User talk:Steven Crossin/Archive 14

Mediation for
I'd be more than happy if you took over the mediation at Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-04-26 Joint (building). I've tried to make some progress so far, but I'm not sure both parties are really interested in what I have to say. I'll let you read over the material so you can decide where to go with it. I guess I'm not experienced at mediation, so it would help to have someone who knows what they're doing. Thanks. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 03:29, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Very well then. I'll go about notifying both parties that I've "officially" accepted it, and I'll go from there. Still reviewing the content at the moment. I'll keep in touch. Thanks for your efforts so far. For the record, I'm not exactly what you would call an experienced DR person, however, I have a variety of methods for dealing with disputes. Regards, Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  03:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


 * You're A-OK by me. Go ahead and mediate. Best, --Achim (talk) 03:46, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

The paper trail you asked for is on the medcab page:

Coccyx_Bloccyx Trail

 * Article history
 * AFD case file
 * Coccyx_Bloccyx Talk Page Edit Avoiding Discussion
 * Coccyx_Bloccyx Contributions, Look For Deletions. --Achim (talk) 23:15, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

✅ Yep, I saw that and commented. Like I said there, I cannot see deleted edits. I'm not an admin. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  23:17, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


 * If there is something that you need, that only an admin can do, you could try Elkman as well as BorgQueen. They are very helpful. --Achim (talk) 01:05, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm not too sure, there are a lot of edits to go through. Could you be more specific? Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  01:33, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't really get it, because I have no difficulty following the matter without admin tools. Using the history tabs on the talk page of the subject article, you can tell who did what. Apart from that, just read the afd page and see what people wrote. THEY cited changes made that are relevant. Just go through that and you should get the picture. Also, read the article. Without being an expert in the subject matter, if you actually follow the links provided, you should be able to understand the topic. It's not difficult. Buildings have joints. You seal the joints. That's most of the topic. Apart from that, ask yourself what else you think you would need to understand building joints. I can't think of anything else and neither can anyone else. So what's with the tagging? That's the subject in a nutshell. He refused to tell anyone else what specifically he's tagging it for. Maybe he will tell you? It's worth a try, I hope. --Achim (talk) 01:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

You gave me a link before to his contributions list, which was rather large. I'll look through the AFD and the article. However, first off, if an editor tags an article, generally they need to post on the talk page as to why they tagged it, and the concerns they have. Not doing so is, well, you could say uncivil, but that's not the right word for it, perhaps unhelpful. If you don't know what the issue is, how are you to fix it? Thats the issue I see with tagging without discussion. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  02:01, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Looks like you've got the picture. After witnessing this, you will see I did two things:


 * 1. I added further citations.
 * 2. I asked what he was on about.
 * As Elkman put it, Coccyx_Bloccyx stonwalled. And he does not do that just with me. But let's see. Perhaps he can disclose to you what is still so awful about the article that convinces him it requires his tags. --Achim (talk) 02:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, he's going to have to disclose the issue. If not, well, let's not go there just yet. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  02:30, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


 * We'll see. At best he has a good point. At worst, he's tripping. We'll see if he responds to you. --Achim (talk) 02:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The silence is deafening. --Achim (talk) 02:51, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  13:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Perhaps THIS is considered to be his response? --Achim (talk) 23:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

✅ Sent them a message. Please leave further comments in a new section at the bottom, I do want to archive this thread. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  23:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Lady Aleena's RfA

 * Steve...There is no reason for me to be uncivil to you for your reservations about my ability to use the tools for which I was nominated. As Keegan said in the nomination, it is no big deal. Hope your day is going well. - LA @ 13:33, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I know you weren't being uncivil :) I was just pointing out I felt sorry that I had to oppose, but, anyway. :) My day is going OK, I eventually finished all those nasty redirects. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  13:44, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

adoption
could you please adopt me? It is ether you or this other guy Tennislover1 (talk) 20:46, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hello. Steve, I hope you think hard about this.-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 21:57, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Erm, what other guy? Who else is adopting you? Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  22:17, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Hersfold Tennislover1 (talk) 22:36, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm a little busy to adopt another adoptee, but have you looked at the adoption centre? There are many other people that would be able to adopt you. :) Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  22:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Just to tell you, Tennislover1, User:Hersfold is currently not adopting as told on my talk page just 3 days ago.-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 23:43, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Adoption
Yes, you are a good adopter. Your technique isn't the most commonly used, but it is effective. Basketball110 My story/Tell me yours 22:45, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Hersfold has the same adoption program, I just run it a bit differently. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  22:46, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

