User talk:Majorly/Archives/6

From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Simple News Issue Two[change source]

Simple news logo 2.PNG
Issue 2 - 13th December 2008

37,332 editors, 41,432 articles, 109,917 pages.

Announcements Administrators

User Articles
It's a bumper edition from Kennedy this month, with a round-up of recent and future developments, and also news of a spin-off from Simple News.
In his second article, Bluegoblin7 writes of the new wikicup that has come to the wiki.
Yotcmdr writes about the Good Article and Very Good Article processes and how we need your help in his debut article.

[The Team]
  • Christianman16 has applied to be an Administrator.
  • Yotcmdr applied to be an Administrator, and was promoted.
  • Matilda had applied to be an Administrator, but was not promoted.
  • Chocolates had applied to be an Administrator, but was not promoted.
  • Gwib had applied to be a Bureaucrat, but was not promoted.

  • The QandA. Every month, Kennedy will interview one of Simple English Wikipedia's editors, asking them about themselves, and their opinions on Wikipedia. It is an exciting insight behind the anonymous face of an online username. Las month we debuted with Microchip08. Due up next was Shapiros10 but due to uncontrollable circumstances we have had to postpone this to next month. Instead, Bluegoblin7 takes the reigns and interviews Gwib, who kindly volunteered to keep the section in this issue. Click for his interview:
Gwib's Interview

Everyone at Simple News would like to wish all users at the Simple English Wikipedia a very Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

--GoblinBot1 (talk) 17:22, 13 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merry Christmas![change source]

BG7even 21:56, 16 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

One Hundred and One Dalmatians[change source]

Can you take a look at User talk:Hatruthnoble#One Hundred and One Dalmatians? Thanks. Hatruthnoble (talk) 01:13, 20 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No need to bother. The Disney Anon just wanted you to bypass the create protection on the article for him. -- Creol(talk) 03:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I know :-) Majorly talk 13:04, 20 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there :)[change source]

Hi there! I've come back to this site again and will be editing here regularly again, only this time, I won't stop like I did in October. Hope to see you around the site! Cheers, Razorflame 02:30, 27 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I know, you posted on several people's talk pages, and on Simple talk. Majorly talk 02:31, 27 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I only left you this note because I was unsure about whether or not you saw any of those. Felt like it would be better safe than sorry ;). Cheers, Razorflame 02:33, 27 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Simple News[change source]

Simple news logo 2.PNG
Special New Year Edition

39,214 elves, 42,705 reindeer, 112,260 presents.

Annoucements Plans for 2009

  • You can find the wikicup pools here, tomorow! They were chosen randomly by our judge, Bluegoblin7.
  • Happy New Year everyone!

[The Team]

Admin-like action questions[change source]

Hi, Majorly, I have two problems with you two latest admin-like actions. First, You did not block the user so he can still edit the rest of the wiki. Second, you CANNOT ban an IP as IP's change from time to time and an innocent by standard can/will be caught up in your ban. Could you please explain these actions?-- CM16 MLB  18:53, 3 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How difficult is it to spell my name right? It's there in big writing at the top of the page: Majorly The IP is Jonas D. Rand, evading a ban. I haven't banned the IP in any case, just protected his talk page so he cannot post there. He has no reason to post there, being banned. Majorly talk 19:19, 3 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's called a typo first of all, calm down about it....second, Considering IPs change from time to time, like I said, I think you should reduce the time the page is semi-protected to say, oh, 6 months or so, but it's up to you, Admin.-- CM16 MLB  19:33, 3 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments needed[change source]

Your comments are needed.
I have written an apology for enWP here that I intend to present to the enWP community somehow and I would like some constructive criticism please. Please read the "letter" and comment on the "letter" here. Thank you.-- CM16 MLB  07:34, 10 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RFA[change source]

I looked around in the RFA pages and I could have missed it. Are we allowed to ask questions of the person being discussed? Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 20:56, 10 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, of course. Majorly talk 20:57, 10 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you[change source]

Thank you for your support in my RfA which passed 24/0/0. I will do my best to better Wikipedia with the administrative tools that the community has seen fit to grant me. Special thanks to Shapiros10 for nominating me and if you ever need anything, feel free to ask! Malinaccier (talk) (review) 18:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Simple News Issue Three[change source]

Simple News
Issue 3 - 19th January 2009

42,058 editors, 53,245 articles, 124,392 pages.

