User talk:ChazBeckett/Archive-Feb2007

Question 4
Good question. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 20:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Your input is requested
Your input would be appreciated at this Request for Comments. Kelly Martin (talk) 15:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for voting


Thank you for voting in my RfA which at 51/20/6 unfortunately did not achieve consensus. In closing the nomination, Essjay remarked that it was one of the better discussed RfAs seen recently and I would like to thank you and all others who chose to vote for making it as such. It was extremely humbling to see the large number of support votes, and the number of oppose votes and comments will help me to become stronger. I hope to run again for adminship soon. Thank you all once more. Wikiwoohoo 19:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

LT
Leave the stats info in of LT. These are viable stats.


 * Your message doesn't provide much context or reasoning, but I believe I understand what you're referring to. The main problem with the stats you'd like to include on LaDainian Tomlinson is that they're essentially original research because you're presenting statistics in a novel way (i.e. they're not commonly presented this way). SuperMachine 00:06, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

SThe stats are coming from computing his stats. And the catching is from football outsiders.com

Please leave alone. That stsats are his stats just computed. The other stat is from footballoutsiders.com


 * If you wish to add such stats, please gain consensus on Talk:LaDainian Tomlinson first. Also, please sign your posts on talk pages such as this one. Thanks. SuperMachine 02:22, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 26th.
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 07:31, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

House
Who are you to tell me what to consider minor or a typo? --Billywhack 12:43, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * A typo is "a mistake made during the typing process. The term includes errors due to mechanical failure or slips of the hand or finger...". This definition certainly doesn't cover different wording, which is what your edit was.


 * From the first paragraph minor it should be clear that your edit was not minor:
 * "A check to the minor edit box signifies that only superficial differences exist between the current and previous version: typo corrections, formatting and presentational changes, rearranging of text without modifying content, etc. A minor edit is a version that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute." SuperMachine 15:14, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 2nd, 2007.
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 07:43, 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 20:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 8th, 2007.
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 07:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

My RFA
Hey, thanks for participating in my recent RFA. You were amongst a number of editors who considered that I wasn't ready for the mop yet and as a consequence the RFA did not succeed (69/26/11). I am extremely grateful that you took the time to advise me on to improve as a Wikipedian and I'd like to assure you that I'll do my level best to develop my skills here to a point where you may feel you could trust me with the mop.

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 19:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC) (the non-admin, formerly known as Budgiekiller)

Signpost updated for January 15th, 2007.
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 06:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Please explain to me why you reverted my edit to heroes talk page
I started the conversation on Micah having a confirmed power. (I wasnt logged in then) And how we have sources that prove Micah has a confirmed power, thus the conversation is not needed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LordArthas (talk


 * Sections of talk pages are periodically archived, but comments are rarely deleted unless they're vandalism. No harm is being done by leaving the section until it's archived. Thanks, SuperMachine 16:17, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Where is it stated that it is against wikipedia rules to delete out of date, inactive topics in the talk page? And yes I believe there IS harm in leaving it there, and many of the other topics for that matter. They all clutter up the talk page, thus making it appear very messy. It also takes attention away from the few topics that are actually being discussed. Anyone looking at the index page on the talk page will see so many inactive or out of date topics. Not knowing where to discuss, the user may simply leave the talk page and not contribute, or at the very least be annoyed in the difficulty finding a active topic. Deleting them cleans up the talk page, brings attention the the topics actually being discussed, and makes the talk page overall better. IN short, I vote we delete the old, inactive, or out of date topics, or archive them immediatly(if thats even possible).LordArthas 06:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Here's a few pages that may help you out:
 * Talk page guidelines
 * Talk page
 * How to archive a talk page
 * The most relevant section would probably be here, where it discusses archiving subjects that are no longer being discussed. I hope this helps. Thanks, SuperMachine 12:58, 19 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much, after reading that, I found a way to clean up the talk pages. You have been a big help. LordArthas 13:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Newyorkbrad's RfA
Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning, as well as for your kind comments that accompanied your !vote. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 18:46, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 22nd, 2007.
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 06:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Thanks for taking the time to review my contributions and contribute to my RfA. I withdrew when it became clear that the uphill climb had crossed the snowball threshold, but I appreciate your feedback and the process gave me some good ideas for other ways I can be contributing to Wikipedia. I'll work on the areas that came up in the discussion, and try again after I've gained wider experience. -FisherQueen (Talk) 12:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 29th, 2007.
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 18:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

RE: Edit Summaries
Format was referring to the format agreed to at WP:PW. ReVertVandalism was in reference to reverting blatant speculation. Just to clear it up. -- bullet proof  3:16 05:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 5th, 2007.
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 05:30, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 12th, 2007.
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 05:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 19th, 2007.
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 07:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)