User talk:Bluegoblin7/Archive 36

This 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.

« 1

← Archive 35

Archive 36

39 »

Cleveland Steamer

Its no vandalism, look at swell its simply an article about a nasty practice, please dont delete it. --95.114.66.67 (talk) 15:22, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA template

I guess you are the main head at WP:PGA. However, you have been promoting articles without adding {{good-large}}. I already added all current GAs this template on their talk pages. Next time can you please add the template when you promote the articles? Thanks, Jona yo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 00:53, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, because we haven't used this template consistently in all the time I've been here and was removed from all templates per a consensus that is somewhere in the archives. I will go and remove it (again) if you do add it. Clearly another part of the rules that never got updated. Seriously - when it comes to P(V)GA don't even try and correct me. Gob lin 00:55, 4 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Dendodge![reply]

First of all, don't come with me with the damn attitude. I did not give you one so I would appreciate if you don't. I'm not like User:Orashmatash, I tell it how it is and I don't do no I am sorry. Point blank, period. Don't test me because I'm not the one. Now on a more positive note, (1) do not remove the templates, unless you can provide a link to verify you're claims. (2) older articles have them so why not newer ones? (3) the template needs to be deleted if it will not be used again. (4) not everyone is perfect, so don't act like you know it all either. Gratts, Jona yo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 01:01, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Itemised more sensibly because it's early. Re: attitude, don't worry, you're not getting special treatment, I really do have an attitude with everyone.

Already done it. It's buried somewhere, if you care that much you can go find it. The agreement was made.
The majority of promotions do not have it; if I have missed any whilst removing then please point them out.
{{QD}} is your friend. Sorry for not having the time to getting round to it. There is more to life than Wikipedia.
Never said I did know it all. I don't. But when it comes to any of the main community processes I do. Mainly because I wrote them. And am by-and-large the person that enacts them. Ask all of these lovely people.

Gob lin 01:08, 4 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Belinda![reply]

No, either you give me those links like I have done for you or then I won't accept your argument. Secondly, uh-uh sweetie not with me. You either give me the fucking respect or you out buddy, I ain't no little kid like you to be screaming and pounding up and down to others. I stand alone and do me. Yes he is my bud, however, I'm blunt and I am not going to allow you to keep giving me the little attitude. Like who is you? Keep sticking your head up in the air and have followers, because I'm a stand-alone and do me. Jona yo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 01:14, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, now try that again without the expletives and by actually speaking in correct, well formatted english (or even better, simple english), because I couldn't understand a word and I'm a native speaker who's studied English to undergrad level. Gob lin 01:16, 4 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ GoblinBots![reply]

It's called slang, get a urban dictionary bruh. Jona yo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 01:18, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TALK, though sadly it's not as comprehensive about not using slang as I thought. We're Simple English Wikipedia for a reason. Gob lin 01:22, 4 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Barras![reply]

Rollback removed

Because of your mass reverting of good faith edits (the good article templates), I have removed your use of the rollback tool. As you are well aware, rollback is reserved for obvious vandalism. It is never to be used to revert good faith edits or during a content dispute. As always, you can request restoration of the tool at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback. Only (talk) 01:18, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quite happy using undo to be honest. Even if I had wouldn't have had an explanation for it so not fussed whatsoever. Gob lin 01:23, 4 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Jersey![reply]

Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		Thanks BG7 for the work you do around the place, especially in finalizing areas like the PGA and GA process. Keep up the good work. Peterdownunder (talk) 11:20, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Peter, but much more importantly thanks to people such as yourself who write the content that appears at the processes. Sadly I don't have the time anymore to dedicate to writing better quality articles, though I am hoping to try and get one written in the near future! And, most importantly of all, it's great to have you back and glad to hear that you're recovering well! Kind regards, Gob lin 17:04, 4 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Belinda![reply]

