User talk:Master Jay/Archives Apr-May 2006

My (HereToHelp’s) RfA
Thank you for supporting my RfA. I’m proud to inform you that it passed with 75 support to 1 oppose to 2 neutral. I promise to make some great edits in the future (with edit summaries!) and use these powers to do all that I can to help. After all, that’s what I’m here for! (You didn’t think I could send a thank you note without a bad joke, could I?) --HereToHelp 12:46, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your vote of confidence in my recent request for bureaucratship. Even though it didn't pass, I greatly appreciate your support and hope I will continue to have your respect. Thank you! Flcelloguy (A note? ) 22:59, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

RFA Thanks
Thank you for your support vote on my RFA. The final result was a successful request based on 111 support and 1 oppose. --CBDunkerson 12:44, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for feedback; Ronald Reagan page still needs change
Hello,

Here is a statement from the Ronald Reagan page under "Criticism":

Reagan's support of apartheid South Africa was sharply attacked by African American leaders.

This is NOT true. President Reagan was opposed to SANCTIONS against South Africa, not against apartheid itself. Please correct. (And, I had stated very accurate and relevant facts, with references, to my previous correction.)

Best regards,

JR

jr4notaxes@comcast.net


 * Thanks for pointing that out. Feel free to correct it as necessary. --  Jay   (Reply)  21:05, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Have I offended you in some way?
Master Jay, I don't recall interacting with you before; have I offended you in some way? I know you nominated TigerShark for adminship, and I've opposed his nomination, but I'm surprised at the hostility I've seen in your comment to me. As far as I can remember, it's the first comment you've ever made to me. Is there some other issue you would like me to address? Or is it just all about this nomination? If the latter, I would hope that people could simply agree to disagree about these things, rather than making them personal. I don't have anything against you or TigerShark personally or as editors, I just think that in order to interact effectively as an administrator of an encyclopedia, one needs to have a lot more experience dealing with article content issues. Jayjg (talk) 17:27, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * We're cool. I have nothing personal against you. We may disagree in terms of admin details, but what would Wikipedia be without a good argument once in a while? It was a fair point that I thought you might have considered, and you have done a good job in elaborating on my concern. --  Jay   (Reply)  21:11, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

TigerShark's RfA
Why did you revert User:Evilphoenix's vote here? --  Rory  0  96  02:54, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It appears he voted after Ilyanep closed the RFA. -- light darkness (talk) 04:09, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure, because the original ending time was 00:13, 4 April 2006 (UTC), and Evilphoenix's vote was at 23:29, 3 April 2006 (UTC), which would make him in time... --  Rory  0  96  18:30, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Ilyanep closed it a few minutes early I guess, see this diff. -- light darkness (talk) 22:12, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * The problem is DST. The current revision has the correct closing time, meaning Evilphoenix's vote was in fact after the closing. It is more likely that a user would vote after a vote has been closed than a bureaucrat closing a vote early. Nonetheless, the issue is moot now, and the vote (even if it had been legit) wouldn't have effected the end result. --  Jay   (Reply)  23:07, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, no big deal. I was a little surprised by it, but I guess I didn't notice it was closed by then. &Euml;vilphoenix Burn! 04:28, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi Jay. I just wanted to let you know how grateful I am, both for nominating me in the first place but also for your efforts during the process. I will do my very best to live up to the new responsibility and also to prove that your faith in me was well placed. It really goes without saying, but if there is anything that I can ever do for you - please don't hesitate to ask. Thanks again! Cheers TigerShark 04:33, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It was my pleasure. --  Jay   (Reply)  23:06, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

thanks for the support
Hi Jay- thanks a lot for your support on my recent, (barely) successful rfa. Please feel free to leave me any comments or criticisms on my talk page! --He:ah? 22:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Kusma's RfA
Hello, Master Jay! Thank you for your support in my recent successful request for adminship. If you ever have problems that you could use my assistance with or see me doing stupid things with my new buttons, don't hesitate to contact me. Happy editing, Kusma (討論) 02:17, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

