User talk:Cprompt/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Cprompt. 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.

Archive 1

THanks for the compliments on the Newark article. I'm glad people are reading it. dinopup

Archive 1

Prime Minister of Canada

Hi, is there any reason you protected Prime Minister of Canada? It doesn't seem to have been in an edit war and you haven't noted anything on Wikipedia:protected page. Please could you give the reason on that page or unprotect it. Thanks. Angela . 00:41, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I don't remember protecting it, so either I didn't it accidentally, or someone is using my account. I've unprotected it, and will change my password as a precaution. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

--cprompt 01:46, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Don't worry, loads of pages get accidentally protected every week. Angela . 02:27, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hello,
I'm Miguel Romero Schmidtke, the author of the article Comunleng of the wikipedia in spanish. I would like to thank you for translating it. Since I'm not fluent in english, and as you said you were not fluent in spanish, perhaps we could cooperate for some details.

I think it would be a good idea to compare comunleng directly to english, instead of refearing to spanish. For exemple you could say that x has the same sound of the english sh, and that u is pronounced like a short oo or like the ou in you, it'll be easier to understand for an only-english speaker. You can ask me any question about this subject.

I'm glad you're pleased, Miguel! I will try to translate some more of the article later. You are right, it would be best to make comparisons to English. Don't be afraid to edit the English version! Your English seems good to me, and I will try to correct any errors you might make. There is some information that I am leaving out because myself or Babelfish cannot translate it properly.

--cprompt 07:14, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I was up rather too late that night and didn't quite appreciate the difference between "Talk" and "Sandbox". Ghruaim

No problem.

--cprompt 15:09, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Cprompt....just curious, why'd you nominate Metasquares for admin? If you've watched that page at all, you ought to have known that the answer would be a unanimous no, not because of anyone's conflict with Metasquares, but because Metasquares has hardly contributed here at all. I guess I'm just wondering if this was well-intentioned but maybe a little misinformed (as to the usual requirements for admins), or if you were trying to shake things up or make a statement. I'm not trying to cause trouble--just to understand. Please drop me a note at my talk page if you can help me out. Thanks, Jwrosenzweig 19:49, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Jimbo Wales has said being a sysop should be "no big deal". It's a power that we'd give everyone; except that some people would then delete page after page, or protect every page in site. Being a sysop just means we restrict certain powers until we can trust that a contributor doesn't have any foul intention. In that spirit, I nominated Metasquares, because he has been lurking here for a while, hasn't caused any trouble, and has taken an interest in cleaning up the community. His contributions, though few, are actually pretty substantial. If I recall correctly, there's some articles he wrote from scratch, and a few stubs he turned into articles. I do not think he would go on a page-deleting rampage or block users wantonly. Wikipedians with less time on their hands should not be denied the opportunity to become a sysop.

--cprompt 20:00, 30 Jan 2004

I respect your opinion--sorry if I seemed overly suspicious. I'm afraid I still can't support Metasquares, but I do recognize your very legitimate reasons for nominating him. Thanks for taking the time to respond, Jwrosenzweig 20:46, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)

No problem. Perhaps in the future we'll be able to agree on his nomination, when he's edited more articles.

--cprompt 21:45, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I anticipate that, definitely. We'll see if I beat you to the nomination. :) Thanks for being understanding, Jwrosenzweig 20:40, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Bureaucrat Status

You are now one of the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats. -- Infrogmation 19:47, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Please come to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=MediaWiki:VfD-Dan_Waniek&action=edit and vote to keep this article. There is no reason that we should not include an article on this Romanian iridologist. The cabals attempt to labal this man as a "quack" only shows that inclusion of this page is necessary to maintain NPOV. Lirath Q. Pynnor

cprompt, RE: Keep. He may not be a major celebrity, but he seems fairly big in the field of iridology, which may or may not be a pseudoscience. His inclusion does little harm even if he is not famous, but his exclusion is causing a lot of anxiety. Even if people feel iridology is quackery, we can still treat the subject with NPOV and have a good article. --cprompt 15:29, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC), Dr Waniek has asked me to say the following on his behalf:

Thank you for the kind words! While they are perhaps not quite true, their sincerity, sense of fairness and fair play honor the spirit of truth which made the Wikipedic ideal so generous.

