User talk:Walton One/Old

{| width=100% style="border: 2px solid midnightblue; padding: 5px; background-color: Navy" | |- |style="border: 1px solid midnightblue; background-color: LightSteelBlue; text-align: left; padding: 5px; font-size:90%;font-family:Trebuchet MS"|

Adoption
Yes, I would still like to be adopted. Thank you for your reply. Veritas (talk) 15:09, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Request for Adoption
Hello Walton One! I am considering adoption.

1. I have only been on Wikipedia for several days. I hope to become an administrator in the future, so I am looking for someone who is familiar with the process and can give me preparatory advice. I'd like to engage in those activities that put me on the way to administratorship.

2. I believe that 'administratorship' and 'bureaucratorship' are about the Wikipedia community at large &mdash; not an individual. Recommendations are crucial. Thus, I'd like to learn how to interact with and become better known by various members of the Wikipedia community.

3. Also, I would like to gain some fundamental knowledge of the technical aspects of Wikipedia. I'd like to learn how to implement and use the various technologies to create articles that are more easily understood and efficacious in teaching fellow Wikipedians and browswers.

In conclusion, if you can help me with 1) preparation for adminship, 2) making connections, and 3) rare technical advice, please consider being my adopter. Veritas (talk) 23:37, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

You are wise
You made a wise comment some months ago about the terrible effects of blocking good editors. One editor, you noted, was blocked and never returned again. Whoever blocked this person is guilty of vandalising wikipedia (in an indirect way, but still damaging).

Many administrators cease to edit wikipedia mainspace much. That's why the rest of wikipedia is so important.

I am an another example of what you mentioned. I was blocked for nothing but now I think I may come back. Polounit 03:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Seconded. I am not blocked but seeing the drama surrounding a few incidents recently (SevenOfDiamonds (flimsy circumstantial evidence), Melsaran (no published evidence, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain), and others which get away with so much and when they do get called out on it are reinstated quickly), it disheartens me greatly from participating in the project. I have been contributing off and on since 2004 but mostly recently has this place seem to become "BAN FIRST, IGNORE THE REGULARS!" place that I really no longer want to be associated with. You are one of the few people that I truly think that want this project to succeed no matter what and treats regulars and new people equally. Spryde 18:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Unhelpful edits to Superintendent (education)
Hi Walton, sorry for the unhelpful edits I made to the above article. I realize now that the content was not written in a neutral tone.(And the bolding superintendent was unhelpful)--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 18:20, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

My (KWSN's) RFA
Thank you for supporting my recent (and successful!) RfA. It passed at at 55/17/6. Kwsn  (Ni!)  01:29, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

The Haunted Angel's RfA
I indented your struck neutral comment here so as not to show up as a double !vote for TangoBot (nevermind the incorrect edit summary saying "oppose"). — Dorftrottel⁠ 12:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

RE: Politics rule
What do you want? A pointless RFCU with an arbitrary template slapped on it? Stop being so paranoid. -- John Reaves 00:36, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Ban user?
Is there any way to block/ban User:Giddee2? He constant creates articles violating and edits articles in violation of WP:Crystal Ball and it's getting tiresome, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Butterfly0fdoom (talk • contribs) 21:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Tally updates
In answer to the question you asked in an edit summary, the reason no one remembers to update the tally anymore is that the discussion section is in a separate edit window from the top of the RfA, so the tally numbers don't appear in front of the user when he or she is editing. Regards, Newyorkbrad 00:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * That's no excuse. Before the format change, I always voted on RfAs by pressing the edit button on the Discussion header, and subsequently made a second edit to update the tally. Failure to do so is simple laziness. :-) WaltonOne 09:26, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

In Remembrance...
--nat Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?! 02:03, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

OhanaUnited's RfA
 Thanks for voting at my RfA. Unfortunately, the result stands at 51 support, 21 oppose and 7 neutral which means that I did not succeed. As many expressed their appreciation of my works in featured portals during my RfA, I will fill up the vacuum position of director in featured portal candidates to maintain the standards of featured contents in addition to my active role in Good articles. Have a great day. OhanaUnitedTalk page 04:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Gin Tonic
Haha! I love Gin Tonic, too! I even thought about including it there but thought it may be too much unnecessary detail. That stuff never gives you a hangover or any awkward spin on your mood. Projectile vomiting notwithstanding, in case you ever overdid it. But even so, it's not the kind of beverage I couldn't drink anymore after a bad experience (compare, in contrast, the combination of alternating between Jägermeister and beer). — Dorftrottel⁠ 12:38, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you
  Click there to open your card! → → → Dearest Walton One, Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 137 supports, 22 opposes, and 5 neutrals. Your consideration and kind words of support are very much appreciated and I look forward to proving you right. I would like to give special thanks to The_undertow  and  Phoenix-wiki  for their co-nominations. Thank you again and best regards.  Lara  ❤  Love  19:51, 10 November 2007 (UTC) P.S. It was about something to do with RfA (our argument).

Credits: This RFA thanks was inspired by  The Random Editor 's RFA thanks which was inspired by Phaedriel 's RFA thanks.

Hm?
Seems you resigned for a lot of the reasons I did. Welcome to the former sysops' club. :p ~ Riana ⁂ 13:20, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

You were an admin for only a month? What happened? Archtransit (talk) 21:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks for seeing some sense in the RfA that was filed for me. "Oh for God's sake, this Oppose is the most ridiculous I have ever seen. All of the essays cited in the oppose are not only perfectly acceptable and within the bounds of legitimate essay-writing, they are all precisely correct (especially the statements about how new users are intimidated by our masses of pointless rules). Nor do any of them qualify as "attacking other editors" in any meaningful sense." -h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 02:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Meh
Sorry to have you hand in your mop, but I'm glad that at least you'll still be around. I don't think you and I saw eye to eye on everything, but I always had immense respect for what you said.

If you ever need a quick admin action (let's ignore how that sounded), just gimme a shout. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 19:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey, at least you're not leaving. Your input is allways valued and appreciated. Best of luck with the RL pressures! Pedro : Chat  08:18, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Sad, sad day
Wikipedia is much poorer for your resignation, but Her Majesty Armed Forces and the Bar are both noble, rewarding callings. I should hope that the English curriculum for aspiring attorneys is more rigorous than that found in the United States (where preparation is sometimes comical), but I suspect your impressive intellect will still leave you much time to work within the project however you like.

On a related matter, your resignation has just brought the block of Melsaran to my attention; I am often the last to know of these sorts of things. Did you inquire regarding the evidence? Were you left unsure? Best wishes, Xoloz 17:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Forgive me for dropping in uninvited. I happened to see your comment on Xoloz's talk and I wanted to echo his thoughts above.  It may not seem like it from your perspective, but from where I sit the power of any ruling elite at Wikipedia seems to slacken gradually with time.  That's not to say there aren't incredibly frustrating moments where communication is not what it should be -- oh there are! -- but as months fade into years I believe things on whole are improving.  You fought the good fight, and once life permits, I do hope you return to it. --JayHenry 02:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Sir, you have my respect for dedicating your time to wikipedia, and later to your country. While I agree with you to a degree that we have to work to keep editors, I also know of a few vandals who have created new ID's, and know that the law has to permit that, particularly if they resume problematic behavior. Several troublemakers are well-behaved in one field, although maybe not others, maybe even including myself. (Joke.) I've haven't always been on "your side" of issues, but I know that you have done your best by wikipedia, and that you have earned the thanks of all of us for it. If you find that you can contribute to content regarding the British military, of course, I think we would all be very appreciative, and if you don't have time, then you have all our hopes and prayers (if you find such acceptable) that your military duties give you some time off to relax. God save the queen. John Carter (talk) 22:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

My RFA
Thankyou for this. I know you didn't mean to be quite so brusque - things can easily me misinterpreted - but I appreciate the honesty with which your opinion was given. I've also read your userpage, and you seem like someone I could get on very well with - if you ever need a hand with anything, give me a shout. Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry 23:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Something I wrote which you might like...
Perhaps I've come to my senses at last?? ;)  Majorly  (talk) 22:12, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Somewhat-Belated RfA Thanks
  Tapadh Leibh (Thank You)... ...for helping me navigate the waters of my surprisingly peaceful   RFA, which closed successfully with 85 supports, 1 oppose, and 0 neutral.

I would particularly like to thank Acalamari  and  Alison, my nominators, and everyone who watched the page and ran the tally.

If there is anything I can do to be of service in the future, please feel free to contact me.

And forgive me if I need a Wikibreak  now and then (like now. I'm exhausted!). You wouldn’t want to see me climbing the Reichstag, now would you?

Off to flail around with my new mop! (what?!)  Kathryn NicDhàna  ♫  ♦  ♫ 

This RfA thanks inspired by Neranei's, which was inspired by VanTucky's which was in turn inspired by LaraLove's which was inspired by The Random Editor's, which was inspired by Phaedriel's original thanks.

