User talk:Tonywalton: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 00:42, 25 February 2008 editVartanM (talk \| contribs)6,453 edits →Thanks: last reply. I promise :)← Previous edit		Revision as of 02:39, 25 February 2008 edit undoArsenic99 (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users998 edits →What are you talking about?Next edit →
Line 136:		Line 136:

	Dear Arsenic, I left comments because my wrong addition was going to effect their vote. Yours on the other hand was canvassing. I'm sure you didn't know about it, thats why I'm telling you, so next time you will know. Regards. ] (]) 00:13, 25 February 2008 (UTC)		Dear Arsenic, I left comments because my wrong addition was going to effect their vote. Yours on the other hand was canvassing. I'm sure you didn't know about it, thats why I'm telling you, so next time you will know. Regards. ] (]) 00:13, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
			:Next time I will write the messages in English to show you that I wasn't influencing their decision but simply informing them, I'll be more cautious next time so thanks for pointing it out. I am still learning Turkish and I wanted the practice. But you on the other hand, have altered MY CfD to make me look like a Holocaust denier, this was very wrong of you, and I hope you will be apologizing to me. You are welcome to make your own CfD entry about your Holocaust Denial. ] ] 02:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:39, 25 February 2008

This is Tonywalton's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

In fact the box above lies. Undated sections are archived here.

Archives

This is Tonywalton's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Elonka 3

Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate, that landed on WP:100! I paid close attention to everything that was said, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I'm taking things slowly for now, partially because of the holidays and all the off-wiki distractions. :) I'm also working my way through the Misplaced Pages:New admin school and double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, but I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are several more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status! Thanks again, and have a great new year, --El on ka 05:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Yup, absolutely right on "getting the broom out of the closet." To do adminship right, often requires some time spent doing research before that page-protect or user-block, and often I just won't have the time or attention bandwidth to do that. More often than not, I just manage to get on Misplaced Pages to do some disambig cleanups. However, for those times now that I will have time to do something admin-related, at least I'll now have the tools and can help out! --El on ka 16:50, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

London Meetup - January 12, 2008

Hi! There's going to be a London Misplaced Pages Meetup coming Saturday January 12, 2008. If you are interested in coming along take part in the discussion over at Misplaced Pages:Meetup/London7. The discussion is going on until tomorrow evening and the official location and time will be published at the same page late Thursday or early Friday. Hope to see you Saturday, Poeloq (talk) 02:23, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

A request for your consideration regarding CAT:AOTR

Hello fellow Misplaced Pages administrators open to recall category member!
I am leaving you this message because recent events have given me concern. When Aaron Brenneman and I, and others, first developed this category well over a year ago, we visualized it as a simple idea. A low hassle, low bureaucracy process. We also visualized it as a process that people would come to trust, in fact as a way of increasing trust in those admins who chose to subscribe to the notion of recall. The very informal approach to who is qualified to recall, what happens during it, and the process in general were all part of that approach. But recent events have suggested that this low structure approach may not be entirely effective. More than one of the recent recalls we have seen have been marred by controversy around what was going to happen, and when. Worse, they were marred by some folk having the perception, rightly or wrongly, that the admin being recalled was trying to change the rules, avoid the process, or in other ways somehow go back on their word. This is bad. It's bad for you the admin, bad for the trust in the process, and bad for the community as a whole. I think a way to address this issue is to increase the predictability of the process in advance. I have tried to do that for myself. In my User:Lar/Accountability page, I have given pretty concrete definitions of the criteria for recall, and of the choices I can make, and of the process for the petition, and of the process for other choices I might make (the modified RfC or the RfAr). I think it would be very helpful if other admins who have voluntarily made themselves subject to recall went to similar detail. It is not necessary to adopt the exact same conditions, steps, criteria, etc. It's just helpful to have SOME. Those are mine, fashion yours as you see fit, I would not be so presumptuous as to say mine are right for you. In fact I urge you not to just adopt mine, as I do change them from time to time without notice, but instead develop your own. You are very welcome to start with mine if you so wish, though. But do something. If you have not already, I urge you to make your process more concrete, now, while there is no pressure and you can think clearly about what you want. Do it now rather than later, during a recall when folk may not react well to perceived changes in process or commitment. Further, I suggest that after you document your process, that you give a reference to it for the benefit of other admins who may want to see what others have done. List it in this table as a resource for the benefit of all. If you use someone else's by reference rather than copy, I suggest you might want to do as Cacharoth did, and give a link to a specific version. Do you have to do these things? Not at all. These are suggestions from me, and me alone, and are entirely up to you to embrace or ignore. I just think that doing this now, thinking now, documenting now, will save you trouble later, if you should for whatever reason happen to be recalled. I apologise if this message seems impersonal, but with over 130 members in the category, leaving a personal message for each of you might not have been feasible, and I feel this is important enough to violate social norms a bit. I hope that's OK. Thanks for your time and consideration, and best wishes. Larry Pieniazek NOTE: You are receiving this message because you are listed in the Misplaced Pages administrators open to recall category. This is a voluntary category, and you should not be in it if you do not want to be. If you did not list yourself, you may want to review the change records to determine who added you, and ask them why they added you.

