| Revision as of 11:32, 15 January 2022 editMasterhatch (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers48,464 editsNo edit summaryTag: Manual revert← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:10, 19 February 2022 edit undoXeCyranium (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,262 edits →Cbc: new sectionTags: Mobile edit Mobile web editNext edit → | ||
| Line 82: | Line 82: | ||
| *], the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.<!-- Template:Pending changes reviewer granted --> <br> | *], the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.<!-- Template:Pending changes reviewer granted --> <br> | ||
| ] (]) 20:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC) | ] (]) 20:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC) | ||
| == Cbc == | |||
| You've again deleted the content while referring to the talk page discussion in which you supported not deleting the content on the Poilievre article. I'm not interested in tit for tat editing so could you please explain what you actually want on the article talk page? From what I can see you complained that the material didn't warrant its own subsection, another user chimed in with agreement, the editor who added it asked why and supported leaving the material, you then said you supported leaving the material just in a different subsection. I've moved it twice per that discussion and both times you've deleted it without really saying why. Do you want the material deleted or do you want it moved? ] (]) 00:10, 19 February 2022 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:10, 19 February 2022
Congradulations
Hello Masterhatch, we and countless of other Wikipedians & Internet users have been chosen 2006 Person of the year, by Time magazine. Congradulations. GoodDay 21:58, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
That weren't yesterday :) GoodDay (talk) 14:54, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
- Nope! Was a long time ago. Thinking back to my life in November of '06 compared to now... wow things are different. And in a good way. Masterhatch (talk) 15:01, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
- Do note, my spelling has improved, since then ;) GoodDay (talk) 15:39, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
Ouch
I'm used to Lecen's emotional posts & edit summaries. But, in his edit-summary, he didn't have to snap at you, too. GoodDay (talk) 13:11, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
- Water off a duck's back.Masterhatch (talk) 15:34, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
Rebellion links
Thanks for fixing those links in the two articles. Probably my fault, although I don't remember it. By the way, I recognise some of locations in your pix from the south-east corner. :) Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 16:28, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
- Hello User:Mr Serjeant Buzfuz, yeah, easy tell where I spend most of my time by my pix! As for fixing links, sometimes at work I have time to kill and that's an easy way to kill time and learn something! I've read so many articles I would never have even thought about reading if I hadn't gone through articles just fixing links. Masterhatch (talk) 20:32, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
Don’t know if you heard: https://regina.ctvnews.ca/mobile/sad-to-see-it-go-renowned-kenosee-restaurant-destroyed-in-overnight-fire-1.5581820 Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 06:17, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, I heard on the radio this morning. Sad. Masterhatch (talk) 06:35, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Autopatrolled granted
Hi Masterhatch, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Misplaced Pages:Autopatrolled. However, you should consider adding relevant wikiproject talk-page templates, stub-tags and categories to new articles that you create if you aren't already in the habit of doing so, since your articles will no longer be systematically checked by other editors (User:Evad37/rater and User:SD0001/StubSorter.js are useful scripts which can help). Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! -- TNT (talk • she/they) 00:15, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
Happy New Year, Masterhatch!
Masterhatch,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Misplaced Pages.
Ravenswing 16:03, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Nomination of List of players who played only one game in the NHL for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of players who played only one game in the NHL is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of players who played only one game in the NHL (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.
« Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:45, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Rollback granted
Hi Masterhatch. After reviewing your request, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when using rollback:
- Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
- Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
- Rollback should never be used to edit war.
- If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
- Use common sense.
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Misplaced Pages:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! – Juliancolton | 21:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
Pending changes reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
See also:
- Misplaced Pages:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
- Misplaced Pages:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
- Misplaced Pages:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
Cbc
You've again deleted the content while referring to the talk page discussion in which you supported not deleting the content on the Poilievre article. I'm not interested in tit for tat editing so could you please explain what you actually want on the article talk page? From what I can see you complained that the material didn't warrant its own subsection, another user chimed in with agreement, the editor who added it asked why and supported leaving the material, you then said you supported leaving the material just in a different subsection. I've moved it twice per that discussion and both times you've deleted it without really saying why. Do you want the material deleted or do you want it moved? XeCyranium (talk) 00:10, 19 February 2022 (UTC)