| Revision as of 00:50, 22 June 2017 editTAnthony (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors853,229 edits ''GoT'' character awards← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:14, 3 July 2017 edit undoAffeL (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users13,562 edits i'm back.. lol hade no idea I got blocked for a day. #clearpageNext edit → | ||
| Line 73: | Line 73: | ||
| == Your ] nomination of ]== | == Your ] nomination of ]== | ||
| The article ] you nominated as a ] has failed ]; see ] for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. <!-- Template:GANotice result=fail --> <small>Message delivered by ], on behalf of ]</small> -- ] (]) 11:01, 7 June 2017 (UTC) | The article ] you nominated as a ] has failed ]; see ] for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. <!-- Template:GANotice result=fail --> <small>Message delivered by ], on behalf of ]</small> -- ] (]) 11:01, 7 June 2017 (UTC) | ||
| == June 2017 == | |||
| <div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''48 hours''' for making ]. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may ] by first reading the ], then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx|" code. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here ~~~~''}}. ] ]] 08:09, 21 June 2017 (UTC)</div> | |||
| <!-- Template:uw-aoablock --> | |||
| Casually throwing around accusations of sockpuppetry, as you did and , is completely unacceptable, especially considering that you yourself have been (correctly) blocked for abusing multiple accounts in the past. ] ]] 08:14, 21 June 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :AffeL, I've said this before; you are getting too close to your subject in some of these cases. Take a step back, don't get annoyed without reason and fling around accusations with no basis. You have done good work on GoT related articles, but if you continue in this manner you are liable to end up with an extended block or topic ban. Just take it easy, for all of our sakes. ] (]) 08:45, 21 June 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> ] (<small>]]</small>) 09:12, 21 June 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :Note to reviewing admin should AffeL request permission to post at ANI: I (as the victim of the attack that led to the block and the one who opened the ANI thread) don't mind him being unblocked specifically to allow him to defend himself on ANI, even if he doesn't apologize for or retract his previous attacks against me and the other user. But (assuming no contrition for the earlier disruptive behaviour) he should be "semi-unblocked" on condition that he not edit anywhere other than this talk page and ANI, similar to what Floq gave me . ] (<small>]]</small>) 10:22, 21 June 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ==''GoT'' character awards== | |||
| When you get back: before you freak about and similar ones to other ''GoT'' character articles, take a look at the discussion at ]. I tend to agree that this info may be more appropriate in prose, which I'll attempt in ] or something. I'm not sure of your opinions, but there is no harm in letting the edits stand and reintroducing some of the information over time.— ]<sup>]</sup> 00:49, 22 June 2017 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:14, 3 July 2017
A Barnstar for you
|
The Writer's Barnstar | |
| For your excellent work creating character articles for A Song of Ice and Fire. Keep up the great work! IdenticalHetero (talk) 16:51, 21 January 2016 (UTC) |
Your GA nomination of Game of Thrones
The article Game of Thrones you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:Game of Thrones for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 23:02, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Peter Dinklage
The article Peter Dinklage you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Peter Dinklage for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of RL0919 -- RL0919 (talk) 17:41, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
True Detective
|
Congratulations, it's a... |
| ...Misplaced Pages Good Article!! Shearonink (talk) 04:05, 4 March 2017 (UTC) |
Yay.. thanks for the review and all. - AffeL (talk) 11:31, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of True Detective
The article True Detective you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:True Detective for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 04:22, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
Jon Snow
Hi, I made a few edits on Kit Harington's page. I saw you nominated it for GA. Great job! I hope to see it pass. Let me know if you have any questions. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 02:02, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for the help. - AffeL (talk) 14:07, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
Kit Harington
