User talk:Ryan Postlethwaite/archive12

Clarification re block denial policy needed.

I don't understand this: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism&diff=next&oldid=164325638 The IPs talk page indicates to me that the IP WAS warned, many (5) times, and vandalized many times, SINCE the last block. The listing criteria for the page are : The vandal is active now, has been sufficiently warned, and has vandalized after a recent last warning, except in unusual circumstances. AH! "RECENT last warning"... I guess you don't consider 'since the last block' to be recent enough. I'll warn the user. If I'm correct, 'recent' needs definition. If not, please explain. Dictionary.com defines it thusly: "not long past: in recent years."--Elvey 18:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

This is a shared IP, so every time someone edits, it is a new user. To block this IP, I would like to see 4 warnings within at the very most 72 hours. The IP in question has made some good edits, and has had few warnings since its previous block months ago. Ryan Postlethwaite 19:24, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I see. Would you be offended if I re-posted the request for other admins to see (and link here), as I feel a block would be a) appropriate and b) within policy? PS: I indicated that I knew the IP was marked shared when I made the request. I also proposed a SOFT block. Perhaps you missed those points.

No, by all means re-add it to AIV to get another admin to take a look, it will do no harm. I still don't believe a soft block is appropriate as there were constructive edits from the IP, but hey, another admin may see it differently - I'm all for transparency :-) Ryan Postlethwaite 19:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA questions

I was answering the questions when you were writing me that note. Sorry if I was supposed to do it in the same edit as accepting the nomination - I didn't realise. Hut 8.5 19:36, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Ah no worries, thought it would be for the best to let you answer the questions before it went live. Best of luck sir, hope it goes well! Ryan Postlethwaite 19:37, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

quick question

Just checking out your userpage, and I was wondering...is WikiProject Endorsements a joke? Because it's redlinked. Does it not exist yet or was it deleted? VanTucky ^Talk 00:29, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

It did exist, but it was just a joke. Basically, it was because Kelly Martin's RfA rationale was that someone should have a wiki-project endorsement or they got opposed, this was a comical way of giving someone a wiki-project endorsement! Ryan Postlethwaite 00:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Children Overboard Affair

(lifted from protection request page)

Children Overboard Affair (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

(lifted from protection request page) Full protect briefly and Semi protect for a while (if it's possible to do this.) High-speed revert war (hence full protection), use of sock IPs (hence semi protection). Thanks. <eleland/talkedits> 16:56, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Fully protected Ryan Postlethwaite 21:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I note that the page has been protected in the state at which the last IPSock left it. Perhaps this could be undone as a discouragement to bad behaviour? --Pete 21:25, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, it would be wrong of me to revert a page I have just protected. I'm sure the IP believes the other side of the edit war is wrong. Ryan Postlethwaite 21:36, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I am sure that the IP is also a registered editor. Protecting the page in its current form, as edited by a Sock IP falsely claiming consensus, especially where the page protection request also noted the use of socks, seems to be sending the wrong message. This sort of behaviour should be discouraged, not excused with a shrug of cybershoulders. --Pete 21:59, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

UNOFFICIAL Vandal Police

I do this this user really ought to adjust his attitude, and I think his username is still a violation. He can combat vandalism without drawing attention to himself in this way, and his conduct borders on unacceptable. I saw he was reported to UAA, I left a comment saying that you were involved in discussion. What do you think? And what do you think ought to be done? SGGH ^speak! 11:34, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to take it to RFCN is a bit I think, I'll give him time to respond. Ryan Postlethwaite 11:51, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: RfA

agreed I have rved my readdition of the RfA. However, you should close it or something like that. nat^tang 17:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Admins

Thanks very much!! Out of interest, why does the software have that feature if it can be circumvented by asking an admin? Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 17:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Because, the function can be abused by vandals wanting to create a lot of accounts similar to other respected users to disrupt. - admins are supposed to be trusted so they are given the right to create accounts that are similar to other users to get around the problem of the software blocking these usernames from ordinary users. Although the software didn't block it, an imposter incident happened when User:Alllison was created to pretend to be User:Alison. Ryan Postlethwaite 17:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Frustrated

Hi ryan, you seem to be getting a little frsutrated as of late, so I thought I would say that you are doing a fantastic job, keep up the great work! Viridae^Talk 21:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Viridae - it's very much appreciated, I think I've just been getting involved with a few things that have touched a nerve and hence why I've probably come across a little upset - I'm sure things will blow over soon enough and things will get back to normal, we all have our off days/weeks. It's good to hear from you Ryan Postlethwaite 21:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Someone vandalized my Userspace! But a little angel came along and fixed it! Thank you! You can thank others by using {{subst:Vangel}}! Tiptoety 00:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Hehe, no problem. Ryan Postlethwaite 00:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Your block to 68.49.47.157

I would recommend you extend his block to indefinite because every time he is "let loose" (in other words, unblocked) he keeps testing his talkpage and messes with the sandbox heading. Please, we cannot let this person on Wikipedia again. I've dealt with him since day one, when he was testing his sandbox. He plugged his talkpage with earwax, personal attacks, and other stuff (check here), and, most recently, .0. (Check my FAQ.) Please, I (and probably the other admins) are stressed out dealing with him. Please! Please! --Goodshoped35110s 04:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and one more thing...

Hey.

Thank you all for helping out. Becuase I (probably) suffered the most from that IP address, I,Goodshoped35110s, give you all the RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar! (yay.) :) --Goodshoped35110s 04:23, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Dear Ryan Postlethwaite, ______ __ __ __ /\__ _\/\ \ /\ \ /\ \ \/_/\ \/\ \ \___ __ ___\ \ \/'\ __ __ ___ __ __\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ _ `\ /'__`\ /' _ `\ \ , < /\ \/\ \ / __`\/\ \/\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \/\ \_\.\_/\ \/\ \ \ \\`\\ \ \_\ \/\ \_\ \ \ \_\ \\ \_\ \ \_\ \ \_\ \_\ \__/.\_\ \_\ \_\ \_\ \_\/`____ \ \____/\ \____/ \/\_\ \/_/ \/_/\/_/\/__/\/_/\/_/\/_/\/_/\/_/`/___/> \/___/ \/___/ \/_/ /\___/ \/__/ For your contribution to My RfA, which passed with 8000 Supports, 2 Neutrals and no opposes. The standards and dedication of the English Wikipeidan Administrators is excellent and I am privileged to stand among them. Thankyou for putting you trust in me, I'll not see it abused. And now, I will dance naked around a fire. Party at my place! Cheers! Dfrg.msc 09:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Cheers mate. That'll really help. Thanks again, Dfrg.msc 10:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 42	15 October 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Brion Vibber interview
Wikimania 2008 awarded to Alexandria	Board meeting held, budget approved
Wikimedia Commons reaches two million media files	San Francisco job openings published
Community sanction noticeboard closed	Bot is approved to delete redirects
License edits under consideration to accommodate Wikipedia	WikiWorld comic: "Soramimi Kashi"
News and notes: Historian dies, Wiki Wednesdays, milestones	Wikimedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Military history	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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 10:08, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

UAA instructions

With all due respect, I don't understand your logic. The reminder I tried to add was taken verbatim from WP:U. By saying, "We don't do it that way here," you seem to be saying that WP:UAA overrides WP:U. This seems slightly out of whack to me. --Bongwarrior 10:50, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

The point is that if a name is inappropriate, not blatantly inappropriate then it can still be blocked and reported without and edit, it's always been done that way. I don't see how one edit makes a difference. I'm not sure I understand why you're revert warring over this. Ryan Postlethwaite 10:53, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

SamBC's version is a lot better. Ryan Postlethwaite 10:54, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Unbelievable. I copy and paste username policy, it's misleading. SamBC does it, and it's a masterpiece. I'm going to bed. --Bongwarrior 11:10, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Your warding was ambiguous, Sam's reflects what we do. Night. Ryan Postlethwaite 11:11, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Carrickmakeegan tragedy

My memory is not perfect, how does the current article differ from that deleted at AfD in August? Nuttah68 20:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Different title (check the capitalisation of tragedy, that's why I couldn't find the deletion in the log. I'll go ahead and delete it now. Ryan Postlethwaite 20:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for that. :-) Cbrown1023 talk 21:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem whatsoever, just had to think what the number were in your name! Ryan Postlethwaite 21:27, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Userpage Question

