User talk:Lradrama/Archive 7

Vandalism

You have sent me a message accusing me of vandalising Irshad Manji's page. I am not sure why. Much of what I have included has come Irshad herself. The other material I have footnoted to prove authenticity so what is the problem? I have only edited the page to include a more holistic and accurate view of Irshad Manji. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.200.141 (talk) 17:40, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Make sure all your claims you put onto this encyclopedia display no point of view at all, and that they are all backed up using reliable sources per WP:citing sources. Those claims at the top needed these more than anything else if they are true. It may be polite to others who edit the article to explain your edits on the article talkpage, as no other editor has declared this person before in the article's history. Lradrama 17:45, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Everything I included in Irshad Manji's page was backed up using reliable sources so I am unsure why it was undone. The claim at the top of the page is common knowledge and something Irshad herself has stated numerous times so it would hardly qualify as vandalism. It is correct information. I can easily find a source for it, if it is necessary. However the page calls her a Muslim, feminist, author, journalist and activist. If no source is required for that why is one needed for my insertion at the top of the page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.200.141 (talk) 21:51, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

A claim such as that is generally more controversial than her career specialism. Yes, please find a source for it, and show it to me before you put it on, or if you're confident it agrees fully with Wikipedia:Citing sources, then just put it in the article. Many thanks, Lradrama 17:42, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I have found a source for Irshad being a lesbian. It is an article from the San Fransisco Chronicle interview. Irshad also founded the show queertv. Sorry I thought this was widely known. Here is the source. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/01/19/DDG424BVAN1.DTL —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.200.141 (talk) 17:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, thankyou for your co-operation. That's a good source. It is from a popular newspaper, that states the author. Thankyou, you may put it into the article. Drop a note on the article's talkpage to say you have done this. Best wishes, Lradrama 18:01, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Gutteeeedddd!!!

James —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.40.14.172 (talk) 22:50, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you too!

Thanks for the WikiSmile, it's nice to be appreciated once in a while!! Arriva436^talk 15:24, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

please excuse the edit.

I really apologize, that was my brother just messing around. could you just answer this question, how do you guys find out so quickly when someone has messed up a page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.16.210.105 (talk) 17:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

We look at a special page that displays all the new edits made to Wikipedia. We can look at them, and using our tools we have, make rapid reverts/rollbacks if the edits are bad. ;-) Lradrama 18:03, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

ahh that is very cool. so for example would I be able to reply to you by simply editing this? and also, I have found a mistake in a Judson Laiply article, how would I correct it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.16.210.105 (talk) 18:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you have just replied to me by editing this yes. If you have found a mistake in an article, you would either click edit this page on the menu at the top of the page (up there ^), or, of the article is split into sections, you could click the small, blue, edit tab that appears at the top-right of each section. Be careful not to abuse this privilege though, as it could lead you being blocked from editing this encyclopedia. For more information, you may want to read Wikipedia:Getting started. Lradrama 18:17, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

well in the Judson Laipply article, it says that his Video, The Evolution of dance, is the top viewed video of all time. This is not true. Now technically it is, because if you look at the most viewed all time section of YouTube you will clearly see that his is the most viewed, but youtube does not list some other videos that surpass The Evolution of Dance video. a link to The Evolution of Dance: http://youtube.com/watch?v=dMH0bHeiRNg a link to a greater view count than video listed above: http://youtube.com/watch?v=244qR7SvvX0 I just thought that the article should specify that The Evolution of Dance is the most viewed video that YouTube decided to list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.16.210.105 (talk) 18:28, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, by all means change it my friend. Also, if you look at the top menu of the page, there is a tab that says discussion. Just click on that, then click new section and drop a note there to say what you have done and why. :-) Lradrama 18:32, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

3rr violation - help, please

I believe that User:Steve0999 has violated the 3rr rule at Joseph Romm. Can you take a look please? -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:22, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

User blocked by Kbthompson. Lradrama 17:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

RFA Remarks

One cannot take back what was already said and i admire that you are the first to actually bring it up on my talk page   «l| Ψrom3th3ăn ™|l»  (talk) 02:03, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