You have been RfA'd!
 Mathwiz2020 would like to nominate you to be an administrator. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Mathwiz2020 to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Requests for adminship/. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so. Remember that note you left on my talk page two months ago? Well, I listened. Good luck on your RfA! -- M @  th  wiz  20  20  21:24, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
 * You keep to your word (off a date, by oh well:) Thanks plenty. --  Jay   (Reply)  04:55, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I was too busy on the 7th, but I did do it (late) on the 8th! (I wish real-life procrastinating was this easy: I didn't finish this assignment in time, but I'll get it to you just a bit - one day - late and all will be fine!)  Well, if all 10 of the next 10 voters vote in support, you'll have 70% support.  Or, you can learn for next time! -- M  @  th  wiz  20  20  00:14, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
 * We'll have to see. --  Jay   (Reply)  00:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Your RfA
I've added some questions to your RfA. When you have a minute, I'd appreciate if you would answer them. Thanks. JoshuaZ 05:18, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

I've also added some. Ditto. Petros471 18:46, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Responded. --  Jay   (Reply)  22:48, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Fair chance
Jay.

Thank you for telling me your concerns.

I read every comment on your RfA, including your responses, others responses, and your nomination. I also looked at your contributions and your talk page. Unfortunately, I cannot support your RfA at this time.

I am very glad, however, that you are learning from your mistakes; keep this up and you will be an admin in no time.

If you have any more evidence that would support your RfA, I will be willing to reconsider my vote. At this time, however, I will stand by my initial choice.

Good luck. (^'-')^ Covington 00:08, 11 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I appreciate the time and effort you took to prepare yourself for your RfA. As I said, if you have any other evidence that would support your RfA, let me know, and I will be willing to reconsider my vote. As for now, I will stand by my initial vote.


 * Good luck. You're on the right track, and I can definitely see you as an admin in the future. Let me know in a few months when the time comes, and I will be willing to support your RfA. (^'-')^ Covington 00:32, 11 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I just want to let you know that I read your message on my talk page. I spent a few days thinking about this, and I am choosing to stand by my initial vote. The Wikipedians who commented on your RfA provided some useful constructive criticism; address these issues, and I will be happy to support your RfA. Take care. (^'-')^ Covington 01:57, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

A KISS Rfa Thanks
Thank you, I've been promoted. psch e  mp  |  talk  01:24, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

My RFA
Hi, this is Matt Yeager. I wanted to thank you for your vote on my request for adminship. The count was something like was 14/20/5 when I decided to withdraw the request. My decision was based on the fact that there are enough things wasting people's time on the Internet that doomed RFA's shouldn't be kept up for voters to have to think about. Regardless of the rationale behind your vote, I hope you will read this note for an extended note and discussion on what will happen before I make another try at adminship (I didn't want to clog up your userpage with drivel that you might not be interested in reading). Thank you very, very much for your vote and your time and consideration of my credentials--regardless of whether you voted support, nuetral, or oppose. Happy editing!  Matt Yeager   ♫  ( Talk? ) 01:26, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

why
It seems that you are almost out to make sure I fail at this attempt to serve the community a little better. From your reasons at my RfA, it is almost as if I am a blatant newbie monster, who after 5+ months at a couple hours a night, hasn't heard of WP:BITE. I assure you I have welcomed a fair amount of newcomers and have followed guidelines to the teeth when it came to warning about vandalism. I know that this message won't convince you, and if anything, aggravate you more, but I wanted to make sure you heard my side of the issue. --  Jay   (Reply)  01:56, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not out to make sure it fails...I had a concern and I expressed it. I'm always very careful to back up my statements because I don't like when people just make assertions. I'm sure you don't like it either. Please don't make this into something personal, because it's not for me. I'm sorry if I made you out to be a monster....I didn't mean to, and don't think I did. And, when someone responded to my comments, it's certainly within the bounds of reason that I respond in a civil manner. I'm sorry, I really am....new users are important, During my first hour here I wonder about how I would have felt if I made some edits and they were rejected out of hand without any comment. Rx StrangeLove 02:07, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

