User talk:Wpktsfs/Archive 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Wpktsfs. 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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
my RFA
Thank you for supporting my RFA. I hope I will live up to your expectation. Let me know if you need any help, or I make any mistake. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 00:07, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Re. Coaching
Hello Wpktsfs and thank you for contacting me. Unfortunately, I'm currently not accepting new users for coaching, as I'm already coaching three at the moment. Maybe you will find an available coach here. Good luck! :-) Regards, Húsönd 01:41, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Reply from T-borg
Thanks for the review, Wpktsfs! About becoming an admin, a low confidence doesn't exactly help me with it, still it's a pretty responsible job. Plus, I'm always happy to help fellow editors, and that doesn't exclude anyone. Already shortened the sig, now that there's a restriction to 255 characters. Again thanks for the review! —May the Edit be with you, always. (T|C) 05:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- Your welcome. It was the most pleasurable one I have done tonight. I am trying to kill the backlog... I need to refill my lamp with more midnight oil... Cheers! --wpktsfs 05:44, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
RE: Review
Wow, thanks for your honesty of you review. Well, your honesty can help me improve on my edits later on. Appreciate it. :) --esanchez, Camp Lazlo fan! 05:48, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
review
Thanks for the review – I was wondering if the backlog would ever be cleared ;) Thanks for the comments, –Sebi ~ 05:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for taking the time to do my review, and for the comments and tips. Greatly appreciated. Could you clarify re XfD and RfA, ie where and what they are? I'm still finding my way around! --EH74DK 07:34, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- XfD(X for Deletion) is where deletion debates occur. I would suggest reading:
- Before entering a debate.
- RfA (Request for Adminship) where editors are voted into admins.
- Feel free to jump in! If you need any help, just contact me on my talk page and I will be glad to help! --wpktsfs 07:56, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 18th, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 25 | 18 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:30, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
My editor review
I am currently doing an editor review; Wikipedia:Editor review/Haggawaga - Oegawagga. Care to review me? I'd like to see other wikipedians' thoughts on me as an editor. -)-(-H- (|-|) -O-)-(- 12:24, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Merci :D
Merci beaucoup pour le "review". :D Nat Tang talk to me! | Check on my contributions!|Email Me! 23:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Votre Français, ce n'est pas mal...quelle province est votre famille de? (btw...just some friendly advice, not to critize you or anything, when you want to say "I speak a bit of French" it should be "Je parle un peu de Français".) Anyhoo, have fun editing and i'll cya around. :D Nat Tang talk to me! | Check on my contributions!|Email Me! 22:10, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Editor Review Mike33 Editor review
C'est C'est tout bon. Veuillez prendre votre temps, vous n'ont pas besoin d'être rapides ;-) . Je vous espère que vous avez eu une bonne nuit et remercie et tres mercie de votre assistence. Mike33 04:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC) (My french isn't so good but thanks. Please dont worry about how long it takes. Hope u had a greap sleep and thanks for all your help) Mike33 04:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Editor Review
Thanks a lot for the review. Monkeyblue 06:40, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Editor Review
Hello, thank you for doing my editor review. I really apreciate your feedback; I hope you don't mind a couple of questions... First of all, why would people oppose an RfA if the person simply wanted to be an admin? That would be the whole reason for going to RfA in my opinion. Would it be a problem later on down the road for me to have an un-neutral userpage, or would people judge by number/quality of edits? Thank you so much for your time and help. I really appreciate the advice/comments. Peace, Neranei 09:02, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Your welcome! I would be glad to answer your questions as best as I can. See oppose 16, Oppose 4.5 (removed) and oppose 10 and this. For some odd reason (I don't agree with it) many editors do not trust, or weigh people who "want" to become admins with the same weight as those who are simply nominated by chance. If that explains it, it's hard to get a grasp on it, (spending time at RfA and learning about the process might help). Many editors look at edit count, however, many editors feel that editcountitis should be avoided at all cost. While many will look at the quality of your edits, but many will be uncomfortable with an editor who shows their beliefs in their editing (not saying you do). I would remove some particularly "controversial" userboxes, particularly the one with the flag burning. It's not to say that I don't agree with it (I won't say if I do or don't) but rather that some users feel that an editor that shows neutrality in their userpage will automatically put POV in their edits, regardless of if they remotely show any trace of POV. If you do plan on becoming an admin, please dive into the experience at RfA. Moreover, here is your reading homework for tonight: advice. I hope this has helped you, and if you have any more questions, please do not hesitate to continue this conversation. Wishes, wpktsfs 15:56, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the editor review, It did help quite a lot. GreaterWikiholic 00:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