Oxonians unite!
Hi there Walton! I'm at St John's (so not too far away...) and yes, I matriculated when I was 17. Although my 20th birthday was a few days ago - I should update my userpage! What are you doing? Took a sneeky peek at your user page... looks like you've been around a while? (Although I'll have to warn you not to talk Aussie politics with me... I'm somewhat overexcited about the new Labor government in my home country). Good to hear from you! Cricketgirl (talk) 13:29, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure - Facebook and Wikipedia are my two favourite procrastination techniques from the worksheet I'm supposed to be doing! We can carry on the political discussion over there... but I suspect you'd label me a "bleeding-heart liberal" with my "Say sorry to the Indigenous Australians" and "we are all boat people" ideas... Cricketgirl (talk) 14:38, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikidemocrat userbox
Is there one? &mdash;Ashley Y 04:31, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

James Arbuthnot
User:Vintagekits began a war yesterday by adding silly fact tags. I easily referenced the queried statements and asked Rockpocket to stop VK doing this (see User talk:Rockpocket). VK whinged a bit and added material which was unencyclopedic, wrongly attributed to Nicholas Soames poorly sourced and relating to a living person and not NPOV (as noted by Rockpocket). I reverted on those grounds. Giano put it back in because of my relationship to JA. So did Deus Ex Machina. I reverted both on grounds previously stated. Article now blocked 24 hours (right version) by Iridiscenti and Rockpocket. Please take over for me presumably on the talk page. Many thanks. - Kittybrewster  &#9742;  10:17, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Me warring? "silly fact tags"! - says it all.--Vintagekits 13:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Please would you sort out this article. Kittybrewster  &#9742;  19:31, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Pseudo RfA
You have our trust! Go for it! J- ſtan TalkContribs 04:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

RfA
Although you may be good at what you do. I do find fault at you not standing by your word. "I will not do so without undergoing a further request for adminship". I was brought up to stand by what I say. And believe that others should do the same. Not standing by your word could give the thought of mistrust in your actions. Those are my feelings. --Jeanenawhitney 10:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Just want to add that that's also my view. There's nothing personal; I'm sure you were and could be again a good admin. But I do like to see promises kept. --Malleus Fatuorum 03:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikihelp
Hey, Walton. Could you please confirm it is you on Wikihelp. We have an unofficial policy (as discussed on IRC) that we should about the first 15 users who come along and can be trusted from the English Wikipedia, however the account with the username "Walton One" has never edited, so please could you confirm its you — then I will regrant you sysop status. Regards, -- Qst 11:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections comments
Hello. This is regarding your recent comments on the candidate votes page for Deskana; unfortunately, the comments were too long for the main voting page, and should be placed on the voting talk page. The maximum length of comments on the voting page itself should be two short sentences. This determination was reached on prior consensus on the ArbCom Elections talk page. For your convenience, I have moved them appropriately, and have included a link from the vote page to the comment on the talk page - but feel free to edit my move to your preference. However, extended comments, like the ones you provided, are best placed on the talk page. I apologize for any inconvenience this may cause. Thank you. - ZZ Claims~ Evidence 20:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I ended up moving your comment at Raul654's voting page, as well. Same format as before, and feel free to edit the comment and your vote as you wish. Thanks, ZZ Claims~ Evidence 04:41, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Nom
Jeez. Can I just nom you so we can get those toolz back?! the_undertow talk  01:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry I left right after this. You know I back you up bro! the_undertow talk  20:48, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

RfA
 Keegan would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Keegan to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Requests for adminship/. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so. Keegan talk 01:38, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Arbcom Elections
Hi Walton. I noticed you changed your vote on my arbitration candidacy, citing my "controversial history". I'm just curious about what you're referring to by this. Rebecca (talk) 11:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Great success!
  Click that-a-way to open your card! → → →

AfD
I have only just picked up on an AfD you wound up back in May for the article page Sir William Arbuthnot, 2nd Baronet where there was no concensus at all for deletion, so the article page was left, correctly, in situ. However, almost immediately after that AfD was closed a few of the article's detractors continued their verbal attacks on the Talk Page and one of them, who was particularly opposed to the article, wiped it out. You may wish to review this as a monstrous abuse of process. It is interesting that this same user is now standing for election as an arbitrator on ArbComs. Thanks. David Lauder (talk) 13:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

re: To the opposers in my RfA
Hi, WaltonOne. Re: your comment on my talk page, I have taken another look at your RfA, and reconsidered my !vote. Unfortunately, my opinion has not changed. I'll try to elaborate on the RfA, as a comment under mine. Had you not declared that you would re-stand, I would have had no objections to a crat's re-sysopping you, despite my reservations brought on by Dmcdevit's oppose !vote. --Storkk (talk) 11:50, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Nevertheless, I do wish you good luck on your RfA. :-). --Storkk (talk) 13:06, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

My 2p at your RfA
Hiya walton. Re-reading my comment at your RfA it perhaps could be read wrongly so I'd better clarify. My "personal axe to grind" is reconfirmation RfA's and not you personally. As I'm sure (hope!) you are aware I have long respected you, and would never want any misundestanding between us. Best of luck buddy. Pedro : Chat  14:48, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Looking at Elonka's RfA, You're still nicely high in the discretion range. It would however be pleasing to see some Neutral's switch to support. Clearly if it doesn't pass you will have my undoubted support in the future. Let's cross that bridge if we regrtfully come to it. Hopefully not. Cheers! Pedro : Chat  15:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas
  Blessed editing, and...  Happy Holidays from  Marlith   T / C

Credits: This card was inspired by Macy's123, assistant of V's Shop     Marlith   T / C  04:00, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Adminship
Congratulations, you are now an administrator again! Please ensure that you are familiar with the latest guidance, at the Administrators' how-to guide and Administrators' reading list. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me, or at the Administrators' noticeboard. Warofdreams talk 12:40, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Congrats! Make sure you don't give them up again :)  Red rocket  boy  12:42, 17 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, many congratulations. Your talents are much needed. Regards, David Lauder (talk) 12:43, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * And thanks for proving that not all admins who make themselves eligible for recall necessarily will lose the recall election. John Carter (talk) 14:28, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Congratulations, Walton One, I am glad you are an admin again! :) Acalamari 17:51, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Blah Blah Blah. Good. Pedro : Chat  23:33, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Congrats and all, man. Take a deep breath now... it's over.  Lara  ❤  Love  13:20, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank god you're an admin again - it would NOT be the same without you. Thanks also for the offer - I think I'll be turning it down for now, because 1) I promised Riana that she could nom (heck, she emailed me with a "nooooooooo" subject line pointing to your diff :P) 2) JoshuaZ asked to co-nom, and I've said yes to that, 3) I promised both I'd be running next year. But if you want to throw in another co-nom, I'd be delighted. Although I should probably point out that I'll be voting next Australian election, and (on a two party preferred basis) I'll be voting for Rudd. If you still want to nom, give me a yell :) &mdash; Dihydrogen Monoxide  07:15, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Admin Coaching
Is this possible, I was nominated for Adminship, but declined, saying it was still to early, useing yours as a base you were here a year and failed so... F 9  T  20:39, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Nomination here - Not a convincing reason either F  9  T  20:40, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd like that, thank you vey much! F  9  T  20:48, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations
You proved me wrong once before, I look forward to you doing the same again. Hiding T 15:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Death yell
Hi, could you restore this to my user space? Thanks, Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 04:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

The Wessex Children
Dear Sir, you are cordially invited to join a discussion on this matter at WikiProject British Royalty. Yours in anticipation, DBD 16:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Rfb
Sorry about the typo on Evula's Rfb. !Typo!. Dustihowe Talk  17:25, 21 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Your question on EV's RFB is a bit misleading. Perhaps you just aren't in the know, but Goodshoped has not retired. He only retired the name.  Lara  ❤  Love  17:29, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi Walton! I too, noticed the question on EVula's RfB, and I'm wondering if you were aware of Goodshopped's past? He was not a new editor, he had been editing since July, with a long history of inappropriate incivility, biting newcomers, baiting vandals, and multiple other disruptive issues. Various members of the community had tried time and again to explain policies and guidelines, he had been warned many times by editors, administrators, and even a bureaucrat about his editing. He had attempted two RfAs, and had not taken the constructive advice given during those, nor did he appear to take any advice given to him on his talk page. If you'd like to see my comments that I left at his last RfA, they can be found here.


