User talk:Ryan Norton/Archive3

Common Ground
I respect you at least you are not an anonymous coward. I think we should together. But arent you the least upset that you are not working at software house cos society cannot accept you for who you are???? I am. I can regale with stories of simple anoyances that was purposely inflicted on me to outright abuse. I am sure you probably could as well. For example, I have an out of whack startle response. I would focus on work, my co workers would sneak up on me and scare me cos I would yelp and shake and they would then laugh riotously. I could not get back to work for hours if at all for the day. JoeMele 17:04, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

The charter is here. (Relating to Esperanza)
Hello RN, the Charter for Esperanza is up. Take a looksie :) R  e  dwolf24  (talk) 02:55, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Explanation of gap
Greetings. I did not take a voluntary break from editing Wikipedia from June to August of this year. My husband and I had been sharing a house with a (now former) friend from January; in early June, relations with her began to deteriorate, culminating in my husband and I needing to flee our former residence at half past midnight on a Sunday, after our roommate flipped out and started making threats of violence against us. We then needed to find a new place to live, extract our possessions from the crazy woman's house (still not entirely complete—she refuses to turn over some of our more precious possessions, like my husband's wedding ring), and get our Internet connection hooked back up, in the middle of a telco strike. IceKarma&#x0950; 23:00, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

My RfA
Thanks for participating and supporting me in my RfA, I hope I will not let you down. I will also take that tip on the edit summary section. Molotov (talk)  18:04, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Esperanza made less bureaucratic
Hello again, I have (unilatterly) taken away the 'assembly' idea, as per my reasons at that edit summary and per Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/Charter. I have left the admin general, as some leadership is good. Now, all you have to do is be a member to establish consensus, the whole assembly idea is gone. Also, I have added an advisory committee, of four members, with limited power besides watching over the admin general and making sure he doesn't do anything stupid. Please look at the ammended charter, and I would love a comment. R e  dwolf24  (talk) 00:27, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

The last time I'm spamming you all with Esperanza stuff
Hello RN. As you may or may not know, there have been some troubles with Esperanza. So now, as a last ditch to save the community, please vote at Esperanza/Reform on all neccisary polls. P.S. I'm very sorry for spamming you all with these messages, and this will be the last time. I recommend putting ESP on your watchlist. Cheers and please look at that, let's stop the civil war then. R e  dwolf24  (talk) 02:51, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Asperger's syndrome
Hi,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Asperger%27s_syndrome#removed_link Thanks. Apokrif 21:58, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Mario
Hey, I undid the changes you made to mario, because I feel it is better to keep all the images in the article wrapped by text. By pulling it out of the text it doesn't integrate very well with the words describing Mario's Mushroom ability. Fine, the text on the right is cramped, but is that such a problem? We are only used to having images on the right, but in other cultures images are commonly on the left. Still, take a good look and make the changes that you feel will improve the article. Jacoplane 00:24, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

My RfA
Thanks for your (eventual) support in my RfA. I'm glad you took the time to look into the matter; I think you made some pretty valid points in your initial criticisms. I'm also glad I was able to reassure you on the matter. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on minor edit summaries, but if you see me make an edit you regard as significant that I have marked as minor, do let me know. -R. fiend 15:44, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your support
I would like to thank you for your support of my adminship nomination. --Mb1000 22:37, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

RfA
Just to say thanks for supporting my RfA. Please let me know if you see me screw up anytime. --Doc (?) 19:13, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Hyperlexia
I was wondering why you removed all references to autism/AS from the hyperlexia article? Most of what I have read about hyperlexia indicates that hyperlexia is probably on the spectrum, though of course there is some dispute over it. (This Google search lists a lot of articles discussing the connection between hyperlexia and autism.) I think that, given this background, it is inappropriate to remove autism from the hyperlexia page; instead, we should perhaps expand the article to address the on-spectrum/off-spectrum perspectives. I am going to post this to the hyperlexia Talk page as well, so if you want to respond there, that would be good. :) ManekiNeko | Talk 20:27, 24 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Responded at the article's talk page :). Ryan Norton T 20:54, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