That's OK. But please, next time, if you oppose, just explain to the candidate nicely why you have voted as you have, rather than shooting them in flames, as it can be very demoralising to the candidate. Thanks, Lradrama 10:55, 22 June 2008 (UTC) 10:55, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi Lradrama. Thank you for your involvement in my RfA. There has been quite a lot of really useful constructive criticism, notably Peter was kind enough to explain his voting and offer support for the future. I appreciate your comments to Ψrom3th3ăn, and I believe his out-burst is something best forgotten, and himself and I can move forward as if it never happened. Which ever way my RfA turns out thanks for your input and I can use build upon your suggestiions for the future. All the best, Mark t young (talk) 18:43, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

You are very welcome. Sure, if you take note of all the comments left for you, which I'm sure you will, all the negative points will be addressed, and in a few months, you can try again and hopefully, have a much better RfA. I'm sure you'll be successful, because it was similar for me over a year ago on my first attempt. Very best wishes, Lradrama 07:49, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

I do't know if this is the correct way to do this but apparently you can grant me permission to have rollback. May I have it? Please tell me if I'm doing this wrong. Chubbennaitor 20:18, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello. You have come to the right person, yes (the other way would have been Wikipedia:Requests for rollback, but you can also do it this way) I have had a look through your contributions, and they seem fine. I have granted your request for rollback. Please do not abuse this tool, or it will be removed, and further action may be taken. You may wish to read Wikipedia:Rollback. Best wishes, Lradrama 21:35, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you and best wishes. I hope you stay loyal to WP and give me the same hope in that. Not abusing anyone. Chubbennaitor 16:09, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome :-) Lradrama 18:38, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

More trolling

Hello again, Lradrama. The anon is back on Talk:Slavic peoples. [1] Is it possible for the range block to be extended/changed? And if it's not too much trouble, could you watch the article, along with Talk:Bosniaks? Thanks. BalkanFever 03:30, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello, and thankyou for bringing this to my attention. Before I proceed with this, are you sure that this is the same person as someone I blocked before? Lradrama 19:29, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, I don't know if it was exactly you who blocked him, but I remember you helped me out with the situation. (User talk:Lradrama/Archive 6#IP troll and User talk:Lradrama/Archive 6#The IP troll is back). BalkanFever 23:56, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I thought I had come across this person before. The behavioural pattern is exactly the same, and a checkuser shows that this is a case of abusing multiple accounts. I have extended the range block - 6 months like the rest of them. Lradrama 10:41, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I also stumbled across this, which looks particularly worrying. BalkanFever 12:42, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

That is rather interesting...is that saying that the IP can still edit when blocked? :S Lradrama 19:20, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for just reverting the vandal on my userpage. I also added that page to User:ClueBot/Optin, where it would automatically revert vandalism on my page. But still, thanks. SchfiftyThree 19:25, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! Glad I could be of assistance! Lradrama 19:26, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Yet more thanks!

Thank you for not only restoring my page, but for finally putting an end to that unpleasantness. Have a great day! LonelyBeacon (talk) 20:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! Glad I could help! Happy editing! ;-) Lradrama 20:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

SarekOfVulcan RFA

Thank you for !voting on my RfA. If you supported, I'll make sure your confidence is not misplaced; if you opposed, I'll take your criticism into account and try to adjust my behavior accordingly.

See you around the wiki!--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 00:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Well done, I'm glad to hear of your success! Happy editing! ;-) Lradrama 09:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your !vote at my RFA

Thanks!

Thank you, Lradrama, for your support !vote at my RFA. I will be doing my best to make sure that your confidence has not been misplaced. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 18:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome & I'm glad to hear of your success! Enjoy the new tools :-) Lradrama 08:38, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

My RfA

I hope the other kids at school play with me...

Thank you for your support in my recent RfA, which closed successfully. I felt the process was a thorough review of my contributions and my demeanor, and I was very gratified to see how many editors took the time to really see what I'm about and how I can be of help to the project. As a result, some editors changed their views during the discussion, and most expressed specific, detailed points to indicate their opinion (whether it was , , or ).

