User talk:Daniel/Archive/48

My recent RfA
Thank you for supporting my RfA, which unfortunately didn't succeed. The majority of the opposes stated that I needed more experience in the main namespace and Wikipedia namespace, so that is what I will do. I will go for another RfA in two month's time and I hope you will be able to support me then as well. If you have any other comments for me or wish to be notified when I go for another RfA, please leave them on my talk page. If you wish to nominate me for my next RfA, please wait until it has been two months. Thanks again for participating in my RfA! -- Cobi(t 00:29, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Blackwood
I would have used the already existing blackwood river - but if you have done it fine - you might notice that i had started an article in tasmania of wine regions and wine regions inwestern australia - it would be good if we could have good integration between the region articles and the wine regions articles - also there are issues that make a separate river versus valley thingo a bit problematic - checkout our south west of wa separations in the regions of western australia as to the potential complexity of what is what - cheers good work - talk to ya later SatuSuro 08:26, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
 * It is a confusing topic, but I was merely rattling through the requested articles on WP:AWNB. I thought that the river could be the geographical feature (running water), and the article I created the region. I'm all for trying to integrate this confusing set of articles :)  Daniel  11:54, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

FL Main page proposal
You either nominated a WP:FLC or closed such a nomination recently. As such, you are the type of editor whose opinion I am soliciting. We now have over 400 featured lists and seem to be promoting in excess of 30 per month of late (41 in August and 42 in September). When Today's featured article (TFA) started (2004-02-22), they only had about 200 featured articles and were barely promoting 20 new ones per month. I think the quality of featured lists is at least as good as the quality of featured articles was when they started appearing on the main page. Thus, I am ready to open debate on a proposal to institute a List of the Day on the main page with nominations starting November 1 2007, voting starting December 1 2007 and main page appearances starting January 1 2008. For brevity, the proposal page does not discuss the details of eventual main page content, but since the work has already been done, you should consider this proposal assuming the eventual content will resemble the current content at the featured content page. Such output would probably start at the bottom of the main page. The proposal page does not debate whether starting with weekly list main page entries would be better than daily entries. However, I suspect persons in favor of weekly lists are really voicing opinions against lists on the main page since neither TFA nor Picture of the day started as weekly endeavors, to the best of my knowledge. See the List of the Day proposal and comment at WP:LOTDP and its talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:23, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

That's a lie!
I find you hilarious :p Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 01:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
 * ...  Daniel  12:20, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the kind words on my talk page; however, no I did not give myself an award. Just wanted to clear that up :-) Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 15:57, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Responded on your talk page - it seems I was unclear in who he refered to (it wasn't you). Sorry,  Daniel  02:55, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I see :-) It gets funnier and funnier.  I guess DrWho is quite worked up about it.  Clam down time !  Thanks again for your kindness, best, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 02:59, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, Ta bu's little clam was very celver clever.  Daniel  03:00, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for commenting on my RFA
Thank you for commenting on my RFA, which was withdrawn. Whether you supported or opposed, I thank you for the suggestions for improvement. And please forgive me if my wording was a bit harsh, by oppose I meant opposing Wikipedia. Marlith  T / C  04:23, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Iraq War mediation
Just thought I'd give you a heads-up that all parties have agreed to mediation in Requests for mediation/Iraq War. -- I. Pankonin (t/c) 06:20, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note - case accepted and parties notified.  Daniel  11:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Ooh, freshly archived
Minty. Check it out. :) ~ Riana ⁂ 12:59, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
 * :)  Daniel  04:51, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Alkivar
- you know the drill. Picaroon (t) 21:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 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 09:23, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Favour for another Aussie?
Hey Daniel, is there a possibility of you fast-tracking my application to use Vandal Proof as you are a Mod, if it doesn't take you away from ArbCom too much? I think there's a problem with the database being too large and hence hard to add new users. But I would appreciate if you could add me to the list as I'd love to start using it to speed up my edits. Thanks! Phgao 18:25, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, the reason I haven't been moderating is because I don't have access to the application on the computer I access the internet on at the present. Sorry,  Daniel  04:52, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * No sweat :) Thanks anyway. Phgao 14:16, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Frontline
Hi Daniel. I am sorry. I hadn't checked my wikipedia account for a week and saw your message just now. The arbitration filing seems to have discontinued for the dispute on Frontline (magazine). Can you suggest the needful now? Thanks, Vrsrini 09:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

RFA
Thanks for your comment in my RfA. Although I would have preferred if it were on the support section, I fully understand your reasoning, and appreciate your comment. I look forward to coming back to RfA sometime down the road. Thanks again - Rjd0060 13:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Withdraw
I have to withdraw from the Iraq War mediation because I will be unavailable to edit. My opinions are already stated well, but I'm not going to be able to continue them. Please go along without me. There are others in agreement with me who can hold up my end of the argument. 1of3 17:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Noted, thanks.  Daniel  04:58, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- ForteTuba 20:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Did you know

