User talk:Sjakkalle/March, April and May 2006

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Sjakkalle

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cactus.man (talk | contribs) at 07:19, 17 March 2006 (my RfA). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome to my talkpage!

Ordinarily, any comments placed here will stay, and only simple vandalism will be reverted. Personal attacks against me will stay, such comments say a lot more about the person making them than the person who is targeted.

Note that I am quite inconsistent with where I make responses. If it is a response I think several people might be interested in reading, I might respond here. Otherwise, I will probably respond on your talkpage. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:53, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Previous archives of my talkpage can be found at

MSK

I've got confused by the minimalist interface of unblocker that's linked from Block log (it wasn't there last time I used it. Thank you for doing the unblocking yourself, even if some people probably won't approve this action.  Grue  15:30, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your message

I agree with you, but feel that this is one of those obvious cases. A look through the contribs shows nothing but trouble, and very few constructive edits. There has been vandalism, personal attacks, particularly against Muslim editors, trolling, obsession with user boxes, posting of personal details, attempts to publicize a website critical of WP; and then on that website, very serious personal attacks (rising to the level of libel) against a number of editors, and the publication of their supposed real names. The off-site behavior is in itself close to warranting an indefinite block, under the provision of placing users in danger, and when combined with the on-site behavior, it's indicative of no respect for the project or for the people who contribute to it. I take Jimbo's view that this isn't a playground, and it especially isn't one where we go around attacking one another. SlimVirgin (talk) 15:38, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Need your debate-closing help

I really, really appreciate your recent closing the political party userboxes debate, and re-instating said userboxes. You seem to be one of the more rational admins. :-) Thank you. Yet we seem to have another problem: User:Grue recently archived debate on the next 30 or so debates, but he failed to render judgements, or re-instate userboxes per debate results. There is a policy poll going on, but until the conclusion of that poll (which seems to be becoming inconclusive), all these userboxes are in limbo. The one I care about is User Catholic Evangelical, but they all need looking at. Thanks for your consideration. I would do it myself, but I do not have such powers.    GUÐSÞEGN   – UTEX – 16:59, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see they are archived. A quick cursory view shows them to be restored. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:28, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops.

I didn't see that you'd closed LUEshi (5th nomination) in between when I put the {{inuse}} on it and when I closed it. This would not be a problem but for the fact that I closed it differently than you. If you'd like to have your version stand I'll not be fussed.
brenneman{T}{L} 08:13, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it. I think that you are one of those who don't endorse the "binary" school of AFD closing, but I do (and of course, O know best right? :-)). In that school a "merge" result and "keep" result are the same thing, at least administrerially speaking, since they can be altered by any editor without needing the admin tools. If you think that it's better to merge the article then don't let a "keep" result prevent you from being bold and merging it. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Library IPs?

I have posted a comment to one of your blockings which has applied to an entire school community at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:207.228.220.93

I would greatly apreciate it if you looked at it, thank you.

OK, I have responded at User talk:207.228.220.93. Sjakkalle (Check!) 15:44, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have done the same thing again at User_talk:209.113.221.11

Yeah, I've unblocked it now (that's why you were able to send me this message) and put a shared IP warning on the talkpage. Sjakkalle (Check!) 15:05, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Thanks for your support in my RFA. The final vote count was (66/2/3), so I am now an administrator. Please let me know if at any stage you need help, or if you have comments on how I am doing as an admin. Have a nice day! Stifle 17:02, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LUEshi

I really have no idea what's going with the last AfD. Aaron seemed to have been in the proccess of closing it, when you closed the AfD. When Aaron overwrote your decision (intentionally or unintentionally), Sileonsr reverted it back. I was wondering if you could clarify some of this, since the multiple closures and reversion have kind of muddied the waters. Thank you.--Toffile 00:06, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I talked about this above. Aaron closed the debate as a merge, not noticing that I had already closed it as a keeper, most likely because of a large green "in progress" template. In view, it doesn't matter very much because a "merge" is a version of "keep", and the difference between is a discussion for the articles' talkpages. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:55, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John Bambenek

