User talk:Ral315/Archive 8

edit History Archives: Dec. 04 to Feb. 06 Mar. 06 to Feb. 07 Feb. 07 to May. 08 Jun. 08 to Present 2004-2005: 01 · 02 · 03 · 04 · 05 · 06 · 07 · 08 2006: 09 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 2007: 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 2008: 29 · 30 · 31 · 32

Features and admins

I can do that if you'd like. For the featured articles, lists and pictures do you just get it from Wikipedia:Goings-on? And for Admins do you copy paste the names from the TOC's of Wikipedia:Recently_created_admins? If so, am I correct in thinking Image:Seawifs global biosphere.jpg should be included in this weeks SignPost? (it's listed on Goings-on) - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 03:45, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Good to know about the pics. I already checked, and now double checked... I don't see Seawifs mentioned last week, and since it was featured on the Monday (14th) I would think that would qualify as this week. I went fishing through the Newsroom history on how to prep a Signpost article; is this still applicable or is there a new procedure. Whatever the low-down is I think that could go in Tools. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 04:59, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Climate change dispute

I pointed out the attention in the climate change dispute. You didn't write about it in the current Signpost, but it looks like you'll have to mention it next week. Things would be simpler if people would follow the rules. (SEWilco 04:47, 22 November 2005 (UTC))

Notice that I asked for clarification of a number of issues. [1] (SEWilco 16:38, 27 November 2005 (UTC))

It might be interesting for the signpost, though things are at an early stage at present (4/0/0/0 as of now at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Request_to_re-opening_Climate_change_dispute). I don't know whether the arbcomm are likely to re-open the RFA whilst Wikipedia:Requests for comment/SEWilco is in progress. Note that SEW has so far failed to respond there. Note also that SEW has been blocked for 3RR spam: [2]. William M. Connolley 18:11, 27 November 2005 (UTC).

Price Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act

Ben's latest discussion says he intends to ignore consensus and edit-war. Is there something you can do? Simesa 01:36, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Signpost

Sorry for adding something on my own; thanks for letting me know about the tip line. Regards, Hydriotaphia 00:47, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Mindmatrix adminship

Hi. You asked me to notify you after I had configured my email, so here I am... Mindmatrix 13:19, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Signpost suggestion

I've been away for a week and returned to find an article I wrote and got through the FAC gantlet was featured on the front page. In my absence, there apparently was a nasty edit war and numerous questions about its suitability to even be a FA. Perhaps there's a story there. See the history for Tom Brinkman and Talk:Tom Brinkman. PedanticallySpeaking 16:21, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

oops

Hey sorry about the errors on ITN. For some reason when I went in there (and another place) the system slowed down to a c r a w l! It took pages to type each word. By the time I hit save I all the words still weren't on screen so I did not know if any letters were missing. (Current events seems particularly prone to this s l o w n e s s! lol FearÉIREANN 04:00, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

MarkGallagher's RFA

Thank you for making the adjustment on User:Zzyzx11/RFA nomination records. I did not notice that Redwolf24 moved all of those 8 "oppose" votes to BJAODN. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:18, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Just wanted to say BRION is simply a wonderful read and has exceeded my expectations. Thanks for providing a series to wet our tech appetites. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 20:48, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Right on, you can credit my guilty conscience for that :"D... having you do more work for my/our/Signpost's benefit and not stepping up felt a little unWiki. Didn't surprise me the "most objections" section was removed; but I thought it notable to point to admins who have doubts surrounding them... then again I recognize(d) it is relatively minor to people who's nominations fail outright. Still... - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 22:12, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Classic Rock

Hello. I was wondering if you would like to participate in my classic rock survey. I'm trying to find the most liked classic rock song. There is more information on my user page. Hope you participate! Oh and good luck for the arbitrator position. RENTASTRAWBERRY ^{FOR LET?} röck 02:50, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Images

Don't be annoying. -- Netoholic @ 15:16, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Parody is fair use. -- Netoholic @ 17:24, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: Boothy on RFA

Lighten Up. It was a joke to help ease the nerves of a very anxious candidate. karmafist 18:00, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