A number of editors were concerned about my level of experience. I was purposeful in not waiting until a particular benchmark occurred before requesting adminship, because I feel - as many do - that adminship is not a reward and that each case is individual. It is true that I am not the most experienced editor around here, but I appreciate that people dug into my contributions enough to reach the conclusion that I seem to have a clue. Also, the best thing about this particular concern is that experience is something an editor - or administrator - can always get more of, and I'll continue doing that, just as I've been doing. (If I seem a little slow at it, feel free to slap me.)

I am a strong believer in the concept that this project is all about the content, and I'm looking forward to contributing wherever I can. Please let me know if I can be of any help. In the meantime, I'm off to school...

Thanks again!

Congratulations on succeeding! Best wishes and happy editing! Make the most of the admin school. Lradrama 22:30, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Bottle-Of-Musical-Joy

He's requesting unblock and saying he won't do it again. Is this how we implement the new get-tough BLP policy? A guy who was blocked for 31 hours a month or so ago is then blocked for two weeks with very little warning? What's the reasoning behind this? Any diffs I should see? Daniel Case (talk) 04:21, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

He had plenty of warning, but I still have a hard time understanding this block. He posted something and self-reverted, apparently before any warning, and all his other edits near the block were to talk pages. Was this for BLP violation? Was it for edit warring on the talk page? Either way, your block summary (simply "Vandalism") seems wrong. Mangojuice^talk 05:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, his request for unblock seems to show a willingness to improve and do better. My second block was longer than the first by the amount of time it was, lest it should develop into a regular disruptive account. In light of this, yes it is rather long, and I have thus given the user another chance. Thanks for lending me your thoughts. Lradrama 10:14, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Your comment on Stephen's page...

IMHO admin coaching CAN be a detriment if it is rushed and seen as a means to become an admin... when it isn't really that deep and rushed. The candidates where it is meaningful and thought out... that's a different story.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 03:55, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes. I can see where people come from when they criticise candidate's who've admin coaching, as it's basically assistance from someone else in order to reach a certain goal, instead of earning yourself that position by oneself. However, I offered my support because, after reviewing the candidate, as you said, there was no element of things being rushed with a direct goal, if you get me. I think Steven is a good candidate. Lradrama 10:01, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:HAU, Status, and you!

As you may know, the StatusBot responsible for maintaining the status of the Highly Active Users was taken offline. We now have a replacement in the Qui status system. This semi-automatic system will allow you to easily update your status page found at Special:Mypage/Status which the HAU page code is now designed to read from. If you are already using Qui (or a compatible system) - great! - no action is needed (other than remembering to update your status as necessary). If not, consider installing Qui. You can also manually update this status by changing the page text to online, offline, or busy. While it is not mandatory, the nature of HAU is that people are often seeking a quick answer from someone who is online and keeping our statuses up-to-date will assist with this. Note if you were previously using your /Status page as something other than a one-word status indicator, your HAU entry may have been set to "status=n" to correct display issues. Please clear this parameter if you change things to be "HAU compatible". Further questions can be raised at WT:HAU. This message was delivered by xenobot 23:06, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

The traditional rfa thank you message

		Thank you for the support!
		Lradrama, it is my honor to report that thanks in part to your support my third request for adminship passed (80/18/2). I appreciate the trust you and the WP community have in me, and I will endeovour to put my newly acquired mop and bucket to work for the community as a whole. Yours sincerly and respectfuly, TomStar81 (Talk) 02:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not worthy

		Your Opinion is More Important than You Think Barnstar
		For brightening my day with your comments, I award you this barnstar-with-a-rather-long name. I'm not quite sure I'm this legend you speak of but I'm humbled that you think so! Keep bringing smiles to people's faces. =) –xenocidic (talk) 22:12, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Aww thankyou so much! That is my first one since January I think...I don't know where I've gone wrong! Many thanks... legend ;) Lradrama 22:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

They seem to come in cycles... I've seen you around a lot, I doubt you're doing anything wrong =) –xenocidic (talk) 22:17, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou. I appreciate your comments also :). You have made my day better too. My golly, we're bloomin' fantastic, me and thee, you gotta admit! Hehe ;) Lradrama 22:20, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

hehe =). –xenocidic (talk) 22:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Help me please!!

