User talk:DS1953/Archive01

This is an archive, please do not edit this page. Feel free to leave a message here.

Oceanographic Museum

Thanks for correcting my typoes at Oceanographic Museum. I tend to type fast and it was late last night when I posted the article. I've noticed I made the exact same typoes somewhere else in the text, but I corrected myself in time. Since you are a typo-corrector, how'd you like to check my articles? I could really use someone like you if that's OK with you and if you have time. Check out my (only) other article Toyota Aygo and if you have time, tell me the quality of my articles and suggestions/comments. Feel free to write anything in my user Talk Page... With regards... Dungodung 08:35, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Oh unfortunately, I don't have any articles left for checking. Last two days, I've been concentrating on Commons and Serbian version, so I didn't do much in the English part. When I make some, I'll be sure to contact you. --Dungodung 18:05, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Stub improvement

Hi there! I spotted your idea on stub-improvement-or-timed-deletion on Neutrality's RFC... I think the idea has merit and could use some further discussion. Maybe you would consider taking it to the village pump, or VFD talk or something. Yours, Radiant_* 07:44, May 19, 2005 (UTC)

• Having given the matter some thought, I'd refer you to both Wikiproject Stub Sorting and the proposal for Wikipedia:Countdown deletion. It is often argued that a stub containing little information might as well be deleted, as in the creation of a real article it's just as easy to start from scratch as from the stub. There is some precedent for merging large amounts of stubs. Radiant_* 09:13, May 20, 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I'm not an admin!

Sorry, I can't delete pages - I'm not an administrator (though I may try for it next year). -- BD2412 ^talk 04:13, 2005 Jun 3 (UTC)

Due process...

Sorry. I can not do that for you as much as I like to. I don't wish to abuse my administrative power, so I must ask you to go to WP:RFPM (requests for page moves). As the Wikipedia is built on community consensus, I don't know whether your move is considered conversional or what. I don't know the full story therefore I can not, in good conscience, act in good faith for the community. -- AllyUnion (talk) 05:16, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Done. Sometimes I feel like a Vogon, and for that I apologize. I suggest that the person should be placed under the name, and a simple note at the top about the company would do just fine. Furthermore, you can mark it as {{delete}} and explain why. An administrator will come by to see why and do that for you. -- AllyUnion (talk) 09:03, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Lazlow

Hi! I've expanded this article using the link you posted on the [[Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Lazlow|Lazlow VfD] and my own knowledge. Please have a look at the article and expand it if you can - it should survive VfD now. Harro5 23:09, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

Re:

Removed VfD tag and withdrew vote once I saw that info was added... At first glance, page seemed like vanity when i put up the VfD and has now since changed. Sorry for the inconvinience. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 05:55, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

Re: Which speedy did I do?

I'm trying, so which speedy so I'll remember next time. What article did I improperly speedy?

Antares33712 19:47, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I always WANTED the speedy, BUT the poster kept removing it. IF you check the history log, you'll see I was the second editor (with the speedy). It has been a fight to keep the speedy on the page, so I was tryign to list it elsewhere to make sure it was properly reviewed and deleted. I apologize for not following procedure, though I've been a Wikipedia user for almost a year (logged since January), I am new to this stuff Antares33712 20:18, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

OKO, then I apologize. I will remove speedy when I get a chance Antares33712 21:39, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Inheritance Trilogy

Thanks for your typo fixing on the Eragon summary. I just wanted to ask you if you agreed with me about deleting the subcategory for Inheritance Races. Talk:Inheritance Races Thanks for your time. Aznph8playa 01:00, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Mean Girls

I think that your new wording is better, though the high school could just as easily have been based on nearby New Trier High School or another nearby high school named North Shore Country Day.

Response

DS, I agree entirely with you on the WP Carey subject :) Sorry for being defensive. It's just that the anonymous IP who posted that (and the other articles I put up for voting) has been quite aggressive in defending them, so I just assumed (my fault) that you were jumping on his bandwagon. I was mildly confused, because I know that you're a good VfDer and solid wikipedian.

And, more importantly, you're entirely correct. I guess we just have to chalk it up to Wikipedians having a certain knowledge base - being skewed towards the Internet and popular culture (by definition of popular culture, more persons will be knowledgeable of it than, say, economics, business, or history, to take some examples). It's just part of the system.

