Misplaced Pages

User talk:Sjakkalle/June, July and August 2006

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.
< User talk:Sjakkalle

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Phil Boswell (talk | contribs) at 09:50, 9 June 2006 (→Image removal: FYI, I've replaced the same image in another archive…). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 09:50, 9 June 2006 by Phil Boswell (talk | contribs) (→Image removal: FYI, I've replaced the same image in another archive…)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Welcome to my talkpage!

Ordinarily, any comments placed here will stay, and only simple vandalism will be reverted. Personal attacks against me will stay, such comments say a lot more about the person making them than the person who is targeted.

Note that I am quite inconsistent with where I make responses. If it is a response I think several people might be interested in reading, I might respond here. Otherwise, I will probably respond on your talkpage. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:53, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Previous archives of my talkpage can be found at


Anti-Vandalism Work

Just a note to say congratulations on your anti-vandalism work. You were very quick off the mark on 205.174.123.82.--TDE 12:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks :-) Sjakkalle (Check!) 12:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

IRC

Hello Sjakkalle, do you use IRC? Here's something for you:

With your fanstastic work of voting and closing AFDs, TFDs, the efficiency of fighting vandals and reverting pages within minutes, I award you the Working Man's Barnstar. --Terence Ong 13:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Do keep up the good work and I hope to see you more often. ;) --Terence Ong 13:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


Thanks for the barnstar! I am not on IRC because I have trouble in getting my webbrowser to accept it. I keep getting "is not a registered protocol" messages. Sjakkalle (Check!) 13:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism in cricket

hello !

sorry about the vandalism that has went on. the IP 142.227.251.130 is shared by a couple of students of this High School and unfortunatly, some kids have nothing to do better than that.

i will have a talk with those who use this computer.

thank you and excuse their behavior again.

Help

Good evening Sjakkalle, I have asked User:AmiDaniel to help me with this. But would also like you to look at it, if you could please read my post on AmiDaniel's talk page. Thank you. Havok (T/C/c) 15:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Image removal

Yes, as per the edit summary, I am orphaning an image which has been obsoleted by a more up-to-date version; rather than updating the image I am removing it where it is used in a signature which is now contrary to WP:SIG. Unfortunately because of a limitation in MediaWiki I cannot grab the whole list in one gulp, I have to keep refreshing to get the next tranche, hence my second try at it after your reversion (sorry about that). Would you rather your archive had the replacement image, or just a red-link? I can try to remember to skip your archive next time it comes up if you really want… HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 11:09, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the explanation! I have replaced the image with the updated one since that seems to be the one which will leave the archive intact as well as possible. Thanks also for your efforts in the image cleanup. I won't try to add further burdens to your workload by telling you to remember to skip my talkpages, so if this situation happens again, just do what looks right. :-) Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Cheers…I always try to do what looks right from where I'm standing: however I'm also aware that others might be standing somewhere entirely different. You are the only person who has commented so far, thank you for being so reasonable. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 12:44, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
  • FYI, I've replaced the same image in another archive: I think that's all of your pages covered, I don't see any more on the list (which is now down to almost manageable proportions!). HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 09:50, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

myg0t article deletion

Hi, I left this message on your talk page a while back, but I think I did it incorrectly, I was informed I should have put it in as a new message, rather than a reply to an old one;

Anyways, reguarding the myg0t DrV you closed (http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Myg0t_%28second%29), there are a few issues with the deletion process of the article:

  • First of all, you said "A look at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Myg0t shows a strong consensus to delete and will therefore declare this deletion as endorsed", however this AfD was performed "in secret", as none of the regular contributors to the article were notified, and no notification was left on the article until hours before the AfD started.
  • Second of all, this AfD took place in the timespan of a few hours, rather than the several weeks it took for the DrV to complete.
  • Due to these two circumstances, I'm obligated to insist that the AfD was unfair. Were the contributors given proper notification, and were the AfD given more time to take place, and were the AfD not closed prematurely, I can assure you it would have turned out differently. A vote where only assenters are invited, and the dissenters not given enough time to even notice it, is hardly a fair vote. Even if the article didn't survive it's SECOND DrV, I think that it should have been given a fair AfD. It makes sense to base a closing decision off an AfD, but only if the AfD was properly executed - this one was not.
  • Lastly, I don't see why an AfD can be held just a month after a fair DrV was held. The DrV took about a month to complete, and just a month later, there is already an AfD. Does this not defeat the purpose of the DrV? If the wikipedia general public clearly voted to reinstate the article, why can the dissenters appeal immediately afterwards?

I feel that your decision was just, based on the facts you were given, but, with all due respect, you were not given all the facts.

Thanks for listening, cacophony 02:52, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks for your note! Yes, I am not at all satisfied with the way this thing was handled either, and if this things starts happening often, it will seriously undermine the integrity of the DRV/AFD processes. I would favor some discussion on policy change if this method becomes widespread. Sjakkalle (Check!) 05:51, 7 June 2006 (UTC)