User talk:Majorly/Archives/46
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Majorly. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
RfA
Would you mind clarifying your oppose at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jbmurray; all candidates are editors, and it's hard to determine what it is about Jbmurray having admin tools that you object to. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:14, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Trolling
Hello Al Tally, please stop disrupting Wikipedia to make a POINT. I too find User:Kmweber opposes on RFA's unideal but that is no reason for you to parody him. Please stop; if you continue you will be blocked. Icewedge (talk) 23:42, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
- Err, no he won't. Nick (talk) 23:46, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
- Normally, I would agree. But Al is clearly being disruptive to make a point related to this Balloonman (talk) 00:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
AFD Close on ED
I know that was a difficult discussion to do, good job. NonvocalScream (talk) 21:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Here here. SynergeticMaggot (talk) 21:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Well done on the closing and explaining your rationale for doing so. This wasn't an easy debate to close, so many thanks for taking the time to tackle it. ;)--Hu12 (talk) 21:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Wildthing61476 (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
You earned yourself this one for closing that AfD. Great job summarizing the close and reasoning for it. Wildthing61476 (talk) 21:47, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for your contribution to that beast of an AFD Broooooooce (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 21:49, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Echoing the comments of those above. Props on not being afraid to take charge of a messy situation! JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 22:11, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Congratulations on your decision. Acalamari 23:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Echoing the comments of those above. Props on not being afraid to take charge of a messy situation! JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 22:11, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Congratulations, and I sure hope there isn't yet another DRV to follow... we need further DRVs or AFDs on ED like we need a hole in the head. *Dan T.* (talk) 23:17, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- I also agree with your close. Nice work, good to have you back. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 23:20, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- I also looked it over and it was a well thought out and explained decision. Nice work. Enigma message 23:25, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for laying out your reasoning in the close. You did a good job in doing that, and thanks for doing one of the harder jobs. Now please reconsider the whole thing and reverse your decision completely, and I'll be completely satisfied! Seriously, here's where I think the decision is faulty:
In point 2: And yes, it is just a guideline, not a policy. It does not have to be strictly followed Granted "guidelines are advisory in nature" but in deletion decisions the option of not following guidelines seems to be constricted by (a) a consensus (by the numbers, it's there, so no objection), (b) "common sense" (I can't really fault your decision much there) and (c) the 'occasional exception" -- emphasis added -- (this is taken from the generic guideline box at the top of WP:N and WP:WEB). So what's the nature of the exception here other than a raw consensus on the page? A finding by a majority of editors that sources only two, three or five sentences long do not constitute "a brief summary of the content"? Both? If the way you ruled were to be a standard for all AfDs, they'd become something close to referendums, and the more that happens, the more they get closer to popularity contests. Consensus has got to have at least a somewhat reasonable relationship to the guideline or the guideline means next to nothing. A totally elastic definition of "trivial source" (which is what we have here) eviscerates WP:N and WP:WEB because you could drive a truck through that interpretation. Almost every article or potential article has or can get citations to sources with trivial amounts of information. I see a convoy of trucks coming.
In point 4: Additionally, there are going to be more mentions of it out there. Just because they aren't immediately available to you doesn't mean they don't exist. As to the present, it seems to me that a lot of work went into finding more sources for this article, and they came up with no non-trivial sources. Tillamook Cheddar (dog) can fetch sources. Gladys the Swiss Dairy Cow can milk the media for airtight sourcing to pass AfD twice in two weeks. But not Encyclopedia Dramatica, with an army of friends beating the bushes to scare up a source. As for the future, yes, there may well be another source coming along, but AfD isn't a crystal ball, and there will be a lot of work done in monitoring the article in the meantime. In other words, we can well afford to wait until adequate sourcing actually comes along.
That brings me back to "common sense" because if we're going to have "common sense exceptions" then we should bring into consideration common-sense reasons for not having the article. To me, the principal one would be the additional workload on editors who will need to watch this new mischief magnet. It seems to me common sense that this article will not just channel already-existing mischief but actually attract more of it to Wikipedia. I sure hope I'm wrong.
