User talk:RyanGerbil10/Archive 8
This is an archive of past discussions with User:RyanGerbil10. 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. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
Please imagine a different catchy song:
- Believe it or not, this page is archived,
- Please leave a meesage at this page
- Scream all you want, but I'll never hear,
- 'cause I'm not here-
- Believe it or not, it's archived!
Signpost updated for October 30th.
| ||
Volume 2, Issue 44 | 30 October 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
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 06:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for supporting my RfA
Thank you for your support in my RfA, which passed with a final tally of (56/0/2). It was great to see so much kind support from such competent editors and administrators as commented on my RfA.
I know I have much reading to do before I'll feel comfortable enough to use some of the more powerful admin tools, so I'll get right to it.
|
November Esperanza Newsletter
|
|
|
Closing TfD discussion - note added to template talk page?
Hi there. As mentioned at this WP:AN thread, I was wondering if you could confirm whether or not you ever put a note at Template talk:Wr concerning the TfD discussion you closed here? Such notes are extremely helpful for anyone later considering nominating the templates for deletion, or speedy deleting them. Apologies if you did add such a notice. Carcharoth 16:05, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 6th.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 2, Issue 45 | 6 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
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 05:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
RfA thanks
Thank you for your support!
23:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC) |
If I'm a bit pale in the face now, And if in the future |
RfA
Hi Ryan! I don't mean to be annoying, but just reminding you that you said that you would write me an admin nom to go live tomorrow here. If you are still interested and have the time, please let me know when it goes live, and thanks again for the nom! - Mike | Talk 00:51, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks very much! - Mike | Talk 02:54, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- I've answered the questions and listed the nom. Thanks again! - Mike | Talk 21:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Ryan, I'm thinking I'm going to withdraw the RfA and try again in a few months. It seemed to be on cruise control early on, but now it seems it hit a guardrail and spun out of control (Yay for crazy road analogies!) I do think that I was a little too hasty in wanting the tools and this nom was rather premature after the last one. Although, if I never created the first one this one might have turned out far differently ([[Homer Simpson|D'oh!). Many thanks for your nomination. Oh, and BTW, your response to KazakhPol hit the nail right on the head :-D. - Mike | Talk 03:33, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- I've answered the questions and listed the nom. Thanks again! - Mike | Talk 21:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
DYK
Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:54, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
RfA Thanks
Mike's RfA Thanks | ||
RyanGerbil10: Thanks very much for your support at my RfA. Unfortunately, it was clear that no consensus was going to be reached, and I have withdrawn the request at a final tally of 31/17/4. Regardless, I really appreciate your confidence in me. Despite the failure, rest assured that I will continue to edit Wikipedia as before. If all goes well, I think that I will re-apply in January or February. - Mike | Talk 04:32, 13 November 2006 (UTC) |
Signpost updated for November 13th.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 2, Issue 46 | 13 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
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 05:23, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Dangherous
Generally adding notes to Beauracrats about users' voting tendencies is frowned upon. Please refrain from doing this again for Dangherous or any other user. Beauracrats are usually able to discern the revenge-votes from true community consensus. On another note I find it somewhat surprising that you consider it acceptable to characterize another users' edits as "disruptive," "abusive" and "spurious," but consider it a personal attack when someone says a potential administrator lacks the required temperament. KazakhPol 03:08, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 20th.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 2, Issue 47 | 20 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
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 06:46, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
User:Will314159 Legal threats
Please see here. I'm fed up with him. << armon >> 12:37, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 27th.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 2, Issue 48 | 27 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
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 01:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
My RfA
Oh, the humanity!
I had my doubts about a second RfA, but even I couldn't have predicted the way it caught fire and inexorably drifted to the ground in flames, causing quite a stir on its way down. Still, it was encouraging to see the level of support and confidence. Thank you for yours, and I hope I'll still have it the next time around. Kafziel Talk 13:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC) |
My RfA
Thank you very much for your support! I greatly appreciate it. Biruitorul 19:22, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 4th.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 2, Issue 49 | 4 December 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
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 05:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your block action.I fear a block will not stop him since he claims "you believe that I have that only one IP dirty idiot? I have a lot of accounts here and in the others wiki then fuck off ****. block one I will create five other poor ****. I go where I want, I say what I want..." but since you understand french well Merci et bon courage pour "War & Peace" ;-)--Neuromancien 07:19, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for voting
Thank you for voting in my RfA which at 51/20/6 unfortunately did not achieve consensus. In closing the nomination, Essjay remarked that it was one of the better discussed RfAs seen recently and I would like to thank you and all others who chose to vote for making it as such. It was extremely humbling to see the large number of support votes, and the number of oppose votes and comments will help me to become stronger. I hope to run again for adminship soon. Thank you all once more. Wikiwoohoo 19:24, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Rollback on Barak Obama
I just noticed that you did a revert on Barak Obama using what appears to be the rollback button. Did you intend this as a vandalism revert or just an editorial one? The fact the anonymous editor posted is actually true (it was on ABC news this evening) although it didn't provide a citation. Using rollback is usually discouraged on editorial edits. Just a friendly note. --StuffOfInterest 01:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi. I don't disagree that the fact was trivial cruft. My only concern was that a good faith edit was rolled back in a way that made it look like vandalism. Thanks for your understanding. Of course, right after your rollback the article got hit with some serious vandalism (replacing Obama with Osama). :) --StuffOfInterest 01:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)