User talk:RyanGerbil10/Archive 9
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Please imagine a different catchy song:
- Believe it or not, this page is archived,
- Please leave a meesage at this page
- Scream all you want, but I'll never hear,
- 'cause I'm not here-
- Believe it or not, it's archived!
Signpost updated for December 11th.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 50 | 11 December 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
User:Berkeley City College
Oh, totally unfair that you get to do that, and I didn't. I'm filing a complaint against you, if I can find the whine-he-had-more-fun-than-me page. Thanks, it does look like strictly copying from the other page, and I did invite the user to justify it, which they apparently opted not to do. Wikipedia sometimes gets these hard boiled eggs. KP Botany 01:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Needs a cleanup
Hi! You're in my old neck of the woods. I grew up near Pittsburgh.
re: Template:Headermessage(edit talk links history)
thus: This seems to have been improperly disposed of. The Tfd result was to userfy, but the template is still listed in Category:Internal link templates, which via the Tfd, lead me back to you. The what links here is pretty short. If I can help tidy up the links, ask. Don't have admin powers. So that part's up to you. Best regards // FrankB 23:03, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
- Ahhhhh, this tidbit! I didn't recollect the context, nor recognize your handle. One head scratch later I get it. Thanks for the courtesy of getting back to me. Since you didn't ask, I figure tidying up is on you--I've done zip for Xmas shopping, so see ya! Have a good holiday! // FrankB 21:57, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Day!
Congratulations! It's been... 1.. 2.. 3.. ___(plug # in) years since your very first edit! Happy First Edit Day, RyanGerbil10!  Have a f-a-n-tastic day and keep up the good work on Wikipedia!  Best of wishes, the Birthday Committee and myself! --lovelaughterlife♥talk? 04:03, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
Thank You!
Thank you for your input at my RFA, which successfully closed at 58/2/0. I will think about the 10 questions and answers I had, and I hope that I will use the tools constructively and for the benefit of Wikipedia. If you ever need any help, don't be afraid to drop me a line. I'm here to help afterall! 8) -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 00:18, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Bhutan
Good catch on the Bhutan vandalism, but you didn't get it all. That was three consecutive vandal edits in the past 40 minutes. I've placed your talk page on my watchlist, so you may reply right here, to keep the discussion all in one place. --Smack (talk) 19:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
- Sounds good. I reverted quickly because of the damage the vandal had done i.e; destroy the infobox. I was going to look deeper at the history, but I got distracted and read the article instead... Thanks for cleaning it up. RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 19:36, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
"spurious"
spurious \SPYUR-ee-uhs\, adjective:
- Not proceeding from the true or claimed source; not genuine; false.
- Of illegitimate birth.
NP, apology accepted. I am harsh, I know. Who knows, maybe you'll grow even harsher. It's almost inevitable. But Blnguyen is convincing as usual. - crz crztalk 05:56, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 18th.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 51 | 18 December 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:23, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
AfD Closings
Please be sure to place Template:at above the section header so Mathbot doesn't get confused when he puts the lists of old deletions together. Thanks, and Happy Holidays! :) Cbrown1023 03:57, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
|
Hello, and thank you for the support on my recent RfA despite your concerns. The final tally was 63/3/2, and I have now been entrusted with the mop. I hope I can live up to your trust, and certainly welcome any and all feedback. All the best, and thanks again! — Agathoclea 12:30, 25 December 2006 (UTC) |
Signpost updated for December 26th.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 52 | 26 December 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:27, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Template:windowHome
windowHome template is widely used in Italian Wikipedia. I found nothing similar in English one. Of course, if any is available, even similar, I will be glad to use it. Otherwise I really would appreciate if you could restore it. I'm open to discuss the reason for delation to find an agreement. Thank you in advance.--Dejudicibus 14:31, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
"One TfD can't fix this..."
