Wikipedia

User talk:EVula/Oct-Dec 2009

< User talk:EVula
Latest comment: 14 years ago by EdwardsBot in topic The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 December 2009
Archive This is an archive of EVula's past discussions. You can't edit the contents of this page, so nyah.

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, head over to User talk:EVula instead.

This archive contains comments posted between October 2009 and December 2009.

Since there is not much happening on Wikipedia these days...

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

... I am attempting to cajole Jimbo into kick starting a discussion that will result in a policy for desysopping based on community input. As such, I would like to include User:EVula/opining/RfA overhaul as part of a basis for how it may be set up. As you are the architect of the page I would request your permission to do so. As there is a general melange of discussion on my talkpage regarding my "initiative" I should be grateful if you would respond there. Cheers, LessHeard vanU (talk) 09:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

You most certainly have my permission. :) As for getting involved in the initiative, I'm not going to be around much this weekend, but I'll try to swing by at some point to check it out. EVula // talk // ☯ // 13:43, 3 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

spam

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I know that you've been interested in these issues in the past. Wikipedia:WikiProject Administrator — Ched :  ?  03:57, 5 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the heads up. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 October 2009

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 October 2009

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Kww 3 - Bureaucrat discussion

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kww 3/Bureaucrat discussion

I've opened a bureaucrat chat in relation to this RfA as I don't think the outcome is particularly clear cut. If you have a moment, I'd appreciate your input. WJBscribe (talk) 20:07, 17 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm fairly tied up at the moment[1], but I can take a look at it when I get home from the theater tonight. Sorry. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:45, 17 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 October 2009

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 October 2009

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

nudge

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

'Bout time, doncha think? :D

I happened to spot your username over on the Half-Life Wikia... would that be you, or an imposter? bahamut0013wordsdeeds 15:32, 1 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 November 2009

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Happy Adminship day

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Happy Adminship from the Birthday Committee
 
 

Wishing EVula/Oct-Dec 2009 a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!

-- Vatsan34 (talk) 15:44, 7 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

A project you might be interested in

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi, I've recently created a project which, broadly speaking, will help to develop and support the enwiki community. At this stage, we're currently calling for individual proposals on how to improve Wikipedia. If you're interested, sign up and add your ideas here! –Juliancolton | Talk 00:44, 8 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 November 2009

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Not dead

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I'm not dead, just highly inactive. My show opens Friday, and the lines have been kicking my ass.

I hope to resume editing, even in a light capacity, on Monday. Just gotta get thru hell week and then opening weekend first. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:31, 10 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

I had already called dibs on your sig... er... I mean, I'm glad that you're OK! :D Good luck with your production. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 19:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
Hey, I hope you've found someone else for your question, 'cause I've certainly been taking my sweet sweet time. Ugh.
If anyone cares, you can follow my general exploits on Twitter. That's the only place you can get such gems on a regular basis, as well as read my whining about rehearsals running holy shit forever. EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:51, 11 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia Signpost: 16 November 2009

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Wikipedia Signpost: 23 November 2009

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

No doubt

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago7 comments4 people in discussion
  Brassy Award
For leaving no doubt as to the epic size of your cajones. MBisanz talk 18:42, 27 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
Oh good, I was afraid I'd have to grace Commons with the evidence. EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:44, 27 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
Geesh - I didn't mean anyone in particular and certainly not you! ;) hydnjo (talk) 19:32, 27 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
Haha, 'twas just a general statement about the general unavailability of the 'crats at times. Since you've shown proper defference to Vera, I'll make sure you survive my eventual overthrowing of the project. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:37, 27 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
Your closing certainly removes any lingering doubt 'bout those big and brassy things up there! hydnjo (talk) 16:37, 28 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
I'm not as impressed as these other guys. Now if you'd done it before Scribe and I posted this morning.... SOOOO, to prove you are worthy of the BBB award (I already have one), rename Jimbo post haste. ;-) HeHe. — Rlevse • Talk •
Damn arbs, always wanting evidence for everything...[2] EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
ROFL — Rlevse • Talk • 22:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Request

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I was wondering if you could fix an issue in Nihonjoe's RFB. In the neutral section, the first one begins with a "#". I would fix it and place in a few colons, but since I don't have any special powers, I thought that it would be best to ask you since you closed it. Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:34, 28 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Standard practice(ish) is to not indent the very first !vote if its been struck. Since the # is within the strike tag, it's not being automatically indented (and numbered), so it's probably fine. (that said, it's not like I'd lose sleep if someone went in and removed it... I just don't think it necessary) EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:38, 28 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
Okay, thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:11, 29 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Joe RfB

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

It has been an interesting couple of weeks for me at WP. Haven't really been engaged in too many contentious events (but then, an emphasis on editing articles about women's basketball isn't exactly volunteering to walk through a minefield). The the ClimateGate incident broke (and I think WP is acquitting itself very badly) and the RfB issue was in progress. I was quite stunned to see the level of opposition over what I believe to be a fundamental misunderstanding of appropriate process. I feared, given the high bar (understandably) required for bureaucrats, that Joe would fail. I remarked to another editor that my world view of WP would be colored by the outcome, including my commitment to what has also struck me as an irrational project. I'm greatly cheered by the result. It would have been easy for crats either to note the level of opposition and close no consensus, or the level and the trend, making it an easier close, or not want to imply in any way anything other than a no-tolerance policy for pedophilia. Thankfully, you didn't take the easy route, and recognized that a pass could in no way (by an honest person) be construed as support for pedophelia.