Hello...I have a slight problem that maybe you might be able to help with. The little "menu" at the top of my userpage that has a time, links to my talk page, contribs and the like, and a little saying is normally right in between the line at the top of the page, for some reason it is slid way down (you will see what I mean) and I am not sure how to fix it. If you could help, I would appericate it. (Sorry for the bad explanation). - NeutralHomer ^T:C 01:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Hows that for you sir? Ryan Postlethwaite 01:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Not bad :), but the bottom line (with the "Non nobis solum" was under the line) the red ribbon was actually directly at the end. Somehow it all slid last night. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 01:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Well I just edited the margins a tad, and it seemed to sort itself out - there may have been a change in the media-wiki interface causing it to move across the bottom line, looks like I've fixed it now though :-) Ryan Postlethwaite 01:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh I see, how is it looking now? Ryan Postlethwaite 01:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Sweet! Much better, many thanks! :) Take Care...NeutralHomer ^T:C 01:49, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Closing that thread about Husnock/OberRanks and Durin

You closed the WP:AN/I thread telling OberRanks to discuss it with Durin on his talk page. He's trying to, but every time he has, Betacommand or Videus Omnia has been removing it with the charming edit summary "rv troll". Neil ☎ 17:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Speaking about this thread, did you by chance notice the fire & brimstone on my talk page with regard to it. I've been travelling on business today and yesterday and thought maybe I'd see it differently after being away from the discussion, but I just looked over it again and just can't see what I did to inspire that reaction in DuncanHill. Am I turning crotchety as I approach 30? Look it over and give me your two cents, Ryno. A Train^talk 02:19, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Email

You've got one! Ryan Postlethwaite 17:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh yeah ;) i'm reading it now. I'll respond in a few minutes. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 18:16, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Dear Ryan

I've replied on my talk page, as I'm sure you see, but honestly I'd like to just express again how much it means to me, that despite my own personal hesitation, and perhaps my own lack of objectivity, you are there to urge me on, and tell me I'm ready. I can't tell you how much that means to me, I really can't. I just hope that you know. And please, don't be upset with Mike, I understand where he's coming from, and I can see how it may have come across to him, but I want to assure you that I didn't see it as anything but a wonderful thing, truly. Thank you. Ariel♥Gold 18:25, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Ariel, I don't hold grudges against anyone - the best thing to do is say your bit and then you can move on as friends :-) I wouldn't say I'm surprised about you declining for now, you're diligent and want to know in your heart that you are ready. When the day comes that you finally run, I'll be there to support/nominate if you wish. Take care, Ryan Postlethwaite 19:31, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I absolutely want that, and you know I'll be putting your school through the ringer, lol. I'm sure I'll have plenty to bother you about! And I just think that November is better for me, for a number of reasons, but I will be quite sure to let you know when things get going! And, I really can't thank you enough, but I hope you know how much your suggestions and support means to me. Thank you, you are truly a very special Wikipedian, and a wonderful Wiki-friend. Ariel♥Gold 19:51, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Inquiry about Blocks

Thank you for your input. I have already tried to inquire into the nature of the blocks I find questionable from the admins who put them in place, but they do not want to further elaborate on why the blocks were justified. This is why I was seeking outside advice. I will now follow your suggestion, and will inquire through the WP:AN/I. Thanks once again! ~ Homologeo 19:25, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Um...

I think I fixed it for you. Thanks, Codelyoko193 _Talk Contributions 23:41, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Totally unrelated question: Was the WP supposed to be a joke? I looked through some of the AFDs and that is what they said. Thanks, Codelyoko193 _Talk Contributions 00:08, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

The WP:Endorsements, to be exact. Thanks, Codelyoko193 _Talk Contributions 00:09, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

There was a user here who wouldn't support an RfA candidate unless they had a wikiproject endorsements - but wikiprojects don't endorse candidates. So we create this page as a joke, soley to endorse every candidate that went up for RfA, so yeah, it was a joke! Ryan Postlethwaite 00:13, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar. Thanks, Codelyoko193 _Talk Contributions 00:16, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Username

Hi Ryan. Could you please block User:Madigan = Sotiropoulos? This username tells me that the user goes to the same school as me, and he/she is impersonating my drivers education and band teachers, and the username has been in WP:UAA for more than an hour. NHRHS2010 ^Talk 00:02, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. NHRHS2010 ^Talk 00:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem, I was just going down the list so didn't get to it faster. Ryan Postlethwaite 00:05, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: RfA?

Hey Ryan. Wow I really appreciate being nominated by such an established editor. But I'm currently working on getting two albums up to a GA and an RfA now would be distracting. I know I said this when Jaranda nominated me in September, but I really do feel I need another month. But not to worry, I'm here for the long term. Until then, I'd love to join the team. Currently, I'm an article builder first and RC patroller/AfD contributor/RfA candidate second :) Spellcast 11:05, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, that's the right attitude to have, article writing is more fun anyway, admin chores can get rather boring. I fully understand you wishing to wait a little longer, but whenever you want a nom, just let me know and I'll gladly write one for you. Ryan Postlethwaite 11:08, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For the revert. That's nine spoofers on my username now! Acalamari 16:21, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem, you're obviously Mr Popular! Ryan Postlethwaite 16:26, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Question

Hello Ryan, I have a question: was I right to re-direct both Double the Trouble (album) and its talk page to Pussycat Dolls rather than delete both pages? It was the result of a deletion debate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Double the Trouble, but due to the length of time since the debate, I wasn't sure if the pages still fell under WP:CSD#G4, so therefore, I was not keen on deleting them. I should also note that Double the Trouble is salted, and the version of "Double the Trouble (album)" before the redirect was crystal-ballism, the same concerns listed in the AfD. Acalamari 23:18, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I think that's acceptable, there's no need to delete the pages fully as a redirect seems quite helpful in this instance. Is the album definitely going to be called Double the Trouble and is there a release date for the album yet? Ryan Postlethwaite 23:22, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

No sources for the name or release date have ever been provided or found yet. So far, the album has currently been nothing more than speculation. Acalamari 23:25, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

In that case then leave it as a redirect. The minute they publish a date and name, take it to DRV. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:26, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay then. Thanks again! :) Acalamari 23:27, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

ArielGold

Hi Ryan - I thought you might be interested in reading this thread — Timotab ^{Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!)} 18:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes, if you take a look at the thread, you'll even see that I participated in it! :-) I was just trying to be sly and force her into running but she's a persistent woman! Ryan Postlethwaite 19:23, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

~*Giggle*~ I'm Irish! I'm allowed to be stubborn, aren't I? On this topic, I've saved the RfA for my own posterity to my scrapbook, but I think perhaps it would be a good idea to nuke it for now, as I've been asked when I'm going to fill it out, and someone has already commented on it, lol. We can re-created it when the time comes, and again, my most heartfelt thanks for your encouragement, support, and friendship. Ariel♥Gold 19:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

And nuked, I hope to be recreating it very soon! Ryan Postlethwaite 20:03, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, dear. Ariel♥Gold 20:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

What are you up to with the RfAr?

It appears based on your additions to the workshop page that you have already decided these issues. It was my impression that the Evidence page was for laying out evidence on both sides. Yet you are already making findings of fact without reviewing my statements there, and offering interpretations of evidence as facts, in an entirely one-sided presentation. Are you planning to list Biophys' violations of all the same rules, or have you already made up your mind about the issues? If you have already made up your mind, what is there to arbitrate? I am very confused and disturbed by this process. csloat 21:05, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not an arbitrator, but anyone can make proposals in the workshop at any time. I'm putting the evidence together as I see it, from the evidence on the /evidence page - it makes it much clearer that way. I have had a quick look at Biophys already, but will do in more depth soon. This is by no way pending, and feel free to make your own proposals on the workshop page or state the parts you disagree with. Ryan Postlethwaite 21:09, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks, that helps me understand a bit. I am still troubled, however, because I had responded point by point to most of the links presented there; by amalgamating them like this on the workshop page it makes it look like an overwhelming amount of evidence, when in fact very little of it actually is relevant to the claim. csloat 21:29, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, if you disagree, why don't you make a comment on the /workshop talk page? You can put evidence there as to how the links that are in my proposals are wrong. The arbitrators will certainly look at the talk page and take your comments into account. I've looked over your evidence aswell before making these proposals. Ryan Postlethwaite 21:34, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Respectfully, you do not appear to have looked at my individual responses to every link, or you would not have included many of those links in your list. I will go ahead and put this stuff on the workshop page too if you insist but I have already responded on the Evidence page. csloat 21:37, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

