User talk:65HCA7/2017 archive

Latest comment: 6 years ago by MaynardClark in topic Ha ha!

Archives edit

2015

2016

Whoops! edit

Hi YITYNR. Thanks for reverting my accidental rollback on Organ (anatomy). I clicked "rollback" accidentally while scrolling through my watchlist and you beat me to fixing the error. I appreciate it, and sorry for making extra work for you! Ry's the Guy (talk|contribs) 21:48, 22 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Rystheguy: No worries - everyone makes mistakes sometimes! I've done it too; it's kind of embarrassing. :D
Have a great day! YITYNR My workWhat's wrong? 21:51, 22 January 2017 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, you too! Ry's the Guy (talk|contribs) 21:51, 22 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

RfA edit

  Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. ) Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:52, 23 July 2017 (UTC) Reply
Cullen328: You're welcome, and I'm confident you'll make a great administrator :) 65HCA7 11:13, 24 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

RfA Cullen328 edit

I easily fully accept that you did not perceive "mafia-like..., fully inappropriate" verbiage at all. I do not even assume this were intended by Cullen328, but I perceived the verbiage this way, especially the advice to "take care", and Cullen328 did not comment any further to his reply, which I still consider to be remarkably beyond of saying "I'm good with that". In spite of opposing to all the PC-derived crap of urbanity, civility, safety of spaces, I still try to adhere to a higher level of sensitivity, more fully de rigeur, than you seem to expect from an admin to be. Purgy (talk) 10:46, 24 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Purgy Purgatorio: But it's obvious that the sentiment was "I'm okay with your vote, and I hope people don't give you crap for it." It is fully appropriate for people to say that, even the second half of it, considering people can gang up on each other around here and Vertium, the guy who voted neutral, himself expressed discomfort with said ganging-up. Your vote comes across, as K6ka said, as an oppose vote for being civil. And I don't know where you're from or what it means to you, but where I'm from "take care" is a polite thing to say, along the lines of "Okay, have a good one!"
Either way, I fail to see how Cullen's comment was the least bit inappropriate, uncivil, or offensive. 65HCA7 11:13, 24 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Chelsea edit

Hey mate, I'm just trying to keep the vandals off the page Davide Zappacosta. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prawny007 (talkcontribs) 14:09, 31 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Prawny007: I was trying to take care of the vandalism spree too (which has now ended), but your edit reinstated a fairly obvious test/vandalism, which I reverted, thus making your edit nonconstructive, hence my v2 warning on your talk page. I appreciate your other edits to that page, which were indeed partial or full vandal reverts, but this edit was indeed nonconstructive; if this was just a mistake, please let me know. 65HCA7 14:16, 31 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I reverted an edit which was in turn another revert of a unproductive addition to the page. This was indeed a mistake and I'm glad it was corrected. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prawny007 (talkcontribs) 14:22, 31 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Prawny007: All right; no worries. Have a great rest of the day! 65HCA7 14:35, 31 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

You too mate! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prawny007 (talkcontribs) 14:22, 31 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! edit

Hi 65HCA7, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated! ansh666 20:26, 22 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Ansh666: You're welcome, and I'm confident you'll make a great administrator. Have a great day! 65HCA7 21:33, 22 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Blog Inquiry edit

Hey 65HCA7,

Hope you're doing well.

I came across your page through researching the edits of a few music-related Wikipedia pages and wanted to get in touch as I'm currently working on a blog to discuss best practices / tips for Wikipedia and thought I'd reach out to see if this is something you'd want to be involved in.

Let me know your thoughts. I would email you but I already emailed a few people today and that action is currently throttled for me. Please email me back (on my user page) if you’re interested. Thanks!

CMCreator900

CMCreator900 (talk) 23:50, 24 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

CMCreator900: Could I by any chance have more information or a link? 65HCA7 21:39, 25 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Pending changes reviewer granted edit

 

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Alex ShihTalk 00:11, 7 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Alex Shih: Thank you very much; have a great day! :) 65HCA7 11:42, 7 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Why revert partial vandalism only? edit

Erm why did you only revert part of this edit, when the rest of the edit was obvious vandalism too? It allowed the remaining vandalism to stay for a day because other editors (or at least I did) thought you had already screened that edit for vandalism. Please take care to ensure that you are not letting obvious vandalism through in the future. Bennv3771 (talk) 15:09, 27 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Bennv3771: That was just a simple mistake; I legitimately did not see the "BEING A DADDY" portion. If I'd seen that, I would have reverted it, no questions asked; that's stupid and childish vandalism. Sometimes I am just focused on "getting the vandalism", get carried away, and don't scan all the revisions. 65HCA7 15:26, 27 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

ArbCom 2017 election voter message edit

Hello, 65HCA7. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Ha ha! edit

Yes, whatever on Cedarville University, but ....  :-) MaynardClark (talk) 14:30, 24 December 2017 (UTC)Reply