I note that you've voted reasonably on the other ASU pages (like Andrew Harrison), so thanks. All I can say is... let's keep working. As long as everyone who can is honestly trying to contribute, I am certain that we can work around misunderstandings and keep vandalism out of Wikipedia. jglc | t | c 13:15, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Self-induced abortion vfd.

Thank you for voting to keep the article on self-induced abortion. I promise to continue working to develop and improve this article. -- BD2412 ^talk 15:21, 2005 Jun 17 (UTC)

Judith Alice Clark

Your version is much better than the original. I've changed my vote to keep. My only outstanding concern with the article is its last sentence. I've left a note on the article's talk page to that effect. --Xcali 15:17, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the note

I do get caught up in this sometimes, although I keep telling myself that writing law-related articles is almost like studying. ;) -- BD2412 ^talk 21:32, 2005 Jun 24 (UTC)

A reply to your (not so recent) message

In reply to your message, "Bart, I noticed that you work at Triton College and did the article on that college. Would you mind taking a look at my new article Illinois community college system and see if it sounds right to you? DS1953 06:35, 30 May 2005"

Well, better late than never  ;-) I just realized I never replied to your query. Although I'm certainly no authority on Illinois community colleges (as I just manage a planetarium that is located on the campus of one of those colleges), I found your article on the Illinois community college system to be well written and informative. Keep up the good work! BartBenjamin 02 Jul 2005

Cricket on VfD

Hiya. You previously voted 'keep' on the VfD for Nottinghamshire_v_Yorkshire_26_June_2005 and other subarticles of 2005 English cricket season. I just wanted to let you know that these pages have promptly been put back up for deletion, this time at Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Essex_v_Glamorgan_15_May_2005. Those of us who have worked on these articles would value your continued support. Thanks and best wishes. --Ngb 19:47, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

The mop is mine!

Thanks for voting in my RfA; I promise I'll wield my sacred mop with care. If you ever need me for anything, you know where to find me. Thanks again! -- Essjay · Talk 15:31, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

thanks for supporting me

Hello, just a quick note to express my gratitude for your support of my RfA. I'm sure I'll become a familiar face on places like the Administrator's Noticeboard and Requests for Adminship, as well as the murkier parts of my new job. "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked." (Luke 12:48, NIV) Never was a truer word spoken. I feel empowered, yes, but not in the "oooh cool delete button!" way I was kind of expecting. Already I feel the weight of the responsibility I have now been entrusted with, a weight that will no doubt reduce given time. Thank you for believing in me. :) Garrett^Talk 10:26, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Eric Gilder VfD

Hi, I noticed you voted keep in the VfD for Eric Gilder (professor). Just wanted to direct your attention to the VfD's for the other related pages:

• Four Freedoms Federation - (talk) - (VfD)
• Province of the Carolanas - (talk) - (VfD)
• John Lilburne Research Institute - (talk) - (VfD)

They are all vanity/non-notable/hoax/original research by the same user (MPLX), and rapidly speeding toward deletion. Just thought you may want to reconsider your vote on this page. --JW1805 20:18, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your vote of support on my recent RfA. I was quite surprised by the amount of support I received, and wish to extend my thanks to you for taking the time to support my nomination for adminship. -- Longhair | Talk 12:19, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

--ditto-- --Jondel 06:31, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Robert Diamond VfD

"On Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Robert Diamond your vote was Delete but your explanation sounded like you were saying keep".

Ahem. That'd be the deletionist in me! I've corrected my vote. Thanks for the heads up! -Splash 20:35, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

Thank you for supporting my recent RfA. I was surprised and humbled by the number of positives votes. I'll be monitoring RfA regularly from now on and will look for a chance to "pay it forward". Cheers, --MarkSweep 02:21, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

DOH!

Sorry! I was cribbing from Maine for the template. Fixing. Thanks very much for catching. Let me know if you have anything else you think needs changing on that page. Be happy to try to do it. jengod 21:25, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

The mop is mine!

Thank you for voting to support my RFA. I've been promoted, and I promise to wield the mop with good faith, patience, and fairness... except when I'm exterminating vandals with the M-16 recoilless nuclear Gatling mop. --malathion ^talk 08:12, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Func's RfA :)

and happy to help try to beat the record.... You did indeed! DS1953, thank you for your support in my adminship, it was very much appreciated. :)

Please never hesitate to let me know if you have concerns with any administrative action I may make.

Func( t, c, e,  ) 18:56, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Have you seen these?

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of Catholic Actresses and Actors and Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of Catholic Criminals Doohickey 16:31, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Promises, promises...

