User talk:EVula/Oct-Dec 2007

user page // talk page

admin • opining • matrix • fun • awards

This is an archive of EVula's past discussions. You can't edit the contents of this page, so nyah.

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, head over to User talk:EVula instead.

This archive contains comments posted between October 2007 and December 2007.

Archives

Current
2014: 1Q, 2Q, 3Q
2013: 1Q, 2Q, 3Q, 4Q
2012: 1Q, 2Q, 3Q, 4Q
2011: 1Q, 2Q, 3Q, 4Q
2010: 1Q, 2Q, 3Q, 4Q
2009: 1Q, 2Q, 3Q, 4Q
2008: 1Q, 2Q, 3Q, 4Q
2007: 1Q, 2Q, 3Q, 4Q
2006: 1Q, 2Q, 3Q, 4Q

Re: Sig code

I'd definitely be up for the 1st, more readable variation. Thanks, EVula, you're the best! hmwith talk 18:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the last variation is even better. Thanks again! hmwith talk 18:13, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has a new administrator!

Thanks, Oct-Dec 2007!
Thank you for voicing your opinion in my RfA, which passed today with a unanimous 79/0/0 tally. It feels great to be appreciated, and I will try my best to meet everyone's expectations. If you have any advice or tips, feel free to pass them along, as I am sure that I will need them! Cheers, hmwith talk 21:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On a personal note, thanks for helping me along the way! =) I look forward to future collaborations. hmwith talk 21:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, Hayley. If you have any newbie admin questions, you know where to edit. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:19, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(don't forget to test your deletion and blocking abilities here and here, respectively!)

Signpost updated for October 03, 2007

The Wikipedia Signpost


Volume 3, Issue 40	1 October 2007	About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "Buttered cat paradox"	News and notes: Commons uploaders, Wikimania 2008/2009, milestones
Wikimedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View

Shortcut : WP:POST

Automatically delivered by COBot 02:13, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for help at RfA

Hi again. Thanks for help in re-redirecting my posting. Also, I have created a legal sock-puppet at User:Bearian'sBooties, as you suggested at my RfA. Bearian 17:25, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:00, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My recent RfA

Alright. Thanks anyway!--Gp75motorsports 17:59, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References?

Hmm...you still haven't really explained to me why there is some really good referenced articles and some which are not so great. Is it because some articles don't have to be referenced, for example a computer game...is it because of the fact that a game isn't found in a non online-encyclopedia that it therefore isn't really required to have references (or citations) as long as the info isn't copied directly and it can be proved? Anyway, I decided to talk to you directly on your talk page, both talking to you on manual of style and TomasBats page got a little to hard for me to keep up with the conversation. Any comments? -Jack 21:28, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

The reason that some pages have references and others don't is simply because some have them and some don't. Ideally, all articles would be properly referenced, but there are more than 2 million articles, and this is a volunteer-driven project. People work on what they want, and generally don't work on what they aren't interested in. For example, I haven't edited Campiglione-Fenile because I have no interest in French provinces, while I'm sure that other people are entirely disinterested in The Zombie Survival Guide, which is a favorite book of mine (and I wrote the majority of the existing article). EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:55, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's a good point. Hahaha, I already knew that though...I just thought that maybe there was a different reason, oh well. However, I do have another question that has come to mind, after reading your reply...Does wikipedia actually have actual employed staff that manage and contribute (emphasis on the contribute) to this encyclopedia or is it just run and watched over by people like you and me? Oh and another thing…Is paraphrasing considered a breach of copyright (ie. Shouldn’t be done on Wikipedia) when I have found on two websites, containing legal information, that it isn’t? -Jack 01:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stealth Carbon Eagle (talk • contribs)

Question

Since you're always right =) and seem to know a great deal about html (when I thought I did), I have a question for you. I must keep missing something, because it says "Invalid raw signature; check HTML tags." when I try to use this signature:

нмŵוτнτ

'''[[User:hmwith|нмŵוτн]][[User talk:hmwith|τ]]'''

It gets my formerly 232 character sig down to 213 characters... if I can ever get it to work! What's wrong here? I'd greatly appreciate the help, and I know as soon as you point it out, I'll hit myself that I missed it. Thanks so much in advance! hmwith talk 22:38, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the plainlinks span is extraneous; it only serves to remove the little arrow from external links (compare: before and after). After some fiddling, it turns out that the "offending" code is the lack of quotes around the font color value. The two color values are also unneeded; I've removed the font tag (since font tags are evil) and moved it all inside the link. Here's an even further clarified version (with even extra spaces and ending semi-colors removed, just to get it as low as possible):

нмŵוτн τ

'''[[User:hmwith|нмŵוτн]][[User talk:hmwith|τ]]'''

Heh, I've actually redone the sig four times while writing this... it's been 213, 202, and 192, and this version is a whopping 178. Not bad at all. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:34, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I challenge you to make mine shorter :P Viridae ^Talk 06:01, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The gauntlet has been thrown!

Viridae ^T

[[User:Viridae|Viridae]][[User talk:Viridae|T]]

Hey, you never said I couldn't change it a bit. :P EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheat :P Viridae ^Talk 06:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But of course. I never said I was honest. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:05, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I can always count on you! Haha, you even inspired me to make a matrix, as well. Cheers! нмŵוτн τ 14:58, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome at LMO.WP and user lmo template

Hi! Welcome to Lombard wikipedia. The templates user-lmo are fully proteced as the user-en ones are at English wikipedia, if I am not wrong. I will add the interwiki link. Moreover, at that time there was a high risk of vandalism. Probably it's better they remain protected, but everything could be discussed. Bye bye, --81.208.125.60 15:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC) (lmo:user:Clamengh)[reply]

Boy, if people thought conversations spanning multiple talk pages on the same wiki were confusing, they'll flip at tracking it across multiple wikis. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:30, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Writing

I want to write articles on notable users who will be remembered for things like sockpuppetry. I understand you and Sesshomaru are involved in a few. Could you give me details? --BlackShadowWriter 21:37, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

EVula/Oct-Dec 2007, take a gander at TimySmidge's most recent creations. He made this BlackShadowWriter (talk · contribs · logs), along with the blocked BlockMeNowPlease (talk · contribs · logs). Kinda disruptive if you ask me. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 21:50, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm finished with all this. Someone already blocked Timy for six months, but I've extended it to indefinite. I've got better things to do with my time than play with socks. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:39, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My signature

Hi there, thanks for your help. Couple of problems though. The top and bottom borders are missing and the talk link doesn't work. It might be a browser issue. I'm using IE, what about you? Thanks again. Doyley Talk 15:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the talk won't work on your own talk page (see my sig for an example). Similarly, if you placed your sig on your userpage, the "Doyley" link wouldn't work. IE shouldn't be displaying the borders at all, but IE doesn't know jack shit when it comes to rendering CSS properly. Here's an updated sig that should have white borders at the top and bottom:

Doyley Talk

[[User:Doyley|Doyley]] [[User Talk:Doyley|Talk]]

Now it's 232 characters.
Now, all that said, I don't like the borders at all; sigs should just be to identify your posts, not call undue amounts of attention to them. Plus, the white is completely lost, since most pages have light colored backgrounds anyway. I'd recommend just sticking with the first version (since the white gets lost, and just adds to the code). EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:02, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, well on my original version there was a white border to provide a margin and a black border going all the way around. Without the white margin the black border was touching the text and it looked a mess. I think that is whay you are seeing as unnecessary code. Doyley Talk 16:11, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have done some work on it, got rid of the border. It is now 219 characters and I think it looks a lot better. Doyley Talk 16:21, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I'd just done a revision of the above that weighed in at 186, but I like that better anyway. :) Though, my ever-working need to tweak...

Doyley Talk

[[User:Doyley|Doyley]][[User talk:Doyley|Talk]]

Now it's just 199 characters, and you can tweak the spacing on either side by upping or lowering the "4px" value. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:29, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and completely unrelated to sigs, I'd recommend switching to a different browser, such as Firefox or Safari; IE is fraught with security problems and CSS quirks. Then again, I'm highly biased against IE, as I do web development professionally; you'll never meet anyone that does any amount of CSS coding that doesn't hate IE with a burning passion. :D EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:30, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've replaced it with your version. I know what you mean, I am a professional PHP developer. I use IE simply because almost all of my clients do and I need to know how it will look on their browser. I have a dual boot with Linux on my computer though that uses Firefox. I hate MS so I understand you biase ;-) Doyley Talk 16:43, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the only reason I use IE is to test out sites. I use a Mac, but I don't have an Intel machine (otherwise I'd install Windows *just* for testing sites in IE). I use a website called Browsercam to do all my testing, since I can quickly and easily check it on a wide range of browsers relatively quickly. It's not as good as running it natively, but definitely works well in a pinch (there's a free trial if you want to test it out before putting any money down). EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your Help

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thank you for your help with my signature and for also hating IE. Doyley Talk 16:46, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I love getting a barnstar with a smiley face for it and having it be for hating something with you. Wonderful juxtaposition there. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For knowing when to keep the tone light and in appreciation of these edits which have kept me smilling through an occasionally fraught process... WjBscribe 19:45, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I particularly liked the second comment. Finally I have an excuse for why my article writing has so many typos in it - I'm encouraging new people to start contributing... WjBscribe 19:45, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trust me, I can justify just about any kind of mistake. Just hit me up with your next debacle, and I'll find the silver lining in it somehow. For example, you just wanted to see if anyone was paying attention. Looks like your test worked.
(See? It's easy! :D)

Seriously though, I have to admit to having some serious reservations about the idea when I first saw the RfA name, but upon reading your argument, I was convinced that it wouldn't be an issue. I think having such a highly restricted purpose helps to alleviate most of the concerns people may have (though obviously not all). I think you are handling this push for an admin bot very well. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:01, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for personally updating the light, the way, the mouth.

ALthough I too have asked for updates to a section or thread, I was thoroughly confused as to why he wanted a personal engraved report, esp. in light of the fact that he knew that the editor had been blocked... ThuranX 06:10, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, seems to be a bit of poor wording; looks like a note to AN/I would have been sufficient for him. That said, I can easily understand why a note wouldn't have been dropped in the AN/I thread at all. EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:16, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, a couple of that sort of embarrassing situation and he'll learn to figure new ways to check for action on a topic, I've done followups, seen it's resolved, and just asked for admisn to close out a thread; now I use that sort or 'status' requests more to get clarifications where a thread seems to have gone into serious discussion for a day or more, then stopped abruptly, and seemingly in the middle, without a clear resolution. that sort of 'what's happening with this problem now?' often gets good summaries, or action moving again, which I think makes for better archives, which in turn makes citation of earlier sections easier and better evidence. ThuranX 06:35, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Animaniacs for Featured Article Status

EVula,
Thank you very much for your contributions to the Animaniacs article. I have just nominated the article for featured article candidacy, so if you want to express any concern about the article's quality, please do so here. Thanks again, Gak Blimby 19:43, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

Dear Sir- as an Admin for wikipedia you do realize that you represent wikipedia in every way. For me, you are an official mouthpiece. Thus, I wish to inform you that I am highly offended at your lack of civility and seemingly laughing at me and my very valid concerns. I have read through your request for beurcraticship and it seems many, many others share this concern. I must say it has been substantiated. Additionally, I feel that your levity in dealing with my concerns is unprofessional and unbecoming someone who is an admin. Bstone 04:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First and foremost, admins are not official mouthpieces. You are, of course, free to think of me as one. You'd be wrong, but you're still free to think so.

Secondly, while I'm sorry you're offended, you've demonstrated absolutely no understanding of the purpose for AN/I, or what the proper channels for dispute resolution are. Furthermore, I find your instance that massive changes be made simply because you got confused at what a warning message meant incredibly self-centered and arrogant. You're making borderline personal attacks[1][2] and then attempting to pin blame on someone else; I can honestly say that I have very little regard for both your editing attitude and your opinion of me.

The issues raised in my RfB are completely different from my dealings with you; while I appreciate your attempt at constructive criticism so I may better improve as both an editor and as an admin (which I'm actually quite receptive to, in all actuality), I've received far too little feedback similar to your own to feel that this is anything but an isolated incident (and if you want to bring my RfB into it, I'd like to point out that even those that opposed my becoming a 'crat praised my work as an administrator). Given what little direct interaction I've had with you and what I've observed, I think the issue here has very little to do with myself.

I am often light-hearted and friendly in my comments because, let's face it, this is just a website; I dunno about you, but I've got much better things to get worked up about. If my attitude offends you, all I can do is apologize for both the past offenses and the most assuredly future ones as well, as I'm certainly not going to change any time soon. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:23, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: if you truly think I'm out of line, and other editors agree with you, I wouldn't be opposed to putting myself up for re-confirmation as an administrator. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:47, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting how you accuse me of making "making borderline personal attacks" and in the same paragraph you state that I am "self-centered and arrogant". Truly, wikipedia needs no admins who deal with serious situation with levity and personal insults. Bstone 07:06, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm stating my opinion, not stating that someone's edits are vandalism. There's a difference; the fact that you see nothing wrong with your own commentary is the crux of the issue. EVula // talk // ☯ // 13:55, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cobi

Hey dude, just as a heads up, I've moved your comment in this RfA to the discussion area.[3] Anon users are most certainly allowed to participate in RfAs :) Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 08:41, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, anon comments are allowable in the Discussion area, but not in the actual !voting area (as it says on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship, "Any Wikipedian with an account is welcome to comment in the Support, Oppose, and Neutral sections"). Good move. EVula // talk // ☯ // 13:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: WP:AN/I

At this point, I'm seeing it as disruption on Doczilla's part. No one else ever commented on the case, and it appears pretty much over (I even lefted a response there verifying what I'll do from now on). What do you think? I'm willing to move on but he is reverting the messages back on my talk page. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:17, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is he even talking about? Is this related to the Bstone stuff too? EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not related to that, Doczilla (talk · contribs · logs) has backed off for now. I don't know what he was trying to prove by shoving that crap back in my user talk page when he is aware that the dispute is over, but he likes being disruptive I guess. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:18, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay. Thought I'd seen his name in conjunction with the above somewhere, but I could be mistaken. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANI help

Did the ANI post list the phone number? Nobody said they would call. The link is dead. I am willing to call if it seems like there is an emergency. Possible prank? Yes. Could someone die? Possible. Mrs.EasterBunny 20:06, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To butt in here, the edit was oversighted. Ask User:Eliz81 for details; she was the original poster. I saw the link, the edit went something like this: "Why do I cut myself...call *number* if you think you can help" on a talk page (can't remember which one right now). As I said in the ANI thread, there is the possibility that s/he is serious. Love,Neranei (talk) 20:09, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Emphasis on "possible". And by "possible", I mean "practically certain". The amount of drama surrounding this is astounding. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed there is, but all I'm saying is that this could be someone's cry for help. There have been incidences of stuff like this. Perhaps they don't have anyone to talk to. Yes, it is a long shot, but things that aren't likely do happen. Love,Neranei (talk) 20:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It could be; I'll grant you that much. But considering the insanely silly furor that's been generated over this and the tone of the IP's posts, the only remorse I feel is about the time being squandered on it, rather than for the potential loss of life. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is much too much drama. Someone needs to take care of it; either establish whether or not it's a hoax, and be done with it. Neranei (talk) 20:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments like "unblock me NOW before i slit my throat" (on the now-deleted talk page) most definitely mark this as an attempt at getting attention. The sooner everyone moves on, the better. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:30, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Block of User:NYCyclist1 for legal threats

Thanks for the block... but how exactly did you become aware of this? It's like you came out of the blue. Just wondering. Gscshoyru 04:28, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I felt a disturbance in the Force... also, it was reported to AIV.[4] EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:31, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Only 48 hours? I would have indef'd until they retract (and was going to until I saw you already blocked them)... but meh. On a related note, after hearing the same disturbance in the force, I removed the text that was the root of the problem per WP:V and WP:BLP. If someone finds a WP:RS it can go back in.--Isotope23 ^talk 13:04, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm still considering that indef as they mailed en-unblock essentially asking for an unblock so they can gather diffs to send to their council. I'm not too keen on a block expiring on someone with an outstanding legal threat. Thoughts?--Isotope23 ^talk 13:08, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is my first legal threat block, so I'm willing to admit that I was wrong to downgrade the block. Feel free to override me if you feel it appropriate to do so. EVula // talk // ☯ // 13:25, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to restore the indef for now. I'd rather not set an arbitrary time until this is sorted out... though I have no problem at all with an immediate unblock if they retract.--Isotope23 ^talk 13:34, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thanks for cleaning up after me. :)
I'm thinking that {{uw-lblock}} needs to be updated; the only reason I backed the block down was that I saw the template said "temporary", and jumped to a confusion about needing to down the block a bit. Perhaps it should say nothing at all about the block duration, since it's an indefinite block, but may be removed at any time. EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:40, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LEGAL suggests that while a threat is outstanding, the person should not be editing wikipedia. Personally, I tend to apply that as indef blocks that are immediately removed when the party recinds their legal threat. As long as they are pursuing legal action they are opting to follow a path of resolution that is inconsistent with them editing here. I think the "temporary" wording is there to suggest that it isn't necessarily a permanent block, but yeah... that might be better if clarified.--Isotope23 ^talk 14:47, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Weekly Episode 32

Great news! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 32 has been released!

