User talk:Walton One/Old
|
|
Adoption[edit]Yes, I would still like to be adopted. Thank you for your reply. Veritas (talk) 15:09, 6 April 2008 (UTC) Request for Adoption[edit]Hello Walton One! I am considering adoption. 1. I have only been on Wikipedia for several days. I hope to become an administrator in the future, so I am looking for someone who is familiar with the process and can give me preparatory advice. I'd like to engage in those activities that put me on the way to administratorship. 2. I believe that 'administratorship' and 'bureaucratorship' are about the Wikipedia community at large — not an individual. Recommendations are crucial. Thus, I'd like to learn how to interact with and become better known by various members of the Wikipedia community. 3. Also, I would like to gain some fundamental knowledge of the technical aspects of Wikipedia. I'd like to learn how to implement and use the various technologies to create articles that are more easily understood and efficacious in teaching fellow Wikipedians and browswers. In conclusion, if you can help me with 1) preparation for adminship, 2) making connections, and 3) rare technical advice, please consider being my adopter. Veritas (talk) 23:37, 12 March 2008 (UTC) You are wise[edit]You made a wise comment some months ago about the terrible effects of blocking good editors. One editor, you noted, was blocked and never returned again. Whoever blocked this person is guilty of vandalising wikipedia (in an indirect way, but still damaging). Many administrators cease to edit wikipedia mainspace much. That's why the rest of wikipedia is so important. I am an another example of what you mentioned. I was blocked for nothing but now I think I may come back. Polounit 03:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Barnstar[edit]
Unhelpful edits to Superintendent (education)[edit]Hi Walton, sorry for the unhelpful edits I made to the above article.[1] I realize now that the content was not written in a neutral tone.(And the bolding superintendent was unhelpful)--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 18:20, 27 October 2007 (UTC) My (KWSN's) RFA[edit]Thank you for supporting my recent (and successful!) RfA. It passed at at 55/17/6. Kwsn (Ni!) 01:29, 31 October 2007 (UTC) I indented your struck neutral comment here so as not to show up as a double !vote for TangoBot (nevermind the incorrect edit summary saying "oppose"). — Dorftrottel 12:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC) RE: Politics rule[edit]What do you want? A pointless RFCU with an arbitrary template slapped on it? Stop being so paranoid. -- John Reaves 00:36, 2 November 2007 (UTC) Ban user?[edit]Is there any way to block/ban User:Giddee2? He constant creates articles violating and edits articles in violation of WP:Crystal Ball and it's getting tiresome, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Butterfly0fdoom (talk • contribs) 21:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC) Tally updates[edit]In answer to the question you asked in an edit summary, the reason no one remembers to update the tally anymore is that the discussion section is in a separate edit window from the top of the RfA, so the tally numbers don't appear in front of the user when he or she is editing. Regards, Newyorkbrad 00:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
In Remembrance...[edit] --nat Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?! 02:03, 6 November 2007 (UTC) OhanaUnited's RfA[edit] Thanks for voting at my RfA. Unfortunately, the result stands at 51 support, 21 oppose and 7 neutral which means that I did not succeed. As many expressed their appreciation of my works in featured portals during my RfA, I will fill up the vacuum position of director in featured portal candidates to maintain the standards of featured contents in addition to my active role in Good articles. Have a great day. OhanaUnitedTalk page 04:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC) Gin Tonic[edit]Haha! I love Gin Tonic, too! I even thought about including it there but thought it may be too much unnecessary detail. That stuff never gives you a hangover or any awkward spin on your mood. Projectile vomiting notwithstanding, in case you ever overdid it. But even so, it's not the kind of beverage I couldn't drink anymore after a bad experience (compare, in contrast, the combination of alternating between Jägermeister and beer). — Dorftrottel 12:38, 9 November 2007 (UTC) Thank you[edit] Click there to open your card! → → →
Dearest Walton One, P.S. It was about something to do with RfA (our argument). Credits: This RFA thanks was inspired by The Random Editor's RFA thanks which was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks.Hm?[edit]Seems you resigned for a lot of the reasons I did. Welcome to the former sysops' club. :p ~ Riana ⁂ 13:20, 11 November 2007 (UTC) You were an admin for only a month? What happened? Archtransit (talk) 21:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC) Thank you![edit]Thanks for seeing some sense in the RfA that was filed for me. "Oh for God's sake, this Oppose is the most ridiculous I have ever seen. All of the essays cited in the oppose are not only perfectly acceptable and within the bounds of legitimate essay-writing, they are all precisely correct (especially the statements about how new users are intimidated by our masses of pointless rules). Nor do any of them qualify as "attacking other editors" in any meaningful sense." -h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 02:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC) Meh[edit]Sorry to have you hand in your mop, but I'm glad that at least you'll still be around. I don't think you and I saw eye to eye on everything, but I always had immense respect for what you said. If you ever need a quick admin action (let's ignore how that sounded), just gimme a shout. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Sad, sad day[edit]Wikipedia is much poorer for your resignation, but Her Majesty Armed Forces and the Bar are both noble, rewarding callings. I should hope that the English curriculum for aspiring attorneys is more rigorous than that found in the United States (where preparation is sometimes comical), but I suspect your impressive intellect will still leave you much time to work within the project however you like. On a related matter, your resignation has just brought the block of Melsaran to my attention; I am often the last to know of these sorts of things. Did you inquire regarding the evidence? Were you left unsure? Best wishes, Xoloz 17:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
My RFA[edit]Thankyou for this. I know you didn't mean to be quite so brusque - things can easily me misinterpreted - but I appreciate the honesty with which your opinion was given. I've also read your userpage, and you seem like someone I could get on very well with - if you ever need a hand with anything, give me a shout. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 23:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC) Thankspam[edit]Something I wrote which you might like...[edit]Perhaps I've come to my senses at last?? ;) Majorly (talk) 22:12, 21 November 2007 (UTC) My RfA - thanks[edit]
Somewhat-Belated RfA Thanks[edit] Tapadh Leibh (Thank You)...