I always try to keep mine! Check out new Mike Inez. Peace! Hamster Sandwich 20:05, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Done

Thanks for the vote, you're quite right, the songs project recommends "title" so I have changed all the singles to conform. Alf 18:07, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

LinneaPierre

I have talked with this particular user about her edits. She had gotten angry with me after I reverted this [1] and after I explained that this was against Wikipedia policy. She then erased my welcome message and comments, and had blanked my user page [2], when I had only been trying to help her. Please do not think that she was completely in the right here, I have tried to be very kind to new users on this site. I only suggested that she had inadvertantly commited an act of vandalism; and I suggested, as you had, that the article in question be redirected or merged. Take care, D. J. Bracey (talk) 19:59, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

I saw your exchange with the user before I left my own message. I had second thoughts about even leaving a message at that point, but I decided to take a chance and threw caution to the wind. -- DS1953 21:32, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

I'll move this to my talk page under what she had posted. D. J. Bracey (talk) 00:37, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, by the way. D. J. Bracey (talk) 14:22, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Warren Benbow

I don't agree that a person's advanced age in itself is any indicator of notability (or that youth in itself is an indicator of lack of same). And merely listing a profession does not assert notability unless pretty much every member of that profession automatically qualifies for a Wikipedia article (eg, holders of public office). The vast majority of members of nearly every profession wouldn't qualify for a Wikipedia page, in which case the profession itself doesn't convey notability.

It's not a requirement to do a Google search before speedying (especially if the article contains so little context that such a search is impractical, or merely because of time constraints). The speedy deletion criteria are set at such a low threshold that, essentially, if an article fails them then we're better off with a redlink (because a redlink at least conveys the information that we don't have an article on the subject). And the "originator", as you put it, frankly doesn't deserve credit in the article's history, for creating an article that's worse than a redlink.

Entries on a watch list survive deletion of the article. If you click on "display and edit the complete list" at your watchlist page, you may see some redlinks in the complete listing. Hopefully when the "originator" sees the new article by Tony Sidaway and clicks on edit, they'll see how wiki markup is done and they'll learn a few things, and go forth and create useful articles in the future.

Like you, I occasionally rescue a speediable stub if I happen to be familiar with the subject and believe that it's notable. In the case of the Warren Benbow article, though, I would have done the exact same thing that Geogre did the first time around. I'm not familiar with him or his branch of music, and that initial version looked for all the world like a vanity page.

We really do need to weed out vanity pages quite earnestly because Wikipedia is a secondary source of information, not a primary source (not a vehicle for original research or publication of essays or advocacy or publicizing new discoveries, etc). We have to insist that a person or thing must achieve notability or fame first, and only then qualify for inclusion in Wikipedia... unfortunately a lot of users out would like to do it in the opposite order, seeing Wikipedia as the perfect vehicle to publicize themselves or their ideas. The problem will only get worse in the future. -- Curps 06:37, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Fernando Rizo's RfA

I thank you for your support of my RfA, DS. I'll work hard to be the best admin I can be. Thanks again, and I'll see you around the Wiki. Fernando Rizo T/C 19:25, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Adminship

DS: Thank you for supporting my nomination for adminship. I received many votes from editors that I encounter frequently, which is re-assuring, but I am honoured that you and others that I don't know through Wikipedia saw fit to support the nomination. The admin powers will enable me to patrol for vandals more effectively, amongst other things. I promise to use my new powers for good, and not to inflict the retribution on my enemies that they so richly deserve, as tempting as that may be. ;-) Thanks again, Kevin. Ground Zero 13:55, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Me too, thanks for supporting my request for adminship. :) Coffee 08:56, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

a request for assistance

I created a Christian apologetics area. I thought it would be helpful. It has precedence as there is a Mormon apologetics subject area. It needs to be Wikied up and made to look nicer. Also, please add content.

ken 20:28, 22 August 2005 (UTC)kdbuffalo

HappyCamper's RFA - thanks for your support! :-)

Hi DS1953! Thanks for your support on my recent RFA. I'm now an administrator, and I wanted to come by and thank you for everything - for coming to vote, and showing your support. If you ever need a helping hand, let me know, and I'll do my best to help out. Thanks again for your support, and I'll see you around the Wiki! --HappyCamper 12:00, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Deletion?