.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/10/09/episode-32-trust-me/, and, as always, you can download past episodes and leave comments at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.

For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP 08:39, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery.
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.

RFA Thanks

Click there to open your card! → → →

My dear Wikipedian EVula,
Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 36 supports, 3 opposed, and 1 neutral. No matter if you !voted support, oppose, neutral, or even if you just stopped by to make a comment, I thank you for taking the time to drop by. Since I am a new admin, if you have any suggestions or concerns, feel free to inform me of them. Thank you and good day.

The Placebo Effect

Credits

This RFA thanks was inspired by The Random Editor, who in turn was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks. So unfortunately this is not entirely my own design.

This end the usual RFA thanks spam. You may return to your regular editing now.

Wikipedia Weekly

A couple new episodes - we're posting the infobox to save duplicating info.

Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly

Wiki Loves Monuments

Fuzheado, Gamaliel, Effeietsanders, Nikikana, LilyOfTheWest, and SuperHamster discuss the annual Wiki Loves Monuments worldwide photography contest

Onsite · Offsite
Subscription · Feedback

For the podcast crew -- Tawkerbot 20:34, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFA Thank You Note from Jehochman

		Ready to swab the decks!
		Another motley scallawag has joined the crew. Thanks for your comments at my RFA. Arrrgh! - - Jehochman ^Talk 05:18, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Hello EVula, I do believe this is the first time we've talked directly! G'day from Australia :) Well I have a question regarding Tangobot, as the user who made it seems to be inactive, therefore how does the bot run if there is no user to run it? This probably is a silly question. But I’m confused :S Phgao 05:27, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While Tangotango certainly isn't active on Wikipedia in the sense that he's making edits currently, he's most definitely around; when I emailed him about a minor detail about Tangobot, I got a response almost immediately. I think he's at least watching his bot. EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:06, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah right! A clever distinction. Phgao 06:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-Admin Closure

Er.. yes I tried to be bold and closed this RfA after consulting with the editor beforehand here, hope I did everything right, would you kindly check? Phgao 09:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, looks like you did everything properly. Good job. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimania 2008/Conference of the Americas

Hello, As you may or may not know, Alexandria, Egypt was selected to host Wikimania 2008 [5]. So as to prevent the hard work of the many Wikimedians involved in the Atlanta bid from going to waste, we have decided to host a conference for the Americas. This is in no way an attempt to compete with Wikimania or make a statement against Wikimania.

As one of the people signed up to help with the Wikimania Atlanta bid, we hope you will join us at the Wikimedia Conference of the Americas. We will be having a meeting tonight in IRC tonight (Oct 15) at 9:30PM in #cota-atlanta on irc.freenode.org to discuss the conference. For more information about IRC see [6].

For more information about the Wikimedia Conference of the Americas see http://www.cota-atlanta.org and our wiki http://www.cota-atlanta.org/wiki.

If you do not wish to receive further notices about the COTA please remove your name from our notify list. --Cspurrier 18:13, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yay! I'll be sure to keep my May open next year. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 42	15 October 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Brion Vibber interview
Wikimania 2008 awarded to Alexandria	Board meeting held, budget approved
Wikimedia Commons reaches two million media files	San Francisco job openings published
Community sanction noticeboard closed	Bot is approved to delete redirects
License edits under consideration to accommodate Wikipedia	WikiWorld comic: "Soramimi Kashi"
News and notes: Historian dies, Wiki Wednesdays, milestones	Wikimedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Military history	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:28, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hypocondriac's Thanks

Hypocondriac says thank you for typing in his Talk page and that he and EVula are good friends —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypocondriac (talk • contribs) 12:29, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Heyhey EVula, I left you a comment on my talk page on faroese wiki. In short, your right, thanks for letting me realise its silly to keep language templates protected! :) cheers --Girdi 17:02, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome and the response. :) (and, for that matter, dropping me a line here) EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry

Please do not block this user name. I'm sorry for all of the socks I have made. And I confess. TimySmidge Jr. is me. In fact, I have no children, as I am only 12 years old. As for BlackShadowWriter, Block Me Now Please, and Darn it all, they are also me. I am sorry for these socks and will never do it again. Please do not consider this username a sock, but rather a temporary replacement. If you unblock my real user name, you can block this one. Once again, I'm sorry. --TimySmidge 20:10, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about this: you can go back to making constructive editing (no personal article forking in your userspace, no misuse of Fair Use images, etc) with this username, and you stop using any alternate accounts. This way, you've got a bit of a "clean slate", so to speak. That sound good? EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would be okay, but I really don't like having the second "m". Also, why do you and Sesshomaru always talk all the time together? --TimySmidge 20:18, 17 October 2007 (UTC)I'm truley sorry[reply]

What about "Timy Smidge"? If you can't register the account because it is too close to your old username, I could create it for you.
As for my conversations with Sesshomaru, I talk with him because he's left messages for me; I generally try to respond to everyone that posts here (and that needs a response; a simple "thanks" doesn't really need one). EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the sig code suggestion!

I recently decided to make my signature more interesting and this was an experiment, your suggestions are great though. I'm going to go ahead and clean it up based on your advice. I owe you one! -- Atama sama 19:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing, no problem. If you come up with anything else, feel free to drop me a line and I can take a look at the code; I've got a pretty good track record of trimming down signatures that are hitting the maximum number of characters that the system allows. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects

Can you delete Jon Richardson, comedian? It currently targets to the page I moved it to, Jon Richardson (entertainer)‎. I corrected all of the pages it linked to. None of these names carry such an article title. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:06, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect deleted, though you did miss the one on Jon Richardson. All taken care of. EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:58, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry about that. I'm exausted yet there's still so, so much to do. Think I'll stop for tonight. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 06:37, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I've made similar mistakes. You can also tag pages with {{db}} and explain why it should be deleted, and someone will take care of it. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:07, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is this User:Malomeat/CO TIER LIST? A sandbox? I'm sure the user page is valid. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:25, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have no clue what the hell that's supposed to be... Malomeat seems to be making actual edits, and as long as people are actively contributing to the encyclopedia, I'm inclined to give them a bit of leeway on their userspace, but that's just confusing. You could always ask them directly, I suppose. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 03:53, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can I borrow your matrix design @ meta?

I just registered there, gonna try to make the wikirounds to prevent impersonation. Since User:ArielGold credited you with her matrix design, I wanted to ask you in return. Many thanks, ~Eliz81 ^(C) 19:05, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely! Drop me a line (either here or on Meta) when you're done so I can add it to my links at the bottom. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Umm... yeah. I'm wikiformatting challenged. I think it's done?? [7]. :) Thanks so much btw! Now time to create accounts and stop more spoofing. ~Eliz81 ^(C) 20:18, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion: you can get around the table of contents being in the matrix one of two ways. Either put __TOC__ before the table begins, or toss a heading up before the matrix begins (which is what I did, and will probably look better; all the headings of the matrix appear as sub-heads then). EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:45, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Phew. I'm now registered in over 140 wikipedias!! It's been so cool to get template welcome messages in so many languages, though a few have added English notes like "so what bring you here, English girl??" lol though not exactly in those words. I added the TOC thing and now it looks much better. Woo! ~Eliz81 ^(C) 00:43, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but the trick is to have actually edited (outside your userspace) with all those accounts. Then you will have attained cross-wiki enlightenment. ;)
I do like getting welcomed in all the different languages, though I'm always pleasantly surprised when I get someone who's actually paid attention to my userpage and (a) responds only in English, and/or (b) acknowledges that I'm not a wiki-newbie at all. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Volapük Wikipedia

Hi EVula! I´ve recently seen your account (for dealing with interwiki link issues) at the Volapùk Wikipedia. Did you know, by the way, that there is a Proposal for Closing the Volapük Wikipedia? Maybe you could help us keep it by casting a vote there against this proposal -- if you think this is a good idea?... --Smeira 23:26, 23 tobul 2007 (UTC)

I've cast my vote for keeping the project open. EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David Q. Johnson

Can you look into this account? Fellow user JJJ999 called it a sockpuppet, but who is it a sock of? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 01:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No clue; I'm actually relatively inexperienced when dealing with socks, and there aren't enough edits to really get a sense for who it is. They do indeed seem to have stopped editing, so there's no real reason to pursue it any further. EVula // talk // ☯ // 02:27, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WTF?

Why is my page User:hmwith/sigs listed in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion? I can't find anything on the page that put it there... You can always help me out, so... WTF? нмŵוτн τ 23:03, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, linking to it here made your page show up too... нмŵוτн τ 23:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Put a ":" before a category name, otherwise it adds the page the link is on to the category. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 00:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, though, I'm not sure why your sig page showed up there; by the time I responded, the category wasn't there anymore. Hrm. EVula // talk // ☯ // 00:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Returning spammer

Dai3tna is back, this time as the cleverly disguised User:Dai3tnacom. Same nonsense. --PMDrive1061 06:53, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User already blocked, but I've expanded it so they can't create more accounts. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:05, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

Hi EVula, I originally wrote this to respond to your comment here, but I wanted to be sensative to another editor because the situation I refer to is settled and I don't want to cause undue stress.

The most recent time I saw WP:D invoked, the response at ANI was disappointing. We should make sure the community doesn't appear to condone the use of the WP:D essay to attack other editors. I might not have as much of a problem with it, if that were to happen. But a couple of days ago on ANI, an editor complained of such a personal attack and exactly 1 other person took the time to rebuke its use in that manner (over at least 2 days). At about the same time, about 3-5 admins swooped in very quickly to defend the WP:D essay at MfD (Oh and I think 2 people at ANI took the time to tell the person complaining, that they were thin-skinned and whiny). Now the situation is resolved, and the editor realizes that he/she shouldn't have used it that way. . .but the way it went down was wrong.

I don't mean to complain to you specifically, just thought you might want to know where I'm coming from at the meta page. Take care, R. Baley 05:59, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, without any concrete details (which I certainly don't blame you for keeping to yourself), I can't respond too much to the situation. I understand that, yes, sometimes WP:DICK can be used antagonistically, but that's true for a lot more than that one particular essay; I've seen WP:NPA get thrown at admins that are simply voicing their opinions about editors.

The only reason that WP:DICK and WP:DOUCHE are so contentious, as far as I can tell, is because of the language used (heh, especially Cyde's essay). It is a position I am entirely unmoved by, which is why I've responded in the MfD the way I have. EVula // talk // ☯ // 08:49, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your response. Take care and happy editing, R. Baley 06:57, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question

How exactly do I close deletion discussions that are ridiculous? It said delete the image because it was in the wrong article... so I moved it to the right article, and the discussion is now obsolete (no one's commented since the person who proposed it for deletion). Should I wait it out or just close it now per WP:SNOW or something? нмŵוτн τ 18:08, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'd say that if the terms of the original deletion are obsolete and the discussion has died off, you can go ahead and close it per WP:SNOW (just make sure you cite it explicitly for the sake of full transparency). Toss {{ifd top}} and {{ifd bottom}} around the discussion. (sadly, as obviously-named as those templates are, I still have to hunt them down every time I need them) EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deskana

I asked him a question here but he has a habit of not replying at times. Would you kindly answer it? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:47, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it got lost in the mix of other messages. I've deleted the pages (though you also could have just tagged them with {{db-u1}} and they would have been deleted not long afterwards). EVula // talk // ☯ // 23:30, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Weekly Episode 33

Great news! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 33 has been released!

.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/10/26/wikipedia-weeekly-30/, and, as always, you can download past episodes and leave comments at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.

For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP ^(?) 07:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery.
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.

Successful RfA - Thank you!

Thank you for participating in my recent RfA. It was successful, and I was promoted to Administrator today. I appreciate your comments and will take them to heart as I learn the ropes. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 23:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 43	22 October 2007	About the Signpost

Fundraiser opens, budget released	Biographies of living people grow into "status symbol"
WikiWorld comic: "George Stroumboulopoulos"	News and notes: Wikipedian Robert Braunwart dies
WikiProject Report: League of Copyeditors	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:06, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commons

Yup, that's me - need to figure out a way to template my userHeader and use it across projects I guess ;) Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 19:12, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could go with my route: I use my Meta account to verify my (160+) accounts in my matrix, and then have all my userpages link back to that (via both a link in my header box and in the globe icon at the top right). Then all you have to do is the initial setup without making changes for every single account you create. Works out fairly well. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm being targeted

I don't know why but I've been targeted by trolls and possible sockpuppets lately, however, it seems to have stopped for now. Is it possible that this is the same person abusing usernames? I'm considering a CheckUser report. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:33, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think a CU request would be out of line at all in this case. I wouldn't be surprised if Shinobigai and Ken shoryuken were the same person. EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess we shall see what happens next. Thanks for everything EVula. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know, my name is easier to type out than "{{PAGENAME}}". It's a full 7 characters less you have to type. ;P EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:55, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I keep forgetting to use "subst" when I do that. I have now fixed it. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:17, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi EVula, just now I need your help, please can you tell me what's wrong in this page, or if now does it satisfy the notability guideline? [8] Please tell me it with simple words, I'm not very able in Wikipedia. thanks --Carlons 21:08, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be getting advice on your talk page. Probably for the best, as notability standards aren't my strength. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:36, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: RfA note

EVula, with all due respect (which is considerable, I might add): I gave it some thought beforehand and then went ahead and identically tagged each of those very similar opposes so as to (i) cry foul as vehemently as possible, out of fear that an admin might get away with this and that it might then create a precedent for other likewise inacceptable things; and (ii) to mark those opposes as being —for all relevant purposes— identical.

Reacting on a per RfA basis to Kurt Weber's "self-nom" 15 minutes, or Kelly Martin's "WikiProject endorsement" monomania wasn't any useful, imo. These "different" !votes don't each merit a different discussion on each of the RfA pages, since they are pointy and single-issue and have marginal relevance for any specific RfA. So I judged it appropriate to tag those comments rather than reacting to their validity case-by-case, with the secondary focus of informing others who had already begun to oppose per those comments.

Also, I do not believe this amounts to wikistalking or even assumption of bad faith, as Mikka suggested. I tried only to describe what I saw and what I think to be of immediate intersubjective "conveyability", namely that those are indeed disregardeable point votes.

You see, I don't care much for the wrong kind of sympathy. There's many ways to be nice, good ones and bad ones. And if an admin (who really should know better) feels compelled to start making point !votes on RfAs, there should be someone to —how formulate this as civilly as possible?— carefully pull the proverbial mop out their ass and politely beat them over the head with it.

Admin patience with normal user can grow thin, and they may then begin issuing blocks. My non-admin patience with admins can grow thin, too, but there is virtually nothing I could do. Post to ANI? Forget it. Been there, done that. It never carries any fundamental consequences. So the only opportunity to cry foul is to do it in situ.

Further, looking around a bit, things like [9], [10], [11], and [12] make me believe that the RfA comments are not such a totally isolated incident, after all. I've seen non-admins blocked for less. For example myself. Indef. Twice. Without warning. And those blocks were justified. — Dorftrottel⁠ 16:50, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Btw: I suppose you saw this? I read that as announcing a WP:POINT violation which may justify a preventative block. Then again, I may not know policy as well as the average admin, and it's not my call anyway. — Dorftrottel⁠ 17:04, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trust me, I didn't leave you that message because I disagreed with you... heh, not at all (just as I agree that stuff like Kurt's "self-nom" argument was, in a word, bullshit). I consider Mikkalai's edits to be highly pointy and borderline trolling, not to mention incredibly counter-productive (and that's not even to mention the fact that I personally disagree with the assessment). But at the end of the day, Mikkalai is a member of the community and as such is welcome to voice their opinions/concerns in RfAs (just as long as they're aware that their comments are open to discussion).