My RfA
Many thanks for your support on my recent RfA. It was successful. Thanks again, Mark83 19:35, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for supporting me in my RfA. I really didn't think people appreciate my work here that much, but it's nice to see you do: my Request was closed with 66 supports and 4 opposes. I'll do my best not to turn your confidence down. If in any point in the future you get the feeling I'm doing something wrong, do not hesitate to drop me a line. --Dijxtra 12:00, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Discussion and your RfA
Thanks for providing me with those examples. I changed my vote to neutral as I'm sure you noticed. Mostly I'm concerned about people getting the admin buttons and using them inappropriately when they're stressed out. For example, blocking a user or protecting a page when someone is arguing a perspective different from yours in a way that offends or annoys you. I think the best way to ensure that that isn't going to happen is to see some examples of discussions where an editor's work is questioned (such as on the content of an article he/she wrote) or where an editor gets involved in a long discussion or attempts to mediate a dispute. Anyway, if you get into any of those types of situations, do your best to stay calm =). Best wishes, Spangineer[es]  (háblame)  04:35, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I will do my best. Thanks. --  Jay   (Reply)  04:37, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations
Greetings, Master Jay. This is an old bureaucrat who's dusted off his sysopping wand with your nomination: congratulations, I see that the community by consensus is willing to trust you with the increased responsibilities of being an administrator.

There are many views of the task you are now accepting for yourself. Some see themselves as guardians of the principles of Wikipedia (its Five pillars, most notably). Others see themselves as janitors with mops and brooms, who clean up the messes inevitably made in the chaotic work of bringing this encyclopedia project to life. Still others see themselves as not much different than other users--held to the same standards (if not higher) and no more important than a fresh-faced newbie. I encourage you to keep all these in mind as you begin.

Remember also, if you will, those voices who spoke against you with concern--I encourage you to act in ways that will show how much you respect their perspective, and that will prove how willing you are to continue to learn and grow as an editor here. The community clearly believes you can do this, and I do as well.

Final advice: the best advice I ever got as an admin was this. Before you do anything as an admin for the first time, ask an old hand who's done it many times if it's appropriate. This goes for everything from blocking your first anonymous vandal to protecting a page in the middle of a dispute between two respected editors. Nothing is so great a threat to the 'pedia that it can't wait 5 minutes for you to be certain of yourself. My best wishes and heartiest congratulations to you again, Jwrosenzweig 05:13, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll do my best. --  Jay   (Reply)  05:15, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations Jay! Enjoy the mop! I know you'll use it wisely. All the best TigerShark 05:22, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Congratulations. Jedi6   -(need help?)  05:29, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Congratulations. I may not have been sure at first glance, and you had to put up with my rambling for a while, but I'm truly glad that you made it. Having another good admin on board is always good news. E WS23 | (Leave me a message!) 08:41, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Congrats! You deserve this and enjoy your newly added responsibilities! -- S iva1979 Talk to me 14:07, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

From me too  Sceptr e  ( Talk  ) 15:29, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I, too, am glad that you were sysopped. I've seen other nominations with consensus in the high 70s that didn't make it, but you did.  Once agains, congrats, and use the mop wisely! -- M  @  th  wiz  20  20  17:17, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations. Pepsidrinka 04:23, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations on your successful RFA! --Ter e nce Ong 15:10, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations! _-M    o     P-_   02:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Parabéns!!! Welcome to the fold!--Adam (talk) 03:35, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations from the land of ice and snow. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 13:00, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Best wish for your adminship.--Jusjih 15:10, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Congratulations! Good luck. -- a.n.o.n.y.m  t 19:25, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks everyone!
Thank you all for your show of support or suggestions, in my RfA. --  Jay   (Reply)  17:12, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem - I was glad to be of assistance. -- M @  th  wiz  20  20  00:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