You don't need to copy your evidence over, the Arbs will certainly read that. I have read your rebutuals to Biophys' evidence but there are some nasty personal attacks from you which haven't a place here, even if provoked. Likewise edit warring hasn't got a place here. Ryan Postlethwaite 21:43, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Most of the list of links does not show any "nasty personal attacks." The only statements that can be described that way that are from the last year are two statements that I profusely apologized for when an RfC was raised. All of the issues here were resolved by that RfC and I have been nothing but polite in the time since then. It is entirely unfair to recommend draconian punishments now based on links that are two years old plus a couple of links that were already addressed and resolved in an RfC. WP:DR worked for the actual "nasty personal attacks"; most of that list, as I have shown, is padding. Edit warring is a different question -- it is true I have been involved in those, but no more than any of my interlocutors, so it is very unfair to single me out for punishment. (In fact, I don't think this should be about punishment at all). I have also been very careful to discuss all of my changes on the talk pages of articles and in the edit summaries. What Biophys is characterizing as me edit warring is actually me explaining each edit carefully and then him mass-reverting a group of 10-20 edits without ever addressing the substantive arguments on the talk page. csloat 22:23, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

The diffs showing a lack of civility show old comments but also very recent ones, post the RfC - whether you appologised in the RfC or not, it shows you are still doing it now and the issue is not resolved - you have provided reasoning which the arbitrators will take into account. With regards to the edit warring, the fact is that you have been - it doesn't make it any better that your fellow contributors have. An edit summary is not an adequate explanation of the edits. If there is a great enough consensus for a change and one person is acting disruptively then that will be apparent and the disruptive user quickly blocked - I fail to see this here, it looks like plain and simple edit warring to get your way across. Ryan Postlethwaite 22:59, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I disagree -- which comment from post-RfC shows incivility? The only one I think you could claim that about is the one where I pointed out that another user was lying -- the lying was blatant and I had provided the proof, and I was not uncivil about it; simply matter of fact. That certainly had nothing to do with the rfC. As for the edit warring, any punishments for edit warring should certainly punish all participants in the edit wars rather than singling out a particular user. csloat 06:48, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration looks at all sides of a dispute, and people who you believe have edited disruptively will also be taken into account. There were issues with civility in the RfC, post the RfC, there are diffs that still show a problem with civility - calling another contributor a lyer is not the most civil thing to do, regardless of whether you were right or wrong, that's why I believe a remedy that focuses on civility is required to complement the remedy for edit warring. Ryan Postlethwaite 19:17, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I never called him a liar; I said he lied. One is a statement of opinion about the person whereas the other is a statement of fact about the thing the person said. I don't believe the statement was especially uncivil under the circumstances. csloat 00:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Tireless Contributer Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		In recognition of your endless amount of absolutely fantastic contributions to Wikipedia, I award you with this utterly spiffing barnstar. ;-) Keep up the great work! With regards, Lradrama 15:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

You're very welcome, and I'm glad it made your day better. Happy editing, Lradrama 19:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Just a quick note of thanks for your recent support. I made it through this time, and look forward to getting started. It's been a pleasure working with your over the past few months, and I look forward to keeping that interaction going in the future. Hiberniantears 17:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Yeah, but all I've done the past three days is vandal-revert... I need to finish that essay sometime... :) *Cremepuff222* 21:38, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

What you need to do is edit some articles :-) Ryan Postlethwaite 21:39, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom

Hi Ryan,

I just want you to know that I was very emotional at the time I said what I did on the FA talk page. Also, it was never intended as a threat to disrupt. I didn't think of it that way even at the time. See responses on workshop page. ——Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 22:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Threats to Block

Greetings,

In response to the below comment:

[edit] Contacting me If you wish to contact me about this issue, do so privately (ie. email) - the main factor for my removal of my name makes the idea of public correspondance silly. In short: do not leave any messages on my userpage about this or related issues, ever. Daniel 12:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I strongly urge you to stay off the List of Wikipedians by edit page, any more re-addition of names will result in a block. Ryan Postlethwaite 12:30, 19 October 2007 (UTC) Likewise, contacting daniel after he has told you not to if harassment, and will again result in a block. Ryan Postlethwaite 12:31, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I note the misspelling of the word 'correspondence': that says about all you need to know about this.Ryoung122 08:20, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I am #1 in the world in what I do (see my user page)

http://www.grg.org/Adams/E.HTM

http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/rej.2005.8.274?cookieSet=1&journalCode=rej

I have been in over 1,000 newspapers on six continents.

, I do not fear 'user Daniel.' Simply DISCUSSING issues should not be an issue. If he does not wish to discuss issues civilly and in a peaceful manner, then I will not contact him; however, I will contact the appropriate persons, if needed, should further action be required (i.e. if I am blocked for merely responding to an abuse of power)--including, ironically, the 'arbitration committee.' Notably, several other persons had a problem with Daniel's actions at the same time. Thus, you may wish to consider whether it would be wise to continue issuing threats to me. If I am blocked, whatever...other users will simply be copying my work from a third-party source.

Communication CANNOT be a one-way street...we do not call it 'harassment' when a plaintiff presents evidence to a court room. I find it IRONIC that someone supposedly involved in 'arbitration' would be so loathe to...arbitration. So, you can let User Daniel know that I do favor 'resolution' of disputes through discussion, but it becomes difficult to 'arbitrate' when one 'doesn't want to hear it.'

AS STATED: I DON'T CARE IF 'USER DANIEL' IS ON THE LIST OR NOT. HOWEVER, I DO FAVOR THE USE OF 'PLACEHOLDERS' and plan to continue advocating that position. However, user Daniel indicated that he doesn't mind the use of placeholders. THUS, THERE SHOULD NOT BE A CONTINUED ISSUE HERE. So, you can do the right, pro-active thing...favor a conflict resolution...or you can choose to issue 'yes-man' threats. It is up to you. Ryoung122 08:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

How does you being number one in your field make any difference here? If you contact Daniel when he has specifically asked you not to, or re-add his name to a list that he asked to be removed from, then it will result in you being blocked, plain and simple as it is harassment. Threats to shopping me to ArbCom do not help your situation. Ryan Postlethwaite 10:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

That uncivil Farscape vandal

Hi. Seen your name around. Thanks for dealing with this fellow. I expect him to be true to his word and be back on another IP. I'll keep an eye out. Best, Jack Merridew 12:24, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, yeah I suspect we might see him back, if he returns, you can report it to me or AIV. Cheers, Ryan Postlethwaite 12:26, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Right on cue: [1] --Jack Merridew 12:32, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again, Jack Merridew 12:47, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

No probs, let me know any more. Ryan Postlethwaite 12:49, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Helpme

Yes. I do mean the table of contence --Titan602 (talk) 16:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

G-Unit's thread on ANI

• My intent wasn't to shoot him down, I'm just a little surprised he would take something like that to ANI without talking to the user involved first. JuJube 12:07, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, it wasn't just aimed at you, I just thought the thread was getting a little nasty in relation to G-Unit, especially when he brought it to AN/I in good faith. He was getting ridiculed from all sides and it wasn't really fair. Ryan Postlethwaite 12:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Message

Hi, I'm currently on Editor Review and was wondering whether you would consider reviewing me? Your opinion would be very appreciated. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 15:50, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah certainly, I'm just doing some uni work, so I'll get round to it in a bit. Ryan Postlethwaite 15:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Wow that was a quick reply. Thanks. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 15:52, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi, would you be able to let me know roughly when you will review me. Thanks! --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 16:35, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Of course, I'll do it in an hour - just watching neighbours followed by The Simpsons then I'll be right on it. Ryan Postlethwaite 16:41, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok thanks, I really appreciate it. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 16:42, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your review. I will be sure to work more on my wikipedia space edits and would love to one day run through an RfA. Thanks again. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 17:55, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Talk:RealGM

Hi, I'm sure you didn't want to get involved when you made this revert (diff) but since you were unlucky enough to stumble into it would you mind taking a look at the conversation about the forums? I could really use an experienced editor to tell me if I've stepped out of line at this point. Thanks either way. Stardust8212 01:42, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for that, things are looking up now. Stardust8212 21:34, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For reverting vandalism to my user page. I sometimes thank goodness I do not have one of these "This page has been vandalised x times" userboxes there... --John 17:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Hehe, yeah, it'd probably boost your userspace edits. Would have blocked the nice fellow that did the deed, but saw you got there first! All the best, Ryan Postlethwaite 17:20, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The Nom

I'll accept it. Kwsn(Ni!) 22:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

:-) That's what I like to hear! I wish you good luck sir! Ryan Postlethwaite 22:05, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Email

An IP asked for instruction on how to email you on your userpage, i reverted it and gave my email address to the IP and said I'll forward you the email as I don't mind just giving out my email address directly on-wiki. Is that OK with you? If not I'll have another chat with the IP. Ryan Postlethwaite 22:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

• My email is enabled. They should be able to click "E-mail this user", but any way is fine. Alansohn 01:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • The problem is, he's not registered so can't register an email address so won't be able to email you. That's why I gave him my email address because I presumed you wouldn't want to release yours to anyone - I on the other hand don't care who has mine! :-) Ryan Postlethwaite 01:03, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Email

I've replied ;-).