Sincerely, irismeister 17:59, 2004 Apr 19 (UTC)

You're quite welcome! My "kind words" are blushing. :-) --cprompt 00:40, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The sample probably doesn't work... I might get around to replacing it, but all of the samples I upped were lost in software problems (there was a couple days earlier this year where images and media files were lost). Tuf-Kat 15:08, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)

Oh well. :-/ I might make a replacement sometime when I'm on a decent computer. 30 seconds sound okay? --cprompt 16:47, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)

Nothing too drastic

You can't make that claim, in the course of a normal day, everyone does something relatively drastic, it is part of the dragon's wills and the flow of our lives. Ilyanep 14:40, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)

RFC pages on VfD

Should RFC pages be placed on VfD to be deleted? I'm considering removing Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Slrubenstein, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jwrosenzweig and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/John Kenney from WP:VFD. Each of them was listed by CheeseDreams. Your comments on whether I should do this would be appreciated. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:30, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Sure, put them on VfD. Let people talk em over. Makes sense to me. However, I'm not sure it's a good idea to delete RfC pages. I don't feel strongly enough either way to vote on VfD, but certainly list it and try to get a consensus. --cprompt

Sunday, Sunday, Sunday! Come to NYC... +sj +

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
Multi-Licensing Guide
Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Unverified images

Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

Image:LaEspero.mid

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{PD-self}} if you wish to release your own work to the public domain, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. Peter O. (Talk, automation script) 21:30, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

eo:

Saluton Cprompt! Dankon pro la kontribuoj al eo:. Amike Gangleri | Th | T 02:03, 2005 Mar 18 (UTC)

Comunleng

Latest comment: 19 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Arrghhh! People are voting to delete Comunleng! Yes, Comunleng! Come and save it at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Comunleng 24.4.127.164 11:44, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Hi, if you know anything about the history of Comunleng or its creator, or its existence outside the WikiWiki encyclopedias, please add it to the article. Thanks -- Cam 00:46, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

Hello, sorry to answer so late, but you wrote your message at the bottom of my discussion page, and in Enciclopedia Libre we always use the top of the page (and we've just moved to version 1.4 and we've some technical problems too).

All I know about the origin of Comunleng is that it was created in 2000 by students at university in France, Spain, Germany, Italy and an English speaking country (Ireland perhaps). They were beetween 15 and 20, they communicated through internet only (on a special conlang forum and by e-mails of course). I said them I was interested in the result so they send me five "pages" about the general principles (is that correct English ?) and some vocabulary. They always insisted on using assumed names (pseudonam = pseudo nam as they said). I don't know if they finished their diccionary they were working on, if they want to remain unknown, who has written the french version, which is better than mine, how many people do speak this language, if it is part of a massonic-Brussels-leaded plot against America's imperialist "culture" politics and if they were killed by the CIA or more probably by esperantist extremists ... I'm joking of course. I think that this language is really interesting (much more than europanto !!!), and it's a bad idea to delete the English stub version; why not make a good translation of the french one instead ? But I do understand why some people can't accept this kind of article coming from nowhere (although it's very frequent in constructed languages).

When I find some time (beetween to mathematical articles) I'll "finish" the spanish version I neglected a year ago, and I'm really sorry I could not help you.

M.Romero Schmidtke.

You are receiving this notice due to a consideration that has come up during a VFD for the article Comunleng. As there was no clear consensus in Comunleng's previous VfD, it has been nominated again. Please see Votes for deletion/Comunleng 2 for comments. The Literate Engineer 01:09, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

User categorization

You were listed on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians/New Jersey page as living in or being associated with New Jersey. As part of the Wikipedia:User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in New Jersey for instructions. Al 15:36, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard

I have created a new project page at Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard, which Secretondon suggested that I tell my fellow bureaucrats about. It's designed as a forum where users with bureaucrat rights can discuss difficult situations, either beforehand (for advice about what to do) or after taking action (for review and feedback). It's similar to another page I created, which is starting to catch on (e.g., Jimbo used it this August): Wikipedia:account suspensions, which is not for 3RR or simple vandalism but for close calls and disputed blocks.

Popups tool

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Congratulations on being made a bureaucrat! I thought you might like to know of a javascript tool that may help in your editing by giving easy access to many admin features. It's described at Wikipedia:Tools#Navigation_popups. The quick version of the installation procedure for admins is to paste the following into User:Cprompt/Archive 1/monobook.js:

// [[User:Lupin/popups.js]] - please include this line 

document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="' 
             + 'http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Lupin/popups.js' 
             + '&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=s"></script>');

popupAdminLinks=true;

Give it a try and let me know if you find any glitches or have suggestions for improvements! L upin 02:36, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Visual Basic Classic Wikibook