Announcements Administrators

User Articles
Another bumper article from Kennedy this month, with not one, not two, but three pages including Simple News, DYK and RfA
This month Bluegoblin7 writes about the GA and VGA processes
In his second article for Simple News Yotcmdr writes about his new WikiProject, WikiProject France
In a third short article Yotty talks about his opinions of the RFA system

[The Team]

  • The QandA. Every month, Kennedy interviews one of the Simple English Wikipedia's editors, asking them about themselves, and their opinions on Wikipedia. It is an exciting insight behind the anonymous face of an online username. This month is a bumper edition for QandA, as Kennedy was an idiot and forgot to load the interview last edition! This month will be Shapiros10 and Yotcmdr! Click for their interviews:
Shapiros10 Interview
Yotcmdr Interview

The Commander's Choice

The Commanders's Choice. For every edition, Yotcmdr will be chosing articles that need creating, expanding or being attended to. Here is this edition's list:

--GoblinBot3 (talk) 20:45, 19 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jeongwoldaeboreum[change source]

Hi, do you want to have a glance at this page Jeongwoldaeboreum - on the enwiki it is called Lantern Festival and spelt Jeongwol daeboreum, but the article doesn't mention Korea, so this might be a new page or it could be rubbish. It either needs work or deleting. What are your thoughts?--Peterdownunder (talk) 00:44, 21 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted it. Majorly talk 00:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Quick trigger finger?[change source]

Hi Majorly, I'm teaching pre-freshman Korean students and having them write on a topic of their choice. In a short span, several had their articles deleted for lack of notability. These topics included Cold Stone Creamery, Korean International Circuit, and Pygmalion effect. By my understanding, deletion for these would only be if the article "Is about people, groups, companies or websites that are not notable." One article is about a company, one about a racetrack, and another about a psychological theory, but all of these have articles in the English Wiki. Another student wrote about the Korean festival of Daeboreum, also known as the Lantern Festival. It was brought to your attention as being either related to the (Chinese) Lantern festival or as being nonsense. You went ahead and deleted it as nonsense. Following the Wiki rule of neologisms, shouldn't words be looked into before there is an automatic quick deletion? Perhaps I misunderstand, in which case I would appreciate an explanation... Fortietfideli (talk) 05:26, 21 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It doesn't matter if the articles are on English Wikipedia. If the articles do not show notability here, then they will be deleted. Additionally, they seemed to be poorly formatted and badly written. Neologisms also do not belong on Wikipedia. Hope that helps. Majorly talk 12:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit[change source]

I agree with you in principal. (shock I know). It's just that his then disrupts everyone elses. I won't revert you, I just wanted you to know my reasoning better. -Djsasso (talk) 18:08, 22 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. Majorly talk 18:09, 22 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your vote[change source]

Your vote on the Wikipedia talk page about Requests for adminship (saying will this user be a net positive for the Wikipedia) was something that I forgot about a while ago. Now that you have refreshed my memory about this, I have changed my vote for Juliancolton back to a weak support. Thanks for the illumination and cheers, Razorflame 00:40, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The user[change source]

The IP didn't even get a warning, I think I'm missing something, but it looks like you violated policies.-- Chris†ianMan16 t c r 20:33, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are indeed missing something, you're right. Majorly talk 20:55, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply][change source]

