User talk:Eluchil404/Archive1
 | This page 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. |
Welcome!
Hello, Eluchil404/Archive1! Thank you for joining WikiProject Middle-earth and contributing to improve Tolkien-related articles. We are glad to have you join in the effort! Here're some good links and subpages related to our WikiProject.
If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to ask on our talk page. Thank you for your contributions and have fun editing!
May not need it, but just in case. ;) —Mirlen 00:46, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
The Lord of the Rings Peer Review
I have make extensive changes to our Lord of the Rings article in an attempt to work it up to Featured Article status. In order to find more suggestions I have listed it under Wikipedia:Peer Review. Under the guidelines to nominations I am required to notify others of knowledge in the area to review it. I have decided that the best group for this would be our WikiProject. So I ask you all to look at the article and make any suggestions you can. Hopefully we will be voting this FA soon enough. SorryGuy 00:59, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 16:11, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Maedhros
As for the External History part, we are discussing that in the Standards talk page, to either keep it as 'Other versions of the legendarium' of 'Textual history'. Could you also expand and be more specific on how it could be conformed to WP:WIAGA, besides from the fact that the evolution of his character and history fleshed out in Tolkien's legendarium in a seperate section under a more encyclopedic header? As for the pronunciation, I have always known it as My'thros, or alternatively, Mayth-ros (not pronounced with the American a of course). Phonetic break-down: Mae=My, dh=th, ros=ros. I don't pretend to be a Sindarin expert (nor in any other Middle-earth languages), but I do know that it is not 'Maid-ros'. Oh, and thanks for your critique, Eluchil404, it is appreciated. :) —Mirlen 04:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
Infobox Tolkien
Just letting you know that there's a new proposal of the syntax by Carcharoth here, so please share your opinion as a WP:ME participant. —Mirlen 22:51, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
Earliest Christian Art
The earliest Christian art of the late 3rd and early 4th centuries shows some early Christians may have thought of Jesus as a young worker of magic, or wonder worker. This would give some support to The Secret Gospel of Mark and add to the interpretation of the legit Gospel of Mark. The scholarly book reviewers of The Secret Gospel of Mark that called it a forgery in the 1970's (and still today) were plainly offended by its material and especially Smith's interpretations. Other scholars saw it as just another Gnostic Gospel, of which there were many. User:Kazuba 12 May 2006 Moved my materials to Images of Jesus.User:Kazuba 12 May 2006
Survey on the use of Latinized/Greek names for Byzantine rulers Follow Up
Greetings. As a recent contributor to the survey on the names of Byzantine rulers at Talk:Constantine XI, you may be interested in the following. A mediation sought by Panairjdde resulted in the recommendation that "that proposal two from this page be implemented in the short term, until a consensus can be reached about proposal three". Accordingly, before resuming the editorial process, I am seeking feedback on whether option 2 or 3 of the former survey is more acceptable. Please state (or re-state) your opinion in the follow up survey on Talk:Constantine XI. Thank you for your time, Imladjov 14:52, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your support; nice to know you're satisfied – Gurch 17:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Rfa thanks from Samir
 |
Dear Eluchil404, thanks so much for your support during my recent successful request for adminship. I really appreciate it. Let me know if you need any administrative support; just leave me a message on my talk page or send me an e-mail if it's urgent. Take care, and keep up the good work! WikiGnomes are so important here! -- Samir धर्म 06:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC) |
Just stumbled upon the deletion review of this article (actually the first of my deletions that's been reviewed) and noticed that you requested it be userfied, which I will gladly do for you. Just drop me a note on my talk page containing a link to where you want it. AmiDaniel (talk) 21:20, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your support
Thank you very much for your support on my recent RfA. I am pleased to announce that it passed with a tally of 72/11/1, and I am now an administrator. I'll be taking things slowly at first and getting used to the tools, but please let me know if there are any admin jobs I can do to help you, now or in the future. —Cuiviénen 02:24, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Christopher York
I do agree with a deletion of the Christopher York article, given his lack of notability, but the reference to him in [Batman]] can surely continue to remain in place. - Dyslexic agnostic 07:22, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Iraq and the War on Terrorism
Wikipedia:WOT is up for vote now. Rangeley 23:42, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
My RfA
Hello Eluchil404, and thanks for voting in my recent RfA, which passed with a tally of (68/19/3). I appreciated your comments, which I hope to take on board in order to gain your respect in my work as an administrator. Best of luck in your continued editing of the encyclopedia! Sam Vimes 17:54, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
