| Revision as of 03:11, 25 June 2015 editDawnseeker2000 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers483,780 edits →WP ratings← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:41, 1 July 2015 edit undoLegobot (talk | contribs)Bots1,668,727 edits →Your [] nomination of []: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
| :::{{ping|Dawnseeker2000}} you mean, it's not a ''requirement''?! {{p|grin|size=20px}} —]<b>/</b>] 03:02, 25 June 2015 (UTC) | :::{{ping|Dawnseeker2000}} you mean, it's not a ''requirement''?! {{p|grin|size=20px}} —]<b>/</b>] 03:02, 25 June 2015 (UTC) | ||
| ::::I wouldn't argue with that :) ] 03:11, 25 June 2015 (UTC) | ::::I wouldn't argue with that :) ] 03:11, 25 June 2015 (UTC) | ||
| == Your ] nomination of ]== | |||
| Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article ] you nominated for ]-status according to the ]. ] This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. <!-- Template:GANotice --> <small>Message delivered by ], on behalf of ]</small> -- ] (]) 01:41, 1 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:41, 1 July 2015
| Messages may be ignored or receive only a curt reply if they involve anything not on my watchlist. No disrespect intended.I will usually ping you in any reply here. If you ping me elsewhere, I will reply there.Automatic archival by lowercase sigmabot III. |
Template:Archive box collapsible
James Horner
I know you deleted your question but felt you should get an answer. I protected in response to a request at RFPP (seen here). At the time, his death was not confirmed but editors were still putting in a death date. --NeilN 13:48, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
- @NeilN: sounds good. I had seen it happen three times, if memory serves, and it seemed to have stopped—then again, I didn't even notice PP when it happened.
—ATinySliver/ 18:17, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
WP ratings
I'm not a "new user", I'm an experienced editor who prefers to not log in for simply tasks. 189.225.21.90 (talk) 02:45, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Tbhotch: ... which, I have to say, makes no sense in this case. It has long been my understanding that article ratings within the scope of a Wikiproject are done by people associated with that project. To do so while not logged in gives the impression that someone is, instead, randomly offering an otherwise detached rating. —ATinySliver/ 02:54, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, it's definitely preferable to have users that are associated with wikiprojects doing the assessments. Dawnseeker2000 02:59, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Dawnseeker2000: you mean, it's not a requirement?! —ATinySliver/ 03:02, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
- I wouldn't argue with that :) Dawnseeker2000 03:11, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Dawnseeker2000: you mean, it's not a requirement?!
- Yes, it's definitely preferable to have users that are associated with wikiprojects doing the assessments. Dawnseeker2000 02:59, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Clint Grant
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Clint Grant you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of BenLinus1214 -- BenLinus1214 (talk) 01:41, 1 July 2015 (UTC)