User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31

☕ A@📧mail ☕ 🐣c🐣 😎 💀d💀 😎 ⭐b⭐ 🧮 🗄️ 🧹

⬅️ Previous Archive Page (#-1) ☕ 🗄️ ☕

Next Archive Page (#1) ➡️

🌳 🍀 🌳 🌿 🌳 🌱 🌳 🗄️ClueBot Detailed Index Archive #AndreJustAndre/Archives/31🗄️ 🌳 🌱 🌳 🌿 🌳 🍀 🌳
1	Thanks	2007-07-03 04:44	2007-07-03 04:44	1	122	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
2	Hey my brother	2007-07-03 07:12	2007-07-03 07:12	1	929	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
3	The Blend	2007-07-04 02:16	2007-07-04 20:25	2	996	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
4	Here's a good ice-breaker...	2007-07-04 04:00	2007-07-04 04:53	3	1984	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
5	RfB question	2007-07-04 14:14	2007-07-05 17:07	2	645	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
6	AFD explanations	2007-07-06 08:13	2007-07-06 08:13	1	1811	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
7	RfB	2007-07-09 23:25	2007-07-10 01:00	2	418	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
8	Thank you	2007-07-10 16:19	2007-07-10 16:19	1	115	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
9	My RfB	2007-07-10 22:55	2007-07-10 22:55	3	1890	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
10	Ral315 WP:100	2007-07-10 23:49	2007-07-10 23:54	2	469	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
11	Bureaucrat promotion	2007-07-11 02:56	2007-07-13 01:54	22	5428	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
12	Thank you for the welcome	2007-07-11 03:06	2007-07-11 03:08	2	533	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
13	Congratulations	2007-07-11 12:39	2007-07-11 12:39	1	140	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
14	Thanks Andrevan!	2007-07-11 13:33	2007-07-11 13:33	1	114	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
15	RE:Thanks!	2007-07-11 15:11	2007-07-11 15:11	1	361	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
16	RFB	2007-07-11 15:25	2007-07-12 02:19	4	1129	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
17	Re: my (Black Harry's page)	2007-07-11 22:19	2007-07-11 22:19	1	710	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
18	You're welcome!	2007-07-11 23:06	2007-07-11 23:06	1	151	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
19	RE: Username	2007-07-12 04:36	2007-07-12 04:36	1	372	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31
20	My RfA	2007-07-12 09:01	2007-07-12 09:01	1	609	User talk:AndreJustAndre/Archives/31

Thanks

Thanks for the welcome to Wikipedia

Gollum the fishy hobbit 04:44, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey my brother

Andre, how are you? Thanks for dropping by in my talk page. Right now I am working on my Mega-project (That's how I call it). Ken Burns the filmmaker, made a documentary called "The War" which PBS will air in September. The documentary is about World War II and has created a controversy because it has totally omitted the contributions made by the Hispanics and women of this country. So, guess what? I have taken it upon myself to write an article about "Hispanics in World War II" which will cover all of the bases. This article, after the final copyedits are done, will first be published in soem of the magazines that I write for and then I will work on the Wiki version. I plan on doing a job that will go all the way to FA and mainpage by Sept.

When I'm done with the magazine version, you will be among the selected few to view it before publication. Tony the Marine 07:12, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

The Blend

There is a link... It's not as prominent as it used to be (I'll try and fix that) but it's there. About halfway down our MySpace page on the left there's a picture of one of our albums with a button below it that says "iTunes". Click on that and click on "see all albums". All of those, except the one released in 1977 (apparently there was a notable band in the 70's called The Blend!) are ours. The blue one is a live acoustic album.

If you don't have iTunes we're also on Napster and a bunch of other stuff... Grandmasterka 02:16, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

(Hope that helped.) Grandmasterka 20:25, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Here's a good ice-breaker...

Hi,

As an RfB question, this might be properly called a koan (or, maybe, a litmus test): Do you believe RfA is broken? Best wishes, Xoloz 04:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

"Voting is a tool" addresses most of my concerns. Personally, I wish you hadn't written "Polls are Evil" -- I prefer the phrase "Polls give no answers." Mechanistic decision-making in a human enterprise is a very bad thing: we need humans to be free to inject subjective judgment into every possible place on the wiki. Having said that, numbers are decidedly not irrelevant; the radical bunch who favor a "pure discussion" model on RfA, disallowing any reference to numbers at all, are asking for chaos. Any consensus forum needs to allow "less loud participants", those who don't have the time to follow a thread of a mile-long length, a voice in the deliberations. RfA's "vote counts" do that. At a certain level, also, when two sides have equally-valid arguments, it does matter which side has more heads in its column. I would never argue that "voting" be held as determinative; but, when folks push for the abolition of any numeric measurement, I do get a little upset. "Pure discussion" mile-long threads also have the grave disadvantage of being hopelessly opaque to all but the very-involved discussants. It is in this respect that your reference to "zen" made me uncomfortable: elusive though consensus is, Wikipedia must have means in place to make it as transparent as possible. "Voting as a tool" provides that transparency, even if the percentages are unimportant in close cases.

