User talk:PookeyMaster/Archive Dec 2007

Personal information
Regarding this edit, I've contacted someone to deal with the personal information. For more information, see Oversight. Thanks! Acalamari 02:49, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Yes. I noticed. Thanks a lot. And I reverted some vandalism on your page too :) . - Aksi_great (talk) 06:55, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks also
Thanks alot for reverting the vandalism on my page. I'll return the favor if I see any going on in your page. Rapigan 03:17, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Jacques Gruet
Hi there; you recently speedy tagged this article. As it clearly refers to a notable person I have removed the tag, but would be interested to learn why you affixed it? You have not been with wikipedia very long, and have at this moment only 196 recorded edits to the project. I would ask that you carefully study WP:CSD, but would also suggest that until you gain a little more experience you should think more about editing or creating encyclopedia articles, rather than new-page patrolling. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 11:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC)


 * My friend, many of these decisions are a matter of opinion, and I had no wish to appear to criticise you; I was hoping to provide guidance. You did not cause me any inconvenience, and there is absolutely no need to apologise. The wiki-system whereby an article is first nominated and then considered by a sysop is designed so as to minimise error while maximising experience. Please carry on exactly as you are doing - we continue to need enthusiastic newpage patrollers, who ultimately, we hope, become admins. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 18:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Scott5114's RFA
Thank you for taking the time to participate in my recent RFA nomination. I have withdrawn the nom early at 17/13/3. I am presently going to undergo admin coaching in preparation for a second candidacy somewhere down the line. I hope to see your potential support in the future. Regards, —Scott5114↗ 07:51, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Asume good faith.
Regarding this edit. How is this vandalism? It seems clear that Mikebe genuinly belives that the article would be better without the section.

Please note WP:vand. In particular note that edit waring is not vandalism. Taemyr (talk) 09:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm inclined to agree. I think User:Mikebe's edit was ill-supported and unjustified, but it wasn't vandalism. --Stlemur (talk) 10:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Vandalism Level
The level went down to one earlier today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robotboy2008 (talk • contribs) 09:58, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Really, really bad haiku from a new admin
Setting new lows in thank-you spam:

  Click there for my RfA spam haikus! → → → Janitor's new tools

Spam must stop -- will new mop act?

Ooops, .com blocked

New admin, new tools

Earnest newbie furrows brow

Fare thee well Main Page

New mess all about

Sorcerer's Apprentice mop

Not supporter's fault

A. B. so grateful

Wikipedia trembles

Watch out DRV

A. B. wonders why

Copyright always confused

Fair use, farewell, bye

Qatar is blocked

Shucks those range blocks are tricky!

Will get it straight soon.



Dear RfA friend, I will learn, chaos will fade ''Thanks so much ... A. B.

This RfA thank you card is based on a card originally done by Phaedriel

PookeyMaster, thanks for your strong support.

-- A. B. (talk) 22:07, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Australia newsletter
WikiProject Australia publishes a newsletter informing Australian Wikipedians of ongoing events and happenings within the community and the project. This month's newsletter has been published. If you wish to unsubscribe from these messages, or prefer to have the newsletter delivered in full to your talk page, see our subscription page. This notice delivered by BrownBot (talk), at 21:58, 11 December 2007 (UTC).

Vandal?
Hi, Forgive me if I am reading the diffs wrong (it has happened, and with all the craziness over there I would not be surprised) but it would appear that this edit of yours restored vandalism from a user that had been blocked? Perhaps it is a bug, as you do not seem like a vandal to me! (Although the name PookeyMaster raises other questions :P)  l'aqùatique    talk   06:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hah, good deal then. Say, it's been pretty crazy over there hasn't it? It was like a DOS attack, complete with 'Nam flashbacks... :O  l'aqùatique    talk   06:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I've noticed that it's been pretty ongoing. However, tonight it seems like it just exploded like a firecracker... which are actually sort of illegal in Alaska. Oh, the irony. 'Nee way, thanks for your help. I'll be off in my little wiki-corner, if you ever need anything just 'holla!  l'aqùatique    talk   07:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

4.5 generation fighter
You are out of line. Please read the various discussion threads that pertain to the article and the subject before reverting again.Thanks70.18.1.60 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 06:50, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Great success!
  Click that-a-way to open your card! → → → <span style="font-family: times, arial; font-size: 110%;">Dear PookeyMaster,

Thank you for your participation in my request for adminship, which ended successfully with a final tally of (52/10/1). I was impressed by the thoughtful comments on both sides, and the RFA process in general. The extra buttons do look pretty snazzy, but I'll be careful not to overuse them. If you have advice to share or need assistance with anything, feel free to drop me a message or email. Thank you and good day!

Cordially, — <font face="Arial" color="green">xDanielx T/C\R 06:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Credits - This RFA thanks was inspired by Carlosguitar's RFA thanks and LaraLove's RFA thanks, which were both inspired by The Random Editor's RFA thanks, which was in turn inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks.

RfA thanks
--Michael Greiner 18:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

N-arachidonoyl-dopamine
For this article you put a speedy deletion on, I just want to say, thanks for being dilligent, but be careful where you put the tags. Some administrators may just go and delete it if it doesn't look like a full fledged article. It takes a while to write a good stub, do the research, find the links, correct the grammer, make it readable, and if it gets deleted, then all the work goes out the proverbial window. Anyhow, the chemical in question is part of a group of endocannabinoid ligands of which this is the only chemical without a wikipage. So even if it looks like it's not notable, but you're not sure about whether to do the speedy deletion on it (unfamiliar with the subject), maybe just drop a notability template in, and if it deserves deletion, eventually someone will give the old heave 'ho down speedy deletion lane. Thanks for looking out, Rhetth (talk) 04:29, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * And I just wanted to add, I appreciate the diligent work of people who tag pages for speedy deletion, having worked hard at it myself, and I don't substitute my judgment for theirs except in the most extraordinary of circumstances. My apologies, and I hope you believe I was just trying to divert one useful article from the firehose-flood of crap that rains down in the form of new pages.  Accounting4Taste: talk 04:43, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Your User:AmiDaniel/VandalProof|VandalProof Application
Dear PookeyMaster,

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof! Unfortunately, your application has been declined because it seems that you don't have at least 250 mainspace edits. When you fulfill this requirement, feel free to re-apply.

 Snowolf How can I help? 11:36, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Date links
Why did you "Remove Date Links per Manual of Style" on various articles? See MOS:DATE. Gimmetrow 23:49, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * "Full dates, and days and months, are normally autoformatted, by inserting double square-brackets, as for linking. This instructs the MediaWiki software to format the item according to the date preferences".

Full dates (with day, month and year) are linked to support date preferences, not because of context.


 * Wikipedia has articles on days of the year, years, decades, centuries and millennia. Link to one of these pages only if it is likely to deepen readers' understanding of a topic.

This refers to links like November 2002, or 2000, or 1980s, which should only be linked if they provide context. Gimmetrow 23:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

That's My Line
Before you revert, please look closely at the information that I have deleted, in comparison with what remained. The info that was deleted was in reference to an image that was deleted, followed mainly by information that was already given in the earlier paragraphs. Folloing your reversal, I reverted back, including some info that was in the paragraph that was deleted. Thanks for your cooperation. -- azumanga (talk) 00:18, 16 December 2007 (UTC)