A vandalized welcome
Welcome to WP and your new status as a admin here. I hope you revert this and label is vandalism even though it really sucks that I cant vandal right. --Scott Grayban 20:58, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, ! 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. AmiDaniel (Talk) 03:17, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for helping out in the BNP article. As you can see, several anon IPs are making controversial and often blatantly POV edits without discussion or explanation. I have requested semi-protection for the article here:. Since you are an administrator, would you be willing to grant this request? -- WGee 18:16, 17 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Okie dokie. Thanks. -- WGee 18:20, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

thanks
Many thanks for your support of my recent RFA, which passed narrowly. I will try to be worthy of your support. Regards, Kaisershatner 20:54, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Your RfA
You beat me :( Computerjoe 's talk 07:43, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

No worries
Hi Jay,

I appreciate the apology, but it is absolutely unnecessary: I would never hold a little thing like that against you personally. I pointed it out in RfA because I was worried about the chance you might snap at newbies. You're now aware of the concern, and the community clearly trusts you, so all is forgotten, and I look forward to working with you happily in the future. :) Best wishes, Xoloz 20:22, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Cuba dispute
I am still having problems with User:Adam_Carr and his personal attacks even after his warned on his talk page. His comments on Talk:Cuba have now gone to insulting peoples ethnic background. His out-right refusal to be WP:CIVIL is just wrong for this person's background and his continued attacks are causing the article to become stale. I have made repeated requests that he stop attacking and being un-civil to users only to be attacked even more. I make posistive statements about Cuba and he call's me a commie or a fidelist and yet I am far from that. I am retired from the USAF and his constant abusive actions is uncalled for. Please do something. --Scott Grayban 10:02, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It appears that things have cooled off from a few hours ago. Nonetheless, I will keep an eye on things if they continue to get out of control. --  Jay   (Reply)  18:20, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey Jay. Maybe you would take the time and look at the RfC about this? Need outside views and comments on the actions. Thanks. --Scott Grayban 18:33, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually I think Cuba needs to be fully protected now. An anon and User:172 who is part of the POV problems are now in edit wars and we are going to end up losing what progress we have made on it. --Scott Grayban 18:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * On it --  Jay   (Reply)  18:52, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Does Scott mention that he-- not Adam-- has been the one making personal attacks: ''You are very ignorant and rude. And me being German has nothing to do with your repeated insults here to users or me. For your information I am retired from the USAF after serving over 20 years in it, not to mention all the ribbons and citations I have gotten and you sit here mocking my ethnic background? I'm more pro-democratic then you will ever be. You are a wannabee. You wish you had something to stand for like I do. I spent my time fighting the freedom you have to insult me and bash my ethnic background. You really do have mental issues don't you? --Scott Grayban 09:46, 23 April 2006 (UTC) '' 172 | Talk 18:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I was just about to mention that but 172 beat me to it. However, it appears that this incident isn't the only one. But Scott, please refrain from fighting back in the future; you'll only hurt yourself.  _-M     o     P-_   18:44, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Gentlemen, lets break this vicious circle of who said what and so forth. Were there heated words on both sides? Sure. However, it is imperative that we focus on the article, Cuba, and improving it, rather than each other. --  Jay   (Reply)  18:52, 23 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Me attacking? You are certainly kiding here. You're copy/paste of that sentence is my response when Adam implied I was a Nazi simply because I am German. Anyone who says such nasty and very insulting comments as to ones ethnic background does have issues. Don't distort the facts of his abuse. --Scott Grayban 19:07, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for signing my statement of the Adam Carr rfc. I believe there is still poor etiquette going on within the rfc itself. User 172 is insisting that another user is a sockpuppet of Scott Grayban, without evidence. Would you mind taking a look please? --Zleitzen 07:37, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Further incivility by Adam Carr on Cuba talk page "what is one to do when confronted by fools like ScottGrayban or hypocritical, devious Castro apologists like Bruce? (Yes Bruce, I am being uncivil - so sue me)--Zleitzen 14:54, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree that no premature action be taken, but it's coming to something when Adam's incivility is making the newspapers!!!!. This is something that really needs to be examined.--Zleitzen 03:41, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

