User talk:Siva1979/Archive 21

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 Article rating for Milton Keynes Dons F.C. 2 Wikipedia has a new administrator! 3 Requests for adminship 4 Good Luck! 5 Sorry 6 Your Question 7 Signpost updated for October 03, 2007 8 Thanks! :D 9 Your RfA 10 CSD on Max kues 11 Bedfordshire Football League Premier Division 12 Links to dates 13 AFC Wulfrunians 14 Heh 15 Your RFA was not successful 16 Brighton & Hove League 17 Cannot access wannabe kate tool 18 Corgis... 19 RFA Thanks 19.1 Credits 20 My recent RfA 21 RFA Thank You Note from Jehochman 22 RfA thanks 23 RfA followup and thanks 24 RfA Thanks 25 Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007. 26 Speedy deletion of Real Brunswick F.C. 27 Thanks 28 Speedy deletion of Portslade Athletic F.C. 29 RfA 30 RfA 31 RfA Thanks 32 RfA thank-spam 33 Template:Devon County Football League 34 Wikipedia has a second Carlos admin 34.1 Credits 35 Clarification re: my RfA... 36 Successful RfA - Thank you! 37 Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007. 38 My (KWSN's) RFA 39 Thank you!

Article rating for Milton Keynes Dons F.C.

I as a little surprised that you only gave Milton Keynes Dons F.C. a rating of "Start". Ok, it's a long way from GA, but "Start" says that it has significant omissions. Could you suggest some points that need attention, please? --John Maynard Friedman 17:10, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I assume that only project members can decide on ratings? (are you not a member?) I don't think it makes sense for editors to rate articles that they have edited extensively. Otherwise all my articles are GA! Are you saying that I need to look for the football project and ask for a formal review? --John Maynard Friedman 12:08, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a new administrator!

Thanks, Archive 21! Thank you for voicing your opinion in my RfA, which passed today with a unanimous 79/0/0 tally. It feels great to be appreciated, and I will try my best to meet everyone's expectations. If you have any advice or tips, feel free to pass them along, as I am sure that I will need them! Cheers, hmwith talk 21:36, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Requests for adminship Hey there - thanks for the consideration on the admin process - Yes, you are correct, I do sometimes have a tendency to leave edit summaries blank which can sometimes lead to confusion during any editing process - I usually tend to do this when the edit is either minor or a reversion of nonsensical vandalism. Nevertheless, this is no excuse. It is something I am definitely going to work on, as I agree with you that it is essential in making a good administrator. Thank you though, and cheers! Wisdom89 14:17, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Good Luck!

Hey, I just wanted to wish you good luck, on your RFA! :) SQL^{(Query Me!)} 10:26, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

I saw your name in the RFA of User:AA. (I added a question on that RFA) You are not an administrator. Too bad! Keep in contact. On a cursory glance, you look like you would be a fine administrator! Archtransit 16:06, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Your Question

That was strange, but it is working now, not sure why though, please refer to my comments on the page. See you around! Phgao 19:05, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I also want to add; don't let your RfA get you down, you're a fine editor! Phgao 02:15, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 03, 2007

Volume 3, Issue 40	1 October 2007	About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "Buttered cat paradox"	News and notes: Commons uploaders, Wikimania 2008/2009, milestones
Wikimedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

Thanks! :D

	Thanks Siva1979/Archive 21
	I would like to thank you for your participation in my successful RfA, which passed with a tally of (44/10/5)[1]. Whether you supported, opposed or were neutral in my RfA, I appreciate your participation and I hope that we can continue to work together to build a stronger and better Wikipedia.
	Regards, nattang 03:57, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Your RfA

Best of luck mate, you have my support, but I've seen the process change so much, I'm even starting to lose hope from my (eventual) RfA. If you need anything, just contact me. Cheers, Dfrg.msc 21:43, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I hope the tide shifts and it goes through. You work very hard here and I think you'd be an asset as an admin. -- Samir 04:52, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

CSD on Max kues

Hey. Next time, could you use {{db-attack}} on pages that attempt to harm it's subject? Thanks! *Cremepuff222* 14:29, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Heh, no problem. In the past, people have gotten mad at me for tagging with {{db-nonsense}}, so be careful when using that too. Good luck! :) *Cremepuff222* 14:34, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Bedfordshire Football League Premier Division

You appear to be in the process of creating separate articles for every team in the Bedfordshire Football League Premier Division. As per very long standing precedent, teams not in the top 10 steps of the pyramid in England do not get their own articles, but subsections of the article on the league itself; I won't prod these for the moment, but unless you can make an argument to change policy these are all likely to be deleted. — iridescent (talk to me!) 15:07, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