BTW, I saw you commented on User talk:Basketball110, saying if your a good adopter, yes, you are a great adopter!-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 23:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, thanks a lot. :) Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  23:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Of what [perhaps] you've seen or noticed, what do you think of my adoption, furthermore my editing (better not here, but here). Basketball110 My story/Tell me yours 02:02, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Reply
Hello Steve, nice to be of acquaintance! I just would like to say that my reason for changing the template image (the orange ! mark) is because of a recently held discussion at Article Message box was to standardize all ambox images. I changed the 24 image out of courtesy since I though that what I did was an improvement. If, however, my 24 image change was not beneficial, please, do not hesitate to revert back. Thanks, and sorry for any inconveniences. -- penubag  (talk) 00:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

No, that's alright with changing the template. Could you self revert the image for me? Also, if you could join the project in any way, I'd appreciate it, I need some techincal aid. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  00:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem, I've reverted the image back to its original state. However, I feel that I'd be of little use to the project. I've watched the 24 series a while ago and know some basic plot details, but that is all; besides, we don't need plot. If you need any template coding, formatting, image creation, or anything of technical aspect, please, don't hesitate to contact me for whatever minor it may be. I'm open to help. Thanks! -- penubag  (talk) 00:52, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

No, we don't need plot at all. Well, if there is plot info, it needs to be minimal and sourced, and in addition to real world info, like on Martha Logan. I decided to re-start the project and co-ordinate it's efforts, well, I have a good head on my shoulders, so to speak, and I feel I can improve this project quite a lot, it just needs support, something I've been lacking a bit, except from a select few people. Could you help me fix this error? I want the article list (the coloured one) aligned left, and the Class box aligned right, but next to each other, and not overlapping the next heading. The origninal colour table is here. That would be really helpful. Thanks. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  01:00, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ anything else? :) On second note, my edit summary had a typo, but the tables should be fine. Cheers!-- penubag  (talk) 01:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Hmm, I don't think there's anything else I really need at the moment. Thanks a lot :) Really helped me out. :) Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  01:26, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, you know where to find me if there is anything. -- penubag  (talk) 01:29, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello, just wanted to let you know that you needn't revert Image:24DNTV.svg back to the original version so many times. One revert sets the image back to its original state. The reason why you didn't (or don't) see the changes is because the image is stored in your browser cache (which is a temporary storage place to lower loading time.) All you have to do is bypass your cache to see the changes. You can also purge the image at Commons if that doesn't work (afterwards bypass your cache again). Hope this clarifies. -- penubag  (talk) 15:15, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes I was aware of that actually. I just reverted it once, as I wanted the alternate image you made, and then restored the current one. Thanks for letting me know anyway. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  15:18, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, great just making sure. By the way, I edited the 24 image again. I hope it's better than before, please revert if you don't like this image either. I checked and the change doesn't interfere with any existing templates. Cheers -- penubag  (talk) 22:51, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

A 24 project award? How's this? :) -- penubag  (talk) 23:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, it's roughly based off of the newer 24 logo used on the box art  -- penubag  (talk) 23:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, that image was actually the original 24 image, if I recall correctly. The new image is th yellow 24 one :) Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  23:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * No, the round one is actually the newer one. I bought all the series (except the last one) and the first two (or three) are the yellow one. The later ones are all the round logo. Just a note, I'm going offline so talk to you later. -- penubag  (talk) 23:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Editing from a hot spot (meaning I won't reply for a while): Do you want me to make the 24 yellow on the star, or do you like how it is? -- penubag  (talk) 02:37, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