Signature

Hi BG7, just wondering, how do you get your signature to alternate between names? (e.g. I <3 Belinda!)(And then it can change to I <3 The Rambling Man!) Orashma tash 17:01, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Orashmatash! If you take a look at User:Bluegoblin7/Signature and click the 'Change' tab you'll bring up the code that I use to generate the signature, including the randomisation. The same code could be used for colours, links or anything that you can think of! Once you've created a page you then 'substitute' that in the signature box using {{subst:User:Bluegoblin7/Signature}} (For mine) and then checking the box to treat the signature as Wikimarkup. Hope this helps - if you're stuck or confused please let me know and I will do my best to help you out! :) Kind regards, Gob lin 17:07, 4 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Nifky![reply]

Thanks for your help Goblin! Orashma tash 17:11, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problemo. Gob lin 17:15, 4 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Belinda![reply]

Hi Goblin, I tried the signature out, but I have ran into a... rather large problem. It duplicates the time. When I take away the {{CURRENTDATE}} template from the Signature subpage, it gives only one time, which is good, but it does it after the "I <3" part. You'll see the problem when I sign this post. Help? Orashma tash 03:44, Friday, April 19, 2024 (UTC) I ♥ Fr33kman! 19:29, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Two ways of solving that - or three:

Just remove the current date and leave it to appear afterwards automatically, which could be easier.
Sign using three tildes rather than four, which is what I do, and will not include the second date.
(My preferred option) Alter the signature so that it is not basically the same as mine. Took me some time to get it working and is an idea that I had and have been doing for a couple of years. Obviously, it's your call at the end of the day, but the fact that it has been lifted pretty much verbose is somewhat annoying and could be quite confusing to some.

Hope that helps... Gob lin 19:41, 4 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Juliancolton![reply]

Don't worry, I'm not going to copy it. I just wanted to know how to get the "I <3" part to generate. Thanks for all your help! (The sig still isn't done) Orash matash 19:47, 4 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Normandy![reply]

Probably should be 'flattered' that you've become the second person to use my font and gradient too... Gob lin 19:51, 4 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ The Rambling Man![reply]

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
This is my finished one -- Orash matash 19:58, 4 October 2011 (UTC) I like... Maths! It randomly generates "I like...". You can check my signature subpage if you want to see all the possible generations if you care that much...[reply]

Gobby's got a great sig, even if it doesn't always say "I ♥ Fr33kman" often enough :P fr33k man 21:51, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, you might want to click here. I'm sure if you find one of Gobby's signatures on that page, you'll be pleasantly surprised... Orash matash 18:25, 5 October 2011 (UTC) I like... Rollback![reply]

Queues 4 & 5

Hey, I undid your edit that undid my edit. Bet you're wondering why...because it violated WP:BRD. Your claim that "because nobody responded, they automatically agree with you" has no basis in policy; my use of BRD does. If there's disagreement, you should wait until the discussion is closed, and more people have commented. You didn't even bother to respond even after you knew that the discussed existed! This is a community; we discuss things, not just make BOLD/OWNy edits Purpleback pack 89≈≈≈≈ 13:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Such a hypocritical message there. Also, consider yourself warned for breaching WP:3RR. My initial reversion was not bold and therefore BRD does not apply. It had the backing from numerous users, including three administrators. If you were slightly active in the process I might consider your view with a bit more weight. As it is, I don't. Gob lin 13:54, 10 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Chenzw![reply]

Hypocritical? Basically everything you've said in that statement is wrong:

Why should I be warned for 3RR. I made ONE revision this morning, and I'll make a SECOND one per BRD until the discussion is settled. Even after that, I still gots one more in the chamber
"Slightly active?" I have over a dozen DYKs, all of which are delineated at my user page for your viewing pleasure
Backing of three administrators my left foot. If you had the backing of administrators, why didn't you say so in your initial edit summary? Not saying so would leave me no impression other than it was a bold edit, and therefore perfectly subject to BRD

Guess I'm the goat of the week. Last week, you bullied Goblin, this week you bullied me. AGF for once. Going to undo your revision per BRD Purpleback pack 89≈≈≈≈ 15:46, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Content dispute

