Misplaced Pages

User talk:Benc: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 05:58, 29 August 2004 editBenc (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,553 editsm →Exploding whale talk page← Previous edit Revision as of 06:01, 29 August 2004 edit undoBenc (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,553 editsm →Exploding whale talk pageNext edit →
Line 39: Line 39:
:The <tt><nowiki>{{fac-contested}}</nowiki></tt> tag is for ''previous'' candidates; the <tt><nowiki>{{fac}}</nowiki></tt> tag is for ''current'' ones. The tag change was part of a mass update &mdash; I changed <tt><nowiki>{{fac}}</nowiki></tt> to <tt><nowiki>{{fac-contested}}</nowiki></tt> for all articles that were in ]. It wasn't me adding an objection to the article. In fact, I hadn't even read the FAC discussion until just now. :-) :The <tt><nowiki>{{fac-contested}}</nowiki></tt> tag is for ''previous'' candidates; the <tt><nowiki>{{fac}}</nowiki></tt> tag is for ''current'' ones. The tag change was part of a mass update &mdash; I changed <tt><nowiki>{{fac}}</nowiki></tt> to <tt><nowiki>{{fac-contested}}</nowiki></tt> for all articles that were in ]. It wasn't me adding an objection to the article. In fact, I hadn't even read the FAC discussion until just now. :-)


:Looking back at the discussion, it looks like Meelar, Pcb21, and Eequor had objections that were never withdrawn, so that's why someone archived the nomination (it wasn't me). FWIW, I would probably support the article if it was re-nominated. :Looking back at ], it looks like Meelar, Pcb21, and Eequor had objections that were never withdrawn, so that's why someone archived the nomination (it wasn't me). FWIW, I would probably support the article if it was re-nominated.


:See also: ], which is a discussion about your wonderful exploding whales. :-) It looks like there are some folks at FAC who want it re-nominated, too. ]] 04:09, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC) :See also: ], which is a discussion about your wonderful exploding whales. :-) It looks like there are some folks at FAC who want it re-nominated, too. ]] 04:09, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:01, 29 August 2004

Archive

  1. Welcome
  2. Detroit
  3. Law article disambiguations not needed
  4. May-December romance
  5. Image:Anarchy_symbol.png
  6. Merge and redirect instead of VfD listings
  7. European Union Olympic medals count for 2004
  8. Transparent Aluminum
  9. Re: Age disparity
  10. Insanity templates

Anarchist Symbolism

I thought (I had hoped) that we were coming to a consensus on the anarchocapitalist symbol issue, but an anonymous user has significantly altered or removed (I don't know if "vandalized" is the right term) the section repeatedly in the last day. I'm not sure what to do about this. Do you have any suggestions? --Pmetzger 15:32, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Responses at: Talk:Anarchist_symbolism#Vandalism and User_talk:213.100.52.73 • Benc • 02:15, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

adminship

Dear Benc,

Yes, I will treat the "keys to the mop closet" well. :-)
Thank you very much for your vote in (strong) support of my nomination for adminship.

-- PFHLai 03:51, 2004 Aug 24 (UTC)

Thanks for the thanks, and congrats on adminship. :-) • Benc • 04:17, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Flags

Thanks for the tip. Io 14:17, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Welcome. • Benc • 04:12, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Featured article archiving

Benc - (speaking as the chief maintainer of the featured articles and candidates) - your edits to Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations and Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Featured log have made them quite a bit prettier, but totally unmaintainable. It took me upwards of 10 minutes to archive 5 nominations (that works out to roughly an hour a week spent archiving). Simply put - I refuse. (for the record, your edits are a form of m:instruction creep, which I oppose in all forms). I think we need to work out something better. →Raul654 05:14, Aug 28, 2004 (UTC)

Exploding whale talk page

Hi, I notice you added a FAC contested tag to the exploding whale article. Why? All the objections were dealt with! - Ta bu shi da yu 01:54, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The {{fac-contested}} tag is for previous candidates; the {{fac}} tag is for current ones. The tag change was part of a mass update — I changed {{fac}} to {{fac-contested}} for all articles that were in Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations. It wasn't me adding an objection to the article. In fact, I hadn't even read the FAC discussion until just now. :-)
Looking back at the discussion, it looks like Meelar, Pcb21, and Eequor had objections that were never withdrawn, so that's why someone archived the nomination (it wasn't me). FWIW, I would probably support the article if it was re-nominated.
See also: Misplaced Pages talk:Featured article candidates#A precedent, which is a discussion about your wonderful exploding whales. :-) It looks like there are some folks at FAC who want it re-nominated, too. • Benc • 04:09, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)