Does anything I've said make you think I need clubbing with a "clue-bat"? ;) If no, this is progress! Best wishes, Xoloz 04:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Any other points you wish to discuss would be welcome, as I am always lonely and loquacious; but, you have eased my concerns. I will not oppose the RfB. You're cool. :) Best wishes, Xoloz 04:53, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

RfB question

I've asked an optional question on your RfB, the same as I have asked of all current RfB candidates. Walton^talk 14:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Based on your note on my Oppose, I apologise if I misrepresented your viewpoint. I have changed to Weak Oppose, and clarified my comments accordingly; I understand that you wouldn't use/abuse IAR in closing RfAs. Nonetheless, I can't change to Support, but I doubt that worries me, as you're on track to passing anyway. Walton^talk 17:07, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

AFD explanations

I'm not sure if the length is justified, you have a good point there that I've considered myself.

These are articles people created. People care about them and their removal. Although people don't usually protest AFD decisions, it doesn't mean they don't have a view -- especially on the few AFDs where there are strong views and both sides will see any decision as biased or ignorant.

I see AFDs as a place where one is making a decision which is (subject to occasional relisting) every bit as permanent as any arbcom decision would be. There should be a good explanation which leaves people thinking "I might not agree, but I see how it was reached", and in most cases that is the result [1].

None of this justifies excess wordage; the reason for that is simple -- sometimes I'm not sure how to keep it short, and since AFD results are typically read once by everyone, then archived in the dust, I'm less worried if it's a bit long. Sometimes as you've noticed, that strays into "awfully long". The longest it's ever got is the AFD on Doctor of Chiropractic. But you'll also note that that one, where I denied the deletion, got a public congratulation on WP:AN ... from the nominator whose request was turned down, no less. [2]

Don't know if any of that helps! I'm not sure one can do justice to such a debate if it's too brevified. But I do take your point, and if I see ways to shorten in future, I'll bear it in mind. Thanks! FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 08:13, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

RfB

Done. Good luck. :-) SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 23:25, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

It has been awhile, but I have no problem still supporting you. Good luck. K1Bond007 01:00, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for welcoming me here and helping in my searching.Dilando 16:19, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfB

Thank you, Andre, for participating in my RfB, which ended unsuccessfully with a final tally of (80/22/3). I shall continue to work on behalf of the community's interests and improve according to your suggestions. Most sincere regards, Húsönd 22:55, 10 July 2007 (UTC) Obrigado, Andre, por participares no meu RfB, que terminou sem sucesso com um resultado final de (80/22/3). Continuarei a trabalhar em prol dos interesses da comunidade e a melhorar segundo vossas sugestões. Calorosos cumprimentos, Húsönd 22:55, 10 July 2007 (UTC) Thanks • Obrigado • Gracias • Merci • Danke • Спасибо • Tack • Kiitos Esker • Köszönöm • Takk • Grazie • Hvala • ありがとう • 謝謝 • 谢谢

By the way, the closing time of your RfB is near. I wish you better luck than I had. :-) Húsönd 22:55, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Ral315 WP:100

You beat me here. I ended up edit conflicting. :) Acalamari 23:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Heh; thanks for the congratulations. :) I made sure not to add myself to WP:100 when my RfA reached that number; figured it was best to let someone else do it for me. Acalamari 23:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Bureaucrat promotion

Per your RFB and discussion on the bureaucrat's noticeboard, I've promoted you to bureaucrat. Congratulations. Raul654 02:56, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations, Andrevan! Acalamari 02:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Congrations! No doubt in my mind that you will make a great 'crat! ~ Wikihermit 02:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Congrats Andrevan (even though I opposed, I hope you become more active) Majorly (talk) 02:58, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