If you could make it like the 24 text (yellow, digital looking), I'd really appreciate it. :) Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  02:42, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

New barnstar image

 * Okay, I found some time and I made a 'digital' barnstar for you! here it is :) -- penubag  (talk) 00:18, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

24Stub
Hi - a stub template or category which you created has been nominated for deletion or renaming at Stub types for deletion. The stub type, which was not proposed at WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, does not meet the standard requirements for a stub type, either through being incorrectly named, ambiguously scoped, or through failure to meet standards relating to the current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first! Grutness...wha?  02:27, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * No, if anything, it underlines them. And as with all such process pages, you shouldn't really change the title of anything that's been nominated during the discussion period,a s it simply makes more work for everyone later. Grutness...wha?  02:49, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi again - you wrote: ''Mind explaining the issue to me? That would be helpful. Also, I'm sorry, but I'm not familiar with Category:UNKNOWN. Mind fixing your mess? And, I don't see the issue there? Explain that too.''

There's no mess. The "unknown" indicates that there needs to be debate on exactly what the new title should be, since the current title is clearly not in keeping with normal Wikipedia category names - as such, that template indicates that there is a debate taking place and where the debate is taking place (it also clearly says not to remove it while the debate is taking place - I've put it back).

General explanations... I see you've read what I wrote about the stub category at SFD. Basically stub categories and Stub-Class categories deal with similar things, but whereas Stub-Class and other assessment categories are used by individual WikiProjects, general stub categories are used across the whole of Wikipedia. To stop there being tens of thousands of them and to try to keep them uniform and useful, several strong guidelines have been set up, such as only creating categories once the number of articles on a subject reaches a certain number, and making the stub template names conform to a set pattern. Which is pretty much what the main problems were with 24Stub, and it really did look like a WikiProject talk page banner would be doing almost identical work in this case.

As far as is concerned, the main problems are the name, which is not standard Wikipedia naming (especially since the parent categories do0n't use the name, but rather , and the fact that it looks like again its intended as a WikiProject category, in whihc case it shouldn't have been in the ) parent anyway, but rather in a WikiProject category (have a look at the way a similar category, , is parented, for instance - it's a hidden category and not in the main  navigation category). Grutness...wha?  07:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I can change that, if you check the history log, you will see that I didn't add that category. How about, I change the sub category, and we decide on a name? Let's not have this debated over, let's just decide and fix it up. And sorry if my message to you was a bit uncivil, im under a bit of stress right now. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  07:31, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


 * No offence taken, and none intended on my part either, though with my comments on both the stub template and this I could understand if you were concerned (no, I'm not on a vendetta against your WikiProject!). The best thing to do is probably let the process continue - if the category name is changed it'd need some sort of comment at CFD anyway. Simplest thing to do is to add to the debate at CFD yourself and hopefully we can come to a quick decision as to a new name. The main problem is the lack of the "TV series)" qualifier in the name, which isn't a particularly controversial change. BTW, I did explain the reasons for the proposed change - over at WP:CFD, which is linked from the template. That's standard practice. Follow that link and you'll find those comments. Grutness...wha?  07:40, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I sort of felt like you were against the project a bit, I've been jumpy ever since the MedCab case was announced to be closed, which means a lot of our articles could be merged. I'm doing my best to rewrite the articles, but there is only so much one editor can do. :) Anyway, I assume you mean this discussion? I can head over there, however I'm unsure what alternate name we could make it. You are right, it is a Wikiproject 24 category, feel free to add this one too, we should probably rename that too. Cheers, Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  07:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, that's the discussion I mean. I've added the other category you mention to it and suggested that the best thing might be to merge them into one category called (like the astronomy one I pointed out above). If that sounds reasonable, or if you can think of a better idea, it'd be good if you could comment at the WP:CFD discussion - input from people involved in the WikiProject is very useful in cases with project-specific categories like this. Grutness...wha?  01:12, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Have some awards

 * Those are from User:Lucy-marie's other hand, in case you were curious. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I have decided not to use my actual account to give awards due to the mad people who hound my actual acount, consider this an award account.--12:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barnstar-Giver (talk • contribs)