What would you suggest, then? There doesn't seem to be another place to discuss deleting a template... -Amarkov blahedits 17:36, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Templates for deletion
Sure. The templates to be untranscluded are Template:20 Largest Airlines by Fleet Size as of December 20, 2006, and Template:Month disambig. The noms are found on the main TfD page under the December 20th and 18th subsectyions, respectively. You can close the noms if you want, or let me do it once the templates are orphaned, your call. Either way, thanks a lot for the help. Best Reagrds, RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 01:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 2nd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 1 | 2 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your support
Thank you for your support in the RfA on my behalf. It is an honor to have received your expression of confidence. To be chosen as an administrator requires a high level of confidence by a broad section of the community. Although I received a great deal of support, at this time I do not hold the level of confidence required, and the RfA did not pass. It is my wish that I will continue to deserve your confidence. Sincerely, --BostonMA talk 20:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for blocking the IP address that has done repeated vandalism to North Dakota politician articles. It is greatly appreciated. --MatthewUND(talk) 22:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
lonelygirl15 edit
Why did you revert my LG15 edit? I was updating a seriously outdated page that is shoddy and no longer up to date. Do you even follow the series?75.46.167.76 22:42, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 8th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 2 | 8 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
My Request for Adminship
|
Thank you for your support in my my RfA, which passed with a tally of 117/0/1. I hope that my conduct as an admin lives up to the somewhat flattering confidence the community has shown in me. I intend to continue to be a good contributor, and not let my extra abilities detract from my mainspace contributions. Please don't hesitate to leave a message on my talk page should you need anything or want to discuss something with me.--Nilfanion (talk) 15:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC) |
I can't find Template:Jupiler League (and something like Template:FA Premier League teamlist) put it on tfd, the deleted one should be Template:Jupiler League Matches 2006-07 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs).
Why you remove all from club's article?
Template:Jupiler League Matches 2006-07 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) is included in Template:Jupiler League, but not equal to.
Matthew_hk tc 10:52, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi _ I disagree with the "no consensus" ruling. What are my options for a next step? -- Stbalbach 15:45, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Insignia template
Hi, I have noticed that you removed {{insignia}} from Image:Mpflag.svg, and have not replaced it with anything despite your edit summary implying a replacement. Please explain this and if indeed the insignia template is deprecated, please tell me of a template which best fits the image, which is a flag of a military corps and has the same copyright status as country flags and such. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 15:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the answer. I have looked around and found {{Symbol}}, a proper replacement template in this case. FYI. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 18:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
My RFA
Hey, thanks so much for supporting my recent RFA. A number of editors considered that I wasn't ready for the mop yet and unfortunately the RFA did not succeed (69/26/11). There are a number of areas which I will be working on (including changing my username) in the next few months in order to allay the fears of those who opposed my election to administrator.
I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you sincerely for your support over the past week. I've been blown away by the level of interest taken in my RFA and appreciate the time and energy dedicated by all the editors who have contributed to it, support, oppose and neutral alike. I hope to bump into you again soon and look forward to serving you and Wikipedia in any way I can. Cheers! The Rambling Man 19:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC) (the non-admin, formerly known as Budgiekiller)
Template:Catholic-link on deletion review
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Template:Catholic-link. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Stbalbach 02:52, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
perhaps you should read the reason the people "voted" keep, and check against reality, then another picture might be drawn. At least, the result is not "no consensus", but I can understand if you want to keep the template. →AzaToth 01:45, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Vandalism???
Dude, what is up with this? Did someone get your password? —Angr 10:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
- That'll teach you to bring girls back to your room. Never touch the things myself. Anyway, you gotta be careful -- people get emergency de-sysopped for that sort of thing. —Angr 20:31, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
catholic-link DRV
Over at Wikipedia:Deletion review#Template:Catholic-link, you said, "I believe that my closing was correct (obviously) but I believe that according to policy, the template should have been deleted." Could you elaborate on what policy you're talking about? I've been arguing against it purely from a pragmatic standpoint but I'd be interested in the policy. Also, if you have time to read it, I've addressed the "no consensus" ruling and why I believe it was mistaken, back at DRV. I invite you to take a look if you're still interested in that discussion (I don't blame you if you aren't). — coelacan talk — 10:24, 15 January 2007 (UTC)