You should probably raise it at WP:WPF to get a consensus. As long as their "top 10 levels only" rule is in place, if anyone does AfD one of the articles it will almost certainly result in a "cascade effect" with the whole lot being deleted. — iridescent (talk to me!) 15:28, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Links to dates

Good morning from England. I note that you have been changing the date links for birth/death dates in several articles to e.g. [[10 November]] [[1876 in football (soccer)|1876]] I understand your motives but unfortunately this is not acceptable practice because it messes up the way the dates display for certain Date & time preferences. (Under the "my preferences" tab at the top of the page.)

For users who prefer the fourth possible style (16:12, 2001 January 15) your changes would still come out as 10 November 1876 rather than the preferred style of 1876 November 10. I would suggest therefore that you revert the changes you have made. Best wishes. --Daemonic Kangaroo 05:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that it's only possible to see the effects of your edits if you change your own Date & time preferences temporarily.

There is an essay on this subject on WP which I will try to find when I have more time. --Daemonic Kangaroo 05:46, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I've not found precisely what I've been looking for, but Wikipedia:Piped link#Use sets out the guidelines:

"Piped year links should not be used when the date is a full date, including the day and the month, because it stops readers' date preferences working. For example, do not write [[5 August]] [[2006 in sports|2006]] or [[August 5]], [[2006 in sports|2006]]." --Daemonic Kangaroo 11:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

AFC Wulfrunians

About the default sort for AFC teams, the basic answer is "Yes", they should all (by FA precent) be sorted under A. Also I've reverted your later change to link individual years e.g, 2005 to 2005 in football, as this adds nothing to the article. - fchd 06:54, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Heh

Hi & thanks for this. --88.66.110.157 10:32, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Your RFA was not successful

I have closed your RFA. I am afraid it was unsuccessful. Please address the concerns and feel free to reapply in the future. Good luck. --Deskana (talk) 10:42, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

4 months I reckon. Hit WP:AFD. Hit WP:HELPDESK. Add comments citing policy. Keep up commenting at WP:RFA but add more value to the comments. Keep welcoming the newbies if it helps you relax. But sloooooooooow down a bit and try to bring some real value to every discussion. I've supported you twice now mate. Hopefully my next support at an RfA of yours will bring you the buttons I genuinely believe that you would use, and use wisely. As ever my respect for your attitude and best of luck. Pedro :  Chat  14:37, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

It is your undoubted dedication to this project that drives my support. Although your RfA failed I got a sense of resignation from many opposers - a lot of editors would have loved to support you but couldn't find the value in your contribution history. I've seen worse RfA's - at least it's pretty clear people respect you as an editor, even though you have made some errors of judgment, such as welcoming users with clearly inapropriate user names. I'd particularely like you to think about helping at WP:HELPDESK - you've been here so long you understand where to direct people, and no-one could ever acuse you of being uncivil or not wanting to help the newbies. Also some new page patrol may help as well. In summary I think you do have a lot of respect from the community, but they need the evidence that you will be able to exercise policy slowly and calmly. You'll get there!! Pedro :  Chat  15:04, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd concur with all the above, but it would nice to see you also making some substantive edits - more constructive than adding a category here, or a template to a talk page there. Making tons of edits like that, plus having the 28000+ edits userbox and changing it every time you clock up a thousand more, do make it seem like the editcount is part of the reason you're here. Slow down, find one or two articles where you know quite a lot about the subject area, and help get them up to a higher status. Then, in 6 months or so, hopefully someone will nominate you again and you will get the promotion. However, I don't think a third self-nomination would be appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Rundle (talk • contribs) 18:43, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello Siva, Sorry to know your RFA was not successful. But I do think that you should lay off welcoming for a while. A very few percentage of IP addresses actually contribute continously to the project. Even welcoming users does not help the project. About 0.5% of all users registered with wikipedia are regular users. So, if you are going to welcome 800 users in a day, only about 4 will actually become dedicated users. Hence, I do believe that it is just a waste of time of you welcoming users. If you want to do minor stuff, create another account and get it done. Also, I just checked another one of your AFD comments. Seems like you have replaced Google now with secondary reliable source. Please try to comment on these things with policy. And also try for an RFA only after next year.--60.234.55.135 20:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Brighton & Hove League