Why was this user blocked when it had no warnings on its' talk page? Aren't you supposed to wait until the user has warnings on his or her talk page before blocking? Razorflame 20:50, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not if they are a returning vandal. Majorly talk 20:55, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Even if they are a returning vandal, shouldn't you give them at least a test3 or test4 first before blocking? Razorflame 21:02, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's what my section above is about.-- Chris†ianMan16 t c r 21:06, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No. Majorly talk 21:07, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I definitely think that you should have given him a warning first before blocking him. Isn't that what it states in the Blocking policy? Razorflame 21:13, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Blocked users should be warned with the right warning templates before administrators block them, but administrators can block a user at any time if they are abusing Wikipedia on purpose or going against other policies." If it's a returning vandal, clearly they're abusing Wikipedia on purpose. Either way (talk) 21:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, that would be the case in this instance. I admit that I had a lapse in memory there for a second. I remember that part now. Razorflame 21:20, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What is your proof that this is a returning vandal?-- Chris†ianMan16 t c r 21:08, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Majorly shared the text of the article with us on IRC and I can confirm that this is definitely returning and ongoing vandalism. Either way (talk) 21:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok just wanted to make sure. Good work, Majorly.-- Chris†ianMan16 t c r 21:25, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RfA thanks[change source]

Thank you for voting in my recent RfA. Unfortunately, I have decided to withdraw from the RfA due to concerns brought up in the oppose votes. The final tally was 4 supports and 6 opposes. I would like to thank American Eagle for the nomination. Razorflame 22:04, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WP:ST[change source]

I apologize for reverting you, but the topic is entirely within policy. It was only a follow-up of this, and was in good faith. He was only asking where the best place to add that would be – a Wikipedia-related discussion. Yes, WP:ST isn't the best place for the question, but a note on his talk page would be better, rather than a full revert. Alright? Thank you. TheAE talk 01:20, 24 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Personal info[change source]

Ha, there were 4 diffs to get rid of! --Gwib -(talk)- 17:38, 25 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RfA Thankspam[change source]

  Majorly/Archives/6, thanks for your comments in my recent RfA which closed as 12/11 or "no consensus". I hope to work on the things that were raised and prove to the community that I am worthy of the mop, this includes showing my RL stability, that I don't have Ownership issues with DYK and also showing that I know what consensus is. Special thanks go to Kennedy for nominating me! Thanks for your comments! GoblinBot3 (talk)  

GoblinBot3 (talk) 11:01, 27 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You improved an article...[change source]

Editors Barnstar.png The Editor's Barnstar
For fixing Cherryade. \o/ Synergy 17:50, 27 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm too good for you, Synergy. Majorly talk 17:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My RfA[change source]

Thank you for participating in my recent request for adminship, which passed with a total of 21/5. I will try to the best of my abilities to maintain the trust of the community, and I will carefully consider the opposes to learn how to further improve. Cheers, Juliancolton (talk) 14:04, 28 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Barnstar[change source]

Barnstar Congratulations: You have been given a Barnstar!

You haven't gotten one in a long time :P. You're a good admin, and you deserve a reward. Shapiros10 15:44, 28 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For...[change source]

Tireless Contributor Barnstar.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
I see you on the wiki all the time. I see you comment here and there, and improve articles. The time you donated to the project, thank you. For outstanding dedication, contributing to the success of this project, I award you The Tireless Contributor Barnstar. You service reflects great credit upon Simple English Wikipedia, The Wikimedia Foundation, and free projects everywhere.

NonvocalScream (talk) 15:49, 28 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bureaucrat[change source]

Hi there Majorly. Now that Creol has retired from the Simple English Wikipedia, I believe that we are in desperate need of another bureaucrat. At this time, you are the only one besides Chenzw who has the experience necessary to becoming a bureaucrat. I would therefore like to propose you running for bureaucrat at this time. Cheers, Razorflame 14:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd love to help out, but I'd fail an RFB right now. If you can persuade those who are likely to oppose me to support, I'd run. Majorly talk 15:10, 29 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What about CheckUser? I would be willing to nominate you for CU as well. Cheers, Razorflame 16:49, 29 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, as for RFB, I'd get a lot of opposers, but if I was given the rights, I'd never abuse the position or the tools. Majorly talk 16:52, 29 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have nominated you for checkuser. Good luck if you decide to accept it. Cheers, Razorflame 16:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]