Here's my thought process. This is either a) Kit Harington, not wanting to publicise his relationship with Rose Leslie on Misplaced Pages, b) the reverse, c) a vandal screwing about. WP:AGF says we can't choose option c) if a) and b) are within the bounds of plausibility. If the IP comes back again, drop me a line and I'll have a look - if they're not prepared to communicate with us though, we can't do anything. Ritchie333 12:46, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- Both Kit and Rose have been public about their relationship(See:(Min: 4.24) and ) If the ip user comes back, I will inform you. - AffeL (talk) 12:54, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- What if they've just had an almighty row and split up? Not that I would wish that to happen particularly, but sometimes that's just the way life goes. Ritchie333 12:58, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- They where seen togheter just a day ago at an event in England, as a couple, holding hands and kissing. So, I don't believe they have parted ways, Even if they hade, a source is needed to confirm it. - AffeL (talk) 13:03, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- What if they've just had an almighty row and split up? Not that I would wish that to happen particularly, but sometimes that's just the way life goes. Ritchie333 12:58, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- And they said romance was dead :-) ... okay, I'm leaning more towards option c) now. Ritchie333 13:08, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- Of course, in my warped imagination I have thought of d) a 27-year old bespectacled geek with suspicious facial hair who can't stand that that beastly Mr Harington had the gall to date the delectable Ms Leslie and decides to blank all mention on the internet to make him feel better. However, in practical terms that is close enough to c) anyway, and also d) is more likely not to be an anon IP, but an admin on Commons. (ooooh) Ritchie333 13:34, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- Hahah...Yeah, I would not be surprised if that was the case. - AffeL (talk) 13:42, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: The suspicious facial hair guy is back. - AffeL (talk) 14:24, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- Of course, in my warped imagination I have thought of d) a 27-year old bespectacled geek with suspicious facial hair who can't stand that that beastly Mr Harington had the gall to date the delectable Ms Leslie and decides to blank all mention on the internet to make him feel better. However, in practical terms that is close enough to c) anyway, and also d) is more likely not to be an anon IP, but an admin on Commons. (ooooh) Ritchie333 13:34, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Banhammered. Ritchie333 14:27, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333:. That guy is back, using another ip adress. Wow, he really can't stand Harington and Leslie being a couple. - AffeL (talk) 18:51, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Right, protected it for a week. That should keep things at bay. Ritchie333 18:53, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
References
- @Ritchie333: The sentence in question, as it currently appears, is clear WP:SYNTH. I don't know what edits you were referring to, and I am not the IP in question (nor Harington, nor Leslie), but I know the content you are talking about and I am not a vandal. Either (a) a new source that explicitly supports the claim needs to be added, (b) the claim needs to be removed, or (c) the claim should be rewritten to accurately reflect the content of the BuzzFeed article (that the "on-and-off relationship" was widely rumoured and it wasn't until 2016 that the two "officially" appeared together at an event as a "couple"). Note that I think (c) might be a BLP-violation and violate WP:SPECULATION, and (a) might not be viable as I don't follow celeb gossip "news" and so don't know if such a source exists. One doesn't need to be a vandal or a COI editor to reach this conclusion -- any editor who understands our policies would reach the same conclusion. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:57, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Barnstar for you
|
The Special Barnstar | |
| This Special Barnstar is for all the hard work you have done on List of awards and nominations received by Game of Thrones during the last few months. Kingstoken (talk) 23:56, 9 May 2017 (UTC) |
Death Grips discography FLC
Hi AffeL, I saw the kerfuffle at FLC over unactionable opposes etc, would you now, in the cold light of day, be prepared to strike your oppose at the above? It would be a good gesture and would encourage me to review your list in good faith. What do you reckon? Cheers, The Rambling Man (talk) 07:33, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Done. - AffeL (talk) 11:40, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Much appreciated. Review soon! The Rambling Man (talk) 11:41, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Done. - AffeL (talk) 11:40, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Kit Harington
The article Kit Harington you nominated as a good article has failed 
; see Talk:Kit Harington for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Numerounovedant -- Numerounovedant (talk) 11:01, 7 June 2017 (UTC)