Hi! For the first time in my Wikipedia life, I don't know what to do, in that I don't know how to deal with a certain situation.

I have chosen to contact you because I have come across you before, and you are an administrator, so I hope you have a more policy-minded approach that what I have (panic!!).

I have today become aware through my watchlist that one user, Richard Harvey, has been removing a lot of the content from Wikipedia articles about bus companies. These include fares information, but more substantially route information. He is claiming this on two policies, WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory and on some WP:ADVERTISING.

Well, the more silly of the two I disagree with is advertising. I don't think that many operators would use Wikipedia to advertise their services. A list of routes is no way going to make a potential user get on one of their buses. They will need something more than that.

I also disagree with the argument that Wikipedia is not a directory. While some of the articles on bus companies have some of this info, for example many pages on London Bus operators have garage addresses etc. which I do think is unnecessary and usually remove, I feel that route information is different. The routes of a bus company are basically the main part, without them the buses would be pretty useless. I believe that including details of the routes on Wikipedia helps give the reader some idea of where and how the operator runs.

The main point though is what Richard Harvey. He has had a discussion on Talk:First Leeds that has led to loads of pages being changed. I hadn't seen the First Leeds page, so had no time to disagree, but now literally 50+ (maybe 100) pages have been changed, some ruined. It you look at his contributions, you can see the scale of the problem.

Many pages have now been left as pathetic stubs, with one, Blue Bus of Penwortham how having deletion proposed. He has also removed the info, and that's it. Look at Bluestar (bus company), where tow sections are just left with no background info, just titles with logos, and no content.

I thought that large scale changes such as these had to be discussed individually. What has happened is that it has been discussed on one talk page that I (along with many other people I suppose) haven't seen, and then tons of pages been changes, all just giving the reason of "See Talk:First Leeds" (which of course, I hadn't seen, so had no chance to give my views etc etc. it goes round and round!!). In my opinions this is unacceptable.

He has also changed many articles of bus routes in Glasgow and the West Midlands to redirects of their operators, again linking to "Talk:First Leeds", which has nothing to do with bus route articles. I notice he has stayed away from the London Buses articles, which makes me wonder whether the user is scared of the response at WikiProject London Transport, and is sticking to thing he knows there will be no trouble over.

I would revert the edits, but as you can see it you be a mammoth task and would probably start an edit war. I would also contact the user, but they already seem to be uncooperative and I already know their Nike style views - just do it!!

I maybe wrong on the removal of content front, but I want to know whether you can make changes to loads of articles and just link to one specific talk page.

Anyway for now, help!! Arriva436^talk 16:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Just to give a scale of the problem, I have listed all the pages that are so far affected:

Cavendish Motor Services, Coastal Coaches, Burnley & Pendle‎, Centrebus, Choice Travel, A2Z Travel, Cango, Glasgow Citybus, First Glasgow, York park and ride, Buglers, Brijan Tours, Bullocks Coaches, Bowers Coaches, Brighton & Hove Bus and Coach Company‎, Bluestar (bus company), Bluebird Bus and Coach, Blue Triangle, Blue Bus of Staffordshire, Blue Bus of Penwortham, Blackpool Transport, Black Velvet (bus company), AMK Group, Teamdeck, Truronian, First Manchester, First Leeds, First Hampshire & Dorset - I spent ages on this one lol!, First Berkshire & The Thames Valley - And this one!!, First Essex, First Chester & The Wirral‎, First Cymru, First Calderdale & Huddersfield‎

As mentioned above, he has also changes various (OK loads) route aricles into redirects. Some have been reverted back, which he is now changing back to redirects as I speak.

