This is an archive of past discussions. 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.
Hey, I was recently approved by prodego to use vandalproof. However, my log-in requests keep on failing, and I think this is because prodego forgot to add my name to the list, even though I was approved. Could you please help? Thanks. JianLi15:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks anyway. Just going by user contributions, you were the only active moderator. Do you know if any others are online? JianLi15:28, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I've added some questions to your RfA. When you have a minute, I'd appreciate if you would take a look at them. Thanks. JoshuaZ02:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I noticed you made a change to our blocking policy. I'd like to politely contest this - although there is the option whereby existing registered accounts are not blocked, this isn't always the case. There are circumstances where blanket blocking is still used. I do however see why you removed it because it could cause confusion amoung new editors, and we should try and sort this.
Thanks for pointing that out; I wasn't actually familiar with how many options there were available to admins regarding blocks, so I presumed that the policy was already accurate when it said there were only two (neither one being a blanket block). If we could enumerate what all the actual options are in that section, then that paragraph I removed can be rewritten to be more relevant or gotten rid of again. What are all the options? Phoenix-forgotten23:25, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for participating in my RFA, which closed successfully today with a result of (62/18/3). I will go very carefully at first, trying to make sure I don't mess up too badly using the tools, and will begin by re-reading all the high-quality feedback I received during the process, not least from those who opposed me. Any further advice/guidance will be gratefully accepted. I hope I will live up to your trust! Guinnog14:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)}[reply]
Yep, there's gonna be a Signpost article about it. I was gonna wait until you were promoted before asking if you had a comment on the matter. I don't know the exact name of the article yet, so keep WP:SIGN on your watchlist and wait for the next issue, click on the link, and add that to the userbox. If you'd like to say something, leave a note at my talk page, and I'll try to get it in the article, but no guarantees. ;) Congrats! If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian MankaTalk to me!19:27, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, you go!! Congratulations in advance, in around 4 hours you will be crowned 1000th admin on the english wikipedia, I am so reading the next signpost! I'm going to see If I can stay up to *watch*. its about 7:15 pm in New Zealand right now! By the time you get sysopped it will be around 11:30 pm. 1999 all over again. And again, congrats in advance -- LegolostEVIL, EVIL! 07:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops, Couldn't think of any other word use. Not much time left, i'll probably be signing out at 7:30 NZ time -- LegolostEVIL, EVIL!
Heh, I can't say this was what I expected to see when I nominated you, but glad you did persuaded me to bring the date forward a bit ;-) Maybe you should delete a thousand CSDs or something today to celebrate :) Petros47111:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Here's another random image for you. Congrats, NoSeptember 12:01, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Despite opposing your nomination, the community has reached consensus, so I wish you well with your new powers and hope you try to improve some of the things I pointed out. Remember: Power corrupts. Absolute power is kind of neat. :o) --Wafulz15:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations Xyrael! 1000th admin...a milestone on Wikipedia set by a milestone editor (that sounds stupid lol). Have fun as sysop! --Nishkid6417:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well done Xyrael - I'm still surprised you weren't already an admin - but now you're the 1000th! Congrats :). Martinp2316:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC) PS: please feel free to use that edit summary - I think I actually picked it up myself from another editor some time age :p [reply]
Hi, you say you can't comply with my author speedy deletion request because others have made edits, but in my eyes these edits are not substantial, such as style correctios and tag adding. Nick Mks13:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there; please note that this user, whom you have blocked indefinitely on the basis of the username, had been warned by me shortly before for posting a number of deliberately destructive vandalisms in other editors' articles.--Anthony.bradbury16:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was looking through the Mikhail Lebedev page and it seems to be vanity and non-notable to me. First of all, there is hardly any information about him on Google. Then, none of the publications seem to be news-worthy and notable. Finally, the scientist does not have many 1st author publications and seems to be non-important in his field. If you agree with me, can you please help me nominate Mikhail Lebedev for deletion? --GoOdCoNtEnT08:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like the script I use for articles for deletion developed a glitch and wasn't reposting correctly :( Thanks so much for looking at those; I'll go back over what I did yesterday and make sure they've all actually been reposted. Shell babelfish22:59, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
After deleting an article it is good to put the page on your watchlist to know if gets recreated(of course some recreations will be legitimate but still better to keep an eye on them). This has already happened in the case of one your speedy deletions United-Traders (UTrade) (which I'll leave you to deal with/figure out what is going on/explain deletion criteria and such to the user. Again, congratulations. JoshuaZ05:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Xyrael, thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which was closed as successful today with a finaly tally of (56/0/3). I will be very careful at first to avoid any mistakes. Please feel free to leave a message in my talk page if you have any comments/suggestions about me in the future. Once again, thank you! --WinHunter(talk)09:05, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Xyrael: I'm a little confused as to your full protection of Wigstruck. There's not really (in my opinion) enough activity to warrrant it, and there's really no edit warring, it's really reverting vandalism. I probably wouldn't have protected it at all, but I can see semi-protection (basically it's all anons). Don't worry about it: it's really not a big deal, I just don't want to wheel war, so I'm asking here instead :-). —Mets501 (talk)18:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see what I did - I looked at the history and saw lots of reverts, and looked at the more recent, and found it to be one of them (I think). But, I didn't see that it was reverting something from a week before *slap*. Please feel free to unprotect it :) —Xyrael / 18:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think we just deleted something together, and it may happen again. Therefore, I propose I start at A and work down, and you start at the other end and work up! Hopefully, we'll clear the backlog faster that way. Good idea? Thanks :) —Xyrael / 10:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Loserz. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. - Hahnchen21:38, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A DRV already. Oh well, don't take it personally whatever the outcome, just treat it as part of the learning experience. Remember not to vote count on those AFD ;) Petros47121:56, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You absolutely may comment on deletion reviews for deletions you did. That why we have {{DRVNote}} specifically to alert the deleting/closing admin that there is a discussion. Thanks for doing so. GRBerry12:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