I'm just saying that your messages seem to exacerbate the situation, which is incredibly unfortunate, as I believe you are both (a) right, and (b) well within your right to flag potentially disruptive !votes in RfAs that seemingly have ill-will behind them. (as I consider the RfA process to be both a discussion and a community decision, I support the ability for regular users to call into question any !votes, supporting or opposing)

In short, it's just a shitty situation, and one that I think can best be handled by allowing someone to hang themselves, rather than taking an active role. EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:36, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. I will heed your advice and log out for the rest of the day. I just joined the mages guild anyway and now I'm going to settle some scores with my all-new mage's staff... :-D Best regards, — Dorftrottel⁠ 18:50, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Man, I wish every minor dispute over RfAs could be resolved by the involved parties playing video games instead. Things would move much easier if everyone learned from your example. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MonoBook

Best Regards! Thank you EVula.[13] --CyclePat 18:28, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, glad I could help. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:34, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/The Haunted Angel 2

Well I answered to your first comment without fully registering that it not only JackRm but also another edit of yours that caused the conflict. I'll now sleep over this. --Tikiwont 19:50, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me. I'm watching the RfA closely (as I strongly believe that THA would make a good admin), so I'll see your response. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:09, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know THA better and I find this all unfortunate. One quality seems to be a "thick skin" that will help him in some areas but was also according to others uncalled for here. An I am disappointed with the reactions to the repeated suggestions that there might be a problem. It is just one thing, but also the only concern he has been asked to consider. Nevertheless, I struck a maybe too harsh part of my comment, but am not sure if further comments from me are necessary or would help. And your collection of grammar related userboxes would certainly improve if you replace the current "Grammar Nazi" one with one of the available alternatives. --Tikiwont 08:25, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I finally noticed the alternative grammar userboxes ({{User:Coldacid/Userboxes/Grammar Nazi}}, {{User:Joseph/ubx/grammar nazi}}, and {{User Grammar nazi}})... I disagree that my collection would improve.
I find it interesting that there's not one, not two, but three different Grammar Nazi userboxes. EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:45, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

These redirects, Trunks dragon ball and Trunks dragon ball z, are they potentially useful? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, being unfamiliar with the whole Dragon Ball mythos, but they appear to be "lazy search redirects", which I personally consider mildly valid. They certainly aren't hurting anything, at worst. EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to ask if this was a personal attack. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:58, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The grammar is bad enough that it's reasonable to assume that the "12 year old" comment was in reference to themselves. :) I'd assume good faith on this one, if only because it's not actually worth the energy to chastise them over; sometimes a light touch is better than a heavy-handed one. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:01, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been trying to remove an uncivil comment from the DBZ talk page but the user keeps re-adding it [14], [15]. It may or may not be targeted to anyone but the tone is quite innapropiate IMHO. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:49, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The comment is mildly antagonistic, yes, but removing the comment repeatedly can be seen as antagonistic from his point of view. I'd let it stand; sometimes the best reaction to borderline incivility is to ignore it (sometimes people are dicks just to get a rise out of people; by refusing the get riled up, you effectively cut them off at the legs. I'm not saying that that's the situation here; just some general advice). EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:12, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you delete this image? I don't think source information is able to be placed long after the image's creation, but I could be wrong. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 21:40, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you missed this thread. (See above) {^_^} Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, sure did. I'm just so popular to talk to, it causes problems... :)
There's no time limit on when a source can be provided, so it's fine to just leave the image alone for now. No need to hurry it right along; it might find a home in the next seven days. *shrug* EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quelle thespian

I do comedy, and stand-up when I get over my nervousness (things where I'm doing other people's words, I haven't the slightest nervousness about, and my own words *written*, I'm very confident about, but *performing my words* always gives me a huge bout of 'what if they don't LIKE ME?' worries). Thespian was, also, a shapeshifting superhero character I played about 23 years ago in a roleplaying game, and is a near-anagram of my real name. I've used it online since I was 13 or 14, and first logged into bbses ;-) --Thespian 05:22, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As badly as I flubbed a good portion of my lines at tonight's rehearsal, I'm afraid I can't relate to the "I'm fine with other peoples' words" bit. :) Cool that you do standup, though; it's something I admire, but I just don't think I can do it (I'm a funny guy, but I generally need something to work with; the thought of just standing there actively trying to be funny is mildly horrifying).
Interesting how sometimes names can come from one place and stick with you for a very long time... "EVula" was a name of a computer disk (yes, I named them... I was young) that just happened to be sitting next to me when I first signed onto the website for Escape Velocity back in 97 or 98. I've been using it everywhere ever since. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I recently did a 'Your Ideal Profession' test, and it told me, #3 of so, that I should be a 'stand-up comic'. I've been working with a friend, a professional comic, to see if I can possibly work that into an opening for my next little attempt; "I'm here...because the computer told me to be." --Thespian 06:02, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, maybe you could do a little stand-up routine the next time Wikimania is state-side. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 44	29 October 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Florence Devouard interview
Page creation for unregistered users likely to be reenabled	WikiWorld comic: "Human billboard"
News and notes: Treasurer search, fundraiser, milestones	WikiProject Report: Agriculture
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:31, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

rollback

I am reverting your edits, you put an oppose in the support section. Anyway I was formatting the comments not changing them, you have also removed my oppose. The sunder king 15:16, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't tell me what I meant by my !vote; it was a joke, which I consider fairly obvious. Regardless of that fact, you de-indented several discussion comments, which artificially inflated the opposition section. If you revert my edits, I will revert you right back and block; you're disrupting the RfA process with your misguided editing. (cross-posted comment on both users' talk pages to ensure it is seen)EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was an accident! sorry I miscalcuated I never meant to rig the RFA or anything, but you can't threaten to block me, read WP:BLOCK by the way I've been on the project for months and made thousands of edits, I am no vandal. The sunder king 15:20, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I threatened the block because you're disrupting Wikipedia, which is covered in the block policy. It's one thing to make a mistake, but it's another to willingly make that mistake again after being warned by an administrator not to do it again. Your revert came before my warning, so I'm not blocking you, but you shouldn't format comments if you don't know what you're doing. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:22, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No I am not, it was an accidental misreading of the RFA which lead to me making a misleading edit by accident, I am an experienced editor and I do not wish to disrupt. Anyway I've stopped. The sunder king 15:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That you stopped is my only concern. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:25, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Somethings wrong, why did you put a "oppose" in the support section, and why did riana support the RFA saying "shameless troll"??? and other people are reporting for silly reasons, what's going on? The sunder king 15:31, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Riana and I both know Gurch well enough to crack jokes with him (well, Riana probably does; I don't know Gurch personally, but I enjoy making jokes on RfAs on occasion). EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:40, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

changed to support now, I relised he can be a big help ;). The sunder king 16:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Groovy! I'm glad you reconsidered; I personally think he'll be a great help to the project. EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:16, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the laugh...

"(→User-reported - manually removing Evilblood4, who has already been blocked (suck it, bot!))". Into The Fray ^T/C 16:05, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just gotta celebrate any time you can beat the bots. :D EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:08, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response

For a reason which wasn't very smart on my part (I was being lazy, and didn't want to do something I should have done). I fixed it. --əˈnon gahy ♫Look What I've Done!♫ 22:29, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, groovy. I've certainly done stuff like that before, so I've got no room to talk. :D EVula // talk // ☯ // 03:36, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar Nazi userbox

Hi. I'd like to respond here to your comments from the THA Rfa. First, I'm not quite clear why you are ridiculing people's concerns. ("pathetically ridiculous") Sure, I hear that you yourself don't take it seriously. However, because some voters are concerned that THA did not take the issue seriously enough, or at least deal w/it efficiently, doesn't it undermine THA's candidacy for one of THA's main allies to not take it seriously too? I can imagine your frustration, esp since THA may well deserve to be an admin. However, for what it's worth, from my perspective your comment is to the candidate's detriment.

Second, I'm curious about your own userbox. You've drawn attention to it twice. Since some people are offended by it, and consider it inappropriate for an admin, do you plan to delete it or under what circumstances you would do so? (I've worded it this awkward way because I'm uncertain that I would request this myself.) Thanks for your consideration. Pls reply on my Talk, if you don't mind. HG | Talk 20:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've drawn attention to it twice because everyone has said stuff along the lines of "I can't believe you'd run for adminship with that box", when I did the very thing with no problem whatsoever. Even well after becoming an admin (coming up on a full year), that userbox has never once been an issue. That is why I have such a flippant attitude towards the whole situation; it's a little thing that's gotten blown waaaay out of proportion (in my opinion). Opposing because of THA's reaction to the situation? That's different. But to the userbox's mere existence, and the vague and nebulous idea that somehow it will make THA a less effective administrator? Absurd.

As for whether I'd take it down, I'd have to say pretty adamantly that I would not, unless I was presented with evidence that it disrupted the project. If I had such evidence, I would take it down immediately. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:36, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The distinction you draw (between THA's reaction and the presence of the userbox) is important, but I didn't sense that it wasn't drawn so clearly in your recent comment. I gather that your second answer suggests a fairly high hurdle. That is, presumably something could be considered offensive or uncivil without disrupting the project, right? In any case, thanks for your straightforward responses. HG | Talk 21:58, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I suppose it is a rather high hurdle, as I can't imagine an example of a single userbox hidden away in someone's userspace disrupting the project. I think the clearest distinction between my use of the box and THA's is that his was front-and-center on his userpage, while mine was on a subpage, and is surrounded by other grammar-related boxes (if it were on, say, my interests or personal subpages, I could more readily understand confusion over its purpose).

At most, I think that, once he removed the box, the whole thing should have been a dead issue. Concerns that it would be misconstrued by new users are perfectly valid, in my opinion, but to question THA's judgement for having ever used the box is blowing the problem out of proportion. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough and, for what it's worth, I agree that context/placement is relevant. Be well. HG | Talk 22:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My recent RfA

Thank you for participating in my recent RfA. Although the voting ended at 36/22/5, there was no consensus to promote, and the RfA was unsuccessful. I would like the thank you nonetheless for supporting me during the RfA, and hope that any future RfA’s proceed better than this one did. Again, I thank you for your support. ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 02:05, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Riana

Geez. You know you've been on Wikipedia for way too long when even those you thought you'd see around forever start to go. :-( Thanks for telling me. I hope you're not thinking of leaving too. Best regards, Hús ö nd 02:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think about it from time to time, but I think I'm in it for the long haul. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:50, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully, on your oppose of Hdt

I would respectfully ask you to reconsider your oppose on Hdt's RfA. You call it "knee-jerk" and I would agree. His contribs throw up no real flags, and he seems a very friendly and civil fellow. As adminship is "no big deal", and this good editor is right on the line (68-70% right now), I'd respecfully ask you to reconsider your oppose. I've appreciated your contributions to other RfA's, and I know that you do not just canvas them with opposes. As such, I felt like you might be open to reconsidering your vote, based upon the fact that Hdt DID wait nearly 3 months this time, racked up 3000+ edits in the process, and is in general not a problem editor. Also, for the record, I am not a Wikifriend of his or anything like that. I'd never interacted with him prior to this RfA. I'm just an editor of the project, concerned with the fact that good editors are often being denied adminship. Thanks in advance for any time you spend taking another look at your vote on Hdt83. K. Scott Bailey 13:02, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hdt83 mentions that being open to constructive criticism is an important trait in an administrator (which is absolutely true). However, I see absolutely no evidence that Hdt83 paid any mind to the numerous calls that he not self-nominate again. To quote myself from his previous RfAs:

(Neutral - RfA #2) "3. I'm sorry, I just can't quite get behind this RfA. Barely any time has passed since your last RfA, and while I have no doubt that someone can immediately turn their attentions to their own limitations, only time can tell if their attempts will actually bear fruit [emphasis added for this conversation]; without this time having elapsed, the complaints in your first RfA still stand (in my opinion). The canvassing bit that tennisman pointed out is also mildly disturbing; unless you've worked with that editor in a training capacity (for example, Husond provided me solid advice in my editor review, and so I dropped him a note when my RfA took flight), I don't think it was proper. EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:39, 19 June 2007 (UTC)"
(Oppose - RfA #3) "19. You're waiting about a month between RfAs, despite the fact that numerous people have mentioned that you need to give it more time. You really need to be more receptive to feedback, especially when you volunteer yourself for it (as happens in an RfA). Stop self-nominating every month [emphasis added for this conversation], and concentrate on improving the project for a couple of months before coming back here. At this point, you're just pissing away any good will that you're building up. EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC)"

Several other editors also voiced their opinions that Hdt83 shouldn't self-nominate again, but instead wait for someone to nominate him. While yes, he did go out and keep working on the project like I suggested, that's also something that's to be expected from any RfA candidate, and so isn't particularly extraordinary. Fact is, he's being given sound advice from multiple users (and I would consider advice on adminship from admins something that any candidate should pay close attention to), and he's (apparently) disregarding it. I don't consider that a particularly constructive stance to take, and so I've opposed the RfA, and don't feel the need to retract my !vote. I do appreciate you dropping me a line, though. EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:00, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now that Newyorkbrad has weighed in in favor of my view that recommending someone not self-nom (in direct contradiction to RfA instructions) is not good advice, are you any more willing to reconsider your opposition to Hdt? He clearly listened to the "wait a few months" advice (which was spot on, IMO), and did not listen to the "advice" to not self-nominate (which was clearly not good advice, also IMO). Whether or not you choose to at least consider the fact that your opposition was perhaps ill-founded, as I stated before, my respect for you remains. I'll just put a bit less weight into your opinions on RfA, that's all! :) Regards, K. Scott Bailey 01:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly not good advce is totally subjective - in this case I happen to agree with EVula, because in my opinion the flurry of self noms is a possible indication of power hunger. I find it interesting that he can't wait and find someone who is willing to nominate him. Viridae ^Talk 01:56, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is a clear assumption of bad faith. How can you possibly ascertain that a "flurry" of self-noms indicates "power hunger" in Hdt, especially given the fact that self-noms are not only allowed, but encouraged? That simply does not follow logically. I'm trying hard to understand how doing something that is encouraged (or, in the converse, advising someone AGAINST doing something that is encouraged) by the actual RfA instructions constitutes evidence of "power hunger" but I just don't see it. K. Scott Bailey 02:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hypothetically speaking, would you consider advice to report someone to AN/I for vandalism "good advice"? If not, why, if you believe that "good adv[i]ce is totally subjective"? Good advice, is actually not always subjective. In many cases, it's either good (follow the instructions at a given page, for example) or bad (ignore the instructions at a given page, for example). K. Scott Bailey 02:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[de-indent] I'm not going to bother breaking my response down into a point-by-point comment, as I haven't the time to dedicate to such a response. I will say this, though: I don't care what the RfA instructions are. I personally feel that the candidate shouldn't self-nominate anymore, and it is an opinion (apparently) shared by numerous other editors. The candidate ignored that advice, which he is certainly within his right to do so; likewise, I'm within my right to oppose based on that fact. The instructions aren't some gold-plated, handed-down-from-on-high list of requirements; they are general recommendations, and editors are more than welcome to subject candidates to their own requirements, even if they run contrary to the official instructions (to a certain degree, of course; someone who opposed any editor with under 20k edits wouldn't be taken seriously). If I had seen Hdt comment on why he was self-nomming yet again, I might have reconsidered my !vote, but he completely glossed over it (with a statement that made the glossing over stand out all the more, in my mind).

