect there isn't one as mentioned above but its good to at least check. GamerPro64 03:06, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, I did not mean to uncivil. But, I was very much frustrated due to that. I wanted to clear it out. That user came very late here after nominating. If you can see I only asked for deletion and that's it. I would request you to please delete it because this nomination was premature, unwanted and was done without anyone's consent.—Prashant 03:17, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Contrary to popular belief, I'm not an admin on Wikipedia. That's why I pinged my pal PresN so we can see if there is a possibility for a deletion. Please have some patience. GamerPro64 03:21, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Patience, to put it lightly, does not seem to be a virtue in abundance regarding that FTC page, for anyone. @Prashant!: you have some serious WP:OWN issues with that topic, as well as some serious anger and civility issues. It's certainly quite rude to nominate a topic without informing the lead contributor to the articles in it, and I would certainly be annoyed if someone did it to me (they have, and I was), but this episode has been an immense overreaction on your part. It may be impolite, but anyone can nominate a topic if they see one- FTopics actually frowns on it less than other featured areas. Even FAC allows it, though it's a quick way to get oppose votes there. All you had to say was "I'm the primary contributor, and I don't think this topic is ready, and I'm unhappy that it was nominated without my knowledge." That's it. GamerPro would have closed the nomination, and you (and others) wouldn't have spent the whole day screaming at each other on Wikipedia.
Anyways. Yeah, there's no rule as far as I know about deleting wikipedia-space pages like nominations, and since it's an FTC nomination I think it falls under the discretion of the FTC delegates- I know that's how it works over at FLC. Since it seems likely that GamerPro would be in favor of the nomination page getting deleted rather than have you continue to be upset about it all over the place, I'll delete it. GamerPro- if you'd rather I not, just let me know and I'll restore it. I'm sure if you ever nominate the topic yourself, Prashant, with a shiny "archive1" in the url, no one will remember that you threw a fit about it to make sure it wasn't "archive2". --PresN 04:03, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
I think letting the participants in the nomination know about an impending deletion of the page should be done first before getting it over with. GamerPro64 04:21, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you PresN. Yes, I will nominate in in future as I can't right now or in coming months because two more articles need to pass GA for its eligibility to FT. That's why. —Prashant 04:09, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

I think if that happened then, it will end up being archived. It sad that a faulty nomination will have to be dabated. GamePro, you said it was okay to delete it but, now you are saying to debate? I think its fine as it was deleted by the administrator. I dont want another nomination because it was a faulty nomination.—Prashant 04:32, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Ah. Didn't notice Pres already deleted the page. We're done here now. GamerPro64 04:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
I strongly disagree with this, and have raised a concern on the deleting admins page. The ability to delete articles should be carefully used in accordance with policy, and there is no policy that supports deletion because an editor is "super angry", especially after several other contributors had added content to the discussion, and several others expressed that an archival would have been more appropriate than deletion. This very clearly should have gone to debate, and not have been done unilaterally. Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 13:05, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
So, you guys are trying to undelete a prematue nomination that was nominated without any idea behind it. Frank Boy was not even aware of the criteria. Also, there is not a single input in that page which helps to improve the topic. First of all, all three articles are rock solid and people opposed because the lack of her other articles. I dont see anything in it. Its not about getting angry. Its about Lack of knowledge about a topic which could lead to these misunderstandings. It is very unfortunate that you will be re-adding that file. Its upsetting.—Prashant 15:44, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Premature nominations happen all the time. This one isn't special. Except for the outburst. I just don't want pointless arguments to be a thing in Featured Topics. GamerPro64 15:51, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:GamerPro64/Archive_8&oldid=1143370349"