nationality!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Please add nationality to the articles about humans that you create or edit. In an Encyclopedia is not written anywhere that people must be American or English or what. Thanks!!! Attilios 21:23, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for your support during my recent RfA.--Rockero 23:32, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Lindsay Lohan
Thanks for restoring the page Lindsay Lohan. I was just about to edit it back to it's "clean version" when you already did it. Please leave a response at my user talk page. :)Tut74749 20:02, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

the john mayer thing
I in no way intended vandalism, I was merely correcting a couple of points on the page...There is no mention of Clay Cook on the site..if you check the liner notes of John's first 2 cd's (inside wants out and Room for Squares) you will see that the writing credit is shared on at least 8 different songs (comfortable, man on the side, northstar, neon, Torie came by, etc.etc.) Clay also recieved a grammy for No Such Thing, along with John, however, being that he wasn't invited to the ceremony, and was never even mentioned by John in his acceptance speech, I felt (being a close friend of Clay's and at one point John's) that he should. The thing I put in about Family Guy, and Digging his own hole, were totally inside jokes for me, John, and Clay. That being said, I completely understand your reasons for removing them, however, I feel that if you intend to provide the internet with factual information, then maybe a little more research into how some loser ass clown from mass. actually got famous..by using other peoples material and never giving them credit. Thanks

Just another RFA thank you note
im terribly sorry my cat just died and im just having a tough time.

Re the whole de-bureaucrating thing
Hi, I never came to thank you for the message you left for me a month ago when I stepped down from being a bureaucrat. Thank you for the things you said, it's good to know there are still plenty of good people about in this project. I do not see myself standing for bureaucrat again anytime soon though who knows what the future may bring! Thank you once again. -- Fr a ncs2000 09:59, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

rfa
Thanks for the support on my RFA. Unfortunately, it did not achieve consensus. I look forward to your support in a couple months when I apply again. Holler at me if you need anything. &rArr;   SWAT Jester    Ready    Aim    Fire!  19:18, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page! I owe you one! Later, zappa.jak e (talk) 02:19, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

you deleted my article
You deleted my article about The Puya group simply based on the reason that it was " It is reposted content that was removed in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. (CSD G4)"

It was originally deleted because the significance of the group was not listed. I listed all of the groups accomplishments and was in the process of editing future goals and current projects.

You did not engage in any discussion and seems like you did no research on the group.

How can you just delete it blindly like that. What research did you do? On what basis other than it was reposted content? How can fraternities, sororities, and other campus groups have wiki pages, but our group cant. We are represented at 8 different Universities and graduate schools, and we are growing.

please explain.

Thanks. --Thepuya 21:08, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Replied at your talk page. --  Jay   (Reply)  23:10, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Jay, I understand a line needs to be drawn. I just thought it was deleted too fast without a debate. I will work on adding more stuff to show our significance. It's finals time for a lot of us, so the process will be slow. Thanks. --Thepuya 23:40, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Sgrayban unblocking
Hi Jay. I was eavesdropping on your comments regarding Sgrayban on WP:AN/I and User talk:Jdforrester. I'm a bit concerned that there may be a question of interpretation of the legal threats policy. To wit, the passage that you quoted to Jdforrester:


 * ...if you really feel the need to take legal action, we cannot prevent you from doing so. However, we ask that if you do so, then you do not edit Wikipedia until the matter of law is settled - one way or the other - to ensure that all legal processes happen via proper legal channels. If you do decide to proceed with legal action, you should deal with it privately with the user by e-mail.