Thankyou so much! Lradrama 10:01, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Coaching

Hey, I know you've been a bit busy, and your internet isn't working great, but if you could review my essay, or at least give me a new task? It's just been a while, and I want to keep this going. Thanks! J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 21:07, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Of course, I'll review your essay now and set you a new task sir. Sorry its taken so long. Ryan Postlethwaite 21:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I've made some comments and your tasks are ready! Ryan Postlethwaite 22:01, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Mediation

Ryan, please don't find another mediator. I think it may be the subject, and not you at all. I think I should bow out of this. It's not fair to the others that agree for you to mediate just because of me. :( I really think you'll do well. I don't think I will. Jeeny ^(talk) 23:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes I think you should stay too, SqueakBox 23:43, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll think about it, but only if you stay as mediator. Jeeny ^(talk) 01:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

About my front and talk page

Mr. Postlethwaite, I wish to have both my front and talk pages deleted. I still want to be active on Wiki, I just don't want anything either on my pages. Agtax ^{Call box | Contributions} 01:24, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Done, I probably shouldn't have deleted your talk, so if anyone has a problem with it, I'll have to restore it. Ryan Postlethwaite 01:39, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

With all do respect, I wasn't that popular. You can do a welcome template if you want. Agtax ^{Call box | Contributions} 01:42, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

In fact, I've restored your talk as it acts as a record for people that have contacted you. You can only delete your talk page if you leave the project I'm affraid. Sorry I could help more. Ryan Postlethwaite 01:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

How many edits do I need to be an admin? Agtax ^{Call box | Contributions} 01:48, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Generally speaking, users look for 3000 edits minimum and 3-4 months service - with a good record. I looked on your talk page and you do seem to be well liked so I don't think you've got anything to worry about :-) Keep your head up, get involed in some dicsussions and you could quite easily be an admin in the future. Ryan Postlethwaite 01:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Rudget RfA

Dearest Supporter,

Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed unsuccessfully with 39 supports, 15 oppose, and 1 neutral. I would have liked to gain some experience of being an admin, but it wasn't to be. At least I gained some valuable time there and will use my knowledge picked up to my next candidacy. I would like to say once again, thank you for voting and I hope to see you at my next request be it a nomination or self-induced, I hope I don't get as many questions! Rudget _{Contributions} 09:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Inversion (music) mediation

The article has been locked for an awfully long time, and to prevent any appearance that the others like it that way—since it was locked in a way that favours their line—I'd be pleased if you asked for a time-line to get this issue resolved. I suggested one, but no one has responded. I sense strategic stalling, and I'm not convinced that the recent walk-out by Cuthbert was in good faith. Tony (talk) 04:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Better do something about this: Rainwarrior has just walked out, following his friend Cuthbert. I'm no longer willing to sit around while the article is locked in their favour. People who put on tantrums and walk out of mediation, IMV, lose their voice in the solution. I need to know whether Wahoofive and I are going to negotiate a solution now (with your mediation). It does appear to be close. Tony (talk) 09:46, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Leave it with me, I'm just heading out to uni right now, but I'll take a look when I get back. Ryan Postlethwaite 09:57, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Giant goby

Why did you delete my article? I'd already explained that I was going to add more to it. Did you actually read the talk page? Totnesmartin 12:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes I did, but you should only create an article when there is some context there. This was not the case with this article. However, I'm pleased to see your efforts on the article now, and I think it looks really good. Ryan Postlethwaite 15:20, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Looks like my experiment to create several articles in a row by rubber-stamping the taxobox didn't really come off! oh well. Totnesmartin 15:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

To be honest, had you not recreated the article already, I'd have been happy to undelete it as soon as I came back on. It's never a problem if an article gets deleated as you can always get it back. It's often a lot easier to work on one article at a time - it gets less confusing! :-) Ryan Postlethwaite 15:30, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Too right it does! I just thought I'd try it out... Totnesmartin 17:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Inversion (music)

As your not around, I've taken 2 steps in regards this case:

1. I have removed all links to it from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Tony1.
2. I have closed the case given the withdrawal of agreement to mediate and start of user conduct proceedings.

We may need to delete the talkpage if it continues to be cited as evidence. WjBscribe 11:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I was giving Rainwater one chance to remove it himself, but obviously that didn't happen. Cheers for sorting it for me. Ryan Postlethwaite 11:42, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

re:Daima

Do deleted histories count for the GFDL required attribution? They aren't publically viewable so probably not. Nonetheless I have userfied as you suggested. James086^{Talk | Email} 11:56, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah they are if you use the text from them. Even though you only copied it onto the talk page, that should have been attributed and it couldn't be as it was deleted. Thanks for sorting it. Ryan Postlethwaite 12:01, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

end of mediation

Ryan, can you inform me (1) who brought in WBScribe to end the mediation, (2) why it was closed on the basis of a stated falsehood, that all parties have abandoned it (neither Wahoofive nor I have abandoned it), (3) why there is talk here of removing the mediation as a record, so that it can't be used as "evidence" in this RfA? I wonder why you started the "moving on" section, only to have the whole thing expunged. Tony (talk) 12:42, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

In response:

(1) WJBscribe (talk) acted in the role of Chair during my temporary absence, and Ryan's as mediator (see two threads above) and closed the case.

(2) I have edited the reason used at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Inversion (music) - the use of all was intended to refer that "it is no longer the case that all parties agree [as one no longer does]". Mediation can only continue with all parties, as you may be aware.

(3) See WP:M#The privileged nature of mediation.

Cheers, Daniel 12:49, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Lradrama 2

Hello, and thankyou for nominating me for adminship. I am about to fill in the RfA form with my acceptance of the offer and the answers to the questions. Could you post it for me afterwards so absolutely nothing goes wrong? Many thanks, Lradrama 13:09, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I've filled it in! Once again, many thanks for the offer to nominate me. If you could post it on the system I'd be most grateful. Best wishes, Lradrama 13:58, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou. :-) Lradrama 14:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Lradrama has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Good call

Good call. No idea what he was up to with that. Acalamari 00:06, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I've taken it to AN/I for the possible COI with me blocking. Ryan Postlethwaite 00:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll hear what others have to say, but I don't see a problem with it myself: that sort of edit is unacceptable. Acalamari 00:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll check later

Hi Ryan, I'll check my e-mail later, OK? Thanks, Kyoko 00:06, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah no problem madam, nothing important! Ryan Postlethwaite 00:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ryan, I sent you a reply. Be sure to check your machine, because your message got tagged as dangerous. --Kyoko 11:44, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ryan

This is a cross post from the crazy AN/I - I thought you might be the best person to speak to directly;

Sorry to perhaps be a little cynical, but could anyone above confirm if this is being discussed elsewhere, perhaps IRC? The block notice, followed by several 'supports' seemed to arrive somewhat quicker than the concerned responses below. No biggie if this isn't the case, but if it were, it would be healthy to disclose. Privatemusings 00:29, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Not really, it's being mentioned in passing, but it's too serious a matter to really discuss on IRC. Ryan Postlethwaite 00:30, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I appreciate that. My priority in asking is in ensuring an accurate picture of consensus. As I mentioned, fairly immediately after the decision was made, several 'support's came in. Was the block mentioned at that time on IRC, and more particularly, is there any possibility that some of those support votes were informed through IRC in a way that editors solely working 'on-wiki' would be unaware of?

The only danger is that a false picture of consensus gets painted in the short run.

