User talk:Geo.plrd/Archives2006-8

Eureka Police Department
A tag has been placed on Eureka Police Department, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. If you plan to provide more material to the article, I advise you to do so immediately, and also put a note on Talk:Eureka Police Department. An administrator should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 1 under Articles. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template  to the page, and then immediately add such material. UKWiki 18:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

re: your message
Generally we do not block IPs indefinitely. However, I blocked him yesterday for a month, and if he comes back and vandalizes after that I or another administrator will probably block for 3 or 6 months. Academic Challenger 23:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

It's not really worth unblocking and reblocking right now. You'll probably be able to figure it out within the next month. Academic Challenger 07:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Clerk for Requests for Checkuser
Hey Geo.plrd,

I am messaging you to ask whether you would be interested in reassuming your role as a Request for Checkuser clerk. Currently, the clerk duties are being shared among three experienced clerks, and we have added two new clerks, who are currently in the learning stage. We are currently experiencing backlogs and long waiting times for some actions to occur.

As you are currently listed under "inactive" on our clerk roster, we're asking that if you are willing to resume these clerk activities, please leave a message on my user talk page (quick link). A number of things have changed, so we reccommend re-reading Requests for checkuser/Clerks/Guide. The guide is currently being rewritten, but the new and updated version should be available by 00:00 December 12, 2006 (UTC) at the latest.

If you aren't interested in being a checkuser clerk any longer, we accept your decision and thank you for your service; it would be greatly appreciated if you'd leave me a note that you're no longer interested. If you would like to resume your role in the future, but can't do so now, please mention so on my talk page, and I'll note this on our clerk register.

Thanks for your cooperation,

Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ], Head Clerk, for, 05:11, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Concordia Newsletter
NEWSLETTER

Concordia is currently trying to relaunch. I, and all the members of the ex-council, wish to welcome new members to the group. We are a group who aim to promote remaining civil, in an environment where messages can easily be interpretated wrongly.

Help out now!
We are a community, so can only work though community contributions and support. It's the helping that counts.
 * Try and help people remain civil! Talk to them, and help them in any way possible. Do not be afraid to use the talk page.
 * Give people the Civility Barnstar.
 * Make and spread some Wikitokens so people know there are people to help if they want assistance.
 * Add banners or logos to your userpage to show your support.
 * Suggest some ideas! Add 'em to the talk page.

Decision Making
The council expired one month ago, but due to the current position of the group the current council will remain until the position of the group can be assessed, and whether it would be sensible to keep Concordia going. For most decisions, however, it will be decided by all who choose to partake in discussions. I am trying to relaunch because of the vast amounts of new members we have received, demonstrating that the aims are supported.

If you wish to opt of of further talk-page communications, just let us know here.

- Ian ¹³  /t  20:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC). Kindly delivered by MiszaBot.

Motto of the Day
I've given the project a second refreshing, cleaned out all the pages and organised new mottos well into February 2007 - are you participating in this as an overseer any more, or would you like to be removed from the list? —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ
 * You create the 'ifexist' stuff for the MOTTO schedule page, right? Would it be possible, for the 2007 ones, to not have the motto itself linking to the page, but the date alongside it? If the motto on a certain day has any Wikilinks in it, it break the layout of the page with the current code setup - like this:


 * 12-29


 * When it should be:


 * 12-29


 * Thanks. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 11:06, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Great! Once you've finished, I don't suppose you could backdate that for the other two months on that page? Pretty please? —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 17:54, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas, and  May the Edit be with you, always. T- borg (drop me a line)  19:28, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

RE: WP:AMAIRC
The nickname "Geo" is already registered on IRC. If this is your nickname, log in with it so we can verify it is you. Otherwise, you'll have to pick a different nickname. Make sure that you register it using these instructions. -Royalguard11 (Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 19:59, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue X - December 2006
The December 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:42, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Text rendering
Just bringing your attention to this. -- Tewy  19:59, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Re:Esperanza
Hi, Geo.prdl. I'm here in response to the message you left on the Esperanza talk page, the one about wanting Esperanza to stick around. Well, I'm with you. I want Esperanza to remain. Do you have any plans? I know of this page that an Esperazian set up. Take a look here. What do you think? Zachary crimsonwol f 13:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC) 13:22, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, sure. But before we do anything, we must find more members first. We can't do this alone. By the way, the page was set up by TeckWiz, but he left before anyone had any chance to do anything about it...what should we do now? Zachary crimsonwol f 13:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC) 08:54, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

It's neat, but what do we need the Coffee Lounge for? They had an MfD previously before this, and most Wikipedians disagreed with the Coffee Lounge. Did you know this? Well, but we could work up a different kind of Coffee Lounge. So, what can I do to help? Should I start creating some of the pages now? You could change them if you want to, I'm just setting up a...um...foundation of the organisation. Will tell you when it's finished. <font color="black" face="comic sans ms">Zachary <font color="crimson" face="comic sans ms">crimsonwol <font color="green" face="comic sans ms">f 13:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC) 12:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Re;Esperanza
Yes I would like to see Esperanza return. I wish that we could organize some kind of group that's intent is to recreate Esperanza. I believe that it would be hard to recreate something that has already been voted by majority that it should be deleted on already. I don't know what to do. If you have any more information on things relating to recreating Esperanza contact me and I will willingly help. :-) -- ¿  Why  1  9  9  1  <sup style="font-family:Times New Roman;"> ESP.  |  Sign Here  18:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I want EA to remain, but I don't think its going to happen. They haven't dispanded the b-day committee, so that's a good thing.  Bearly  541  20:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Esperanza
Good evening (GMT time); regarding the comment you left on my talk page earlier tonight. Just letting you know that I have replied at my talk page, as I do with every other comment - however, regarding the important nature of the discussion, I felt compelled to let you know I've replied.