You recently closed this AfD (and deleted). I'm not sure if this quesiton should go to you, but I was wondering why the link on the page for the "deletion vote page" doesn't redirect to the 2nd nomination (the one resulting in delete). -- Superdosh 13:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, simply because nobody added a link to the first AFD page. I'll add it now. Sjakkalle (Check!) 14:07, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Five little speckled frogs

You wrote: "although I note that nobody mentioned that the article contains hardly anything else than the lyrics". I did...twice. Oh well, at least I tried. -- Krash (Talk) 17:14, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops!! You're right. Sorry, I read it too quickly. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:03, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

This user thinks it is ironic that thanks for supporting Cyde's successful RFA came in the form of a userbox.

Here's a userbox for you. --Cyde Weys 04:44, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, congratulations, and good luck with your new tools! Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:02, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Savvica

I strongly disagree with your arguments for resulting the Savvica AfD as a 'no consensus'. Can you please tell me how I shall take my complaint further? It should be listed for a review by other administrators. --Sleepyhead 10:54, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can list it on WP:DRV. It was a close case, so there is a fair chance of it being overturned. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:58, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks for the quick reply. I find that page a bit confusing - how do I list the article? --Sleepyhead 11:20, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It would be an entry something like this at the top of the March 9 entry on the DRV page:
====[[Savvica]]====
This article was kept as a no consensus after [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Savvica]]. However, I disagree because... ~~~~
Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:30, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. --Sleepyhead 11:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

JDoorjam's RfA

 Thank you!
Sjakkalle/March, April and May 2006, thank you for your support in my RfA: it passed with a final tally of 55/1/2. If you want a hand with anything, please gimme a shout. Again, thanks! – JDoorjam Talk 22:10, 9 March 2006 (UTC) [reply]

ISP meltdown

Thanks for cleaning up after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vote stacking for me. My service provider actually told me it could be as long as forty-eight hours before the problem would be fixed, and delirium tremens kicked in instantly. - brenneman{T}{L} 22:40, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Sjakk alle? I am not a good player, but it's those kinds of people that I can usually beat. Anyway, I wanted to thank you for taking the time to consider my RfA, which passed this morning. If there's ever a project that I can help you with, just ask; you know where to find me. ×Meegs 09:09, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:81.153.19.106

Just so you know they blanked Chemical compound too, my bot autoreverted it but its something to note, it looks like they're a bit of a recurring vandal. -- Tawker 09:10, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I see. Curps appears to have blocked him. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:20, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit block

Wondering why my edits are frequently blocked by yourself. Laurel Bush 10:32, 14 March 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Protologism

Hey Sjakkalle. As you took the prod notices off Protologism, I thought I should inform you of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Protologism. Proto||type 16:27, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: Hellcat & Longbow

The rule we mostly used for deciding whether to keep ships or not was whether they appear in more than one game. But we would've kept the Excal for its "historical" significance even if it had never appeared again, and originally I didn't think we should keep the Claw because its second appearance is more of a cameo. (I was overruled.) Hence, the secondary rule: notability. I don't think the Hellcat and Longbow were notable, but that's just me; we've been doing most of our discussion at Talk:Wing Commander (computer game), and I'm going to bring up the issue there and see what everyone else thinks. Feel free to contribute. =) Marblespire 22:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If Defined, etc

Would it be possible to have the talk pages for these templates undeleted as well? —Locke Cole • t • c 08:00, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, will do so now. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:10, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! =) —Locke Cole • t • c 08:49, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"oh snap"

My mistake, looked like the rules were being broken. Sorry! --Bob, just Bob 14:29, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Successful RfA

File:Saguaro2.jpg Thanks for your support and kind words on my recent RfA, which I am pleased to say passed with a final tally of 80/1/1. If you ever need any help, or if I mess something up as an admin, please let me know.

Cactus.man ✍ 07:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sjakkalle/March,_April_and_May_2006&oldid=44179352"