Cheers, Privatemusings 00:35, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I only went on after the unblock happened, and I wasn't on when the block happened. I have AN/I watchlisted so that's how I saw it. To be honest, AN/I is where the drama is occuring - when something like this happens, people know IRC isn't the place to discuss things. Hope that helps. Ryan Postlethwaite 00:38, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Cool - thanks for answering so quickly too. Take care, Privatemusings 00:40, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

What a day, huh? ;) A Train^talk 01:20, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

What a nightmare!! I'm so stressed - Just cracked open a bud though so I'm happy! Ryan Postlethwaite 01:24, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't be stressed dude <virtual clink of beer bottles> - you're one of the good guys. Privatemusings 01:32, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Hehe, cheers, that comment was appreciated after today. Think I'll attempt to get some kip, night night all.... Ryan Postlethwaite 01:34, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

AMA

As it's now historical, there's a lot of cases open, pending, under investigation, etc., that might be better to be closed out; all they are doing is getting older, and I think there's little value in having unclosed cases in a defunct project. Does one have to be an admin to close them out, or should they go under MfD, which might not work because AMA itself was ineligible for MfD? MSJapan 02:00, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Jew comment

It appears you took the comment personally (nominee a mate of yours perhaps?) and abused your powers by blocking me indefinately, masking the fact by referring to some faux consensus. I have agreed to your terms so I hope this is the end of the matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dyslexicbudgie (talk • contribs) 00:58, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Hey Ryan, I've just stopped by to thank you for taking the time to request my unbanning – and make it successful. As I noted on my talk page, I will not let you down, or anyone else :). I hope to keep in good contact with you throughout my time on Wikipedia. You're a great friend. Additionally, happy first edit day :). Best wishes, Qst 11:18, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

HAPPY FIRST EDIT DAY!!

Happy First Edit Day, Ryan Postlethwaite/archive12, from Cremepuff222! Have a great day!

:) :) :) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Wild_Beasts&diff=prev&oldid=84312597 :) :) :) *Cremepuff222* 01:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Yey!!!! thanks! Maybe it's ironic, but I just went to watch Arcade Fire with a member of The Wild Beasts - guest list of course! :-) Ryan Postlethwaite 01:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations, Ryan! A year on Wikipedia for you! Acalamari 01:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Cheers acalamari, you're certainly one of the good guys. It's been a pleasure working with you over the past year, and I look forward to further interaction. Ryan Postlethwaite 01:52, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day! ~Jeeny ^(talk) 01:56, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!! It's only been a year? Wow! Now where's my 1 year, 8 months and 5 days Edit Day congrats? :] . --(Review Me) R ^ParlateContribs_@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 02:03, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

The same place where my 1 year, 2 months and 12 days award is. :-P Congrats, Ryan! —Animum (etc.) 02:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

There's a party on IRC. Come on over! :) *Cremepuff222* 02:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Zomg. I have suspicions that this improptu celebration was canvassed on IRC... WjBscribe 02:17, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Call in the Steward Cabal WJB! --(Review Me) R ^ParlateContribs_@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 02:38, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

(Indent) Hey man, happy first year! I remember my first Wikiversary way back in July. It's a cool thing to have under your belt. Enjoy it! J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 03:37, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks guys! It's been emotional! Ryan Postlethwaite 22:30, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Happy first edit day!

Happy First Edit Day, Ryan Postlethwaite/archive12, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!

It has been one year since you made your first edit! I've seen you several times. I first saw you when you closed my stale RfA after I decided to withdraw, and then I met you again on WP:AN and finally, you blocked User:Madigan = Sotiropoulos, since that username clearly impersonates my driver's education teacher and my band teacher. I'm about to make my 10000th edit soon. Leaving you this message is my 9981th edit, including deleted edits, according to My Preferences. Again, Happy 1st edit day! NHRHS2010 talk 05:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Happy WikiAniversary, Dear Ryan! Ariel♥Gold 07:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

	HAPPY FIRST EDIT DAY!	from the BIRTHDAYCOMMITTEE
	Wishing Ryan Postlethwaite/archive12 a very Happy First Edit Day! Have a fantastic day! From the Wikipedia Birthday Committee

Pat^{Politics rule!} 02:10, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		I've seen you everyday since I joined wikipedia so I, Phoenix-wiki, present you, Ryan Postlethwaite, with this barnstar for being seen!--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 23:03, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Non-Admin Closings

You told Qst that non-admins couldn't close AfDs as "No Consensus". According to the relevant section of the deletion guideline, they are only restricted from closing "Delete" results, as they lack the technical ability to do so. In this case, he obviously shouldn't have closed them, as there were no comments at all. But still, non-admins are permitted to close as "No Consensus". i ^(talk) 23:53, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

That's interesting, it always used to be the case that non admins should only close discussions where everyone has said keep. Anyway, Qst has had problems in the past with his AfD closures, so it may be an idea for him to stay away from them completely. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:58, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not neccisarily concerned with Qst here, although the closes were incorrect. I'm just saying that non-admins can close as no consensus. i ^(talk) 00:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Somebody removed the sentence "Close calls and controversial or ambiguous decisions should be left to an administrator", which I have now restored. Daniel 01:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

That sentence has not been there since the new wording in June, so it was not removed. I've reverted and started a section on the talk page. i ^(talk) 03:43, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

And I've reverted you, per my comments on talk. Establish a consensus to remove it before doing so, as there was never a consensus to remove it in the first place. Daniel 04:14, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Apolgies, it was my understanding that one would relist a debate if the !votes were equal or nearly equal, but a debate could be closed as no consensus, if there are no comments - whether these may have been vote/delete/merge etc. I apologise, I'm sure it used to be like that at Wikipedia:Deletion Process#NAC :) I just assumed it still was. Again, sorry. Qst 12:55, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, the deletion process has said that non-admins could close as no consensus since the first of June. It was only just amended by Daniel. However in this case, yes, it should have been relisted, as there were no comments. i ^(talk) 13:08, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I'm willing to openly admit, that I was in the wrong. I'm not to good with AfD debate closing; but as they say practice makes perfect ... Qst 13:15, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 43	22 October 2007	About the Signpost

Fundraiser opens, budget released	Biographies of living people grow into "status symbol"
WikiWorld comic: "George Stroumboulopoulos"	News and notes: Wikipedian Robert Braunwart dies
WikiProject Report: League of Copyeditors	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315

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 14:46, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK October 29

On 29 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Medical papyri, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Andrew c ^[talk] 22:46, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

My (KWSN's) RFA

Thank you for supporting my recent (and successful!) RfA. It passed at at 55/17/6. I owe you a big thanks since you nominated me as well. Kwsn (Ni!) 01:01, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Just thought I'd let you know, I got my first DYK! *Cremepuff222* 14:53, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Well done Cremepuff222 - you've done really well with it and congratulations on the DYK. Now, there's just a few more papyri to go! Ryan Postlethwaite 22:19, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

A quick note

I'm leaving wikipedia. See my talk page for details. Thebestkiano^T|C 22:04, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I've left a comment on his talk page, he told a handfull of random editors about his leaving. Sorry for intruding on your talk page. Best wishes, Qst 22:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

You never intrude :-) Thanks for leaving the note, I've also gone ahead and left one. Ryan Postlethwaite 22:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I never left RANDOM messages. They were people involved in my blocking/unblocking. Sorry if I caused you any trouble. Thebestkiano^T|C 07:36, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Pharmacology Update

Here are a few updates in the realm of WikiProject Pharmacology:

• The Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week has been changed to Collaboration of the Month, based on current participation levels. It is also more likely that articles collaborated on for one month are more likely to achieve featured quality than articles worked on for only a week or two.

• The current Collaboration of the Month for November is Receptor antagonist. Please take a look at that article and contribute to it if you get a chance. Ideally, the article should adhere to the featured article criteria.

• Therapies for multiple sclerosis is currently a featured article candidate. If you are familiar with the featured article criteria, please visit WP:FAC and review the article.

• Anabolic steroid is the wikiproject's newest Featured Article, having been promoted on October 8, 2007.

• Theobromine was delisted as a Good Article. The Peer review and GA reassessment discussions provide suggestions on improvement. Muscle relaxant was recently reviewed for Good Article status, but not promoted. Please see the full review full review here for details.

Dr. Cash 22:17, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the kind welcome and advice, whilst it was a rather "cookie cutter" greeting it was good none the less. I hope to help fill the shoes of a Wikipedia Administrator one day so I greatly appreciate the advice. Keep up with the good work Cheers Twilln 00:37, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Thanks I am finding things alright the system is a little different than I expected and I am a little upset to see that wikipedia uses its own coding instead of html (which would make it easier for me) yet I think things are going well. I have started to edit a few things and look around. It's kind of hard to get your footing in a fast community; but I really want to help and be apart of such a great thing so thats worth the great confusion! Cheers Twilln 00:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

RfA? OMG, my hair's a mess!

