Jump to content

User talk:Majorly/Archives/61

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for supporting my RfA!

{{subst:Horribly ugly RfA thanks}} -- Credit Cruncher (talk) 19:28, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome, though I didn't support it. Majorly talk 19:29, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
You did, 36 times... Credit Cruncher (talk) 19:37, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
OK OK. I also opposed you. Majorly talk 19:38, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

←For those who are wondering — Ched :  ?  23:47, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for looking after my user page. That guy hit all the arb pages. No doubt some Scientologist on a crusade. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for this. I guess I'll have to learn French to adequately fight vandalism :-\ See ya 'round Tiderolls 15:32, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Space pen

Thank you for the space pen. I will try to use it wisely. :-) Finetooth (talk) 20:17, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 15 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 11:47, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Credit Cruncher's RfA

Unfortunately, Credit Cruncher's RfA exhibited a confused response, and has been placed on hold until such time as the bureaucrats can come to a reasonable and measured consensus. We appreciate your patience and your understanding as we implement wikipedia policies and guidelines in this area. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 18:20, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Re Lar talkpage edits

It has been my experience that Lar usually prefers that he does his own clerking of his page; you may receive a (polite, of course) note from him saying so - if the ip is really adamant in putting that note up, it may just a well be that it stays this time. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you Majorly for your support and help at my RfA. I know you pull a lot of weight around here, and I really appreciate your help and support. It honestly meant a LOT to me. Thanks.  ;) — Ched :  ?  20:43, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Pull a lot of weight? No, but he does drag a lot of weight behind him here. As do I, to be fair. ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum 22:15, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Bop It Guy / Samlaptop accounts

Hi, User:Majorly, I have just filed a report on this user at WP:ABUSE. I am attempting to attack the problem of this user's constant IP-based recidivism by going to the source of the problem. I noticed that you had had some previous interactions with this vandal and I wanted to offer you the chance to participate in the proceedings. If you would like to add any specific comments, please do so in the appropriate section at the bottom of the report. The report can be found here. Thanks for all the help you've been so far. -Thibbs (talk) 16:06, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

RFA

That little jibe at Timmeh's RFA was frankly totally pathetic Majorly. You come up with a load of well meaning bollocks about peeople being human in the support section, then when I reflect I'm less than perfect so abstain rather than oppose the RFA you give me some shit over it. You utter hypocrite. And I used to think you ought to be an admin again. Dear me, I was wrong there. Pedro :  Chat  22:06, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, your antics at WP:BN lately really haven't put you in a good light, have they? If you're no better than Timmeh is, why should you be allowed to continue adminship? It's simply not fair. I think it is clear the only hypocrite here is you. I am not the one opposing (or neutralling, whatever) for not meeting criteria that I don't even meet. He said he was offended? So the hell what. Do you really think that has anything to do with adminship? I'd have thought you would have known. And your remarks about me being an admin are totally irrelevant, but confirm my thoughts about you too. Majorly talk 22:17, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
And please don't reply to this either, I really can't be bothered to argue about something so utterly pointless. There's articles to work on. Majorly talk 22:21, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Poor effort Majorly. "It's simply not fair" - hmmmm..... My "antics" at BN "haven't put me in a good light" - that's the kind of rubbish I expect from games players who work the sad little wiki-career ladder - when we have poeple using closed mailing lists to make major decisions regarding this site? You think this is some game? That I'm doing it for a laugh? That I have nothing better to do with my time? That I don't make those comments because I believe they matter, and that someone needs to stand up and make them on occasion? As for your "thoughts" about me? When I've bent over backwards to support you numerous times? Well that's up to you mate. I didn't do it for gratitude - I did it because it was the right thing to do. You, sir, need to sort yourself out. I at least have the common decency to recognise when I might be wrong. You apparently do not. I'm going to bed. Pedro :  Chat  22:29, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Sorry - I replied and got ec's by you. Pedro :  Chat  22:29, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Goodnight. Majorly talk 22:31, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
"Mind the bed bug's don't bite" as my mother says :) Pedro :  Chat  22:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 22 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:01, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Cheadle Hulme

First you managed Stockport's first GA, and now its first FA. In case you hadn't noticed, Cheadle Hulme just got promoted :-) Great work. Nev1 (talk) 22:53, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations! --Malleus Fatuorum 22:53, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

It's a great article. Nice one. Acalamari 23:03, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm fairly amazed at how smoothly it went, but happy all the same. Thanks Nev1 and Malleus for your really helpful work on it too, it wouldn't have passed first time had I ignored your advice. Majorly talk 23:29, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Just stopping by to congratulate you on your efforts; it's heartening to see someone who has been around for so long combat namespace drift—and, if you'll forgive my saying so—for someone with such an illustrious past as yourself to confound expectations. I hope you keep up the great work. Mahalo,  Skomorokh  17:02, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 29 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Greater Manchester July Newsletter, Issue XVII