So please reverse your decision, delete the article and I'm sure everyone, on reflection, will be quite happy you did. Noroton (talk) 23:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- No, take it to DRV like I said. Al Tally (talk) 23:39, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Good job on the close. seresin ( ¡? ) 00:31, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Allow me to add my voice to those congratulating you on a clear, sensible and well-reasoned close of an extremely heated AfD discussion. Well done sir! --Stormie (talk) 01:09, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- What they said - Well done. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 12:26, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, as you can probably guess from my opinion on the AFD ("delete"), I do not agree with the outcome of the AFD, but that it wound up being kept is not your fault. Your job as an AFD closer is to evaluate consensus, and if there isn't consensus to delete, and the arguments for deletion are not deal-breaking concerns over WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:COPYVIO or similar, then closing as "keep" or "no consensus" is the way it must happen. Your reasoning for closing it the way you did was impeccable, and I would like to thank you for your efforts in writing that summary. Good job. Sjakkalle (Check!) 12:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Small mistake
Don't know if it's anything you can fix, but the time at the top of your page is using a 24 hour clock and also uses PM. Enigma message 21:17, 19 May 2008 (UTC) Also, google talk is axel9891? Enigma message 21:18, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for noticing that... I'll fix in a sec! Yes, it's axel9891. alex9891 was taken! :( Al Tally (talk) 21:19, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Sweet! Now the time is actually correct. :D Enigma message 22:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Help needed
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Worrying vandalism to suicide We need someone to call the Ilford Police: 020 8478 1123. Can you? --S.dedalus (talk) 03:53, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Er the edit in question was made 2 days ago. Really no point now. Al Tally (talk) 07:28, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
My recent RfA
Thank you for supporting my RfA, which unfortunately didn't succeed. The majority of the opposes stated that I needed more experience in the main namespace and Wikipedia namespace and talk space, so that is what I will do. I have made a list and I hope I will be able to get through it. I will go for another RfA in about three month's time and I hope you will be able to support me then as well. If you have any other comments for me or wish to be notified when I go for another RfA, please leave them on my talk page. If you wish to nominate me for my next RfA, please wait until it has been about three months. I will not be checking back to this page so if you would like to comment or reply please use my talk page. Thanks again for participating in my RfA! ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 06:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
thx
[1] Was wondering what the eff was going on, cheers. 86.44.28.186 (talk) 23:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah see below, it got reverted by mistake... Al Tally talk 23:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Mistake
My apologies. I was on the lupin recent ip edits page and about a third of of the ip edits are vandalism. I must not have noticed it was a legit edit. Please undo my edit. This is why you must be careful with rollback, you really don't get a chance to see the effect your edits will have.Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 23:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- OK, please be more careful next time. Thanks, Al Tally talk 23:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for being more considerate than Iridescent.Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 02:11, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Or Metros.Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 02:28, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Re:Lradrama/Huggle
Well in that case, would you like to sift through a few thousand automatic edit summaries in order to try and find some scattered edits in which a user hasn't used any form of tool? There was no need to be as degrading as that. :-S Lradrama 16:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Good work
|
The Editor's Barnstar | |
| For doing excellent work and diligently editing the right side of Wikipedia. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 00:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC) |
Hello!
recent comments
And they were being uncivil first. GreenJoe 13:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
- Seeing as you seem to be accepting complaints, User:Gary King isn't assuming good faith over at Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. GreenJoe 18:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
- I think you need to work in some other areas - FLC doesn't seems to be your thing. Have a lovely day! Al Tally talk 18:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
- Your opposes were, in my view, out of order (although I respect you for staying firm to your belief), and people agree. You are in no way banned from commenting in the FLC process, it just means such opposes aren't looked well on. :-) Qst (talk) 18:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
- I think you need to work in some other areas - FLC doesn't seems to be your thing. Have a lovely day! Al Tally talk 18:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly Episode 50
It may not be weekly, but Wikipedia Weekly has finally reached Episode 50! Listen or download MP3 and OGG versions at the episode's page.
- Have a comment about the episode? You can leave your comment right on the episode's page!
- Miss an episode? Catch up in the Wikipedia Weekly archives at wikipediaweekly.org!
- Know someone who would love Wikipedia Weekly? Tell them about it!
- Care to participate in a podcast? Sign up here!
For the Wikipedia Weekly team, WODUPbot 00:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
You're receiving this because you're listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery. If you'd like to stop receiving these messages, please remove yourself from that list.