Sgrayban made a legal threat privately. That is fully within his rights, and he did it through the correct channel&mdash;a private email, rather than a public posting here. However, our policy doesn't distinguish between legal threats made on- or off-wiki. As written – and, I suspect, as intended – the policy asks editors to settle their legal disputes before they return to editing Wikipedia. Even if an editor makes all of his legal threats off-wiki, those threats can have a distinct chilling effect on actions on-wiki.

As an incidental note, I agree that it may have been inappropriate for Adam Carr to post Sgrayban's private email message here. On the other hand, a summary may have been useful in the context of what was, after all, a user conduct RfC.

With regard to your personal decision to unblock Sgrayban, you might have been better off posting a request for comment and discussion at WP:AN/I rather than unblocking immediately. Undoing Jdforrester's block without giving him a chance to comment or provide context may have been a poor move, etiquette-wise, and you know how skittish people are lately about anything that has even a whiff of wheel-warring to it. The block has been in place for a week and a half; giving James a half-day to respond probably wouldn't do further harm. Particularly where someone might see you as biased – you cosigned several one of the statements against Adam Carr in his RfC – you would be well-advised seek a third opinion before taking action.

Finally, Sgrayban has engaged in further legal threats against the Wikimedia Foundation on-wiki since his block:.

I strongly urge you to undo your action until other admins – particularly James – have an opportunity to comment and discuss. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 03:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Well do we need to let The Miami Herald to continue to write about this then? I'm certainly willing to finish this and win. My block was illegal in every sense of the word. Jdforrester used a private email sent by both me and my lawyer as basis for my block. If that was the case then Adam's posting of it also warrant's his indef block as well. Wikipedia has no legal authority to moderate any private email sent reguardless of how any admin here wishes to interprete the law. However, I agreed to drop any action on wikimedia if I was unblocked because of the illegal block originally made. I am willing to go back and be blocked if the admin here are determine to undermine and write there own laws and prevent my right to privacy with emails. I would seriously think about this before making another mistake. --Scott Grayban 04:52, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Do not unblock this user again. He has posted legal threats on the Wikipeida namespace, not just in the private email. 172 | Talk 08:38, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

If you have any interest in Template:MLB
please join the current discussion at Template talk:MLB. As a member of WikiProject Baseball your opinion is particularly valued. Thanks. 66.167.139.143 08:42, 4 May 2006 (UTC).

My RFA
Hi Jay,

Thank you for supporting my RFA! Unfortunately it did not succeed mainly because most opposers wanted me to spend more time on Wikipedia. Thank you for your faith in me & looking forward to your continued support in the future.

Cheers

Srik e it ( talk ¦  ✉  )  09:26, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Rmrfstar's RfA
If you don't mind, I'd like to address your concerns for my RfA more fully...

You first say that, "adminship is no prize". Well I think prize is a bad word; it implies that I think I deserve adminship for my work on this encyclopedia; few things could be further from the truth. Instead, I see adminship as a mark of trust and acceptance by the Wikipedia community, a belief which is in accordance with the Wikipedia philosophy and past practice. See Administrators

You also argue that, a toolset does you no good if you don't have experience with the wood." This would be true if I expected to immediately start altering the interface of Wikipedia itself or closing XfD. But I would continue doing everything I have been doing for a year, only with a little more functionality.

You see, one shouldn't worry about giving the mop to a user who they think won't use it, for no harm is done by doing so. If I am untrustworthy, my committment to Wikipedia is not crystal clear, or I seem irresponsible or ignorant, by all means oppose. But withholding the toolset simply because I might not use it is wrong. First of all, because I in all likelyhood will use it, though probably for minor things. Its tools are useful for the everyday editing which I do. If I'm innocently browsing Wikipedia and I see blatant vandalism, the rollback tool is nice. There have also been many times that I've noticed typos on the Main Page, but was unable to fix them immediately and instead had to wait until Raul654 checked his talk page. This is unnecessary.

