User talk:BigNate37/Archive 4

Nice template
I like the template you demonstrated on CfD, User:BigNate37/TM/Future article talk page. Might I suggest that it be moved into the template namespace? I think it's ready.

Good work.

--EngineerScotty 22:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the complement. One thing that's bothering me about this template is that it lists the talk page on Category:Wikipedia requested articles rather than the article itself. Also, there is no way to categorise the request, which seems the norm at that category (though I don't mind this as much). Do you have any suggestions for this?  Big Nate 37 (T) 22:21, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't think that's a problem; the article doesn't exist yet, remember? Category pages with redlinks would like strange. Though I'd make a subcat, say "Wikipedia articles requested via talk page", to make it clear why the talk page and not the article is listed.  --EngineerScotty 23:39, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you so very much! You accomplished exactly what I wished to accomplish if I had more wiki leetness :)  Mathiastck 17:34, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Just checking in, continuing to use your template. Talk:Nazi_era_humor

Editing
Thanks for teling me, but now I am quite perplexed. The only thing I remember doing was changing Justine to ''Justine'. In fact I didn't even know some of the things my edit says I did. — [ Mac Davis ] (talk) ( Desk | Help me improve )
 * Sounds unlikely. I have no idea what could have happened. I'm just letting it go. Whatever. — [ Mac Davis ] (talk) ( Desk | Help me improve )

You added quote to my userpage
Lol, thanks. That quote's sort of true. And if it isn't, it's at least random and stupid, which in my book makes a great quote anyway. --TerrorBite 07:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I know...
I did take your comment at Wikipedia talk:Protecting children's privacy lightly. I just feel very strongly that this proposed policy is flawed, possibly unsalvageably so. I've yet to see a good reason why we need this; we're not in the business of protecting kids, what actions we could be taking to help do not need policy to enforce or can be enforced under other policies, and if these were necessary measures then it wouldn't be us volunteer editors forming the policy. With that point of view in mind, seeing a suggestion to prevent me, an adult in mine and Wikipedia's jurisdiction, from disclosing my age feels like oppression for oppression's sake.  Big Nate 37 (T) 21:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I understand your concern. --Elliskev 23:12, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Missing cat
Thanks for finding my cat. Atom 03:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Reply from P.B. Pilhet
Nope, I don't mind. -- P.B. Pilhet 17:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Iron Ring
No, I've changed it back. Rich Farmbrough, 22:19 11 September 2006 (GMT).

Barnstar
Thank you. It brought me a smile when I needed one. Sanguinity 22:49, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Animated property
Thanks for the informative template. Unfortunately, i do not know any reference. However, i created the article, because i have reason to believe others will add references, the article is expandable by others. User:Yy-bo 18:33, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

== In reply to your comment at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Help requested ==

I was going to reply to your comment at WP:AN/I, but it's not really necessary to put it there.

All I can say is please take a short break to clear your head and then rethink the matter. I understand where you're coming from, it's not that I agree or disagree with you. You're deeply involved in a disagreement with this editor, and I think you're seeing this in a different light than those of us who aren't involved with the AfD/RfD/whatever disagreements. I'm no admin, and not that great an editor either, I'm just trying to put it in perspective. If you still feel strongly about it tomorrow, pursue it, however consider that letting it drop may be the best course of action for all involved (read: the best for you and RN). It's just advice, take it with a grain of salt, my only agenda here is to see you both back to constructive tasks in the near future.  Big Nate 37 (T) 23:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * My head is quite clear. If it wasn't, I would have reported RN when he removed the final warning, rather than simply and calmly asking him what was going on.  I would have then reported RN when he removed that question.  Instead I decided that it wasn't worth pursuing.  However, by allowing him to blank his page, against guidelines, and then having his talk page protected, only reinforces to him, that his behaviour is appropriate.  It isn't.  It's quite clearly defined, what he should, and shouldn't do.  He's crossed that line, and there has to be some consequences, or he'll just go and do it again.  Why is he allowed to blank his talk page, when there are legitimate warnings (even if you count mine as illegitimate ... and I wouldn't have warned him again, if it was only my warning). Nfitz 23:12, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, that's a fair position. I hope that you can see this come to a resolution without any(more) unnecessary stress.  Big Nate 37 (T) 23:27, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * After obtaining a lock on his page, the only resolution I can see, is that his page be locked in the state where his archives are showing. Such as like this, before I posted on his "Wikibreak" (which was inadvertent BTW, as it was an edit-conflict ...] Nfitz 23:31, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm still waiting for this to be dealt with properly. Allowing someone to clearly break the rules, and then instead of penalizing or at least chastising them, to reward them instead, is not on.  If the Talk Page is to be protected, shouldn't it be protected in it's state when he went on his 'wikivacation' with the archives linked? Nfitz 13:15, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * A slap on the wrist may be appropriate here, but I'm not sure how I can help you—if it's protected, I've got no more power to change it than you have.  Big Nate 37 (T) 16:08, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Protecting children's privacy
Hi. You contributed to the discussion at Protecting children's privacy. If you have time and interest, I'm asking for contributors to make a brief statement summarizing your thoughts about it here, thanks. Herostratus 19:56, 21 September 2006 (UTC)