...for helping me navigate the waters of my surprisingly peaceful RFA, which closed successfully with 85 supports, 1 oppose, and 0 neutral. I would particularly like to thank Acalamari and Alison, my nominators, and everyone who watched the page and ran the tally. If there is anything I can do to be of service in the future, please feel free to contact me. And forgive me if I need a Wikibreak now and then (like now. I'm exhausted!). You wouldn’t want to see me climbing the Reichstag, now would you? Off to flail around with my new mop! (what?!) This RfA thanks inspired by Neranei's, which was inspired by VanTucky's which was in turn inspired by LaraLove's which was inspired by The Random Editor's, which was inspired by Phaedriel's original thanks. Oxonians unite![edit]Hi there Walton! I'm at St John's (so not too far away...) and yes, I matriculated when I was 17. Although my 20th birthday was a few days ago - I should update my userpage! What are you doing? Took a sneeky peek at your user page... looks like you've been around a while? (Although I'll have to warn you not to talk Aussie politics with me... I'm somewhat overexcited about the new Labor government in my home country). Good to hear from you! Cricketgirl (talk) 13:29, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Wikidemocrat userbox[edit]Is there one? —Ashley Y 04:31, 30 November 2007 (UTC) User:Vintagekits began a war yesterday by adding silly fact tags. I easily referenced the queried statements and asked Rockpocket to stop VK doing this (see User talk:Rockpocket). VK whinged a bit and added material which was unencyclopedic, wrongly attributed to Nicholas Soames poorly sourced and relating to a living person and not NPOV (as noted by Rockpocket). I reverted on those grounds. Giano put it back in because of my relationship to JA. So did Deus Ex Machina. I reverted both on grounds previously stated. Article now blocked 24 hours (right version) by Iridiscenti and Rockpocket. Please take over for me presumably on the talk page. Many thanks. - Kittybrewster ☎ 10:17, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Pseudo RfA[edit]You have our trust! Go for it! J-ſtanTalkContribs 04:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC) RfA[edit]Although you may be good at what you do. I do find fault at you not standing by your word. "I will not do so without undergoing a further request for adminship". I was brought up to stand by what I say. And believe that others should do the same. Not standing by your word could give the thought of mistrust in your actions. Those are my feelings. --Jeanenawhitney 10:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC) Just want to add that that's also my view. There's nothing personal; I'm sure you were and could be again a good admin. But I do like to see promises kept. --Malleus Fatuorum 03:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC) Wikihelp[edit]Hey, Walton. Could you please confirm it is you on Wikihelp. We have an unofficial policy (as discussed on IRC) that we should about the first 15 users who come along and can be trusted from the English Wikipedia, however the account with the username "Walton One" has never edited, so please could you confirm its you — then I will regrant you sysop status. Regards, --Qst 11:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC) ArbCom Elections comments[edit]Hello. This is regarding your recent comments on the candidate votes page for Deskana; unfortunately, the comments were too long for the main voting page, and should be placed on the voting talk page. The maximum length of comments on the voting page itself should be two short sentences. This determination was reached on prior consensus on the ArbCom Elections talk page. For your convenience, I have moved them appropriately, and have included a link from the vote page to the comment on the talk page - but feel free to edit my move to your preference. However, extended comments, like the ones you provided, are best placed on the talk page. I apologize for any inconvenience this may cause. Thank you. - ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 20:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Nom[edit]Jeez. Can I just nom you so we can get those toolz back?! the_undertow talk 01:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
RfA[edit]Arbcom Elections[edit]Hi Walton. I noticed you changed your vote on my arbitration candidacy, citing my "controversial history". I'm just curious about what you're referring to by this. Rebecca (talk) 11:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC) Great success![edit] Click that-a-way to open your card! → → →
AfD[edit]I have only just picked up on an AfD you wound up back in May for the article page Sir William Arbuthnot, 2nd Baronet where there was no concensus at all for deletion, so the article page was left, correctly, in situ. However, almost immediately after that AfD was closed a few of the article's detractors continued their verbal attacks on the Talk Page and one of them, who was particularly opposed to the article, wiped it out. You may wish to review this as a monstrous abuse of process. It is interesting that this same user is now standing for election as an arbitrator on ArbComs. Thanks. David Lauder (talk) 13:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC) re: To the opposers in my RfA[edit]Hi, WaltonOne. Re: your comment on my talk page, I have taken another look at your RfA, and reconsidered my !vote. Unfortunately, my opinion has not changed. I'll try to elaborate on the RfA, as a comment under mine. Had you not declared that you would re-stand, I would have had no objections to a crat's re-sysopping you, despite my reservations brought on by Dmcdevit's oppose !vote. --Storkk (talk) 11:50, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
My 2p at your RfA[edit]Hiya walton. Re-reading my comment at your RfA it perhaps could be read wrongly so I'd better clarify. My "personal axe to grind" is reconfirmation RfA's and not you personally. As I'm sure (hope!) you are aware I have long respected you, and would never want any misundestanding between us. Best of luck buddy. Pedro : Chat 14:48, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Merry Christmas[edit] Adminship[edit] - Mtmelendez (Talk) 20:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC) Congratulations, you are now an administrator again! Please ensure that you are familiar with the latest guidance, at the Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide and Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me, or at the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Warofdreams talk 12:40, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank god you're an admin again - it would NOT be the same without you. Thanks also for the offer - I think I'll be turning it down for now, because 1) I promised Riana that she could nom (heck, she emailed me with a "nooooooooo" subject line pointing to your diff :P) 2) JoshuaZ asked to co-nom, and I've said yes to that, 3) I promised both I'd be running next year. But if you want to throw in another co-nom, I'd be delighted. Although I should probably point out that I'll be voting next Australian election, and (on a two party preferred basis) I'll be voting for Rudd. If you still want to nom, give me a yell :) — Dihydrogen Monoxide 07:15, 18 December 2007 (UTC) Admin Coaching[edit]Is this possible, I was nominated for Adminship, but declined, saying it was still to early, useing yours as a base you were here a year and failed so... F9T 20:39, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations[edit]You proved me wrong once before, I look forward to you doing the same again. Hiding T 15:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC) Hi, could you restore this to my user space? Thanks, Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 04:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC) The Wessex Children[edit]Dear Sir, you are cordially invited to join a discussion on this matter at WikiProject British Royalty. Yours in anticipation, DBD 16:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC) Rfb[edit]Sorry about the typo on Evula's Rfb. !Typo!. Dustihowe Talk 17:25, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Adopter[edit]Hi Walton One, I've started to clean up the Adopters' list. You appear to have changed username since you added yourself to the list but not updated your info there. In case you're still interested, can you kindly update your information? Or, if you're not interested any more, would you mind removing yourself? Thank you and happy editing, Snowolf How can I help? 22:53, 21 December 2007 (UTC) ~~ The Colt (Supernatural) (2nd nomination)[edit]Hi Walton One, just interested to know why you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Colt (Supernatural) (2nd nomination) as no consensus? For the second AfD in a row (it was relisted by the closing admin last time) it has been judged as such despite the "keepers" being unable to answer the asserted policy and guideline violations. As you didn't comment on the decision, I thought I'd ask here. Cheers, Miremare 18:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Pssst...[edit]Did you know your email link at the top is not working? lol. And hey, I wanted to let you know that I really think you're attitude about the project is awesome. I saw the comments you left at the GPMotorsports MfD, and while I commented the pages should be deleted, it was because this was an ongoing, persistent problem with this editor (who is a friend of Goodshopped's, by the way) and he'd been previously warned about the creation of such types of "projects", in fact, the last MfD warned that future creations of pages like that would result in deletion and possibly blocking. However, I completely agree with you that someone who does good work, even if it is a minority of their edits, shouldn't be berated for it. Heck, my talk page comments outnumber my mainspace edits by about 3000, lol. And I have a lot of userspace edits, because I design pages for folks, fix userpages, and do a lot of work in my own userspace. Community is extremely important, and I just wanted to thank you for posting what you did, to remind people who may sometimes forget. I realize everyone has different ideas of what "belongs" and what doesn't, but I think that fun, humor, and laughter is productive, especially in a voluntary setting such as this. So thanks. Seriously. Ariel♥Gold 22:06, 22 December 2007 (UTC) MfD question[edit]
