| Revision as of 02:39, 27 July 2005 view sourceWoohookitty (talk | contribs)Administrators611,225 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 02:58, 28 December 2006 view source Kurykh (talk | contribs)Administrators41,205 edits changed to redirect | ||
| (611 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] | |||
| == Comments == | |||
| # | |||
| # | |||
| # | |||
| == re:nomination == | |||
| No, if i thought i had a chance to be fairly looked at on the basis of my contributions to this site rather than my opinions of the, lack of standards for adminship, lack of accountability with the admins, my decision not to submit to arbitarity policies made on the fly, and how the current administration of the site seems to be more concerned with the idea of protecting their own backs then the protection of accuracy and neutrality of information provided and a policy of basic appeasement towards vandalism and people that are here to promote an agenda either from the right or the left in which many admins would rather ignore if it does not effect them or interject them selves in on one side or the other, among other things. I find the RFA not a election, for that is what it is, based on the qualifications of a user but no more then a popularity contest. --] | ] 23:01, 20 July 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| I've responded to the claims of copyvio in ], and, as you seemed to be involved with this page, I thought you ought to know. Thanks for your work on Misplaced Pages! ] 00:12, 22 July 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :Ah! Thank you for your explanation!(Random bystanders, see ]) Now I understand what you meant on in the edit summary when you talked about looking all the way through the page. The reason I relisted it was that a copyright notice (at least in ] signatories) is not required for something to be under copyright, and inelibble for inclusion into Misplaced Pages. Here are some pages to review in regards to this: ], ], ]. After reading those pages, let me know if you still think the copied text is allowable, or if you have any other questions. Thanks for responding so quickly! (Also copied on my talk page) ] 00:43, 22 July 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :I've made a sorted, uniqed list of ]'s contributions, at ](which I use as a sort of sandbox) - I would delight in any help looking through it. I've also told him about the things you suggested. ] 02:08, 22 July 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == thank you for your opinion on my RfA == | |||
| Hello, just a quick note to say thank you for voting, even though you were not convinced of my experience. "''From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.''" (] 12:48, ]) Never was a truer word spoken. I feel empowered, yes, but not in the "oooh cool delete button!" way I was kind of expecting. Already I feel the weight of the responsibility I have now been entrusted with, a weight that will no doubt reduce given time. Perhaps I am ready for it, or perhaps, as you say, I am not. I hope that in the coming weeks and months I can prove you wrong, but no matter what I thank you for giving your honest opinion, it is really important to me. Thank you. :) ]<sup>]</sup> 11:06, 22 July 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==Vfd on Islamic Term== | |||
| Actually the vote was 4 for delete, 1 for keep and we also 3 people who mention redirects, but only 2 actually mention redirect in the vote. That is not a vote for a delete and redirect. If you want to make it a redirect, that's your perogative, but I am not changing the vote. You can't assume that the deletes want it redirected. In fact, one of the deletes said that it should NOT be redirected. --] 02:39, 27 July 2005 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 02:58, 28 December 2006
Redirect to: