| Revision as of 01:41, 1 July 2015 editLegobot (talk | contribs)Bots1,669,103 edits →Your [] nomination of []: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:28, 1 July 2015 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,298,789 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:ATinySliver/Archive 2) (botNext edit → | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{clear}} | {{clear}} | ||
| == ] == | |||
| I know you deleted your question but felt you should get an answer. I protected in response to a request at RFPP (seen ]). At the time, his death was not confirmed but editors were still putting in a death date. --] <sup>]</sup> 13:48, 23 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :{{ping|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. {{p|grin|size=20px}} —]<b>/</b>] 18:17, 23 June 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ==WP ratings== | ==WP ratings== | ||
Revision as of 02:28, 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
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)