You were using (parentheses rather than {brackets to transclude the template. Fixed now. HTH! Radiant_>|< 13:12, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Brian Tracy

For starters, you freaked me out because your message made it seem like I was responsible for the copyright violation (which I am not), second why didn't you just delete the info or revert it to an earlier edit instead of going through the whole rigamarole of copyright violation? Best, TitaniumDreads 04:43, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for any confusion. I looked at the edit history, and from the descriptions it looked like all the changes after yours were minor so I assumed (incorrectly, obviously) that the copyvio was in the orginal article. My apologies. The correct action is, as you stated, to revert to a version prior to the copyvio. -- DS1953 15:35, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

TLAs

A proposal has been made at Wikipedia:Requested moves to move TLAs from AAA to DZZ and other related pages to Wikipedia namespace. Please visit Talk:TLAs from AAA to DZZ for the related discussion. -- Francs2000 | Talk 00:36, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

North Carolina Research Campus

Thank you DS1953 for the Keep on the deletion page. I am learning Wikipedia style, and will make my articles better. I edited the gallery out, replacing thumbnails with links, like the Wikipedia:Picture tutorial recommends. Brad Spry 21:04, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks - I'm glad to be part of the profession. -- BD2412 ^talk 00:14, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Celestianpower is an admin

I'm almost done with the thank you's so thank you very much for your support - my bid (as you probably know) went swimmingly. I couldn't have asked for a better one. Thank you very much and I just hope I don't mess up! --Celestianpower ^hablamé 13:27, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Maryville Middle School

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maryville Middle School appears in danger of being trumped by a conspicuous effort on the part of deletionists. Please review the nomination and vote at your convenience.--Nicodemus75 05:22, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Miami Metro Rail

The reason I re-adjusted the date, because, as stated in the MoS, the local usage should outweigh any opposition (?). Therefore I changed it to American translation. Next time though, I'll add the [[]]. Pacific Coast Highway 21:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hey, thanks for sorting out Madison Academic Magnet High School. Should I also, as one Village Pump user suggested, tag it as a stub and a high school? Thanks! --William Pietri 21:04, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

RFA for Johntex

Hello DS, I want to thank you for your support of my RfA. I'm looking forward to using the new tools in the fight against vandalism. I hope I see you around Wikipedia soon. Best, Johntex\^talk 00:26, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

My RfA

Success!!! Thanks for your support! --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:04, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Please tell me you can laugh at this

Other similarities

Welcome back. I don't want to make a bigger deal of this but I want to draw your attention to the following:

• While the evidence is wholly circumstantial, I would point out two similarities that I believe are fairly convincing that at least some direct connection exists between the two editors:

(1) In March of 2005 User:Texture ceases editing anything but his own talk page. In late April 2005 User:DS1953 made his first edits on Wikipedia beyond a half dozen "feelers" in August 2004. From April 2005 on both users edit heavily with immediate attention by both given to AfDs and most wanted articles despite User:DS1953 having no talk page or Wikipedia-space edits prior to that time.

(2) User:DS1953 surprisingly has immediate grasp of user subpages and talk page signature on his first talk page edit.

(3) Both edited extensively at AfD, Star Trek pages, and both admit having set foot in Illinois.

I'm all for moving on, but unless there are some better answers to some of the questions raised, I think there will be a lingering suspicion that some connection exists between you and Texture. I don't feel that you have been abusive in any way, so I am satisfied that you are a good editor but I do think that there will be doubts in the future if you and Texture expect to be heard as two voices. -- Tεxτurε 20:44, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

There must be some valid explanation, but I am at a loss to explain it!. -- DS1953 ^talk 20:52, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Illini Fan

You're not still in CU are you? TheChief (PowWow) 23:28, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank-you for expressing your confidence in me at my recent Request for Adminship. The final result was 40/0/0, and my "superpowers" have now been activated. I look forward to helping out with the development of the encyclopedia. Physchim62 (talk · contribs)

Thanks from Pamri

Hi, Thanks a ton for supporting and voting at my RFA. I am now a wikipedia administrator. I hope I can keep your trust and hopefully, we should interact more in the future. Thanks again. --Pamri ^{• Talk • Reply} 05:03, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Income tax

Could you help with the administrator User:Garzo? After a week of dealing with the tax protester idiot on income tax, trying to treat him as a valid contributor, I finally posted a note asking for administrator action on WP:AIV, and Garzo removed it, saying I had been breaking the 3RR for reverting the tax protester idiot's edits. He claims that the reversions on income tax constitute a "content dispute". I would appreciate if you would help explain to him how the tax protester's edits are patently false. Thank you. — Mateo SA | talk 17:54, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Re: your comment on my talk page:

DS1953, the mainstream view is not the facts and Wikipedia and Encyclopedia are about printing the facts. Just because it's mainstream view doesn't make it correct. I have printed as the Constitution and Supreme court back up of over 200 years. I can understand you wanting to express your point of view of "going with the flow" so to say, but you can't disregard the facts as they are now. You may state your theories of main stream view in the discussion pages. Just because some of the courts have rejected the law doesn't mean they have priority over the Constitution. I have already mentioned what I have provided in the article and backed it up. No one has provided proof yet contrary and until they do, the article should stay true. I'm very open to having the discussions about it and pointing people in the right direction on the discuss page. I am sure many editors will continue to remove my added wording as PoV, and I will continue to remove their PoV and insert the law. Thanks for contacting me and feel free to continue to contact me directly. BB69 20:56, 8 November 2005 (UTC)BB69

"BB69, your edits to Income tax, though only a few words long, do not represent the mainstream view of the constitutionality of the income tax in the US after more than 85 years of court cases. I can understand your desire to incorporate your point of view but we need to find a way to do it that clearly states that it is a theory and that it has been considered and rejected by the courts repeatedly. See Talk:Income_tax#RfC_responses. The article's talk page already contains a thorough discussion of the issue and I suggest that after reading it in its entirety you propose a sentence or two, on the talk page, that you would propose to insert into the article. Short of that, I assume that editors viewing the article will continue to simply remove your added wording as POV. Feel free to contact me directly, but I would suggest that any substantive discussion be on the talk page of the article. -- DS1953 talk 18:50, 8 November 2005 (UTC)"

DS1953, Fair enough on neutral point of view. I won't erase anyone else's point of view as long as they will let my information stand. Although, my bias is no different than the one presented in that it also presents a bias without my information. I do use the talk page for controversial edits, but that doesn't mean that the article as it is can stand. Don't you see how unbalanced it is if you only present the main view? You seem to be biased in your approach to me as if there wasn't more people involved. I ask that you show some balance in your view. All I see are people also removing my edits as well and breaking the three-revert rule. It doesn't make sense if I only get three reverts and 10 other people come along to do the last edit that is against mine. However, I will stick to the three reverts a day. Thanks BB69 02:39, 9 November 2005 (UTC)BB69

I don't say that the income tax is unconstitutional, just how it is applied by the IRS and the courts, which is true and a fact, not an opinion. I don't say that the law is unconstitutional. I say the law is fine as it is and is only not recognized and practiced correctly and that's a fact, not an opinion. I agree that we can say that the courts have ruled the tax constitutional, but that's not my argument. Perhaps we need to word it something like "The courts have ruled that the constitution is being applied correctly, but that is just their opinion and it is open to question. The laws are available for one's own research to come to your own conclusion." When the courts trounce upon the constitution, it does not make their opinion count more than ours and it is up to us to challenge them and their rulings to stay in line with the law. The courts have a way of ruling something but not ever pointing to the statute that makes it so, and that's something people should be aware of and to look it up themself. So, you see, they are already ruling the way I am talking about, but they don't put that in the ruling. For instance, if you look at any ruling on income taxes, look for where the judge states the liability to file and pay an income tax is in the IRC. You won't find it because no such liability exists under Section 1 of the IRC which is the only part on Income Taxes. The IRC must define income in order for it to be understood what is meant and as you can see it isn't defined anywhere. However, we can find that in Supreme Court decisions that it is defined as "gain or profit" and that the 16th amendment didn't give the goverment any more power than they had before, because their hands are tied when it comes to applying a direct tax. Again, I am not challenging whether the legsilative, judicial and executive branches all agree that the law is constitutional, only that it is applied correctly and none of them state as much. That's why you'll find my statements accurate. Now, what I need to do is find a neutral way of saying it and perhaps I could use some help in that area. We are here to to challenge the interpretation of the law and to show what the law says today. Looking forward to your help. Thanks. BB69 03:40, 9 November 2005 (UTC)BB69

FireFox RFA

DS1953/Archive01

---

Thanks for your support on my request for adminship.

The final outcome was (96/2/0), so I am now an administrator. If you ever have any queries about my actions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Again, thanks!