That deletion you mentioned
Just to keep the tangential stuff off of VfU: That deletion of Blogosophy was one of several out-of-process speedied executed by Neutrality that day. At the time, I asked why on his talk page, but he's never responded. Interpret that as you will. Since no-one has actually challenged those deletions (which would almost certainly have been overturned at VfU), he could now perhaps cite WP:IAR but it would seem rather retrospective. -Splash talk 23:35, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
 * It was? So it was. Well, a few weeks ago Neutrality did some other ones that weren't speedies. However, that particular article, from looking at the deletion log was probably an A1 speedy "Blogosophy means the philosophy of blogging.", with three ext links. However, to delete it citing the afd is not correct. He's an Arbitrator. I rather think they consider themselves to Have Powers at times. -Splash talk 23:47, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Yeah - I'm glad to see the articles go but I doubt I could pull that off I was an admin. Neutrality has special powers :) Ryan Norton T 23:51, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, yeah, they were obvious enough deletes. Just that not-technically-a-speeies cause upset when it might be more easily avoided. Incidentally, Netrality just replied: apparently they were A1/A7 speedies (which that one above was, I agree, but the other was a nursery school). -Splash talk 00:01, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Yeah - the nursery school thing reminds me of the first time I tried to speedy a band that didn't assert notability :). Some day we will have an A7 rule for bands!!! Ryan Norton T 00:05, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Some day that cannot come too soon. It might actually be worth prodding talk pages of those who were in Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-C after the poll. It was stopped because it was too soon, but it isn't anymore. I did try prodding watchlists, but that rarely works. -Splash talk 00:19, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Great Year
I don't know about the rest of it, but the Great Year, narrated by James Earl Jones, does exist. The DVD is for sale on Amazon. Cheers. 23skidoo 17:58, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I did a quick Google search and found plenty of references to it being a PBS program, including the Amazon listing itself and several discussion websites where users make comments such as "I saw The Great Year on PBS last night." That's good enough for me. Cheers! 23skidoo 18:07, 25 September

Fair enough - the sources seemed dubious.... but if you think its good I'm not one to disagree :). Thanks! Ryan Norton T 18:15, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Disneyfication
Ryan, I've attempted a rewrite of the stub at Disneyfication. I haven't tried to merge in anything from Disneyization yet, though. What do you think? Joyous (talk) 21:20, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Joe's Talk Page== ==

While I disagree, vehemently, with a lot of Joe's recent comments and actions (oh, you'd noticed), it is my view that he can do what he likes with his own talk page, so long as he does not actually misrepresent what anyone said. Make no mistake, I don't like the big blanking he did, especially as some of my comments (one semi-unfortunate one but also several that I wholeheartedly stand by) were among those deleted. I would prefer that he'd simply archived it, and I would not do the same if our positions were reversed. But as much as I think it was in some respects a poor decision, I think he was nevertheless within his rights. PurplePlatypus 06:20, 26 September 2005 (UTC)


 * My understanding was that Talk page content (other than vandalism) should not be deleted. So I have been reverting Joe's deletions. I will gladly give way to more experienced editors on this issue. But I am uncomfortable with the apparent whitewashing that is occurring. ManekiNeko | Talk 06:35, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

It's a grey area. In general some people here blank their talk page like that - it's considered poor form but it's not worth edit warring over (rather disappointed that he removed my comment too...). Article talk pages though are a bit less grey and its pretty bad if he just removes it. He should probably put something like "personal attack removed" or something. Ryan Norton T 06:40, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks! If you need any help with those articles or any others, just drop me a note on my talk page. Also, when I make the final push towards FA status on Extraordinary Machine, I would be ecstatic if you were to give a helping hand on the next peer review. Thanks again! :). Extraordinary Machine 15:14, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Journalist's RFA
I want to thank you very much for your vote on my RFA. Greatly apperciated, I owe you one! Jo urna list |  huh?

Reversing
Can't rollback. Have to revert manually. --AllyUnion (talk) 07:47, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

My sandbox
Would you mind keeping an eye on my sandbox? My bot is dumping info right now, and I'm going to bed. If you could, please offset the amount of data that it is loading into the page. Thanks! --AllyUnion (talk) 08:15, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * So far, I've moved January off to: User:AllyUnion/January 2005. There is at least 8 more months of data.  --AllyUnion (talk) 08:16, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Ya, because the amount of data per page is reaching up to around the ballpark of 200k. Splitting it up would be helpful, but I can't do that since I have to bed.  <- PDT time zone. --AllyUnion (talk) 08:27, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

MDAC
Great work! Those are most valuable contributions - I really think the lead is in much better shape now :-) Thanks for helping out on this one... - 203.134.166.99 07:39, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

My RfA
Ryan-- Thank you so much for your support of my RfA. I'm a little afraid it may end up as "no consensus", but appreciate your support nonetheless. And don't worry... the personal attacks are far behind me. I now appreciate what WP is trying to do and am working to become a valued contributor. Thanks again. -- Lord Vold e  mort  (Dark Mark)  17:02, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Palazzo Pitti
I've responded to your comments here. Regards Giano | talk 09:55, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Who's RfA
Thank you for supporting my masters RfA. He appreciates your support and comments and looks forward to better serving Wikipedia the best he can. Of course I will be doing all of the real work. He would have responded to you directly, but he is currently out of town, and wanted to thank you asap. Thanks again. --Who's mop?&iquest;? 20:53, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

