User talk:Tanthalas39/Archives/2009/March

Co-nomination?

I notice that you had previously asked User:Teratornis if he were interested in becoming an admin. I'm also interested in proposing him; would you like to be a co-nominator?

(And a bit of very unsolicited advice - if you find [doing] some things in Wikipedia to be frustrating, please don't leave. Rather, ignore them - let other editors deal with them. The whole point about being an unpaid volunteer here is to get some satisfaction, enjoyment, whatever from it; when you find that isn't the case, that's a good sign that you should be working elsewhere on this huge, huge project.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:54, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

First question - nope, not interested. Thanks tho. Secondly - you're absolutely right. Thanks for the encouragement; I'm going to follow your advice. Tan | 39 22:50, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, don't leave, I'm a fully paid-up member of your fan club and they don't give refunds. --Closedmouth (talk) 05:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

My RFA

Hey mate. Thanks for the support, I really appreciate it. I seem to be running into lots of opposes, and my attempts at defending myself seem to be failing. This, of course, makes sense. No one wants to hear it from the person they're discussing. If you're not too busy (and you want to be my best friend :) would you mind taking another look at my RFA and maybe responding to some of the opposes? Thanks again! --Cryptic C62 · Talk 22:20, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I've been watching. You're not going to pass this time. However, if you can accept that, you can set up your next one in 3-4 months for smooth sailing. I've always thought the worst thing you can do is try to defend yourself; the less editing going on in the oppose section, the better - even if it's defending yourself or answering critics. Take the opposes in stride, note a few things you can work on - CSD work, for one - and you should breeze through RfA #2. Tan | 39 22:23, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough, though a bit counterintuitive. Thanks for the tip. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 22:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Now that you realize that RFA is the very definition of "counterintuitive", you should be fine next time. Just do the opposite of whatever logic dictates that you should do, that simple. Oh, and hey Tan. Hope yer well. Kick anyone's ass lately? Keeper | 76 04:35, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Sock editing around your block

206.248.226.88, a self-admitted sockpuppet of Tylerwade123. [1] , is editing around the blocks of Tylerwade [2] and one of his other socks, 66.207.75.219, who you blocked for editing around the Tylerwade block. [3], using the 206.248.226.88 IP. [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] Edward321 (talk) 05:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

RfA gaming

I saw a line at someone's RfA about you "gaming the system" to get adminship. I don't see any readily evident gaming, so could you explain what happened/what someone thought happened? flaminglawyer 19:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't really want to get into it. Ask Pedro or I'm Spartacus; they might fill you in. Tan | 39 22:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Pedro!! lOL. 173.79.93.71 (talk) 01:15, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVI (February 2009)

The February 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Teletubbies

FYI I dropped this (3 month old) protection, hopefully the socking won't be a problem anymore, but it can always be reprotected. Just letting you know since you asked to be informed in the protection summary. Cheers! Prodego ^talk 03:25, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

• I'm sorry to say it almost certainly will be a problem, as evidenced by the talk page history. Beeblebrox (talk) 05:13, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 13 March!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:26, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Jason Reso

I believe you protected the page a little while back, and since I have to use this new account I am not yet auto confirmed. So I was wondering if you could add some variation of the following to Return to WWE (2009-present):

After defeating Swagger twice in singles action and again in a tag team match, Christian was defeated in an ECW title match on the February 24th edition of ECW on Sci-Fi. Christian won a 24 man tri-brand battle royal to earn a spot in the WrestleMania XXV Money in the Bank ladder match. Eaglesfan619 (talk) 04:05, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppet account of User:Johnlemartirao

Hello! You blocked User:Johnlemartirao late February for disruptive editing. Well, he has created a confirmed sockpuppet account: User:I heart CE!. He hasn't done any disruptive editing so far so this is just a head's up. I'm not sure what the policy or procedure is for sockpuppet accounts of indef blocked users; it seems that the sockpuppets accounts should be blocked for evading a previous block if I'm reading the policy correctly, but since he seems to be behaving himself, I leave it to your discretion. --seav (talk) 02:12, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I came here to post a similar message. Some of his recent edits aren't terribly high on the "disruption scale", but they are questionable nonetheless. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Can you give me some diffs of the questionable edits? I don't see anything jumping out at me. Tan | 39 17:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

My upcoming RfA

If you are still interested in nominating me for adminship, feel free to weigh in on User:Yellowdesk/rfa, where my other co-nominators are editing a draft. Thanks. --Teratornis (talk) 08:53, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Tanthalas40

A new account User:Tanthalas40 is redirected to your user page, but it doesn't look like you have confirmed whether it is your account, if the account is not yours it should be blocked for impersonation. —Snigbrook 12:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. User indefblocked. Tan | 39 14:50, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Maltese (dog)

Regarding the above article, will it eventually be available for editing? Some interesting solutions to the issues that resulted in the block have been suggested; Talk:Maltese (dog). -ja fiswa imċappas bil-hara! (talk) 01:18, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

It's due to be unprotected automatically on March 25. As the two editors that essentially caused the protection are still bickering on the talk page as of March 7 (and is the end of the thread), I see no real reason to unprotect it before March 25. Tan | 39 23:04, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I would rather describe the talk page as constructive as possible when Mangojuice is concerned. It is a completely different story when talking about Pietru il-Boqli who has contacted you under the screen name ja fiswa imċappas bil-hara! and simmilar names. So one of those editors still bickering has contacted you, just a heads up. :) -- Imbris (talk) 23:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Tom Delonge Page

Hey, I noticed you locked the Blink 182 page... I would like to know if you would lock Tom Delonge's Page as well? I ask this because his page is being vandalized. Just look through the history and see for yourself. --MySummerJob (talk) 23:51, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Joe the Plumber

There seems to be support for lifting of protection of Joe the Plumber, based on an informal straw poll conducted by several editors on its talk page. I don't know about the history of this article and why it's protected, so I leave it to you to decide! Best wishes, — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:41, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Chin up ol' sport

Here is a piece of unsolicited advice (don't worry, I am just gathering karma points for my next reincarnation) -if you feel drained with perpetual arguments, some gratitude can be had at Peer Review - all these folks will be insanely grateful for any feedback, and the beauty is you can swing by and point out a few things and disappear off into the sunset, or stick around and help out. Keeping it positive and giving constructive feedback (eg. is it understandable/confusing etc) is good. Remember these folks have likely askedtehir wikichums and will really appreciate some input. Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:13, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

And there is a handy-dandy box to look at:

Peer reviews needing feedback: Update:

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. We will be selecting coordinators from a pool of eighteen to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on Saturday, 28 March! Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 07:10, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Will you adopt me?RicoRichmond (talk) 22:40, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Adoption

Will you adopt me?RicoRichmond (talk) 22:41, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Hahah

I lol'd. GlassCobra 18:55, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I figured some people would see the humor. It's really too bad the whole situation exists, tho. Tan | 39 00:48, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I tried to have a discussion with the kid (check his talk archive), but it didn't go well. GlassCobra 02:33, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I lol'ed too. Synergy 18:42, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Talk page protection

I think you were looking at my log wrong. It last was protected March 28 of last year, I provided my talk page history in the reply as I would have seen my page protected already. Momusufan (talk) 22:58, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

My mistake; looks like JDelanoy took care of business in the meantime. Tan | 39 23:48, 29 March 2009 (UTC)