This is an archive of past discussions about User:Σ. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
Hi, generally when a user adds an image using a link, one should undo the edit manually and notify the user with {{Uw-imageuse}}. Huggle (rollback) is used for reverting vandalism only, so please assume good faith when IP users try to add images with links. Thanks. Guoguo12--Talk--23:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Vandal Eliminator Award
The Vandal Eliminator Award
I've noticed your name popping up on my Huggle feed quite a few times tonight. You've also beaten me to a few reverts! So here's a VEA for your troubles. Cheers! Bped1985 (talk) 04:06, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
No problem. Just spreading the Wikilove. Also, if you don't mind my asking... I noticed that when I go to edit your talk page a banner is present above the text editing field. I've seen this elsewhere but always wondered how to do it. Possibly you could provide me with some insight? Much appreciated. Bped1985 (talk) 04:22, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
I am not friends with anyone else who likes to make even small contributions to Wikipedia so I didn't know a thing about the culture when I applied for a privilege. I'm just a frequent user who likes to fix errors or vandalism when I see them. Only after I had requested rollback did I look at the profiles of the other people applying and realize they had 10+ times as many edits as myself. So thanks for helping me look less clueless. Bcaulf (talk) 10:18, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
MOTD Barnstar for helping to keep our project "alive"
The MOTD Barnstar
I award the MOTD Barnstar to 43?9enter for helping to keep our project "alive" during this difficult time. Without you and your so precious help and contributions, we all probably would have seen the end of this project. A BIG THANK YOU!!! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 19:37, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
A brief note, please, read it carefully, especially the last part in bold: The last time we (our project) gave awards to our (its) members on last Summer, then the number of new nominations and reviews of the existing nominations has been diminishing. The end result was the "April crisis" with no mottos for about an entire week. On the contrary, I hope this award will help to maintain our level high or, at least, appropriate to its needs, the needs of our project. I think that around 10 minutes a week to "devote" to the project, when it is possible of course, should be more than enough to achieve the desired result. Of course, I gave you this award personally, in a personal way and not in the name of the project. This is just a way to say a BIG thank you, so, refrain from returning the award to me or I would be overwhelmed by stars and banners and it is not my intention to "profit" on this, really! Please, do NOT return the award! And, there is no need to thank me, it was my pleasure. Thanks again (I think I can speak for all the contributors to MOTD) and all the very best!!! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 19:37, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
I see. At the time, I believed in good faith that "building a particle accelerator in a garage" was a literal impossibility--and it sounded like exactly the kind of goofiness that a vandalizer would put, given that the common impression of a particle accelerator involves kilometers of space. Looking around the web, I see that, it is, in fact, true. I will make a correction on the IP's talk page, just in case it's not a dynamic IP. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:56, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi there! Can you avoid using the RfPP templates (eg {{rfpp|n}} because the script that we use to keep the page tidy can't tell the difference between the note & question templates {{rfpp|n}} and {{rfpp|q}}, and all the other ones. This means that where you've replied using a note template, the script thinks the request has been actioned, and there's a chance it'll be filed in the bottom half before an admin's actually looked at it.