This gives a scale of what he has done. It just seems a lot for one person to take on, with thereason of "See Talk:First Leeds Various people are now questioning what he is doing. Arriva436^talk 16:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Looking at the links you provided above, it seems the actions are within both general consensus of what Wikipedia is and is not, and specific consensus for the articles in question. Do you have a reason to believe otherwise?  Frank  |  talk  16:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't quite understand that, but basically here is what I think. Fares, tickets, stops, adress details in articles probably are violationg WP:NOT. A basic list of routes, as long as it doesn't have frequencies and sunday services etc etc should however be included; they are in the blood of a bus company. Even if routes are against what WP is not, then I still have one problem.

How one discussion on one talk page that most contributers to this kind of article would not have seen is a base to go around deleting masses of content (and hard work) without many people having any idea what was going to happen. I have not recently seem the First Leeds page, yet I find that one discussion about a company in Leeds has affected so many others.

If this kind of non-dicussion-before-big-edits is OK on Wikipedia, then I have serious concerns. Arriva436^talk 17:23, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the main problem here is the lack of discussion behind what is physically taking place. Wide-ranging content removal on such a large scale on so many articles should not take place without discussio. That is unless of course, Wikipedia policy is clearly violated. Which in this case, I can confidently say, it isn't.

Listing of routes operated by a bus company. That is the issue in question. Yes? Well, we can all confidently agree that is not advertising. We are writing an article about a bus company, and a list of routes displayed on a company website (which is advertising) would be very different. It's obvious why and how, and people involved can easily see the different between a Wikipedia list of routes and an advertised "buttered-up" list of routes. Take this for example, which goes into detail about how things have been ammended and tweaked "due to our customer demands" and such-like. That is advertising.

Now then - a directory. This is more complicated, as there are various things which constitute a directory. Cross-categories, (sales) catalogues & loosely associated topics are not an issue with this case. If phone numbers or any obvious contact details are involved, however, they should definately be removed. The main issue, is that it could be a resource for conducting business. And, if the picture is widened, that just brings us back to advertising. Look at it this way - this is an ancyclopedia. The aim is to tell people about a subject, in this case, a bus company. But not to advertise it. You know how bus companies advertise their routes? Following our customer requests... and due to extremely encouraging use of this route... and a bus ride through the beautiful Lancashire countryside, with dipping valleys, sea-side resorts... and all that trollop? THAT is advertising. A list of routes, and ONLY a list of routes within a detailed article, serves the purpose of an encyclopedia, and not an advert. And no policy is violated.

Now that needs communicating to the user who's deleted all this stuff. Lradrama 22:43, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Right, thanks for what you have done so far! I think that a lot of people are now entering a more formal discussion about the problem. I am glad you do think that route lists are not advertising, even if other things are. I am also glad I have done the right thing by not reverting (well, only one but that wasn't a list) anything yet. I hope we can get this sorted out soon. Arriva436^talk 15:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, no worries, and don't hesitate to give me a shout if you need some help! Best wishes, Lradrama 16:04, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

My RFA Thanks

Thank you for your support at my RFA, which has closed as a success. I didn't realise until a short while before my RFA started that coaching was an issue at RFAs. I realise now that we coachees can sound a bit too prepared, and that is why your support despite that issue means a lot to me. Once again, thank you. StephenBuxton (talk) 22:30, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

You're very welcome, and I am glad to see you succeeded. I know, many people see admin coaching as a negative, and I can see why, but Balloonman explained clearly in his introduction that this was not a "quest for power", as it were, but a constructive and thought-out process. You have come out of coaching as a highly capable Wikipedian, and you fully deserve these extra tools. Very best wishes, and happy editing, Lradrama 16:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

What you and others think is right

In your last edit (to an archived convo no less) you kind of proved what I was saying. What "you and others" think is right isn't getting done, and your whining about it. That's what it still seems like. No offense, of course. And, I will, as others will, always try to make things better on Wikipedia. You can join us if you want! Beam 17:04, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, thankyou for your reply. What do you mean "join us". Join us in what? Lradrama 17:05, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I mean, just for clarification...you mean join you in trying to obtain what is best for Wikipedia? I most surely will, but tbh, I have already spent over a year and a half doing just that. Lradrama 17:13, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Honestly? Join "us" as in "me" (lol), by just looking past that Giano bullshit (excuse my french). It's obvious the kid is a jerk, no question as far as I'm concerned. But his incivility is timid and most times seems a response to others abusing civility and baiting him. Take a look at my block log. I had issues with an admin who, at least to me (and eventually to others who backed me), abused the civility rule to remove a personal problem, the problem being me. So by join us, i mean join me, in not letting one jerk prevent the 'pedia from improving.

