| Revision as of 07:13, 31 October 2007 editHeimstern (talk | contribs)Administrators16,881 edits →Good friend100: update← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:20, 31 October 2007 edit undoCaspian blue (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers35,434 edits →Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive317: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
| ==Text alignment== | ==Text alignment== | ||
| Hi - dunno what causing this but your talkpage looks odd in some browsers. Its fine in Safari and Firefox, but IE7 and Opera seem to be display all the text as center-aligned. Dunno what part of the code for it is causing that so not sure how to fix it. Anyway, just thought I'd let you know as it prob looks fine on the browser you're using. <span style="font-family: Verdana">]]</span> 03:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC) | Hi - dunno what causing this but your talkpage looks odd in some browsers. Its fine in Safari and Firefox, but IE7 and Opera seem to be display all the text as center-aligned. Dunno what part of the code for it is causing that so not sure how to fix it. Anyway, just thought I'd let you know as it prob looks fine on the browser you're using. <span style="font-family: Verdana">]]</span> 03:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC) | ||
| == ] == | |||
| Hi, AGK. I come here to ask about the recent achieving AN/Incident. I filed a report regarding ]'s abusive behaviors and racial slurs. That case is still not done yet, and I've not got any notice from any admins again. Do you know why the sysop, ] move my report and the discussion to ]. It is not fair and unreasonable. Were there any decision reached without any notice to me, or removed by accident? Please give me a reason and if there is no plausible explanation, please restore it to the incident page. And you were very quick to judge my 3rr violation as soon as Sennen goroshi reported, but has not decided on my report of whether Sennen goroshi get a block and punishment or not. I want to know why. That seems unfair to me. Thanks. --] 13:20, 31 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 13:20, 31 October 2007
User:AGK/Userpage/Header User:AGK/Userpage/Icons User talk:AGK/Userpage/Header The archives are located here. Please see there for previous discussions.
Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Diavlog
I was surprised to see that the result was no consensus. None of the Keep votes presented evidence or in any way countered the valid reasons for nomination. What factored into your conclusion? Pdelongchamp 17:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, I think that both sides presented evidence that resulted in no notable difference between the arguments. As such, I closed the discussion as "No Consensus". Anthøny 17:37, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- No, I just reread the discussion. The keep side didn't present evidence. Thanks to the RfD, the article now contains 4 blog references and one list serve reference but I'm still not clear on how you came to a conclusion of no consensus. Pdelongchamp 20:28, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- I have just explained how I came to a conclusion of No Consensus: having analysed the arguments presented, I concluded that there was no definitive advantage on either side and, in accordance with policy, I concluded as required. Anthøny 20:32, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, I understand your reasoning. Let me phrase it this way, if the reasoning behind the RfD was valid, and the "Keep" side didn't provide any evidence against the RfD reasoning, why should the result be "No Consensus"? Could you link to the policy you are referencing? Thanks, I'm mostly trying to understand because the outcome seemed like it was just a vote count as opposed to a review of the discussion. Pdelongchamp 20:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Not at all, it wasn't a !vote count - that's a big no-no :) the policy I was referring to was Misplaced Pages:Deletion guidelines for administrators (which may be a guideline, I've not brushed up on the specifics in a few weeks!). As I've said, the "Keep" argument did present evidence - I think this simply boils down to a difference in opinion between you and I. Anthøny 20:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, I did some reading on it. I think the only remaining question for me is, what exactly did the Keep present to counter the RfD reasoning that you consider to be evidence? Pdelongchamp 21:11, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, I have to dash at the moment, but I'll deal with your enquiry as soon as I can. Anthøny 21:37, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, I did some reading on it. I think the only remaining question for me is, what exactly did the Keep present to counter the RfD reasoning that you consider to be evidence? Pdelongchamp 21:11, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Not at all, it wasn't a !vote count - that's a big no-no :) the policy I was referring to was Misplaced Pages:Deletion guidelines for administrators (which may be a guideline, I've not brushed up on the specifics in a few weeks!). As I've said, the "Keep" argument did present evidence - I think this simply boils down to a difference in opinion between you and I. Anthøny 20:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, I understand your reasoning. Let me phrase it this way, if the reasoning behind the RfD was valid, and the "Keep" side didn't provide any evidence against the RfD reasoning, why should the result be "No Consensus"? Could you link to the policy you are referencing? Thanks, I'm mostly trying to understand because the outcome seemed like it was just a vote count as opposed to a review of the discussion. Pdelongchamp 20:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- I have just explained how I came to a conclusion of No Consensus: having analysed the arguments presented, I concluded that there was no definitive advantage on either side and, in accordance with policy, I concluded as required. Anthøny 20:32, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- No, I just reread the discussion. The keep side didn't present evidence. Thanks to the RfD, the article now contains 4 blog references and one list serve reference but I'm still not clear on how you came to a conclusion of no consensus. Pdelongchamp 20:28, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Against Vandalism...
Huh, I coulda sworn I did lol. I must not have cuz I was in kind of a hurry. sorry. --Crash Underride 18:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- No problems ;) just bear it in mind in future! Cheers, Anthøny 19:00, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
User talk:Oli Filth
Hi. Are you sure you meant to leave me that message on my talk page? I haven't reported that user! Regards, Oli Filth 19:02, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry about that! Check out your talk page, I've left another apology and an explanation there. Again, apologies! Anthøny 19:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Good friend100
What's your thought about this user? I know you were considering upgrading to an indefblock depending on the result of the ANI discussion. Some objections have been raised, though I personally am uncertain of their merit. What do you think? Heimstern Läufer (talk) 03:14, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
- Well, it appears we have some disagreement from another admin, namely Penwhale . Perhaps we should consider arbitration. What do you think? Heimstern Läufer (talk) 07:13, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Text alignment
Hi - dunno what causing this but your talkpage looks odd in some browsers. Its fine in Safari and Firefox, but IE7 and Opera seem to be display all the text as center-aligned. Dunno what part of the code for it is causing that so not sure how to fix it. Anyway, just thought I'd let you know as it prob looks fine on the browser you're using. WjBscribe 03:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive317
Hi, AGK. I come here to ask about the recent achieving AN/Incident. I filed a report regarding User:Sennen goroshi's abusive behaviors and racial slurs. That case is still not done yet, and I've not got any notice from any admins again. Do you know why the sysop, User:Misza13 move my report and the discussion to Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive317. It is not fair and unreasonable. Were there any decision reached without any notice to me, or removed by accident? Please give me a reason and if there is no plausible explanation, please restore it to the incident page. And you were very quick to judge my 3rr violation as soon as Sennen goroshi reported, but has not decided on my report of whether Sennen goroshi get a block and punishment or not. I want to know why. That seems unfair to me. Thanks. --Appletrees 13:20, 31 October 2007 (UTC)