User talk:A man of honour

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello, leave me a message! :)

RfA, concerns and whatnot[edit]

"Okay, to be honest with you, I am not N00b, but have been on and off when it comes to editing WP, so I do not need you to start listing policies and stuff, I know what I am doing!!" — Not to assume bad faith, but you are aware that an account that arrives at RfA in their seventh edit doesn't look too good. Maybe some more in-depth explanation on your userpage would help alleviate concerns. Have you been / are you solely an IP editor? Or do you have other registered accounts? User:Dorftrottel 15:28, February 11, 2008

Thanks for assuming good faith man!
I used dynamic IP addresses to edit, even help with FA's. The problem is that now, I have switched to AOL, and I keep getting these annoying messages telling to stop doing edits that I have not done, so I decided to open an account on WP.
I am likely to have been on WP far longer than most users, and have watched it grow over the years from 2004. It is so sad how I am being treated for voicing my opinions, see comment below from a sysop.
I am sorry I do not have flashy userpages with all kinds of wiki mark up and achievements, I just did not have time for that, and it would not matter that much if you ask me.
Cheers!
A man of honour (talk) 16:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thin ice[edit]

You will be blocked if you continue your disruption, if you continue to add baseless opposes to current RFAs. Regards, Rudget. 15:45, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting!!! Would not you say?
Coming here and threating me! I know you are an admin, and we have met before, but it appears that you can not tell who am I. Very well, but I just wanna say that there is no policy I am aware of that will prevent new users from voting (Support or Oppose), and I would have found it a bit unlikely to recieve this message if I voted Support.
I would urge you to reconsider your words, you are also advised to strike out the word "disruption" above.
It is a wonder that one simple comment like that can break so many policies, for example WP:BITE, WP:AGF, and most importantly one might resort to WP:DR or WP:RFC/U.
You, sir, are walking on thin ice, and might lose your admin tools if you continue this pattern of activity.
Cheers
A man of honour (talk) 16:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
May I ask where we've, and I quote, "met before"? Rudget. 16:44, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think you have not addressed my concerns and questions for me to answer yours <hint> dear friend </hint> A man of honour (talk) 16:50, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Look, I can fully understand if you're reluctant to post personally identifiable things like your IP addresses on-wiki. But you may consider mailing details to some user, preferably an admin (=not me), whom you trust. Relevant information includes (more than one) articles you've worked on, as well as the range of your IP addresses. My idea is that you give someone the opportunity to evaluate what you're saying and vouch for you if and when everything seems in order. Just a suggestion however. User:Dorftrottel 17:01, February 11, 2008
I will see what I can do...Thanks! A man of honour (talk) 17:19, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Look, I don't mean to be nasty, or rude or rouge, or any of those things. It's just that we sometimes get users who disrupt Wikipedia by posting baseless opinions which disrupt the flow of content or discussion. You opposed three perfectly acceptable candidates at RFA with a 4-5 time period with the same/similar opposes, and that to the community looks like disruption. I apologise if my words came across in an incorrect manner, but the situation still stands. I would urge you to take the advice of Dorftrottel above, and post details of your former identity to us and then at least we can know who we are dealing with. Regards, Rudget. 18:19, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) Rudget, he's said that he was a dynamic IP editor; even if we wanted to, we probably couldn't track down his history. However, it seems he left you a hint above. In the meantime, I strongly suggest that we stop threatening this user. He's entitled to his standards; if he holds the bar high, I will assume, in good faith, that it is because he only wants the best users to serve as admins for the project. GlassCobra 18:26, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You perhaps did not mean anything nasty, but "You will be blocked if you continue your disruption, if you continue to add baseless opposes to current RFAs" is hard to understand any other way, do not you say?
Assume good faith, even, when dealing with these kinds of cases. An admin, or any editor for that matter, will be right 90% of the time when they encounter such situations by simply assuming bad faith, which you did above. However, you will be scaring away newbies or anger experienced users in the remaining 10%. WP will be the only loser in this type of situation, and this runs contradictory to your mission as one of the 1500 sysop.
Dynamic IP's pose a problem indeed, a fact that seems to have been ignored by all but GlassCobra.
As for my "baseless" opposes, they are perfectly sourced and reasoned. Take for example: nousernameslef, I can hardly think of anyone with only 1000 main edits to be an, and I quote" acceptable candidate". How about Kim Dent-Brown, he has virtually no experience outside vandal fighting. Take Mind meal, who has a very miserable edit summary usage to what one might expect from an admin.
My !votes were based on something real. Points I would like an admin to have on WP, and I granted that right.
How can you say that these opposes are similar????
Finally, WP is already losing many of its fine editors (see WP:MW), and I would hate to see you scaring away the rest ( and the new ones)
Regards
A man of honour (talk) 11:30, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello[edit]

