Misplaced Pages

User talk:Newyorkbrad: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:08, 2 April 2009 editMiszaBot III (talk | contribs)597,462 editsm Archiving 2 thread(s) (older than 7d) to User talk:Newyorkbrad/Archive/2009/Mar.← Previous edit Revision as of 19:07, 3 April 2009 edit undoJFD (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,235 edits →MailNext edit →
Line 19: Line 19:


Hey Brad, you've e-mail. Best, &mdash;<strong>]</strong>] 07:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC) Hey Brad, you've e-mail. Best, &mdash;<strong>]</strong>] 07:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

:I'm afraid you've got more. ] (]) 19:07, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


== Adminbots == == Adminbots ==

Revision as of 19:07, 3 April 2009

This is Newyorkbrad's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Archiving icon
Archives

Index of archives


This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

BLPs

I thought you might find this thread interesting, particularly the number of (seemingly completely) unreferenced biographies of living people we have (approx. 1 out of 10). --MZMcBride (talk) 09:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm travelling this weekend but will take a look when I get home tonight. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 11:36, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
The bad news continues. Another possible 19,000 unreferenced biographies that aren't properly being taken into account (when things like the number of articles in Category:Unreferenced BLPs are looked at). Bah. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:49, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Monty Python's Life of Brian ban in british town

NPR story --Jeremyb (talk) 23:30, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Mail

Hey Brad, you've e-mail. Best, —Anonymous Dissident 07:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid you've got more. JFD (talk) 19:07, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Adminbots

WP:BOT: "... When the Bot Approvals Group is satisfied that the bot is technically sound, they will approve the bot and recommend that it be given both 'bot' and 'sysop' rights. The bureaucrat who responds to the flag request acts as a final arbiter of the process and will ensure that an adequate level of community consensus (including publicity of approval discussion) underlies the approval. ..."

Adminbots are given separate accounts. One of the core tenets of the new policy is that adminbots should be segregated from their operator's account. (You have to be an admin already to operate one of course). Dragons flight (talk) 22:48, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Noted. I missed that. I'll modify accordingly. Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:16, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom and Aitias

Does this mean that the ArbCom is back on? Does he really think that he can slip in and slip out while he was supposed to be at ArbCom? Ottava Rima (talk) 15:18, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

As I understand it, the case should only be necessary if he requests adminship back. Simply editing is not the issue. Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:20, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
He did the same thing to Ironholds. Blanking your page, stating a right to vanish, then going back on it, then disappearing, then coming back to oppose RfAs, its all just a little unsettling. Not as strange as this, but yeah. Maybe its just me. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:28, 1 April 2009 (UTC)