All you need to do is just indent your reply normally with a colon. Nothing wrong with your contributions on there, btw, just avoid the templates! Thanks! GedUK07:25, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure, to be honest, you'd have to ask Rami R (talk·contribs) who wrote the script. To be honest though, you don't really need the template, any admin would really all the comments before actioning anyway. GedUK11:51, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Signature
I just wrote the date, time, etc into the signature by hand (using {{subst:CURRENTTIME}}, a red link because it's a magic word rather than a template, and other similar templates) and sign with three tildes rather than four. --ais523 19:29, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
So does {{subst:CURRENTTIME}} {{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}} ([[User:Σxample|U]][[User talk:Σxample|T]][[Special:Contributions/Σxample|C]]) work? --Σ☭★23:40, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
To anyone who is about to complain about: This was accidentally reverted, I was viewing recent changes and missed the rollback button. --Σ☭★00:15, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
New e-mail
Hello, Σ/Archive/2011. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
I was perusing WP:UAA and noticed that you'd nominated User:Smd175 on that page. I agree that this editor is not likely to be a benefit to the encyclopedia at this point, but for the life of me I can't figure out how "Smd175" is offensive. I've looked at the name backwards, upside down, and both. I'm asking out of sheer curiosity, as I'd like to be better at catching things like this myself but sometimes I can be exceptionally obtuse (and I'm usually ignorant of new slang). Would you mind letting me know when you have a free moment? Thanks! --NellieBly (talk) 04:51, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
I made a decision when I became a serving politician five year ago, I would be open and not use anonymity on line. This is perhaps a less safe path in the short term than that of some of my colleagues although what is done in haste can be repented of at leisure. My username is my name and my reputation is mine. I am unsure of the wisdom of changing this since as a political candidate my information is so much more accessible than other people anyway. This is my current position, I am happy to enter dialogue and I am prepared to change my position if I am convinced of a better course, I am a pragmatist, if you wish please convince away... Kind regards
User:MikeBeckett Please do say 'Hi!' 04:34, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
speedy deletion rationale
Hi, the article you tagged as A7 about Julian Assange would have been more accurately tagged with A10. That's the tag to use when there's already an article on a subject, and the new article is not a useful addition. LadyofShalott05:37, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
I scanned the text, and it seemed like an unreferenced BLP. I was never aware of Julian Assange's article (I never knew who he was until I checked a second ago), and therefore tagged it as an A7. Perfectly understandable. --Σ☭★05:40, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Well, if he somehow had not had an article already, being the founder WikiLeaks (which I believe was stated) would certainly have ruled out A7 in itself. But anyway... LadyofShalott05:51, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
I don't often give advice to others so feel free to ignore me, but with regards to this I think the best thing anyone can do is simply revert and ignore such trolling comments. Personally, I'm just going to move the entire section to the archive before long and reduce the incentive for stupidity, since the thread passed its lifespan ages ago. 1ForTheMoney (talk) 23:35, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
True, but this is one situation where I won't indulge an individual with a misguided impression. I had hoped it was just a random comment that would never be followed up, as is often the case; clearly I was wrong. But I won't stand in the way of your decision, I'll just do what I wish and leave you to do the same. 1ForTheMoney (talk) 00:47, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Greetings! Thank you for filing an Abuse Report for abusive behavior originating from 202.27.219.186. We wanted to let you know that the case has been opened and is currently under investigation.
23:03, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
RfA opposes
Please stop opposing RfAs on grounds such as "it's not a real RfA unless there is someone opposing." I am sure you mean well, but I believe there would be a pretty strong consensus that this kind of oppose !vote is not productive or useful (or even very funny).
I would appreciate your withdrawing this !vote, as there is otherwise likely to be controversy about whether it should actually be counted or not, which will be unhelpful to the RfA process.
Of course, if you have a serious reason for either supporting or opposing any candidate, your input will always be welcome.
Hi Σ. If I may add a suggestion to what Newyorkbrad says above... please don't oppose RfAs and RfBs so flippantly. It's hurtful and disrespectful to the candidates, who are under a lot of stress, having put themselves up for the whole community to judge. Fetchcomms left a little hint for you in Maxim's RfB that your oppose did not appear to be a serious one; you might consider taking the hint and withdrawing your vote, as you did in Drmies' RfA. Best, 28bytes (talk) 06:59, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Warning
Seriuosly?!WP:DTTR, my edit was 100% uncontroversial, if the user doesn't like it, they can change it back. He has indicated male, so adding "he" to a ubx instead of "they" is hardly anything to get worked up over. CTJF8305:49, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
What does that have to do with the fact the template was still useless as was your revert. The edit wasn't vandalism, and clearly my edit summary shows a good natured edit, and if the user doesn't like being called "he" instead of "they", then he can revert it. CTJF8305:53, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Cause every other time i've made such changes, the user has welcomed it. Not like I'm adding or removing userboxes, who would want to be called "they" as opposed to "he" or "she". But if you want to make a big deal out of it, revert it, and I'll post on the user's talk. CTJF8305:58, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Could be, since this is beyond the point of me caring, I've reverted myself and posted on his talk. CTJF8306:08, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
