| Revision as of 10:59, 19 August 2009 view sourcePastor Theo (talk | contribs)5,650 edits →Re: Barnstar: My pleasure← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 18:52, 15 September 2009 view source Amalthea (talk | contribs)31,926 edits #REDIRECT User:Pastor Theo | ||
| (120 intermediate revisions by 41 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] {{pp-usertalk}} | |||
| '''If you leave a message here, I will respond to it here. Thank you.''' | |||
| {{Archive box|] ]}} | |||
| == Re: ] == | |||
| Might I ask for a brief closing statement? <font color="navy">''']</font>''' ''(<font color="green">]</font>)'' 00:52, 8 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :"Per consensus." ] (]) 00:56, 8 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::...That's not really what I was looking for. I was hoping that your reply would take into account the fact that you weighed the different keep/delete rationales appropriately, and explain why you found the keep rationales of more weight than the delete ones. <font color="navy">''']</font>''' ''(<font color="green">]</font>)'' 01:04, 8 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :I most certainly "weighed the different keep/delete rationales appropriately." The consensus of the discussion was not in favor of deletion. Your opinion that the article was beyond salvaging is, at best, highly subjective and is not an appropriate reason for demanding outright deletion. If you wish to merge or redirect the article elsewhere, you have that option. ] (]) 01:24, 8 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009) == | |||
| The ''']''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.<br /><small>This has been an automated delivery by ] (]) 20:42, 9 August 2009 (UTC)</small> | |||
| == blocked == | |||
| You declined unblocked DocKino. In the United States article, he hasn't been too helpful. For example, in the caption of a White House photo, he removed a phrase about John Adams being the first resident there so now it looks like Washington was there, which is wrong and could get a student a lower grade if they wrote a paper based on WP. | |||
| I am not calling for extending the block on DocKino but have asked him to be more careful about the US article. I hope he or she will be a good editor. ] (]) 15:19, 11 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :I hope so, too. Thank you for stopping by. ] (]) 23:05, 11 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| You closed this saying how the articles editors should improve the article, or otherwise it can be put up for deletion again. Though editors were already warned in the previous afd (]) that it fails our policies.--] (]) 17:49, 12 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Hello! I may be mistaken, but I don't see any warnings in the first AfD, which closed as Keep. If you are committed to deleting the article, I would recommend revisiting it again at the end of the year. Thanks! ] (]) 00:37, 13 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::The hint was that it failed policies in the first AFD, and at the time of my nomination (over a year later) it still fails policies and guidelines. So I'm confused why you didn't decide to delete it.--] (]) 00:59, 13 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Hello, again! The hint is not obvious, since it passed the first AfD with little difficulty. I closed the AfD as No Consensus because there was no consensus on whether to delete or keep the article; neither side made an airtight argument for their cause. Again, I would recommend revisiting the article at year's end. Thanks. ] (]) 01:02, 13 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Failing all relevant policies and guidelines is not an airtight argument?--] (]) 01:03, 13 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::I'll be listing it at ] if you can't give any explanation as to why guidelines and policies don't matter.--] (]) 17:54, 13 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :You have the option to bring the discussion to DRV, but please remember that DRV is not AfD Do-Over and the onus will be on you to persuade those gathered on why the closure was inappropriate. ] (]) 22:30, 13 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ==Deletion review for ]== | |||
| An editor has asked for a ] of ]. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. <!-- This originally was from the template {{subst:DRVNote|PAGE_NAME}} ~~~~ --> ] (]) 18:27, 14 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Help with deleted article == | |||