 * EVula took the initiative of putting it in more firm words a couple weeks later, after Goodshopped had again been baiting the PeeWee vandal repeatedly (at one point, saying: "(hands all users on talk page a semi-automatic rifle) I'm off hunting for him.", to which more than one person explained that was inappropriate, and it was best to not bait vandals, and again directed him to read WP:DENY). EVula posted immediately to ANI to let other admins know about the block, and it was supported 100%. Everyone agreed it was an appropriate response for his uncalled for tagging of User:U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. as a sockpuppet of PeeWee. U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. left Wikipedia shortly after that, which is really unfortunate. Now, please understand that I am not posting all of this to disparage Goodshopped, but merely to explain that this was an ongoing, long term disruptive editor, and please know that I hold you in the highest regard, and I think that the question is valid on the RfB, but I also thought perhaps you'd like to have some background on the situation. Best regards, Ariel  ♥  Gold  18:57, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply, Walton, I know that you support EVula's RfB, and that the question was not one intended badly at all, it is a valid question, especially since many folks may not know the history. I completely agree that community is highly important, and agree that if someone is contributing helpfully, while socializing, that's not a bad thing. I also agree that Goodshopped was harassed by the PeeWee vandal, but it should be noted that Goodshopped specifically "went after" him, making it a goal of sorts, to get him and bait him at every turn, and this is the very reason that we "RBI", WP:DFTT, and have WP:DENY, because nonconstructive editors very rarely react well in those situations. I agree with Isotope's comment on my talk page that Goodshopped likely had good intentions, but for whatever reasons, (your age theory is most likely correct) has not yet fully read and understood the underlying policies, despite many months of people explaining them to him. Thank you for understanding the spirit in which I left this message, as I actually debated for a good hour whether I should or not, but I did think it important to provide a little background on the issue in case you were unaware of the many chances, and warnings he'd had before EVula stepped in. And on a completely different topic, congratulations on your RfA! I'm not sure how I missed that, I'd have certainly commented if I'd seen it, but let me just say that I think the project will benefit from your promotion, well done! Ariel  ♥  Gold  19:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Adopter
Hi Walton One,

I've started to clean up the Adopters' list. You appear to have changed username since you added yourself to the list but not updated your info there. In case you're still interested, can you kindly update your information? Or, if you're not interested any more, would you mind removing yourself? Thank you and happy editing,  Snowolf How can I help? 22:53, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

The Colt (Supernatural) (2nd nomination)
Hi Walton One, just interested to know why you closed Articles for deletion/The Colt (Supernatural) (2nd nomination) as no consensus? For the second AfD in a row (it was relisted by the closing admin last time) it has been judged as such despite the "keepers" being unable to answer the asserted policy and guideline violations. As you didn't comment on the decision, I thought I'd ask here. Cheers,  Mi re ma re  18:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for the explanation. I'm not going to bother with DRV for such a small article - I was sure it was an open and shut case when I first nominated it, but I don't think it's worth devoting more time to. Cheers,  Mi re ma re  18:58, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Pssst...
Did you know your email link at the top is not working? lol. And hey, I wanted to let you know that I really think you're attitude about the project is awesome. I saw the comments you left at the GPMotorsports MfD, and while I commented the pages should be deleted, it was because this was an ongoing, persistent problem with this editor (who is a friend of Goodshopped's, by the way) and he'd been previously warned about the creation of such types of "projects", in fact, the last MfD warned that future creations of pages like that would result in deletion and possibly blocking. However, I completely agree with you that someone who does good work, even if it is a minority of their edits, shouldn't be berated for it. Heck, my talk page comments outnumber my mainspace edits by about 3000, lol. And I have a lot of userspace edits, because I design pages for folks, fix userpages, and do a lot of work in my own userspace. Community is extremely important, and I just wanted to thank you for posting what you did, to remind people who may sometimes forget. I realize everyone has different ideas of what "belongs" and what doesn't, but I think that fun, humor, and laughter is productive, especially in a voluntary setting such as this. So thanks. Seriously. Ariel ♥  Gold  22:06, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

MfD question

 * Walton, I read and very much appreciated your comments on the MfD for my still-in-construction essay. I can accept that perhaps a different title would be good (though WP:AA sounds really good...thinking future). I was wanting to ask for suggestions. What I don't want is something long or complicated, which is why I started up with the AA title: Simple, Direct. Two words would be great, but "Admin" needs to be one as I figure. Maybe three words. I have thought about it a bit and came up with nothing so far. As soon as I can come up with a better/decent title, I'll voluntarily move it and then del|userrequest the AA redirect page to take care of the MfD's main issue, the title. Thanks in advance for any thoughts you can provide and your insight on the page (you can be verbose anytime). VigilancePrime (talk) 02:41, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the support
Thanks for the support on the shop MfD it was quite difficult being one of the only ones consistantly arguing for the support side, Cheers! Sirkad talk 22:43, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

An Administrator is I!
Adventurer! The Council has identified a number of strange occurrences (such as "vandals" and "articles for deletion") in the surrounding wilderness. The Council would check it out, but they have important Councily-type things. But never fear: brave adventurers known as "sysops" roam the lands!

Thank you for your support in my quest to become a sysop. Although I am now wielding the keys to my very own Bitchin' Meatcar, I promise to uphold the laws of the land, martini in hand, in a way that would make Saint Sneaky Pete proud. I will do my best to be a Jack of Several Trades (although I may be a Master of Nuns). I promise to Heart Canadia. And I will make it my goal to Make War, Not ... er, Wait, Never Mind.

I am glad to serve my guild, the League of Wikipedians. If I can be of any assistance, or you have any questions, suggestions, or criticisms in the future, please let me know. And if you are at a loss for what any of the above actually means, see this website.

Thanks again.

An Encyclopedia is We! - Revolving Bugbear  22:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for supporting my candidateship
Hi. I would like to thank you for supporting my Requests for adminship/Magioladitis. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:41, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

RfA thanks
  <div style=" border: inset 2px white; background-color: #f5f5f5; padding: 10px; color: black; ">

Dear, here is a little note to say thank you for your kind support on my request for adminship which succeeded with a final result of (72/19/6).

Now that I am a sysop, do not hesitate to contact me with any queries you have. I would be glad to help you along with the other group of kind and helpful administrators.

Thank you again and I look forward to editing alongside you in the future. &mdash; E  talk 12:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support in my successful RFA. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 07:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your support in my successful RFA. And I do love my Savage 10FP. Sorry your political situation doesn't allow you the privilege of having one yourself. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 07:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

== Happy New Year, Walton One



Seth Finklestein DRV
I think this debate should be left open for a full five days for more comments. I'm less-than convinced there's a consensus to overturn. (Although I admit that my endorse edit-conflicted with you closure). Cool Hand Luke 23:50, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Ron Paul Revolution
I withdrew my nomination. Who edited my comments to remove the withdrawal?--Goon Noot (talk) 01:56, 3 January 2008 (UTC) see?

Meetup
Hi there, I noticed you expressed interest in the Birmingham meetup last October. Just letting you know, another UK meetup is in planning stages, here. We need input on where and when we will meet so comments would be much appreciated. Thanks.  Majorly  (talk) 16:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Example of new users' pleas being ignored
Articles for deletion/Motorola Modding –Pomte 05:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

recall debate in RFA, comment about your comments
Although it is easy to think of it as Corvus cornix being opposed to all RFA candidates who pledge to be listed on the recall category versus those opposed to Corvus cornix' opinion, it not necessarily 2 sides opposing each other.

I presume that Corvus cornix also agrees that administrators should act responsibly. Perhaps that's the common ground or existing consensus that is a start? Archtransit (talk) 16:40, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

RFA thanks card
== Hi Walton One

→User:Monobi/a <span style="font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"> Mønobi 18:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: WP:EM
Walton - what draws contributors here, and what pushes them away? Valuable new editors come because they want to contribute to the goal of Wikipedia by adding content. These are the people we want to retain, and rather than focus on keeping all contributors we should pay attention to keeping the editors who actually support the goals of Wikipedia. So what keeps editors interested in content here? In my mind it is the ability to have an impact on the project and the presence of a like-minded community.

You say that some folks who don't contribute also do no harm, because their social activity does not impede the contributions of other editors. I disagree. We have a choice in how we construct this community - and I submit that the reason we have NOT#MYSPACE and other policies is not because people don't understand that keeping editors is important, but rather because the community does understand that a degree of community engineering is essential to supporting our goal. If we protect the proliferation of non-productive users and the changes to our community that result drive even one productive content writer away, then our community has failed its purpose.