RFA proposal
The proposal was indeed archived (and brought up a variety of views, including the idea that RfA works fine as it is). However, I don't consider the idea dead, just in need of refinement. The outcome of Kappa's RfA has redoubled my conviction that something needs to be done to deflate the vitriol that occasionally arises in this process. I'm developing a proposal for a two-step (as opposed to my original four-step) process, with the first step giving limited admin powers and the second giving full admin powers, with a mentoring element included. I'll invite input when I have a more concise description in place. Cheers! -- BD2412 talk 21:23, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
 * btw, no harm done - it's just the internet, for corn's sake! :-) -- BD2412 talk 21:24, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Feel free to give it a shot
... can't hurt :-) Hopefully all the issues were resolved... might be others. - 211.30.173.157 01:05, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I like it! That makes it look better, for sure. Have also updated MDAC. - 211.30.187.224 02:59, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Brian's RFA
Hey, thanks for this nomination. I thought he was... well you know... so I never looked him up at WP:LA. In all of my interactions with Brian he seemed to exude Adminship so I just thought he was. I hope he gets a BIG vote of confidence, he is certainly deserving. --hydnjo talk 05:51, 1 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Do you think he even knows about this? Did you send an E-mail? One of us should. :-) --hydnjo talk 05:58, 1 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Nevermind. I see that he has posted today. --hydnjo talk 06:01, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the idea - I went ahead and e-mailed him :) Ryan Norton T 06:36, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm clearing up after him. Do you mind dropping a polite note on his Talk page explaining that WP does not accept linkspamming? Regards— enceph alon  09:31, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Jaxl's RfA
Thank you very much for your support vote in my RfA!  Rob e  rt  15:35, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Peer Review
Hey Ryan, I just wanted to let you know that I'm working on your concerns about Federalist No. 10, but more importantly I wanted to thank you for getting to so many of the peer reviews in general. The page was becoming very overloaded and lots of article weren't getting looked at. Thanks bro. Christopher Parham (talk) 17:02, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Rogerd RfA
I wanted to thank you for supporting my RfA. Unfortunately, it did not reach the required level of support and failed. Apparently, some didn't feel that I had participated enough outside the article namespace. I may try again in a few months. Thanks again. --Rogerd 21:42, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

My dear Ryan
Hi, my dear Ryan! First of all, allow me to thank you wholeheartedly for your nice words (and for adhering to that barnstar!). But I mostly come to visit you because I'm concerned about what you said about feeling guilty. As I already told you at my RfA, you have nothing to feel bad for. I would have felt guilty myself if I had made you break your principles. I praise that you didn't, and that you acted according to your conscience. So put your mind at rest, because what really matters to me is that you actualy took the time to express your motives with honesty and truth, and they were constructive and objective.That, not to mention that you came to my Talk page to send your good wishes, and beat me to come and visit you before!

By the way, I must thank you too for your input at the Peer Review for Texas Ranger Division. That's very valuable information. Your advices sound great, and I feel a little dumb for not noticing some of the points you correctly raise before. Thank you! I'll work on the article as soon as I can, and if you don't mind, I'll ask you to review it again once I'm done, sounds ok?

You'll always have a friend over here. Oh, and you'll have the dubious honor of being the owner of the first test of my new signature... hope you don't mind ;) Smoochs! - Shauri    smile!  23:32, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Gyrofrog RfA
I just wanted to thank you for your vote of support in my request for adminship! -- Gyrofrog (talk) 04:58, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Wikiversity vote
You might want to read rule #2 of the Wikiversity voting rules. - As it is your vote does not count. --Krischik T 07:10, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Mediation application
RN, I would recommend to you that you don't try to become a mediator until you pass an RfA. Note that every mediator is an admin, not that this is required, but partly as mediators should at least have some authority. For example, mediators should be able to set boundaries, and if there was way too much attacking after warning, the mediator should be expected to block that user. Now, if you don't mind, I'm gonna nominate you for adminship. And I recommend that you take down the medcom application until you pass your adminship. R e  dwolf24  (talk) 00:08, 5 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Go here and accept. R  e  dwolf24  (talk) 00:08, 5 October 2005 (UTC)


 * k NOW go. R  e  dwolf24  (talk) 00:13, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your concern
I added a mean but very true comment in response to your question on Fvw's talk page. Thanks. Molotov (talk)  04:28, 5 October 2005 (UTC)