Jump to content

User:Prodego/archive/81

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Admin Coaching: Reconfirmation

I was looking through the coaches at Wikipedia:Admin_coaching/Status and saw that there are a lot under "reconfirmation".

Could you let me know if you are still interesting in being involved with Admin Coaching, or if you would prefer to have your name removed from the "reconfirmation" list and placed on the "retired" list. If you want to be involved, could you please move your entry from "Reconfirmation" to "Active" and indicate how many students you would be willing to have (obviously, if you are actively coaching at the moment, then please indicate this!)

If I do not hear from you within a week, I will assume that you would like to have your name removed from the list of coaches and moved to the retired list.

Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 07:24, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Goatse

Please undelete it; see Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2010-01-12/Goatse.cx. The fact we're getting mediation other the image precludes it from arbitrary unilateral deletion. Sceptre (talk) 20:24, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

The discussion page was clearly marked with a note on the previous deletion discussion. There was no legitimate reason for you to have deleted it in the first place. Jolly Ω Janner 21:01, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
I would consider "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia" to be a pretty legitimate reason for deleting an image. Not legal at all, but perfectly legitimate. If you don't understand this, look up the words. Hans Adler 22:05, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Well done, Prodego. I am pleased to see that at least one person understands WP:IAR. Risker (talk) 00:14, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

  • Well, here's a formal "in the face of a loud community outcry, will you reverse your decision before this goes to WP:DRV?" request, though it appears this editor may be signed off for the night, as there have been no edits in the last several hours. I have a hot date with Arthas in a few mins, so will have to check back in later myself. Tarc (talk) 02:02, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
  • While the deletion is not within the formal deletion process, I believe it is still an appropriate deletion. Using that image, on Goatse.cx or any other article, is inherently going to harm the encyclopedia more than it benefits it. That image is intended only to be "offensive, disgusting or/and disturbing to its viewers"[1]. A description of what it is of can easily replace it, without sacrificing any information. One can certainly find the image out there if desired. Prodego talk 02:31, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
  • You seem to be substituting your own judgment for something that was already under dispute resolution, and had been through several dispute resolution and deletion processes. Your unilateral summary deletion undermines the good faith dispute resolution efforts. It's at DRV now, so I suppose the time for you to reverse your own action has come and gone; so I would simply advise you to carefully consider future such bold actions. –xenotalk 13:49, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, have archived the ANI discussion and opened a DRV. Please see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 March 22. This is purely procedural: most of the ANI discussion was DRV-ish so if any consensus is going to form it's more useful to hold discussion there. Respectfully, Durova412 02:36, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Filter 308

You recently disabled 308 under "neither abusive nor problematic". I have no problem with this, as I was about to delete it myself due to inactivity, but there's other filters like that one which is why I figured it would be OK, including 167 and 183. I agree that 308's lack of activity would prevent it from becoming a filter, but we should come to some kind of agreement over whether or not these types of filters should stay. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 14:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

I've disabled both of those several times, but they are reenabled by Someguy1221. Prodego talk 15:49, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Re Goatse ANI thread

I don't want to comment in the ANI thread because I think the last thing you need is more argument there, but I just wanted to say as a casual reader of it that you seem a little hard done by. Whether or not you were right to delete the image, I approve of the way you deleted it - boldly, with the intention to improve the project, open to the idea you might be wrong, and with a notification left at ANI so that those best placed to review the decision would be able to. That's the kind of openness and forthrightness I expect from admins so thank you. - DustFormsWords (talk) 11:14, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 March 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 19:16, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

User talk:HalfShadow

WP:DTTR. Woogee (talk) 19:35, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm lazy. Prodego talk 19:37, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

First of all, don't template a regular. You know better than that.