I understand your point, but it's my opinion that satire is not an NPA vio, particularly when it's in good faith. And about that "admin" comment, you might want to talk to the two other ones that laughed as well. Quite frankly, most admins would laugh at that if you asked, you really do need to relax in regards to that, both since Boothy made himself into a joke anyway with his WP:POINT vio absurdities, and since everybody on that rfa is likely to see you as un-empathethic, which is not a good trait for a politician (if Jimbo decides to actually allow an election) karmafist 18:13, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I'll Enter Your World For A Bit

Please state your legal precedent and/or citation of US Code in regards to your action on the Wikifanatic Rfa(although the servers are around the world, let's assume we're still talking Florida Law), or i'll put the picture back. Thanks. karmafist 08:00, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Great, thank you. Why didn't you just have a link to that in the first place? karmafist 17:44, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

It's Ok :-)

We all have bad days. Hopefully you'll be able to make me more "respectable" and i'll be able to help you become more congenial and together we'll make this place better, at least if I don't die of massive Wikipediholism. I'm going to head over the pump and ask they change WP:BLOCK towards voluntary blocks. I could use one right now IMO so I can focus on getting a steady job and working on my real estate career that i've been neglecting over the past several months due to Wikipedia. karmafist 17:50, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

"Technically"

Heh. In my experience, "Technically" roughly translates to "Future Aggrevation". Recent arbcom events have reinforced my belief in that.karmafist 18:23, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

B.R.I.O.N.

I love it, thanks :-)

BTW, it would be nice (understatement of the year?!) if there was a RSS feed for the Signpost. There was a screen-scraper, but it's broken. Do you know anyone who could run one? Dan100 (Talk) 09:03, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Block on User:4.230.150.225

I felt the length of the block was acceptable as it was the only contribution. I stand corrected, thanks. Is there a way to tell if an IP is dynamic if it is not in the AOL range? --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:30, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Availability and Error suggestion

I won't be available tonight, I've done the Feature and admin up till now but missing the December features. Also can BRION include a mention % of error messages, as a barometer for system performance. Sometimes I'll get through a day without an error page, other days it will pop up 50% of the time. (I'll be in for the next 30 minutes) - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 23:00, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Signpost

I've updated two articles, and put me as the updater. Royboy says this might not be correct, however. I disagree, but I'm asking for your opinion on the matter. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:37, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Commented on RoyBoy and Ta bu shi da yu's talk pages. I will put some editorial policy in stone by the year's end. Ral315 (talk) 14:44, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

What's the difference between updating and clarifying? - Ta bu shi da yu 20:59, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

TROLL article in the Signpost

Hello. Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2005-12-05/Arbitration report includes the line

"Cases were accepted this week against Ed Poor (talk page), Carl Hewitt (talk page), voters on webcomics AFDs, and Reddi (talk page)."

I think it's confusing to have "talk page" link to the user pages. Furthermore, the user involved in the "Carl Hewitt" case is User:CarlHewitt. I'm not sure whether I'm allowed to edit the article myself, doubly so because I'm involved in the "Carl Hewitt" case. By the way, the Signpost is great; thanks very much for the work on it. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 11:13, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

I guess this should read "(user page)" like it does in the next paregraph, and have amended accordingly. -- ALoan (Talk) 13:46, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Thus emboldened, I changed User:Carl Hewitt to User:CarlHewitt. You know where to find me if I did something wrong! -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 13:56, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks a lot. I really don't know why I said "talk page", and the Carl Hewitt problem was partially because the case itself spaced the name out, while he doesn't. Thanks again for fixing these! Ral315 (talk) 14:45, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

TROLL in signpost

I noticed the case is described as a case against me. I understand the TROLL articles describe all cases in this way, but, as mentioned, the case is actually not a case against me. It was a continuation of the previous case that several users were involved. Do you have any idea that we can actually present it in a less confusing manner? Thanks very much. — Instantnood 13:14, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you so much. It's now much clearer. — Instantnood 15:07, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

30gigs deletion

I was looking through some old deletion pages, and was about to vote delete on 30gigs. Now I know that old pages can be closed at any times, so will respect your closing. However, as I was doing some research into the topic in question, I came across some evidence that 30gigs is a scam site, or at least not totally legitimate. Try doing a Google search on it, a Google News search and a Google Blogsearch. It seems to be run by the same person who runs a Battlefield 2 cheats scam and there are reports of it limiting your usage to less than 1 gig.

