User talk:Steven Crossin/Archive 31

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Steven Crossin. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 25

←

Archive 29

→

Your proposal's numbering

Some of your proposals aren't numbered correctly. Could you please fix them? Thank you! Mythdon (talk • contribs) 00:01, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Your statement

I don't see enough content in this statement to understand it. Did you accidentally press the save button too soon? Thanks. Mythdon (talk • contribs) 23:56, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

My edit summary clearly said "Intermediate edit". I needed to get a diff to continue the edit. I use edit summaries for a reason, you know...Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 00:06, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for finalizing your edit. Mythdon (talk • contribs) 00:18, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I also was confused by the edit, but having seen this discussion my puzzlement has been remedied. For what it's worth, Mythdon's comment was most valid, I would say. Regards, AGK 10:32, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- Right, but I did say "Intermediate edit". I didn't mean to be rude to Mythdon, and in hinsight apologise. Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 11:27, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

NPW request

Not sure what you meant to do with this. If you want to remove him from the list, the page is here. Protonk (talk) 00:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Ugh, I really hate my iPhone sometimes. Small screen, big watchlist. Was a mistake, I apologise. Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 02:50, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

No apology necessary. Seemed like it was a mistake. :) Protonk (talk) 03:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Interview

Hi, Steve. I'm doing a study about Wikipedia (particularly about sysops) for my Masters in Communications and Media Studies at Monash Uni, and was wondering if you would be so kind as to take some time to talk to me. I'm contacting a few editors/sysops in hopes of hearing first-hand accounts of your day-to-day activities are and your relationship with other members of the community. If you're in Melbourne and can spare some time for a friendly talk (no more than 30 minutes), I'd greatly appreciate it :)

Please let me know if you're interested. Cheers, --In continente (talk) 06:41, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

RFA chat

Steve, replied on my talk to keep it easy. Pedro : Chat 22:59, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Way ahead of you. Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 23:03, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm looking forward to this. ;) — Ched : ? 13:43, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Yo Steve, regarding your interest in running for RfA and uncertainty regarding aspects of your history, I thought I'd mention there's a new set-up for getting confidential feedback before running at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Vetting. It looks like Pedro's already got you covered, but if you're interest, drop me a line. Skomorokh 17:02, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey Bud. I've tried my best to get a grasp on your sitch, and you seem like a stand-up editor. Would you accept my nom? Law_{type! snype?} 08:51, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I guess that I've really got nothing to lose when it comes to RFA. A failed RFA is just that, it's not a death sentence. Pedro offered to nominate me, and he's a stand up nominator, but he gets too many noms (No offence Pedro) :P. I'd be happy to accept your nomination. Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 08:52, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Pedro was key in defending me during my RFA, with little interaction with me. He trusted me and I would not have been entrusted with said tools without his input. I have a feeling that you will be subject to many co-noms. If you are ready to get this started, I am happy to help, as I'm sure Pedro will be as well. Law_{type! snype?} 10:02, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

It might be best to wait and see what Pedro thinks. I would prefer if any RFA I may have ends on, or before, the 4th October, simply because I have more free time than normal until then. I don't hope to get too many co-noms, they can generally sink an RFA from what I've seen in the past. Perhaps I should set a limit? I'm ready to get started when you are I guess, but Pedro would probably be a big help. Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 10:55, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Accidental fire

My apologies Steve.. I was lecturing a newbie with his hands on the mouse when he accidentally clicked on: [1]. ≈ Commit charge 00:25, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Not to matter. No harm done :) Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 00:45, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

twelve

Hi. I thought under Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) that the preference was to write twelve as a numeral, as it says "As a general rule, in the body of an article, single-digit whole numbers from zero to nine are spelled out in words; numbers greater than nine are commonly rendered in numerals."--Numbersnow (talk) 07:39, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

No, I do apologise, you are correct. I was directed to undo your edits by an admin, as they didn't have the mass rollback script I did. I trusted their judgment over my own, and I do apologise. No hard feelings, I hope. Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 07:44, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

No, no hard feelings at all. I'm just trying to learn as I go, so I may well make mistakes. Another editor also reverted me for changing times (like nine a.m. to 9 a.m., which seemed clear from the rule that I was pointed to, so I just asked him why he did it too.--Numbersnow (talk) 07:46, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Alright. We all have brain fart moments from time to time. I have reversed my changes. Happy editing. :) Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 07:48, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Just so you know, Numbersnow (talk · contribs) has been indefinitely blocked as being one of the nine socks of Epeefleche (talk · contribs) discovered via Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Epeefleche/Archive. — Kralizec! (talk) 02:41, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 03:01, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

RE: Block

Yes, I screwed up. However in the two minutes it took me to reverse my block, I also recognized that I had to do two things before I got distracted with anything else: (1) address the misuse of tools and (2) apologize to the IP. Unfortunately it took me too long to collect the evidence and write a passably civil message to Jeff G. regarding his improper reverts and AIV report. By the time I had that take care of, the angry orange bar was giving me the hint that someone other than me had also caught my mistake. Postponing the temptation to peek at my new messages, I wrote my overdue apology, read my messages where I was delighted to see that not one but two people had caught my error, apologized again, and finally apologized for my late apology. Since I still have not received the orange bar I am looking for from Jeff, I am now off to his page to address that issue in more detail. — Kralizec! (talk) 08:33, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I've screwed up too. Don't let it get to you. :) Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 08:37, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Feel like cleaning some stuff up?