| We've communicated in the past regarding a deleted article, Sullivan County Legal Aid Panel. You "userfied" the article for me, after which I redirected the content to Sullivan County. I was hoping you can do the same for another article that I worked on, ]. I noticed this article for the first time on the afd log and thought I could improve it to save it from deletion. Despite my vast improvements the article, to my surprise, the article still got deleted. I'm hoping you can userify this article as well, for me to work on it further and establish its notability. I guess I'm assuming you can do it even thought you were not the deleting administrator. Sincerely, --] (]) 00:53, 13 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Done! Check out ]. And, wow, this product sounds really tasty -- don't tell anyone, but I am a major caffeine fiend! ;) ] (]) 00:56, 13 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::Thanks for that. So then maybe you can help me with the article!--] (]) 01:05, 13 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| Not to be a pain, but when you userify an article you can't just copy the content from the last revision. You have to actually undelete it to establish proper attribution. If the content is put in another article, the article has to be put back into main space with a redirect to the merge location, along with taking certain other steps. (See ] and ] for all the details.) If it is coming back as a stand alone article (which I assume it the intention), then the edit history is needed. | |||
| None of this mattered the first time because Pink Bull was the sole author of that page, but that isn't the case here. I went ahead and fixed it for you, though, so there is no need to do anything else this time. Just be aware of it in the future. | |||
| Thanks, ] (]) 01:23, 13 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Oh, you are hardly a pain! You are a big help - thanks for clarifying that for me. :) ] (]) 01:24, 13 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == re: Barnstar == | |||
| I wanted to take a moment and say "Thank you very much for the barnstar." It is always nice to know that my efforts are appreciated. A little encouragement goes a long way toward keeping me motivated to work hard on improving the encyclopedia. | |||
| Thanks again, ] (]) 05:05, 13 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::My pleasure! :) ] (]) 22:30, 13 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Fall 2009 Meetup in Providence? == | |||
| I'm trying to schedule another Providence Meetup for the Fall. Please drop a note at ] expressing interest and preferences for dates/times. --] <sup>]</sup> 13:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :September promises to be a busy month for me, but I will keep you posted if I have a free Saturday. Thanks! ] (]) 22:30, 13 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Ok, if you have a preference for a day other than Sat. just drop a note a the talk page. We'll likely schedule another later in the fall. --] <sup>]</sup> 13:39, 15 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Re: Barnstar == | |||
| I hate to be the naysayer, but I think handing Mandarax a barnstar for his UAA edits was ill-advised. When someone has such a large number of UAA reports declined as being unsupported by the username policy, it indicates to me that they are using the process irresponsibly. | |||
| Was this a wiki-political statement? Do you believe that the username policy should be changed to the way that Mandarax uses it? If so, join the discussion at ]. ] (]) 06:32, 17 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :I've made about a hundred to a hundred fifty reports to UAA, and only two or three have been declined. Please check your facts before making wild, unsubstantiated claims. ]<font color="6600FF"> • </font>] 08:31, 17 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Rspeer, you are a guest on this page -- please act like a guest. If you have concerns about a specific individual, please contact me in private -- do not hold people up for ridicule. Mandarax, I am genuinely sorry that my praise for your work is being spoiled in this ridiculous manner. ] (]) 13:00, 17 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::Thank you so much for your kind response. Rspeer's mean-spirited note with its false accusation was very discouraging, and he's probably succeeded in driving me away from UAA at least for now, but I'll continue to contribute in other ways. Thank you for being kind, welcoming, friendly, and encouraging. Misplaced Pages needs more people like you. ]<font color="6600FF"> • </font>] 22:00, 17 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I apologize. My note was inappropriate. ] (]) 02:27, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| There is no damage done -- mistakes happen and all is well with the world. :) ] (]) 02:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Oh, come on. When it comes to unreasonable barnstars, I ''certainly'' don't deserve a barnstar for this. :P Thanks for your forgiveness. ] (]) 02:41, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::I am well aware of what you are doing on Misplaced Pages -- consider it a "career achievement" award! :) Peace be with you! ] (]) 02:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::Rspeer, thank you very much for the apology! It is greatly appreciated. And Pastor Theo, thanks again for your support and encouragement. ]<font color="6600FF"> • </font>] 10:14, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :My pleasure. Both of you are welcome to return here anytime. :) ] (]) 10:59, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ==]== | |||