Redirect of Christina Madonia
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Christina Madonia, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Christina Madonia is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Christina Madonia, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 05:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
ANI thread
You are more or less accused of sockpuppetry here: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Prima_Facist. Thought you might be interested... Fram (talk) 14:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
- To almost sound like we were ending a relationship: Don't worry, it's not you, it's me ;) Prima Facist 14:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm going to take PF's word for it that it's not you, especially since you've been honest when you've pulled stunts like this in the past. Apologies, at least, for that bit. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 15:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Majorly, would you mind commenting over in that thread? Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 16:37, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
RFAR
It would be nice if you could stick to your own section. That way I could respond to your statement, which is currently in my section. Thanks. Guettarda (talk) 03:06, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Get your facts straight
I have no clue when I last edited Intelligent design, but it may have been when it was a Main Page FA. I rarely edit those articles, because I don't have the time to battle intellectual douchebags. Nearly all of my edits lately, save for fighting racism wherever I can, are in medical articles. Oh yeah, I've taken a recent interest in cleaning up some US Navy and Marines articles, just to keep my mind going. Check it out, if you want to get your facts right. Second, I did not canvass shit. I asked slrubenstein and Jayjg, both of whom are fellow members of the tribe as to whether or not I was out of bounds on considering DHMO a racist, anti-semitic enabling pig. If I were wrong, which I am apparently not, then I'd retract my vote, and support his nomination--I'm a big enough person to admit my faults and errors. By the way, I also dropped a comment on Hfran's page because he gets amusement out of being part of a cabal. So there's my point, do with it what you want. I'm pretty loyal to this project, and an outstanding contributor, so you can have whatever opinion you want, as long as you don't try to convince me that drinking from the urine of a camel will cure cancer. But I would suggest accurate descriptions of me in the future. I've vented for now. Hope you understand my viewpoint here.OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 20:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not entirely sure what was wrong with what I said. You did canvass, by linking to DHMO's RFA. Care to clarify what you mean? Al Tally talk 20:41, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- I made my point, you prefer to make unfounded comments. Thank you. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 20:57, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- You're very welcome. Have a lovely day! Al Tally talk 21:03, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 21 | 19 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 22 | 26 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:54, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello yet again. I regretfully inform you that the bot we were using to update the user status at Wikipedia:Highly Active Users, SoxBot V, was blocked for its constant updating. With this bot out of operation, a patch is in the works. Until that patch is reviewed and accepted by the developers, some options have been presented to use as workarounds: 1) Qui monobook (not available in Internet Explorer); 2) User:Hersfold/StatusTemplate; 3) Manually updating User:StatusBot/Status/USERNAME; or 4) Not worry about it and wait for the patch to go through, which hopefully won't take long. If you have another method, you can use that, too. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Useight (talk) 22:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi
User_talk:Dihydrogen_Monoxide#You're_awesome
Al Tally, please read my response, I do not understand you're prior comment within that section regarding me. I hope after reading what I said, and assuming that I am an honest wikipeidan when I state such things, you will not gag at my contributions anymore. Beam 02:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- I also posted similar sentiments to Keeper, and Wisdom89 who could, like you, be seen seemingly belittling me and my sentiment towards DHMO. I assure you that I do believe you guys just think I'm over reacting or acting in some self interest, which would account for "gag" replies. But I have faith that after I explained myself you might not. Thanks for reading and sorry for taking up your time with such trivial shit.
- PS - What's up with the user redirect? Why not just a new name? If I'm being intrusive regarding that you don't have to answer, and feel free to respond about all of this (if you do have a response) on my talk page, or on DHMO's page, in that section.Beam 02:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- I also posted similar sentiments to Keeper, and Wisdom89 who could, like you, be seen seemingly belittling me and my sentiment towards DHMO. I assure you that I do believe you guys just think I'm over reacting or acting in some self interest, which would account for "gag" replies. But I have faith that after I explained myself you might not. Thanks for reading and sorry for taking up your time with such trivial shit.
Reminder Sunday Lunchtime
Just a reminder about Wikipedia:Meetup/London 10. You said you might be able to make it. Hopefully we'll see you Sunday 1p.m.! -- Harry Wood (talk) 00:29, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- I'll be there! :) Al Tally talk 01:31, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 23 | 2 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:15, 8 June 2008 (UTC)