Hello fellow Misplaced Pages administrators open to recall category member!

I am leaving you this message because recent events have given me concern. When Aaron Brenneman and I, and others, first developed this category well over a year ago, we visualized it as a simple idea. A low hassle, low bureaucracy process. We also visualized it as a process that people would come to trust, in fact as a way of increasing trust in those admins who chose to subscribe to the notion of recall. The very informal approach to who is qualified to recall, what happens during it, and the process in general were all part of that approach.

But recent events have suggested that this low structure approach may not be entirely effective. More than one of the recent recalls we have seen have been marred by controversy around what was going to happen, and when. Worse, they were marred by some folk having the perception, rightly or wrongly, that the admin being recalled was trying to change the rules, avoid the process, or in other ways somehow go back on their word. This is bad. It's bad for you the admin, bad for the trust in the process, and bad for the community as a whole.

I think a way to address this issue is to increase the predictability of the process in advance. I have tried to do that for myself. In my User:Lar/Accountability page, I have given pretty concrete definitions of the criteria for recall, and of the choices I can make, and of the process for the petition, and of the process for other choices I might make (the modified RfC or the RfAr). I think it would be very helpful if other admins who have voluntarily made themselves subject to recall went to similar detail. It is not necessary to adopt the exact same conditions, steps, criteria, etc. It's just helpful to have SOME. Those are mine, fashion yours as you see fit, I would not be so presumptuous as to say mine are right for you. In fact I urge you not to just adopt mine, as I do change them from time to time without notice, but instead develop your own. You are very welcome to start with mine if you so wish, though.

But do something. If you have not already, I urge you to make your process more concrete, now, while there is no pressure and you can think clearly about what you want. Do it now rather than later, during a recall when folk may not react well to perceived changes in process or commitment.

Further, I suggest that after you document your process, that you give a reference to it for the benefit of other admins who may want to see what others have done. List it in this table as a resource for the benefit of all. If you use someone else's by reference rather than copy, I suggest you might want to do as Cacharoth did, and give a link to a specific version.

Do you have to do these things? Not at all. These are suggestions from me, and me alone, and are entirely up to you to embrace or ignore. I just think that doing this now, thinking now, documenting now, will save you trouble later, if you should for whatever reason happen to be recalled.

I apologise if this message seems impersonal, but with over 130 members in the category, leaving a personal message for each of you might not have been feasible, and I feel this is important enough to violate social norms a bit. I hope that's OK. Thanks for your time and consideration, and best wishes.

Larry Pieniazek

NOTE: You are receiving this message because you are listed in the Misplaced Pages administrators open to recall category. This is a voluntary category, and you should not be in it if you do not want to be. If you did not list yourself, you may want to review the change records to determine who added you, and ask them why they added you.

...My guinea pigs and the "A"s through "S"s having felt this message was OK to go forward with (or at least not complained bitterly to me about it :) ), today it's the turn of the "T"s through "Z"s (and beyond, apparently)! I'm hoping that more of you chaps/chapettes will point to their own criteria instead of mine :)... it's flattering but a bit scary! :) Also, you may want to check back to the table periodically, someone later than you in the alphabet may have come up with a nifty new idea. ++Lar: t/c 20:54, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Variety Charity logo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Variety Charity logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:06, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Happy Birthday

	Happy Birthday	from the Birthday Committee
Wishing Tonywalton a very happy birthday on behalf of the Misplaced Pages Birthday Committee! Don't forget to save us all a piece of cake!

from the Birthday Committee

Wishing Tonywalton a very happy birthday on behalf of the Misplaced Pages Birthday Committee!

Don't forget to save us all a piece of cake!

