User talk:AmandaNP/Archives/2016/June

Barnstar

 * I couldn't agree more. DQ you're a fucking god :D ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  17:48, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * To reply to this old post that I never got around to doing, I have a few comments: 1) TParis, we've known I am insane since day one ;) and the sleep varies on the level of determination lol. 2) Sal, if I was a god, I would have zapped all enwp issues so far and have all the UTRS bugs fixed. That hasn't happened, yet. jk Furthermore, if I was a fucking god, well let's just say I wouldn't be here then, I'd be elsewhere ;) But thank you guys. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 07:14, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Prior arbcom BLP statements
Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning_naming_dispute NE Ent 18:18, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

The Barnstar of Integrity

 * Thank you for your kind words. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 07:09, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Admin The Wordsmith's comments re: "...the ineptness of many current Arbs..." is certainly casting aspersions
Given the seriousness of this Rfc at User talk:The Wordsmith/GMORFC the ongoing threats to sanction participating editors seem to ring hollow in light of supervising admin The Wordsmith's astonishing comments regarding ArbCom members. The comment, which by any definition "casts aspersions," raises a number of questions that call for immediate answers, given the self-created deadline for comments.

The questions, which I hereby put directly to The Wordsmith, are as follows:


 * Exactly which ArbCom members are you referring to, when you describe them as "inept?"


 * In what way are these current community-elected ArbCom members, as you term them, "inept?"


 * Do you have diffs to support this sweeping claim, and can you produce them? If not, why not?


 * Since the thrust of this extraordinary Rfc seems to be to prevent "casting aspersions," in the Talk pages of GMO articles (as well as precedent-establishing proposed "locked in" multiple article wording regarding GMO safety) is this not exactly what you are doing in the past 24 hours towards members of the Arbitration Committee? Does this not disqualify you immediately from further participation?

To all concerned: I will post the above subsection on the Talk pages of current ArbCom members, per The Wordsmith's declaration, despite substantial objections, that they will be locking down the page a few hours from this posting, making further timely discussion on this page impossible. Jus da fax  11:13, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * You might want to look two sections up, and double check if you really think this is relevant to Amanda. The Wordsmith Talk to me 15:37, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

UTRS case updates
The UTRS case status has stopped updating at WP:RFU. Can you smack the side of a computer/kick a fax machine/turn it off and on again in order to get it back in order?--Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 18:07, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * This time, surprisingly, I can't put any fault on the bot itself. It said it was saving them without error. So either this was some spam prevention that wasn't caught on to with pywikipedia, or there is something wrong with the wiki servers. Please let me know as soon as you see it go 20 minutes without updating and i'll look into it. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 19:43, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * At this point it hasn't updated since at least yesterday; there are a couple of appeals I closed yesterday that are still showing as new.--Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 19:49, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Crap, I just realized what is happening. Recently in preperation for internationalization I migrated the enwiki UTRS database to a localized name. For stability though, I did leave the old database running. It's therefore accessing the old database which has no changes or new appeals being made too it. I'll go flip the swtich. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 21:09, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * 5-star service as usual! Cheers, --Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 21:12, 9 June 2016 (UTC)