User talk:Xoloz/archive5

Bounty

You might have to pay up. (Well, at least some of it) National Teacher of the Year is being expanded. Thanks WP:BOUNTY! See ya. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 19:44, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nah... while I immensely appreciate the offer, I just can't. Sorry. But since you are feeling stressed (etc.) with WP, is there anything I can do to help ya out? --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 16:35, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I am just struggling with Wikipedia currently. There is a lot of stuff here that I don't particularly care for, and some things that I am not sure about yet. I can't kick the habit, but sometimes feel bad doing it. I don't really know how to explain without going into page-long diatribes filled with details and I don't really want to do that either. Just know that whatever happens, I am grateful that you would consider me worthy to be an Admin. Cheers. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 17:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe... "Less than hateful". I just think some people take their hatred for the dude too far. I couldn't care less if people don't like him, but some don't even give him a fair shake it seems. I don't think he's really that good of a President, but think we should at least respect the guy. Oh well, to each his own, I suppose. "Good Catholic"... heh, if you only knew. ;-) But seriously, I do respect the Catholic Faith and its viewpoints. I didn't mean to make it sound dire, and for that I apologise. I just meant, if you end up leaving, or if I end up leaving, or some other crazy thing happens... thanks. See you around. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 18:23, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think I am very well aware of how many people come to hate someone like Bush (of course you may have different, personal reasons, and there's no requirement to share), but commend you for not allowing your POV to destroy your editing skills. I know it can be very hard to edit topics where POV is involved, as I tend to haunt the American politics articles. I have seen some very strong POV that won't allow editors to contribute properly, and think it very honourable for you to realise that you might not be able to stay objective around Bush, and avoid editing it. I wish more people, on many topics, would notice that their POV has taken away their ability to do what we are set to do: build an encyclopedia. Okay, back to work for me. See ya. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 18:42, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Hampshire Supreme Court is looking good. I went through and spot graded all of the U.S. State Supreme Court articles, and found 15 missing articles. If you want my full grading, just ask and I'll be glad to give them to you. We're gonna try and make you poor. :-) --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 00:52, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It may be hard to read, but here is how it goes, AL—F, AK—A-, AZ—0, AR—0, CA—A-, CO—0, CT—D-, DE—B-, FL—B, GA—F, HI—C, ID—0, IL—F, IN—D, IA—D-, KS—0, KY—D+, LA—0, ME—D, MD—A, MA—B-, MI—D+, MN—C, MS—D-, MO—D, MT—0, NE—0, NV—C, NH—A+, NJ—C+, NM—0, NY—C, NC—C, ND—C-, OH—B+, OK—C, OR—C, PA—B, RI—0, SC—0, SD—B+, TN—B+, TX—C+, UT—C-, VT—0, VA—D+, WA—D-, WV—C-, WI—B-, WY—D

"0"s represent missing articles. Since my initial brief run through, I have tweaked some of them, so the grades might not really relfect their true quality, therefore take these grades with a caveat. (Plus I graded each one in about 20 seconds. :-))See Category:State supreme courts for the list of the actual articles. See ya. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 02:00, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

That is much appreciated! I'll try to keep it up, and thank you! Yours, >Radiant< 00:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Thanks!

Okay, this is perhaps a bit overdue, but thank-you for your support in my recent RfA! I passed with a final ~~vote count~~ consensus of (82/1/0), which was a lot of support that I really appreciate. I'll try to live up to the expectations; and on that note, if there's ever something I do wrong (or don't do right), please spit in my general direction. Cheers! --P e ruvianLlama^(spit) 05:31, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Femto

At Requests for adminship/Femto I wrote "over the past 6 months" in my nomination, but I made a mistake and should have written "over the past year and 6 months". I apologize for my mistake. --unforgettableid | talk to me 06:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Joke's RfA

Hi Xoloz, thanks for voting in my (successful) RfA. All the voters who voted neutral or oppose had the same criticism – lack of involvement in the Wikipedia namespace. This is nice, because it is a weakness that I can endeavor to fix. Although I don't think I have the disposition or diligence to be actively involved with, say, VfD, I've recently started to participate in the Featured Article discussions and will start participating in some policy discussions now that I am starting to grasp the way the project runs. –Joke 16:50, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship Vote