FireFox 19:06, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

I just wanted to thank you for your support of my RfA which finally passed! I greatly appreciate it! Ramallite ^(talk) 04:28, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Tax protester

BB69 is making something of a mess of this article. He has reverted my attempts to correct his incorrect statements of law and fact, and now has dumped in an enormous tract about the "true meaning of the 16th Amendment". More alarmingly, he continues to restore text that essentially advises readers to break the law, stating that people do not actually have to pay penalties assessed against them by courts. BD2412 T

Book titles in quotes

Hi. In the article for the book The Sting of the Scorpion you placed the name of the book in quotes. However, my interpretation of Wikipedia:Manual of Style (titles) is that only short works' titles should be in quotations. The book in question is nearly 200 pages in length, so it should not qualify as a short story. In either case, the manual of style does not show any titles that are both italicized and quoted - it is one or the other. --Dan East 00:28, 22 November 2005 (UTC) Please disregard - I misinterpreted the diff page - you italized already bolded text, which looked like it was quoted, because the two single quotes you added were in a different font. My bad! --Dan East 00:35, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Ianblair23's RfA

G'day DS1953,

I would like to thank you for supporting me on my RfA. It closed with the final tally of 57/0/0. I can only hope I can live up to the expectations that this wonderful community of ours demands from each of its administrators. If you ever need anything, please just let me know. Cheers! -- Ianblair23 (talk) 02:47, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Sean Black RfA

Thank you very much for your support of my RfA. Thanks, in part, to you, I am now an Administrator, and I pledge to use my newfound powers for good rather than evil. Thanks again!--Sean|Black 08:30, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi DS1953,

I would like to thank you for your support and kind words on my RfA. I'll do my best to be a good administrator. If you need anything, or if I ever do something wrong with my new powers, please contact me. Mushroom 17:07, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi DS1953,

Thanks for voting to support my RfA. I wasn't expecting an unopposed promotion (I thought I'd hit some die-hard edit-counters at least) and I'm touched by the trust shown in me. I'll try my best to continue to earn that trust. But first, I'll have to work on not sounding like a politician; that last sentence was awful. Oh well. Let me know when I screw something up with the shiny new buttons. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 06:02, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

RfA thanks

I would like to thank you for your support of my recent successful RfA. If you have any further comments or feedback for me, my door's open - don't hesistate to drop a note on my talk page. Happy editing! Enochlau 11:27, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Shreshth91's RfA

Hello DS1953,

I just wanted to thank you for supporting me on my RfA. It finally closed with a tally of 22/0/0. I hope I can live up to the expectations of the entire community. If you ever need anything, please just let me know. Cheers!--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 00:57, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!

Now that my RfA is fully and officially completed, I want to thank you for your support. I appreciate your confidence that I can do the job. -- SCZenz 19:01, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Mindmatrix scam adminship

I have recently been granted greater access to your systems, and can begin the process of salvaging the sensitive information from my politically unstable land, as I promised. Please accept this loonie as a token of faith that I will conduct myself as required to complete our transaction. Thank you for your support. Mindmatrix 20:29, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

RFA for TheParanoidOne

Hello DS1953. Thanks for the vote of confidence in my RFA. I have now officially received the badge, so I shall try my best to be a good administrator. Thanks again. --TheParanoidOne 21:43, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Cnwb's RfA

DS1953,

Thanks so very much for supporting my Request for Admin. The final result was 38/0/0. I'm looking forward to spending my summer holidays shut away in a darkened room, drinking G&Ts and playing with my new tools ;-) Please accept this Tim Tam as a token of my gratitude. Cnwb 22:49, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Re:Administrators

Now that you bring up that point of view, I must accept that your argument is very valid. I'm sory for not thinking about that earlier. I've changed my vote to neutral Thanks for making things a little clearer to me. I hope I'll learn from this and think before I leap again.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 14:54, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Awolf002 vote

Vote changed; I realize your point. He's a good guy. So I supported after all. WikiFanatic 22:12, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Whatever the outcome of my RfA, I thank you for your trust and support! I especially recommend you for your open and clear comments that focussed the minds of some early voters back to the reason for my request. You're a great asset to WP!! Awolf002 15:20, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Petty garbage

A term that is more hostile than intended and is directed at the conversation rather than those engaged in it on a personal basis. Two wrongs don't make a right and I think the whole thing was turning into a witch hunt and that is something that I don't like. I think that sidestepping the issue of the early closing of the RfA by demanding that it be reopened so they can vote oppose is really ugly, regardless of the accidental early closing of the voting. I respect User:Kim Bruning a lot, but was shocked to see this coming from him, and hence my strong wording likewise.--MONGO 03:40, 6 December 2005 (UTC)