Thanks for the nom! I'm delaying saying yes for about 1/2 an hour while I feed our dogs and double check my answers before posting them. Near as I can tell, I just say I accept and post my candidate statement and the three questions, right? Do I have to then list it on the main RfA page? Or perhaps I could just read the d--n instructions, right? Oh, and since it seems to be the often included optional question, I've also answered the "Would you add yourself to [[Category:Wikipedia administrators open to recall]]? Why, or why not?" question. I figure I'll just post that as well. Anyway, I'll be ready in about 30 minutes or so. Thanks again. Oh, yeah, and technically I've been editing under this account since June, 2005, not Nov. 2006. But my contribs were pretty limited before late Oct. 2006 so it's not really a big deal. Cheers, Pigman^what?/trail 00:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll reply here, not sure you'll see it though! Basically, just answer the questions (plus your optional one) and say you accept and list it on the main page (You'll see the format that everyone uses when you click edit on WP:RFA). Whatever you do though, sort your hair out - I can't have any of my candidates going into the arena looking like a mess!! I did see that you started editing in June 2005, but I didn't really think those 2 or 3 edits in that period counted!! Best of look sir, really hope it goes well!! Ryan has to stay up now to get the first support in! Ryan Postlethwaite 00:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry it took me a little while to get my, er, stuff together. So I'm proceeding forward now but it might take a few minutes because WP is really slow right now for me. If you've gone to sleep don't worry about it. Best, Pigman^what?/trail 02:45, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Just about still awake - just going through my emails with one eye open. If I don't catch you tonight - I've got 7 days so I won't worry about it too much! Ryan Postlethwaite 02:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

You got in the first support! Although it was simple enough to do, I was hugely paranoid that I was going to malform the listing on the RfA page. That would have been incredibly inauspicious. Nothing says "inattentive editor unsuited for adminship" than big public mistakes like that. At least it doesn't look like I'm going to snowball so I'm cheerful. Pigman^what?/trail 04:10, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Arbcom elections

Wow! I didn't know you were running for the arbitration committee. Good luck!--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 01:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, I've only just decided to run really. Hey, if it's not successful it's no big deal - I'll just stick to what I do now! :-) Ryan Postlethwaite 02:07, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 44	29 October 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Florence Devouard interview
Page creation for unregistered users likely to be reenabled	WikiWorld comic: "Human billboard"
News and notes: Treasurer search, fundraiser, milestones	WikiProject Report: Agriculture
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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 06:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

A quick question

Hey I just created this template {{Wikipedia policies and guidelines}} and I was first wondering what you thought about it and secondly (if you like it) would it be appropriate to add it to the pertaining articles. On a second thought, I think this would be a great replacement for {{Wikipedia principles}}, {{Policylist}}, and {{Guideline list}} while also having the benefit of showing the reader the common shortcuts, while also being collapsible, but thats just a thought. Thanks for any help!
Gonzo fan2007 ^{talk ♦ contribs} 06:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi there Gonzo fan2007, I think this has been looked into before. I like the idea in principle, but the problem with it is that the project is here for our readers, not for our editors. They shouldn't be subjected to policy links, when all they are wanting to do is read up on a subject, they don't want to see policies and guidlines. It all boils down to it been more aesthetically pleasing without the templates. Hope that helps, Ryan Postlethwaite 17:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Um Ryan I think you misunderstood what I was actually trying to do. I don't want to add this template to every single page on Wikipedia, that would just be...crazy. I think this template would work good being placed on Wikipedia policy and guidelines pages. It would help people to easily find different policies and guielines when they are searching for them. It was just a thought to help editors when they need to cite and find different policies. Hope this clears things up.
Gonzo fan2007 ^{talk ♦ contribs} 00:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh right, why didn't you say so!? :-) I actually think that's a really good idea and would be a real help to both new and old editors. I'm trying to think where might be the best place to propose this....... maybe the village pump? Would you like me to propose it for you? Ryan Postlethwaite 00:23, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Haha yeah that made me laugh when you thought I meant ALL of Wikipedia. But yeah if you want to propse it that would be great because this weekend I will be a little busy in rl. Just send me the link when you propose it and I'll give my thoughts. Oh and if you would, could you look over the template and see if I did everything right and placed the most important policies and guidelines on it? Feel free to make any changes you think would be good. Thanks for your help!
Gonzo fan2007 ^{talk ♦ contribs} 04:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for semi protecting the Hungary article, and bringing some stability to this important article. Hobartimus 14:39, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou!

Once again, thankyou for your support and adminship nomination. Yes, indeed I shall check out the admin school and practice over the next day or so before commencing work again. Thankyou! :-) Lradrama 18:28, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Re : DYK/Dave Teo

Hi, is there anything wrong with the abovementioned article/hook? It has adequate sources to cover the entire article properly (15 of them, and no less than the frontpage of the country's only broadsheet). - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 21:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi there Mailer diablo, the concern I have with the article is that it is a biographical article about a person famous for one news event, BLP specifically states that we should try not to have articles on people who are famous because of one news story. Whilst I haven't done anything drastic regarding the article (as I do agree it's well sourced), the guy hasn't even appeared in court yet and casts him in a very negative way, so from a BLP perspective, I don't agree it's good to have on the main page. Hope that helps to explain. Ryan Postlethwaite 21:49, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Just to add to that, I see you're the article creator, and I appologise for not informing you I had taken it off the main page - that would have been the courteous thing to do. Ryan Postlethwaite 21:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Inversion (music)

There seems little point in not unlocking the previously disputed article, now that everyone seems to be satisfied with the sandbox and it has come down to the odd bit of fine tuning. You'd be an appropriate person to do this. Please see Talk:Inversion_(music)#Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation.2FInversion_.28music.29.2FSandbox. Tony (talk) 04:18, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

re: United Nation of Islam

Thanks for protecting the page, Ryan. It's a bit of a mess and I disagree with User:Useruser1x's version, but the level of warring there is silly. Happy 1 year here, and I hope you're here for longer, too! -- Flyguy649 ^talk 01:01, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey there mate, saw you add the request so thought I'd pop over and try and sort it for you. Hopefully 1 week will be long enough for discussion. Take care, --Ryan Postlethwaite 01:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I've been the one reverting most of Useruser1x's recent edits - which consisted entirely of removing criticism of the United Nation of Islam, as well as any discussion of the organization's religious views. I notice that Useruser1x got to the page again before it was protected. Would you be willing to restore the last-version-but-one, which contains the criticism and religious views sections? I also think Useruser1x has been gaming the system to avoid WP:3RR violations, after I issued a warning. Michaelbusch 02:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but whilst you may think that Useruser1x is acting disruptively, what you are involved in is an edit war. As the protecting administrator, it would be wrong of me to revert to my preferred version of the page. If you get a consensus on the article talk page, then I'll revert it. --Ryan Postlethwaite 02:05, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. I had rather thought there was already such a consensus (i.e. every editor involved but Useruser1x has expressed disproval), but I'll ask for opinions. Michaelbusch 02:07, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


This whole thing is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen on Wikipedia. I have no dog in this fight. But it strikes me as incredibly arbitrary that the page was protected at a random point in time minutes after one side in an edit war struck. Especially when an editor had previously posted a reasonable piece. And when the vandal in the edit war is so obviously biased in promoting this religious group. I mean, what would have happened if it was protected 5 minutes earlier? The whole thing strikes me as incredibly arbitrary and capricious. That is not the point of Wikipedia at all. Pick a neutral version (Michaelbusch's last, perhaps shortened by 50%) and then you'll need to fully protect it for a long time. But just picking a random point in time in the middle of the edit war, when one side is so obviously biased, is a very bad idea. 195.189.142.138 04:52, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

That's what we do in edit wars, we protect the version that it's currently at - see m:Wrong version. Ryan Postlethwaite 20:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Politics rule

Whoa, just noticed this guy was blocked! I'm really surprised that this happened, first, because I thought he seemed to be a decent guy, and also that I didn't notice this sooner! Am I allowed to ask what happened? Is there somewhere I can see the CheckUser results, or are they private? I'm really very surprised about this...one of his confirmed sockpuppets did make this edit, which was surprising given what a blatant conservative he was. You think he was just trying to throw people off his trail? GlassCobra 08:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