I could add these findings into the article, but am not too sure on the NPOV aspect of the findings. Whether this new information, which was not mentioned in the AFD warrants a relisting or anything, is up to you. - Hahnchen 05:47, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

over-linking

I realize the temptation to make lots of links between pages is strong, but can you please only link items of real relevance. My main example is on Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2005-12-05/Technology report, where you linked each of the dates. I can't see ANY value in that. -- Netoholic @ 07:19, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

(also posted here) Could this be intended to allow user preferences to be followed as to date format? AFAIK the system will only activate your preferences on dates or partial dates within links. Maybe we should have some other mechanism for this, but for now that's how it works. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 08:32, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

toolserver

hi. please mail me (keturner [at] livejournal.com) an SSH key and username for the toolserver, and make an edit to this page to confirm it's yours. thanks, kate.

Confirming that I sent an e-mail about an hour ago. Sorry I didn't do so sooner... Ral315 (talk) 01:33, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

BD2412's RFA

Thank you, Ral315, for your support in my RfA. I swear, I really wasn't one before - but now I'll do my best as an admin to make the reality of Wikipedia rise to the level of the dream. BD2412 T 02:08, 8 December 2005 (UTC) ^{<--note new "admin gold" sig :-D}

You made me laugh

Divulge anything? Is this like that Mission Impossible tape that will self-destruct in 10 seconds? :-) --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 05:19, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Oh I know. I'm an admin too, you know :) I'll be very surprised if it's not taken since it's a long standing and well known dispute. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 05:35, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Yet Another RFA Thank You Note to clutter up your talk page...

Ral315:

Just wanted to drop you a quick note to say thanks for your vote of confidence in my recent RFA. As you may know, I succeeded with a final tally of 46/13/2. My goal is to never give you (or anyone else, really) a reason to regret the success of my RFA.

All the best.
→ Ξxtreme Unction {^yakł_blah} 15:11, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

And yet another thank you, this time from Ann

Hi, Ral315. I just want to thank you for voting to support me in my RfA. I know I'm very late thanking you, but I've been a bit caught up with college work. I want to thank you also for your help and support at the time that I was being stalked. It seems to have died down completely now. I did appreciate your prompt action and concern. Thanks again. Cheers. AnnH ^(talk) 20:44, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually Ral

I'm pretty sure that even if the arbcom is taken, you won't be able to state your views. The ArbCom is about Ben's behavior NOT specifically about Price-Anderson. I'm pretty sure we'd still be considered in mediation for P-A. Just because one of the users has an arbcom against them doesn't end any mediations they are in. I wouldn't think so anyway. From what Kelly said, if the case is taken, it'll be as Ben Gatti not as P-A. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 16:05, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I posted the question to the arbys at Talk:RfAr. I just don't want you to get into hot water if the mediation case is still live when we go to arbitration on Ben and you comment. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 16:12, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Arbcom does have a private mailing list you can post to, if you have something that will contribute to the arbitration, but would be harmful to the mediation to be public. May wan to think about that. Dmcdevit·t 00:21, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually, they wouldn't even know if you'd posted or not, which would be the point. But I just thought I'd bring it up to make sure you knew about the option. Good luck with mediation. :) Dmcdevit·t 00:37, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

That's my thing here too. I just don't want to get you into trouble, Ral. Whether Ben sees it that way or not, I don't see how a case that's explicitly against just him can be compared to the P-A mediation. 2 different things. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 05:48, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Hey Ben, the vote is now 3-0. And there's no scheming. We're trying to protect Ral so he doesn't get into trouble. And whether or not the mediation continues or whether Ral makes a statement or not is something you have no control over. It's the arbcom's and Ral's call, not yours. So please stop acting like you have any say in the matter, because you do not. Neither do I, honestly. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 01:05, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I would appreciate some semblance of civility on my talk page. If you'd like to argue, please do so elsewhere. Ral315 (talk) 02:24, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

good point - pardon Benjamin Gatti 06:05, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually I wasn't arguing. Just pointing out that whatever you do is your call Ral and that neither Ben or I or anyone else has any kind of real say over it. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 04:27, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Just letting you know