I'm beginning to tire of being told that my advice is bad advice; you think I'm wrong, I think you're wrong, and I'm willing to let it drop as a case of "we have to agree to disagree", but you won't let it drop. I honestly couldn't care less about the whole situation; if I were a 'crat, I'd probably be a lot more invested in it, but I'm not, so I'm not. I honestly would have forgotten about the whole damn thing if not for the repeated discussion about it here and on WP:BN. While I admire your dedication to what you believe is the good of the project, you're starting to become a little too hostile for my taste (saying that the 'crats aren't bold enough just because they disagree with you [16] is ridiculous). EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:21, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Instructons are there for a reason. Advice to ignore them is what then, if not "bad"? Nothing in Hdt's contribs raises any redflags. Nothing. The only real problem I see anyone cite is the self-nom, wanting-it-to-bad issue. I'm sorry if you take offense at it, but it's incontrovertible that opposing on the basis of self-nomming is bad form. And for the record, if you look at Hdt's talk page, he's had offers of noms come in already, based mainly on the fact that so many people piled on about the spurious self-nom nonissue. I would be interested to see what would happen if someone put him up for RfA next week. What would be the oppose rationale then? K. Scott Bailey 05:07, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Instructions aren't the Word of God; RfA participants are well within "the bounds" (for lack of a better term) to ask a candidate to not self-nominate. If he's had offers for nominations, then it's all the more ridiculous that he self-nominated, and shows poor judgement on his part (considering the fact that the self-nom was an issue last time).

If he were put up next week, I'd oppose for the exact same reason I did this time: a lack of evidence that the candidate can accept constructive criticism. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:15, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The offers came in after he was voted down by you all, as a sort of protest of the perceived ridiculousness of it all, I would guess. And, for the record, RfA participants are not "within the bounds" to tell someone not to self-nom. That's akin to saying it's okay to instruct an editor to report vandals to AN/I or RFPP. It's forbidding him from doing something explicitly allowed by the instructions, and as such is spurious. I don't believe you told Hdt that in bad faith. I just believe you were wrong in giving him that advice, and now you refuse to rethink your position. That's fine, and we can agree to disagree. K. Scott Bailey 05:25, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your argument about vandal-reporting to ANI or RFPP is silly; those pages have specific purposes, just as vandal reporting has a specific place for it to be done (even though I've seen plenty of "please kill this account" reports made directly on admin talk pages). Telling someone to report elsewhere disrupts numerous processes; asking a user to not-self nominate is different. If Hdt had said anything about the whole self-nom issue, and explained why he decided to just up and self-nom yet again, I might have reconsidered my argument. But he didn't. No amount of wikilawyering is going to convince me that I was wrong. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:40, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just as there are instructions (and they're not the "word of God" either) at the top of AN/I, AIV, et al, so there are at the top of RfA. We can't treat one set as optional and the other as mandatory. Oh, and are you trying to escalate? Accusing me of wiki-lawyering is certainly not helpful. Especially after I had basically said "agree to disagree." K. Scott Bailey 06:09, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, whatever, conversation done, I don't care anymore. I'm tired of this whole thing. EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Barnstar

Haha, well it's the thought that counts, right? :) Actually, odd that you left me a message right as I was looking at your userpage. I saw a pretty blatant impersonator of yours that wasn't listed in the impersonators section, so I took the liberty of adding them myself. GlassCobra 07:44, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, I'm aware of that one, but I'd left it off on purpose. *shrug* It was originally to not have my real name right out there, but considering I link to my IMDB listing (and I've been addressed by my real name by vandals before), it's a moot point. Thanks for adding it. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 07:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, my bad, I should have figured you left it out on purpose, my fault. By the by, seeing as you do know me from various other intarnetz places (EV-Nova.net, Ambrosia, your old forums), do I qualify for inclusion in the "folks that I know from elsewhere" section? :) GlassCobra 07:52, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I... but... wait, what's the username that I would know you best by? I just did a search for "GlassCobra" on the ASW boards but got nothing... at any rate, if you're a former Lair dweller (gee, I really should update the site sometime...), by all means, add yourself. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 07:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I don't go by this name anywhere but here. On all those other places, I just went by Guest. Not really sure why, but I'm sure it drove everyone crazy. Heh. :) GlassCobra 08:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, now that name I do recognize. Yes yes, you definitely deserve to add yourself (just make sure you add the comment that you're Guest; I'm likely to forget, and go "why the hell is GlassCobra listed?" :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 08:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right, all done! Thanks very kindly for the vote on my RfA, and also congrats on hitting 22k! Personally, I can't even comprehend having that many... GlassCobra 08:13, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If someone had told me that, after correcting a typo on my (then) girlfriend's high school's Wikipedia article would have led to twenty-two thousand en.wp edits, adminship on three wikis (coming up on the 1-year mark here on en.wp), and accounts on more than 160 different WMF wikis (not to mention editing in roughly 90 different languages), I would have told them that they were crazy. Instead, I just tell people that I'm crazy. EVula // talk // ☯ // 08:19, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, to be honest, sometimes I still have a tough time wrapping my brain around even my 5,000, but...anyhow, I'm glad we've got really dedicated (if a tad crazy) people like you around! I've got to get a little shuteye, as I've got work tomorrow, but nice catching up with you, and feel free to drop me a line anytime! GlassCobra 08:37, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GlassCobra's RfA

		My RFA
		Hey buddy! Thanks for your support in my request for adminship, which ended with 61 supports, 3 opposes, and 1 neutral. I hope your confidence in me proves to be justified, and if you ever need backup or second opinions, I'm your guy! By the way, I don't know if you've noticed it yet or not, but I left a little joke in your userpage. :P GlassCobra 02:22, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, nice. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 03:52, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, damn, I shouldn't have told you. Then I could have seen how long it took you to figure it out. :P GlassCobra 04:35, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for voicing your opinions in my recent RFA which unfortunately did not pass at (47/23/5). I will be sure to take the advice the community has given me and wait till someone nominates me next time as well as improve my editing skills. Have a great day(or night)! --Hdt83 ^Chat 05:51, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For the revert and block. :) Acalamari 19:35, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. I always have fun busting vandals. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:37, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you bunches!

Thank you so much for suppporting my RfA. I was promoted with a total of (44/1/0) - a vote of confidence from the community that I find humbling and motivating. I will not abuse your trust. Look forward to working with you! (Esprit15d 21:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I don't have time so I'll make it quick

I don't have much time. I didn't read my failed unblock all the way, so I missed where it said that I shouldn't put another one on. I'll also didn't read the reason for the failed unblock, and now that I have, my talk page got protected. I need you to unblock TimySmidge soon, please, and unprotect my talk page as well. They blocked TimmySmidge, and soon they'll block this username too. If you can unblock me, I have a new idea for Wikipedia that will change it forever. Don't worry, it's not against the rules. --TimySmidge 21:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not particularly inclined to do either; you're welcome to share your idea here instead. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:44, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No that won't work. It's a big idea (and a surprise). --TimySmdige 21:48, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't negotiating. You can post it here or nowhere; I'm not unblocking your account(s) or unprotecting your talk page without good reason, and a vague promise of "a big idea" isn't particularly compelling. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:01, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then please help me. My good reason is:

I am 12 years old. I am a stupid idiot and I wasn't thinking when I made those socks. As a child, a deserve second chances. If unblocked, I will work on making Wikipedia a better place, rather than contributing to the badness. I am sorry for what I have done and I repent. --TimySmidge 22:05, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Age is no excuse; as I recall, we've got an administrator that is 13 or so. Besides, all this happened roughly a month ago; by your own admission, you're still "a stupid idiot". What evidence do I have that you're actually going to be productive? None. I tell you to post your grand idea here, and you steadfastly refuse. That's not particularly compelling. I consider myself as being extremely generous in not blocking your current account, though my patience is beginning to wear thin. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:15, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All right, I'll tell you. It's called a Discussion Group. A something where a group of users get together and talk about anything without having to move article to article. I was going to create it and invite you, Sesshomaru, Nemu, TTN, Therequiembellishere, DBZRocks, Minervamoon, Lucky Mitch, BetaCommand, Viridae, Carnildo, and PeterVogel (so we can get to the bottom of his suspected sockpuppetry). It's a great idea, but I want to do it as TimySmidge. TimySmidge 22:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by EgdimsYmit (talk • contribs) [reply]

We already have that: it's called the talk page. If the discussion encompasses several editors, you just drop them a note on their user talk pages to check out the centralized discussion (on either the article talk page or, sometimes, the talk page of the appropriate WikiProject). EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:30, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aww, you don't like it? Can I create it anyway? I still want to do it. It's kinda different from a talk page. Also, are kid users common for Wikipedia? --EgdimsYmit 20:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

↑ Interesting ↑

You have much more patience than I do. ;) — $PЯINGεrαgђ 00:31, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are times when I am patient to a fault. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 00:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. — $PЯINGεrαgђ 00:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Remembrance...

--nat ^{Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?!} 00:47, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...uh, okay. If Remembrance Day is November 11, why is this being posted on the 6th? EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:18, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if this came a little early, but its kind of a tradition we have in Canada, or at least in my part of Canada, to begin handing out poppies a few days before the actual day of remembrance. nat ^{Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?!} 05:46, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, alrighty. In the states, Veterans Day is a largely ho-hum holiday (compared to Memorial Day, which is largely the same thing). EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's worse (or better) in the UK - poppies (plastic charity badge-like things) are common sight before Halloween (and Christmas fetes in the first weekend of November, and no I'm not joking). Still, I do wear one as a sign of respect. Will ^(talk) 22:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been seeing Christmas stuff hanging up in some places for the past three to four weeks; it seems to start earlier and earlier every year. I think if I see a Christmas tree somewhere in July, I'm going to snap. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:25, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for saying that too rudely. I have had relatives who have died in both World War II and Vietnam and I was raised very American. I just took your comment wrong and I am sorry for that. I just think highly of Veterans Day but I do disagree with the h-hum statment. It means a lot to some people that day Neville 06:00, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apology accepted. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:25, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Your Sig

Well, for my sig, I simply placed the template: '''{{subst:User2|Malinaccier}}'''. I guess it is really long in raw code. I'll remove the edit count, and go with your suggestion. Thanks a lot, I guess that must have really been bugging some people =]. {{SUBST::User2|Malinaccier}} 01:47, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Wow that tinkering really messed up my sig. Malinaccier (talk • contribs 01:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do you mean it "messed up" the sig? Aside from missing the closing ")", it looks fine to me. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Weekly Episode 34

zOMG! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 34 has been released, and it's the biggest panel in quite a while!

.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/11/03/wikipedia-weekly-34-aka-fundraiser/, and, as always, you can download past episodes and leave comments at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.

For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP 05:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery.
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.

/me renames EVula to...

TallyBot. ~ Riana ⁂ 03:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~*Giggle*~ That's a good name! :o) Ariel♥Gold 03:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...that's actually pretty creepy. I was thinking that very same thought just before popping into the shower, and lo and behold, it's here on my talk page when I come out.

Obviously, my shower is some sort of thought-transference device. EVula // talk // ☯ // 03:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~*Ariel breaks out her tin foil hat...*~ Ariel♥Gold 03:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Showers don't interfere with your circuitry at all? That's some bot :) ~ Riana ⁂ 04:36, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Riana, what he won't tell us is that what was coming out of the shower head was actually WD-40, to loosen up all those chips and boards, and keep him running in primo condition. :P And probably some magic potion that keeps him (unlike other robots/computers :P) from crashing on a regular basis… :/ — $PЯINGεrαgђ 05:28, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, it's important to stay lubed-up... er, wait, that came out wrong... EVula // talk // ☯ // 07:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

! — $PЯINGεrαgђ 22:59, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An excellent idea! TallyBot // talk // 08:12, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Admin

You're the second person this past month to suggest such a notion -- see here. :) Maybe I'll reconsider down the road, but I feel that my fortitude is in straight-up contributions to film articles. I appreciate the thought, though! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:39, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope so, though I can certainly understand your trepidation. In the year I've been an admin, I've had a major namespace shift away from my previous gnome work on Mortal Kombat articles and more towards general editing in the project namespace (not to mention an increase in activity on wikis other than en.wp).

I'd hate to see you pare back your outstanding film contributions, but I'd also love to see you be able to bust heads when vandals attempt to ruin your wonderful articles. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think my biggest concern with pursuing adminship is that my attitude may be seen as arrogant because I tend to be very steadfast in shaping the content and structure of film articles. Also, while I am not interested in labeling myself in such a fashion, I can be perceived as a "deletionist" with the vast majority of my AfD involvements recommending to delete. Not to mention that "This user does not want to be an administrator" template sitting on my user page for quite some time! :) I've also had a couple of issues with admins regarding their removal of non-free images. (While I understand their perspective, their efforts struck me as too brusque.) I'd rather encourage a gradual change, fomenting discussion every so often at WikiProject Films and negotiating for appropriate implementation of images per #8 of WP:NFC#Policy, as seen here. I would probably want to understand the responsibilities of an admin more fully, but I don't want to be drawn away from my current editing priorities in the realm of film. Any thoughts about this? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:32, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, I'm definitely out of sync with everyone else when it comes to Fair Use images; I think we're crazy heavy-handed about them, but my primary encyclopedia edits have been to fictional characters and the like, where the chance of having a free use image is completely and utterly impossible.

I can understand your concern about perception. Ultimately, I think it would be fine, but you're probably a better gauge of that than I am.

Personally, I enjoy being an admin, but my editing patterns are different from yours. As far as responsibilities go, it's more of a "be as involved as you want" sort of thing; when I feel like busting heads, it's all about WP:AIV patrol, but if I just want to do some simple editing, I can. Adminship very rarely comes into play (unless I run across the stray vandalism-only account). EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Rfa

Thanks for shutting my RFA down. I actually didn't even care if I got adminship at the time or not, I knew I wasn't ready anyway.

Redmarkviolinist 19:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Darth Maul External Links

Why do you say that link doesn't add anything of value? Did you look at the page it linked to? It brings in fan videos, youtube videos, fan art, flickr images, fan fiction, external links, and will have exclusive video from lucas. I think you should reconsider.

Mhanagan 8 November 2007 (UTC)

But none of it is actually worthwhile. External links should, in theory, help to create a better understanding of the topic for the reader. That link doesn't.

However, you're more than welcome to ask about whether it should be added or not on the talk page; if consensus determines that it does add to the article, I'd be more than happy to add it back in. EVula // talk // ☯ // 23:01, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. I think it does add a lot to "fill out" the experience of Darth Maul in that it has photos and fan art and videos as well as discussion which the other sites linked do not provide and are unique to the Yahoo site. I posted on the talk page for the article as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhanagan (talk • contribs) 23:37, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned category

Can you delete Category:Wikipedians who like VeggieTales? It was created by TimySmidge before he was blocked, and it appears useless. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 09:24, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just added includeonly tags on the userbox; once the category is empty for a few days, I'll speedy it per WP:CSD#C1. It's not like it's doing any harm in the meantime. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:57, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your thoughts...

Your thoughts, sir EVula, on this? ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 20:58, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh bloody hell... part of me wants to be a nice person (a very, very small part) and give him a second chance, and the rest of me remembers vividly all the shit he stirred up.

Since AB was community banned (and not just indefinitely blocked), I'm not particularly inclined to let him back in without getting community support for it. I'm blocking the account and posting a topic about it to WP:ANI. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:49, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very well - thanks for the help, I'll keep an eye on the ANI. ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 23:19, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Click there to open your card! → → →

Dearest EVula,
Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 137 supports, 22 opposes, and 5 neutrals. Your kind words of support are very much appreciated and I look forward to proving you right. I would like to give special thanks to The_undertow and Phoenix-wiki for their co-nominations. Thank you again and best regards.

Lara❤Love 06:06, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply] Credits: This RFA thanks was inspired by The Random Editor's RFA thanks which was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks.

Strange, perhaps

Can you check out the user and talk pages of Presioni, Logan brennan and Mulliqi? The categories within them, I think they're supposed to be for articles only. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:57, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This also looks like an unholy mess. User pages need citations? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:20, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the categories from Logan's userpage. For the other two, the problem is a hell of a lot more than their listing in the categories; I need to do a bit more with them (delete, perhaps). As for the category, I don't think it's a very big deal; several of those are sandboxes anyway, and going through and removing the categories would involve subst:ing the various templates that are causing the inclusion, which just plain isn't worth the trouble. EVula // talk // ☯ // 01:07, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Oh, I don't know which {{db}} to place on The Histoy of Dragon Ball Z Games and Dragon Ball Z History of Games. But since these are two very redudant redirects, can you simply delete them? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the The Histoy of Dragon Ball Z Games redirect; the other one had a substantial history that I didn't feel like wading through. Since it's not hurting anything to exist, I decided to take the lazy route and leave it alone. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's just junk, should have been redirected to List of Dragon Ball video games, I might just do that, or just place WP:CSD#G6 on it. Regardless, here's the history, what do you think should be done? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 07:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you're right, that's junk. Er, was junk. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 07:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Weekly Episode 35

Let us rejoyce! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 35 has been released!

