User talk:Dank/Archive 37

Robots wiki

Mr. Dank, may you please give user Fireworks888 admin rights at the Robots wiki? I want to undeadify that wiki by spiffing up its layout, and you're the only admin there I know that is still active. I am also aware that I could go request an adoption, but you simply logging into your wikia account and giving me admin rights would be much more faster and easier. I understand if you don't want to, but believe me, I'll try to make the best of it, as I've been an admin on a few other wikis. 72.148.118.59 (talk) 09:34, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I can't help; I haven't edited at Wikia in a long time. Best of luck. - Dank (push to talk) 14:15, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Signpost interview

I noticed you're on the membership list for WikiProject History. The Signpost is looking to feature WP History in an upcoming issue. You might consider answering some of their interview questions. Thanks. Chris Troutman (talk) 06:06, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Gertrude Stein once said that the problem with Oakland (her childhood home) was, "There is no there there", and that's the problem with Wikiproject History as well. It might make more sense to interview people from more cohesive history-related wikiprojects. - Dank (push to talk) 14:21, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

A-Class discussion

Hi Dan, if you want a second opinion on your closing the A-Class discussion, please let me know on my talk page. I haven't been so active on WP of late, but I still have a lot invested in the assessment scheme so I'd be happy to help out. You'll see my vote as "weak support" so I don't have a strong opinion either way, and I'd be happy to help you judge a consensus. My inclination in such things is to lean slightly towards the status quo, because I think any change to a system that isn't too broken should have at least a little momentum behind it. I oversaw the vote in introducing C-Class a few years back, and that was a difficult one with (as I recall) over 500 people voting, so closing that was hard, but there was (IMHO) a clear majority pushing for change in that case. Please let me know on my talk page if you want any help. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 03:59, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Martin, I'd be happy to get your help with closing any discussion or RfC ... except for ones you've voted in, like this one. - Dank (push to talk) 13:27, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

OK, sorry, my bad! (I had seen my vote as pretty neutral, but you're absolutely right.) Anyway, good luck with the closing, and thanks for taking this on. Walkerma (talk) 02:42, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Any time. - Dank (push to talk) 14:24, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Quis custodiet

I find your reply to my question of a piece with your other comments on my talk page - disingenuous and stigmatising. I don't want you to make any more comments on that page and will not respond if you do.Keith-264 (talk) 07:49, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel that way, it wasn't my intention to stigmatise you, I was looking for resolution on an important principle. We have a lot of friends and co-workers in common; I'm still hoping that you'll ask around (privately, if you like) for opinions. I need to stay neutral, so I'm not going to get into it. If this isn't resolved to your satisfaction, but you don't want to talk about it any more, then ask someone to come talk with me. - Dank (push to talk) 13:08, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

JSTOR Survey (and an update)

Hi! Just a quick update that while JSTOR and The Wikipedia Library discuss expanding the partnership, they've gone ahead and extended the pilot access again, until May 31st. Thanks, JSTOR!

It would be really helpful for growing the program if you would fill out this short survey about your usage and experience with JSTOR:

SURVEY

Cheers, Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:47, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

T:WPMA listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect T:WPMA. Since you had some involvement with the T:WPMA redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 17:01, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Replied there. - Dank (push to talk) 18:48, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Kronan at FAC

Sail ho, matey!

You're invited to comment on the FAC of the article on Kronan.

Peter ^Isotalo 14:59, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Constitution of May 3, 1791/archive4

Since you commented in our of the prior discussions on this subject, you may want to comment on the nomination. Please note that the last year's nomination failed primarily because not enough people voiced their opinion (whether for or against, it was decided that not enough people commented in the first place). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:26, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the copyedits, especially this. I tried to reword it yesterday but couldn't think of anything that wasn't entirely torturous. :-) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 00:57, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Sure, happy to help. I had already copyedited this one so there really wasn't much to do. - Dank (push to talk) 02:28, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

If I could impose

Designate and I have brought John Tyler to peer review. As it is history related, you will weigh in at FAC, so I was wondering if you could glance at it in peer review? Thanks for your help with Mr. Bosbyshell, it was most appreciated.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:00, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm going through and doing something on all the MilHist PRs today, actually, but I doubt I'll be able to cover all the MilHist FACs. Most of my time is invested in copyediting software. - Dank (push to talk) 20:23, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

A worthy project.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:22, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I'll be able to achieve critical mass, it's a big project. We'll see. - Dank (push to talk) 23:44, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Dank. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 12:33, 29 April 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Nikkimaria (talk) 12:33, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Nikki! - Dank (push to talk) 13:31, 29 April 2014 (UTC)