 * Ya, I did get round to authorising that hook. Anyway, sorry about everything going so slow. The Australian day shift on DYK has almost stopped nowadays because its exam season, or for grad students like me and PDH (Petaholmes), it is PhD reporting season...I've just been updating without spamming in the past month. Blnguyen  (two years of monkeying ) 06:22, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll see what time I can find to help out. Thanks again Blnguyen,  Daniel  09:23, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Charlie Macartney FAC
Wonder if you'd move your "support" to the start of the line, so Raul easily sees it when he glances the FAC over? Cheers! --Dweller 12:34, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Done :)  Daniel  12:39, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thagyoo very much --Dweller 12:50, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

PS
I don't get the "When does a signature stop being a signature and start being a way to conceal your message?" link. Please explain! --Dweller 12:36, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * If your resolution is small enough that the message goes over two lines (as mine is...), the black border conceals half the message :)  Daniel  12:39, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * OIC. --Dweller 12:50, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't get it, concealing messages? Sounds interesting. Phgao 14:19, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Hello! Thank you for participating in my RfA, I'd like to inform you I've made a response to your statement. Regards, Rudget Contributions 14:57, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Block/edit conflict
Re: I blocked the editor before I saw that. Feel free to unblock or take other action as you feel is appropriate. BTW, your user talk page is still cascade protected.--chaser - t 08:44, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that - as I noted to the reporter on his/her talk, I got my wires crossed, and was about to block. I forgot about my talk page being cascaded - cheers for that.  Daniel  08:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I just dug into the history of the cascade-protection. It's good to have you back, Daniel. I've seen you around and always been impressed by your maturity and level-headedness. I do hope you stay with us; people like you are an asset to Wikipedia.--chaser - t 08:49, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * My stress yesterday caused a major lapse in any sanity that remains with me, but thanks for your kind words :)  Daniel  08:50, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * unprotected...ZOMG here come the vandals! ;) I was worried you were being harassed? ~Eliz 81 (C) 08:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Nope - stress and a situation I didn't really appreciate lead to a sort of flip-out...probably not a great idea to be placing yourself in a volatile environment just before exams...  Daniel  08:52, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Egads. Well I do hope it's all sorted out and that all is well. ~Eliz 81 (C) 09:01, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Exams... the worst thing you can get except for maybe England winning the World Cup...(I love the Springboks now!) :p --DarkFalls talk 07:07, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * :)  Daniel  07:11, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Tag Removal
The IP user is back to removing tags. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ghayyour&diff=166254166&oldid=166254118 —Preceding unsigned comment added by MorrisRob (talk • contribs) 11:13, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Blocked.  Daniel  11:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism by Dc76 on Bălţi article and on the Bălţi talk page
Hello Daniel! Thank you for your answer. Following your message I would like to mention that the referecnes I've indicated: spam, sneaky vandalism, nonsense edits, intentional misinformation fully correspond to the definiton and examples given on the Wikipedia article about vandalism. If you wish, I can identify them all on this page, alternatively you can check the Bălţi article history, Bălţi article talk page, User:Dc76 talk page, User:Edokter talk page User:Persian Poet Gal and my talk page User:Moldopodo.

Could you please indicate what are the further steps for contestation of Edokter's edits on my talk page and leaving my requests to him on the similar issue against Dc76 without any approproate action.

Thank you in advance for spending your time on this. Moldopodo 11:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)Moldopodo

Hello Daniel, please refer to this link to see the characterization of vandalism by Dc76 on Bălţi article. Thank you. Moldopodo 16:05, 23 October 2007 (UTC)Moldopodo


 * I would suggest a user request for comment.  Daniel  07:11, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

fogot to add an editor
Hi Daniel. I have proposed formal mediation or Pro-pedophile activism, but I forgot to include an editor, user:Welland R. Seeing that the form of formal mediation is rather strict, I'm asking your help in what to do with that. Can I add it in on the subpage, can you add it in, or should I file a whole new request? Martijn Hoekstra 12:14, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Feel free to add them as you please, prior to the case being accepted.  Daniel  00:22, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * As I said in regard to the "informal mediation": I will assist in whatever ways I can. I'm on-board, if that is desired and considered proper. Sincerely, Welland R 08:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks.  Daniel  07:10, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Sri Lankans at Adelaide Oval
Are you going to be there? I am currently not in possession of a camera .. . for the next few months :( Blnguyen  (bananabucket ) 03:35, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Responded privately.  Daniel  07:12, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Lake Ontario Waterkeeper
Daniel, can you please assign a mediator for Lake Ontario Waterkeeper? I believe that I am being unduly harassed by one individual, and unduly shadowed by another with which I have had long-standing prior professional relationship.

User:butseriouslyfolks is being unduly agressive. I have been at odds with this person since the very beginning. I believed he prematurely AfD'd the Lake Ontario Watrerkeeper topic, within minutes, while I was still working on first edits. Prior to that he deleted the first draft of Lake Ontario Watrerkeeper leaving no trace in history, forcing me to start over again.

