| Revision as of 22:16, 7 September 2007 view sourceEdison (talk | contribs)Administrators53,890 edits →Thanks!: add code to close the box← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:56, 9 September 2007 view source Ugen64 (talk | contribs)15,266 edits →Thanks!Next edit → | ||
| Line 101: | Line 101: | ||
| ] 15:18, 7 September 2007 (UTC) | ] 15:18, 7 September 2007 (UTC) | ||
| |} | |} | ||
| ==Talk page unprotection== | |||
| Someone seems to be taking themselves too seriously - and it's not the IP. Honestly, protecting a talk page for such minor incidents is in poor taste. If the gloating/whatever offends you, then don't look at it. I see no violation of policy, and it must be something exceptional in order to protect a user talk page without an obvious policy violation. ] 04:56, 9 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 04:56, 9 September 2007
User:Krimpet/header I prefer to keep all correspondence in the same place; if you leave me a message here, I will respond here. If I post a message on your talk page, please reply there rather than here. Thank you!
1/2/2007 - 5/5/2007 | 5/5/2007 - 6/18/2007 | 6/19/2007 - 7/23/2007 | 7/24/2007 - 8/24/2007 | 8/22/2007 - present
USRD Newsletter - Issue 12
|
|
|
| The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||
| Volume 1, Issue 12 • September 1, 2007 • About the Newsletter | ||
|
|
|
| Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS | ||
- Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot 22:21, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Let's discuss your block
I think it would be a good idea for us to discuss the block you put on me. I don't think it was justified, and I think you could have taken another approach. (I don't think I took the right approach either, although I was trying.) Would you discuss the matter with me, civillly, on my talk page? I'm interested in a civil, unemotional discussion.Noroton 00:03, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response. I've replied at User talk:Noroton#Regarding your prior block. Noroton 20:09, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- Please respond or tell me you'd rather not. Thanks. Noroton 18:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
I revisited Ryulong's talk page
I revisited that talk page where I asked about the cabal. It seems someone corrupted that link. If you have info on how to set up a cabal please let me know on my talk page: þ. Although that guy Ryulong sort of took away my ganas (will power) to do it. Hey for all I know you can be in on it. But anyway if your not let me know. Lighthead 23:58, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks man... Lighthead 19:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- I have a question does the rect number have to be the same? Lighthead 19:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Song/Wiki Gangsta Rap
Today I was sifting through the songs when I saw that you deleted the forementioned article. Can you give me a better explanation, even though you deleted it a month ago? bibliomaniac15 Two years of trouble and general madness 01:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- Honestly I thought it was a unintelligible mess of nonsense, which had only been edited by its (now-long-inactive) creator almost a year ago, and I do not think it would have survived an MfD. If you want to undelete it, I have no objections. --krimpet⟲ 04:40, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank You
Thank you for looking into my autoblock and removing it. I'm glad you gave it some thought, and I appreciate your positive evaluation of my actions. I love my brothers, but sometimes they can be pretty ridiculous. Again, thank you for your help. Also, a general question about talk page policies - would it be inappropriate to remove the block template and whatnot from my talk page? It's kind of embarrassing. Just let me know if it's supposed to stay and I'll leave it there. Thanks again.. Glad to be getting back to contributing normally. bwowen talk•contribs 06:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, and it's funny to note that today is the one year anniversary of the creation of my account. Go figure that today of all days I would get caught up in a messy explosion of vandalism from an IP address related to my own. Haha. Thanks again. bwowen talk•contribs 06:08, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- No problem, you can gladly remove the section from your talk -- it's understandable why you got caught in that autoblock, and as a positive contributor to our project there's no reason for your page to be forever branded with an unblock request like that. =) And a happy first wiki-anniversary! --krimpet⟲ 06:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Krimpet, could you please take a look at my block and see if it is still active? I went to bed after our exchange last night and when I got up I couldn't edit any more. Now I'm at the university library and can edit, which seems to suggest that my IP range has been blocked or some such business. Can you have a look at this for me? Thank you, bwowen talk•contribs 17:03, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- I think that finally did it!! Thank you! =] Is it okay if I remove the declined template? It says not to, but considering it was accepted after the fact.. Just want to make sure. Thank you for following me so closely and helping me out... This was so stressful. I appreciate it so much!! bwowen talk•contribs 01:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Krimpet, could you please take a look at my block and see if it is still active? I went to bed after our exchange last night and when I got up I couldn't edit any more. Now I'm at the university library and can edit, which seems to suggest that my IP range has been blocked or some such business. Can you have a look at this for me? Thank you, bwowen talk•contribs 17:03, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- No problem, you can gladly remove the section from your talk -- it's understandable why you got caught in that autoblock, and as a positive contributor to our project there's no reason for your page to be forever branded with an unblock request like that. =) And a happy first wiki-anniversary! --krimpet⟲ 06:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Joestella
I invite you to review my latest post on his talk page - he may have been caught out :-) Timeshift 04:01, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- I was in the middle of declining his unblock request when I got your message. =) --krimpet⟲ 04:08, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Question on Sock report
Although I am not involved in Chrisjnelson's recent discussions, he and I have had a number of run-ins for reasons I'll leave for you to figure out. Recently, during his block, another user has engaged in some alerting edits. I have engaged him briefly and am of the opinion that it could be a meatpuppet or sock. This user then showed up on the ArbCom evidence page despite no notification or request (in an attempt to raise issues on my behavior). I would like to explore this users identity but i don't want to fuel the fire either. Any suggestions? JmFangio| ►Chat 04:21, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- I would suggest filing a checkuser request with the evidence you have gathered, so that a checkuser can confirm for sure whether the user is a sockpuppet and take the necessary corrective action. --krimpet⟲ 04:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds good, if it comes back negative, it is still possible that this is a meatpuppet. Thanks for your advice. JmFangio| ►Chat 04:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- I filed and made note of this conversation - here is the link. be well. JmFangio| ►Chat 04:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Ankush 135
Have requested my block for arbitration —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.224.91.131 (talk) 19:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Guess should have added it http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Involved_parties —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.224.101.109 (talk) 20:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Zeitgeist the Movie
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Zeitgeist the Movie. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --Thoric 07:13, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks!
|
My RFA | |
| I thank you for participating in my successful request for adminship, which ended with 60 supports, no opposes, no neutrals, and one abstain. |
Talk page unprotection
Someone seems to be taking themselves too seriously - and it's not the IP. Honestly, protecting a talk page for such minor incidents is in poor taste. If the gloating/whatever offends you, then don't look at it. I see no violation of policy, and it must be something exceptional in order to protect a user talk page without an obvious policy violation. ugen64 04:56, 9 September 2007 (UTC)