| Revision as of 19:08, 9 December 2007 editCaulde (talk | contribs)21,354 edits →AFD: align further to right.← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:50, 9 December 2007 edit undoRandom832 (talk | contribs)12,146 edits →AFD: +Next edit → | ||
| Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
| ::Yes, true, I am realizing this myself, that no matter what you say or do you are trapped. I was wondering if the whole thing was devised as a trap to maximize embarrassment to all parties involved. The irony is that you and Daniel Brandt are now linked as being on the same side of the issue, and your article is heading to the top of the list in the number of deletion attempts, with his at the top. The person who is spearheading the Brandt, and your deletion, can keep referring to your ''ex parte'' communication as your approval, and or instigation of the deletion process. A good number of the delete votes are because you are requesting the deletion, whether it is correct or not. --] (]) 00:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC) | ::Yes, true, I am realizing this myself, that no matter what you say or do you are trapped. I was wondering if the whole thing was devised as a trap to maximize embarrassment to all parties involved. The irony is that you and Daniel Brandt are now linked as being on the same side of the issue, and your article is heading to the top of the list in the number of deletion attempts, with his at the top. The person who is spearheading the Brandt, and your deletion, can keep referring to your ''ex parte'' communication as your approval, and or instigation of the deletion process. A good number of the delete votes are because you are requesting the deletion, whether it is correct or not. --] (]) 00:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :::It was deleted by Mercury, see AFD. But has since been recreated as a redirect to Wikia, upon discussion at ]. — ] <sub>].]</sub> 19:08, 9 December 2007 (UTC) | :::It was deleted by Mercury, see AFD. But has since been recreated as a redirect to Wikia, upon discussion at ]. — ] <sub>].]</sub> 19:08, 9 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
| Do you, in fact, want it deleted? Someone at the AFD said you'd made a statement, but I can't find it, and suggests you were never in contact with Durova. (which makes the existing AFD a bad-faith nomination regardless). Do you want the article deleted or not? —] 21:50, 9 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:50, 9 December 2007
|
Thursday 26 December 20:15 UTC Welcome to my talk page. |
Thank you
Just a little message to say thanks for changing my username PhilB ~ /C 10:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
CHU
Hi Angela. I see you've been active recently changing and not changing appropriate username at the changing username page. Could you archive, this thread, the archiving bot seems to have missed it out. (But I'm not sure whether that's because there's no, yes or no comment on the thread or just a bot malfunction). Thanks. Best, Rudget zŋ 19:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Facebook about to be deleted
Hi, as one of the people with a picture on Misplaced Pages:Facebook, figured you might be interested in knowing that it is up for deletion at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Images of Wikipedians (2nd nomination). - Ta bu shi da yu 02:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Consensus vs. voting on local Misplaced Pages
Hello Angela,
We're trying to settle a bit of a dispute on some basic Misplaced Pages principles on the Romanian Misplaced Pages, and we're looking for some representative outside input. Please direct me to the right person I should talk to. The issue is exposed on Meta.
Thank you,
Gutza 21:24, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Classification of admins
Hi Angela. Please consider adding your admin username to the growing list at Classification of admins. Best! -- Jreferee t/c 23:01, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Angela and Jreferee. Why would a User page be the spot to classify oneself? Thanks in advance for any information and apologies for the question from another user. -Susanlesch (talk) 07:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- It's not. It was just spam sent to all admins. Angela. 13:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
ArbCom voting
Hi Angela, thanks for voting on my candidacy. I was wondering, is this in the wrong section? Thanks. --Deskana (talk) 10:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- I see you fixed it, never mind. Thanks again. --Deskana (talk) 11:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
AFD
I'm not sure if you're already aware, but your page on the mainspace is up for deletion. Regards, — Rudget contributions 19:35, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Your lack of participation in the deletion Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Angela Beesley (7th nom) is giving the appearance of your tacit approval of the deletion. The person proposing the deletion is claiming that he is acting at your behest by way of private communications. It would be best if you responded with a posting, to clear it up. Cheers. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 21:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Right... but my participation gets me accused of COI and then people start voting "keep" because they object to the fact I'm voting on it. Since I can't win either way, I'd rather just stay out of it. Angela. 00:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, true, I am realizing this myself, that no matter what you say or do you are trapped. I was wondering if the whole thing was devised as a trap to maximize embarrassment to all parties involved. The irony is that you and Daniel Brandt are now linked as being on the same side of the issue, and your article is heading to the top of the list in the number of deletion attempts, with his at the top. The person who is spearheading the Brandt, and your deletion, can keep referring to your ex parte communication as your approval, and or instigation of the deletion process. A good number of the delete votes are because you are requesting the deletion, whether it is correct or not. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 00:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- It was deleted by Mercury, see AFD. But has since been recreated as a redirect to Wikia, upon discussion at the admin noticeboard. — Rudget speak.work 19:08, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, true, I am realizing this myself, that no matter what you say or do you are trapped. I was wondering if the whole thing was devised as a trap to maximize embarrassment to all parties involved. The irony is that you and Daniel Brandt are now linked as being on the same side of the issue, and your article is heading to the top of the list in the number of deletion attempts, with his at the top. The person who is spearheading the Brandt, and your deletion, can keep referring to your ex parte communication as your approval, and or instigation of the deletion process. A good number of the delete votes are because you are requesting the deletion, whether it is correct or not. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 00:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Do you, in fact, want it deleted? Someone at the AFD said you'd made a statement, but I can't find it, and suggests you were never in contact with Durova. (which makes the existing AFD a bad-faith nomination regardless). Do you want the article deleted or not? —Random832 21:50, 9 December 2007 (UTC)