THAT'S TWO! HOLY HELL! CONGRATS! Kwsn^(Ni!) 03:01, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations Andrevan. I hope you are able to use the extra tools to everyone's advantage. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 03:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations, foo'! Third time's the charm, eh? That was goddamned epic. -Silence 03:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations, that is to say, more than one Congratulation, on finally achieving it! Comic 03:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Congrats! Best of luck. Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 04:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Well done! The second of the day - let's hope that you are not the last one for a long while to come! Good luck with your new powers and responsibilities. (aeropagitica) 07:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Congrats on achieveing the impossible with me :-) --Deskana (talk) 08:42, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations and you are very welcome! --Merovingian (T, C, E) 09:44, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Congrats! :D FunPika 10:56, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Awesome! Congratulations, man. It feels good to have another 'crat. Good luck! —Anas ^talk? 11:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, wow, that was quick turnaround. Congrats! -- Zanimum 15:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, since you commented on my talk page, I'll tell you what I think: we have plenty of bureaucrats already, and because of that nobody should be promoted unless they receive a very high level of support (no more than a handful of opposes, I'm thinking less than five, or ten max). The opposition on your RfB was too strong to merit promotion. I am concerned about bureaucrats forming an elite class of users who exist in numbers far greater than necessary, and it becoming a matter of status rather than function. Everyking 10:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I have my concerns too but good luck anyway. Haukur 11:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for considering my opposition in the mode it was meant for: constructive. Good luck with the new tools. -- nae'blis 13:31, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Also incase you are wondering, I think there are 3 bots ready to be flagged if you want to try out Special:Makebot. :) FunPika 11:31, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Wield us! Wield us!

Congratulations on your successful RfB! Here are your shiny new squeegee, sponge and chalk. :-) Festive regards, Húsönd 23:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey - no problem. I thought that the question might help to make things a little clearer, make your (from what I could see) ability to wield the crat tools more transperant. Cheers, -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 05:38, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

• Teensy bit late, but congratulations! I see you're already doing all sorts of crat-like things, so I won't say good luck, but I do hope you enjoy yourself :) Cheers, ~ Riana ⁂ 01:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome

Thank you for the welcome and for sharing your thoughts on my video game inquiry. Also, good luck in becoming a Wikipedia Bureaucrat.Camann^TALK 03:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Seems you have just recently been granted the position. I hereby upgrade my "good luck" to "congratulations"!Camann^TALK 03:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations

Best of luck with your new position. I'm sure that you'll be one of the good ones. Modernist 12:39, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Andrevan!

I appreciate the username change. Have an awesome week. -- GoDawgs 13:33, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

RE:Thanks!

Don't tell me; show me by delving into pages that require bureaucrat attention!! :-) —« ANIMUM » 15:11, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

RFB

Congrats on your RFB. Politics rule 15:25, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

• Congraulations, you know that I have always believed in you and that is why I have always backed you up. You will make a great "crat". Take care Tony the Marine 19:33, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
• Deepest, warmest, heartiest Congratulations Andrevan. I know you will use the new tools well. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (ταlκ) 20:18, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure you'll so well, congrats! JACOPLANE • 2007-07-11 21:34

• Congratulations, Sorry for the delay, but I want to say congratulations for becoming newest bureaucrat about few days ago. I think that you will be a great bureaucrat. Daniel ⁵¹²⁷ 02:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: my (Black Harry's page)

Congratulations on becoming a 'crat. I'm happy (but a little surprised) that both you and Deskana both passed, and Ral315 may as well. On a more personal note, I did decide to return here, though I probably won't be editing at full power for a little while, since I still feel a little burned out (probably made too many edits in June for my own good). Of course I also changed my username to New England, which was due mainly to privacy concerns (didn't feel comfortable using my real name), but I guess part of the reason for changing it was to symbolize a "rebirth" here.

Thanks and Good Luck,
New England 22:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome!

You're welcome for the support and the kind words! I am sure you'll do well as a bureaucrat. Acalamari 23:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

RE: Username

Hi,

Sorry for requesting a rename to an active username. However, when I look at User:Isaac, the username appears to have been inactive for four years, and has only made one minor grammatical change in 2003 (changing "twenty-fourth" to "twenty-four"). Are wikipedia accounts ever deleted or recycled?

Thanks St.isaac 04:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Well, I was looking for a prettier way to do this, but I'm not very artistic, so I'll just say thank you for your support in my RfA, which was closed as successful. Big congrats are due you as well. Now we both have more work to do! Take care! -- But|seriously|folks  09:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)