Thanks for the support[edit]Thanks for the support on the shop MfD it was quite difficult being one of the only ones consistantly arguing for the support side, Cheers! Sirkadtalk 22:43, 23 December 2007 (UTC) An Administrator is I![edit].svg) Thank you for your support in my quest to become a sysop. Although I am now wielding the keys to my very own Bitchin' Meatcar, I promise to uphold the laws of the land, martini in hand, in a way that would make Saint Sneaky Pete proud. I will do my best to be a Jack of Several Trades (although I may be a Master of Nuns). I promise to Heart Canadia. And I will make it my goal to Make War, Not ... er, Wait, Never Mind. I am glad to serve my guild, the League of Wikipedians. If I can be of any assistance, or you have any questions, suggestions, or criticisms in the future, please let me know. And if you are at a loss for what any of the above actually means, see this website. Thanks again. An Encyclopedia is We! - Revolving Bugbear 22:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for supporting my candidateship[edit]Hi. I would like to thank you for supporting my Requests for adminship/Magioladitis. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:41, 27 December 2007 (UTC) RfA thanks[edit]
Dear Walton One, here is a little note to say thank you for your kind support on my request for adminship which succeeded with a final result of (72/19/6). Now that I am a sysop, do not hesitate to contact me with any queries you have. I would be glad to help you along with the other group of kind and helpful administrators. Thank you again and I look forward to editing alongside you in the future. — E talk 12:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC) Thanks for your support in my successful RFA. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 07:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[edit]Thanks for your support in my successful RFA. And I do love my Savage 10FP. Sorry your political situation doesn't allow you the privilege of having one yourself. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 07:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC) == Happy New Year, Walton One  Seth Finklestein DRV[edit]I think this debate should be left open for a full five days for more comments. I'm less-than convinced there's a consensus to overturn. (Although I admit that my endorse edit-conflicted with you closure). Cool Hand Luke 23:50, 31 December 2007 (UTC) Happy New Year![edit]
I withdrew my nomination. Who edited my comments to remove the withdrawal?--Goon Noot (talk) 01:56, 3 January 2008 (UTC) see? Meetup[edit]Hi there, I noticed you expressed interest in the Birmingham meetup last October. Just letting you know, another UK meetup is in planning stages, here. We need input on where and when we will meet so comments would be much appreciated. Thanks. Majorly (talk) 16:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC) Example of new users' pleas being ignored[edit]Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Motorola Modding –Pomte 05:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC) recall debate in RFA, comment about your comments[edit]Although it is easy to think of it as Corvus cornix being opposed to all RFA candidates who pledge to be listed on the recall category versus those opposed to Corvus cornix' opinion, it not necessarily 2 sides opposing each other. I presume that Corvus cornix also agrees that administrators should act responsibly. Perhaps that's the common ground or existing consensus that is a start? Archtransit (talk) 16:40, 4 January 2008 (UTC) RFA thanks card[edit]
== Hi Walton One →User:Monobi/a Mønobi 18:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC) Re: WP:EM[edit]Walton - what draws contributors here, and what pushes them away? Valuable new editors come because they want to contribute to the goal of Wikipedia by adding content. These are the people we want to retain, and rather than focus on keeping all contributors we should pay attention to keeping the editors who actually support the goals of Wikipedia. So what keeps editors interested in content here? In my mind it is the ability to have an impact on the project and the presence of a like-minded community. You say that some folks who don't contribute also do no harm, because their social activity does not impede the contributions of other editors. I disagree. We have a choice in how we construct this community - and I submit that the reason we have NOT#MYSPACE and other policies is not because people don't understand that keeping editors is important, but rather because the community does understand that a degree of community engineering is essential to supporting our goal. If we protect the proliferation of non-productive users and the changes to our community that result drive even one productive content writer away, then our community has failed its purpose. Avruchtalk 15:47, 6 January 2008 (UTC) Nathann sc[edit]I noticed that you made a comment at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Nathann sc a few days ago protesting the deletion of that user's userpage. Since then, the user has made a number of confusing edits, primarily consisting of replacing words with thesaurus-esque synonyms that are inappropriate to the context of specific articles as well as sprinkling articles with commas incorrectly. The exemplar you provided as evidence that the user was attempting to become a good Wikipedian actually smacks of patent nonsense, and I've db-tagged it as such. What's more, another account has since started editing a very similar list of articles, making similar (or sometimes reinstating the same) changes but being more combative with attempts to revert the edits. Since you were the only person to speak in favor of keeping that userpage, I thought you should be kept informed of the user's progress (or lack thereof) in improving Wikipedia as opposed to using it as an alternative to MySpace. --DachannienTalkContrib 10:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC) Bluemarine's arbcom[edit]Hi, you may want to check out Matt's RfC. I think someone best summed it up that too little was done (wikipedia guidelines on behavior/blocks) at first then too much happened all at once. There was some folks LGBT and others trying to add BLP-problematic items into his bio but others like myself trying to keep anything out that didn't belong there. At this writing there is still a whole blog-supported section which I feel should be removed until it is better referenced. You can also read through the 11 talk archive pages of that article and the talk pages of Scott Thomas Beauchamp controversy to get a sense of what has transpired. Benjiboi 12:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC) Hi, you offered to help at User talk:Bluemarine - if you are sure that you are uninvolved, I dont see a problem with that. Bluemarine has posted a lot of what I consider to be evidence onto Talk:Matt Sanchez; here is the changes. In order to try and keep the block parameters enforced, I have rolled this material back. Perhaps you would like to review and advise Matt, or take it to the Evidence page yourself? John Vandenberg (talk) 11:20, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Erased comments[edit]Not sure what happened here. Lawrence Cohen
Your edit[edit]It would be very good of you to restore my comment, which you erased here. Thanks and best, Badagnani (talk) 20:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC) Please see the above link as I have requested arbitration for a dispute that you are involved in. Feel free to contribute there. Regards, henrik•talk 11:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC) Can you reverse this CFD of yours?[edit]Greetings; could you by any chance restore for historical reasons Talk:Space_Hijackers. You deleted it speedily after its corresponding article was deleted. I have recreateed the article with more than enough reliable sources to survive any number of future Afd's, and it would be useful to see what comments editors had on the previous article. Regards, Skomorokh incite 21:29, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
IRC[edit]If you're still interested, please send me an email saying what browser you use. Thanks, Majorly (talk) 22:16, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Barnstar[edit]
Question[edit]It's been answered. John Carter (talk) 17:00, 12 January 2008 (UTC) An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding/Workshop. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Anthøny 16:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
your lesson to others[edit]I've seen your name in print. The idea of what you said before (something about good editors leaving WP is bad for WP) is bolded here. I am not asking you to comment. Just a reminder that others remember what you have said before. Archtransit (talk) 15:55, 15 January 2008 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Keilana#chain_of_events Rudget![edit]
Rejoice![edit] Angel David (talk) has given you a kitten! Kittens promote Wikilove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Share the WikiLove and civility with everyone and keep up the excellent editing! Send kittens to others by adding {{subst:Joy message}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
 Angel David (talk) 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!