The discussion and the result restored my belief that, while far from perfect, the process can lead to the correct result in important issues.

(I didn't realize until looking at the page that non-admins could weigh in, but that page feels stale now, So I'm posting this just to the opening and closing crats.)--SPhilbrickT 16:16, 29 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Heh, I'm glad I could help restore your faith in Wikipedia. Situations like these are why the position of bureaucrat is often thought highly of; 99% of the time, we're just like everybody else (primus inter pares), but that 1% of the time where we're called to step up, man, we better have our game faces on or there will be hell to pay. ;)
However, I don't feel like I deserve thanks any more or less than the other bureaucrats that participated in the chat; I was only the closing bureaucrat because I happened to be around a few hours after WJBscribe suggested we close as a promotion (and that decision was hastened by another 'crat, who had previously considered the RfB as having no consensus, changing his mind). My fellow bureaucrats were probably more active in the discussion than I was (I'm just coming off a lengthy wiki-break that has seen my editing across all the wikis I'm active on drop to roughly zero); I was just in the right place at the right time. EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:05, 29 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia Signpost: 30 November 2009

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 December 2009

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Great Wikipedia Dramaout

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi! As you have expressed an interest in the initial The Great Wikipedia Dramaout, you're being notified because we are currently planning another one in January! We hope to have an even greater level of participation this time around, and we need your help. If you're still interested please sign up now at Wikipedia:The Great Wikipedia Dramaout/2nd. Thanks, and Happy Holidays! JCbot (talk) 04:29, 16 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 December 2009

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion


Happy Holidays

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
File:Father Winter Solstice.jpg
 

Ret.Prof (talk) 13:00, 19 December 2009 (UTC) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hannukah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!Reply

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec09}} to your friends' talk pages.

ANI

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
What an entirely unexpected turn of events! :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:05, 20 December 2009 (UTC)Reply
LOL... No worries from me Evula. For what it is worth, my explanation of the block on Kurt's page created a ham fisted action, and I think you gave some well reasoned explanations for your overturning the block. I still think we should block him again, having discussed the process and the existence of the ban, but I'm not going to try and hold back the tide if my view is beyond the pale. In a nutshell, I think Kurt is banned, and that he is not being a good faith contributor right now. I blocked him without running it past anyone because I was operating under the belief that we had run this past the community last year. I indefinitely block long term trolls and clearly "disruption-only" editors on a regular basis without any drama. Kurt is no different than any of them, but he generates drama because he specifically targets admin related areas of the project.
As for the ArbCom comment, I really only meant that I don't support an overturn of the block by anyone unless ArbCom calls me out for being wrong. I didn't mean that to imply that I was giving an order to the community not to negate my block. Poor phrasing on my part all around. I'm taking a big picture view of dealing with Kurt while you're taking a process view of dealing with him. Neither view is wrong, and while they are not necessarily complementary to each other they are not contradictory views either.Hiberniantears (talk) 03:44, 21 December 2009 (UTC)Reply
Awesome, it looks like we're both on the same "no worries from me" page. I love it when two people can disagree so very, very civilly... I wish it happened more often, but then again, I also wish I'd win the lottery (and, given the choice between those two, I'd go with the later).
Also, thanks for confirming that you didn't have a problem with being overturned. I kinda got the sense that you wouldn't have considered an unblock to be wheel warring, though there was nothing textual to back up that gut feeling. WP:EVULA strikes again! ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:07, 21 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Notification: Proposed 'Motion to Close' at Wikipedia:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC re: a 'Motion to close', which would dissolve Cda as a proposal. The motion includes an !vote. You have previously commented at Wikipedia:WikiProject Administrator. Jusdafax 20:52, 22 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 December 2009

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Merry Christmas!!

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  Set Sail For The Seven Seas  12° 40' 45" NET   00:50, 25 December 2009 (UTC) Reply

Season's greetings

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  Thank you for being one of the people who has made 2009 such an interesting and enlightening year for me. It has certainly had its challenges, but also many highlights. I wish you peace and contentment in 2010, and a joyous holiday season to you and yours.


In honour of the season, I hope you will enjoy a little musical token. Your choice: traditional or cheeky.


Best, Risker (talk) 02:26, 25 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

 

E-mail

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I've sent you one. Thanks. Acalamari 16:51, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

  Done EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:55, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Another gentle ping from WP:VG

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Dear EVula,

You are receiving this message because either [[Category:WikiProject Video games members]] or {{User WPVG}} is somewhere in your userspace, and you are currently listed in the "Unknown" section on the project's member list.

The member list is meant to provide a clearer picture of active membership. It is recommended that you update your status if you plan to regularly:

Members listed in the "Unknown" section will be removed from the membership list and category at the end of January 2010. You may re-add yourself to the active list at any time. Thank you for your help, and we look forward to working with you.

Sincerely, the Video Games WikiProject (delivery by xenobot 21:47, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 December 2009

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EVula/Oct-Dec_2009&oldid=1147982774"