So I ask you to reconsider your oppose, or at least be more clear as to why you don't think I'm fit to have those extra tools. -- Rmrfstar 17:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks
Dear Jay &mdash; Thank you for your support on my recent RfA. It succeeded with a final tally of 72/2/0 and I am now an administrator. I'll be taking things slowly at first and getting used to the new tools, but please let me know if there's any adminnery I can help you with in the future. &mdash;Wh o uk (talk) 18:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi Master Jay, thanks for supporting my request for adminship! Unfortunately, it ended with a final tally of 45/15/2, no consensus. I may have another go in the near future, once the school year is over. Thanks again! -- getcrunk   juice  contribs 22:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Dual-sexual
Thanks for speedy delete. --GoAround 20:33, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Block
On this IP. Did, you mean 2007? January 2, 2006 has passed. --GraemeL (talk) 20:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks
, thank you you so much for validating my RfA! I am grateful for all the supportive comments, and have taken both the positive and constructive on board. If I can ever make any improvements or help out in any way, please let me know, ditto if you see me stumble! Thanks again for your much appreciated support.

 Dei zio  talk 18:07, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

9 month block
Hello Master Jay, I was wondering if you would change your block on from nine months to one, per the blocking policy. Thanks, Prodego  talk 21:58, 18 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I just looked through your blocking log, and it seems you were unaware of the 1 month cap on IP addresses. Would you like me to help you reblock all of these blocks to a month from the original block time? Prodego  talk 22:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok. Prodego  talk 22:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I am afraid I can't, I don't have an IRC client or an IRC cloak, and I would prefer people not know my IP address. I have no problem using e-mail however, would that work? Prodego  talk 22:18, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * That would be fine. I will correct my mistakes in this area. --  Jay   (Reply)  22:56, 18 May 2006 (UTC)


 * You missed a few, ; ; ; . Thanks, Prodego  talk 23:22, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and unblocked those for you, so don't worry about it. Happy editing! Prodego  talk 23:48, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Creat the article.
Which article do they usually accept it? I know that bad articles are deleted recently by administrator. I know all about Wikipedia Policy, but I don't know how to create the article. That's what I ask you for. Send me message for that. Thanks. Daniel5127, 01:39, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

reply
thank you.

Sukh's RFA - Thanks!
Thank you for your vote on my RfA. Unfortunately there was no consensus reached at 43 support, 18 oppose and 8 neutral. I've just found out that there is a feature in "my preferences" that forces me to use edit summaries. I've now got it enabled :) Thanks again. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:44, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

VandalProof 1.2 Now Available
 After a lenghty, but much-needed Wikibreak, I'm happy to announce that version 1.2 of VandalProof is now available for download! Beyond fixing some of the most obnoxious bugs, like the persistent crash on start-up that many have experienced, version 1.2 also offers a wide variety of new features, including a stub-sorter, a global user whitelist and blacklist, navigational controls, and greater customization. You can find a full list of the new features here. While I believe this release to be a significant improvement over the last, it's nonetheless nowhere near the end of the line for VandalProof. Thanks to Rob Church, I now have an account on test.wikipedia.org with SysOp rights and have already been hard at work incorporating administrative tools into VandalProof, which I plan to make available in the near future. An example of one such SysOp tool that I'm working on incorporating is my simple history merge tool, which simplifies the process of performing history merges from one article into another. Anyway, if you haven't already, I'd encourage you to download and install version 1.2 and take it out for a test-drive. As always, your suggestions for improvement are always appreciated, and I hope that you will find this new version useful. Happy editing! --AmiDaniel (talk) 02:56, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

COMPLAINT
The subcategory of notions under the article Winchester College was recently edited correctly, however you deleted the edit and then decided to block the IP address. This blocked 700 pupils and over 100 dons (teachers) from one of Britain's finest and oldest educational establishments from editing Wikipedia. I think it would be greatly beneficial if you could restore the changes you made.

Yours faithfully Alexander Mather