Response[edit]You're welcome--Angel David (talk) 22:45, 15 January 2008 (UTC) This may have been a mistake[edit]It may have been a mistake bringing up Conservapedia at all, or letting it be known that you edit there. For what it's worth, your version of the article looks much better to me than most of the articles there. I wouldn't be surprised that some folks will be automatically against anything you do, knowing that you've set foot on that site. Friday (talk) 22:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
I just noticed that one of the sentences Filll was bending over backwards to object to, on Conservapedia's Expelled article, is also in our article here, apparently without objection. So, this confirms my suspicions that he was having a knee-jerk reaction to the word "Conservapedia" rather than engaging in rational discussion. We sure could use more people who are willing to actually discuss things like rational adults. You'd previously said you were giving up editing articles on that topic I think.. but I hope you would reconsider that. Friday (talk) 14:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC) Expelled Conservapedia[edit]Not clogging up our article's talk page, and not opening a Conservapedia account (just yet). "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is a documentary by Ben Stein"
"Some of the scientists interviewed in the film, notably Richard Dawkins, claim that they were deceived as to the film's purpose and title, and would not have agreed to participate in it had they known of its pro-intelligent design message.[3]"
While the article does present a rather NPOV article, particularly compared to other examples of conservapedia's work, I don't feel its really comparable to our article. The Wikipedia article is double or treble the size and has far more information detailing the relevant controversies. The Wikipedia article is more comprehensive, and as far as I am concerned, lacking comprehensive detail is a factor of POV, in words lies-by-omission. I am not saying that the Conservapedia article is dishonest or misleading, but it does appear devoid of a lot of relevant information (while similarly the Wikipedia article has quantity of irrelevant, or over-relevant information). I agree with your assertion the article requires cleaning up. However this is not the same as significant NPOV problems. I think approaching the wikipedia article with a little less hyperbole ("Still horrifically biased") may make editors more amenable to any suggestions you have.--ZayZayEM (talk) 00:56, 18 January 2008 (UTC) Re: MONGO's RfA[edit]I've been thinking about presenting a rationale, but I might as well explain it here first to gather my thoughts. First off, I'm afraid his RfA won't have much chance of succeeding anyway, which is sort of the first reason for me not to pile-on oppose, esp. since most of the opposers don't even bother to underscore their concerns with diffs or any specific explanations. Just took another look, and imo some of the opposes added in the meantime are self-righteous, summary character judgments rather than taking into consideration his enormous contrib history. MONGO's arguable past mistakes should be contrasted with a common-sense estimate of how probable it is that he will repeat them. I remember MONGO has had plenty of run-ins with different people, and he may be a bit short-tempered at times. OTOH, his engagement in keeping conspiracy theorists at bay on 9/11 related articles is what gained him most of his enemies, and he's had loads of horseshit thrown his way for no good reason. That's why I'm willing to overlook his frequent presence at RfC/RfAr: Too many people have a tendency to automatically assume bad faith with him, especially ever since he became the target in several offsite locations (the usual suspects). Also, imo civility is far overrated on Wikipedia, compared to other things like e.g. an uncompromising willingness to vouch for encyclopedic standards. The reason I finally decided to support is his often-demonstrated ability to quickly and reliably discern edits of encyclopedic merit. I'm fairly sure people will be watching him closely, and he won't have much opportunity to misuse the tools in any way the opposers seem to fear. As to argument against drama: I'm not sure I understand how him having the tools would affect any of that. Actually, it reminded me a bit of some of the opposition you received in your second RfA. Another thing that makes me assume twice as good faith with him as with the usual gladhanding RfA suspects is that he does have an attitude. Unfortunately, combined with his efforts to keep POV/OR away, this makes him just the perfect projection screen for conspiracy theories. The tendency (in general) is that people accept such as explanations for just about everything, simply because looking twice is half the fun. Guess that makes me an elitist of sorts, but we desperately need people with an attitude and the willingness and capability to stand by it. Those without an attitude are the ones who worry me and that's why imo people like MONGO, in spite of the fact that I don't agree with him very often and that I would not consider him a "wikifriend", need encouragement and a vote of trust. User:Dorftrottel 19:39, January 19, 2008 MfD Again (You voted before)[edit]
My RfA[edit]Hey there, I'm writing to inform you that I have withdrawn my request for adminship, which was currently standing at 11 supports, 22 opposes and 6 neutrals. This count could have been so much better if I had understood policy, although I believe that 17 questions is a lot to ask of a user's first RfA. I will take on all comments given at the RfA and will endeavour to meet the high expectations of the RfA voters. WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDENplay it cool. 21:16, 20 January 2008 (UTC) Hello, Walton! I thought about this for a bit and decided to say something. I have come to know you as the editor who made me aware of the impact of discussing someone's userpages for deletion, and since then I have come to view these nominations from the POV of the user being discussed, ala WP:EM. However, what about from the POV of the nominator? It is possible, too, that the nominator is misguided, but he, too, deserves the benefit of the doubt and should be given occasional nudges to do the right thing, too, no? Look at User:Master_of_Puppets. He messed up a few times when he first started nominating. Should not all editors, even nominators, matter? Just something to chew on, hopefully to raise the bar some, not to criticize. Regards. --12 Noon 2¢ 15:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC) My RFA[edit]I do pledge to add my name to the category, I believe that all administrators should be reassessed as some point. STORMTRACKER 94 20:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC) New Semester, New Appeal[edit]This semester I am teaching academic writing to a group of teachers at my school. This course starts on Monday Jan 28. I would like to know if you are still interesting in "mentoring". You can see the syllabus at Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/ITESM_Campus_Toluca/SyllabusIf so, please leave a message on my talk page and update the mentor's page Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/ITESM_Campus_Toluca/Mentors, if . If not, please remove your name and information from that page. Thanks! Thelmadatter (talk) 21:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
My Rfa[edit]I wish to thank you for being supportive of my effort to regain my adminship. Though it was not successful, your support was still very much appreciated. Let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Thank you!--MONGO 06:25, 27 January 2008 (UTC) My RfA[edit]RfA thanks[edit]
Thanks for your support. I look forward to working with you and I hope your intuition will move you to support me once again when the time comes in a couple months! - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 04:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC) My monobook page[edit]I want to import a script, but it's protected. Can you unprotect it real quick? Thanks. --Gp75motorsports REV LIMITER 01:36, 29 January 2008 (UTC) Mediation[edit]Please would you mediate in Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Spam-blacklist.2FUnrealRoyal CarbonLifeForm (talk) 10:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
BQZip RFA comments[edit]I replied to you there in regards to Bearian's comments. just wanted to give you a heads up in case you didn't have it watchlisted. I think you were way, way off target there. I'm happy to discuss that, but I'd prefer to do it on the RFA. Lawrence § t/e 17:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC) Please give your thoughts on this AfD[edit]Hello, We are having a 2 person AfD debate over Vor of Barrayar. I am strongly Keep, Doctor Fluffy is strongly delete, and I just think we need a few more faces in the discussion adding productive thoughts. (The debtate has been exceptionally well mannered and well conducted but I think we are stalemating) I just want to get some more input. Please investigate at your earliest convenience. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Vor_of_Barrayar -My word as Dachande (talk) 12:24, 8 February 2008 (UTC). This Arbitration case has closed, and the final decision may be reviewed through the above link. Further to the relevant findings of fact, Waterboarding and all closely-related pages are subject to article probation (full remedy); editors working on Waterboarding, or closely related pages, may be subject to an editing restriction at the discretion of any uninvolved administrator, whereby any edits by that editor which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, may result in a block. (full remedy). Should any user subject to an editing restriction in this case violate that restriction, that user may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeated violations. After 5 blocks, the maximum block length shall increase to one year (full enforcement). Before such restrictions are enacted on an editor, he or she must be issued with a warning containing a link to the decision. For the Arbitration Committee, ^demon's RfA[edit]Got the diffs! Phew, that was a lot of work. нмŵוτнτ 21:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC) Speedy deletion of Template:User David Cameron[edit]A tag has been placed on Template:User David Cameron requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted. If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes ( <noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>). Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC) Waterboarding RfM[edit]A Request for Mediation has been filed on the Waterboarding article concerning the content dispute in the first six words of the article. You have been named as a party and your participation would be appreciated. I believe this is the best approach to an amicable resolution of the dispute. Please indicate your agreement here. Thank you. Neutral Good (talk) 20:28, 23 February 2008 (UTC) Admin Coaching Re-confirmation[edit]Hello, previously you expressed interest in participating in the Wikipedia:Admin coaching project. We are currently conducting a reconfirmation drive to give coaches the opportunity to update their information and capacity to participate in the project. Please visit Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Status to update your status. Also, please remember to update your capacity (5th table variable) in the form of a fraction (eg. 2/3 means you are currently coaching 2 students, and could accept 1 more student). Thank you. MBisanz talk 09:14, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Request for mediation not accepted[edit]
