User talk:Tarheel95/May 2009

Requests for adminship/CardinalDan
There are instructions that need to be followed. Dloh cierekim  20:15, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It might be best to first discuss with CardinalDan. Cheers,  Dloh  cierekim  20:16, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi. Please stop readding the RfA. Its not ready to go live yet. Best.  Syn  ergy 20:17, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * CardinalDan has declined your nomination, which means the RFA cannot be transcluded, even if completed. Would you object to it being deleted? Regards  So Why  06:40, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

No, I fully respect his decision. I believe that he will eventually request the status again, during which I will support him.T-95 (talk) 20:23, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay. I deleted the RFA page. I, too, think he will request adminship some day. If he does and he agrees to let you nominate him, please remember to follow the procedure outlined at Requests for adminship/nominate. Regards  So Why  20:29, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Racist Editing
Hi Tarheel95,

I am dropping this note to you as you responded with a bit of praise when I did some reversing of racist editing a while back. Could you take a look here at an exchange I am having with an Admin about what I hope is a misunderstanding on the Admin's behalf as to which of two edits I had referred to WP:AIV. The one I had referred was IMHO of just about the worst form of racist comment on a WP:BLP related page on which he only issue a first level warning. Pending his reply which may clear it up I was hoping perhaps you could advise too where one goes on WP to get clarity about what the WP policy is on such edits and the blocking of IPs, thanksTmol42 (talk) 19:42, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for following this up as well with the Admin. As I said on theier talk page I will follow this up as there must be a line on this type of behaviour hopefully not to deep down in the policies. Any thoughts on where to go would be appreciated as you also seem to have similar viewsTmol42 (talk) 21:33, 20 May 2009 (UTC)