Delivered on 4 July 2009 by Nev1. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add two *s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

Nev1 (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for picking up on my deliberate typo designed to make sure people are reading ;-) Nev1 (talk) 19:14, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Spotlight

Hey there :-)

I noticed that you've edited Marco Polo quite a lot, and that article is being worked on via IRC, as the current spotlight project. Please come to the IRC channel and help us to improve it :-) We're trying to get the 'spotlight' thing working again. Cheers!  Chzz  ►  22:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Since you're working on a wikipedia article, why not discuss it on the article page? That way everyone interested or associated with the article is able to participate in improving it without feeling disenfranchised or excluded if they are not on IRC. Nev1 (talk) 23:13, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
It's easier and faster to discuss things in real time, in my experience. I often ask for help on articles over IRC. And since IRC is so incredibly easy to setup and use, I don't think anyone is going to be excluded. Majorly talk 23:08, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
To Chzz: most, if not all my edits to Marco Polo are reversions, not adding actual content. Majorly talk 23:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Majorly - fair enough; I admit I 'spammed' people based upon stats checks without examining edits themselves - well, that's not entirely true; mostly I checked validity, but in your case - as I 'knew you' a bit from IRC - I left the note anyway.
Nev1, I am concerned about any disenfranchisement, and therefore encourage all spotlight contributors to make entensive use of the talk page to document the reasoning and to discuss tricky issues; in addition, all changes can of course be reverted or altered by any editor. It is merely a mechanism for timely discussion and 'putting our heads together' with a view to improve the article, and does not exclude other contributors in any way; check the talk page of Marco Polo at the moment, for example. We aim to encourage any improvements. In addition, anyone capable of accessing Wikipedia is able to access IRC.  Chzz  ►  18:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 6 July 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:00, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

You probably notice this on your own

But I wanted to make sure you saw this discussion---Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 03:31, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

The idea of myself, Peter Damian, Malleus and Friday being among "Majorly's too-ardent followers" is a – erm – unique perspective on events. – iridescent 2 15:34, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
You three are such sheep.---Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 15:35, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Great. Well I long stopped watching that page. I only went neutral because my opposes in the past have been misconstrued as retaliation - check out my RFA for examples of that. So to be on the safe side, so people didn't get the chance to attack and bully me about their misinterpretation, I went neutral, bringing up the concerns anyway but not taking a position. I really couldn't care less if Pastor Theo is an admin, but thought I'd let everyone else deal with the issue I brought up. Majorly talk 16:48, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I think it was a wise move on your part, Majorly. The only reason I decided to vote neutral rather than oppose was because Pastor Theo stated that he will mainly be involved in deletions etc and so should not be touching the block button; had that not been the case I would have opposed. I hope that he won't use the button at all. Unfortunately my perception that he is too touchy about what is acceptable was not helped by his comment on WT:RfA regarding the opposes after he passed. Nev1 (talk) 16:55, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

And this is just a general note: I wish people would stop using me in examples to make a point about something. I wish people would stop making a point when we happen to agree on something, like it's the most amazing thing ever. I'm tired of it. I wish people would stop bringing up the past and move on. The only reason I am still here is... I don't know why, I just am. I would have left some time ago if I could. I'm slowly but surely starting to tire of this place, and the people in it's antics. I wish people would leave me alone and stop making me out to be some horrible bad person. Majorly talk 16:56, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

An apology from me.

Sorry Marjorly, my comment regarding you at the BNI was unnecessary, uncalled for, and downright rude and I regret having made it, I have struck it, and hope that helps, sorry. (Off2riorob (talk) 23:05, 11 July 2009 (UTC))

Diff

Majorly, see this diff. AdjustShift (talk) 00:29, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I've removed that page from my list. I've simply lost interest in what is simply going to be a circular argument of disagreement. It's frankly unbearable. Majorly talk 00:33, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

"politians"

See my talk page. Dr. Blofeld White cat 19:11, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Albert Midlane

Updated DYK query On July 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Albert Midlane, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wizardman 18:00, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

ODNB

hi Majorly, noticed your query to Magnus Manske re the ODNB. What exactly did you have in mind? I have a file of ODNB bios, with (from recollection) 16K or so of them matched to wikipages.Dsp13 (talk) 21:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Basically, articles on the ODNB that have no article here. There seems to be several (thousand) missing... he emailed me the relevant pages. The one above is such an example, which I created. Majorly talk 16:14, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 July 2009

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 11:37, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Majorly/Archives/61&oldid=1144458841"