Ben just violated 1RR. The first revert is when we went from this to this. Not listed as a revert but it was. And this was an (explicit) revert. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 05:46, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Esperanza elections

File:Voting box clipart.gif

Hi Ral315/Archive 8: This is a quick note just to let you know that there's an election under way at Esperanza. If you'd like to become a candidate for Administrator General or the Advisory Council, just add your name here by 15 December 2005. Voting begins at 12:00UTC on 16 December.

You've received this spam because you signed up for it here. To stop the spam, pop over and remove yourself and you'll never hear from Esperanza again!

➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 20:01, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Signpost

Hello Ral - have you given any thought to doing the Signpost by mail as well and introducing reader views? It appears that there is some demand for the Signpost being "delivered", and I'm sure that our readers would like the opportunity for them to express their opinions. Thanks a lot! Flcelloguy (A note?) 23:29, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Hey, Ral! Two things: first, I noticed that you had volunteered to help out with the Esperanza electiosn. That would be great! There's nothing much to do now; once the elections starts, all there is is to check for irregularities (i.e. everyone who voted was a member, didn't vote twice, etc.). Also, here there's demand for a notice in the Signpost. I don't think this warrants a full article; perhaps mentioning in News and Notes? In either case, I'm wary of either myself or you writing it, considering we're both members and about to oversee it. Thoughts? Thanks a lot! Flcelloguy (A note?) 22:16, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, thanks! You can write it if you wish. Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:07, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Signpost subscription

Awesome! You are the man!! Jdavidb (talk • contribs) 05:42, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Dec. 12 news and notes

Hi! In your latest news and notes column, could you specify who "Mayer" is? (second paragraph). Thanks for all the hard work with the Signpost. --Merovingian 06:57, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Haha, alright. I was sure that "Mayer" = Daniel Mayer, but I couldn't remember his username. --Merovingian 07:30, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Cool! Thanks again. --Merovingian 07:33, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the RSS

Thanks for the RSS feed for the Signpost! If it's on the toolserver, perhaps the code could be made public and it can be adapted for other pages? Could be very useful. Dan100 (Talk) 08:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Block lifted quickly after block created

According to this page, two to three hours after you blocked User:Netoholic for violating namespace restrictions, User:Snowspinner unblocked Netoholic for, apparently, no reason other than cronyism. Adraeus 09:38, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Why not? Adraeus 23:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Okay. I eventually found the note you referenced. Adraeus 23:50, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

See my comment at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Netoholic Adraeus 12:19, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

To Esperanza elections staff:

Thanks for helping out! Could I ask a favor from you all? Would you mind checking Wikipedia:Esperanza/December 2005 elections/Vote and confirming that every candidate was listed on the member's list before December 12 and fulfill all the membership requirements (150 edits, 2 weeks)? Also, would one of you mind formatting and playing around with the tally box - I'm having some difficulty making it format correctly and listing all the candidates in the two races. Thanks a lot for your help! Flcelloguy (A note?) 16:33, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, a candidate must be listed twice in order to run for both races. Yes, I should have thought of that (slaps himself). I was trying to play around with the colors to indicate the two races. If only I knew how to make it two tables... Thanks a lot! Flcelloguy (A note?) 16:51, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Sure, take your time. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 17:05, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I'd say all three are eligible. The tally box looks great. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 17:34, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Image on wikinews

[copied from n:user talk:Ral315 ] Please provide sources for your images. It is against policy to upload public-domain images to wikinews, please use commons: instead. Specificly refering to n:Image:Stanley Williams mugshot.jpg. Since this is not used in any articles and is against license policy, do you object to me deleting it? Thank you for uploading images, they make wikinews a prettier place. Good luck in Arb-com elections. ☺☻ n:user:bawolff 10:29, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

thank you for your quick response ☻. It has now been deleted. Bawolff 20:09, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Netoholic now permitted to edit Templates?