editor review - comments
What I'm trying to do is find an understanding of HO knowledge of copyright(something he is having a lot of problems with atm), the answer to the question will form the basis for a follow up question. Please remove your query from the page as the question is directed at HO, it'll be more beneficial to the process to enable him answer without your input. Gnangarra 02:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
My Editor Review
Thank you for the review on my Editor Review - I did post an additional response to the question you inquired I expand upon. Again, thank you. --Ozgod 03:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
editor review - comments
What I'm trying to do is find an understanding of HO knowledge of copyright(something he is having a lot of problems with atm), the answer to the question will form the basis for a follow up question. Please remove your query from the page as the question is directed at HO, it'll be more beneficial to the process to enable him answer without your input. Gnangarra 02:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yep, I will strike the comment, I wont remove it however. Moreover, I think the point was already brought up in his editor review by the editor that reviewed before me. I think the point will get across better if you just put it in review form, but thats just my opinion. Please do not take offense to my questioning of your question, I just was not sure what point you were trying to convey. Wishes, wpktsfs 02:52, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Please understand that I was not trying to answer the question for the editor, I was simply trying to clarify and answer my own question. As a note, I generally try not to delete comments from a review or talk page, I try to strike them instead, which is why I did not remove the comment. I am sorry that you are choosing to no longer participate in HO's editor review, as I do think that copyright is something that he needs to be aware of. I do not feel your question was unimportant, nor was I trying to answer it, I was just confused. Please accept my sincere apologies. Cheers, wpktsfs 03:44, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry Wpktsfs but I reverted your responses to the question on HO's editor review because it is a very important question, particularly in light of the foundation's recent position on images and I think HO should have the opportunity to respond without any hints or chatter. Editors submit themselves for review because they want to have the opportunity to get feedback from other editors. You responding to questions directed to someone who has put themselves forward for review defeats the whole point of the review. If HO agrees with you and doesn't understand the question, then please let him say that for himself. Sarah 04:01, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- No problems, I understand. I'm just concerned about his attitude to uploading copyright images and images of art work that he then licenses as PD-self, claiming that he is the creator of the original work. So I think it is important that he respond to Gnang's question about creating copies of original art work, so we can maybe help him to understand the licensing requirements and issues, both legal and WP policy. Anyway, thanks for your understanding. All the best, Sarah 05:05, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Response to your response :P
C'était mon plaisir :D Nat Tang talk to me! | Check on my contributions!|Email Me! 04:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Avant que j'oublie, VIVE LE QUÉBEC...lol :P Nat Tang talk to me! | Check on my contributions!|Email Me! 04:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Editor Review Comments
Thanks so much for answering all of my questions; I have one more. You don't have to answer unless you want to, I hope I'm not taking too much of your time. When do you think I could enter RfA? (Either in terms of time or achievements.) Oh yes, and how did you get that little Editr Review box at the top of your talk page? By the way, I did read the discussion you marked as advice. People made some very interesting points... I probably should take down the particularly controversial userboxes. Again, thank you for your time, and very helpful advice. Cheers, Neranei 13:04, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- I am always open for questions. There is no set time or magic number to enter an RfA, however, for whatever reason, many newcomer RfAs get beat down. If you are interested in becoming an admin, I would suggest you keep making edits in the mainspace and check this out. Currently, I do not advise you to put yourself up for RfA, just my opinion, however, the future does look bright, and I think you should continue your work here. Also, {{Editor review|user name}} is the code for the template.--wpktsfs 22:07, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you X 100
 Hmmmm, tough one this one. One could call it trolling for some praise, but I don't think we should do that in this case. Can I suggest leaving a review for him, you know, the suck up one so we can try and keep him on the project. I'd do it, but my time is limited for a few days. What you could do is talk to him on his talk page and see what the matter is? Sounds OK? Ryan Postlethwaite 21:05, 22 June 2007 (UTC) QuestionDoy you think I'm ready to become an admin now? Please be honest, and put your response here. Thanks, Meldshal42 22:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC) Thank youI really appreciate your time, advice, effort, and template. Thank you! Neranei 23:49, 23 June 2007 (UTC) Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotSuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping. If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker. P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 21:16, 25 June 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for June 25th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:17, 26 June 2007 (UTC) |
||||||||||||||||