(blushes) Thanks a lot. There's no way I deserve all of those. I had to revert the edit to the icons however, it broke my browser. :( I'll try redevloping it so it can have more icons without affecting my browser. Thanks a lot lucy. Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  12:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Phillip Bauer.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Phillip Bauer.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  12:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

✅ I feel so silly, I forgot to add it to the article after I uploaded it. Well, I'm probably sillier, I'm replying to a bot. :P Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  14:07, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

help with template please
Dear Steve, I am trying to remove the following template from my article on the My Hero Project:

This article or section appears to have been copied and pasted from a source, possibly in violation of a copyright. Please edit this article to remove any copyrighted text and to be an original source, following the Guide to layout and the Manual of Style. Remove this template after editing.

I assure you there is no copyright issue. I am currently trying to figure out the best way to add the internal links and references and I hope to have them up by the end of the day. Thanks, in advance, for your help. Roughcopy (talk) 17:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

It's best not to remove tags like those. Where is the original source of the article? The article needs to be wikified and you will need to cite your sources. I hope that helps somewhat. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  16:07, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks... that's a good start. To answer your question about the original source, this is an original article, researched and written by me. Roughcopy (talk) 17:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I think you will have issues there. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is not the place for original thought. I'm not sure what you can do here, I can move it to your own userspace if you want. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  17:13, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

It's not original thought at all. It is a well researched article that contains facts that are easy to verify. Please take another look at it and let me know how to proceed. Thanks! Roughcopy (talk) 17:50, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

DYK:Baseball uniform?
Hello. Do you think this article is ready for DYK nom? I have just been told "yes" but would like your opinion too. Thanks.-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 03:20, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I see your fixing the article.-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 03:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes I am. This ref is unusable, very vague. It gives results similar to a search engine, like Google. You'll have to be more precise with that one. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  03:50, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I see. I will try improve those points you added to the article suvh as the verification template and the one you just said. Do you think it is ready (soon) for DYK?-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 04:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I think so. I converted the references into a better format, did a basic copy edit. A few of the references are a bit vague, and an infobox of some form could help, or an image. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  04:09, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to add a few images tommorrow. But I think that infoboxes and images are not in the DYK criteria. Also, is there a chance that if there is a "verification template" on an article, can it be still become a DYK?-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 04:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't try to rush the DYK. Work on finding the more precise source, vague sources are a killer at DYKs. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  04:23, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Well said, and I'll try not to rush. Refs are important to articles. Well, I'll be offline soon. Any comments before I go?-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 04:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Nope, none really :) You did well on the article. Don't get a big head though. :P Seeya later. Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  04:29, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. See you tommorrow. :) (Wow, I never used a face symbol in months) Cheers.-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 04:36, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

NTWW 12
See this discussion: --Filll (talk) 14:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  16:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Tibetan history in the Ming Dynasty
Hi Steve Crossin. I'm sorry that I have to trouble you one again. You know, the debate of tibet during the Ming Dynasty has changed to the article Tibetan history in the Ming Dynasty. Everything goes well until a moment ago. I spent hours' work adding the scholars' aguments, but User:Bertport has undone all. I don't know how English Wikipedia deal with this totally vandalist act. I'm really dead since I've suffered this kind of persons for weeks. I beg you to intervene this time for tackle the endless random undo. Thanks. --LaGrandefr (talk) 16:01, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I've gone and warned the user. I'm afraid I can't do much more here. I'd suggest if the issue persists, to take the issue to the administrator incidents noticeboard. I'm afraid I can't personally intervene in this case, there is insufficent dispute depth for me to step in. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  16:09, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I am flabbergasted. If you look at the quality of the article, and you look at the quality of User:LaGrandefr's edits in both the main article and the talk page, you'll see that User:LaGrandefr's edits are tantamount to vandalism. Several users have tried repeatedly to reason with him and advise him, but he generally seems not even to understand what is going on. It looks to me like some mixture of ill will and incompetence on User:LaGrandefr's part. As such, I reverted his edits today without comment, as is commonly done to unconstructive edits. Bertport (talk) 16:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Both of you, don't blindly revert each others edits. Pursue dispute resolution. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  16:27, 2 May 2008 (UTC)