| Pastor, an article I recently created, ], has been nominated for deletion here: ]. Given your attention to other Hohenzollern-related articles, please take the time to weigh in and stop its deletion. Thanks again for all your wonderful contributions to Misplaced Pages! --] (]) 13:39, 17 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thank you for the kind comments. I admit that I am not an expert on Hohenzollern subjects, but I will take a look at the AfD. ] (]) 13:45, 17 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::Pastor, thank you for your addition to the discussion. I've just added and referenced the mention of Maria Adelgunde's wedding from ''Confronting the Nazi past: new debates on modern German history''. --] (]) 14:11, 17 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ==Sexed up== | |||
| Hello, | |||
| I just wanted to let you know that I completely disagree with the outcome of ]. Including the nominator, the discussion had 6 recommendations: four of them were ''delete'' and only two of them were ''keep''. Each of the latter two suggestions was significantly challenged. Alansohn's vote was basically a blatant misrepresentation of the existing facts. I can only assume that you didn't visit my link, as it clearly shows that the mentioned Hutton description doesn't describe the term in any relevant detail. Not only that, the report never uses the neologism without quotation marks—an unmistakable indication of irregular, not commonly accepted usage. The references added by Richard Arthur Norton mention the term briefly and in the context of one particular situation, which is a big no-no under ], which specifically states that ''a new term does not belong in Misplaced Pages unless there are reliable sources specifically about the term — not just sources which mention it briefly or use it in passing.'' Some of these sources barely mention the term at all. To sum it up, I usually respect most of your decisions, but in this case I believe that according to Misplaced Pages's guidelines your decision can only be seen as inconsiderate and downright wrongful. You should pay more attention to all sides of the argument next time. — ] (]) 03:24, 18 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Hello, and thank you for sharing your opinion on this matter. ] (]) 12:49, 18 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Removing rollback == | |||
| Hi, | |||
| I'd really prefer that you hadn't intruded there. I contemplated my removal of those user rights prior to undertaking it, as I hope would be evident from the post on Corruptcopper's talk page. ROLLBACK is a privilege and can and should be removed if it is clear it is being misused. It was clear to me that it was being misused, but in case I was over-reacting I asked ] to ]. He stated that he endorsed the decision. In my discussions with Corruptcopper I tried to make it clear that the removal of rollback just meant the elimination of one tool in the kit, not a substantial change in the user's stature. It ''appeared'' to me that he and I had come to an understanding right before you stepped in to reverse my admin action without discussing it with me first. | |||
| I also don't appreciate your misapprehension about my motivations--I didn't remove rollback to 'punish' Corruptcopper. I removed rollback because he was using rolling back edits which were not vandalism. Rollback is not a reward and the removal of rollback is not a punishment. | |||
| So unless you feel that I (and Julian, in endorsing my decision) made a grievous error in judgment, please self revert as soon as it is convenient. I won't revert you, but if you stand by your decision I may bring this up on the ]. Thank you. ] (]) 02:09, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Hello! In reviewing this situation, I don't see any conversation between yourself and Corruptcopper regarding the problematic nature of his editing -- unless, of course, there is an off-Wiki e-mail exchange that I am unaware of. I see your initial notice of concern, followed 18 minutes later by the abrupt removal of the rollback rights without allowing Corruptcopper to say a word in his defense. That doesn't strike me as being fair. Corruptcopper has had rollback since January and appears to be a very good editor. He is clearly aware of the problem now and, as per his comments on your talk page, he appears to be sincerely apologetic for his error -- which, as far as I can determine, created no damage whatsoever. He is also more than aware that not being careful will lead to removal of the rollback rights again -- and, I presume, spoil his chances for adminship, which he has been angling for via Juliancolton's assistance. As for Julian - who appears to be a friend of yours - I noticed that you asked of him: '''"I was wondering if you could review this action, reverse it if necessary and leave him a friendly note that ROLLBACK is easy-come, easy go?"''' Well, I actually did exactly what you asked of Julian -- I guess the shock of having an outsider take you up on your invitation may have been a bit much, and if that is the case then I would apologize for having me crash unannounced into this situation. ] (]) 02:33, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::I'm honestly less upset about the actual reversal than I am about the implication that I'm punishing him or that removing