Second of all, unless it's changed, page blanking only applies to named accounts. HalfShadow 19:40, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry; I was always given the impression warnings had to stay on IP pages. Nobody's given me the impression I was doing anything wrong. HalfShadow 19:48, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Your post on my page

Thanks. I actually changed my password about 21 hours ago. Hallpriest9 (Talk) 02:14, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

AE

Not sure if you're aware but Tadija mentioned at the AE re Sulmues (apparently an ARBMAC matter) that your outside input may be useful. If you're already aware, that's fine. Orderinchaos 13:27, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 29 March 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 18:55, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of ACC templates

Hello! A few ACC templates have been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the templates' entry on the Templates for discussion page. This notice is because you are an ACC admin. Thanks! Avicennasis @ 04:33, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 April 2010

Note

Hi Prodego, just wanted to leave a note to apologise to you if my arguments went over the line on the edit filter talk page. I do appreciate your viewpoints. Warm regards. ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ ―Œ ♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣ 03:54, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 April 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Categories

You are invited to join the discussion here. Tadijaspeaks 17:07, 18 April 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}}) --Tadijaspeaks 17:07, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 April 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 12:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 April 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 13:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Ref desk talk

[1]The subject of that discussion is the banned user Lightcurrent, who edits under a particular IP range and of course does not sign his posts (and for some unknown reason, the bot doesn't sign them either). AGF toward LC was forfeited when he was banned in 2007. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

There is never anything to be gained by making such comments to anyone. Either ignore them or help them. Prodego talk 21:47, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Or help someone write the filter that will permanently keep LC's IP's out of the ref desks, which is kind of what the focus of another editor's complaint was. LC and PCH both use similar M.O.'s and could even be the same guy (though I doubt it) in that they say they will make productive edits if certain conditions are met. Like wikipedia owes him something. Basically the guy is a mosquito, and those who care about it more than I do will take some action to swat him once they get sufficiently fed up. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:52, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Congrats...

On freeing the Anwar al-Awlaki page from extended incarceration without trial.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:35, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

EF 313

I see you disabled this edit filter because it was acting oddly. Not sure what the problem was, but within a day some edits were getting published with that formatting again. Is there anything that needs to be done to fix the problem? Thanks.  7  04:26, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

And 6 others.  7  04:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
For some reason it was using a very high number of condition checks - I'll reenable and see if it happens again. Prodego talk 12:27, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Apologies

Hey Prodego, I left you a response on my talk page, but I wanted to apologize here as well. I hope that my bold actions did not cause any unfixable damage. I wanted to reassure you that I had the best of intentions, just not well directed. Thanks, and I look forward to working with you in the future, Tim1357 talk 04:34, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Also, I was wondering if I could recreate what I put at edit filter 1 somewhere else. It seemed to be pretty effective. Tim1357 talk 04:37, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
That should be fine, although I believe there is a general 'repeating characters' filter somewhere. Prodego talk 12:28, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Please let me know what if anything I need to do. When I "Previewed" It still seems to be wrong.21:48, 9 May 2008 (UTC) (talk) 20:44, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Also, you can email me at Prodego@gmail.com if you need anything. Prodego talk 21:18, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Understood. I am going to:
  1. Thank you and MBisanz for your efforts.(I cannot edit User talk:MBisanz, please extend thx)
  2. Clean up my user page of anything that reminds me of the last 24 hours.
  3. Hope to hell that the welcome committee stays busy elsewhere.
  4. Sit back, relax and find a fouled up article that no one gives a rats a$$ about and enjoy peacefully cleaning it up.
12Minutes to 10pm on May 9th,08 22:11, 2 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12Minutes to 10pm on May 9th,08 (talk • contribs)
Certainly, and I apologize for the trouble. Prodego talk 22:37, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your words/action on the edit-warring noticeboard

In retrospect, I can see how some of my actions, edit summaries and reverts were troublesome. As best I could, I tried to avoid 3RR with John Bosco. I believe I was set up by the editor, who kicked off the dispute, with his wholesale deletion of the Controversy section. As a Page Patroller, I detest deletions that are not discussed on the affected article talkpage. In many articles I follow or watch, this is typical of someone who is trying to whitewash something. I thought I was communicating effectively but from someone's viewpoint and in particular a neutral person like you, I can see how I was "adding fuel to the fire" so to speak. I will try to do better in the future and avoid descending into the fray. Thanks again, I do enjoy my editting privileges and wish to be seen as a contributor versus a detractor (although that can be viewpoint thingie too). --Morenooso (talk) 13:50, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

BTW, how do you get that Wikipedia mood thing on your userpage? I wish I had one that was labeled "Fun Meter". --Morenooso (talk) 17:12, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Prodego/archive/81&oldid=1140248137"