User talk:NotAnIP83:149:66:11

Welcome
Hi! Welcome. Airplaneman (talk) 00:12, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Re:RFA
Thanks for the insights. I dunno if I'll ever win this (I even resort to doubting, too), but I don't mind even if I lose, whether by split or even the more humiliating unanimous decision. And nice username, too. God Bless and have a nice day, my friend. Blake Gripling (talk) 12:12, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Re:disclaiming my own comments?
Well, we sometimes have issues with users who create extra accounts to generate more !votes for their rfas (otherwise known as sockpuppetry). Basically, it's guilty until proven innocent with such accounts - not that I'm accusing you of course! Hope that helps to clear things up. Cheers,  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 20:14, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Your recent comment on ThaddeusB‎'s RFA
I would say either put it in the support section or in the comments section. I don't think you need to put it in the neutral section just because you haven't had an account for very long. Thanks for your insightful comments. Plastikspork (talk) 22:52, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Typos
Thanks for sharing the google search for typos. I've been using it for various other typos, like thier or realy. Thanks, and happy editing. Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 19:44, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/ThaddeusB
I wanted to take a moment to delivery a personal thank you (not "thank spam" :)) for your involvement in my RfA. (It passed 117-2-7 in case you hadn't seen.)  Although your vote may have technically been a neutral, I considered it just as valid as any other support.  You might be newly registered but your clue level is quite high, and I was glad to have your support.  I am sure you have a bright future on Wikipedia ahead of you.  If you ever are in need of administrator assistance, please don't hesitate to ask as I would be glad to help.

Thanks again, ThaddeusB (talk) 17:17, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Elton
No, the point of the search was to show that John isn't referred to as "Elton Hercules" (without the John). Elton Hercules John meanwhile is a valid redirect... Black Kite 09:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * NAIP thanks for contributing your knowledge of Google as pertainint to this topic. Your 11 reply to his 9 reply was an awesome riposte, I was totally fooled by it too, I did not even see the awesome reference you came up with. NotAnIP, do you think if I listed DeBretts as a reference in the edit summary while recreating EH for a third time that it would be enough to let it stand? I wonder if I'd get blocked for doing it anyway? Tyciol (talk) 04:29, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I actually agree with BK - that redirect was confusing and probably nt needed. Read the DeBretts page clearly - they say his first names are Elton Hercules, and his Surname is John.  So even they are not calling him "Elton Hercules". NotAnIP83:149:66:11 (talk) 18:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Username
Hi. How did you come up with your username? — Jeff G. (talk&#124;contribs) 03:04, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

WT:RFA
You indicated you wanted to strike a comment but didn't succeed. I made a judgment call and changed the  to ; please feel free to revert if I misunderstood your intention. - Dank (push to talk) 19:48, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

User talk page enquiry
Hi NotAnIP83:149:66:11, I have a quick enquiry, which I'm hoping you'll be able to help me with. It is with regards to user talk pages. A user posted a comment thread on my talk page, to which I left a reply... the user has now deleted the thread. I was under the impression that other users cannot deleted threads from another user talk page, without consent/permission. Is this true? If so, then what action (if any) should be carried out in accordance to WP:Policies. Much thanks in advance. Pr3st0n (talk) 16:55, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Ignore that message above, I've now found the guidance policy on this issue - regards. Pr3st0n (talk) 16:57, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks...
...for your kind words here and, I thought, somewhere else but I can't find the diff. It's not so nice to be noticed when it's at ANI, especially when one really tries hard to keep drama out of it, so I appreciate the small notice. Frank |  talk  16:07, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

ANI
hello, just saw that you have brought a concern to ANI. thank you. to answer a few questions, Posting to sandbox was for testing purpose. It may have spilled somewhere else, but please accept my apology. Ecoman24 (talk page) 12:34, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

In regard to your !vote in my recent RfA
Feel free not to answer this. Just out of interest, I'd like to know what the reason was you didn't trust me. Is it just the general impression I give off, or was it my lack of experience. Not that I'm angry or anything, just curious, Lord Spongefrog,  (I am the Czar of all Russias!)  22:27, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Invitation
WT:Sock_puppetry. - Dank (push to talk) 17:50, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

November 2009
Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention/Bot‎. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Stay calm and be civil. Thejadefalcon Sing your song The bird's seeds  23:56, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Username
Hello - I've tried to respond to your concerns here and would like to be able to resolve this issue to everyone's satisfaction. When you have time could you please take a look and let me know what you think. Thank you, 7  01:24, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Policy Report
The community gave feedback on a couple of policy pages at WT:SOCK and WT:CIVILITY, and there will be another one in Monday's Signpost that we're putting together at WT:Username policy. I'm asking for your participation because you made an edit this month or last month at that talk page. If you have questions, feel free to ask at WT:Username policy or my talk page. The best guide to what the community is expecting from the surveys is to follow the links above to see what they've already done; we haven't had any complaints. Thanks for your time. - Dank (push to talk) 17:06, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Community de-Adminship - finalization poll for the CDA proposal
You are recieving this notice as you have participated in the Admin Recall discussion pages.

A poll was held on fourteen proposals, and closed on 16th November 2009. Only one proposal gained majority support - community de-adminship - and this proposal is now being finessed into a draft RFC Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC, which, if adopted, will create a new process.

After tolling up the votes within the revision proposals for CDA, it emerged that proposal 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.

A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;


 * gather opinion on the 'consensus margin' (what percentages, if any, have the most support) and


 * ascertain whether there is support for a 'two-phase' poll at the eventual RfC (not far off now), where CDA will finally be put to the community. Matt Lewis (talk) 01:42, 18 January 2010 (UTC)