<strong style="color:#fff;background:#000;border:1px solid #ccf">Avruch <strong style="color:#fff;background:#000;border:1px solid #ccf">talk 15:47, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Nathann sc
I noticed that you made a comment at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Nathann sc a few days ago protesting the deletion of that user's userpage. Since then, the user has made a number of confusing edits, primarily consisting of replacing words with thesaurus-esque synonyms that are inappropriate to the context of specific articles as well as sprinkling articles with commas incorrectly. The exemplar you provided as evidence that the user was attempting to become a good Wikipedian actually smacks of patent nonsense, and I've db-tagged it as such. What's more, another account has since started editing a very similar list of articles, making similar (or sometimes reinstating the same) changes but being more combative with attempts to revert the edits. Since you were the only person to speak in favor of keeping that userpage, I thought you should be kept informed of the user's progress (or lack thereof) in improving Wikipedia as opposed to using it as an alternative to MySpace. -- Dachannien TalkContrib 10:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Bluemarine's arbcom
Hi, you may want to check out Matt's RfC. I think someone best summed it up that too little was done (wikipedia guidelines on behavior/blocks) at first then too much happened all at once. There was some folks LGBT and others trying to add BLP-problematic items into his bio but others like myself trying to keep anything out that didn't belong there. At this writing there is still a whole blog-supported section which I feel should be removed until it is better referenced. You can also read through the 11 talk archive pages of that article and the talk pages of Scott Thomas Beauchamp controversy to get a sense of what has transpired. Benjiboi 12:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, you offered to help at User talk:Bluemarine - if you are sure that you are uninvolved, I dont see a problem with that. Bluemarine has posted a lot of what I consider to be evidence onto Talk:Matt Sanchez; here is the changes. In order to try and keep the block parameters enforced, I have rolled this material back. Perhaps you would like to review and advise Matt, or take it to the Evidence page yourself? John Vandenberg (talk) 11:20, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Just a note—he copied some of the evidence I had provided in my evidence portion of the case, with editorialization about Benjiboi (who is not listed as an SPA; he doesn't qualify as one by any stretch of the imagination). There is no new data there.  Horologium  (talk) 15:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Erased comments
Not sure what happened here. Lawrence Cohen
 * No worries, I figured it was something silly like that. :) Lawrence Cohen  20:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Your edit
It would be very good of you to restore my comment, which you erased here. Thanks and best, Badagnani (talk) 20:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration
Please see the above link as I have requested arbitration for a dispute that you are involved in. Feel free to contribute there. Regards, henrik  • talk  11:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Can you reverse this CFD of yours?
Greetings; could you by any chance restore for historical reasons Talk:Space_Hijackers. You deleted it speedily after its corresponding article was deleted. I have recreateed the article with more than enough reliable sources to survive any number of future Afd's, and it would be useful to see what comments editors had on the previous article. Regards, Skomorokh  incite 21:29, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you, very much appreciated. Skomorokh  incite 22:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

IRC
If you're still interested, please send me an email saying what browser you use. Thanks,  Majorly  (talk) 22:16, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Replied btw. Update me :)  Majorly  (talk) 13:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * You're welcome: you deserved it. :) Acalamari 17:35, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Question
It's been answered. John Carter (talk) 17:00, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Anthøny  16:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Slighly altered the format, please check if you agree. Nomen Nescio <i style="color:blue; font-size:smaller;">Gnothi seauton</i> 18:06, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

your lesson to others
I've seen your name in print. The idea of what you said before (something about good editors leaving WP is bad for WP) is bolded here. I am not asking you to comment. Just a reminder that others remember what you have said before. Archtransit (talk) 15:55, 15 January 2008 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Keilana#chain_of_events

Rudget!
<div style="background-color: white; border: #5B92E5 solid 2px; margin-bottom:.5em; padding: 5px; font-family: trebuchet ms, sans-serif;"> Dear Walton One, my sincere thanks for your participation in my second request for adminship, which ended with 113 supports, 11 opposes, and 4 neutral. I would especially like to thank my admin coach and nominator, Rlevse and Ryan Postlethwaite who in addition to Ioeth all inspired me to run for a second candidacy. I would also like to make a special mention to Phoenix-wiki, Dihyrdogen Monoxide and OhanaUnited who all offered to do co-nominations, but I unfortunately had to decline. I had all these funny ideas that it would fail again, and I was prepared for the worst, but at least it showed that the community really does have something other places don't. Who would have though Gmail would have been so effective? 32 emails in one week! (Even if it does classify some as junk :P) I'm glad that I've been appointed after a nail biting and some might call, decision changing RFA, but if you ever need anything, just get in touch. The very best of luck for 2008 and beyond, Rudget . 16:11, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Rejoice!
<div style="float:center; border-style:solid; border-color:green; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px; vertical-align: middle;" class="plainlinks">

has given you a kitten! Kittens promote Wikilove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Share the WikiLove and civility with everyone and keep up the excellent editing! Send kittens to others by adding {{subst:Joy message}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

And also...

<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Response
You're welcome--Angel David (talk) 22:45, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

This may have been a mistake
It may have been a mistake bringing up Conservapedia at all, or letting it be known that you edit there. For what it's worth, your version of the article looks much better to me than most of the articles there. I wouldn't be surprised that some folks will be automatically against anything you do, knowing that you've set foot on that site. Friday (talk) 22:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The fear, justified or not, is that a Conservapedian will bring Conservapedia's biases into their editing here; that nobody who could abide the ideological shackles on that side could be an honest editor and maintain a genuine NPOV here on neutral ground. -- Orange Mike  |  Talk  22:41, 17 January 2008 (UTC) puzzled by how somebody can admire Eisenhower and ReaganThatcher
 * FWIW, I was not only one of the first 100 editors on Conservapedia, but along with numerous other "Wikipedia infiltrators" (Tmtoulouse, Hojimachong et al) was personally indefblocked by Andy Schlafly as a "spy" when he found out, while I've never had any negative comments from anyone on Wikipedia about it. If anything, coming out as being active on both is far more likely to get you in trouble on Conservapedia, which - while nowhere near as bad as it was - still has a fair higher POV-pushing fruit-loop/useful editor ratio than even Wikipedia Review, let alone Wikipedia itself. —  iride  scent  02:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I just noticed that one of the sentences Filll was bending over backwards to object to, on Conservapedia's Expelled article, is also in our article here, apparently without objection. So, this confirms my suspicions that he was having a knee-jerk reaction to the word "Conservapedia" rather than engaging in rational discussion. We sure could use more people who are willing to actually discuss things like rational adults. You'd previously said you were giving up editing articles on that topic I think.. but I hope you would reconsider that. Friday (talk) 14:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Expelled Conservapedia
Not clogging up our article's talk page, and not opening a Conservapedia account (just yet).

"Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is a documentary by Ben Stein"
 * innacurate; if a documentary was "by" someone I'd suggest the writer or producer, Walt Ruloff would seem appropriate here. Ben Stein either stars in the documentary, or presents it.
 * similarly "according to Stein" should probably be changed to "according to Expelled". There is no evidence Stein is the sole motivating force behind these opinions. In fact he has suggested his opinions are stronger than those presented in the film.

"Some of the scientists interviewed in the film, notably Richard Dawkins, claim that they were deceived as to the film's purpose and title, and would not have agreed to participate in it had they known of its pro-intelligent design message.[3]"
 * Not quite accurate. Dawkins is the only one who has said he would not have appeared in the film. Myers has explicitly stated he would have, and would have been more scathing of the film's premise. Eugenie Scott merely expressed disappointment in the film's production team's tactics.

While the article does present a rather NPOV article, particularly compared to other examples of conservapedia's work, I don't feel its really comparable to our article. The Wikipedia article is double or treble the size and has far more information detailing the relevant controversies. The Wikipedia article is more comprehensive, and as far as I am concerned, lacking comprehensive detail is a factor of POV, in words lies-by-omission. I am not saying that the Conservapedia article is dishonest or misleading, but it does appear devoid of a lot of relevant information (while similarly the Wikipedia article has quantity of irrelevant, or over-relevant information).

I agree with your assertion the article requires cleaning up. However this is not the same as significant NPOV problems.

I think approaching the wikipedia article with a little less hyperbole ("Still horrifically biased") may make editors more amenable to any suggestions you have.--ZayZayEM (talk) 00:56, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: MONGO's RfA
I've been thinking about presenting a rationale, but I might as well explain it here first to gather my thoughts.

First off, I'm afraid his RfA won't have much chance of succeeding anyway, which is sort of the first reason for me not to pile-on oppose, esp. since most of the opposers don't even bother to underscore their concerns with diffs or any specific explanations. Just took another look, and imo some of the opposes added in the meantime are self-righteous, summary character judgments rather than taking into consideration his enormous contrib history. MONGO's arguable past mistakes should be contrasted with a common-sense estimate of how probable it is that he will repeat them.

I remember MONGO has had plenty of run-ins with different people, and he may be a bit short-tempered at times. OTOH, his engagement in keeping conspiracy theorists at bay on 9/11 related articles is what gained him most of his enemies, and he's had loads of horseshit thrown his way for no good reason. That's why I'm willing to overlook his frequent presence at RfC/RfAr: Too many people have a tendency to automatically assume bad faith with him, especially ever since he became the target in several offsite locations (the usual suspects). Also, imo civility is far overrated on Wikipedia, compared to other things like e.g. an uncompromising willingness to vouch for encyclopedic standards.