 * How can people confound right and wrong? Steve, please have a look at the page, each argument has been well sourced by me, but deleted by Bertport without explaining the valid reason. What does Vandalism mean in English? I'm confused. I beg User talk:Bertport once again not to undo the edit randomly. Regards--LaGrandefr (talk) 16:37, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, normally I would, but I cannot at the present time. I have several mediation cases that require my constant attention. One in particular needs my immediate attention. I've requested on IRC that someone looks at it. In the meantime, look over the dispute resolution process, try an RFC maybe. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  16:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

New Project
Please go right ahead. Add any details you want. My objective is to find the editors that want their details on the list and remove the others. Useight (talk) 06:05, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks like you edit between about 22:30 and 17:30, which is about 19 hours. Don't you ever sleep? :P Useight (talk) 06:33, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * LOL! I sleep occasionally :) Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  06:35, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's UDT (also known as GMT). So I guess you're about in the middle of your editing, while I'm getting near the end of mine. It's 12:43AM here. Useight (talk) 06:43, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, great :D Yes, I'm in the middle of my editing. It's 4.45pm here :) Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  06:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Baseball uniform nominated
It has been nominated for DYK already by User:Milk's Favorite Cookie. I cleaned up the article a bit.-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 06:10, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Good work. :) Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  06:20, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Jordan (Katie Price) 3RR
If you look at the history, you should see I reverted an IP's edit twice. If I revert the article again today, will I violate the 3RR rule?-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 16:24, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Nope, you're fine. Reverting vandalism is an exemption to the three revert rule. You reverted vandalism. 3RR doesn't apply there. As long as it's clear vandalism, then the 3RR rule does not apply. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  16:28, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. That was part of the 3RR I didn't understand quite well.-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 16:29, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Um, what do you think of an edit summary like this?-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 16:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

It's not good, but it appears they were frustrated as their edit that was useful was being reverted. That edit summary is not excusable, but understandable. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  16:41, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Steve Crossin/Adoption/Copyright
I read it but I didn't see the assignment. Did I miss something?-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 23:29, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Nope. There's no assignment for that lesson. I thought exactly the same thing when I was adopted. :P Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  04:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

That's funny. :) So I really passed, right?-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 04:20, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Erm, well, that lesson isnt a pass/fail one. Its more a Done one. And, erm, people have raised concerns with me about your permissions assignment, and after reviewing, there are quite a few errors in it. So, just have a look over it again and fix any mistakes you made. The mark you got will stand however, I marked it poorly so it's my fault there. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  04:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it.-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 04:41, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't see what's wrong with the assignment. Can you explain it to me?-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 04:53, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

What is an auto confirmed account? An auto confirmed account is a new user account that is les than four days old (UTC). During thiose four days, those users are unable to recieve rollback permission, move pages, edit semi and protected pages, and be granted any other kind of permission. Basically, you have the rules as an IP address or un-registered user.

You misread the question entirely, it asked what an autoconfirmed account is.

What does checkuser enable a user to check? Check if an account is a sockpuppet of another account, IP, and bot. It should only be used if necessary.

''Bot is irrelevant. All checkuser does is compare an IP and find the users who have used that IP, or compare 2 users, or find the IP an editor is editing from.''

There were a few other ones, but they're not overly critical. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  05:02, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll read it over again tommorrow. I'v been busy lately. BTW, Baseball uniform passed. I just need a responce from the admin I recently contacted. You can look at Template talk:DYK at the May 1st thread. Comments?-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 05:11, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I've been extremely busy too. Mediating 4 cases  as well as co-ordinating a WikiProject, a huge task. There's more obviously, but that's the bulk of it. Dont forget that reporting to AIV is only when they vandalise past a final warning, I saw this. I think you should listen to NotTheWikipediaWeekly/Episode 09, specifically part 3 and 4. I discussed vandalism there, and rollback, I think it would teach you something. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  05:24, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

RE: Barnstar!
Thanks for the Barnstar Steve!