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly. Trying this again[edit]A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Waterboarding 2, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, Neutral Good (talk) 02:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC) My RfB[edit]Hello Walton One, and thanks for your comment at my RfB. While I'm not here to ask you to reconsider, I just wanted to really understand where my answers had gone wrong for you? I had clarified my position (given further consideration) on Saturday evening, I said "The recent arbcom ruling and ^demon's re-sysoping have left, I think, a small hole in the decision making process which is exemplified by the original question. I'm now pretty much resolved to the fact that if an admin de-sysops voluntarily and wants to re-sysop, they request it and it's granted. If they decide to RfA then their path back to automatically being re-sysopped on request should be closed and they should follow the RfA process. It seems a little self-indulgent for a former admin to go back to the community for RfA, withdraw (no matter what the outcome) and still expect to be re-sysopped." And in the first instance I said as a minimum the community consensus should be achieved before re-sysop. It's entirely up to you, but I'd be really grateful if you could let me know what I'd said that you so objected to. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC) Adminship[edit]To my mind, the ability to climb down and change one's mind (when persuaded by arguments) is the sign of a great admin. Kudos to you. --Dweller (talk) 11:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC) A new Oxbridge user box[edit]Walton One...I am currently in the process of writing a user box for all of the colleges that are part of Oxbridge. This template is meant to replace your current college template. Please take a look at the work in progress and comment on it. My main concerns are college abbreviations and color choice. I am using scarf colors for the colleges. Thank you. - LA @ 17:51, 9 March 2008 (UTC) Hola[edit]Hey Walton, long time no talk. You're not giving up and leaving, are you? I'm sorry stuff's gotten so frustrating. I think your voice is really important in discussions, so few people are willing to speak up about how the project should be more democratic (I tend to agree with you, but I usually stay out of discussions because I kind of hate them. I should force myself to participate more). I think even one person opening their mouth about it can make a big difference, you know? Like those conformity experiments they did where if even one person voiced dissent, a bunch of other people were willing to do the same. And you're respected within the community, so I'm sure you're making a difference. But if it's too frustrating, you could also come back and work on other stuff, no reason you have to participate in just the areas that are causing the frustration. I may not be making the most possible sense here, but what I'm trying to say is I would be really sad if you were to leave. Peace, delldot talk 05:32, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
The "Prince/ss X of Wales" Issue[edit]Just thought I'd let you know that there's a discussion about the above at the WikiProject, and I'm inviting all of the members to join in DBD 13:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC) Hi Walton One, what do you think of my new signature? Acalamari : Chat 15:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Busy next Sunday?[edit]Meetup? Hope it's not too short notice. Majorly (talk) 14:45, 5 April 2008 (UTC) please look at this[edit]You are rumoured to be a fair person who is not part of a cabal. So please look at this. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard&diff=203695745&oldid=203694086 165.21.155.110 (talk) 06:50, 6 April 2008 (UTC) Can you help? RFA thanks[edit]Thanks for your support in my RFA, that didn't quite make it and ended at 120/47/13. There was a ton of great advice there, that I'm going to go on. Maybe someday. If not, there are articles to write! Thanks for your support. Lawrence § t/e 17:39, 12 April 2008 (UTC) Hi Walton, I noticed you closed this AfD as delete a couple of days ago but did not actually delete the article. I'm a Ras Kass fan and am sorry to see articles on his albums get deleted, but obviously that was the consensus and the appropriate decision per policy. Anyhow, just letting you know that you might want to do a little cleanup.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 07:14, 13 April 2008 (UTC) RFA Thanks[edit]Thank you for your comments on my RFA. Even though it failed with 28 supports, 42 opposes, and 15 neutrals, I am grateful for the suggestions and advice I have received and I do hope to improve as a Wikipedian. If you ever need my help in any endeavor, feel free to drop me a line. --Sharkface217 19:37, 13 April 2008 (UTC) Thank you[edit]Thank you for your decency.[2] Imagine you had family in the World Trade Center, as I have. DurovaCharge! 17:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
About the page What The Wikipedian saw[edit]Sorry about the trouble. The page was actually meant to be on the department of fun group but I didn't have time to add it's link. It was not meant to offend anyone. I apologise for this taking your time. Please send me a message on your view via my talk page. This same message will be sent to the other nominators. Anyway thanks for protecting my views. If you could, could add it to the dept of fun. If you cannot be part of this thats ok. Sorry.--Darkside2000 (talk) 17:34, 15 April 2008 (UTC) Addition on What the wikipedian saw.[edit]The story was actually meant to added to and edited by other wiki users. Like Wikipedia the movie for example. Anyway thanks for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkside2000 (talk • contribs) 17:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC) one man battle comment[edit]It's not a one man battle. In fact, having you (an administrator) on our side would help us immensely. I've been looking for a gutsy admin for a while, and it looks like I might have just found one. Please respond on my talk page or email me. Saksjn (talk) 19:06, 15 April 2008 (UTC) The admin rules didn't keep Raul from abusing them. I respect admins that follow the rules. Saksjn (talk) 15:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC) Please consider taking the AGF Challenge[edit]I would like to invite you to consider taking part in the AGF Challenge which has been proposed for use in the RfA process [3] by User: Kim Bruning. You can answer in multiple choice format, or using essay answers, or anonymously. You can of course skip any parts of the Challenge you find objectionable or inadvisable.--Filll (talk) 21:53, 15 April 2008 (UTC) Thanks![edit]Thank you for adding what the wikipedian saw to my user space. Thanks!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkside2000 (talk • contribs) 10:02, 16 April 2008 (UTC) MONGO, Tango, RfAr-o[edit]Just FYI; Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Response_to_Walton_One. Happy to discuss...probably better on your talk or mine...if you're interested. Cheers mate, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:42, 16 April 2008 (UTC) RfA[edit]Just like to say thanks for your moral supporting of my RfA application yesterday. I withdrew my application in order to gain more experience, and I intend to reapply in a few months after admin coaching and generally more experience here on Wikipedia. Best of luck, I hope to hear from you again in the future. Kind regards, CycloneNimrodtalk? 14:37, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Happy Adminship | from the Birthday Committee | |
|---|---|---|
 Wishing Walton One/Old a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! | ||
|
|
Wishing Walton One/Old a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! RyRy5 (talk) 22:07, 20 April 2008 (UTC) |
--RyRy5 (talk) 22:07, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
[edit]Thanks so much for, at the very least, trying to keep the 2019 user subpage from being deleted. Your help was very much needed, even though the result of the arguement was the deletion of the subpage. Many others contributed to the discussion in support of the page, but your comments were the most extensive; you brought to light many very good points and might have been the reason that those others were for keeping the page.
Thanks again,
— TimAlderson | (loque)
- I posted the above message once, only to find that I wasn't logged in; I just didn't want this post to be associated with an IP address instead of an actual Wikipedia user. So I logged in, posted again and deleted the post from my IP address.