He opposed Hdt83's RfA at 15.21, 29 October 2007, shortly followed by Hi264 opposing - Hi264 got blocked, and Politics rule got caught in the same autoblock because they were editing from the same IP - i.e. they were the same person. We had a CU run to confirm it, and there were a number of other sock puppets that PR had used. I was a little shocked to be honest, as he was a very caring and constructive user - I guess it shows you can't trust everyone. Ryan Postlethwaite 20:02, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm quite shocked too! I didn't really have any direct dealings with him, but I saw him around a lot of Wikipedia areas and he seemed to be competent and trustworthy. Just when you think you know someone, eh? Wow... GlassCobra 23:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks re: Inversion (music)

Thanks very much for your help in resolving the dispute at Inversion (music). It feels very good to finally be able to make progress with the article again. I appreciate it a lot. - Rainwarrior 19:18, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure I did much to be honest, but it's good it's finally over and let me congratulate you and Tony on how you have acted in the past couple of weeks to resolve the dispute - my hat off to you both. Ryan Postlethwaite 19:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Portal:England

Hey Ryan, if you're still interested in joining the work with Portal:England (which I'd be delighted if you are), I was just dropping by to tell you that I'm going to create Portal:England/Future updates soon, I'm hoping we can build it up into a big directory of future updates for the Portal, in order to save having to look around on a weekly/monthly basis for new images/articles/DYK's etc. So, if you have any ideas for future updates, please drop them there, or better still, just update the Portal, as its still got loads of work to do on it :). Cheers, Qst 20:54, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Ryan, you reverted me on the T:DYK/N.I had a conversation with an administrator on IRC who said that it would be OK, although you are not technically meant to do it. Qst 23:02, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I've just explained my reasons for doing so on your talk - which admin was it? Ryan Postlethwaite 23:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Because I'm speaking on IRC with you now, should we leave this? We'll sort it out on IRC. Qst 23:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you kindly

Thank you for the offer, but I have a mentor. PR^talk 18:56, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

GlassCobra's RfA

		My RFA
		Hey Ryan! I wanted to drop you a line to say thanks for your support in my request for adminship, which ended with 61 supports, 3 opposes, and 1 neutral. I hope your confidence in me proves to be justified, and please feel free to call on me if you ever need any backup or second opinions! Also, good luck in your run for ArbCom, I know you'd do a hell of a job! GlassCobra 02:11, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Henrik's RfA thanks!

Thanks for supporting my RfA, it closed today with a final tally of 39 supports, 1 oppose and 1 neutral. As always, if you ever see me doing anything which would cause you to regret giving me your support, let me know. henrik•talk 18:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you bunches!

Thank you so much for suppporting my RfA. I was promoted with a total of (44/1/0) - a vote of confidence from the community that I find humbling and motivating. I will not abuse your trust. Look forward to working with you! (Esprit15d 21:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC))

In Remembrance...

--nat ^{Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?!} 01:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

                     Ryan Postlethwaite 04:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the welcome back, Ryan. :-) SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 19:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem whatsoever. I really hope that you decide to stay, you were missed in your absence. Take care, Ryan Postlethwaite 19:57, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Userpage

Hey, I've updated your userboxes :) [2]. Qst 20:55, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Hehehe, just seen that - I should probably pay more attention to it! Thanks! Ryan Postlethwaite 20:56, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Pol64's login

Pol hasn't seem to have received his login credentials yet. Can you have a looksee and see if they are sent? Otherwise, it might be a spam filter or something. Martijn Hoekstra 22:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Pol64 hasn't emailed me yet, so I haven't got his email address, as you're aware, I have to email the password to you directly from the account creation page. If you could ask him to email me I'll sort it out ASAP. Ryan Postlethwaite 22:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, he seems to be under the impression he did. Can you sort it out with him? Martijn Hoekstra 22:44, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I've just got the email now, so I'll go and sort it out :-) Ryan Postlethwaite 22:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. I think he meant he sent you an email just now, and I understood earlier. Martijn Hoekstra 22:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Good example

I have to admit, I find it pretty sad to see that a Wikipedia administrator, someone who's supposed to be setting an example for the rest of the online community, is adorning his userpage with a prominently displayed photograph of himself bombed out of his mind. Way to be a good influence for the kids of Wikipedia! In honor of that, I hereby award you a gold drunk star. --Shathaniel 02:03, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

User:IvoShandor

Hi,

I think the best course of action is to take him at his word and block him indefinitely, per his request to vanish. If he wishes to return, then you can ask him to apologize or otherwise show contrition before granting his request. If he doesn't return, his parting expletives will be his sad legacy. I would do this myself, but you're the blocking admin, and I wouldn't want to act unilaterally here. Best wishes, Xoloz 20:14, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi there Xoloz, I can see your point here, but I really don't want to block a user because they said they wish to invoke right to vanish. We don't normally block users per request. I've started a thread up on AN/I, it might be an idea to post your suggestion there? I have no problem with you doing it, I just would prefer not to myself. Best regards, Ryan Postlethwaite 20:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I have blocked by request of the "right to vanish" before; I'm not sure what black-letter policy is on the question (though I know not to do it for a mere wikibreak), but not complying with the such a request to block is a bit of a waste of time. If a user asks for an indef. block, and one declines to give it, one is almost inviting the user to do something to deserve it. I'd rather just accede than invite the User:Purplefeltangel problem. If you like, you may mention this suggestion at AN/I. Otherwise, I'll leave the matter in the community's hands. Best wishes, Xoloz 20:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for setting up popup's for me . At least i know who to turn to when i need help with setting up js tool meanwhile i just get myself use to popup's for a while before changing any settins in my monobook.js page .Richardson j 23:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Hi there, for some reason the Spellcast RfA is messing up Tangobot, see [3] Can't see how to fix it. Tim Vickers 01:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I've tried to have a look at it, but the formatting seems fine - I've made a few minor changes so I guess the best thing to do is wait and see what happens when tangobot next updates (which should be in 10 minutes). Ryan Postlethwaite 01:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

That's weird, this looks fine... *Cremepuff222* 01:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Check support 27, I think you'll see the problem. Ryan Postlethwaite 01:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see. That's messed up. *Cremepuff222* 02:06, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I re-factored that to hopefully fix the problem. Tim Vickers 02:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Cheers Tim, I'm generally rubbish with this sort of formatting thing! Ryan Postlethwaite 02:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

That fixed it, Tim :) But I do have a question, why are some of the 100%s in green, and others not? Ariel♥Gold 02:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

That's all based on the percentages, green means it's 100%, and it goes through yellow, orange and red depending on how the candidate is doing. If I'm bein honest, I don't like the chart - it just turns RfA into even more of a vote. (If you ran for adminship now, I'm positive yours would be green! ;-) ) Ryan Postlethwaite 02:37, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and to get a colour, you have to have at least 10 supports or opposes - that's why some 100% aren't green. Ryan Postlethwaite 02:38, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I knew the different colors and what they meant, but I think it must need more than 10, because two of them up there now that aren't green are 12, and 13. lol. Ariel♥Gold 03:00, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

TeaDrinker's RfA

Based on what he said, I thought you might like to write a co-nomination for TeaDrinker. Keegan^talk 03:30, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Of course I will, I'd be delighted to. Can you wait till the morning (UTC)? I'm in bed at the minute. Ryan Postlethwaite 03:34, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

No rush, he's indicated it may be another week or so. Get with him, and get some rest. WP:DONTEDITFROMBEDGETSOMESLEEPINSTEAD. Keegan^talk 03:36, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I think I'll take you up on that new policy!zzzzzz Ryan Postlethwaite 03:39, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Thanks for your support at my RfA, which I have withdrawn. The result is at (7/8/2). Have a great day. NHRHS2010 talk 04:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

No one expects a Pigman admin!

Big thanks. I'm a little stunned by the lack of opposes but I guess my record does speak for itself. Pigman^what?/trail 05:12, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

		Wallowing in my RfA: This time it's personal...
		My sincere thanks for your support in my request for adminship, which ended with 51 supports, 0 opposes, and 0 neutral. Doubtless it was an error to put one of the government-bred race of pigmen in any position of authority, but I hope your confidence in me proves justified. Even a man pure of heart and who says his prayers at night can become a were-boar when the moon is full and sweet. Fortunately, I'm neither a were-pig nor pure of heart so this doesn't appear to be an imminent danger to Wikipedia for the moment. Fortunate as well because were-pig hooves are hell on keyboards and none too dexterous with computer mice. If ever I should offend, act uncivil, misstep, overstep, annoy, violate policy, or attempt to topple the fascist leadership of Wikipedia, please let me know so I can improve my behaviour and/or my aim. I am not an animal; I am an admin. And, of course, if there is any way in which I can help you on Wikipedia, please do not hesitate to ask me. Despite my japes, I am indeed dedicated to protecting and serving Wikipedia to the best of my foppish and impudent abilities. I will strive to be an admirable admin, shiny and cool, reasonable and beatific. Pigmanwhat?/trail 05:12, 8 November 2007 (UTC) Post Scriptum: I believe my collaged graphic at left, which incorporates the WP globe and mop image, falls under the rubric of parody for my purposes here. Or is it satire? Regardless, it's a legitimate and legally protected First Amendment usage under US law. Complaints and allegations that this is an improper "fair use" image will be entertained on my talk page, probably with fruit juice, finger food and exotic coffees.