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I see you have contributed to the Visual Basic article on Wikipedia. Any chance you would like to join in editing the wikibook: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Programming:Visual_Basic_Classic? --Kjwhitefoot 09:01, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

God Ate My Homework

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I'm a big fan of their music, and have their lyrics and about 80% of their mp3s sitting around on my computer if you want any of it (or if you think any of it should be posted). I'm really curious what was in the two pages that your computer ate about them. Stephen Aquila 22:06, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

ACCORDION

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello Please continue the book teaching me to play accordion, also do you have any idea whatsoever where I could get a sound sample comparing accordions to Concertinas? 203.112.2.212 19:32, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Easter eggs

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I just happened upon your 07:19, 17 May 2004 edit to Easter egg (virtual). Thank you, sir, I cannot think of more appropriate recognition. ☺ - Calmypal (T) 21:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

The article Bash, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup.

If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.
You have been left this message by PocKleanBot, an automated process that notifies editors that articles to which they may have contributed on more than one occasion in the past now need cleanup. If you have any comments or object to this message being left, please leave a message on PocKleanBot's talk page.

Unspecified source for Image:Newcoke.jpg

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for uploading Image:Newcoke.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:30, 7 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. cohesion 17:30, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:MainPage-WaMCom131-cprompt.png)

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for uploading Image:MainPage-WaMCom131-cprompt.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Jimmy Wales

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Jimmy Wales, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Jimmy Wales satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jimmy Wales (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Jimmy Wales during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 19:09, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Newcoke.jpg

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Newcoke.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 04:24, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Box wings.jpg

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for uploading Image:Box wings.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Time Lord (Ultima)

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Time Lord (Ultima), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 17:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of mnemonics for star classification

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

An editor has nominated List of mnemonics for star classification, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of mnemonics for star classification and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 17:44, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Emailuser

MBisanz ^talk has noticed you do not have your e-mail currently set up and is requesting you enable your EmailUser function. Thanks!

Wikipedia:Bureaucrats

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi! As a bureaucrat on Wikipedia, I'd very much appreciate it if you would fill in your details on the newly updated Bureaucrats page. Thanks! Majorly ^talk 14:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Re-evaluation of bureaucrat rights

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi there! I'm posting to inform you of an ongoing discussion at Wikipedia talk:Bureaucrat removal, which is of relevance to you as an en.wiki bureaucrat. The discussion centres around whether bureaucrat status should be considered a 'lifetime' appointment like administrators, or whether bureaucrats should be subject to periodic reconfirmation in a manner more like the stewards. There is also consideration for a separate re-evaluation of the status of those bureaucrats who were promoted in the early days of wikipedia, when the standards at RfB were significantly lower than they are currently, and whether such users still retain the explicit trust of the community.

As an "inactive bureaucrat" (one who has not performed a 'crat action in the past year), we're particularly keen to hear your thoughts on these issues; in particular the following:

Do you consider yourself to still be a wikipedia bureaucrat in spirit, or is the flag essentially just a legacy? Do you have any intention of ever returning to being an 'active' bureaucrat?
What do you consider your position to be in terms of your 'mandate' from the community, in comparison to more recently-promoted bureaucrats?
Would you be amenable to surrendering the bureaucrat flag, or participating in a reconfirmation RfB, if asked to do so? In what circumstances would you consider such an action?

Your thoughts on these, and any other comments you may have, would be very much appreciated. We have set up a section on the discussion page, Wikipedia talk:Bureaucrat removal#'Crat comments, for such responses.

Many thanks in advance, Happy‑melon 23:55, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Bureaucrat discussion for Juliancolton RfB

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A bureaucrat discussion has been opened in order to determine the consensus in this request for adminship. Please come participate. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 01:59, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello Cprompt! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 156 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Paola Leone - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 23:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:LaEspero.mid

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thank you for uploading File:LaEspero.mid. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:59, 8 January 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 07:59, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Fellow (computing)

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The article Fellow (computing) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article is not based on reliable secondary sources (WP:V), nor show how the software is notable (WP:N)

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Marasmusine (talk) 09:25, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I've made some edits today which hopefully bring this article up to acceptable standards. Thanks for the notice! --cprompt (talk) 14:53, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Happy Bureaucratship Anniversary

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Wishing Cprompt/Archive 1 a very happy bureaucratship anniversary on behalf of the Birthday Committee! Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 01:14, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Wishing Cprompt a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 00:20, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Europanto for deletion

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Europanto is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Europanto until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Bulwersator (talk) 04:41, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Crat statement draft

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi Following the drama at BN, I'm trying to come up with a statement all Crats could agree to. Please take a look, below. I am quite content to do this onwiki -we have always worked transparently, except where secrecy is essential (ie RTV). I think we should be able to wordsmith a statement acceptable to all, and I think it's an important thing to do.