- This is one of those areas of Wikipedia I'm not so proficient in—reverting talk page posts from being not logged in. My bad.
- — TimAlderson | (loque) —Preceding comment was added at 13:04, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Walton! I am writing to you in request for your assistance to resolve a dispute. This is about an article Hogenakkal Falls. This as the name may suggest, is about a water falls in India. This falls is the site of a proposed drinking water project, which as per reliable sources agreed by the parties involved in 1998, but was delayed because lack of funds and now that a Japanese bank is ready to fund the foundation stone was placed. I am leaving you some links here for reference [4] [5] [6] [7]
Now that it has been 10 years as usual some political parties have started causing havoc and the project has been put to hold (but not shelved). [8] [9] As you can guess the project and the issue by itself had been made into two separate articles, namely:
Now, having read this, do you think the article on Hogenakkal water falls should not mention about the proposed project at all? At least that is what one user tells us. He first called this project invalid and not endorsed by the central govt of India, to which I proved him wrong. Then he went to say that the entry is only about the falls and should be only about the beauty of the falls. My stance is based on the articles on Niagara Falls both on Wikipedia and on Columbia encyclopedia, where the article on the waterfalls (not the cities) mentions about the hydroelectric project that is carried out there. So why not a proposed project be mentioned (not elaborated) in the waterfalls entry and directed to the relevant article? There is also another issue raised by the user that a water project is different to an hydroelectric project and the former is of no relevance. Is that so?
Please let us know if am wrong. CheersWiki San Roze †αLҝ 07:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Just realised that I didn't leave the sections of the talk page which you may want to read. Sorry about that. :D Here we go: 1, 2 and 3. Cheers. Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 07:03, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
- Hey, sorry that we have now moved on from third opinion to RfC. See if you can go through them and give your comments here. Thanks Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 08:19, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I have sent one. :) Acalamari 21:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Responded. Thanks Walton! Acalamari 22:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you
[edit]Thank you for voting Keep in my MfD poll. With your help, the debate ended with "no consensus" (although a large majority voted to "keep"). --GHcool (talk) 20:59, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thank spam
[edit]
|
Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 194 supporting, 9 opposing, and 4 neutral. Your kindness and constructive criticism is very much appreciated. I look forward to using the tools you have granted me to aid the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers, Anthony and Acalamari for their nominations. Thank you again, VanTucky |
Well, as it's you .... :)
[edit][10] Pedro : Chat 13:58, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Sent you one. Monobi (talk) 20:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Requests for checkusership
[edit]I saw your message at User talk:WJBscribe. Some of the regulars at WP:SSP, besides me, include:
- User:Gb -- very active
- User:Rlevse
- User:AGK
You can look at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Archive/March 2008 and Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Archive/April 2008 to see who is closing cases. You might also ask the prospects about their technical knowledge and check their logs to see if their blocks have withstood scrutiny. Jehochman Talk 13:56, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
re:Conservapedia
[edit]I didn't think the dictionary definition of homosexuality was "an immoral sexual lifestyle". VanTucky 22:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Rfa thanks
[edit]Thanks for supporting my recent request for adminship which was successful with 89 supports, 0 opposes, and 2 neutrals. Unfortunately all I can offer is this lame text thanks rather than some fancy-smancy thank-you spam template thingy. I was very pleased to receive such strong support and to hear so many nice comments from editors whom I respect. I’ll do my best with the tools, and if you ever see me going astray don’t hesitate to drop a note on my talk page. Thanks again for your support!--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 03:44, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
rule of consensus.
[edit]I suppose in a way you could say that Wikipedia currently has a "rule of consensus", rather than a rule of law. This is a relatively new system, that has slowly been gaining prominence over time as people have been working on internet governance. I'm not sure I want to discontinue using that system simply because it's new though. it seems to work fairly well for all kinds of things.
It does require a bit more education and background than other methods, and sometimes that has been slightly lacking on wikipedia, but that's something we can fairly easily work on rectifying.
--Kim Bruning (talk) 17:03, 26 April 2008 (UTC)(A number of people have kept talking about Acculturation problems on Wikipedia, and people haven't been paying attention. I think this Governance proposal is a huge wakeup call to those people who haven't been listening. I just hope they wake up on time.)
User Page Comment
[edit]Best wishes for a speedy recovery and for resolution of your personal issues my friend Pedro : Chat 11:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Your complaint at User talk:Ma'am
[edit]Hey Walton, I noticed your complaint at User talk:Ma'am. I also complained about some of the contents of the userpage...do you think anyone will ever do anything about either of our complaints? I noticed yours was from Jan 07! --Cameron (t|p|c) 19:25, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 | There is currently a backlog of 52 users at Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user. Please consider offering adoption to one or more of these users. Don't forget to change their {{adoptme}} template to {{adoptoffer|Walton One/Old}}. Thank you for your continued participation in Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. xenocidic (talk) 20:02, 1 May 2008 (UTC) |
Re:Hogenakkal falls
[edit]Thanks for your reply and effort you have taken to read through the talk page, which I do accept has taken too many turns and hard for me to decipher even though I been part of it :D . Anyways, yes the earlier issue was about including a section about a project (an issue we have left in the backburner for now). Right now the issue is about the jurisdiction of the waterfalls. There are two parties involved, where one states that the waterfalls lie in the border and it is a shared jurisdiction (of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka) and the other party (including me) say that the waterfalls is under Tamil Nadu's and pretty close to the borders (the phrase we like to use is along the borders). John Carter has been helping us in a great deal with the dispute resolution. May be it will be a good idea for you to contact John Carter or ShefieldSteel on this matter, as they are third parties and would not be biased. It would be nice if you can look into the sources that both parties can provide, check if they are what they claim to be saying and decide on the dispute. I guess for the good of the article and fairness of your opinion, I should not start defending my stance here. Nevertheless, please feel free to ask (or even demand) citaions from me or any clarification needed. I shall be more than happy to provide you with them since I would like to see the back of this issue asap. Once again, thank a lot for coming forward to help us. I really do appreciate this. Cheers Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 07:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Restoration for userpage
[edit]Hi, it seems that User:JzG refused to answer either of our questions at his userpage about why he deleted an article on my own userpage (User:Slarre/Leftist-Islamist Alliance). He has now archived the discussion here. Do you think that you could restore the page now, or know otherwise how I should get it back? Thanks. /Slarre (talk) 12:42, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Peter Symonds College
[edit]Haha, yeah, Pedro went there and he asked me the same question when he granted me rollback. It's pure coincidence, it just happens to be my name, but I can pretend it's named after me or something. :) Thanks, PeterSymonds | talk 08:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
- [11] Ironically, I'm an Old Symondian! Pedro : Chat 08:56, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Avraham RfB comments.
[edit]Thank you, Walton. I appreciate your intellectual honesty and your commitment to the betterment of the project. Regardless of the outcome, I look forward to crossing paths with you more often in the future. -- Avi (talk) 17:47, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Query re. ID comment
[edit]All following comments are in the spirit of constructive debate.
Regarding your post on FCYTravis page, I bought my query over here, because as you quite rightly said, the debate was going off at something of a tangent. I wanted to ask you a question;
You said,
| “ | ...The other problem is that pro-intelligent design editors (of which I am not one, personally) tend to get driven away from Wikipedia and accused of being "anti-science", with the result that our articles on the evolution-ID controversy are one step away from saying "evolution is the only valid viewpoint, ID is religious insanity", which doesn't seem to me to be NPOV. | ” |
My questions is, if WP said "The vast majority of people believe that evolution is the only valid viewpoint, ID is religious insanity" - and we backed it up with a concrete citation (say, an opinion poll from a reputable source) - surely that would qualify as NPOV?