Mentorship page opened

I opened a mentorship page yesterday. User:Kendrick7 suggested I not use his name on it, thereby making it easier for admins and other editors in good standing to contribute, as you might wish to do. We've already been busy there, with (likely) significant improvements "agreed" to a number of articles.

However, I'm alarmed that the generic name "mentorship" I've given it makes the page even more open to interference, up to and including personal abuse, re-formatting, breaking up and deletion of comments, and the rest of it. Harassment of my mentors has been a massive problem, as you know. I'd like to clear with you my reverting any such disruptive behavior without comment or explanation (better still, if someone else would do it). I trust that is OK, it is my own UserSpace after all.

There is something else - you're putting yourself forwards for membership of the Arbitration Committee. I'd have a number of (perhaps hard) questions for you, but I don't really feel it my place to do so, or not at the official page the same as everyone else, anyway. Do you have any suggestions? PR^talk 12:01, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi PR, of course it's ok for you to use your own user space for this. I'm not sure we need something as official as this, I would just check your edits from time to time and make sure there isn't any disruption from you, and like wise, you aren't bein bullied by other editors. I've watchlisted your talk page so I'll keep an eye our there. Thinking about things, I believe Kendrick7 is OK to act as your joint mediator, so I think that's the way we'll take it. About the arbitration committee, you're more than welcome to submit questions for me, you can do it here if you want, or you can do it on my nomination questions page - I'll look forward to hearing them. Ryan Postlethwaite 12:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

You are perceptive as always. Instead of harassment of my mentors (as overwhelmed the last three of them), this time it's to be bullying of me. Mentorship (which was proceeding at a furious pace and extremely usefully) has been brought to a shuddering halt after just 2 days. I deeply regret this state of affairs, I will probably try to restart mentorship at User:Kendrick7's UserPage, perhaps he will feel he can be more pro-active against intrusions there than I feel I can be on my own page. But as likely as not, it will simply end up with him abandoning the mentorship, a disastrous state of affairs and, for the first time, one that could perhaps be laid at my feet.

I think you can guess at some of the questions I'd like to put to you on arbitration. I watch the ArbCom being apparently overwhelmed with alarm. However, my real concerns are probably above my pay-grade, concerning the use/abuse of sources and abuse of processes. PR^talk 10:39, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Ryan

Thanks Ryan, I am so sorry I called you a douchebag man. So sorry. :( Could you just leave the page deleted for now? It has been used against me in an AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gary Forrester, where I have been subjected to legal threats, attacks etc. Some were based on the content of my user page. Thanks, I will probably want it undeleted after the AfD passes and I am sure the single purpose users threatening me are gone.IvoShandor 21:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Well to be fair, I can be a douchebag sometimes so it was probably warrented :-) I'll leave your userpage deleted for now then, just pop back whenever you want it restoring. I'll take a look at the AfD for you tomorrow, I'll have a word with users that have been making attacks. Ryan Postlethwaite 21:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Looking over it, it appears the user(s) were blocked once, I had unwatched it for a few days and just noticed today that I had apparently pissed off some lawyer beyond all recognition. Pretty amazing really. I didn't even say anything mean, just nominated the page for deletion and backed up my nomination with reasons. Haha. I doubt my insult was warranted, though my block certainly was, man I was mad, I need to ignore things more, like I essentially did with that AfD. Meh. Passion leads to strength....;) IvoShandor 22:01, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

NHRHS2010 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks for the smile. I was upset with my RfA because it was being clogged up with the opposes, and Daniel kept changing his oppose to stronger oppose and said that it is my fault. And Agüeybaná strongly opposed me, and this is not the first time he opposed me. Agüeybaná thinks that I am going to abuse the admin tools. Would I do that? No. Abusing admin tools is worse than vandalism, and I don't want to damage Wikipedia. Do you have any advice?

PS: Take a look at my userpage (carefully) and see what I posted; top to bottom. NHRHS2010 talk 23:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think you'd abuse the tools at all, I think what the opposers were trying to suggest is that you need a little bit more experience that's all. Just sit back and try and relax when trying to fight the vandals, just warn them and move on. Maybe you could do some new page patrolling as well? And tag pages for deletion? I'm positive no-one thought you were going to abuse the tools on purpose, just that you might make mistakes that's all. I'm sorry that it wasn't a good experience for you, and some people probably should word things better at RfA, but I really hope you can continue your valued work here. Hell, I love seeing your name pop up :-) Seriously, keep your head up, you're one of the good guys. (P.S. Thanks for the complement about favourite admins!). Oh yeah, before I forget, Thanks for wishing me a happy first edit day the other day, I was meaning to come and say it earlier but I've been busy - it was much appreciated. Ryan Postlethwaite 00:03, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I wouldn't abuse the tools. Abusing the tools would mean hurting the encyclopedia, which I hate to do. However, Agüeybaná thinks that I will abuse the tools even though I wouldn't. Look at this comment: feel that you would be too trigger-happy and will block a user who probably just doesn't know how things work around here without thinking it twice, instead of educating and instructing. Today's vandal or troll could be tomorrow's Raul654. If you do not make an effort to help make this true, you're hurting the encyclopedia, and would do more bad than good if given the mop. What I do other than reverting vandalism is to add/edit infoboxes on articles about given names and add bus transportation to the transportation section of the articles about towns in New Jersey. Just to tell you that not only that you were on my favorite admins list, something big happened to me last Tuesday, as shown on top of my userpage. NHRHS2010 talk 00:18, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Wow, well done on passing the written test! When's the main one coming?? You'll breeze through it! I don't think he meant to say that in a nasty way, I think he just thought you might make a few mistakes, but that's nothing that a bit more experience can sort - just keep on doing what you've been doing. Ryan Postlethwaite 02:33, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Some thankyou spam, glorious spam

Thankyou for supporting my successful rfa which closed with 58 supports. If i am honest i am rather humbled by the unanimous support and i hope to live up to everyones expectations. If you ever need any help, don't hesitate to ask. Thanks again. Woodym555 15:35, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank You for Punishing me as i know i crossed the limits .plz look at the history of Barelwi what mezzo mezzo has done he reverted my edits even undispured heading biasedly. It is his regular habit to Insert his Personal Views [4]in that Article. he continued after it also .Shabiha ^{(t • c)} 10:51, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

Click there to open your card! → → →

Dearest Ryan Postlethwaite,
Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 96 supports, 1 oppose, and 3 neutrals. No matter if you !voted support, oppose, neutral, I thank you for taking the time to drop by. I'm a new admin remember, so if you have any suggestions feel free to inform me of them. I would like to give a special shout out to Hirohisat, Wizardman, and Husond, for there original co-nominations. Thank you once again and good day.

Тhε Rαnδom Eδιτor

Credits

This RFA thanks was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks. So unfortunatly this is not entirely my own design.

RFA Thanks

Click there to open your card! → → →

My dear Wikipedian Ryan Postlethwaite,
Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 36 supports, 3 opposed, and 1 neutral. No matter if you !voted support, oppose, neutral, or even if you just stopped by to make a comment, I thank you for taking the time to drop by. Since I am a new admin, if you have any suggestions or concerns, feel free to inform me of them. Thank you and good day.

The Placebo Effect

Credits

This RFA thanks was inspired by The Random Editor, who in turn was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks. So unfortunately this is not entirely my own design.

This end the usual RFA thanks spam. You may return to your regular editing now.

Thanks!

		My RFA
		Thanks for participating in my request for adminship, which ended with 56 supports, one oppose, and one neutral. I hope to accomplish beyond what is expected of me and work to help those that lent me their trust. east.718 at 02:38, 11/4/2007

Wikipedia has a new administrator!

Thanks! Thank you for voicing your opinion in my RfA, which passed with 54 supports, 2 opposes and 3 neutrals. Thanks for your support, I really appreciate it. I hope to exceed expectations, If you have any advice please feel free to let me know. Thanks again!. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