Ched would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Ched to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Steve Crossin. If you accept the nomination, you must state and sign your acceptance. You may also choose to make a statement and/or answer the optional questions to supplement the information your nominator has given. Once you are satisfied with the page, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

Steve, I know that there are other folks out there who are wanting to do this, and I don't mean to step on any toes; but, I've created the RfA, and placed the ball in your court due to your having an open time frame to concentrate on this. If you feel that it would be better to discuss these matters with other editors before you transclude the RfA, I will not be offended. I hope that you'll be willing to accept this trial by fire, and wish you the best regardless of the path you choose. — Ched : ? 01:53, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your nomination Ched, I have accepted it. I guess I really have nothing to lose by running for RFA, so I might as well. Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 03:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion

Just what you've always wanted, unsolicited advice from someone who just opposed your RFA.

Maybe this is already fairly well known by most people, or an open secret or something, but: especially now that your RFA is withdrawn, are you absolutely sure you want to divulge your real life name? Don't rush into that decision; if you wait very long, it's irrevocable. Were I you, I'd be tempted to ask an admin to quickly delete that revision, and think about it first. Sorry if sticking my nose in isn't welcome right now. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:34, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I've always tried to be as transparent as possible. It's about time I did so. Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 22:38, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

There's a difference between "transparency" and "giving trolls and vandals an easy way to harass you in real life". As long as you've thought it thru, it's obviously your call; you just won't get a second chance at that decision. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:42, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I've thought it through. Thanks for your concerns. Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 22:51, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

August 2031

Please refrain from making unconstructive contributions to society. Your recent obsessive editing spree on Wikipedia appears to constitute absolutely nothing and has been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please do not use recreational drugs. Thank you.

Please stop your obsessive editing on Wikipedia. If your uselessness continues, you will be blocked from editing.

This is the last warning you will receive for your Wikipediholism. If you edit Wikipedia again, you will be a social outcast.

This is the only warning you will receive for your Wikipediholism. If you edit Wikipedia again, you will be nominated for administratorship. Jeni ^(talk) 01:43, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

September 2009

Could you explain your two day rollback of AIV please? Fifelfoo (talk) 04:11, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

I was clicking the back button, going through previous diffs to try to find something. I have a rollback button there, accidentally clicked but pressed cancel. Didn't think it had gone through, sorry. Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 04:14, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

No worries :) Fifelfoo (talk) 04:15, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Some Advice

My apologies, I have to admit that it was a hasty effort on my part. Thanks for fixing that up. Black Sabre (talk) 07:10, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

User_talk:Jeff_G.#Clarification

Would you mind responding to his latest... explanation? Given the number of subsequent complaints from other editors, misuse of Huggle appears to be an ongoing problem. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 22:55, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll take the matter to ANI when I get up. Thanks for the heads up. Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 23:03, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Now I'm confused. I thought I was leaving a message on Steve Crossin's talk page. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 23:15, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

I've had a rename, it's still me. :) Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 23:23, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

When you get a second...

I'd like to read your reply, I know there's about 14 threads moving along independently on that page, so here's the diff in case you missed it. -- Maelefique ^(talk) 23:37, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I did read it. Truth be told, I've had a lot on my plate, with an RFA yesterday and several other matters going on. I'll go and have a look at it now. Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 00:53, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2009 Sydney dust storm

The nominator for the article is Canadian. And although PMDrive is an American, there is no indication that the others who !voted Delete are. Are you sure they're American? 99.166.95.142 (talk) 17:14, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm also a little off-put at the notion that Americans can't see notability outside their own bubble. I guess that's a result of comically answering loaded questions incorrectly on the internet, right? --King Öomie 18:03, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Was merely venting that anything that's not american gets nominated for deletion. If it was 2009 Chicago dust storm, would it have been nominated for deletion? Probably not. Steven Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 01:48, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

note

I'm just seeking Ched's advice on the content issue. You don't accelerate things of this relatively trivial nature to a noticeboard unless they expand to elephantine proportions (which can happen). →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 09:07, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank You

Thanks for putting forward some positive words for me at RfAR. I appreciate it. G~~ain~~Line ♠ _♥ 08:24, 29 September 2009 (UTC)