-- Chzz ► 23:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Anti-science POV
[edit]The reason I think the anti-science POV is not compatible with an administrator is that it is in direct opposition of NPOV.OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 02:55, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Rfb participation thanks
[edit]Hello, Walton.
I wanted to personally thank you for taking part in the project-wide discussions regarding my candidacy for bureaucratship. After bureaucratic discussion, the bureaucrats decided that there was sufficient significant and varied opposition to my candidacy, and thus no consensus to promote. Although personally disappointed, I both understand and respect their decision, especially in light of historical conservatism the project has had when selecting its bureaucrats. I both understand and respect the rationale behind your opinion, and I hope our paths cross more in teh future. If you have any further suggestions or comments as to how you think I could help the project, please let me know. Once again, thank you for your participation. -- Avi (talk) 19:34, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Sent you one. Monobi (talk) 03:18, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
My RfA
[edit]Hi Walton; I wanted to say thank you for supporting my request for adminship, which passed with 100 supports, 0 opposes and 1 neutral. I wanted to get round everybody individually, even though it's considered by some to be spam (which... I suppose it is! but anyway. :)). It means a lot to me that the community has placed its trust in my ability to use the extra buttons, and I only hope I can live up to its expectations. If you need anything, or notice something that bothers you, don't hesitate to let me know. Thanks again, PeterSymonds | talk 22:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Happy Birthday
[edit]| Happy Birthday | from the Birthday Committee | |
|---|---|---|
 Wishing Walton One a very happy birthday on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Don't forget to save us all a piece of cake! | ||
Idontknow610TM 19:01, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Sean Hannity
[edit]I don't mind that bit going away; I just put it there to demonstrate how the fact could be inserted in a non-POV manner and possibly head off the ensuing edit war. But, of course, once you take the POV away, there's not much point to that fact, is there? :-) Jclemens (talk) 16:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Happy Independence Day!
[edit]As you are a nice Wikipedian, I just wanted to wish you a happy Independence Day! And if you are not an American, then have a happy day and a wonderful weekend anyway! :) Your friend and colleague, --Happy Independence Day! Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 03:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Indiana Gregg and Pirate Bay
[edit]I have been following a dispute that has been taking place between Indiana Gregg and the Pirate Bay about P2P filesharing issues. I have added references to various pages and have been objective in my commentary; however, another user keeps reverting the content I have submitted and is, I believe, in violation of Wiki policy. In the discussion on the page, I have presented factual information and the page is constantly being edited. It is my understanding that information made to wikipedia should be factual and impartial. However, I believe it to be evident that members of The Pirate Bay themselves are editing Indiana Gregg's wiki page. If you would be willing to help resolve the dispute, I would be grateful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carribeanqueen (talk • contribs) 19:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
article Tucker Max and User:McJeff
[edit]Hello, I was wondering if you could comment on this situation. Editor User:McJeff and I were in a dispute about content in a criticism section for the article. That is not what this message is about. The problem is, McJeff has stated that he will revert all my changes, even if it isn't in the criticism section, because I'm the one doing the editing. I don't think this is appropriate. Could you please see the "1 million unique visitors" section of the discussion page of Tucker Max? Please let me know if you think the evidence supports my edit, and if you think it's acceptable for mcjeff to auto revert all my edits, just because I'm the one doing it. thanks. Theserialcomma (talk) 18:30, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Invitation
[edit]
Introducing WikiProject United States Government...[edit] | |||
.svg)
|
Hello Walton One,
Are you interested in Politics, Law or the United States? Do you enjoy expanding, creating or maintaining articles relating to those subjects? Or do you enjoy the small stuff? Or maybe you like learning about the United States Congress or the Commander in Chief. Well, wait no longer, because we have a project for you! WikiProject United States Government is where all the cool Wikipedians who watch C-SPAN hang out! Join the project today and help us get it off the ground and flying. Thanks in advance, « Diligent Terrier Bot (talk) 22:11, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
|
Help us get the project off the ground and flying. |
|
Can you consult
[edit]I have been looking for a consultant to help us (http://www.larsonobrien.com) develop a listing for our company and some of our clients.
We have tried to be listed unsuccessfully, though we have a very good reason - imho - to deserve consideration. I ran into a couple egoistic online wiki administrators who were quite taken with their own power and anonymity. They delighted in insulting me for wanting to be listed, the city where I live, the business I'm in, etc., and wouldn't accept any of the changes we made to meet their ever-changing standards.
I reviewed your listing and was pleased that we have kindred political views. I'd prefer doing business with someone I can communicate with.
If you would consider helping, I can provide a lot more detail via email, Skype, doc file...as you prefer.
Best regards, Jack O'Brien jack@larsonobrien.com
Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice
[edit]Hi,
As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.
We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.
You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.
We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!
Addbot (talk) 22:21, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
| A friendly reminder from the Adopt-a-User project =) | |
|---|---|
 |
Hey there Walton One! This is a friendly reminder to update your status at Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User/Adoptee's Area/Adopters whenever it is appropriate in order to provide new users with the most up-to-date information on available adopters. Also please note that we will be removing adopters who have not edited in 60 days. If you become active again (and we hope you do!) please feel free to re-add yourself. Cheers! |
- Notice delivery by xenobot 14:39, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Time for resolution
[edit]Hiya. For several months now, the article naming for 18th Century British royals has been ever-which-where — all over the shop. In an attempt to solve this, I have prepared a page for discussion: here. Please, please, please come and discuss, even contribute to the Poll. Cheers! DBD 15:36, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
...is an excellent essay - thank you. It's very reassuring to know that other editors understand that contributors matter - to the point of writing a gentle article explaining so. Cheers, Paxse (talk) 15:37, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Your listing on Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User/Adoptee's_Area/Adopters
[edit]Hello, since you've been renamed from Walton monarchist89 to your current name, do you mind if I fix your signature in the S-Z part of the list? Thanks, SchfiftyThree (talk!) 17:33, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Happy New Year!
[edit]Dear Walton One,
Wishing you a happy a new year, and very best wishes for 2009. Whether we were friends or not in the past year, I hope 2009 will be better for us both.
Kind regards,
Majorly talk 20:51, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikimania Oxford bid
[edit]Some time ago you indicated your support of the Oxford 2010 Wikimania Bid, and it was recieved with much gratitude. I now ask if you could could help support our bid by contributing to the bid page that is located at: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2010/Bids/Oxford. Now is the critical period for work to continue on the bid as the official bidding period has now started and the jury has been formed.
I do not ask for huge swathes of time, just enough that with eveyrone working on this, it can be completed in time to the high standard required in a bid. For the bid page, an excellent source of information is the travel wiki article on the City of Oxford which is found at: http://wikitravel.org/en/Oxford. The chance of bringing Wikimania to the UK is the best so far and i expect the best chance for many years. With a fresh and stong UK chapter we have an amazing opportunity to put ourselves on the map. If you have any questions, please mail them to the Wikimedia UK mailing list, email me or post a message on my talk page and i will answer as quickly as possible.