The reason I finally decided to support is his often-demonstrated ability to quickly and reliably discern edits of encyclopedic merit. I'm fairly sure people will be watching him closely, and he won't have much opportunity to misuse the tools in any way the opposers seem to fear.

As to argument against drama: I'm not sure I understand how him having the tools would affect any of that. Actually, it reminded me a bit of some of the opposition you received in your second RfA.

Another thing that makes me assume twice as good faith with him as with the usual gladhanding RfA suspects is that he does have an attitude. Unfortunately, combined with his efforts to keep POV/OR away, this makes him just the perfect projection screen for conspiracy theories. The tendency (in general) is that people accept such as explanations for just about everything, simply because looking twice is half the fun. Guess that makes me an elitist of sorts, but we desperately need people with an attitude and the willingness and capability to stand by it.

Those without an attitude are the ones who worry me and that's why imo people like MONGO, in spite of the fact that I don't agree with him very often and that I would not consider him a "wikifriend", need encouragement and a vote of trust. User:Dorftrottel 19:39, January 19, 2008

MfD Again (You voted before)

 * The article formerly known as VP:Admin Abuse is back up for a MfD, in spite of its new title and greatly expanded sections highlighting great admins. (The MfD is believed to be a veiled personal attack.) The new page is WP:What Were They Thinking? (or simply WP:WWTT). The deletion question is here. Please visit and voice your support or, if your opinion has changed, opposition to this article. As you'll recall, it was a UNANIMOUS KEEP the first time around. Thank you for your time. VigilancePrime (talk) 01:07, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

My RfA
Hey there, I'm writing to inform you that I have withdrawn my request for adminship, which was currently standing at 11 supports, 22 opposes and 6 neutrals. This count could have been so much better if I had understood policy, although I believe that 17 questions is a lot to ask of a user's first RfA. I will take on all comments given at the RfA and will endeavour to meet the high expectations of the RfA voters. WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN play it cool.  21:16, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

MfD
Hello, Walton! I thought about this for a bit and decided to say something. I have come to know you as the editor who made me aware of the impact of discussing someone's userpages for deletion, and since then I have come to view these nominations from the POV of the user being discussed, ala WP:EM. However, what about from the POV of the nominator? It is possible, too, that the nominator is misguided, but he, too, deserves the benefit of the doubt and should be given occasional nudges to do the right thing, too, no? Look at User:Master_of_Puppets. He messed up a few times when he first started nominating. Should not all editors, even nominators, matter? Just something to chew on, hopefully to raise the bar some, not to criticize. Regards. -- 12 N oo n 2¢ 15:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

My RFA
I do pledge to add my name to the category, I believe that all administrators should be reassessed as some point. STORMTRACKER  94  20:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

New Semester, New Appeal
This semester I am teaching academic writing to a group of teachers at my school. This course starts on Monday Jan 28. I would like to know if you are still interesting in "mentoring". You can see the syllabus at School_and_university_projects/ITESM_Campus_Toluca/SyllabusIf so, please leave a message on my talk page and update the mentor's page School_and_university_projects/ITESM_Campus_Toluca/Mentors, if. If not, please remove your name and information from that page. Thanks! Thelmadatter (talk) 21:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I am if he's not. -- Gp 75 motorsports  <sup style="color:#800000;">REV LIMITER  11:32, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

My Rfa
I wish to thank you for being supportive of my effort to regain my adminship. Though it was not successful, your support was still very much appreciated. Let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Thank you!--MONGO 06:25, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks
Thanks for your support. I look forward to working with you and I hope your intuition will move you to support me once again when the time comes in a couple months!  - Jameson L. Tai  talk ♦ contribs  04:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

My monobook page
I want to import a script, but it's protected. Can you unprotect it real quick? Thanks. -- Gp 75 motorsports  <sup style="color:#800000;">REV LIMITER  01:36, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Mediation
Please would you mediate in Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents CarbonLifeForm (talk) 10:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Continued at User:XLinkBot/Blacklist_requests. hu12 seems set upon an rfc. CarbonLifeForm (talk) 15:36, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

BQZip RFA comments
I replied to you there in regards to Bearian's comments. just wanted to give you a heads up in case you didn't have it watchlisted. I think you were way, way off target there. I'm happy to discuss that, but I'd prefer to do it on the RFA. Lawrence §  t / e  17:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Please give your thoughts on this AfD
Hello, We are having a 2 person AfD debate over Vor of Barrayar. I am strongly Keep, Doctor Fluffy is strongly delete, and I just think we need a few more faces in the discussion adding productive thoughts. (The debtate has been exceptionally well mannered and well conducted but I think we are stalemating) I just want to get some more input.

Please investigate at your earliest convenience.

Articles_for_deletion/Vor_of_Barrayar

-My word as Dachande (talk) 12:24, 8 February 2008 (UTC).

Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding
This Arbitration case has closed, and the final decision may be reviewed through the above link. Further to the relevant findings of fact, Waterboarding and all closely-related pages are subject to article probation (full remedy); editors working on Waterboarding, or closely related pages, may be subject to an editing restriction at the discretion of any uninvolved administrator, whereby any edits by that editor which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, may result in a block. (full remedy).

Should any user subject to an editing restriction in this case violate that restriction, that user may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeated violations. After 5 blocks, the maximum block length shall increase to one year (full enforcement). Before such restrictions are enacted on an editor, he or she must be issued with a warning containing a link to the decision.

For the Arbitration Committee, AGK (talk) 14:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

^demon's RfA
Got the diffs! Phew, that was a lot of work.  нмŵוτн τ  21:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:User David Cameron
A tag has been placed on Template:User David Cameron requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<span style="font-family: monospace, monospace;"> &lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude> ).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Waterboarding RfM
A Request for Mediation has been filed on the Waterboarding article concerning the content dispute in the first six words of the article. You have been named as a party and your participation would be appreciated. I believe this is the best approach to an amicable resolution of the dispute. Please indicate your agreement here. Thank you. Neutral Good (talk) 20:28, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Admin Coaching Re-confirmation
Hello, previously you expressed interest in participating in the Admin coaching project. We are currently conducting a reconfirmation drive to give coaches the opportunity to update their information and capacity to participate in the project. Please visit Admin coaching/Status to update your status. Also, please remember to update your capacity (5th table variable) in the form of a fraction (eg. 2/3 means you are currently coaching 2 students, and could accept 1 more student). Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 09:14, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Trying this again
A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Requests for mediation/Waterboarding 2, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, Neutral Good (talk) 02:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

My RfB
Hello Walton One, and thanks for your comment at my RfB. While I'm not here to ask you to reconsider, I just wanted to really understand where my answers had gone wrong for you? I had clarified my position (given further consideration) on Saturday evening, I said ''"The recent arbcom ruling and ^demon's re-sysoping have left, I think, a small hole in the decision making process which is exemplified by the original question. I'm now pretty much resolved to the fact that if an admin de-sysops voluntarily and wants to re-sysop, they request it and it's granted. If they decide to RfA then their path back to automatically being re-sysopped on request should be closed and they should follow the RfA process. It seems a little self-indulgent for a former admin to go back to the community for RfA, withdraw (no matter what the outcome) and still expect to be re-sysopped." '' And in the first instance I said as a minimum the community consensus should be achieved before re-sysop. It's entirely up to you, but I'd be really grateful if you could let me know what I'd said that you so objected to. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Adminship
To my mind, the ability to climb down and change one's mind (when persuaded by arguments) is the sign of a great admin. Kudos to you. --Dweller (talk) 11:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

A new Oxbridge user box
Walton One...I am currently in the process of writing a user box for all of the colleges that are part of Oxbridge. This template is meant to replace your current college template. Please take a look at the work in progress and comment on it. My main concerns are college abbreviations and color choice. I am using scarf colors for the colleges. Thank you. - LA @ 17:51, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Hola
Hey Walton, long time no talk. You're not giving up and leaving, are you? I'm sorry stuff's gotten so frustrating. I think your voice is really important in discussions, so few people are willing to speak up about how the project should be more democratic (I tend to agree with you, but I usually stay out of discussions because I kind of hate them. I should force myself to participate more). I think even one person opening their mouth about it can make a big difference, you know? Like those conformity experiments they did where if even one person voiced dissent, a bunch of other people were willing to do the same. And you're respected within the community, so I'm sure you're making a difference. But if it's too frustrating, you could also come back and work on other stuff, no reason you have to participate in just the areas that are causing the frustration. I may not be making the most possible sense here, but what I'm trying to say is I would be really sad if you were to leave. Peace, delldot   talk  05:32, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Phew! So glad to hear it.  That edit summary from when you put the break message on your userpage had me worried.  See you soon I hope.  Peace,  delldot on a public computer   talk  05:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

The "Prince/ss X of Wales" Issue
Just thought I'd let you know that there's a discussion about the above at the WikiProject, and I'm inviting all of the members to join in DBD 13:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

New signature
Hi Walton One, what do you think of my new signature? Acalamari : Chat  15:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Never mind: I did this as a joke for April Fools' Day. Sorry about it. Acalamari 16:35, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * That's fine: while I understand why you haven't been active much recently, it's nice when you do come back online. :) Acalamari 16:40, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Busy next Sunday?
Meetup? Hope it's not too short notice.  Majorly  (talk) 14:45, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

please look at this
You are rumoured to be a fair person who is not part of a cabal. So please look at this. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard&diff=203695745&oldid=203694086 165.21.155.110 (talk) 06:50, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Can you help?