My edit was correct, the Brighton & Hove League has 10 teams in its Premier Division - 1 AFC ST GEORGES, 2 AMERICAN EXPRESS, 3 BRIGHTON ELECTRICITY, 4 HANOVER, 5 MASTER TILES, 6 MONTPELIER VILLA, 7 O & G UNITED, 8 OVINGDEAN, 9 PORTSLADE ATHLETIC, 10 REAL BRUNSWICK. This is from the official league website, and I updated the Wikipedia page to match this just yesterday, which is why I reverted your edit to the English Football League system page. - fchd 06:24, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

You appear to be right about AFC St Georges. I've found this page from the website of one of the other clubs in the league which also indicates that Brighton Rangers were due to start the season in the Premier Division but also withdew. As to your other question, I know Brighton Rangers were in the Premier Division last season because the league table is given on p.240 of the Cherry Red Non-League Newsdesk Annual 2007. Nomad Online also lists them in that division. I have updated the Brighton & Hove league article, and the associated Premier Division template. - fchd 17:18, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

The sources used for the Brighton & Hove league Champions so far was the back issues of the Cherry Red Non-League Newsdesk Annuals. - fchd 17:58, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Cannot access wannabe kate tool

{{helpme}} I cannot seem to access Wannabe Kate's tool, which is a slow substitute for Kate's tool. Also I can access other users contributions by using this tool but not my contributions. Whenever, I type in my username and press submit, a message appears which states that connection was reset after about two or three minutes. This problem has been with me since July 2007, when I made over 7 000 edits for that month. I am using Mozilla Firefox as my browser. However, I have success with Kate's Tool and Interiot's tool. Can anyone help me with this problem? Thanks. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 08:31, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Maybe because you have too many edits ? Try someone like User:SimonP. If the numbers are the problem, it should fail for him too. Tintin 09:04, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I have too many edits for that month. I cannot access SimonP's edits, but I can access your edits. Do you know how to solve this problem? It is becoming quite frustrating for me. Does that mean that I would not be able to access my edits (and some other users who have a lot of edits per month) forever, using Wannabe Kate's tool? Some other users are able to access my edits as well, so how can I solve this problem? --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 09:13, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

IIRC, the other tools get their input directly from the database but the wannabe_kate draws it from "my contributions" and hence is comparitively inefficient. So I guess nothing much can be done at our side, and since Interiot is not around, we'll have to live with it. Tintin 09:23, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, I tried to contact Interiot through e-mail but have yet to receive a response from him. I wonder what had happened to him? I hope someone can solve this problem because some users are able to access my records. Can you personally access my edit counts or are you facing similar problems? --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 09:29, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

It works here. You have 28744 edits, 576 in this month. So maybe something to do with a slow connection ? Tintin 09:34, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, my connection is 3Mbps, which is relatively fast. I am using a wireless connection, so it could not be a result of a slow connection. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 10:08, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Corgis...

Siva – I removed your Speedy Deletion request from Welsh Corgi. Unfortunately you saw the page during a vandalism episode, when it did indeed consist of arrant junk – I thought your tag was part of the vandalism, so apologies for libellous accusation of maliciousness. Not quite sure why you didn't just revert it though? Or do you think the page itself is junk...? (Not my page, so don't hold back...). Best regards--Richard New Forest 15:45, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

My recent RfA

Thank you for supporting my RfA, which unfortunately didn't succeed. The majority of the opposes stated that I needed more experience in the main namespace and Wikipedia namespace, so that is what I will do. I will go for another RfA in two month's time and I hope you will be able to support me then as well. If you have any other comments for me or wish to be notified when I go for another RfA, please leave them on my talk page. If you wish to nominate me for my next RfA, please wait until it has been two months. Thanks again for participating in my RfA! -- Cobi^(t|c|b|cn) 01:41, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

RFA Thank You Note from Jehochman

		Ready to swab the deck!
		Another motley scallawag has joined the crew. Thanks for your comments at my RFA. Arrrgh! - - Jehochman Talk 02:51, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA thanks

		With thanks!
		Thanks for participating in my RfA, which closed successfuly. I leave you with a picture of the real Blood Red Sandman! Note his 'mop' is slightly deadlier than mine! - - Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 18:30, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA followup and thanks

