User talk:IComputerSaysNo/Archives/Nov 2006 - Apr 2007

Your VandalProof Application
Dear Jhfireboy,

Thank you for applying for VandalProof! (VP). As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank you for your interest in VandalProof. --⁪froth T 23:28, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Emma Watson 1.jpg
Thank you for uploading this image. It has been removed from Emma Watson (per WP:FUC, since fair-use images cannot merely identify a living, public person) and deleted as it failed to assert fair use in any way. RadioKirk (u|t|c)  00:12, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the welcome back. Restrictions on images recently got even tighter than they were already; reading WP:FUC will help (if you haven't already). Thanks again. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c)  22:05, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Generally, your peers like to see a few thousand edits spread across article and user spaces coupled with a reasonable knowledge of Wikipedia policies and guidelines (some of which have changed since I was honored as an admin, requiring me and others to keep up). RadioKirk (u|t|c)  22:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: 213.249.154.100
I have deleted the offending entries. The IP is not solely vandalism, but I will consider blocks (we can only permablock IPs if they're proxies, and this one seems not) if similar behavior continues. RadioKirk (u|t|c)  18:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Jhfireboy! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Prodego talk  23:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Certainly. I have already looked through your user, talk, and contribs pages for your VP approval, as well as one more page. This is (controversially) what many or most of RfA voters use to determine whether to support or decline an adminship nomination. It is editcount, and it shows a lot of data, which can be used as a summary of a user. It shows you have been a user for 11 months, and that you have been semi-active during that period. You seem to be article editing oriented, and have made 439 edits. The standards for RfA are constantly raising, when I was nominated, the standard was about 4000 total edits, and users would also look at how they were distributed across the namespaces. Today 6000 total edits is the norm. A straight analysis of you (currently) indicates that:
 * Your account is old enough
 * Your account is no where near active enought
 * You have not been active enough in the internal possesses (WP:RFA, WP:AFD, ect)
 * You have not been active enough in the Talk namespace.
 * To become an admin I would advise you to spread out your editing into other areas as well as continuing to make contributions to articles. You also need to vamp up your activity considerably, making at least an average of 20 edits a day, for the next six months or so. Becoming an admin takes serious dedication. Prodego  talk  23:29, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I think the most important thing, not so far as the likely hood of it passing goes, but as far as being ready goes, is waiting until someone (who knows what they are doing) offers to nominate you. Nufy8 did this to me. When users offer to do that, and you feel ready, you are close to requesting. It can't hurt to wait until some other people agree though ;-).  Prodego  talk  23:44, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I missed your last message. Being a meta member doesn't really help at all, I have a meta account, and rarely use it at all. Prodego  talk  01:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Natl1's RFA

 * Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 13:10, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

RE: AMA QUESTION
The AMA is "is a Wikipedian voluntary association devoted to advocating, counseling, and protecting Wikipedians in need." For information on joining see WP:JOINAMA.--Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 16:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

About your request for a coach...
Your name is still listed at Admin coaching/Requests.

Note that the instructions may have changed since the last time you checked, and the department now follows a self-help process. See the instructions on Admin coaching.

If you are no longer in need of a coach, please remove yourself from the requests list.

Thank you.

 Th e Tr ans hu man ist   03:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

2.75G
I have added a "" template to the article 2.75G, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Paul C/T+ 18:57, 30 March 2007 (UTC)