Personally I see the civility policy being abused by admins who disagree with a user, or a user's attitude. And, at least in this case, the user is productive and helps wikipedia. So what if he's borderline uncivil? I truly believe in WP:Ignoring Personal Attacks. Especially when they are passive or minor in nature. Civility policy is abused so much and needlessly. I almost quit the 'pedia over claims of me being uncivil, I wonder how many already have? Anyway I hope you don't think I'm an asshole like most people, I truly believe in this project and I hope me and you can be friends. No bullshit, I truly do. (Again excuse my Bastille day language). Beam 17:16, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I fully support your desire to improve Wikipedia to its fullest extent. And I admire your desire just to ignore (quote) the jerk (unquote). But incivility is still not tolerated here, and Giano has got away with rather a lot. Now it sounds like I'm whining again. ;) I fulyl understand what you are saying. This Giano issue has rumbled on for many months now, and we all just want to get it sorted that's all. But nothing can ever be done here without everyone falling out. Which is why your message just then was the highlight of my 'pedia day. You deserve a barnstar for that one. And yes, we are friends. :) x Lradrama 17:22, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar, it's appreciated more than you know. It's really good that you followed along there when others would get defensive and then offensive right away. Most of the time when I try to express a disagreement, I come across like the asshole I am even when I try my hardest. Your ability to peacefully discuss something we disagree with is admired by me. I truly hope we have many more interactions in the future, none of them having to do with Giano. :) Beam 17:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

It's not often people manage to sort out a differing of opinion in this way. Yes, I hope we do interact many times in the future. For the sake of sanity on both parts. Many thanks, best wishes, and happy editing! Lradrama 17:34, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA thank you

		Thank you!
		Lradrama, it is with deep awareness of the responsibility conferred by your trust that I am honored to report that in part to your support, my request for adminship passed (87/14/6). I deeply value the trust you and the Wikipedia community have in me, and I will embark on a new segment of my Wikipedia career by putting my new tools to work to benefit the entire community. My best to you, Happyme22 (talk) 03:38, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

You are very welcome, and I am glad to hear of your success. Very best wishes and happy editing! :) Lradrama 10:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 90 support, 2 oppose, and 0 neutral. All the best, Ben MacDuiTalk/Walk 20:28, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

And you're quite welcome too :). All the best, Lradrama 21:42, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Bus articles

Hi! I've been away from home for a week so have not been aware of the extra messages. I have moved the discussion to User_talk:Richard_Harvey/Bus_articles and placed a hopefully constructive start message to get things underway. :o) Richard Harvey (talk) 09:32, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'll keep an eye on it. I have told people to give me a shout when they need help as well. Lradrama 10:24, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Lradrama! Any chance you could perhaps reiterate some of your opinions you said previously at the current discussion at the above link? I'm the only one who has said anything yet! If you could, it would be great. Thanks, Arriva436^talk 18:45, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes of course! :) Good to see you're still at work on the case, because I still believe all this deleting was wrong. Lradrama 10:24, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I have referred to the Lancashire United article in my reply, because as you can see, the Services & operations section of that article is just lists of routes, with no contact information, flowery advertising or anything like that. Other sections on that article need work yet, such as Fares, although only special purchasable tickets worth noting are discussed in that section. Hope my reply helps, but don't hesitate to contact me again if in doubt. Lradrama 10:42, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

It seems to have triggered more participation anyway. ;) Lradrama 14:38, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks for that. It is of great help and now more people are commenting. Arriva436^talk 19:56, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

thanks for the shiny!

Thanks for the star and the note on it. Just so you know, I am older than 18 now. In my RFA, I said I could legally vote in the United States. Not that that really matters...