RFA thanks
Thanks for your support in my RFA, that didn't quite make it and ended at 120/47/13. There was a ton of great advice there, that I'm going to go on. Maybe someday. If not, there are articles to write! Thanks for your support. Lawrence §  t / e  17:39, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Van Gogh (Ras Kass album) AfD
Hi Walton, I noticed you closed this AfD as delete a couple of days ago but did not actually delete the article. I'm a Ras Kass fan and am sorry to see articles on his albums get deleted, but obviously that was the consensus and the appropriate decision per policy. Anyhow, just letting you know that you might want to do a little cleanup.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 07:14, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

RFA Thanks
Thank you for your comments on my RFA. Even though it failed with 28 supports, 42 opposes, and 15 neutrals, I am grateful for the suggestions and advice I have received and I do hope to improve as a Wikipedian. If you ever need my help in any endeavor, feel free to drop me a line. -- Shark face  217  19:37, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your decency. Imagine you had family in the World Trade Center, as I have. Durova Charge! 17:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree, what an excellent statement. I thought that the request was a bad joke at first. I don't know why Bishonen was granted admin rights on the joke account, but it's totally not acceptable to be doing that.  Majorly  (talk) 17:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

About the page What The Wikipedian saw
Sorry about the trouble. The page was actually meant to be on the department of fun group but I didn't have time to add it's link. It was not meant to offend anyone. I apologise for this taking your time. Please send me a message on your view via my talk page. This same message will be sent to the other nominators. Anyway thanks for protecting my views. If you could, could add it to the dept of fun. If you cannot be part of this thats ok. Sorry.--Darkside2000 (talk) 17:34, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Addition on What the wikipedian saw.
The story was actually meant to added to and edited by other wiki users. Like Wikipedia the movie for example. Anyway thanks for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkside2000 (talk • contribs) 17:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

one man battle comment
It's not a one man battle. In fact, having you (an administrator) on our side would help us immensely. I've been looking for a gutsy admin for a while, and it looks like I might have just found one. Please respond on my talk page or email me. Saksjn (talk) 19:06, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

The admin rules didn't keep Raul from abusing them. I respect admins that follow the rules. Saksjn (talk) 15:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Please consider taking the AGF Challenge
I would like to invite you to consider taking part in the AGF Challenge which has been proposed for use in the RfA process by User: Kim Bruning. You can answer in multiple choice format, or using essay answers, or anonymously. You can of course skip any parts of the Challenge you find objectionable or inadvisable.--Filll (talk) 21:53, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thank you for adding what the wikipedian saw to my user space. Thanks!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkside2000 (talk • contribs) 10:02, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

MONGO, Tango, RfAr-o
Just FYI; Requests_for_arbitration. Happy to discuss...probably better on your talk or mine...if you're interested. Cheers mate, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:42, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

RfA
Just like to say thanks for your moral supporting of my RfA application yesterday. I withdrew my application in order to gain more experience, and I intend to reapply in a few months after admin coaching and generally more experience here on Wikipedia. Best of luck, I hope to hear from you again in the future. Kind regards, CycloneNimrodtalk? 14:37, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Why?
Hey Walton, why did you change your vote on the ScottAHudson debate? Please do not say it was because of my comments. You should know that of everyone on Wikipedia, I respect you the most, just for the fact of you standing by your word. Don't leave a reply on my talk page because I will never see them (they archived after one hour after being posted). -- pete 23:52, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Smile!
<div style="float:center;border-style:solid;border-color:blue;background-color:AliceBlue;border-width:1px;text-align:left;padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

Here's some Beech tree leaves for you! Beech tree leaves somehow promote WikiLove and hopefully these have made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing! Acalamari 19:54, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! Always happy to spread good cheer and let editors know they're appreciated! Acalamari 19:57, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars
Your block on my IP Address is illegal and unfair, and I will be reporting it to higher authorities if it is not removed immediately. You have no right to block anyone that is trying to correct the order of the Star Wars films, and you have only undermined your credibility as an administrator and the credibility of wikipedia. SithLord990205 (talk) 16:00, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Adminship Anniversary
-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 22:07, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks so much for, at the very least, trying to keep the 2019 user subpage from being deleted. Your help was very much needed, even though the result of the arguement was the deletion of the subpage. Many others contributed to the discussion in support of the page, but your comments were the most extensive; you brought to light many very good points and might have been the reason that those others were for keeping the page.

Thanks again, — TimAlderson | (loque)


 * I posted the above message once, only to find that I wasn't logged in; I just didn't want this post to be associated with an IP address instead of an actual Wikipedia user. So I logged in, posted again and deleted the post from my IP address.


 * This is one of those areas of Wikipedia I'm not so proficient in—reverting talk page posts from being not logged in. My bad.


 * — TimAlderson | (loque) —Preceding comment was added at 13:04, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Hogenakkal falls
Hi Walton! I am writing to you in request for your assistance to resolve a dispute. This is about an article Hogenakkal Falls. This as the name may suggest, is about a water falls in India. This falls is the site of a proposed drinking water project, which as per reliable sources agreed by the parties involved in 1998, but was delayed because lack of funds and now that a Japanese bank is ready to fund the foundation stone was placed. I am leaving you some links here for reference    

Now that it has been 10 years as usual some political parties have started causing havoc and the project has been put to hold (but not shelved).   As you can guess the project and the issue by itself had been made into two separate articles, namely:
 * Hogenakkal Water Dispute and
 * Hogenakkal Integrated Drinking Water Project

Now, having read this, do you think the article on Hogenakkal water falls should not mention about the proposed project at all? At least that is what one user tells us. He first called this project invalid and not endorsed by the central govt of India, to which I proved him wrong. Then he went to say that the entry is only about the falls and should be only about the beauty of the falls. My stance is based on the articles on Niagara Falls both on Wikipedia and on Columbia encyclopedia, where the article on the waterfalls (not the cities) mentions about the hydroelectric project that is carried out there. So why not a proposed project be mentioned (not elaborated) in the waterfalls entry and directed to the relevant article? There is also another issue raised by the user that a water project is different to an hydroelectric project and the former is of no relevance. Is that so?

Please let us know if am wrong. Cheers<b style="color:orange;">Wiki San Roze</b><i style="color:green;">†αLҝ</i> 07:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Just realised that I didn't leave the sections of the talk page which you may want to read. Sorry about that. :D Here we go: 1, 2 and 3. Cheers. <b style="color:orange;">Wiki San Roze</b><i style="color:green;">†αLҝ</i> 07:03, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, sorry that we have now moved on from third opinion to RfC. See if you can go through them and give your comments here. Thanks <b style="color:orange;">Wiki San Roze</b><i style="color:green;">†αLҝ</i> 08:19, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

E-mail
I have sent one. :) Acalamari 21:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Responded. Thanks Walton! Acalamari 22:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for voting Keep in my MfD poll. With your help, the debate ended with "no consensus" (although a large majority voted to "keep"). --GHcool (talk) 20:59, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, as it's you .... :)
Pedro : Chat  13:58, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Email
Sent you one. Monobi (talk) 20:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Requests for checkusership
I saw your message at User talk:WJBscribe. Some of the regulars at WP:SSP, besides me, include: You can look at Suspected sock puppets/Archive/March 2008 and Suspected sock puppets/Archive/April 2008 to see who is closing cases. You might also ask the prospects about their technical knowledge and check their logs to see if their blocks have withstood scrutiny. Jehochman Talk 13:56, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * User:Gb -- very active
 * User:Rlevse
 * User:AGK

re:Conservapedia
I didn't think the dictionary definition of homosexuality was "an immoral sexual lifestyle". Van Tucky 22:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Rfa thanks
Thanks for supporting my recent request for adminship which was successful with 89 supports, 0 opposes, and 2 neutrals. Unfortunately all I can offer is this lame text thanks rather than some fancy-smancy thank-you spam template thingy. I was very pleased to receive such strong support and to hear so many nice comments from editors whom I respect. I’ll do my best with the tools, and if you ever see me going astray don’t hesitate to drop a note on my talk page. Thanks again for your support!--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 03:44, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

rule of consensus.
I suppose in a way you could say that Wikipedia currently has a "rule of consensus", rather than a rule of law. This is a relatively new system, that has slowly been gaining prominence over time as people have been working on internet governance. I'm not sure I want to discontinue using that system simply because it's new though. it seems to work fairly well for all kinds of things.