I want to sincerely thank you for voting on my adminship nomination. Whenever I mess up, please let me know. I want to learn from my mistakes so they don't become patterns. Superm401 - Talk 04:56, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Deletion review#List of interesting or unusual_place_names

Further to your views on the undeletion, you may be interested that the page was relisted on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of interesting or unusual place names (2nd nomination). Regards--A Y Arktos 10:43, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to look into the 2nd Wikipedia:Deletion_review#List_of_interesting_or_unusual_place_names. It appears that the "c. 25 for Overturn/Relist and c. 14 for endorse" outcome of the first wasn't clear. -- User:Docu

My RfA

Thank you
Hello Xoloz, and thank you for your support in my request for adminship! It passed with a final count of 63/4/3. I was pleasantly surprised with your vote as you have said you're conservative at RfA (and by the way, I know what it's like to be a liberal in a right-wing zone!) I am honoured by the community support and pledge to serve the project as best as I can. CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 16:38, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFA/Quarl

Hi Xoloz, thanks for your supportive comments in my RFA, which succeeded. If I can ever improve or help in any way, please let me know! :) —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-02-16 11:30Z

RFA Thanks!

Thank you!
Hello Xoloz/archive5, and thank you for your support in my request for adminship! It passed with a final count of 98/2/0. If there is anything I can do to help you, please leave me a message on my talk page! -- xaosflux ^Talk

Thank you!

Thank you very much for your support during my recent Admin election, I appreciate the trust that you have put in me. Please contact me if you have any questions, comments or concerns regarding my work as an admin.

Kind Regards, Elf-friend 07:42, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thank you for your support of my request for adminship. I'm delighted that the RfA ultimately succeeded with a final consensus of 52/1/0, so I am now an administrator. If you ever have any comments regarding my editing, or I can help you at any point in the future, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Again, thank you!

_└^UkPaolo/_talk^┐ 10:38, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Djr xi's RFA

I'm not entirely sure why you voted weak oppose on Djr xi's RFA, but I was wondering if I could trouble you to reconsider given the recent withdrawl of LV's opposition. Thanks for your time! —Locke Cole • t • c 10:59, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bittersweet irony!

Greetings,

This has nothing to do with my weak oppose on your RfA (I'll be happy to support next time, as I said.) Having skimmed your political opinions, I find it amusing that you support the independence of Tibet and Kurdistan, but oppose (tongue-in-cheek, I hope) the American Rebellion. How adorable! :) Best wishes, Xoloz 18:23, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Meh - one of the joys of being British! Just think what the world would be like today France hadn't cost us the War of Independence... lol! DJR (Talk) 18:32, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Thank you for supporting me in my successful RFA. The admin tools will definitely be useful for dealing with vandalism more swiftly. Please drop a note on my talk page, should you have questions about any of my actions. --Aude (talk | contribs) 02:41, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thanks for voting!

Although this is a bit late in coming, I want to thank you for voting (no matter what your vote was) in my recent request for adminship. You might be aware that it did not pass due to a lack of consensus. The final tally was 21/9/10. I think I will try again this spring or summer after I have gained a bit more experience and met a few more fellow editors. Thanks again!

--Matth e wUND^(talk) 05:37, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi Xoloz, I hope you return. I understand your frustration, believe me; there have been some ugly cultural developments in Wikipedia. That's why we need you all the more! Take a break, if necessary, but please come back. Babajobu 19:22, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

With apologies for the impersonal AWB-ness of the message... Thanks for your support on my recent request for adminship. It passed at 91/1/0, and I hope I can continue to deserve the community's trust. Let me know if there's anything I can do to help you, and if I make a mistake be sure to tell me. My talk page is always open. (ESkog)^(Talk) 02:23, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't

If exemplary and thoughtful people like you can be driven off, then Wikipedia is doomed.

The day you leave is a sad day for Wikipedia.

Take a break, and come back. Please.

Regards. LordViD 13:04, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sam Spade

User_talk:Sam_Spade#Adminship_and_you

Don't make this guy an admin.. I'm already irked by his existance. I'm hand-editing the Systema topic because he decided to merge other, very distinct, articles without discussion. See Talk:Systema. -- Sy / ^(talk) 16:12, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The more things change. . .