J.delanoy^gabs_adds 12:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

You're very welcome. I don't think it matters whether an admin is 18 or not, that's not what is important. What is important is how mature they are on the inside, which, after all the time I have spent with you on this project, is something you definately are. And you would clearly benefit from using the tools. Regards, Lradrama 14:05, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on User talk:Old Moonraker

Thanks for your intervention on my talk page: I appreciate it. --Old Moonraker (talk) 22:05, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! Glad I could help! Lradrama 22:07, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi there, A470 blocking

I am sorry but this is one of the first times that I have done this. Is links to Myspace not allowed then?

I wanted to put my mates band who are also called A470 on the end section but you keep blocking it. Advice would be great, thanks.

My name is Gareth and I tried to edit on the 24/07/08 @ 23:00.

Hello, thankyou for asking, I am glad to help you. :) OK, it would be best to have a quick read at this section of the essay. We all fully understand your desire to promote your band and write about it, but you must remember that this is an encyclopedia, and anything that isn't notable enough to be included in one, such as a localised band that hasn't been notable yet, cannot be included therefore. I hope you understand what I am saying. Very best wishes for you and your band, Lradrama 22:18, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok fair enough, no problem. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.22.244 (talk) 00:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

No worries, and thankyou for understanding. :) Best wishes, Lradrama 11:20, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi Lradrama.

Thank you for the welcome note. I hope I haven't been making too many mistakes, and yes, I plan to stay a Wikipedian.

Ciao —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joycloete (talk • contribs) 09:42, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

You are very welcome! Your edits so far have been terrific, well done. Good to hear you'd like to remain here. Don't hesitate to give me a nudge if you want some help! :) Lradrama 14:05, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, Lradrama!

I am grateful for your confidence: My RfA passed by a count of 64/3/3, so I am now an administrator! Of course, I plan to conduct my adminship in service of the community, so I believe the community has a right to revoke that privilege at any time. Thus, I will be open for recall under reasonable circumstances. If you have any advice, complaints, or concerns for me, please let me know. Thanks again! Okiefromokla questions? 21:43, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Well done, and I am glad to hear of your success. Keep up your excellent work! :) Lradrama 11:22, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, wich was successful with 73 support, 6 oppose, and 5 neutral. I'll try to be as clear as I can in my communication and to clear some of the admin backlog on images. If there is anything I can help you with, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page! Cheers, --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 15:08, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Well done! Keep up the good work! Lradrama 18:31, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

RFA thankspam

Thanks for your support in my RFA, which passed with 140 supporting, 11 opposing, and 4 neutral. I will do my best to live up to the trust that you have given to me. If I can ever assist you with anything, just ask.

Cheers!

J.delanoy^gabs_adds 20:22, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Third thankspam message in the same day! Grrrr! Haha only joking, well done my friend! Keep up the excellent work! ;) Lradrama 22:58, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

RFA thank-you

Thank-you for your support of me at my recent RFA, which was successful. I have appreciated everyone's comments and encouragement there. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 03:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! Enjoy the tools :) Lradrama 22:56, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which did not succeed with 30 in support, 28 in opposition and 6 neutral votes. Thanks again for the support!

Well done :) Lradrama 15:30, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks!

Thank you... ...for participating in my RfA, which closed with 119 in support, 4 neutral and 5 opposes. I'm honestly overwhelmed at the level of support that I've received from the community, and will do my best to maintain the trust placed in me. I 'm also thankful to those who opposed or expressed a neutral position, for providing clear rationales and superb feedback for me to build on. I've set up a space for you to provide any further feedback or thoughts, should you feel inclined to. However you voted, thanks for taking the time out to contribute to the process, it's much appreciated. Kind regards, Gazimoff 22:17, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Well done :) Lradrama 15:30, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Anonymous101 (talk) 15:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks for blocking 168.9.18.2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Their vandalism was getting really annoying. Anonymous101 (talk) 15:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

You're very welcome, and I'm glad I could help. :) And thanks for my cookie too! Keep up your excellent editing work. :) Lradrama 15:44, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Hello again

