Misplaced Pages

User talk:n2 - Misplaced Pages

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Wikipedian2 (talk | contribs) at 16:33, 10 April 2011 (→jOHN gIOIA). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 16:33, 10 April 2011 by Wikipedian2 (talk | contribs) (→jOHN gIOIA)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Thanks for looking at my talk page - feel free to comment and i'll reply on this page, I am so busy editing that I probably won't be able to reply immedietly!

Your RfA

I saw it, and it's pretty unformatted. I hope you meant a second nomination for yourself, instead of User:Wikipedian2 2.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:06, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Reply on your own talk page please. I'm sorry, but I don't think you're ready yet, given your daily activity here. See WP:NOTNOW.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:11, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
OK, thank-you for considering anyway. Wikipedian2 (talk) 04:12, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
I did notice your Rfa as well and began some preliminary checks that will occur, and I respect your ambition, but honesty fell I should alert you to the policy regarding early attempts which are not quite ready to be compared to expected criteria. Again, I respect ambition, but an administrator is expected to be well in tune with policy and consensus. The simple act of moving forward without full preparation and credential, will be a negative consideration, and there is not enough motivation and ambition to overcome that fact. Please consider this and believe me I am trying to tell you a thing you can almost expect, if you do go forward. Even the malformed RfA, will be used to demonstrate that now is not the right time for you to attempt this thing. IMHO. My76Strat (talk) 04:23, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank-you for your criticism, which I will obviously fully take on board. The good news is I found what I was supposed to edit, and my RfA is no longer the mess it was in before. Wikipedian2 (talk) 04:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Your recent RfA

I am sorry, but I have closed your Request for adminship prematurely. Simply put, you only have 441 edits on Misplaced Pages; while your edit count isn't the only determining factor, and numerous people have their own personal standards by which they judge RfA candidates, this particular RfA was all but assured of not passing.

I am sorry about this, and I hope you don't take it personally. If you continue to contribute to the project in a positive fashion, I am confident that you would be able to submit a successful RfA in the future. You may wish to consider applying for an evaluation by other Misplaced Pages editors for feedback on how to obtain the necessary experience. Once you are ready to request adminship again, there is a great admin coaching program available, as well as a guide to requests for adminship.

If you have any other questions about becoming an administrator, please don't hesitate to ask me. Good luck! Eagles 24/7 (C) 05:11, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I just realised I hadn't replied to you yet! Thank-you for the advice, I appreciate your positive fashion to (what I now understand to be) such a doomed RfA. Have a good day. Regards, Wikipedian2 (talk) 16:36, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
It's good that you understand that! Maybe in six months or so.... Reaper Eternal (talk) 23:10, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Çan Meslek Yüksekokulu

Hello. I noticed that you tagged this for speedy deletion per db-notenglish. Please note that speedy deletion of non-English articles is only for such pages that have an equivalent on a foreign-language Wíkipedia, not for completely new entries. That is also why a speedy deletion request must have the corresponding interwiki article listed. If you find a page that's not been written in English and can't be sure that there's a similar article on another language Misplaced Pages, please tag it with {{Not English|<language>}} and list it at WP:PNT. If the page then has still not been translated after two weeks it will be proposed for deletion anyway. Regards, De728631 (talk) 15:26, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello, thank-you for your advice on Çan Meslek Yüksekokulu - I will ensure that I apply this in future anti-vandalism activity. Wikipedian2 (talk) 15:34, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Please note that not all articles that are contributed in a foreign language are vandalism. You should almost always assume good faith with those contributors, as they may not realize that Misplaced Pages is English-only and/or that there are other language Misplaced Pages projects. Logan Talk 20:03, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
I will make sure to do this in the future. Thank-you for the advice. Wikipedian2 (talk) 09:44, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Misplaced Pages:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:43, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank-you for the priviledge. Wikipedian2 (talk) 09:43, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Do not keep reverting updates even before they've been finished. It's impolite and bad form. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.166.65.102 (talk) 21:01, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry if you believe this, but I am not the only one to be under the impression that you are harming Misplaced Pages, especially as User:Hamtechperson has given you a final warning for your edits on the same aritcle . Also in future, can I please ask you to start a new section on my talk page. Thank-you. Wikipedian2 (talk) 21:08, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Salut!

--some jerk on the Internet (talk) has bought you a pint! Sharing a pint is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a pint, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Cheers!


Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding {{subst:WikiPint}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Message received at 00:47, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Good work out there on the recent changes. Keep it up! --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 00:47, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Misuse of reviewing/warning

Since you've failed to respond; nothing I've done justified this - 213.246.114.81 (talk) 09:31, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I have now responded on your talk page. Wikipedian2 (talk) 10:50, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism warning

I know its this gadget of yours which cries vandal every time somebody removed something from some article. Please be assured, that a Member of the July 20 plot is still a Member of the German Resistance. So there is no need for any warnings ... --Erich Mayer (talk) 17:16, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I apologise if my reversion has been inaccurate. Please add sources to the content to prove your edits are accurate, and I will remove my warning. Thank-you, Wikipedian2 (talk) 17:23, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
As I said, its redundant to have anybody in the category for German Resistance who is already in the category for members of the July 20 plot. As the latter is sourced in the article there is no need to provide any further information for removing the former. Yours --17:26, 6 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erich Mayer (talk • contribs)
You removed a valid category from the page. Instead it would be possible to add another valid category underneath or above others. Wikipedian2 (talk) 17:30, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Account Creation Interface Request

I have input a re-request to join the 'Account Creation Interface'. Wikipedian2 (talk) 22:59, 6 April 2011 (UTC)


Intergen Edit

I did post an edit summary, please read it- let me know what I need to do if that does not work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.16.131.50 (talk) 16:13, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Just because content is uncited does not give a user permission to remove it. The content was given the citation-needed template, and no more action was required due to the content not being vandalism. I will rollback your last edit to bring back the content. If you decide to undo my actions, I will be forced to continue with the warnings until you reach the point where I will be forced to report you for vandalism to administrators. If you disagree with me, then please feel free to take the routes outlined in Misplaced Pages:Dispute_resolution, or please read Wikipedia_talk:Guide_to_administrator_intervention_against_vandalism if you believe my actions constitute vandalism. Wikipedian2 (talk) 17:23, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

John Gioia

The notice said that I could remove it if I made the necessary changed and explained why in the edit summary, which I did.71.142.74.66 (talk) 21:42, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I see the revisions now, sorry about that.Wikipedian2 (talk) 21:49, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

CSD tagging

Hi, Wikipedian2. Thanks for the patrolling possible vandal edits. I just wanted to remind you to check an article's history before tagging for speedy deletion. As in the case of Swagger, the article was a vandalized disambiguation page -- so I reverted it. Also, even in its vandalized form, it wasn't gibberish and therefore didn't qualify for WP:G1. You may wish to review our speedy deletion criteria when tagging. Cheers. — CactusWriter 01:25, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank-you for your advice. Wikipedian2 (talk) 15:04, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

...for removing vandalism from my talk. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  20:40, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

My pleasure. Have a good day, Wikipedian2 (talk) 23:06, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Vega space

Hi. I removed the speedy delete tag as there is a clear assertion of importance (working on ESA missions). I have no opinion on the strength of the article. It can be taken to AfD if you feel notability is insufficient. Cheers. Taroaldo (talk) 22:53, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I will assume you are correct, and learn from this mistake. Thank-you, Wikipedian2 (talk) 23:01, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: User:KAIndofsortof

Hello Wikipedian2. I am just letting you know that I deleted User:KAIndofsortof, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. Salvio 22:56, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

This is just a procedural note, really, but criterion A7 —— as all "A" criteria — only applies to article namespace, so it cannot be used to request the speedy deletion of a userpage or of a subpage; criterion G11 —— as all "G" criteria — apply to all namespaces. Salvio 23:00, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank-you for advising me further of the criterion on speedy deletion. I am still learning when it comes to new pages and all feedback is appreciated highly. Thank-you, Wikipedian2 (talk) 23:03, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Wikipedian2. You have new messages at WT:EF.
Message added 23:10, 9 April 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

jOHN gIOIA

Please don't delete this article on John Gioia please do a basic google search to see how notable he is. In any case no more prods, take it to AfD, a place I know it will survive but I don't want to have to be looking over my shoulder, make sense? LA Times, SF Chronicle, SJ Mercury. Contra Costa Times. Richmond Confidential. El Cerrito Patch. West County Times. KTVU News. Sites dedicated to opposing him. Sites that praise him. His political profile. Major, Regional, Local and many other sources are available. He is notable.71.142.74.66 (talk) 06:31, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

As now you have added to the article, I no longer feel the need for it to be deleted. Regards, Wikipedian2 (talk) 16:33, 10 April 2011 (UTC) PS. Keep up the good work, its looking good!