Has Netoholic's ban on editing Templates been lifted? I ask because of this, this and this. These were shortly preceded by this and this. Oh, and a little while before that there was this. I take some exception to the peremptory tone of these comments and the abrupt nature of the reversions.

I understand that WP:AUM is Neto's particular little Hobby horse (his "favorite topic, to which he constantly reverts") but I object to being ordered around like some small puppy who has just widdled on the carpet. This is particularly true when the "rule" I have apparently "broken" is a guideline which has repeatedly failed to be promoted to policy status.

I'm asking you and Snowspinner because the two of you seem to have some knowledge of the situation, and possibly some influence over Neto himself.

Yours hoppingly-mad but nobly self-restrained…Phil | Talk 15:14, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Esperanza election

I did that on purpose; I don't feel comfortable voting on an election where I'm a candidate myself. Keep up the good work! -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 17:04, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

News from Esperanza

Hello, fellow Esperanzians! This is just a friendly reminder that elections for Administrator General and two advisory council positions have just begun. Voting will last until Friday, December 30, so make sure you exercise your right to vote! Also, I'm pleased to announce the creation of the Esperanza mailing list. I urge all members to join; see Wikipedia:Esperanza/Contact for more information. All you need to do is email me and I will activate your account. This will be a great way to relax, stay in touch, and hear important announcements. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?)

This message was delivered to all Esperanza members by our acting messenger, Redvers. If you do not wish to receive further messages, please list yourself at WP:ESP/S. Thanks.

New J! Related Article

Hey -- some anonotwerp has created List of greatest Jeopardy! champions and it's rife with factual errors. What do you think -- do you think it's more appropriate to clean up or send to AFD? OntarioQuizzer 00:20, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Range block

That's coo, uncomfortable with doing range blocks myself; perhaps I should try it sometime. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 07:05, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Template protection

Discussion regarding the recent increases in template protection: Wikipedia:Protected_page#Various_template_pages -- Beland 22:01, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

WP:SEMI

I've reverted your changes, as the newest X% of users actually can't edit pages. See this diff for details. Blackcap (talk) ^{(vandalfighters, take a look)} 07:33, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

RFA voting style

Could you refer me to what policies I'm breaking? I'm a little confused on that...My vote on Lifeisunfair is 1. Completely legitimate given my reason and 2. partly a joke. Do you honestly believe that because of my voting style Lifeisunfair is not going to be promoted? Get off my back. freestylefrappe 12:00, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

SCZenz filed a request for arbitration regarding my actions here: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Freestylefrappe. I have listed you as a party involved. freestylefrappe 19:03, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

I would like to wish you and your family a Merry Christmas and all the best for the New Year. Guettarda 18:48, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikinews

Just wondering - to which edits in particular are you referring? Dan100 (Talk) 21:35, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Lyndon LaRouche/Chip Berlet

"Saga" is the right word. I'm not sure which parts you want to hear about. What follows is from memory, so I might make some errors. I got involved over a year ago in editing the LaRouche articles because, as with many other topics that I've gotten inovled it, they seemed to need some neutral help. At the time I knew almost nothing about the group. It became apparent that a set of LaRouche-oriented editors were making it difficult to create an NPOV version of the articles, and were filling them with incorrect information. While we were working through that mess another editor, who'd had little very involvement (Snowspinner, I think), decided to take the case to the ArbCom without any warning or consultation, but also without doing any work (he just dumped it on us, essentially). During that case two surprising facts came to light - 1) that the set of editors was in fact one editor, HK, using sock puppets and 2) that he'd been involved in a thorough campaign to insert LaRouche concepts into hundreds of unrelated articles, often simply cutting-and-pasting text from websites. The two other editors who worked on the LaRouche articles at the time, and were co-participants in the ArbCom case, were SlimVirgin and Cberlet. During the ArbCom case we'd worked in draft copies of some of the contentious articles (inviting HK to join us), and afterwards posted those drafts. Cognition started editing in the late summer and HK returned at about the same time. Due to ArbCom restrictions, there has been little editing by them of the LaRouche articles since then. Though HK predicted that we'd be busy filling the articles with falsehoods, they're little changed from the versions that we had back in the spring.

