| Revision as of 17:54, 5 December 2008 editOrangemarlin (talk | contribs)30,771 edits →For William M. Connolley: Confoozled← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:19, 5 December 2008 edit undoWilliam M. Connolley (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers66,017 edits →For William M. Connolley: replyNext edit → | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
| Erm you've lost me. I don't understand log; G4. If you're watching this page. (I am leaving this here as per your talkpage instructions) Cheers, ] (] '''·''' ]) 23:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC) | Erm you've lost me. I don't understand log; G4. If you're watching this page. (I am leaving this here as per your talkpage instructions) Cheers, ] (] '''·''' ]) 23:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :I was just going to post the same thing. I checked your log, searched for G4, and found a couple of things, but neither make much sense in context of opposing. Moreover, WMC's oppose is one of the most shocking things I've seen on these votes. ] <small><sup>] ]</sup></small> 17:54, 5 December 2008 (UTC) | :I was just going to post the same thing. I checked your log, searched for G4, and found a couple of things, but neither make much sense in context of opposing. Moreover, WMC's oppose is one of the most shocking things I've seen on these votes. ] <small><sup>] ]</sup></small> 17:54, 5 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| : Sorry, not trying to be obscure or shocking. "log" means your admin action log; I see nothing there indicating you're doing the kind of stuff leading up to arbcomm. ";" is a statement separator :-). "G4" is Giggy's questions, number 4. Your answer there is very weak ] (]) 22:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 22:19, 5 December 2008
Edit Analysis
A detailed breakdown of this candidate's edits in article and Misplaced Pages spaces can be found here. Franamax (talk) 02:04, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Comments
LessHeard vanU As I do not believe in a system where my support may be rendered ineffective by the considerations of Jimbo and the existing ArbCom I shall only be supporting Risker; however, had my vote potential been not been constrained by the apparatus employed I would have supported this candidate. LessHeard vanU (talk) 00:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- I understand Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:43, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Article work
It is unfortunate that some editors appear to be opposing based on a concern that Casliber's excellent content contributions will diminish if he is elected. While that may be true (and I understand that concern), we all volunteers here, and each of us has the right to choose the areas in which we contribute. We should not seek to limit a volunteer's foray into a new area because of a prospective loss of that editor's contributions in another area. Kablammo (talk) 14:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the kudos, at least they are nice opposes :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:43, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
For William M. Connolley
Erm you've lost me. I don't understand log; G4. If you're watching this page. (I am leaving this here as per your talkpage instructions) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
- I was just going to post the same thing. I checked your log, searched for G4, and found a couple of things, but neither make much sense in context of opposing. Moreover, WMC's oppose is one of the most shocking things I've seen on these votes. OrangeMarlin 17:54, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, not trying to be obscure or shocking. "log" means your admin action log; I see nothing there indicating you're doing the kind of stuff leading up to arbcomm. ";" is a statement separator :-). "G4" is Giggy's questions, number 4. Your answer there is very weak William M. Connolley (talk) 22:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)