.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/11/11/episode-35-secretly-famous/, and, as always, you can download past episodes and leave comments at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.

For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP 01:32, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery.
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.

User:EVula/Userboxes/admin since and User:EVula/Userboxes/bureaucrat since

Hi, Just a minor note. Noticed on both of those templates "3 years, 8 months and1 day." - Its missing a space after the and.. I couldnt spot it easily in the template, so i thought i'd let you know =). Oh, and when its days (ie day >= 2), its fine.

Reedy Boy 15:24, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've noticed that. It's one of those things I'll get around to fixing sometime, but is never really pressing, since it only happens once a month. :D It's based on someone else's code, too, so I'm not terribly familiar with the guts... maybe I'll get around to it once the holidays hit and I've got more free time. EVula // talk // ☯ // 01:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How does this look?

I've made this personal boilerplate to notify editors that I've closed their RFA early and also give them encouragements and other advice. It's here: User:Wikidudeman/rfafailnote. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 22:05, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, but I'd break it up some; a few short paragraphs are easier to read than one long one. EVula // talk // ☯ // 01:22, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: RfA

Thanks for that (no, I don't mind). Anyway, what I am here mainly asking about is, do you understand what this guy is trying to say? I'm trying to figure out if it is an attack, praise, or something in between. He mentions a deletion, which I suppose is my CSD nom of Aerodynamic qualities of food which was subsequently deleted for the same reason. Is it just me, or have I been staring at too many math problems? Thanks, --FastLizard4 (Talk•Links•Sign) 04:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I... er... uh, I've got absolutely no clue what he was trying to say. Sometimes it's best to just smile, nod, and back away slowly; this might be one of those times. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:58, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for your message, EVula. Belated congratulations on your adminship anniversary by the way. If I remember well, your RfA ended successfully a week or so before mine. :-) Best regards, Hús ö nd 01:03, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ayup; November 7th was the day my RfA wrapped up. It's hard to believe it's been a year already... so much has happened, and yet it feels like only yesterday. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 01:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 45	5 November 2007	About the Signpost

Wikimedia avoids liability in French lawsuit	WikiWorld comic: "Fall Out Boy"
News and notes: Grant money, fundraiser, milestones	WikiProject Report: Lists of basic topics
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Volume 3, Issue 46	12 November 2007	About the Signpost

Unregistered page creation remains on hold so far	WikiWorld comic: "Exploding whale"
News and notes: Fundraiser, elections galore, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Missing encyclopedic articles	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DBZ

This user, Xyex (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), continues to add original content, not to mention overcategorizes the Dragon Ball Z article. Can you help? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:38, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's only so much that I'm comfortable doing, considering my lack of working knowledge about everything related to DBZ. However, I did place a note at Talk:Dragon Ball Z#Reverted. His attitude is rather unhelpful, but if he can be convinced how to properly work with others on the project, we'll be all the better off. EVula // talk // ☯ // 01:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Only warning

Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on User talk:Riana. Please stop being uncivil to your fellow editors; instead, assume that they are here to improve Wikipedia. Additionally, don't template regulars. XD Lara❤Love 05:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good times. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:42, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's you told. /me runs to wikilawyer from behind admin friend Lara's back ~ Riana ⁂ 05:51, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Herbythyme

Regarding my tinkering with the vote count... I had a hunch that you were putting up the final tally, and decided to section edit the page just to mess with you. Glad to see that it worked! In all honesty, it was just me adding to a snowball victory for Herbythyme, and I didn't realize it was closing right then. Sorry for the confusion - ZZ ^Claims~ Evidence 14:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to apologize for; I looked at the last !vote, you edited the page, then I hit edit, and put in the last number I saw. Usually, I double-check, but didn't this time. The error was on my part, not yours. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:48, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:HOTTIE

Oi! Gimme back my page. :P GlassCobra 16:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't realize you were the original author... I thought your comment was just you saying that you wanted it because it was funny. :) Page moved back to User:GlassCobra/Hotties are always notable. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very kindly. :) GlassCobra 16:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I also restored the redirect; too funny not to keep, plus R2 doesn't apply... (I really wish we had a D2 speedy deletion criteria) EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:45, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect is fine with me. :) Technically, you might have a few people growl at you, either because "WP:" is still in the article namespace, or because "WP:" is a pseudo-namespace, and the name-space (pseudo- or not) shouldn't redirect to the userspace. Sigh. I, however, have never been a stickler when it comes to those kind of CNR issues. Just hope Cyde doesn't see it, and you should be fine! ;) Best wishes, Xoloz 16:53, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, they might grumble, but it's just a technicality. Hopefully nobody will care. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:59, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well if we want the technicalities, CSD R2, which covers cross namespace redirects to User: and User talk:, specifically excludes redirects from the pseudo WP: namespace. So it's obviously contemplated that such redirects can be acceptable. Other examples that spring to mind are WP:CRATSTATS and WP:ADMINSTATS. Anyway pseudo redirects to userpace are generally kept at RfD. And Cyde is in no position to complain about XNRs given that he uses a redirect from the Image: namespace to his userpage (Image:Cyde.png - see this RFD). WjBscribe 17:10, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

R2 didn't exclude those in writing until earlier this year. For this reason, old-timers like Danny are likely not to give a hoot what the specific wording of the exclusion is. For what it is worth, I think the exclusion is intended to apply for redirects from "WP:" (technically in the mainspace) to Wikipedia-space only. Xoloz 19:24, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also the D2 speedy deletion criterion could be for the speedy deletion of fake "criterion for speedy deletion" pages! (With D1 criterion existing to speedy delete fake XfD process pages...) Owww... I just gave myself a headache! Best wishes, Xoloz 16:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like the way you think. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:59, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, seems our redirect has been tagged with a CSD... GlassCobra 17:04, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, it appears people don't like to follow MFDs; seeing as I just had to restore both the actual page and the redirect. GlassCobra 17:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...the hell? I've fixed the article's history (when restoring a page, if you don't check any boxes, all the edits get restored), and participated in the RfD. This is bloody ridiculous. EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:31, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You should have seen the conversation that Danny and I had on IRC... GlassCobra 18:34, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It never fails to surprise me how utterly stupid some situations can be. Fighting over a damn silly redirect... ugh. EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects are a dime a dozen, really. Doesn't it take more memory to delete them than have them? GlassCobra 18:55, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, yes, though performance concerns don't matter very much. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:04, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I warned you that some folks would disapprove, didn't I? ;) Turns out its Doc and Danny, who both rank up with Cyde on the "list of people whose actions often confound Xoloz" list that I keep in my head! ;) Good luck, Xoloz 19:24, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One year ago

Good to see you like being an administrator. I suspect many users in your position don't like it much, because the community sometimes doesn't understand how tiresome is that position, with all those repetitive endless tasks. — Raffaello9 | Talk | 01:06, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a glutton for punishment, what can I say? ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 03:40, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Ev. I was wondering if you might want to come over for some tea and crumpets? Let me know. Lara❤Love 03:49, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm trying to give up married women... EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:57, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hahah! Well played, sir. GlassCobra 06:14, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Touché. Lara❤Love 20:21, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

trends, etc

Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

RfA

I considered not spamming talk pages but not saying "thanks" just isn't me. The support was remarkable and appreciated. I only hope that I am able to help a little on here. Please let me know if I can help you or equally if you find any of my actions questionable. Thanks & regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Asgardian

Hi, EV. I thought you might want to know you're mentioned among a host of other editors who have had issues with Asgardian, at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Asgardian-Tenebrae/Evidence, in case you wanted to comment. ---- Tenebrae (talk) 18:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, just a little over 11 months ago. I had no idea who you were talking about at first. :)

Thanks for the heads up. Page watchlisted. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:42, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question

EVula/Oct-Dec 2007, would you happen to know anything regarding WP:MOS:DP#Piping? There's a discussion going on here and perhaps you can share your thought on the subject. Thanks, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:53, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think the misspelt Son Goku (Dragon Ball, the fan-made Ginyu force saga, as well Galactic quadrants (Star Trek)‎ and Galactic quadrant (Star Trek)‎ should all be deleted? The last two I felt definitely should have been, the opposing sysop did not. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:16, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And another, Chumba(comics), which I'm afraid of tagging for deletion since the incident with the sysop. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 10:02, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't appear to be any discussion going on at Talk:Byakuya, though it was recently moved. *shrug*

As for the redirects, I don't see any reason to delete them. Typo-derived redirects are good to have; I know I sometimes go straight to an article by typing it in (I use iSeek so I can come here in any application), and I'm not always 100% accurate with my typing. I'm not suggesting we create redirects for every possible typo, but if one exists, just leave it alone. EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:20, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I just found out that the Byakuya case was settled. As for redirects, you feel honestly feel those referenced above don't deserve a WP:CSD#G6? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:47, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, because redirects are cheap. Anything that can help out the end user when navigating the encyclopedia is a good thing.
Do note that I'm not talking about Ginyu force saga, though. I don't know enough about DBZ (read: I don't know anything about it) to make a judgement call on that one. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:08, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you do me a quick favour? I asked something regarding Dragon Ball Z, and it seems I need a different admin. to step in and correct the policy violations. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:19, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, never mind, I posted a thread on WP:AN. Thanks anyway, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:09, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would probably be for the best; I'm hesitant to start editing anything anything involving DBZ that isn't very obvious, due to my ignorance on the topic. EVula // talk // ☯ // 23:20, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Your high recommendation has already proven its worth. –– Lid^(Talk) 07:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But I had more to say!

[17] the_undertow ^talk 23:19, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NO TALK FOR YOU! EVula // talk // ☯ // 23:22, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jambalaya! the_undertow ^talk 23:25, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Son of a... I'm already hungry enough as it is. Thanks for making it all the worse. EVula // talk // ☯ // 23:27, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My friend...

...would you have the dubious honor of closing my RfB? I hereby withdraw. Since you're one of my favorite future bureaucrats, I'd be glad if you could close it. :-) Best regards, Hús ö nd 01:09, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfB closed, even if I didn't like doing it. :(

I'm still kicking around the idea of doing RfB #2; maybe I'll get to close your next RfB with a different result. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 01:31, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, EVula, for supporting my RfB, which I withdrew at a final tally of (33/12/1). I failed to overcome the not unforeseeable opposition, but I am humbled by some extremely supportive, encouraging words I could read. In order to honor your trust, I once again vow to continue working and improving. Please contact me should you have any advice or recommendation to give. Or, should you need assistance. I am, as will always be, at your service. Again, please accept my most sincere gratitude.

Best regards, Hús ö nd 03:11, 19 November 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Also, thanks for closing it. :-) Best regards, Hús ö nd 03:11, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bring on the RfB 2 EVula :) Pedro : Chat 13:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It'll happen, it's just more a question of when... I want to ask a couple of the opposers from last time to see if I've fully addressed their concerns before running again. Plus, I'm currently in rehearsals for my next show, and won't have the time to dedicate to the RfB (though considering one of the problems was me responding to everyone, maybe it wouldn't be a bad thing...). EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:40, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a minute...

Hi, EVula. I was wondering if you could take a look at this: The Mortal Kombat series article and its talk page are not part of the same article. Someone moved the article to "Mortal Kombat" but the talk page is still at "Talk:Mortal Kombat (series)".

The editor had originally redirected the new talk page to that of a third article, but I've only been able to fix the redirect link, and not physically move the old talk page to where it should be.

It needs an admin to do the job, so it's yours if you want it! :D RobWill80 (talk) 13:51, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whee, getting back to Mortal Kombat stuff... I haven't done much since I had a massive namespace shift not long after my RfA.

Moves all done. Gimme a shout if you need anything else done. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:46, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will do. Thanks, mate. :) RobWill80 (talk) 17:34, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 47	19 November 2007	About the Signpost

An interview with Florence Devouard	Author borrows from Wikipedia article without attribution
WikiWorld comic: "Raining animals"	News and notes: Page patrolling, ArbCom age requirement, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	WikiProject Report: History
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Malarc77

*sigh* I almost wished that guy hadn't been blocked so quickly. I wanted to try to pick his mind a bit. Oh well. GlassCobra 21:40, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oxymoron83 performed the block; I only stumbled onto the situation by the comment on your talk page. Personally, I don't think "hates wikipedia" is a valid blocking reason, and I possibly would have just warned, but I also have very little belief that the attitude would have become productive. *shrug* EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Respond back to me please!!!

hey, can you please tell me how to create a bot for a WikiProject I made? I want it to automatically add a template one time per user if they edited StarCraft related articles. if you have a link in which I can hack (AS IN CHANGE, not breach security lol)the source code and write my own template substitute then please tell me.--Storkian aka iSoroush^Talk 22:50, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've got absolutely no experience with creating or running bots. The best I can do is direct you to Wikipedia:Bot policy, where maybe you can find something helpful. Sorry. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lolcats changes

I disagree that changing the text of lolcats to something more reflective of the meme is vandalism. When do you think discussion will start on my proposed changes? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fitzmadrid (talk • contribs) 00:13, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because I'm an idiot, I responded to this on the talk page of the article, thinking I was on my own talk page.[18] D'oh. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:48, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption

Hi there, EVula. I noticed you were looking to adopt Wikipedians, and the coincidence has it, that I am looking to be adopted. I was hoping I could have the honor of calling you my daddy. So a little something about me.

I currently have a little over 2000 edits. That means I'm not fully green, but not fully ripe yet either. I am currently involved in mediation over Pro-pedophile activism. I'm not a pedophile. I do not care much about userpages, but if I had such an impressive list of how I've been insulted, I would. I'm an eventualist. I patrole newpages. I prefer salveging articles at AfD or even tagged speedy over deleting them. I prefer deleting pages over pages keeping pages that meet the CSD.

I contacted you because on your list of editors you respect/like, I came across a few where I share your oppinion. (I didn't know most though). You seem to have a sense of humor. You are very experienced both as an editor as an administrator. Let me know if you want to adopt me, or prefer for me to find someone else. (I'm wikisperienced enough to take a no, I won't be offended if you WP:BITE me.) Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:33, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be more than happy to adopt you! It certainly seems like you've got a good grasp on how things go around here, but I'd be more than willing to assist you with anything you need.

Since you're the first editor I've adopted, I'm not entirely sure what else to do other than say "here I am". I'm usually around at funky times, and will always respond to any talk page notes. If you need to chat off-wiki, I check my email very often; the "E-mail this user" link works on any wiki that I'm an admin on, including this one. EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I actualy could apreciate some feedback on my actions here and here(last post before user removed the thread from his userpage) and some replies on my talkpage. Should I have done things differently? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:08, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that it was handled as well as can be expected. When an editor simply doesn't feel like communicating, it's incredibly frustrating; all the more so if they give the impression that they'll only pay attention to an admin (which is contrary to the position of admin anyway; we're just regular editors with additional technical abilities, not automatic mediators). EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy Rayl

Oops, i guess it took me about 12 times reading this article over to realize that he actually played for the NBA, it was just so poorly written and i don't know enough about basketball. My bad, Tiptoety (talk) 05:24, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, it happens to all of us. As it was, I was about a split-second away from hitting "delete" before I noticed that myself... EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:46, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Aherm - cheers for the vote of confidence, but I'm feeling a little superstitious at the moment. I think I'd rather avoid tempting fate. I confess to being rather nervous - I woke up this morning ready to respond to overnight opposes and was quite surprised when I logged on and saw the page didn't contain any yet :-) ... WjBscribe 16:47, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough; I remember how quickly my own RfB went down in flames. Just don't lose that diff if it does end up passing. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:48, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA - thanks

Thank you for your support in my request for adminship, which succeeded with a final tally of 38/1/0! I hope I can live up to the standards of adminship, and I will try my best to make Wikipedia a better place. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 18:20, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how to write a good article

I would like to know a few tips on how to write a good article.IslaamMaged126 (talk) 16:44, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I'm a very bad person to ask; as a wikignome, most of my contributions are small things, like fixing typos and correcting links, rather than sitting down and writing articles. Sorry. :\ EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admin since thingie/boxen/gadget/coolness

Can it be made to work inside a table? See User:Lar/Babel where it's commented out, if it's included there, it breaks the table those boxes are in. I think it's the leading div maybe? Nifty idea. Thanks in any case. ++Lar: t/c 20:37, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I've been doing HTML for many more years than I would think possible, and it never fails to amaze me at how a small little character (for instance, a single "|") can utterly and astoundingly screw up a layout.[19] If it makes you feel any better, I spent a good five full minutes playing around with all your other boxes trying to figure out what was going on. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:30, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh! And I've even ran into that very problem before and swore to myself to remember to check for a missing |... sigh. Thanks. ++Lar: t/c 22:48, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa my gosh

Fancy running into you here Eric...

It figures you would be an admin, too. The best part is, I was checking out an admin's user page after following up on some sockpuppet banning when I saw he was an eguor admin. And of course, you'd be one of those couple dozen of elites.

Anyways, nice running into you again after...what is it, seven years now? Coreycubed (talk) 14:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, talk about a blast from the past... I've pretty much fully abandoned the ASW boards for Wikipedia; I'd been there for eight or nine years (maybe nine or ten), and was just burnt out.
How are you doing? EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:33, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doing very well actually. Just dropped by the ASW boards, saw the lack of inactivity -- you did well to move on to greener pastures. My old account still works, heh. Anyways, let's see -- moved on to school (I think that's when we spoke last) and hung out with Skyblade, which was another crazy coincidence, running into him in TN. Married a girl from school and hauled her back to Miami, got some tech certs out of the way and started doing on-site support for law firms. Bounced up to Charleston this summer, to escape the cost of living.

So before I forget to say it, thank you. Thank you for being nice to me, when I was taking my first leaps onto the internet in 2000 at the tender age of 14. For giving me good feedback on my work and my posts and for actually responding when I bugged you about stuff. I haven't forgotten, and I suppose I could say it's part of the reason that I continue to treat mature kids with respect. Coreycubed (talk) 22:02, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, you're going to make me blush with that last part... Thanks for making it easy for me. :)

That's insane that you ran into Skyblade... I think it's funny that he only lives/lived a few hours from me and we never met, and yet you randomly ran into him. Bizarre.

(I do think that was the last time we talked... it's been a really, really long while)

I find it really funny how, with as big as the Internet is, I'm running into some of the same people from elsewhere. You'd think we'd all have better things to do with our time, but no. :) Not sure how likely you'll be to bounce through Nashville sometime (Charleston's not too far away, but far enough that it wouldn't be a random trip), but if you're out this way, gimme a shout. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:30, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What's happened?

I see all the shortcuts to Wikipedia pages have been deleted? What's occured, is it an error on my end? Sorry, I just see your online and I trust you. :) — Rudget _{contributions} 20:16, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What shortcuts are you talking about? I just tried a couple (WP:RFA, WP:BN) and they worked just fine. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:20, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah sorry. It seems some others have noticed aswell. See, ANI. — Rudget _{contributions} 20:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. I had the same thing when I logged on, a lot of short cuts started off as red, but seems fixed now ...... Pedro : Chat 20:31, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bizarre... I know there was talk about making an actual "WP" namespace. Perhaps that had something to do with it? *shrug* EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 48	26 November 2007	About the Signpost

Arbitration Committee elections: Candidate profiles	WikiWorld comic: "Cursive"
News and notes: Ombudsman commission, fundraiser, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Education in Australia	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:00, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done as Requested

Done EVula, i've done what you've requested me to do last night and placed that redirect code on my old Fire Monkey account, i think i've done it correctly. If so, feel free to tell me on my SKYNET talk page SKYNET X1000 (talk) 18:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Responded at user's talk page.[20] EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done I've also responded at my talk page SKYNET X1000 (talk) 19:50, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mentor question(s?)

Another one that I wasn't really sure on: [21]. Could you give a comment on that? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Short on time; I'll check this out at some point tomorrow. I'm just responding so you don't think I'm ignoring you. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Take your time, I know the channels when something urgent comes up. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 14:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I'd say that you did fine; it was a proper interpretation of the disqualifier of A7. The end result from the AfD is that we'll have a better sourced article, which isn't bad at all. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm always a bit reluctant to remove CSD tags, as I feel it's basicly saying "what you did here is wrong". On the other hand, I believe speedy deletion should only be used if it is very clear that an article meets the criteria for speedy deletion. What it comes down to, is that I don't want to be a pedantic editor who tells other editors how to do things, but I don't want to see new editors scared away with immediate deletion either. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

StopTaoSpam

Could you explain how you came to the remarkable conclusion that the username StopTaoSpam is not offensive, not disruptive, and not promotional? Corvus cornix_talk 03:44, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's... not? Orange Mike's comment at the time I removed the listing[22] summed up my rationale quite nicely.

(as an aside, I'd completely forgotten about doing this; ignoring from the wonderful antagonistic attitude you opened up with, a diff to remind me of what I did over a week and two hundred edits ago would have been wonderful)

And before you ask, yes, I would consider StopChristianSpam and StopMuslimSpam to be equally non-disruptive. I see that someone else has blocked the user for WP:U; while I disagree, I can't say that I care enough to get worked up about it. EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User Page "Created"

EVula,, I've just created my user page on SKYNET X1000. dose it sound alright SKYNET X1000 (talk) 16:18, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me. Something that many users do to spruce up their userpages is to add userboxes (though spending too much time tweaking your userpage can be a bad thing; you should also start making some constructive edits to the project). You can find a large collection of them at User:UBX. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done I'll add more tomorrow, what do you think..... SKYNET X1000 (talk) 19:26, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a Mac user, I'm probably the wrong person to ask about what I think of your userpage. :P EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done Is alright, I've erased the mac symbol on the userpage and added some more, to be honest i was only testing it out, i actually like Mac's OX 10 , but what do you think to it now.... SKYNET X1000 (talk) 20:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

EVula, could i have some help, I've sorted out the User Boxes and neatened them but I'm having difficulty in getting the boxes to go to the right side of the user page, and the writing on the left side next to the user boxes, similar to what you've done on your user page. SKYNET X1000 (talk) 08:40, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done Never mind, I've discovered how to do it from the Help Page SKYNET X1000 (talk) 09:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done I've finished my userpage, I've erased the Mac Comment from the user page as it was only a tester to see what it was like and also I've been using Mac's for the last few months and sometimes prefer using them, however I've neatened the boxes and managed to get it to the correct position, i still don't know how to change the background colour though SKYNET X1000 (talk) 13:27, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I use custom code for pretty much everything I do on my userpage. You can find my sidebar code at User:EVula/sidebar2, though at this point I'd recommend that you start actually working on the encyclopedia; out of 90 or so edits, you've yet to make a single edit in the main article namespace. Nobody's going to even see your userpage if you're not out there working on the project. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:09, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB

Your STARmeter is down 42% since last week. You phail. :P GlassCobra 00:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB must be pissed about my recent Wikispecies adminship promotion... EVula // talk // ☯ // 02:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:grats

Thank you. It was a totally unexpected surprise. I will soon post a copy of the resolution and some pictures. Take care Tony the Marine (talk) 07:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

For the birthday congratulations. :) Acalamari 18:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Dalekusa

Not that it had a chance at passing, but I don't think you should have closed it when you did. It was at 2/2/2, which has a snowball's chance in hell of passing (again, not that it would, and it shouldn't be reopened). J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 19:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I base my WP:SNOW closures on the candidate's edit count, not the tally. Dalekusa has 142 edits total; see Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Dalekusa. Regardless of the tally at the time of closure (which is truly closer to 1 support and 5 oppose), there's no way it could have passed. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know it had no chance of passing, and the supports seem a bit frivolous. I just think that when it's not clear (as in this case), we should base closures on tally and not count. J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 19:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's only unclear if you look at the tally. :)
Seriously, there's absolutely no way in hell (the very definition of WP:SNOW) that an editor with only 142 edits could be promoted; no amount of good-faithed "moral support" or "neutral" !votes will change that fact (which is the only reason the tally looks like the candidate had a chance). Even if it had run a full seven days and somehow everyone put in enough "moral supports" to put the RfA at a 90% support ratio, no 'crat worth his salt would have promoted. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't moral supports so irritating? I guess in this case, your actions were justified. Besides, I can't argue with the Cabal, even though it doesn't exist :) Sorry to bother you! Happy editing, J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 19:13, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No need to apologize; I'd much rather have someone give me a heads up about my editing and it turn up alright than to be making mistakes and nobody bother to say anything to me. :) This RfA also prompted me to push for a minimum edit requirement, so it's doubly alright that you asked me. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:35, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

... an idea which I support :) I'm tired of SNOW-storms. J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 21:28, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm getting my first insults!

I must be on my way. I'm "illogical" and on a "power trip". Haha, it will be a long time until I deserve as many wonderful compliments as you. нмŵוτн τ 20:08, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, I never felt like I'd really "made it" as an admin until I started pissing people off. Congratulations. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:29, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My Request For Admishonship

Hello I understandabout my RFA. I ask you do have any tips for my next RFA?--Hardcore Hak 00:17, 1 December 2007 (UTC)Hardcore Hak Sign here User:Hardcore Hak/Guestbook[reply]

Honestly, the only tip I have for your next RfA is that you should concentrate on improving the encyclopedia. RfA candidates who have extensive experience in article writing have a fairly good chance of passing. EVula // talk // ☯ // 02:27, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What would you say if I created my own wikia.--Hardcore Hak 21:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think that would be great, as long as it was a topic that could support its own wiki. However, editing over on Wikia doesn't necessarily translate into experience on Wikipedia. Even administrators on other Wikimedia Foundation projects (of which Wikia is not) need to pay their dues, so to speak, on Wikipedia before the community will feel comfortable giving them an adminship. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Weekly Episode 36

Hey! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 36 has been released!

.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/11/30/wikipedia-weekly-36/, and, as always, you can download past episodes and leave comments at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.

For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP 04:08, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery.
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.

I am new and in need of some help

I have created my first article, it is on Mary Styles Harris, and I am feeling a little confused. There are some problems with my references and I can't figure out how to link my article to others. I would appreciate any help you can give me. Thank you Jaymes10

What are the references? I can help you write out the <ref> tags if that's what you need, though I do have some concerns about the notability of Ms. Harris. EVula // talk // ☯ // 02:30, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

Danke. Qst 20:33, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. It's the least I could do, considering you beat me to the punch on that... when I came back from my shower, it'd been closed. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:38, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Test Your Might

Hey man, this AfD was closed as a merge, but the closing admin deferred making the actual merge to someone more well-versed in MK content. You want to take care of it? GlassCobra 19:20, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I guess you could consider me well-versed in MK. :) I'll jump on it in a bit. EVula // talk // ☯ // 03:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Totally lost track of this, what with some of the drama I've been dealing with. I'll try to do it later tonight... EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: On your future with Wikipedia

The reason why I have user talk so high is because I have nothing to do except cleaning up vandalism and improving articles. Do you have any suggestions? And did you get the messages as a template, because I would really like the template. -Go od sh op ed 06:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've been given several leads on your talk page for where you can better focus your energies. However, I'm curious as to what you're talking about in regards to "the messages as a template". EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for December 3rd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 49	3 December 2007	About the Signpost

Signpost interview: New Executive Director Sue Gardner	Arbitration Committee elections: Elections open
Possible license migration sparks debate	Featured articles director names deputy
Software bug fixed, overuse of parser function curtailed	WikiWorld comic: "Wordplay"
News and notes: Wikipedian honored, fundraiser, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
WikiProject Report: LGBT studies	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You beat me

Looks like you beat me :) [23] I was wondering why that edit wasn't showing up in my contributions! Red rocket boy 03:18, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fast like ninja. EVula // talk // ☯ // 03:19, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UAA report

The reason I posted the username was because of this website the user has been copyvio-ing [24]. The e-mail address on the contact information at the bottom of the first link is the user's username. I'm pretty sure that this is the promotional aspect you may have been looking for. Please don't hesitate to let me know if you think otherwise. Happy editing! Icestorm815 (talk) 21:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Created First Article

EVula I've created the Spellforce 2:Dragon Storm article, I've told the other's on the previous spellforce 2 article that they could improve it if they wanted to, i hope the article is fine SKYNET X1000 (talk) 09:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My userpage

Thanks for the super-fast revert of the vandalism on my userpage! :-) IronGargoyle (talk) 20:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Getting to bust up vandals is thanks enough. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the heads-up

Cheers Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 21:18, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOLJimbo

OMG, Image:Loljimbo.jpg is the funniest thing. I hope people start making lots of those... нмŵוτн τ 22:15, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

commons:Category:Lolcats is the best category on any Wikimedia project ever. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:18, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FU?

I'd tagged Image:Fireflyvarietyad.jpg as orphaned, not lacking an "FU statement". You removed the image from Browncoat, orphaning it, I just tagged it as such. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 19:04, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You sure I'm the one that removed the image?
My bad for mis-reading the tag, but at any rate, it isn't orphaned anymore... EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, you didn't. I don't know what I saw when I was checking, but I was really surprised at thinking it had been you removing it in the first place. Oy vey, maybe it's time for a nap today. Sorry! — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 20:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it, happens to the best of us. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:23, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Goodshoped

Thanks, I will train him well. Marlith ^T/C 19:48, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope so. As I've said before (and is obvious from ANI), he's roused the ire of many an editor. While I hope for a change in his attitude, I can't say that I expect one; I look forward to being pleasantly surprised. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:25, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dang, he left. Marlith ^T/C 04:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, what happened here? --FastLizard4 (Talk•Index•Sign) 05:09, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I actually somewhat know now that I just talked to him, but what really happened from your point of view? --FastLizard4 (Talk•Index•Sign) 05:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From my point of view? An editor, who already had a troubled history with biting newbies, abusing userspace, and ignoring attempts by seasoned editors to give the editor constructive criticism on his attitude(s), somehow decided that it would be a good idea to tag an established user's talk page with an extreme and thoroughly unsubstantiated insult. After finally being called out on his disruptive behavior, he got pissed off and left. See User talk:Goodshoped35110s#On your future with Wikipedia, User talk:Goodshoped35110s#Notice and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#My recent block of Goodshoped35110s for some starter reading on the topic.

Usually I'm not so flippant about such a situation, but I really feel that the contribution-to-disruption ratio was far, far too low for this to be seen, in the long run, as a bad thing for the project. EVula // talk // ☯ // 07:34, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the insults you got....

Well, to be frank, the way your # of contribs show and your weird wiki-editing nature, people might think you don't have a life. Is there any chance that you are addicted to Wikipedia? No offence or anything but that is an illness. Especially when you said "... I'm a fast ninja" above, that kinda raises some eyebrows. Don't be upset, I don't have anything against you :) (...must... edit.. wikipedia) huh what did i say? Can you be my friend? --µWiki Peers / Seeds (YouWiki) 21:53, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any reason for this rather unpleasant comment? It's not an illness! It's a desire to write and maintain a free encyclopedia, that anyone can edit. Anyhow, it's pretty clear EVula does have a life - he's currently acting in a show. Sorry for intruding here, but I thought I had to say something. Thanks. Red rocket boy 22:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not quite a wiki-addict, though I was joking with some folks last night about not having a life when talking about my nearly 200 WMF accounts. It's a valid concern, in my eyes. :)

However, like Redrocketboy pointed out, I do have at least some stuff going on outside of Wikipedia... (for example, so far this year, I've done productions of Wonder of the World, The Constant Wife, Arms and the Man, The Effect of Gamma Rays on Man-in-the-Moon Marigolds, The Two Gentlemen of Verona, The Merry Wives of Windsor, and The Dresser) though I have to admin that I've brought my laptop with me a couple of times to the theater for my current show so I could get online during the hour or so between my scenes. I'd be lying if I said I didn't get on Wikipedia durring that time. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't attempt to alter/decrease EVula's editing patterns. He's beloved. Lara _Love 07:30, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

YouWiki, please read WP:HOLIC and take the WP:CRAZYTEST. One day, you might be as addicted as him. Time will tell. Marlith ^T/C 23:37, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user does not want to be an administrator

If you google "this user does not want to be an administrator" (with speechmarks), this talk page is the only hit. Can u tell me where I might get one of those templates for my userpage please Ryan4314 (talk) 03:38, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it only comes up because someone mentioned it here, though the discussion is now archived at User talk:EVula/Oct-Dec 2007. After poking around, I found the template at {{User wikipedia/Anti-Administrator}}. EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:09, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aw cheers mate, thanks for looking for it. Ryan4314 (talk) 07:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adopt me

--µWiki Talk / Contributions (YouWiki) 16:21, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, usually it's customary to ask... however, I could adopt you. What do you want to get out of the adoption? Where do you feel that you need the most assistance in? EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

Thanks. Regards, — Rudget _speak.work 18:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. It was done as much out of a desire to be helpful as a compulsion to edit every RfA, so it was a win-win for all involved. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:30, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per Kurt's RfA: Lol, I know there wasn't any opposes - it was meant as a light-hearted joke and a comment on the fact there wasn't any. And no, I don't use templates. :) Cheers and thank you for the concern. Spawn Man ^{Review Me!} 03:18, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alrighty, it just looked really odd. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:10, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I am really odd. :) Spawn Man ^{Review Me!} 04:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thank you very much!!!