Cheers and regards, Anthony cfc  [ T &bull; C] <em style="font-size:10px;">21:26, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

You asked: Do I want Esperanza back?
I'm sorry, I don't really know whether or not I do anymore. There is a pervasive fad in taking a "bootcamp" attitude to what wikipedia contributors can do, and it seems toward the end that Esperanza tried to conform to this belief rather than defy it, as evident in the paradigm shift during Esperanza's overhaul as well as the community's deletion of the coffee lounge and most games on wikipedia. This is why I am hesitant to develop an opinion either way: what kind of Esperanza are we talking about here? FWIW, I don't believe that getting rid of silly perks ever did anything good. Personally, I never played any of the games (as I recall) but their presence made a difference. I suppose it's hard for me to explain, but sometimes the mere possibility or existence of something achieves much more than any active working process, which is what Esperanza did for me. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 22:04, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Esperanza
Interesting question. The Esperanza I joined for and the Esperanza it was for a while was a great and friendly place, and was a place that was acceptable to Wikipedia. The Esperanza that we deleted was no longer that Esperanza, and it was not acceptable to Wikipedia. Frankly, if we can't have a well-functioning and accepted Esperanza, perhaps no Esperanza is better than a poorly acting one. -- Nataly a 23:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem is that, unfortunately, I don't think it can become what it used to be, and we will just have to live with that. -- Nataly a 23:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Do I want Esperanza back?
Yes. I would. The one I joined. Dfrg.m s c 1. 2 . Editor Review 23:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I read about your concerns on Esperanza. Perhaps you'd liket o add this userbox to your userpage? ~ Feureau 08:11, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Pheonix
If we want this to work than we will need to give it more of a well... purpose. Right now there's only a couple of pages. We need to start thinking of ideas and make the Pheonix homepage more user friendly and fancy.-- ¿  Why  1  9  9  1  <sup style="font-family:Times New Roman;"> ESP.  |  Sign Here  02:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

User:Geo.plrd/Phoenix
I am very concerned about this user page. Esperanza was deleted for a reason, and the attempt to revive it, as well as its utterly unencyclopedic socializing coffee lounge, is troubling at best. Please reconsider. --Wo<b style="color:red;">o</b>ty Woot? contribs 04:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Please don't spam userpages w/ messages related to Esperanza. -- <font size="2px" face="Verdana"><font color="DarkSlateBlue">Szvest  - <font style="background: gold">Wiki me up ®  17:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it's best if we all just let Esperanza go and move on. It's clearly not welcome here. Why not try starting a Wikia if you really want a wiki-based community? -- Cyde Weys 18:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

User subpage nominated for deletion
Hi there. I've nominated User:Geo.plrd/Phoenix for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Geo.plrd/Phoenix for the discussion and my reasoning. Thanks. Carcharoth 17:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I have speedied these pages as being in violation of WP:CSD, an attempt to recreate deleted material. The community consensus is to disband Esperanza, and so any attempts to revive it are viewed as disrupting the project to make a point.  If you have any questions, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page.  -- <font color="#3D59AB">Merope  18:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Given that you were actively seeking participants, I see it as an attempt to buck consensus and reinstate a group that the community has decided to disband. Perhaps after the dust has settled a new group can emerge, but at this point I'm not inclined to reinstate the pages.  If any such resurrection of Esperanza is going to succeed, it needs to be done through the appropriate channels and after the emotions have quieted.  You are free to request a deletion review, if you wish; however, I believe that many other administrators will feel it is a violation of WP:CSD.  -- <font color="#3D59AB">Merope  18:47, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

My Overseer Application
A few days ago, I requested to be an overseer for motto of the day here. Can you please review it? Thanks! --TeckWizTalk Contribs@ 22:43, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Phoenix and wikistalking
1. I have deleted User:Geo.plrd/Phoenix and protected it against re-creation. It was deleted twice previously. Please accept the community's decision and move on. 2. Tagging Dev920's articles with bogus db tags is not acceptable behavior, particularly if it's just retaliatory (which it appears to be). If you continue to do so, you will be blocked. Please have a look at WP:POINT and reconsider your recent actions. | Mr. Darcy talk 01:49, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I read the page before deleting it, but re-creating a deleted page makes it eligible for speedy deletion, and frankly, I think all of the above plus your previous behavior (re-creating the page before this re-creation, for example) qualifies as being disruptive to make a point. I had nothing to do with the decision to break up Esperanza, but that was the will of the community, and we both have to accept it. | Mr. Darcy talk 04:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * In response to your claim that you were tagging them for a reason, I find it highly suspicious that you came across those articles (and only those articles) created by Dev920, especially given that they were several months old. I understand that tensions are running high, but that means it's all the more important to back away from the monitor and take some time off, rather than tagging articles as speedy candidates when they are clearly not.  (This is a good example - A3 spells out that it is for articles that contain NO content.)  I'll talk with Dev920 as well to make sure that you give each other some space, but your edits are verging very close to disruption--so close, in fact, that any further edits along these lines will likely result in a block.  Take a break from editing if you need to, but let's get back to what really matters: working on an encyclopedia.  As always, if you have any questions, please leave a message on my talk page.  Have a good weekend.  -- <font color="#3D59AB">Merope  05:52, 6 January 2007 (UTC)