In my opinion, this issue has come about through an unfortunate proliferation of documentation: policy, guideline, how-to etc
I am not convinced that there is community consensus on all of the points encapsulated in those various pages
I am unhappy at what may be described as some or all of: inconsistencies, inaccuracies or lack of clarity in that documentation
I do not believe that any of the issues we have faced have been caused by Crats trying to widen their powers
I would like to see the issues clarified, based on consensus, and for the documentation to be updated accordingly
I'd like to thank Griot-de for generously withdrawing the rename request

Signed [crat sig] Lmk what you think. Many thanks, --Dweller (talk) 10:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Forced user renames coming soon for SUL

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi, sorry for writing in English. I'm writing to ask you, as a bureaucrat of this wiki, to translate and review the notification that will be sent to all users, also on this wiki, who will be forced to change their user name on May 27 and will probably need your help with renames. You may also want to help with the pages m:Rename practices and m:Global rename policy. Thank you, Nemo 13:05, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Just to let you know -- Missing Wikipedians

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You have been mentioned at Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians. XOttawahitech (talk) 14:54, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 23:38, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm here, I'm here! :) cprompt (talk) 23:44, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

An important message about renaming users

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Dear Cprompt,

I am cross-posting this message to many places to make sure everyone who is a Wikimedia Foundation project bureaucrat receives a copy. If you are a bureaucrat on more than one wiki, you will receive this message on each wiki where you are a bureaucrat.

As you may have seen, work to perform the Wikimedia cluster-wide single-user login finalisation (SUL finalisation) is taking place. This may potentially effect your work as a local bureaucrat, so please read this message carefully.

Why is this happening? As currently stated at the global rename policy, a global account is a name linked to a single user across all Wikimedia wikis, with local accounts unified into a global collection. Previously, the only way to rename a unified user was to individually rename every local account. This was an extremely difficult and time-consuming task, both for stewards and for the users who had to initiate discussions with local bureaucrats (who perform local renames to date) on every wiki with available bureaucrats. The process took a very long time, since it's difficult to coordinate crosswiki renames among the projects and bureaucrats involved in individual projects.

The SUL finalisation will be taking place in stages, and one of the first stages will be to turn off Special:RenameUser locally. This needs to be done as soon as possible, on advice and input from Stewards and engineers for the project, so that no more accounts that are unified globally are broken by a local rename to usurp the global account name. Once this is done, the process of global name unification can begin. The date that has been chosen to turn off local renaming and shift over to entirely global renaming is 15 September 2014, or three weeks time from now. In place of local renames is a new tool, hosted on Meta, that allows for global renames on all wikis where the name is not registered will be deployed.

Your help is greatly needed during this process and going forward in the future if, as a bureaucrat, renaming users is something that you do or have an interest in participating in. The Wikimedia Stewards have set up, and are in charge of, a new community usergroup on Meta in order to share knowledge and work together on renaming accounts globally, called Global renamers. Stewards are in the process of creating documentation to help global renamers to get used to and learn more about global accounts and tools and Meta in general as well as the application format. As transparency is a valuable thing in our movement, the Stewards would like to have at least a brief public application period. If you are an experienced renamer as a local bureaucrat, the process of becoming a part of this group could take as little as 24 hours to complete. You, as a bureaucrat, should be able to apply for the global renamer right on Meta by the requests for global permissions page on 1 September, a week from now.

In the meantime please update your local page where users request renames to reflect this move to global renaming, and if there is a rename request and the user has edited more than one wiki with the name, please send them to the request page for a global rename.

Stewards greatly appreciate the trust local communities have in you and want to make this transition as easy as possible so that the two groups can start working together to ensure everyone has a unique login identity across Wikimedia projects. Completing this project will allow for long-desired universal tools like a global watchlist, global notifications and many, many more features to make work easier.

If you have any questions, comments or concerns about the SUL finalisation, read over the Help:Unified login page on Meta and leave a note on the talk page there, or on the talk page for global renamers. You can also contact me on my talk page on meta if you would like. I'm working as a bridge between Wikimedia Foundation Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Stewards, and you to assure that SUL finalisation goes as smoothly as possible; this is a community-driven process and I encourage you to work with the Stewards for our communities.

Thank you for your time. -- Keegan (WMF) talk 18:24, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

--This message was sent using MassMessage. Was there an error? Report it!