Continued back and forth revision are not good. Please don't... instead discuss. Reference [1]. Jon@talk:~$ 16:31, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that it has been there, unchallenged, for over a month until it first gets reverted suggests that the other user is the one out of line, as do the views of other users. Either way, it's protected in the 'correct' state, so I don't care. Gob lin 16:38, 10 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Nifky![reply]

Um, that's not what BRD says...it was a bold edit; it can be reverted at any time. I commented against it in addition to BRDing you, and no one commented to the contrary for over a week. That either indicates support for me, or no consensus, which means to revert to before the bold revision. And, even now Goblin, you only have one person who agrees with you. And how am I the one out of line? I didn't violate BRD, and didn't threaten to ignore all rules or "block any attempt" by me under any circumstances. That seems like an ownership threat to me Purpleback pack 89≈≈≈≈ 18:32, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Meh, there is no correct version. :) I just protect it how I found it. m:The Wrong Version. Regards, Jon@talk:~$ 16:47, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You know what I mean! :P Gob lin 16:48, 10 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ PeterSymonds![reply]

AN notice

For your continued deplorable behavior, I ANed you Purpleback pack 89≈≈≈≈ 19:01, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

If one were to ask for a peer review, how would one do so now that it is closed? DJDunsie ^(talk) 16:21, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ask on someone's talk page? Orashmatash (talk) 17:51, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But it's a community thing - it needs the input of multiple editors. DJDunsie ^(talk) 17:15, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ask multiple editors or post on simple talk that you would like someone to look at your article. -DJSasso (talk) 17:31, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks I'll post at simple talk. DJDunsie ^(talk) 17:35, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This AN argument

Hi Goblin, I just wanted to say that the AN argument is just all-round stupid. I realise you mean no bad-faith (I hope) and therefore I support and will continue to support you throughout. If you see any more topics about this, tell an admin. Maybe it would be in everyone's best interest if some administrative action is taken on the people who constantly open topics about these silly arguments that could be sorted out easily without any admin attention. Good luck! Orashmatash (talk) 17:50, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support Orashmatash. I'm staying out of it because this comes and goes from time to time and normally gets dealt with. There's little point be inputting as the same conclusion tends to be reached! I certainly mean no bad faith and my only concern is improving the way that this wiki operates. It's come on a long way in the three years I've been here (Well, 2 years, 11 months and 29 days - Thursday's the threshold!) but there's still much to be done. Feathers do get ruffled from time to time but it's the only way I've found to make any difference, sadly. Gob lin 17:54, 11 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Nifky![reply]

I'm sure, by now, you know how I feel about this kind of thing. Keep on keeping on. Stay on the right side of the line, but keep it up. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:58, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Orashmatash has given you some cookies! Now enjoy them!

For all your help. :) Orashma tash 14:12, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aww, thanks! :) Gob lin 15:44, 15 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Bsadowski1![reply]

No problem, you deserve it. :) Orashma tash 15:50, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Renomination time frame discussion

Your comments are welcomed at Wikipedia_talk:Proposed_good_articles#Renomination_time_frame to discuss the time frame. If you can find and link to the discussion where the consensus was reached, that'd be awesome. Thanks, Only (talk) 21:22, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For your bots and whatnot...

		The da Vinci Barnstar
		Hi Goblin! I decided that the contributions of GoblinBot4 couldn't go un-barnstarred for any longer, so it is with great pleasure that I award you the da Vinci Barnstar for your excellent programming skills. Keep the bots coming! `:)` Cheers, Orashma tash 17:36, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Change of heart?

This would be out of place on the GA discussion page, so I'll ask here: Why the change of heart from Wikipedia_talk:Very_good_articles#Very_Good_Lists to now out of curiosity? Only (talk) 21:57, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I hope it doesn't have anything to do with me personally. If it does, I hope I can fix that :) Jona yo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 22:24, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has changed their opinion from two years ago?! Normandy ^(talk) 09:06, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]