--Nadir D Steinmetz 01:33, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

babelfish

true lol and you end up having to google half the words anyway, as it doesn't know them. Merkinsmum 23:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello Tony

First, thank you for your time and I am sorry if you had to get involve in this. It’s been to long though. I am getting very irritated by Megistias edits. E.g. Look what he did today: Claiming Albanian hero Skanderbeg to be Serbian? I mean come on man Serbian?? Last time he said he was Greek now Slav. I tried hard to communicate with him and even trying to make jokes (maybe some jokes was good for us, breaking the ice).I asked him to work together. I even apologize for all the fights that we have been through. What else can I do? "It’s in his blood”. By that I mean his action in Misplaced Pages. He acts like a vandal and pretty much you can see what he is calling me in Greek. All the time in here, he had created edit-wars in articles with a lot of users. I do feel bad and shame to get Future P again involved with this and of course you too. Your advice will be more than welcomed. Thank you.--Taulant23 (talk) 01:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

RLE International

Hi, you recently blocked the user RLE International, but on WP:UAA it says the block is indefinite (diff) and on the user's talk page it says one month (diff). Should it not be indefinite for breaching the username policy?--JD554 (talk) 14:05, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Cheers Tony --JD554 (talk) 14:14, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Hammerandclaw

Hi Tony,

Just a quick note that I appreciate you, and several other admins, stepping in on this. It kind of resolved itself more messily than perhaps necessary, and might have been a little less so if I had known exactly what I was doing from the very beginning. But I did learn alot about how this kind of thing works, and feel much more confident in being able to handle the next one more smoothly. --barneca (talk) 22:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

St. George Defence

My mistake should of used db-move rather then delete. Reason is to move page there and can't because page exists, hence requirement to delete. ChessCreator (talk) 12:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you ChessCreator (talk) 12:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Whoops! Thanks for fixing that :) - Milk's Favorite Cookie 15:46, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome. Tonywalton 15:47, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Greeting

I assume if you're going to be "scrutinising my edits," then you will, assumingly, answer my calls for assistance if and when I call for it, no?--Hammerandclaw (talk) 22:54, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

User:She's So Fine

Go ahead and delete. I set it up long ago and never got around to using it. She's So Fine (talk) 11:28, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Will do. I'm sure you understand why we can't go around deleting userpages just on request by anonymous editors! Tonywalton 11:30, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Certainly. Do I need to nominate the talk page separately, or can you go ahead and zap that also? She's So Fine (talk)

Already done. Tonywalton 11:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks, I wasn't sure how to propose a deletion on a category, but I think I got it right this time: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:User_categories_for_discussion#Category:Armenian_Genocide_deniers

Thanks a lot, I hope you'll support my decision to stop these types of POV categories. — § _Arsenic99_ 17:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

FYI. I added another category for deletion. In case if you want to reconsider your vote. VartanM (talk) 22:53, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Holocaust deniers and Armenian genocide deniers are the same category, if one gets deleted the other can also be deleted. If one is kept the other should also be kept. As much as I hate doing it, and I'm sure it will be kept I will open a new cfd for it. Thanks. VartanM (talk) 23:23, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Again, I apologize that this had to spill into your talkpage, but I couldn't help but answer to his WP:AGF violation. As requested I will leave you talkpage out of this. VartanM (talk) 00:42, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about?

I don't understand what you're talking about, I didn't say anything about holocaust deniers. — § _Arsenic99_ 23:17, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

A friendly note. Please see WP:Canvassing next you nominate something for deletion. VartanM (talk) 23:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I was talking to Arsenic. He mass mailed something in Turkish, which is a clearly canvassing. VartanM (talk) 23:34, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Well just because I messaged some people, doesn't mean Vartan wasn't messaged either, that is why he is here. Next time I won't message others to get their opinions on the issue, I didn't know it wasn't allowed. But I know for sure that Vartan was messaged by his friends, even though it may not have been on wikipedia. All I mailed in Turkish was to a couple people I met before and asked them what they think of this category, nothing in there was a suggestion that they should vote "delete". — § _Arsenic99_ 23:47, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Dear Arsenic, I left comments because my wrong addition was going to effect their vote. Yours on the other hand was canvassing. I'm sure you didn't know about it, thats why I'm telling you, so next time you will know. Regards. VartanM (talk) 00:13, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Next time I will write the messages in English to show you that I wasn't influencing their decision but simply informing them, I'll be more cautious next time so thanks for pointing it out. I am still learning Turkish and I wanted the practice. But you on the other hand, have altered MY CfD to make me look like a Holocaust denier, this was very wrong of you, and I hope you will be apologizing to me. You are welcome to make your own CfD entry about your Holocaust Denial. — § _Arsenic99_ 02:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)