Since then he has repeatedly belittled the object of discourse, and shown no sign of collaboration. The AfD process was not explained to me, and I have already apologized for breech of a then-obscure Wikipedia policy, but this is STILL being brought up by [User:butseriouslyfolks] and others as supposed justification that User:butseriouslyfolks is fine being on my tail all the time.

My petition is simply this: I request that some other administrator be involved here, and that [User:butseriouslyfolks] step back. I don't object to oversight at all. I just can't work with [User:butseriouslyfolks]. Repeated requests for more space are being rebuffed by [User:butseriouslyfolks]. Nothing I do is right, it seems. I want [User:butseriouslyfolks] to move on, he's been more than disrupive to flow, thank you very much.

User:SarekOfVulcan has been asked several times to not shadow everything I do. In our prior relationship, for eight years he was a user of a wiki website I created and have been running at http://fox.wikis.com. We are currently involved in an unrelared outside conflict about his access to my domain. I have asked this user for more space, to let me work in peace, but he's all over the Lake Ontario Waterkeeper topic. I have repeatedly asked this user for space but that's just not happening.

This diff shows the depth of my aggravation and exasperation with User:SarekOfVulcan.

I find it odd that this user should be showing such an interest in Lake Ontario Waterkeeper topic, don't you? I have asked him to move on, and that's not happening. I normally don't have problems collaborating online with people, but User:SarekOfVulcan I find very annoying. I'm fed up with this.

At the moment the Lake Ontario Waterkeeper, a short topic, still in draft really, but is festooned with TWO "prose" tags, and one AfD tag that I expect will come down without problems. I expect this topic will ALWAYS be controversial, subject to pressure from quarters jilted by the Lake Ontario Waterkeeper in the course of its environmental justice advocacy. I am not convinced that more "prose" is necessarily the best way for this topic to evolve at this stage. I believe agreement on general structure should come first. Attempts to have these "prose" tag moved to discussion, or reduced in number, are being rebuffed by this collegial clique of overseers.

About personal attacks: I feel attacked by the undue aggressiveness of these powerful overseers, and requests for more space, and generally less prompt input from these people on this topic, has never been respected. All this started with a topic deletion by User:butseriouslyfolks due to a bogus copyright violation claim by a bot created by User:caren. The bot was in error. This was followed by a clearly premature AfD from User:butseriouslyfolks which, so early in the topic's existance and considering the deletion by the same user, I viewed as WAY over the top aggressive at such an early stage. Believing I was being bullied by a troll, I removed the Afd (not being aware of policy and have apologised for that) but apparently, in the eyes of many, that AfD removal gives User:butseriouslyfolks carte blanche. Personal attacks arise from my utter frustration in dealing with this user. I'd like him replaced with someone (anyone) else.

In both aspects of this mediation request I am asking that I be allowed to work in Wikipedia as I always have: without pressure and undue aggressiveness from other users who are clearly shadowing me, festooning my young article with garish banners, belittling the object of discourse's notability, and being far more disruptive than I think is reasonable.

StevenBlack 13:57, 24 October 2007 (UTC)


 * This guy's been attacking me left and right. How much abuse do I have to take?  He's called me a troll, a bully, heavy handed, unduly aggressive, etc.  He's asked me and others to keep away from his article, shouting at me repeatedly to KNOCK IT OFF.  He's also abusing User:SarekofVulcan.  Can something be done? -- But |seriously |folks   17:21, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, he's been blocked for 24 hrs for incivility. -- But |<font color="White">seriously |<font color="White">folks  17:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I personally am not inclined to conduct some ex parte mediation. If you wish for mediation, please try using the Mediation Cabal first. The Mediation Committee (which I am associated with) requires prior dispute resolution (including Mediation Cabal, RfC, 3O, etc.). Cheers,  Daniel  07:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Rudget RfA
Dearest Opposer,

Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed unsuccessfully with 39 supports, 15 oppose, and 1 neutral. I would have liked to gain some experience of being an admin, but it wasn't to be. At least I gained some valuable time there and will use my knowledge picked up to my next candidacy. I would like to say once again, thank you for voting and I hope to see you at my next request be it a nomination or self-induced, I hope I don't get as many questions!

Rudget Contributions 09:37, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Page Move Vandalism on your user talk page archives
Your user page and your archives have been vandalised by Internet_Connection_1. As you can see here, he has systematically moved your talk page archives to different numbers. I haven't attempted to revert this because I fear that undoing his vandalism will lead to more disruption - ie, if I revert "new page 8" to "old page 6"; before moving "new page 6" back to "old page 5" (etc) then I will end up deleting archive pages unintentionally. I have flagged this at the Administrators' Incident's noticeboard with a request for an experienced administrator to do the necessary. B1atv 11:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I think I've put all the archives back in the right place and deleted the redirects that resulted. You might want to double check though. WjBscribe 11:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Cryptic and I have move protected all your achives to prevent this occuring again. WjBscribe 11:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much to both of you - it is greatly appreciated. Throwing knives blindfolded, I'm going to take a stab at guessing who this was and point my finger at . Just a thought, anyways :) Cheers, and thanks again,  Daniel  12:41, 26 October 2007 (UTC)