User talk:Sasha Callahan/September 2007
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
 Archives | |
|---|---|
2007
| |
2008
| |
Your image
Hi there. I'm really sorry, but I deleted your userpic which you uploaded. Contact me via email and I'll explain. Really sorry - Alison ☺ 01:01, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
I've closed your Request for Adminship early, see "Decision Process" on WP:RFA for more details of what this entailed.
Your RFA was unlikely to succeed, as most of the opposes were based on your lack of experience and your supports were either with reservation (you do not have email enabled on your account, which is nearly a requirement for adminship) or moral support. To request adminship, you have to earn the trust of the community, and while experience on your part may not be an issue, the community's experience with you has been too brief for them to develop any sort of impression on if they can trust you.
Please note, this isn't stating that the community does not trust you with the tools, they're simply saying "We don't know you yet. Please stay and show us what you're capable of."
We all look forward to seeing just what you're capable of. :) ~Kylu (u|t) 01:13, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- I hope you aren't discouraged by your RfA. You are definitely on the right track! Feel free to drop me a note if I can help you at all. Flyguy649 talk contribs 05:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, please don't be discouraged about the RfA - it was far too early, but you haven't been on Wikipedia long enough to realise that. A little background; when Wikipedia started Jimbo allowed everyone to have the admin buttons that were available. It was quickly found that a lot of damage could be caused by people who used them incorrectly - accidently or otherwise. The "trusted" editors kept the tools, and other editors who became trusted were allowed them too - these were the first admins. In these early days most editors knew each other, and who could be relied on to use the tools properly and new editors were easily recognised by the rest of the community as being reliable. As the community grew this ability to recognise the editors who were able to use the buttons appropriately became more difficult. Nowadays other admins and editors require a larger volume of work and good answers to the standard questions which demonstrate the applicants understanding of policy and reliability to enable them to make that decision.
- What I am saying that it is very likely that you would make an excellent admin now, that you are trustworthy and you grasp Wikipedia policy. All you need is the few more months of applying your skills and knowledge, so that even fools like me can see the obvious truth - that you should be an admin. Keep editing for a little while, get your edit count up over 3,000 and apply again. I look forward to supporting your application next time around. LessHeard vanU 11:10, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks everyone, I would've responded sooner, but my comp was offline for the last 24 hours or so. I will take all the advice given to heart. Sasha Callahan 21:38, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi! A belated welcome to Wikipedia...
...I came across you through something to do with a vandal who was misusing your userspace pic... I'm a 16-year-old Catholic too, and have been editing Wikipedia, using various accounts (my first main account is now disused), since December 2005. Perhaps we could keep an eye on each other's contributions and guide each other whenever and wherever guidance is needed... :-) I'm not entirely reliable in sticking to official Wikipedia policy - I do sometimes forget some important little bit - so any help in that area would also be welcome! However, I think I've managed to behave myself here on Wikipedia for a while now, so I can help you whenever and wherever you need it.--Vox Humana 8' 15:27, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Sasha, I can vouch for Vox. He's one of the good guys :) - Alison ❤ 16:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks Vox, I'm sorry it took so long to respond. It will be nice to have another editor help me. Sasha Callahan 18:26, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
"Edit war"
I have contacted the involved editor, "WIKI-GUY-16" and I am awaiting his response. I'm well aware of the "three reverts" rule but he will not budge on this argument and seems to think he is correct, when he is not. I am not trying to be difficult but uphold the status of the article since I have been monitoring and working on it since early this year, same with Curtis and it's various branched pages. --Ayoleftyz 03:10, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- I understand, however you two should take it to the article's talk pages instead of discussing via edit summaries. Sasha Callahan 03:12, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yup, I agree. --Ayoleftyz 03:19, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Linking to special pages
As regards posting links to somebody's contributions, rather than linking to, say, "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/WIKI-GUY-16", you can link to [[Special:Contributions/WIKI-GUY-16]].--Vox Humana 8' 18:20, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
AFD UIS Journal
Please see WP:DTTR. And a Red Sox fan! Ugh. I don't much care what happens to the article, thanks for notifying me though. IvoShandor 22:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- I understand about the automated processes and all that, just try to bear in mind that not all regular users are familiar with such tools yet, and a template can be seen as impersonal and rude (I don't really care, just thought it might save you some grief down the road). Even though you use Twinkle the signature on the page still leads back to you. Nothing personal here, just thought it might have been something you hadn't considered. IvoShandor 22:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Boston Red Sox
 |
Please accept this invite to join the Red Sox WikiProject, a WikiProject dedicated to improving all articles associated with the Boston Red Sox. Simply click here to accept! |
Hi Sasha. Stumbled across this and thought you might be interested.--Vox Humana 8' 22:53, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Picture
I was just wondering what this picture I have heard so much about contained that it caused such a ruckus thoughout a section of the wikipedia universe. Please advise at your earliest convenience. Clark