First off, thank you once again for your participation in my RfA nom. Your comments are helpful, and this brings me to my second request. I am not asking you to change or reconsider your vote, but I would like your feedback on my recent wikipedia and talk namespace edits. Do you feel that I am taking the necessary course of action that would make for a good future sysop? I really would appreciate your input. Bolstering the edit summaries too : ) Cheers! Wisdom89 19:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Dear Siva1979, ______ __ __ __ /\__ _\/\ \ /\ \ /\ \ \/_/\ \/\ \ \___ __ ___\ \ \/'\ __ __ ___ __ __\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ _ `\ /'__`\ /' _ `\ \ , < /\ \/\ \ / __`\/\ \/\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \/\ \_\.\_/\ \/\ \ \ \\`\\ \ \_\ \/\ \_\ \ \ \_\ \\ \_\ \ \_\ \ \_\ \_\ \__/.\_\ \_\ \_\ \_\ \_\/`____ \ \____/\ \____/ \/\_\ \/_/ \/_/\/_/\/__/\/_/\/_/\/_/\/_/\/_/`/___/> \/___/ \/___/ \/_/ /\___/ \/__/ For your contribution to My RfA, which passed with 91 Supports, 2 Neutrals and no opposes. The standards and dedication of the English Wikipeidan Administrators is excellent and I am privileged to stand among them. Thankyou for putting you trust in me, I'll not see it abused. Also, special thanks for having supported me twice, on my first and on my latest RfA. It’s people like you that keep me coming back to this wacky-white-world.And now, I will dance naked around a fire. Party at my place! Cheers! Dfrg.msc 07:54, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Expand for picture....

Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 42	15 October 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Brion Vibber interview
Wikimania 2008 awarded to Alexandria	Board meeting held, budget approved
Wikimedia Commons reaches two million media files	San Francisco job openings published
Community sanction noticeboard closed	Bot is approved to delete redirects
License edits under consideration to accommodate Wikipedia	WikiWorld comic: "Soramimi Kashi"
News and notes: Historian dies, Wiki Wednesdays, milestones	Wikimedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Military history	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 10:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Real Brunswick F.C.

A tag has been placed on Real Brunswick F.C., requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD A7.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Cruftbane 12:25, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the welcome message. Nice meeting you. --150rushing 15:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Portslade Athletic F.C.

A tag has been placed on Portslade Athletic F.C., requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD A7.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Cruftbane 20:01, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Thanks for your comment in my RfA. Although I would have preferred if it were on the support section, I fully understand your reasoning, and appreciate your comment. Per your advice, I have withdrawn my nomination however I look forward to coming back to RfA sometime down the road. Thanks again - Rjd0060 13:49, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Dearest Supporter,

Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed unsuccessfully with 39 supports, 15 oppose, and 1 neutral. I would have liked to gain some experience of being an admin, but it wasn't to be. At least I gained some valuable time there and will use my knowledge picked up to my next candidacy. I would like to say once again, thank you for voting and I hope to see you at my next request be it a nomination or self-induced, I hope I don't get as many questions! Rudget _{Contributions} 09:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Thanks, Archive 21! Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was a success, and I look forward to getting started! Hiberniantears 17:46, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA thank-spam

Template:Devon County Football League

Thanks for asking, I'm fine. I deleted the first (old) template; mind, I saw there were still some pages linked to the old template, so please take care of the "housecleaning". Do not hesitate to contact me again if you need me; it's all in a days work :)). Cheers and happy editing. Lectonar 16:24, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a second Carlos admin

Clarification re: my RfA...

You said you are concerned with POV, though it seems that you are more concerned with my concentration in one area. One is obviously not the same as the other - a lot of people have interests, and edit in those interests without being biased about it. As it's come up from two editors, I could certainly address it, but I'm not sure if concentration is an issue, or if POV editing is the issue. If the former, there's nothing wrong with an interest, and if the latter, I've never had any issues raised before regarding POV editing. In any case, if you could maybe clarify things as a question for me on my RfA, I'd appreciate it. MSJapan 02:39, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Successful RfA - Thank you!

Thank you for supporting my recent RfA. It was successful, and I was promoted to Administrator today. I appreciate the support! — KieferSkunk (talk) — 23:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 43	22 October 2007	About the Signpost

Fundraiser opens, budget released	Biographies of living people grow into "status symbol"
WikiWorld comic: "George Stroumboulopoulos"	News and notes: Wikipedian Robert Braunwart dies
WikiProject Report: League of Copyeditors	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:51, 29 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!) 01:08, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

-- Eamonn Holmes Edit ==

You addition/correction to the above is a personal comment with no reference or requirement. Austenlennon 11:29, 1 November 2007 (UTC)austenlennon

Thank you!

		My RFA
		Thanks for your support in my recent request for adminship, which was successful. I'll do my best to justify the confidence you've placed in me! Dppowell 22:51, 31 October 2007 (UTC)