Hello! I've noticed the debate here and would like to say that I feel that you are 100% correct and have done nothing that has violated WP so far. However, for your own sanity (and others who are not familiar with your situation) perhaps you could put a small statement in your userpage stating something like, "Hello, I am an established IP user and have recently decided to open an account. I am not interested in making userpages, only in making beneficial edits." You have every right to vote on any RfA, AfD, or anything else in WP. But, being an established user yourself, I'm sure you can understand how others could misinterpret this account as a sockpuppet or a Single Purpose Account. But that is all just my opinion. If I can be of any help let me know. Cheers!--Sallicio 19:31, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Plus, I really think your support criteria is very harsh. An FA takes months of work, to write 2 or 3 would take years. Please remember that sysops are no big deal. WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN it seems the winds have stopped... 20:08, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is clearly untrue that "sysops are no big deal", or so many unsuitable sysops wouldn't try to desperately to hang on to their status in the face of all reason. Therefore, given the lack of an adequate process for requesting desysopping it is quite rational to set a high standard for potential admins at RfA. But I don't think that writing a couple of FAs is such an especially high standard anyway. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I will change the my user page as you suggested.
They tell you it is no big deal, but in sysops' and hopeful sysops' minds , it is. You might say that I am holding the bar too high, but I can say that you are holding the bar too low. Anyway, this is the thing that makes WP so greate, everybody's input fuses together to create this wonderful "site", well, it is more than a site to me!
2 FA is not that much to ask, is it?
Kind Regards!
A man of honour (talk) 20:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA for User:Kim Dent-Brown[edit]

A man of honour,
You voted Weak oppose for the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kim Dent-Brown. However, you had indicated:

"Anyway, if this vote continues like that, I will change my Oppose, this user deserves to land on 100. if anyone else opposes, my !vote will remain the same.
kinde regards
A man of honour (talk) 20:07, 13 February 2008 (UTC)"[reply]

The RfA is scheduled to end 23:50, 17 February 2008 (UTC), around six and one half hours from now. Currently the tally is (66/1/0) with your vote as the only one in opposition. You might wish to check this RfA page in the next six hours to verify the tally and change your vote as you deem appropriate.

Sincerely and kind regards,
--Dan Dassow (talk) 17:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And so I did ! thanks!

Nousernamesleft[edit]

Hi, A man of honour, thanks for voting in my RfA, which passed with 47 supports (I hoped for a perfect square, but two away is close enough!), 3 opposes (the first odd prime), and 0 neutrals. I'm glad the community has decided to trust me with the mop and bucket (the flamethrower isn't supported). Of course, special thanks goes to my nominators Auawise and that one guy who buried stuff (not that the thanks I give to the you isn't special!). If you ever need a hand with something, or just want to say hello, tough feel free to drop a line! Best wishes, Nousernamesleftcopper, not wood 23:01, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't even vaguely resemble a mop, but I couldn't find a picture of one.

While we might have our differences, thanks for voting. Nousernamesleftcopper, not wood 23:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No hard feelings! Nousernamesleftcopper, not wood 20:03, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can has thankspam?[edit]

As noted in the box above - thanks particularly for your contribution. Opposes and neutrals often seem to generate more discussion than any number of supports, and so it proved in this case! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 12:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good stuff. I have to hand it to Kim Dent-Brown here. Enigma msg! 18:02, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Iraq[edit]

Hello A man of honour.. I saw your comment at the WikiProject's page, are you interested in joining the project and helping us out? Cheers! Λua∫Wise (Operibus anteire) 19:00, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, why not? A man of honour (talk) 11:55, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Seicer's RfA[edit]

I think you may have mistakenly voted twice in Seicer's RfA as per these two edits [1] & [2]. The second has already been indented so it won't be counted, but you may want to take a look and strike the second one as I'm sure it was done inadvertently. Ronnotel (talk) 17:30, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

user:Hisham 5ZX[edit]

..should be paid attention to. Articles such as Dulaim are being frequently vandalised by him. After being blocked, his sockpuppet is resuming the same editing pattern. I see that you have been helping in reverting him and that is really admirable. Cheers mate! Λua∫Wise (Operibus anteire) 10:38, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of celebrity and notable guest appearances in Doctor Who[edit]

There's a new AfD nomination for an article you've previously discussed. Please stop by to voice your opinions again. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 11:17, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:A_man_of_honour&oldid=1085728551"