Thanks very much for participating in my RfA, which passed 71 - 4 - 3! I appreciate all the comments that were made and will do my best not to let the community down. Who could do otherwise with such a fabulous rainbow-colored mop?!?

Special thanks to <DREAMAFTER> for nominating me out of the blue.

Happy Editing!
SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 22:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

EpicFlame, etc.

Hey man, thanks for pointing out that ANI link; I went over and described the situation, so things should be okay. :) By the way, did you ever get around to that Test Your Might thing? GlassCobra 09:07, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I got sidetracked by some drama, though a cursory glance suggests it was taken care of by someone. Might need to go in and clean up a bit. EVula // talk // ☯ // 09:15, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You..giggled?

Wow.. :P GlassCobra 20:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My giggling is even more disturbing in real life, since I specifically try to make it as silly as possible. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:41, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taunting

Before viewing your edit [25], I had gotten my hopes up that I had received a highly coveted EVula vote! :-) --Kralizec! (talk) 17:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coveted? Oh dear, you're going to give me a big ego... oops, too late! EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nashville photog needed for Wikinews

Any photographers (and by that, I mean anyone with a digital camera) that can make it to Nashville this Sunday at 6 pm, to photograph the final show of Jump5?

Details here: http://nashville.craigslist.org/crg/505941578.html

Let me know! -- Zanimum (talk) 18:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to be seeing a show in the Mt. Juliet area on Sunday, so I'm not sure if I'll be back in town in time or not. Sorry. :\ EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:40, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really, really bad haiku from a new admin

Setting new lows in thank-you spam:

Click there for my RfA spam haikus! → → →

Janitor's new tools
Spam must stop -- will new mop act?
Ooops, .com blocked

New admin, new tools
Earnest newbie furrows brow
Fare thee well Main Page

New mess all about
Sorcerer's Apprentice mop
Not supporter's fault

A. B. so grateful
Wikipedia trembles
Watch out DRV

A. B. wonders why
Copyright always confused
Fair use, farewell, bye

Dear RfA friend,
I will learn, chaos will fade
Thanks so much ... A. B.

This RfA thank you card is based on a card originally done by Phaedriel

EVula, thanks so much for your support. I look forward to working with you in 2008.
--A. B. ^(talk) 19:36, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad I'm not the only one to do RfA-thanks haiku. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:36, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bathrobe cabal, baby!

File:Son Of Pedro Aspiring Bathrobe Cabalist.JPG

Although not an administrator, and indeed not even able to make a thumbs up signal, Son Of Pedro nevertheless is fully engaged in the cabal

You're not bad looking at all for a Wikipedia administrator! Ryan Postlethwaite 21:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Ditto! ;) GlassCobra 21:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'd just like to point out that, at first, I thought Ryan's comment was addressed to me... EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - You know I think you're god damn sexy EVula - shouldn't need to tell you ;-) Ryan Postlethwaite 22:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dammit, why do you have to be married? Specifically, why do I have to have that pesky rule about no more married women? Oh, woe is me... :P
I'll see what I can do about getting my grubby mitts on a bathrobe for myself... EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I dig the longer hair. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a great photo of Son Of Pedro in a bathrobe, but 1) He's not an admin and 2) I couldn't quite persuade a 20 month old to do the thumbs up. Can he join anyway? :) And I am very envious Lara has the T-shirt. Wife Of Pedro refused to get me one for Christmas..... Pedro : Chat 21:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why again did I ask you, and not Lara as my mentor? Only because she wasn't on the list of people who are looking to adopt? Because you are very capable? We may never know. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 22:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ditching me in favor of a cute girl is always acceptable, and 100% understandable. I promise I won't take it personally. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:51, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pedro, When will we be seeing Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Son of Pedro?! Ryan Postlethwaite 22:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Ryan, WP:BEANS :) .... ! Pedro : Chat 22:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - I really hope that, when he grows up and starts editing Wikipedia on his own, he doesn't want a different username, because that's what everyone will call him... EVula // talk // ☯ // 23:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Should I register it now, along with User:Sock Of Son Of Pedro for public use? Better safe than sorry.... :) Pedro : Chat 23:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - Would you also need to register User:Son of Sock of Pedro? :D Ariel♥Gold 04:39, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Addressing points

File:JasonBRC.jpg

Son of Lara... Da cutie-patootiness is wedicalous!

Thanks. ;)
EVula, drag your secksi ass to Target and get a robe ($20).
There will be an "honorary Bathrobe cabal" for the kids. My kids pics are coming forthwith. Jason's tomorrow, Laila's after Christmas (robe is wrapped).
I am on the list of users looking to adopt. Been there since I grad'd from under Neil way back when. You can have two adopters, but I won't be too active until after the New Year, probably. Lara_Love ^Talk 06:22, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Goodshoped forgives you.

Yeah, GS3 just emailed me an said it's OK. Just thought you should know. Best, --Gp75motorsports (talk) 00:27, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the sentiment, despite the fact that I don't believe for a second that I was in the wrong. EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's back. Lara❤Love 04:11, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

Thank you for explaining on my talk page your decision and the reasons behind it. However, are you able to withdraw a candidate, policy-wise, because of a lack of edits? I urge you to reconsider your decision. As I explained on my nomination page, I have far more alternate edits from previous accounts and while being logged off. Wikitank (talk) 05:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, you provided absolutely zero evidence that you're any more established than you appear to be. Not only that, but your nominator's 9th total edit (which came just three hours after his very first edit) was to propose your RfA nomination, which looks extremely suspect. If you can provide me with a bit more evidence of your alternate accounts (and can verify them), I'd consider re-opening your RfA. EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's more than suspect. It's checkuser-confirmed. Daniel 06:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I love it when my spider-sense is tingling and I'm right. EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for December 10th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 50	10 December 2007	About the Signpost

Wikipedia dragged into German politics over Nazi images	Wales comments on citing Wikipedia produce BBC correction
WikiWorld comic: "Kilroy was here"	News and notes: Elections, Wikimania 2009, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	WikiProject Report: Greater Manchester
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TY & APRDA

Thanks for the swoopy award of hawky goodness! May I ask a question about AIV? Is it just my imagination, or do a lot of people not read the highly complex two-part criteria first? Perhaps I am doing something wrong, but it seems like I am declining at least 25% of the block requests because the vandal is no longer active, has not received sufficient warnings (like none), or stopped vandalizing after a 'last warning.' Am I missing something? Did my "admin manual" not have this chapter? Are people really dumbasses? --Kralizec! (talk) 21:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I... my faith in humanity's ability to read falters every time I patrol AIV. It's not just you. I'm tempted to put pure nonsense in the AIV header, just to see if anyone would notice it (answer: no, they wouldn't). EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Thread

It looks like Gp75motorsports (talk · contribs) didn't bother to notify you about the ANI thread he started relating to you, so I'm just letting you know: Wikipedia:Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents#Unwarranted block of Goodshoped35110s. Sean William @ 00:24, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. EVula // talk // ☯ // 00:38, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Testing notability

on newpages patrole, I noticed that someone is adding alledged witches to Category:Alleged witches. Their only claim of notability seems to be that they are once procecuted as witches. I'm not sure if that consitutes to notability, and was wondering what the best way to deal with that is. Maybe a RfC? A trial AfD? A discussion at WP:N? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 22:37, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, that's an excellent question. My gut says to gang-run them at AfD, but that can get terribly complicated in very short order, especially since there are unreferenced articles (like Jeanette Abadie) mixed with sourced (like Petronilla de Meath), as well as some that probably do deserve to stay (like Rebecca Nurse and John Proctor). I don't think a discussion at WP:N would really have the teeth necessary to do much of anything...

Though I have very little experience dealing with RfCs, it looks like that might be the best way to deal with it, given the 70 or so articles involved. You could probably trim that down a bit by gang-running just the unsourced articles together at AfD first. EVula // talk // ☯ // 02:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another note of cencern is that most of them have been recently created by a single user. Some discussion with that person wouldn't hurt I suppose. I still have an aversion against a group AfD, as that was one of the first things I did as a rather young editor, and the result was a complete and utter trainwreck. I like to think I've come a long way since then, but I'm still a little reluctant on the matter. I think I'll try the road speaking with the editor -> single AfD of an unreferenced one -> group AfD on a bunch -> see whatever is good with what's left over. Does that sound OK? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can definitely understand your hesitation to gang-running articles, given that example... ouch. :)
If one editor is the primary author, then yes, asking them directly is definitely a good idea; for Jeanette Abadie, it was written a couple of years ago, and the author (now an admin) might have a different outlook on things now. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 23:11, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Range block

Thanks for the reverts. I've never range blocked before, and this anon vandal looks like it will require hitting a huge range, something like 70.251.65.0/18. -- Flyguy649 ^talk 07:54, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, a lot of them appear to be in 70.251.123.* or 70.251.126.*. I've never actually done a range block before... good luck. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 07:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Slakr did a rangeblock of 70.251.112.0/20. Hopefully that's fix things! -- Flyguy649 ^talk 07:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yay! Now I can close the window that has your talk page's history up. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 08:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

You got a Christmas card! → → →

Wishing you and yours the very best of the holiday season. May the coming year bring you peace, joy, health and happiness. God bless us, every one! -- ALLSTARecho 21:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there!

Hi there! I was just poking about Meta and saw that you had recently expressed a desire for an account at wikimediafoundation.org. It appeared to have stalled because of a lack of an "endorsement" by a current user. I'd be happy to recommend you if you're still interested. Also, as an aside, I've actually gone and commented against your request for bureaucrat buttons - nothing personal, of course, but I figured it might be proper to mention it, as I'm here asking after you, hehe. Just let me know if you're still interested and I'll be happy to vouch for you, as it were. Cheers gaillimh^{Conas tá tú?} 07:57, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would be fantastic if you could vouch for me. I was rather disheartened that they didn't see the value of a good wikignome. :) I'll re-post a request later today and drop you a line when it's there.

As for the RfB oppose, don't worry, I'm not taking it personally. I mean, I obviously disagree with you (otherwise there wouldn't be an RfB right now), but I'm just the slightest bit biased on that front. :) The only thing that bugs me about my RfB is the opposition based on my last RfB; I feel six months is sufficient time for someone to change, and I do feel that I'm a different candidate now than I was then. I just wish they'd held off on opposing until they saw some recent concerns... oh well. There's plenty of other stuff for me to do if this one fails too. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Jonathan Mostow; Trilby; Daniel Bernhardt; Halo 3; Dan Forden; Marjean Holden; List of Star Wars planets (K-L); Endoskeleton; Parroty Interactive; Naruto; John Tobias; Manhunt (video game); Heir to the Empire; Area 88; Studio Gigante; Landspeeder; Tory Belleci; M5 Industries; François Petit

Cleanup: Kristanna Loken; LucasArts; Principia Discordia
Merge: Finishing move; Rabbit of Caerbannog; Ellen Ripley
Add Sources: Roboticization; Sindel; Baraka (Mortal Kombat)
Wikify: Taja; List of All Grown Up! episodes; James Bamford
Expand: Adoni Maropis; Linden Ashby; The New Jedi Order

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:42, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Weekly Episodes 37 and 38

Well, gee whiz! I don't check WP:WEEKLY for a few days and look what happens: I miss two new episodes. Nonetheless, Wikipedia Weekly Episode 37 and Episode 38 have been released!

.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/12/10/wikipedia-weekly-37-rundown/ and http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/12/14/episode-38-interview-wbrianna-laugher/, and, as always, you can download past episodes and leave comments at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.

For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP 02:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery.
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.

Your talk page gets more action than my college roommate...

Get on it! Lara❤Love 17:09, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for December 17th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 51	17 December 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: ArbCom elections, holiday publication
Former Wikimedia employee's criminal history detailed	Möller resigns from board, joins foundation as employee
Google announces foray into user-generated knowledge	WikiWorld comic: "Tractor beam"
News and notes: Elections, Wikimania 2009, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Plants	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 18:49, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Multi-proyect

Hello!

I left you a message in your Meta talk page. ;) Cobalttempest • Let's talk 01:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Weekly Episode 39

Wikipedia Weekly Episode 39 has been released!

.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/12/18/episode-39-knol-pointer/, and, as always, you can download past episodes and leave comments at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.

For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP 06:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery.
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.

SKYNET X7000

~~EVula, i've placed a tag for adoption, and I'm seeking to gain experience will you adopt my user. SKYNET X7000 (talk) 15:28, 19 December 2007 (UTC)~~[reply]

~~Please respond on my user talk page, once available. SKYNET X7000 (talk) 19:54, 19 December 2007 (UTC)~~[reply]

Cancelled comment, removed the tag. SKYNET X7000 (talk) 21:39, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Er, alrighty. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 23:01, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dropping the ball

Would you mind closing this, I seemed to have dropped the ball on that one. Still got my fingers crossed on your RfB btw. 17:10, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the show of support about the RfB; I think, if it passes, it'll be a close one... EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That 13th oppose might just kill it. With 12 you were pretty much ok, and I was going to note to RedRocketBoy/guy/something that moving to neutral would put you in fact around 85% which is pretty close to 90. It's all because of that evil blnguyen. What can I say? Go be the future Danny question yourself! Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 18:29, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm not happy with how the Oppose section has shaped up. Several of the editors have raised some decent points, but there are a couple that I feel are meritless (to varying degrees). *sigh* Oh well. EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:51, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't quite go for the 'in the future, people may oppose because there are too many 'crats, and that's why I am opposing now, even though I don't think there are too many 'crats now, and don't think there will be too many crats in the future'. And even if that were true, I would count you amongst the people who I would want as a crat if space were limited. On the other hand, I'm not a great fan of badgering the opponents either. It's nice when they explain their !vote, but they don't have to. Some people (not you) are taking it a bit too far for my taste on your RfB. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 18:58, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm not a fan of badgering either, but some of the !votes were incredibly cryptic, such as "I agree with some of the above" (though to be fair, she did later clarify what she meant). As long as I get a fairly well-illustrated reason, even if I disagree with it, I'll be happy; vague comments don't let me know what I need to focus on for the future (which is something I harp on about at User:EVula/opining/RfA ramblings#Vote vs. Discussion). EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

Blessed editing, and...

Happy Holidays from Marlith ^T/C Please feel free to contribute to Wikipedia:Song/The Twelve Days of Christmas

Credits: This card was inspired by Macy's 123, assistant of V's Shop

Marlith ^T/C 05:09, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vital question on your RfB

I've posted a question on your RfB. It concerns User:Goodshoped35110s. Walton^One 16:51, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alrighty. I'll get to it... er, at some point. Work is a little up in the air right now, and I've got a dinner and movie tonight with friends. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:58, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. (I'd also like to point out that my support for your RfB stands, regardless of the answer to the question. I trust you to be a good bureaucrat and I hope the RfB passes; I just wanted some clarification on the Goodshoped matter.) Walton^One 17:52, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine; there's plenty of stuff to clarify about Goodshoped, and hopefully my handling of that will dissuade some of the opposers (doubtful, but maybe).
I also appreciate the kind words. Even if the RfB fails (which I'm 99% sure it will), I'm quite happy that I've had two different editors I respect (you and Joe) support my second RfB despite opposing my first; it definitely makes me feel better about my desire to be a 'crat. Only seven more RfBs and I should be able to pass! ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:55, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rather important

Hey man, will you drop me a line on AIM or IRC when you get a chance? I got something to show you. GlassCobra 08:34, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It better be a gift certificate to target for a fucking bathrobe. Lara❤Love 08:48, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whaddup, E?