. . . the more they stay the same. I came by to thank you for the farewell notice you dropped on my talk page sometime ago, and I find that yet another contributer is thinking of leaving because of anxiety, frustration, or whatever the case may be. It seems that this sort of thing was happening when I left, and I regret that it continues. If you're still around, feel free to drop me a note. In any case, best wishes. --Scimitar 21:24, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Thank you for supporting my successful request for adminship. I'll try to put the admin tools to good and responsible use. If I do anything wrong you know where to find me. Raven4x4x 07:26, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting on my RfA, it passed with a final tally of 68/0/0 so I'm now an administrator. If there's anything I can do to help, you feel I've done something wrong, or there's just something you want to tell, don't hesitate to use my talk page. Thanks, and please don't leave. - Bobet 10:33, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/White race (history)

Hey Xoloz, there's a mini-controversy going on here- I was hoping you could review what I've said given that you have called me "good-natured", and from your perspective of having some African American heritage, as you said on your userpage. And yes, I see you're taking somewhat of a break lately, hope to see you back in full capacity soon. CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 03:02, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to see you back :)

That is all. --Syrthiss 14:04, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA/Christopherlin

Thank you for taking the time to vote in my recent RfA. It closed (22/11/8). I do see your point about not having evidence, but once I get a better grip on "the process", I'll be up again. I hope to have your support then. --Christopherlin 17:35, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re : Nomination for adminship for (aeropagitica)

Hello! Thank you for taking the time to vote for me in my recent request for adminship It ended successfully with a final score of (40/10/5). I value all of the contributions made during the process and I will take a special note of the constructive criticism regarding interacting with users in the user talk space. If you have questions or requests, please leave a message. (aeropagitica) 17:32, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Confrontation Clause...Questions

i see that you had made a comment on the ratification of the US Constitution, and was curious as to your thoughts regarding the following questions.

in criminal cases - what we learn is we have the right to confront. i believe the actual sentence reads - 'to be confronted'. with todays technology, what if a defendant could confront, through close circuit television, but was not confronted by a physical appearance. is the physical appearance regarding jury trials and criminal cases tradition or is it required? and what if a jury really had to base its conclusion upon the facts only?--Cservices 09:21, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to jump in a bit -- while I'm no fan of Justice Scalia's, he goes through the Clause's history and why it is necessary fairly well in his opinion Crawford v. Washington. That might be a good starting point if you want to take a look. --Nlu (talk) 09:40, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answered at questioner's talk page. Xoloz 14:54, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Xoloz: thank you for your quick response. and to answer your question. yes i am researching this issue, actually for myself(school project). for Nlu i am familiar with Crawford v Washington. But my question really lies in the erasing of subconscious prejudice against a defendant by a jury based on physical appearance such as ethnicity. if a defendant is not required "to be confronted" but has the right "to confront" is the public display of the defendant tradition or a right of the trier of fact?

Xoloz: yes, i really love wikipedia! thanks to everyone who makes it possible.--Cservices 17:42, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More on Confrontation Clause

thank you.

all of your input is greatly appreciated.--Cservices 22:14, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spiked

Thanks for the input on Google. I wasn't aware of it. Re; the editor who commented on the logline with it's "Different". If that was a little West Coast irony he needs to check the Gerald Bull entry and then see if Bull's balllistics has been developed much since his death or taken up in fiction. A more cost effective launcher for unmanned spacecraft might take away a few bucks away from some California areospace concerns but consider the science for a moment. To your excellent point re. the notion of a self-published book like Spiked being popularly googled. Beck may not be Balzac, who you'll remember owned his own printing press, but his readers seem to endorse if their comments at various on-line booksellers are to be believed. American Library Association interview appears to me more impartial source than much consumer media publicity generated by commercial interest groups. National Union of Journalists' award supports credentials for a book with journalist protagonists. As for the editor's comment "Malundi also keeps removing tags requesting cleanup", sorry, but that I believe that was only once, and only after I supplied the request for a citation. By all means clean up, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. If you have time please see if the evidence suggests support for nomination. Malundi 8 March 2006

Thanks

This user thinks it is ironic that thanks for supporting Cyde's successful RFA came in the form of a userbox.

Here's a userbox for you. --Cyde Weys 04:50, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That content...

...created at User:Xoloz/sed. Thats what I believe was afd'ed. There was more recent content than that, but it was two lines and non-sensy (a two line summary of that article). Hope that helps. --Syrthiss 16:57, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]