I look forward to working with you on the bid page. Many Thanks. Seddσn talk 15:13, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nan (artist)
[edit]Back in May 2007, you closed this deletion debate without seeming to take into account the rather strong evidence produced by User:Jpatokal late in the debate. I just came across this, and I think the proper course of action would have been to relist for further comment, since Jpatokal's points remained unopposed, and consensus wouldn't have been established then. --Paul_012 (talk) 12:55, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- I just noticed you're currently inactive, so I've taken this to deletion review. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:35, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
[edit]Thanks, from a while ago... Hope you are well. Best regards, ♪♫The New Mikemoraltalkcontribs 00:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
|
The Autograph Book Barnstar | |
| This user has signed The New Mikemoral's Autograph Book and has earned this awesome award. ♪♫The New Mikemoraltalkcontribs 00:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC) |
Wikimania 2010 Oxford bid
[edit]Thank you for supporting the Oxford bid to hold Wikimania 2010! We're currently in the final stages of the bid process - the jury will be announcing their decision by the 16th April. We're currently putting together the local team for the bid (who will do what if the bid wins); if you're able to be on the local team, please put your name in the appropriate place on m:Wikimania 2010/Bids/Oxford/Team. We'd also welcome anything you can do to help refine the bid in these last few days. If you have any questions, please let me or User:Seddon know. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:43, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello there
[edit]Hi there Walton One, I haven't seen you around much recently. Hope everything's good with you. Best wishes. Acalamari 22:18, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
I saw that you were listed in the Coaches for reconfirmation section of the admin coaching status page. Could you please update your status, and if you are still interested, drop me a note on my talk page? Thanks, Genius101Guestbook 22:17, 25 April 2009 (UTC) This message was delivered semi-automatically by AutoWikiBrowser.
- Thank you for updating your status. gENIUS101 19:35, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Wotcha
[edit]Nice to see your user name flash up on my watchlist! Hope all is well. Pedro : Chat 15:11, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Good luck
[edit]Sorry to hear about the real world pressures. You've been a great benefit to the project here, and I sincerely hope that you are as successful out there as I have every reason to believe you deserve to be. And I think I can speak for all of us in saying that we hope to see you return with even minimal activity soon. Good editors like you are very hard to find, good admins even harder. Remember, even I'm an admin now; that shows just how desperate this place is for them. Best of luck in all your efforts in the real world, thanks for all you've done here, and hope to see you back, even if only irregularly, soon. John Carter (talk) 15:43, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'd also like to echo John's sentiments. Very best. Pedro : Chat 15:45, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
- As would I. You are always welcome here. Best wishes. Acalamari 21:35, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
TfD nomination of Template:RfCheck-nom
[edit]
Template:RfCheck-nom has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. PirateSmackKArrrr! 08:27, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
In need of your mentorship
[edit]Hi,
I need help from an experienced Wikipedian, and I saw your name over at WP:ADOPT.
I need your advice concerning WP:WPOOK, which I've been coordinating. The set of pages the project concerns is listed at Portal:Contents/Outline of knowledge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of knowledge#Projected outline, and has grown to about 500 articles in the encyclopedia.
The goals of the WikiProject are:
- Increase awareness of readers of the existence of the outlines on Wikipedia
- Complete the existing outlines
- Create an outline for every subject that is exensive enough to benefit from having an outline (core subjects and major or extensive fields). There are thousands of these.
- Recruit as many editors to work on these as possible (we need thousands of editors working on these)
- Surpass portals in number by the end of the summer, and leave them in the dust by the end of the year
- Get the major outline subject areas displayed on the Main Page (in place of or in addition to the portal links at the top of the page)
- Increase the OOK to higher quality than Britannica's Outline of Knowledge (published in its Propaedia volume).
I was hoping you could comment on how to achieve the goals above.
Also I'm interested in every possible way of reaching readers and editors of Wikipedia. How can I get the most eyes and typing fingers on Wikipedia's outlines? Contacting editors directly without a reason relevant to them is spam, which I'd like to avoid. There are 75,000 regular editors on Wikipedia, and I want to contact all of them. So how do I do it? Directly or indirectly, I don't care which, piecemeal or all-at-once, all methods are fine with me. But I've got to find ways. I need your help.
I would also like to know how to find or attract editors to create new outlines. And I need advice on finding editors to help write the new outline article mentioned above (it needs to be fleshed out, completely referenced, and brought to featured article status).
Can you recommend anyone in particular who might be interested in sinking their teeth into a project like this? Or ways to reach groups of editors? Or ways to reach all editors? I welcome any and all advice you might have.
I look forward to your reply on my talk page.
The Transhumanist 03:21, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Heads up
[edit]Hello! I don't know if you have noticed Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Bravedog#Conclusions, but the nominator and first "voter" in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cherub (TV series) are actually the same person and thus vote stacked in that discussion that you closed. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 05:16, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Need Some Help
[edit]I need some help at over at the University of Atlanta page. I would like a third party editors to come over and add some fresh ideas to some biased info. It seems anyone who offers a different idea or voices a different opinion will get blocked as I did, think god I was unblocked : ) But others who added some great ideas Minsto12 and many many more have been called puppets and blocked, so this it at some risk. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supercopone (talk • contribs) 03:42, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Admin Coaching: Reconfirmation
[edit]I was looking through the coaches at Wikipedia:Admin_coaching/Status and saw that there are a lot under "reconfirmation".
Could you let me know if you are still interesting in being involved with Admin Coaching, or if you would prefer to have your name removed from the "reconfirmation" list. If you want to be involved, could you please move your entry from "Reconfirmation" to "Active" and indicate how many students you would be willing to have (obviously, if you are actively coaching at the moment, then please indicate this!)
If I do not hear from you within a week, I will assume that you would like to have your name removed from the list of coaches.
And yes, I saw your note at the top of this page, but thought I'd ask anyway!
Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 07:34, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Alternative newspaper search
[edit]
Template:Alternative newspaper search has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:39, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Man-Faye (4th nomination)
[edit]You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Man-Faye (4th nomination). --Gwern (contribs) 11:17 4 August 2010 (GMT) 11:17, 4 August 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})
Black Eyed Kids
[edit]Hey, I know this is quite old, but is there any way that I could get a look at the Black Eyed Kids article? I'd like to give it a go but I want to see what state the article was in beforehand so I don't make the same mistakes PanydThe muffin is not subtle 12:32, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Invitation to particpate in the December 2010 Wikification Drive
[edit] | Hi there! I thought you might be interested in the December 2010 Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive. We're currently recruiting help to clear a massive backlog (22,000+ articles), and we need your help! Participants in the drive will receive barnstars for their contributions! If you have a spare moment, please join and wikify an article or tell your friends. Thanks! |
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 19:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC). Redirected here from User talk:Walton_monarchist89.
Too bad your proposal died a few years ago. I've made an account after just being a reader for years because of exactly that kind of problem, and yet I meet resistance from people who can only think of comprehensiveness. Whatever we think, some court somewhere will make it WP's policy sooner or later. <( User:Couch on his Head and Smiling (talk) )> 01:04, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Please confirm your membership
[edit] | This is an important message from WikiProject Wikify. You are currently listed as a member of WikiProject Wikify. As agreed upon by the project, all members will be required to confirm their membership by February 1, 2010. If you are still interested in assisting with the project, please add yourself to the list at this page—this will renew your membership of WikiProject Wikify. Thank you for your support, WikiProject Wikify |
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 20:40, 22 December 2010 (UTC). Redirected here from User talk:Walton_monarchist89.