It does require a bit more education and background than other methods, and sometimes that has been slightly lacking on wikipedia, but that's something we can fairly easily work on rectifying.

--Kim Bruning (talk) 17:03, 26 April 2008 (UTC) (A number of people have kept talking about Acculturation problems on Wikipedia, and people haven't been paying attention. I think this Governance proposal is a huge wakeup call to those people who haven't been listening. I just hope they wake up on time.)

User Page Comment
Best wishes for a speedy recovery and for resolution of your personal issues my friend Pedro : Chat  11:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Your complaint at User talk:Ma'am
Hey Walton, I noticed your complaint at User talk:Ma'am. I also complained about some of the contents of the userpage...do you think anyone will ever do anything about either of our complaints? I noticed yours was from Jan 07! --Cameron (t|p|c) 19:25, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:Hogenakkal falls
Thanks for your reply and effort you have taken to read through the talk page, which I do accept has taken too many turns and hard for me to decipher even though I been part of it :D. Anyways, yes the earlier issue was about including a section about a project (an issue we have left in the backburner for now). Right now the issue is about the jurisdiction of the waterfalls. There are two parties involved, where one states that the waterfalls lie in the border and it is a shared jurisdiction (of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka) and the other party (including me) say that the waterfalls is under Tamil Nadu's and pretty close to the borders (the phrase we like to use is along the borders). John Carter has been helping us in a great deal with the dispute resolution. May be it will be a good idea for you to contact John Carter or ShefieldSteel on this matter, as they are third parties and would not be biased. It would be nice if you can look into the sources that both parties can provide, check if they are what they claim to be saying and decide on the dispute. I guess for the good of the article and fairness of your opinion, I should not start defending my stance here. Nevertheless, please feel free to ask (or even demand) citaions from me or any clarification needed. I shall be more than happy to provide you with them since I would like to see the back of this issue asap. Once again, thank a lot for coming forward to help us. I really do appreciate this. Cheers <b style="color:orange;">Wiki San Roze</b><i style="color:green;">†αLҝ</i> 07:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Restoration for userpage
Hi, it seems that User:JzG refused to answer either of our questions at his userpage about why he deleted an article on my own userpage (User:Slarre/Leftist-Islamist Alliance). He has now archived the discussion here. Do you think that you could restore the page now, or know otherwise how I should get it back? Thanks. /Slarre (talk) 12:42, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Peter Symonds College
Haha, yeah, Pedro went there and he asked me the same question when he granted me rollback. It's pure coincidence, it just happens to be my name, but I can pretend it's named after me or something. :) Thanks, PeterSymonds | talk  08:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Ironically, I'm an Old Symondian! Pedro :  Chat  08:56, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Avraham RfB comments.
Thank you, Walton. I appreciate your intellectual honesty and your commitment to the betterment of the project. Regardless of the outcome, I look forward to crossing paths with you more often in the future. -- Avi (talk) 17:47, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Query re. ID comment
All following comments are in the spirit of constructive debate.

Regarding your post on FCYTravis page, I bought my query over here, because as you quite rightly said, the debate was going off at something of a tangent. I wanted to ask you a question;

You said,

...The other problem is that pro-intelligent design editors (of which I am not one, personally) tend to get driven away from Wikipedia and accused of being "anti-science", with the result that our articles on the evolution-ID controversy are one step away from saying "evolution is the only valid viewpoint, ID is religious insanity", which doesn't seem to me to be NPOV.

My questions is, if WP said "The vast majority of people believe that evolution is the only valid viewpoint, ID is religious insanity" - and we backed it up with a concrete citation (say, an opinion poll from a reputable source) - surely that would qualify as NPOV?

--  Chzz  ►  23:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Anti-science POV
The reason I think the anti-science POV is not compatible with an administrator is that it is in direct opposition of NPOV. Orange Marlin Talk• Contributions 02:55, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Rfb participation thanks
Hello, Walton.

I wanted to personally thank you for taking part in the project-wide discussions regarding my candidacy for bureaucratship. After bureaucratic discussion, the bureaucrats decided that there was sufficient significant and varied opposition to my candidacy, and thus no consensus to promote. Although personally disappointed, I both understand and respect their decision, especially in light of historical conservatism the project has had when selecting its bureaucrats. I both understand and respect the rationale behind your opinion, and I hope our paths cross more in teh future. If you have any further suggestions or comments as to how you think I could help the project, please let me know. Once again, thank you for your participation. -- Avi (talk) 19:34, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Email
Sent you one. Monobi (talk) 03:18, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

My RfA
Hi Walton; I wanted to say thank you for supporting my request for adminship, which passed with 100 supports, 0 opposes and 1 neutral. I wanted to get round everybody individually, even though it's considered by some to be spam (which... I suppose it is! but anyway. :)). It means a lot to me that the community has placed its trust in my ability to use the extra buttons, and I only hope I can live up to its expectations. If you need anything, or notice something that bothers you, don't hesitate to let me know. Thanks again, PeterSymonds | talk  22:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Happy Birthday
Idontknow 610 TM 19:01, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Sean Hannity
I don't mind that bit going away; I just put it there to demonstrate how the fact could be inserted in a non-POV manner and possibly head off the ensuing edit war. But, of course, once you take the POV away, there's not much point to that fact, is there? :-) Jclemens (talk) 16:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Happy Independence Day!
As you are a nice Wikipedian, I just wanted to wish you a happy Independence Day! And if you are not an American, then have a happy day and a wonderful weekend anyway! :) Your friend and colleague, -- Happy Independence Day!   Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 03:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Indiana Gregg and Pirate Bay
I have been following a dispute that has been taking place between Indiana Gregg and the Pirate Bay about P2P filesharing issues. I have added references to various pages and have been objective in my commentary; however, another user keeps reverting the content I have submitted and is, I believe, in violation of Wiki policy. In the discussion on the page, I have presented factual information and the page is constantly being edited. It is my understanding that information made to wikipedia should be factual and impartial. However, I believe it to be evident that members of The Pirate Bay themselves are editing Indiana Gregg's wiki page. If you would be willing to help resolve the dispute, I would be grateful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carribeanqueen (talk • contribs) 19:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

article Tucker Max and User:McJeff
Hello, I was wondering if you could comment on this situation. Editor User:McJeff and I were in a dispute about content in a criticism section for the article. That is not what this message is about. The problem is, McJeff has stated that he will revert all my changes, even if it isn't in the criticism section, because I'm the one doing the editing. I don't think this is appropriate. Could you please see the "1 million unique visitors" section of the discussion page of Tucker Max? Please let me know if you think the evidence supports my edit, and if you think it's acceptable for mcjeff to auto revert all my edits, just because I'm the one doing it. thanks. Theserialcomma (talk) 18:30, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Invitation
{| class="plainlinks"
 * colspan="3" valign="left" style="width: 100%; background:Navy; padding: 10px;" |

Introducing WikiProject United States Government...

 * valign="top" style="border: 2px Red solid; background: white; padding: 1em; width: 20%; " |[[Image:US-GreatSeal-Obverse.svg|200px]]
 * valign="top" style="border: 2px Red solid; background: white; padding: 1em; width: 20%; " |[[Image:US-GreatSeal-Obverse.svg|200px]]


 * valign="top" style="border: 2px Red solid; background: white; padding: 1em; width: 60%; " | Hello Walton One,

Are you interested in Politics, Law or the United States? Do you enjoy expanding, creating or maintaining articles relating to those subjects? Or do you enjoy the small stuff? Or maybe you like learning about the United States Congress or the Commander in Chief.

Well, wait no longer, because we have a project for you! WikiProject United States Government is where all the cool Wikipedians who watch C-SPAN hang out! Join the project today and help us get it off the ground and flying.

Thanks in advance, « Diligent Terrier   Bot    (talk)   22:11, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

This message has been delivered by Diligent Terrier Bot on behalf of WikiProject United States Government.

You have received it because you are a member of a related WikiProject or you have said you are interested in your userspace.

Message written by Leonard^Bloom and Diligent Terrier. Help us get the project off the ground and flying.
 * valign="top" style="border: 2px Red solid; background: white; padding: 1em; width: 60%; " |[[Image:Air Force One over Mt. Rushmore.jpg|200px]]


 * }
 * }
 * }
 * }

Can you consult
I have been looking for a consultant to help us (http://www.larsonobrien.com) develop a listing for our company and some of our clients.

We have tried to be listed unsuccessfully, though we have a very good reason - imho - to deserve consideration. I ran into a couple egoistic online wiki administrators who were quite taken with their own power and anonymity. They delighted in insulting me for wanting to be listed, the city where I live, the business I'm in, etc., and wouldn't accept any of the changes we made to meet their ever-changing standards.

I reviewed your listing and was pleased that we have kindred political views. I'd prefer doing business with someone I can communicate with.