The  Helpful   One  (Review) 11:09, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

lecture
Due to an immediate personal emergency, I will not be able to make the lecture. I am so sorry for the short notice. Circumstances are completely unexpected. Vassyana (talk) 14:46, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, OK Vassyana. I hope everything is OK :( Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  14:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Sovereign Grace Ministries
Please note that I have now added the link to the much-discussed website by former SGM members. I believe this is what was agreed - is that OK? Look2008 (talk)

Oh, erm, here is my advice. Leave it added for now. If it's removed/re-added again, file a request at the Mediation Cabal, and it will be looked at eventually. I'm not sure if by me, although it has been some time since I looked at that case, a fresh set of eyes may be wanted, additionally, I'm rather backlogged at the moment. I can keep an eye on the article, but, long term mediation, is something I'm not sure I can do. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  23:10, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Reply
-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  Review ) 23:26, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Mediation
Hello Steve. Would you mind mediating this case between myself and User:Otolemur crassicaudatus. I would like to join the cabal, too, however I don't think I can mediate this case sice I'm involved in it and I need a third party hearing. Editorofthewikireview my edits here! 23:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the current issue is? It appears on their opinion that the case is resolved. Whats the issue? Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  23:33, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The fact that Otelemur called me a troll when I was simply trying to keep several messages e didn't like up. Editorofthewikireview my edits here! 00:07, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

That's a conduct issue. Mediators don't mediate editor conduct. Try a WP:RFC/U. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  00:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I guess the issue at hand is resolved, but I do find it innappropriate that Otelemur called me a troll while claining I was the one assuming bad faith. Editorofthewikireview my edits here! 00:29, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad the issue is resolved. :) Have a nice day. Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  00:32, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

blacklist
I noticed you removed a 'blacklisted' link from Halo 3 OST. Can you point me to why this link is suspect? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 01:22, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, editor JAF1970 has been using that site, as a self published source. After discussion with an administrator, the site was blacklisted, in addition to any other content he himself wrote, as it's a clear violation of our self published sources policy. I'm removing them per discussion with that admin. Thanks. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  01:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh... ok. Who was the admin, by the by? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk  ) 01:31, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Nick. Steve Crossin  (talk)   (review)  01:32, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

AWC Stuff
I've copied you replies from my talk page to the AWC talk page, as I wish to keep all the stuff together. While I do host the Award Center, I have been trying (as of late) to be more hands off, letting the regular users decide. I will post my comments regarding your opinions (and a few I do agree with) after other members have weighed in. Enjoy. -- Sharkface T/C 01:49, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Spore mediation
Thanks for trying. I definitely appreciate all your help with the mediation. I know it didn't work out in an ideal way, but I wanted to say that I have a great deal of respect for your level of patience and dedication. I've noticed that you're not an admin, and you're only aspiring to be an admin. If you should ever find yourself nominated, don't be too proud to let me know on my talk page. I have lots of great things to say. Thanks again, Randomran (talk) 03:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yup, thanks for helping out! Nanobri (talk) 03:57, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Same here and have a wonderful life with your wife. Skele (talk) 04:21, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm more than happy to still help out, even though consensus will be easier to get now. Additionally, all the discussion in my userspace has been archived into my mediation archives, it's located at User:Steve Crossin/Mediation/Archives/Spore. Everything is still there, feel free to use that how you will. Additionally, an administrator blacklisted the site JAF1970 was using for refereces, as they violated our self published sources policy.

Secondly, I'd like to commend you all for keeping your cool in this case. Admittedly, he was a difficult user to deal with, and I thank you all for being so patient in this long mediation. I also thank you for your comments, you're too kind. If my aid could still be of use, please let me know. Kindest regards, Steve Crossin   (talk)   (review)  04:03, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

24
Thanks for the invite, but not my thing. If you look at my history, I've just wandering through random projects, tidying them up, formatting templates, and getting accurate counts set up. A little bored with article writing and other projects to deal with. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:19, 5 May 2008 (UTC)