User talk:Optiguy54

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, so please add it to your watchlist.
Please click here to leave me a new message.

Senators of the College of Justice[edit]

These two edits were aimed at merging Senator of the College of Justice and List of Senators of the College of Justice because the former is a short enough article to accommodate the latter. If you have some reason for opposing the move, I would appreciate an explanation. If you merely thought it was vandalism or something, please disregard. -Rrius (talk) 21:04, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hilliard P. Jenkins[edit]

[1] Please review and move the draft to Article Space. I have made all requested changes. I don't know exactly how to format this note, so all pointers are welcome. Thank you. Brianbaughan (talk) 17:59, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 2010[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Lee Iacocca has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Sophie ^(Talk) 19:57, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, completely accidental. I think it was an edit conflict: I was undoing the user's page blanking when someone else was doing the same thing, at the same time as the vandalizer blanked it again, and I managed to click on the wrong edit version to revert to. Sorry again, Optiguy54 (talk) 20:04, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moving a draft[edit]

Thanks for addressing the {{move draft}} request at Hilliard P. Jenkins. You may not know that the actual move does not remove the template, so you have to have to remove it after the move. I've done it, but just letting you know in case it comes up again.--SPhilbrick T 00:12, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know; I didn't realize there was even a template there, as the user personally messaged me and asked me to move it. Thanks again! Optiguy54 (talk) 23:23, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback archived[edit]

Hi there.

A while ago, you requested feedback in WP:FEED. Because it has been a while, and you'd received at least some response there, I have now archived the replies in Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/Archive/27. Please do not edit that page though; if you require further feedback, add a new request on WP:FEED.

I am trying to clear the backlogs; it would help us a lot if you could look at the requests from other users on WP:FEED and add any comments to help them out. Anyone can respond there, so please do take a look, and comment on the articles from other people.

If you want help with anything at all, you could either;

Leave a message on my own talk page; OR
Use a {{helpme}} - please create a new section at the end of your own talk page, put {{helpme}}, and ask your question - remember to 'sign' your name by putting ~~~~ at the end; OR
Talk to us live, with this or this.

The last of those is particularly useful - please try it; pop in now and say hello. Best, Chzz ► 02:36, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DEP counts[edit]

Hey, really appreciate your work on the DEP project!

Just wanted to give you a friendly heads up on updating the counts like you did here. What the text "Please add new counts about every 3-4 weeks without removing previous ones" means is that if you are updating the count in between complete list regenerations, add a new count line without overwriting the previous count. Some editors like to see how much progress has been made since the last regen -- if all they wanted was to know how many are left on the list, they could scroll to the bottom of the list and look.

Thanks!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:52, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks! Optiguy54 (talk) 17:14, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TELUS Article[edit]

Hi. Thanks for your message. I believe my edits were made accurately and inline with wiki policy. The content removed was questionabley notable at the time (likely a case of recentism) and certainly is no longer relevant. Specifically: Labour dispute - thre are thousands of strikes each year at many different companies and they are not given anywhere near the coverage that was given on the TELUS page if at all. The hippo info maybe releveant but even that is a bit of a stretch. The porn controversy would not have met wiki notability criteria even at the time never mind today.

Honestly, as I did mention on the talk page, much of the ocntent has been added simply to slander the company but disgruntled employees and customers. Cmopare agains the ROgeres COmmunications page, BELL, AT&T, Verizon and you'll see that page as it was when I found it is a pretty sad summary of the company. My approach had been to begin with the "house cleaning" and then to begin to add more content around the company itself. Let meknow wher you take issue with this and your rational for why the info removed should be kept when held up to wiki policies around notabililty and recentism (or no longer recentism). thanks 209.91.107.249 (talk) 20:34, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for replying. At the time of removal, it appeared as if the content was being modified by some non-neutral contributor. However, if this is not the case and you can justify in the edit description a reason for removing the information, that is fine. Keeping this in mind, I believe that the information is relevant today, and is therefore not a question of a dynamicism in relevancy. For this reason, I persist to believe that the structural information removed from the "hippo" section should remain. As you have mentioned, it is still a possibility that the information is not written from a neutral point of view (in terms of promotion, as you have explained in your reply.) In that case, it would be appropriate to reword the section to reflect a neutral point of view. This does not mean the content should be removed altogether; rather, it should be rephrased to meet Wikipedia's neutral point of view guidelines. Thank you, and I apologize for the inconvenience. Optiguy54 (talk) 20:51, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol survey[edit]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Optiguy54! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 12:40, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

Hello Optiguy54, I'm here onbehalf of WP:ORPHAN in which you are also a participant. So, we want your opinion to a WP:ORPHAN related matter. It is a proposal by Technical 13. Please have a look here. Your opinion (i.e support, oppose etc) are very much appreciated there. Thank you. By Jim Cartar through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Backlog drive[edit]

Hello Optiguy54,

WikiProject Orphanage is holding a month long Backlog Elimination Drive to de-orphan articles which have orphan tags!
The goal is to eliminate the backlog of orphan articles. There are currently 58734 articles which have orphan tags. The drive is running from April 12, 2014 to May 12, 2014.

Awards will be given out for all editors participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive. To add your name in the participants list click here.
So start de-orphaning articles! Click here to see the list of articles need de-orphaning.
Visit Suggestions for how to de-orphan an article to know more!

Thanks. _{Opt-out Instructions} by Jim Cartar on behalf of WikiProject Orphanage through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:21, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

deOrphaning script[edit]

Hello everyone! I was just working on responding to a couple bug reports for a script that I worked up as part of a request from this project, and I noticed that only a couple people (who weren't even on this mailing list) are actually using the script. A little history on the script: In March of 2014, Jim Cartar came to my user talk page and said he needed some help in acquiring a script for a backlog drive that he was working on that could keep track of and score deOrphanings for a scored backlog drive. I took that request to the project's talk page (BackLog Drive "DO" (De-Orphaning) script proposal) and there was near unanimous support for this. I thought about the proposal and decided the best way to do it was to build a new script (which is still no where near as comprehensive as Manishearth's OrphanTabs) and build into it a mechanism that will make BLD scoring easy.

What I'm wondering at this point is, since there appears to be only two people using the script, should I continue to develop this script with a goal of using it for scoring BLDs or just debug the existing script and leave it at that. Thanks for any replies or comments.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page.

This message was sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 14:04, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New deal for page patrollers[edit]

Hi Optiguy54,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey[edit]

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:12, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]