Thanks!!!! I appreciate that more than you know. I had wondered what image I projected, as a n00b admin, to an experienced admin, and I guess now I know! Thanks again, and have a good day! (or evening, I guess, as it appears that you live in Great Britain...) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 17:42, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's evening for me, and I should be in bed in over three hours. Don't worry about your image as an inexperienced admin, you're doing a fine job, and in the 9 months I have been an admin, few I have worked with have been as good as you. :) Lradrama 17:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

Wow, thanks so much! Actually, the AIV reports are a cinch; I use Huggle for that. :) —LaPianista! «talk» 17:58, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

LaPianista! «talk» has given you a WikiCake! WikiCakes promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cake, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Spread the tastiness of cakes by adding {{subst:GiveCake}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

You're welcome, and thanks for the WikiCake! I will enjoy that... ;) ;) Lradrama 18:00, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks, Lradrama, for the message of encouragement. Thanks too for your comments at my RfA: I like that word, "sterling"! Best, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 18:58, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, don't worry about it, I believe you're a fine editor. You fully deserve the admin tools. :) Very best wishes, Lradrama 12:25, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

RfA thank you

Lradrama/Archive 7, I wish to say thanks for your support in my successful request for adminship, which ended with 82 supports, 3 opposes, and 1 neutral. I will do my best to live up to your expectations. I would especially like to thank Rlevse for nominating me and Wizardman for co-nominating me.
                                                  — JGHowes ^talk - 19 August 2008

You are very welcome! Glad to hear that you succeeded! Keep up your stellar 'pedia work! Lradrama 12:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Ariakon SIM-5

Hi. The article above is for a paintball marker (aka gun). To me, this looks like blatant advertising at worst, non-notable at best (the article even includes details of the price) - yet, there's a whole slew of articles, with their own template widget thing (sorry, I can't rememeber the term for that box at the bottom), which seem to have no 'real world' citations, references etc. Do you know if some decision was made to allow these to (apparently) violate WP:N, WP:RS etc, or do consumer products pass notability automatically ? WP:OUTCOMES seems to have nothing, so I'm at a loss to understand why no-one has removed them - or at the least, heavily edited out the advertising, speculative comments, and general opinions... I raised this at WP:EA, and the one response I got (so far) was to propose for deletion - but with so many articles involved, that would be a possibly contentious step. I've already got one administrators view about this whole category, but I'd appreciate that of another before I start making any changes, as I suspect it might get tricky...! Anyway, any thoughts you have would be appreciated. :-) CultureDrone (talk) 13:18, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

This is an interesting case you have brought to my attention. I have spent a good amount of time sifting through these articles that the template presents. I see what you mean. The Ariakon SIM-5 article is written slightly like an advert. After looking solely at this article I was thinking maybe a simple re-write to get rid of the biased language would do the trick. But, I remembered the template that you mentioned, and had a look at some of the other articles. Some are rather badly written. On one, someone who had read the article posted a message on the talkpage, saying that they still did not understand what the article was getting at. Some of the references are a bit dodgy I think, like links to review websites, that are always biased anyway. So I surfed the net, trying to find some more reliable sources of information, but sadly, they don't seem to be as notable as I initially thought, with most hits coming from forums, and shopping websites. Providing the articles with proper references would be thus very difficult, and removing POV would leave some of the articles as tiny stubs I think. POV seems to have resulted from a lack of sufficient information to fill an article with. This really needs a collaborative discussion, but again, this seems to be a remote part of Wikipedia, and the articles haven't been allocated into any Wikiprojects. In light of this, I would suggest merging the whole lot into a main article. This fulfills the purpose of an encyclopedia better. And it's easier access to the required information. One main article, with sections with a paragraph on each should be sufficient. But the references are a problem still. Maybe someone who knows a lot about these type of paintball guns will be able to come up with some reliable sources? Then a merge is my way forward. Lradrama 16:56, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 19:27, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which did not succeed with 41 support, 21 oppose, and 1 neutral. I appreciate both the supports and the opposes. Thanks again and cheers! TN‑X-Man 18:54, 2 September 2008 (UTC)