the userright was wrong in the first place. And on top of that, I'm upset that '''after the event occurred'', after the discussion between me and the user was effectively complete and we were moving ahead, you came along and stepped in without talking to me. As for the timeline of removal, I noted a particularly improper revert, informed Copper about it, then went back through his reverts and in more than 50% of his recent reverts, found problems. More than 50% of his recent actions were flat out errors. And so I stepped in. Arguably you could say that the moment has passed, but stepping in saying the moment has passed is totally different from stepping in and saying that I made a complete error. ] (]) 02:59, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::Also, "which, as far as I can determine, created no damage whatsoever" is incorrect. Every time we revert good faith contributions as vandalism we reject a contributions to the encyclopedia and push away a potential long term editor. That much is clear in the ROLLBACK policy and the VAND policy. ] (]) 03:01, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::You know, I have only been admin for about a month (thank you, Balloonman!), and in that month I have learned one thing -- it is utterly impossible for anyone with a mop to walk from one side of Misplaced Pages to another without stepping on a multitude of toes. :) You obviously had reason to be concerned -- the edits you harvested were mistakes. My red flag moment, however, came without having Corruptcopper speak up ''before'' rollback was removed. If I were in your shoes, I would have allowed Corruptcopper to explain himself first, then I would act accordingly. Corruptcopper strikes me as being very intelligent, and I am sure that he will go forward knowing that he has to be careful because several sets of eyes are watching him -- I will gladly revert myself here if I find that my trust was grievously misplaced. As for any WTF agita created by me, I am genuinely sorry if I spoiled your evening. Peace be with you. ] (]) 03:14, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::Thanks for understanding. I also appreciate the irony of demanding that you discuss reversing an admin action w/ me while I removed a userright without discussing that action with the user. Cognizant of that irony, I will say that the quickest route to stepping on toes is reverting an admin action without prior discussion with the admin. I'm prepared to accept this as 'forceful backup' regarding my actions. We can leave the rollback userright in place. ] (]) 03:40, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Very nice. Now you will have new reason to hate me -- your AfD on ]. I think Ms. Marsh may be (emphasis on ''may'') a notable writer under the name Janet Marsh -- see the AfD for new headaches. :) ] (]) 03:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Oh please do find sources on that one. Check the linked An/i report for the reasoning behind that one. ] (]) 03:45, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Unless there are two women of the same name writing about lichens, I think this woman may be a notable writer whose earlier work was published under "Janet Marsh." ] (]) 03:47, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| : Sorry if I have caused a war between you two admins. I do understand where you are both coming from and have now read the policies through twice and now understand them so will not be so quick in just clicking revert on huggle. ] (]) 10:02, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Hello! It is hardly a "war," but at least something of value emerged from the discussion. I look forward to your future contributions here. :) ] (]) 10:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ==Thankyou== | |||
| Hi. Thankyou very much your kind barnstar. I am 99% of the time, maybe 95% on this crazy site, a pleasant friendly person and rarely curse at people. But I am a firm believer that you should treat others as they treat you and viceversa. What got to me was working hard to improving the quality of the Palestinian articles and then I get it referred to as "diarrhea" behind my back. If you've ever worked hard and something and at the end of it people are highly critical and don't acknowledge you are trying in good faith it is a tough pill to swallow. Anyway thanks...]</span> <sup>]</sup> 09:13, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Hello again! I have found in life that no matter what you do, there will always be someone who is ready, willing and able to find fault with your work. It happens to the best of us. Just keep doing what you are doing -- at the end of the day, your opinion of yourself is the only one that truly matters. Peace be with you. ] (]) 10:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 18:52, 15 September 2009
Redirect to:
 | This page is currently protected from editing to prevent Pastor Theo (talk · contribs · block log · arb · SPI) from using it to make disruptive edits, such as abusing the {{unblock}} template. If you cannot edit this user talk page and you need to make a change or leave a message, you can request an edit, request unprotection, log in, or create an account. |