Revision as of 14:26, 22 May 2013 view source76.189.109.155 (talk) Warning - personal attacks← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:33, 22 May 2013 view source Toddst1 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors137,741 edits →May 2013: :)Next edit → | ||
Line 68: | Line 68: | ||
== May 2013 == | == May 2013 == | ||
] Please do not ] other editors. Comment on ''content'', not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please ] and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-npa2 --> Edits like are inappropriate, particularly from an administrator. --] (]) 14:26, 22 May 2013 (UTC) | ] Please do not ] other editors. Comment on ''content'', not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please ] and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-npa2 --> Edits like are inappropriate, particularly from an administrator. --] (]) 14:26, 22 May 2013 (UTC) | ||
:Nothing wrong with being thumped like a narc at a biker rally. ] <small>(])</small> 16:33, 22 May 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:33, 22 May 2013
This is DangerousPanda's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15Auto-archiving period: 15 days |
Would you tell me why you deleted Notable People section ?
Hi Bwilkins, Would you tell me why you deleted Notable People section ? You said that you want to know if "they have Wiki article", what does this mean ?
The ones I added were not spam, I had web references. Are those references not enough ? Plesae advice ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.7.162.210 (talk) 19:17, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) The coverage for those individuals was WP:ROUTINE they are not on notable encyclopedic value. Every school has many kids who win local yearly awards. To be included, the subjects should be generally of sufficient notability to qualify for their own wikipedia page. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:24, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
- Yup. Thanks for answering pretty much exactly what I was going to say :-) (✉→BWilkins←✎) 20:01, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
But this is just for a school district, people who won at international and national are as notable as they can get, the district may not have a similiar level of winning for yeas to come. Please reconsider. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.15.186.24 (talk) 18:12, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
- This is an international encyclopedia...If the people are only notable in a district then most certainly don't belong, do they? If they warrant their own articles then they can be listed...this isn't optional. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 00:10, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Civility Barnstar | |
You're a good man, Sir Wilkins. Go Phightins! 15:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC) |
Protection Policy
You took part in a previous discussion on the protection policy talk page about the reference to "uncontroversial" edits. A survey is now in progress on that page in response to a request for comments. You may want to visit that talk page again and provide your input to try to obtain consensus. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:55, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Ducktails (band)
You moved this to userspace (User:Marcushamblett/Ducktails (band)) on 7 May as it wasn't ready to be in mainspace. Since then I have made considerable improvements to the content and the sourcing and it is now ready to return. The original author has indicated that he is happy for to happen (), as is the editor who asked me to look at it. I'm bringing this here as a courtesy rather than just restoring it myself, due to your prior involvement with the article. Thanks. --Michig (talk) 11:41, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
- I still disagree ... and the "sources" are still a little weak, however, feel free to move a rather crappy and non-notable article into mainspace if you think it's at all ready (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:18, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
TP clearing
Hi Bwilkins. Regarding this comment you made to an IP editor regarding their declined block request, you were incorrect that they were not allowed to remove that content from their own talk page. Actually, the removal of those comments was neither improper nor required for patrolling admins, as you claimed. Please see this discussion on the editor's talk page, which shows my explanation. Sorry for the interference in this matter. I've never crossed paths with that editor and their talk page seems to indicate an ongoing pattern of inappropriate behavior, but I felt it was important to contact you regarding the talk page-clearing guidelines. Thanks. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 10:39, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
- It's been held by the community that an editor may not remove comments related to the block - the blocking admin has a responsibility to be accountable, and explain their block as well. As such, the IP cannot remove the comments related to the block. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:04, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
- "It's been held by the community"? Do you have evidence to support that statement? I'm sorry, but WP:OWNTALK and WP:REMOVED are very clear on this matter and I've seen many admins who validate it, such as Orangemike did on IP 68's talk page. In fact, you're the first admin I've ever seen who's opposed it. The list of exceptions on what cannot be removed is limited and specific. If an editor removes a warning, that removal constitutes acknowledgement of its receipt. Again, I realize that IP 68 appears to be causing quite a lot of problems, but it's important that no editor is ever improperly accused of violating any rules. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 11:11, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
- The only items related to a block that an editor cannot remove are block notices for a currently active block and declined unblock requests for a currently active block. But any comments outside those absolutely may be removed. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 11:41, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
- Hello. There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 03:56, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
- I see that went brilliantly for you (✉→BWilkins←✎) 19:52, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
- Hello. There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 03:56, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
A cookie for you!
Being an administrator can be one hell of a job, but you always take out the trash and do right. Now you get a reward for it Enjoy. WorldTraveller101 20:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC) |
My talk page
I think it is best if you stay away from it now. My block has expired, regardless of what either of us think of how it was handled - nothing either of us say now will change that. Smurfmeister (talk) 00:22, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
- You do recognize that I am actually trying to help, right? (✉→BWilkins←✎) 19:54, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
- Trying, yes, but I don't believe picking over the bones is doing either of us any favours. I think you are getting bogged down in your belief that you are right and I am wrong; and if there were no grey areas, my unblock request would have been quickly declined. How is it helping to continue to argue the toss now that the block has expired? Smurfmeister (talk) 10:23, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
May 2013
Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Edits like this one are inappropriate, particularly from an administrator. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 14:26, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
- Nothing wrong with being thumped like a narc at a biker rally. Toddst1 (talk) 16:33, 22 May 2013 (UTC)