Regarding Chip Berlet, the original article was heavily edited by HK. I made some edits to it last winter, and a few reverts of Cognition, but otherwise haven't researched the topic. This fall Nobs01 starting adding derogatory information to the article and libellous accusations to the talk page, depicting Berlet as some sort of mass murder (literally). I asked him what it was all about on the talk page. He was amassing lists of all the people connected directly or indirectly to Berlet who'd died mysterious deaths. Eventually it led to a still-active ArbCom case. I have not been particularly involved in this latest matter, but the consensus seems to be that Nobs01 was engaged in original research and POV pushing.

Regarding my own actions in the two matters, I was not involved as a mediator and was just trying to assure the usual Wikipedia norms were followed. Even HK admitted at the time of the January 2005 ArbCom that he did not think I'd done anything wrong in that case. As an editor, I wish I'd been more engaged with the Chip Berlet article because some of the problems might have been fixed earlier. However Nobs01 seems to have had a fixed POV coming into the article, so I'm not sure how that energy could have been re-directed. I don't know if I've answered your questions. If I haven't, feel free to ask. Cheers, -Willmcw 07:46, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Personal attacks

"freestylefrappe's RFA voting is completely erratic and unfounded" Refrain from such comments in the future or you will be blocked. You are not above the law. By the way, I have discussed LifeisUnfair's RFA with him and Matt Yeager, explained my concerns, and changed my vote. As for the other diffs you listed, all were genuine whether you like it or not. I suggest you review basic Wikipedia policy on RFA voting. Perhaps you are new to requests for adminship, but that doesnt excuse your conduct. freestylefrappe 05:31, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikifetch

Hi there, Ral. Just wanted to check how you felt about Wikifetch at this precise moment, due to the reshuffling. I'm co-ordinating the lot, it seems, including development and testers and staffing, etc. If you're still interested in helping run the actual service, when that goes live, let me know, would you?

Season's greetings, Rob Church

Thanks...I guess?

Oh c'mon, we both know the only reason you don't create a stick figure barnstar is that some idiot troll(most like a frequent contributor to USENET from my experience) will challenge your claim to the copyright you use and get into a two week long revert war... :-P

Well, if it means anything, I think same with you, what with all the good faithness and such. I just can't live on here as a slave to the chaos around me, I have to step in and take some action like I think some people like you do.

Oh well, I guess it's ok in the end. at this rate the trolls will swarm all over me until I RickK out at some point so they can claim their next victim. I can only hope that people will come to their senses at some point and I get get enough of a consensus mob together to establish a structure policy creation/refinement/annulment process so they're easier to enforce. karmafist 20:43, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

MOJO Works

...wasn't speediable patent nonsense, and vandalism (namely, the piped links to spyware and spam) should be reverted, not endorsed with a speedy. Particularly when its done by the GNAA; User:Timecop is a member, and User:GNAA Staos self-evidently is; so are User:Femmina and User:Cptchipjew, the first two voters on the afd, calling for the speedy. This probably should have continued to go through the whole afd process. —Cryptic (talk) 16:48, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Feat and Admin

I forgot to post it on the newsroom (actually I didn't forget, I assumed I would have time after work to update it and then post it prior to the Signpost being published), but I did do the article on Dec. 25 when I got back from up north. You didn't mention the first featured portal. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 00:28, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Yeah I should learn to chill, dunno what I was more frustrated at... myself when I didn't update the newsroom, or you having to duplicate something when you have lots of other stuff to do. Yup, Wikipedia:Featured_portals. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 20:11, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

suggestion to change template web reference

Hi, I made a suggestion to change template:web reference. See Template talk:Web reference#Change proposal: break dependency on template tl. You have blocked that template (which is good). Could you do that change? I can't, I'm not an admin. Adrian Buehlmann 17:09, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Done. Thank you! Adrian Buehlmann 20:22, 27 December 2005 (UTC)