I just wanted to say, as I'm about to roll out to Slumberland, that I know your RfB is about to close and, though I don't think it's going to be successful (unless 130 supports pop up with a quickness), that I think you'd be a great 'crat. However, every shitty situation has a silver lining—which may or may not be the equivalent of a turd wrapped in tin foil—and that is, in this case, that you will have extra time to spend shooting the breeze with awesomeness. Additionally, extra responsibilities that would come along with Bureaucratship will not be available excuses when asked why you've not yet submitted your photo for induction into the Illustrious, Most Honorable Bathrobe Cabal... or whatever. So there. Just wanted to let you know. Mad love. You rock, gangsta. Peace out, Playa, Playa. Lara❤Love 07:09, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
-- Transmission Ends --

Word, though the thought of going near a Target this close to Christmas fills me with dread. I'll join up by '08. EVula // talk // ☯ // 07:20, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your RfB

Hi EVula, it's my unhappy duty to confirm that your RfB did not reach consensus. You should, of course, read over all of the questions and the responses (including your own) and pay special attention to the Opposes and Neutrals. There is a lot of valuable information there.

I would like to make a few comments I hope you will find useful; some particular to you and some that I think any prospective 'crat should consider. I believe that your handling of the RfB suggests that you are developing (or at least understand) the temperament needed in a position where you engage the broad community. If there was one thought I have had in following this RfB it is that you need more seasoning; give your 'crat-quest a rest for a while and consider the needs of the job a bit more carefully. Think of a bureaucrat as an umpire or referee. If you make a decision be sure before you make it that it is your best judgment, that it is defensible in policy, that you are confident in it so that you can defend it to the death (figuratively, I hope), and that you stick to it. We have had 'crats resign after especially poor decisions or because they didn't feel up to the heat. This is a process which requires faith in its fairness and accuracy. There have been and probably still are some who would try to take many 'crat decisions to other fora in the hopes of overturning it if they could. This would make the job infinitely harder, the process [even?] more political and faith in it would suffer.

On a more personal level I'd like to make a few comments: I appreciate your sense of humor and the fact that you can look at the world and Wikipedia with a certain lightness. It is a good quality and should add years to your life (no kidding). I also am noted for an ironic (and deadpan) sense of humor which has sometimes caused me a little trouble. Sometimes you'll see it in my off-Rfx work. But RfA/RfB is not a good place for it. In answering questions, don't make the reader read between the lines or look for a smiley. You may well be thinking playful sarcasm, but the reader may be thinking mixed message (to be kind). Should you attain 'cratitude, expect to be attacked early and often. In time, as trust in you builds, you can expect the attacks to be fewer, or at least a little less vituperative. You see how my straightforward question about the anon question was attacked as bad faith in a display of bad faith. That's just the tip of the iceberg. So practice making straightforward responses and leave out the levity unless there is no chance whatever of an ironic response being viewed as genuine. I also think it would be worthwhile to consider dropping the insults and threats rundown from your user space, and be more sensitive that there are quite a few people, notwithstanding the humor of Seinfeld's Soup Nazi, who, because of age, location, or experience, never find certain symbols humorous. -- Cecropia (talk) 09:24, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry that your RfB didn't pass. I also apologise if q24 appeared to be a criticism of your conduct - it wasn't meant to be, and looking at the situation in full I don't think you did anything wrong (note also that I supported the RfB). You can count on my full and unconditional support for any future RfB. Walton^One 16:00, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

<placeholder response> I'm not ignoring this, I just think it deserves a better response than I can write currently. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:20, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick note, I've only just got back from being away, but sry to see your RfB didn't go through. All the best. ^Khukri 12:03, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, in retrospect, I wish I'd been a bit more cognisant of the holiday season... there were several people I would have liked to see participate (either because I thought they'd support me, or they'd give me some solid feedback if they opposed). Oh well, live and learn. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:51, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...so, apparently I never got around to responding to this. :) Oh well, more important that I edit the project than dwell on failures anyway... EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:08, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Leia "Bunhead" Image

Greetings, and Happy Holidays! As far as referencing and citing is concerned, the Princess Leia article is coming along very nicely, I think. One thing I need help with, though: In this section of the article, I've described Leia's unusual hairdo from A New Hope and the impact it has made. Unfortunately, I can't find any image of Leia's hairdo in the Wikicommons. I'd say that section of the article needs more visual identification over that subject, as there's currently only one pic of said hairdo, but it appears much earlier on the page, it's fairly small, and it's a group shot with her and the other two main characters. D'you think you could help me out? — Cinemaniac (talk) 00:07, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you won't find any images on Commons because it's a copyrighted image; Commons only accepts free imagery, so that it may be used on all projects. I'm sure that if you were to watch the movies again, you'd be able to find a decent screenshot of her hair (then all you have to do is take a snapshot, upload it, and the apply the proper license and Fair Use rationale). I'd do it myself, but I'm rather busy at the moment (not likely to have the time to sit down and flip through the film for the right shot). EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:19, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've now listed the Princess Leia Organa page for peer review because it right now seems oddly cluttered and, despite my adding of a lot of references, it lacks reliable source citations. Although I've already requested another peer review for another article, as long as it helps the articles get better, I've got the time. Any helpful comments are appreciated, as this should help me in expanding other Star Wars-centric articles (particularly bios like that of Luke Skywalker and Han Solo, also in dire need of certain expansion). Thanks. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 03:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For examples of some well-done Star Wars articles, see Darth Vader, which is a GA, and Palpatine, which is a FA. Those might help. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Odd AfD close

Hiya, I was wondering what you think of this AfD close. It struck me as really odd to do things like that, especialy since it had just come from DRV. It also seems a weird way to invoke A1. Would you have acted similarly? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 16:05, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, a rather unique situation. Given the fact that the topic appeared to be a hoax, there really wasn't much point in allowing the AfD to continue on (though I think I would have simply because of the article's history). Personally, if I was going to delete that article, I would have cited WP:SNOW, but A1 is an applicable criteria for the article. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yun-Yuuzhan Requesting to gain experience.

EVula could you adopt my user, i'm wanting to gain experience, although i know certain scripts already because of my former username and how to do things on wikipedia, i wouldn't mind gaining experience. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 20:55, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy to adopt you. However, I see that you currently don't have any edits to the encyclopedia; I understand the desire to have a fully-set up userspace (which is why I have one), but our primary purpose here is to build an encyclopedia, not make a personal website.

Also, I've noticed several Fair Use images on your userpage; I've removed them, as they aren't allowed anywhere except on actual articles (and even then, only when accompanied by a rationale explaining why they are needed). Despite these hiccups, I don't think they'll prevent you from being an effective editor. What are your interests (as in, what articles do you plan on spending your time on)? EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:33, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are certain articles which i wouldn't mind doing, like Sci-fi articles, game articles including Real time strategy articles, but however i wouldn't mind gaining experience, including on how to use scripts like reverting vandalism if any are found or write scripts which could be in use. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 21:42, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you don't need scripts to revert vandalism; I've got more than 23k edits, and none of them were with Twinkle, AWB, or anything like that.

Anyway, if you're just starting out, I'd recommend doing some wiki-gnome type work: correcting typos, making sure movie and video game names are in italics, stuff like that. The more wiki work you do, the more familiar with the system you'll become.

(oh, and yes, the images you picked on User:Yun-Yuuzhan/Navbox are just fine) EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, but will it be alright if i ask for help from time to time if required. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 21:55, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely! I'm a rather hands-off adopter, preferring my adoptees to come to me with questions, rather than micro-managing them (though that's also because my first adoptee, Martijn, is pretty polished to begin with...). If you have any questions at all, just drop me a line; I'll answer them as quickly as I can (and some of the other knowledgeable people who watch this page might help, too). Just gimme a shout whenever you need it. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:26, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's Great, but what shall i do with the adoption tag in my userboxes subsection. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 10:09, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated both yours and my userboxes. Now it's all official. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:28, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't use a capital V, that always gets him going. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:17, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh hush. :P EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:28, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, EVula for updating my userbox. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 14:55, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 52	26 December 2007	About the Signpost

Wales appoints six arbitrators	Board approves expansion, up to 11 trustees possible
WikiWorld comic: "Molasses"	News and notes: Stewards, Senate testimony, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	WikiProject Report: Plants
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 13:09, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Thanks for illustrate biographies, your effort is appreciated. Emijrp (talk) 17:41, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, I like the auto-formatted links. It even gave me a reason to create a few more accounts. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:44, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

images at he.wiki

Thank you for the photos!

Gridge (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Gridge (talk) 01:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]

My pleasure! I always enjoy cross-wiki work. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 01:47, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any truth to the rumor...

that you are the best stage manager ever? 'Cause Mel still has you beat...

Don't have any contact info for you... Merry (Belated) Christmas and Happy New Year! (This is the actor that played John in Lion in Winter, FYI). Quartermaster29 (talk) 03:03, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gotta love it when worlds collide... :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I'm willing to concede that Mel's the best stage manager, as long as I can still lay claim to being the best ASM ever. EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:31, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And we all know the ASM works under the stage manager... (cheesecake)Quartermaster29 (talk) 15:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've yet to get any cheesecake from my stage managers. Usually, that's not a problem, but I have had some cute SMs... EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:55, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with toolbox

EVula why has my Lupins Live Spellcheck tool vanished from the toolbox. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 16:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing anything happen to your monobook.js file, so it must have happened elsewhere... you might want to ask Lupin, or take a look at Wikipedia:Tools/Editing tools to see if there's an alternate spellchecker you can use in the meantime. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:53, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've sent a message to Lupin, and am waiting for a response i've told Lupin what browser and version which i'm using so it should be easy. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 17:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's probably the best that can be done. I don't use it myself (I'm on a Mac, which has built-in spell checking), so I can't help you much more than that. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:39, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Current status script

~~EVula what's the code to get the current status on the top right page in the same position like you have. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 20:43, 28 December 2007 (UTC)~~[reply]

Never mind got the status script in the right place on my userpage. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 20:56, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Escape Velocity Override

After looking at the other two EV pages to see if someone had tried to merge them, I found EVO's redirected to EVC. I dug around in the proper history and found out that EVO had been deleted in a two vote AfD, and the two votes weren't even in consensus. I don't think this was a fair AfD. How could we go about restoring the EVO page? The discussion can be found here. TwilightPhoenix (talk) 01:34, 29 December 2007 (UTC) (aka JoshTigerheart)[reply]

Well, the old EVO article is kinda crappy... do you think you could strip out the cruft and make it a better article? If so, I'd have no problem restoring it (basically, I'd only go against a deletion discussion if the concerns were going to be addressed). EVula // talk // ☯ // 02:09, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. Glancing over it, I already see what I can do. Fix the Lead and Gameplay sections, trash everything under governments. Work out a "plot" or "storyline" section to summarize the main storylines in the game, add a reception section with sourced reviews, and either make a plug-in section or work it in somewhere else. I did a very similar make-over to the Redline (computer game) article, bringing it to its current state (with some help) from this, so I feel I am capable of the job. TwilightPhoenix (talk) 04:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Escape Velocity Override restored. Have fun. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:30, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for tiding up my close. Regards, Mercury 17:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, always happy to do gnome work. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A request for your consideration regarding CAT:AOTR

...My guinea pigs and the "A"s, "B"s and "C" having felt this message was OK to go forward with (or at least not complained bitterly to me about it :) ), today it's the turn of the "D"s, "E"s and "F"s! I'm hoping that more of you chaps/chapettes will point to their own criteria instead of mine :)... it's flattering but a bit scary! :) ++Lar: t/c 18:05, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An excellent idea, and one I've already earmarked for posting to User:EVula/opining/admin recall. The idea of doing it without the pressure being on is quite good... I want to clear out some more biography images, but I'll probably write up my criteria at some point in early January. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:36, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the jungle...

Please accept your honorary *Bathrobe Cabal* Slippers..... Of Doom!

Welcome, dearest EVula, to the cabal. Lara❤Love 18:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
--TRANSMISSION ENDS--

<cue maniacal laughter> EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:34, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For working so hard on other language wikipedias and doing a great job as an admin — Phoenix-wiki ^{talk · contribs} 21:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aww, golly gee, you're gonna make me blush. Whoops, no time to blush, got more to do... EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:15, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit counter

How am i doing with the editing on the edit counter, i've check it and it says. Is this good. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 15:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

user:Yun-Yuuzhan

run at Sun Dec 30 15:52:25 2007 GMT

Image:	4
Mainspace 399
Talk:7
Template:2
User talk:65
User:129
Wikipedia:6
avg edits per page1.55
earliest: 19:20, 26 December 2007
number of unique pages: 396
total:612

Well, it looks good to me, but don't put too much stock in your edit count. The number of edits isn't as important as the quality of those edits. (though I'm one to talk about sheer numbers, as I'm closing in on 24k...) EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:26, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need some help.

I can't seem to undo unmove link the GDS page move. Can you help?

Thanks, Mercury 19:05, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On it. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:09, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting assistance

EVula a while ago a user had place a message on my talkpage saying.

"May I please ask never ever again edit my user page?

Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)"

At first i've thought he tried to blame me for editing his userpage which i didn't but i've re-checked his logs and it appears he's getting fed-up because of vandalism on his userpage. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 11:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seems that he's upset that you fixed some typos to his page.[26] Normally, that wouldn't be a big deal (and he probably wouldn't get too worked up over it), but the typos were in the file names themselves; your edit, while good-intentioned, had the effect of breaking the page. The lesson here is to always preview your edits, especially when using scripts. :)
Also, if someone brings a complaint to your talk page, I'd recommend not immediately archiving it. If you hadn't archived it, I'd suggest apologizing on your talk page, but now I think dropping him a note on his would be the better way to go. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've already post an apology on his talkpage via my Yun-Yuuzhan account, also i've created a secondary account which I'll probably use for checking pages being vandalized. →Yun-Shuno→ 17:13, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

EVula, will anyone have any objections for me to edit or add things to my secondary user Yun-Shuno. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 17:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Er, I suppose not, but why do you need a secondary account? EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:42, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't mind using the secondary account for doing things like fixing vandalism if any are found, and just in case if i need a secondary account in the future, since i've read on the wikipedia policy that most users have secondary accounts because they are advised to have it as a precaution if needed in the future and besides i mainly use this user for editing articles, the secondary i could use for monitoring vandalism. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 19:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say that "most" users have a secondary account. Most secondary accounts are more for editing from unsecured locations (such as public libraries) where there's a risk of losing access to your primary account than for regular editing. Personally, I do have an alternate account, but it's because it's more important for administrators to not open their primary accounts to abuse (if someone were to gain access to an admin account, they could wreak havoc around the place very easily). Secondary accounts are usually a "just in case" system, rather than being used for day-to-day editing. However, if you wish to use an alternate account, you're free to do so (as long as you follow the policy on multiple accounts. If you want to break article editing and anti-vandalism tasks across accounts, you can, though I'd consider it easier to just do both with a single account (it certainly makes it easier for other people to keep track of who is who). EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest i don't know why i've created that account, i've placed a tag for it's deletion, and besides i like to use this one, and I'll use this account as a primary account for editing, sorting things out, and sorting vandals out, and it'll mean i can concentrate on this account a lot more rather than getting a bit distress by logging off and logging back on to access the other account. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 16:05, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's one of the reasons I was suggesting just using a single account, but it was also because I'm just lazy. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:56, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ambrosia

Did you used to work for Ambrosia? If so, I owe you a debt of thanks - Maelstrom, Escape Velocity, and Chiral were all bad-ass. In fact, I'd probably be a lot farther along in my career and life if they had never existed. So maybe "debt of thanks" isn't the right phrase... MastCell ^Talk 21:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, I don't work for Ambrosia per se, but I've been a moderator on their official web boards since 2000 (and am now a super-mod). Before I fell hard-core into my wiki addiction, I also ran evula.com, but it's fallen by the wayside... EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Doctorates

Wiki Doctorate is a new scheme designed to recognise the people who "do all the work" on Wikipedia. It has been mainly developed for Wikipedia administrators however if you have done lots to keep Wikipedia on "the straight and narrow", including being members of different groups which help Wikipedia i.e "The Welcoming Committee. We have selected to email you because you can apply for the doctorate and we would be very grateful if you did and put the userbox on your user page to boost advertising. The following link will take you straight to our homepage.

Yours sincerely

--Dr.J.Wright MD (talk) 23:53, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]