User talk:Nagle/Archives/2017/July

About becoming an administrator

Wikipedia needs you! Take the poll. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia so far; they are very much appreciated. Your experience and tenure have been an asset to the project. Have you ever thought of becoming an administrator? It can be enjoyable, challenging, and a great way to help Wikipedia. To receive feedback on your chances of successfully requesting administrative privileges, consider starting a poll: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll Thank you! Are you reading this on another user's talk page? If you are experienced and trusted, and would consider becoming an admin, you are very much encouraged to take the poll. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:20, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, but I'm not interested in becoming an administrator. I don't feel the need for extra buttons. John Nagle (talk) 04:53, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Very well. Thank you just the same. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:01, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

I respect your option on this, although I proposed you be contacted and was hoping the answer would at least be 'maybe'. Now I'm hoping that you'd consider helping solve the apparent 'admin crisis' by discussing why well-qualified people aren't able to be found in the search process, or what about adminship doesn't appeal. Anna, could you suggest a venue? I'm aware of WP:RFA reform but not sure what's the current engagement area. Bri (talk) 05:18, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Hmmmmm, consider asking where to ask at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:35, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Gouyoku (talk) 22:08, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

OK. Awaiting official opening of dispute resolution. John Nagle (talk) 23:32, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

FXCM

Thank you for the explanation, but I won't bother. I've been around here long enough to know that people who want to produce a non-neutral item by edit-warring newsy items into an article will not be stopped, and they'll gather a big enough gang together to overwhelm someone who cares about writing an encyclopedia article. It's harder to find a better example of WP:RANDY than groups of people who neither understand how to write neutrally nor can't understand how their idea of news-as-a-secondary-source is a fringe theory in historical writing. Nyttend (talk) 00:36, 13 July 2017 (UTC)