If you would consider helping, I can provide a lot more detail via email, Skype, doc file...as you prefer.

Best regards, Jack O'Brien jack@larsonobrien.com

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice
Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 22:21, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

AAU reminder notice

 * Notice delivery by xenobot  14:39, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Time for resolution
Hiya. For several months now, the article naming for 18th Century British royals has been ever-which-where — all over the shop. In an attempt to solve this, I have prepared a page for discussion: here. Please, please, please come and discuss, even contribute to the Poll. Cheers! DBD 15:36, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Editors matter...
...is an excellent essay - thank you. It's very reassuring to know that other editors understand that contributors matter - to the point of writing a gentle article explaining so. Cheers, Paxse (talk) 15:37, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Your listing on Adopt-a-User/Adoptee's_Area/Adopters
Hello, since you've been renamed from Walton monarchist89 to your current name, do you mind if I fix your signature in the S-Z part of the list? Thanks, SchfiftyThree  (talk!) 17:33, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy New Year!
Dear Walton One,

Wishing you a happy a new year, and very best wishes for 2009. Whether we were friends or not in the past year, I hope 2009 will be better for us both.

Kind regards,

 Majorly  talk  20:51, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikimania Oxford bid
Some time ago you indicated your support of the Oxford 2010 Wikimania Bid, and it was recieved with much gratitude. I now ask if you could could help support our bid by contributing to the bid page that is located at: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2010/Bids/Oxford. Now is the critical period for work to continue on the bid as the official bidding period has now started and the jury has been formed.

I do not ask for huge swathes of time, just enough that with eveyrone working on this, it can be completed in time to the high standard required in a bid. For the bid page, an excellent source of information is the travel wiki article on the City of Oxford which is found at: http://wikitravel.org/en/Oxford. The chance of bringing Wikimania to the UK is the best so far and i expect the best chance for many years. With a fresh and stong UK chapter we have an amazing opportunity to put ourselves on the map. If you have any questions, please mail them to the Wikimedia UK mailing list, email me or post a message on my talk page and i will answer as quickly as possible.

I look forward to working with you on the bid page. Many Thanks. Sedd&sigma;n talk 15:13, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Closure of Articles for deletion/Nan (artist)
Back in May 2007, you closed this deletion debate without seeming to take into account the rather strong evidence produced by User:Jpatokal late in the debate. I just came across this, and I think the proper course of action would have been to relist for further comment, since Jpatokal's points remained unopposed, and consensus wouldn't have been established then. --Paul_012 (talk) 12:55, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I just noticed you're currently inactive, so I've taken this to deletion review. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:35, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks, from a while ago... Hope you are well. Best regards, ♪♫The New Mikemoraltalkcontribs 00:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikimania 2010 Oxford bid
Thank you for supporting the Oxford bid to hold Wikimania 2010! We're currently in the final stages of the bid process - the jury will be announcing their decision by the 16th April. We're currently putting together the local team for the bid (who will do what if the bid wins); if you're able to be on the local team, please put your name in the appropriate place on m:Wikimania 2010/Bids/Oxford/Team. We'd also welcome anything you can do to help refine the bid in these last few days. If you have any questions, please let me or User:Seddon know. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:43, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello there
Hi there Walton One, I haven't seen you around much recently. Hope everything's good with you. Best wishes. Acalamari 22:18, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Admin Coaching
I saw that you were listed in the Coaches for reconfirmation section of the admin coaching status page. Could you please update your status, and if you are still interested, drop me a note on my talk page? Thanks,  Genius  101 Guestbook  22:17, 25 April 2009 (UTC) This message was delivered semi-automatically by AutoWikiBrowser.


 * Thank you for updating your status.  gENIUS 101  19:35, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Wotcha
Nice to see your user name flash up on my watchlist! Hope all is well. Pedro : Chat  15:11, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Good luck
Sorry to hear about the real world pressures. You've been a great benefit to the project here, and I sincerely hope that you are as successful out there as I have every reason to believe you deserve to be. And I think I can speak for all of us in saying that we hope to see you return with even minimal activity soon. Good editors like you are very hard to find, good admins even harder. Remember, even I'm an admin now; that shows just how desperate this place is for them. Best of luck in all your efforts in the real world, thanks for all you've done here, and hope to see you back, even if only irregularly, soon. John Carter (talk) 15:43, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd also like to echo John's sentiments. Very best. Pedro : Chat  15:45, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * As would I. You are always welcome here. Best wishes. Acalamari 21:35, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:RfCheck-nom
Template:RfCheck-nom has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. PirateSmackK Arrrr! 08:27, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

In need of your mentorship
Hi,

I need help from an experienced Wikipedian, and I saw your name over at WP:ADOPT.

I need your advice concerning WP:WPOOK, which I've been coordinating. The set of pages the project concerns is listed at Portal:Contents/Outline of knowledge and WikiProject Outline of knowledge, and has grown to about 500 articles in the encyclopedia.

The goals of the WikiProject are:


 * 1) Increase awareness of readers of the existence of the outlines on Wikipedia
 * 2) Complete the existing outlines
 * 3) Create an outline for every subject that is exensive enough to benefit from having an outline (core subjects and major or extensive fields).  There are thousands of these.
 * 4) Recruit as many editors to work on these as possible (we need thousands of editors working on these)
 * 5) Surpass portals in number by the end of the summer, and leave them in the dust by the end of the year
 * 6) Get the major outline subject areas displayed on the Main Page (in place of or in addition to the portal links at the top of the page)
 * 7) Increase the OOK to higher quality than Britannica's Outline of Knowledge (published in its Propaedia volume).

I was hoping you could comment on how to achieve the goals above.

Also I'm interested in every possible way of reaching readers and editors of Wikipedia. How can I get the most eyes and typing fingers on Wikipedia's outlines? Contacting editors directly without a reason relevant to them is spam, which I'd like to avoid. There are 75,000 regular editors on Wikipedia, and I want to contact all of them. So how do I do it? Directly or indirectly, I don't care which, piecemeal or all-at-once, all methods are fine with me. But I've got to find ways. I need your help.

I would also like to know how to find or attract editors to create new outlines. And I need advice on finding editors to help write the new outline article mentioned above (it needs to be fleshed out, completely referenced, and brought to featured article status).

Can you recommend anyone in particular who might be interested in sinking their teeth into a project like this? Or ways to reach groups of editors? Or ways to reach all editors? I welcome any and all advice you might have.

I look forward to your reply on my talk page.

The Transhumanist 03:21, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Heads up
Hello! I don't know if you have noticed Sockpuppet_investigations/Bravedog, but the nominator and first "voter" in Articles for deletion/Cherub (TV series) are actually the same person and thus vote stacked in that discussion that you closed. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 05:16, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Need Some Help
I need some help at over at the University of Atlanta page. I would like a third party editors to come over and add some fresh ideas to some biased info. It seems anyone who offers a different idea or voices a different opinion will get blocked as I did, think god I was unblocked : ) But others who added some great ideas Minsto12 and many many more have been called puppets and blocked, so this it at some risk.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supercopone (talk • contribs) 03:42, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Admin Coaching: Reconfirmation
I was looking through the coaches at Admin_coaching/Status and saw that there are a lot under "reconfirmation".

Could you let me know if you are still interesting in being involved with Admin Coaching, or if you would prefer to have your name removed from the "reconfirmation" list. If you want to be involved, could you please move your entry from "Reconfirmation" to "Active" and indicate how many students you would be willing to have (obviously, if you are actively coaching at the moment, then please indicate this!)

If I do not hear from you within a week, I will assume that you would like to have your name removed from the list of coaches.

And yes, I saw your note at the top of this page, but thought I'd ask anyway!

Regards, --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 07:34, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Alternative newspaper search
Template:Alternative newspaper search has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk) 05:39, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Man-Faye (4th nomination)
You are invited to join the discussion at Articles for deletion/Man-Faye (4th nomination). --Gwern (contribs) 11:17 4 August 2010 (GMT) 11:17, 4 August 2010 (UTC) (Using )

Black Eyed Kids
Hey, I know this is quite old, but is there any way that I could get a look at the Black Eyed Kids article? I'd like to give it a go but I want to see what state the article was in beforehand so I don't make the same mistakes PanydThe muffin is not subtle 12:32, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Invitation to particpate in the December 2010 Wikification Drive
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 19:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC). Redirected here from User talk:Walton_monarchist89.

WP:HARM
Too bad your proposal died a few years ago. I've made an account after just being a reader for years because of exactly that kind of problem, and yet I meet resistance from people who can only think of comprehensiveness. Whatever we think, some court somewhere will make it WP's policy sooner or later. &lt;( User:Couch on his Head and Smiling (talk) )&gt; 01:04, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Please confirm your membership
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 20:40, 22 December 2010 (UTC). Redirected here from User talk:Walton_monarchist89.