I'm sick of seeing them with your sig. This is not funny in any sense of the word, so I've removed it as trolling. Please cut it out. Wikipedia is not a playground, and from one student to another, these kinds of things make us look bad. Thanks. Juliancolton (talk) 19:52, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Looks like a heavy handed removal without discussion to me. I'm minded to revert. Pedro : Chat
Looks like an extremely heavy handed removal without discussion to me. Since "he's the guy who once deleted the main page" is probably the single thing for which Maxim is best known, a concern about what other "jokes" he might come up with seems an entirely valid concern, even if I personally think three-year-old history is irrelevant. – iridescent20:34, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
If it were a one-off thing I'd agree completely. It's not; every vote from this user I've seen has been a misplaced attempt at humor, which I appreciate in almost any other context, but not in the context of a live RfA. He's been advised to stop several times, which is why I'm frustrated. Juliancolton (talk) 21:05, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Did I not say Oppose per Jusdafax? I seriously think another half-active bureaucrat is not needed. --Σ☭★22:27, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Σ, you added a "support" vote twoforty-five minutes before you struck it and added an "oppose" vote. That suggests to me you're not really taking time to evaluate the candidate but are just tossing up whatever feeling comes to mind. I could be wrong, and if so, I apologize, but I really don't think you're taking very much care with your RfX votes. 28bytes (talk) 22:32, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Generally I ask a question and wait for it to be answered, and I !supported before I saw any !neutrals or !opposes. --Σ☭★22:36, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
And if you're going to remove it, fine. I'm not complaining. I'm just telling you my intent. And in any case it's not exactly like I can complain against an admin. --Σ☭★22:39, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Complain all you want. Go recall my admin tools if you want. My status as an administrator has nothing to do with any of the edits I've made in the past year or so. If you really have an honest opinion on the candidate, then restate it in a professional manner. Opposing per Jusdafax would have been fine if you had left it at that, in fact. Juliancolton (talk) 22:45, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Good. I feel glad for this conversation, though not they way it has proceeded. --Σ☭★23:03, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
On a possibly related note, "good day." --preceding comment by Σ
I think, Julian, you would be well advised to observe the thread below this one. Sigma was asked politely to consider parts of his signature and responded straight away by changing it - no moans no grumbles. Collegial interaction in a nutshell. Your summary deletion of this oppose without (as far as I can see) any form of discussion or polite request from you is *exactly* why so many editors have the impression they can't complain against admins or any complaint will be pointless. Pedro : Chat 06:35, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I think, Sigma, that RfA and RfB are very important tests of maturity for our candidates for adminship and bureaucrat and please remember that encyclopedia building is serious stuff and there are a lot of adults involved with it. There is a large project underway to reduce the drama at RfA that is driving these mature editors from wanting to run this gauntlet of inappropriate !voting and commenting. One of the main tasks of that project is to consider guidelines for qualifications of those who !vote. I wholly share Julian's opinion about deleting trolling and immature participation from any areas of Wikipedia and I am very likely to do the same, especially at meta area of, or at admin level, and like Julian, it has nothing to with me having admin tools or not. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Signature
Just curious, Sigma—is there a reason you think the hammer and sickle is appropriate for your signature, given that to many people it bears connotations similar to those of the swastika? /ƒETCHCOMMS/03:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I figured that someone would've told me to remove it long ago if it were against the rules. --Σ☭★03:24, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
It wasn't directly against the rules—but plenty of offensive things aren't specifically "against the rules". And yes, that's better, thanks so much. /ƒETCHCOMMS/01:21, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
RfA
Just curious - I see you have this quote from Jimbo Wales on your user page: RfA is a horrible and broken process, I wonder if you know why he said that very recently? --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:00, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
...for removing the craziness from my user talk. Actually, it was quite funny: a quote from the talk page (contested deletion): ...N37_Ph34r needs no references...References need N37_Ph34r.... :)) --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 06:56, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
I upgraded Hiuby's block to indef because he had created a browser-killer in his userspace.
I'm not talking about that unwieldy mess of a userpage with the userboxes splattered everywhere and the fluttering hummingbird and etc. I'm talking about a page designed specifically to crash the browser. That's not something that can be done by accident. DS (talk) 05:02, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
My edit summary
I was poking through my old contributions, and realized that my edit comment here might have been construed as aggressive rather than an attempt at humor on your username. My apologies if that was the case. Anyway, keep up the good work and keep making sure that editing here remains an entertaining hobby. Reply here is fine, or my place if you feel like it. - 2/0 (cont.) 03:46, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
Thank you --43?9enter ★☭ 04:07, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello. You have a new message at ScottSteiner's talk page.18:09, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Greetings! Thank you for filing an Abuse Report for abusive behavior originating from 202.27.219.186. We wanted to let you know that the case has been opened and is currently under investigation.
23:03, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