AfD
Yeah it's just a hazard of closing AfDs... has happened to me a time or two. Generally you just revert yourself, but I've gone ahead and handled it. Thanks for pointing it out. --W.marsh 01:01, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
My (Mtz206) RfA
|
Thanks for supporting me in my RFA. My Request was successful with 41 supports, 12 opposes and 5 neutrals, and I'll do my best to live up to your expectations. If in any point in the future you get the feeling I'm doing something wrong, do not hesitate to drop me a line. -- mtz206 (talk) 02:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC) |
Move
I had missed your message about the move to Filmography of G. Devarajan. Fine with me. Thanks. Tintin (talk) 10:57, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Comrade Wolf
So mention it in the Putin article! - CrazyRussian talk/email 15:44, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Errol (Harry Potter)
No problem, Eluchil404. Note that Tawkerbot3 and all its derivatives will revert any misspelt redirects, such as in your case. (you wrote "#REDIRCT" instead of "#REDIRECT") Cheers, Tangotango 10:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
- I didnt think they should revert conversions to redirects. The bot was too fast though; I would've caught the spelling error myself if it had given me another 30 seconds. Eluchil404 10:45, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
RE: Waves
Greetings. My username is indeed inspired, and borrowed from Tolkien's Legendarium. However, it is not related to any specific character. I hope this answers your question, and if you have any more questions, please feel free to drop me a message any time. Eluchil 08:44, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your support in my RfA!
|
Thanks for voting! Hello Eluchil404/Archive1, and thanks for your support in my recent RfA. I'm pleased to announce that it passed with a final tally of (96/0/0). I was overwhelmed by all of the nice comments and votes of confidence from everyone. Thanks again, and see you around! OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:43, 30 June 2006 (UTC) |
Hexagon1's RfA
Hey Eluchil404! Thanks for supporting my RfA which unfortunately failed with 2 support and 14 against. I still don't see how reverting vandalism and welcoming new users is evil, but the community seems to think so. I will try to get more involved in xfD, and the process at Wikipedia in general. If you need anything, or if you have any suggestions for improvement, feel free to contact me. See you around! +Hexagon1 (t) 09:12, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Please revisit your delete vote for this page. I and another user have worked hard in the last week to improve the page. Thank you for your consideration.ThuranX 15:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks from Northenglish!
On a more personal note, thanks for your help. You're 100% accurate that most of the comments were encouraging rather than dismissive. I would be honored if you wanted to nominate me in about three months, and I will continue doing what I'm doing on Wikipedia to improve my resume in the meantime. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 04:22, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Move request for emperors of the Palaeologus/Palaiologos dynasty
Hi. There is a move request for several Palaeologus/Palaiologos dynasty emperors at Talk:List of Byzantine Emperors. I tought you might be interested in.--Panairjdde 22:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
AfDs
Okay, that sounds fair enough — I strive to be professional, and perhaps I misread the professional edge that displaying a lack of corruption would cause. Would you prefer me to open them back up? — Deckiller 03:12, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Query Re: Closing AfDs/RFAs
Had the pages added to my watchlist, so saw that Deckiller reopened them and followed up on your conversation. Thanks for the statement of good faith regarding me being reasonable -- I appreciate Deckiller's professionalism, and will post a note to his page thanking him for that.
Had a question. You wrote: "I know that any RfA's I close improperly will come back to haunt me if I am nominated at RfA so I strive to be hyper-correct." Are normal non-admin users able to close out AfDs or RfAs? You don't appear to be on the admin list, so I'm just finding myself curious as to what you're speaking about. Learning experience and all that. — Mike (talk • contribs) 03:38, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
- Very much obliged, sir. Useful, and food for thought as to perhaps a new venue for contributions. — Mike (talk • contribs) 03:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
College Football Project
Hello, I noticed that you have edited a College football related article. You may be interested to know that there is a college football WikiProject which you can join if you like. We would love to have you! --Mecu 01:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
An hour wasted?
I hope my contribs weren't that dull. :) Yanksox 02:38, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well, it's quality and not quanity, and I hope when the time comes people see that. Yanksox 03:12, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
of interest
Thought you mind find this MfD of interest. PT (s-s-s-s) 19:35, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi, you voted to delete Holland Landing Public School, and one of the reasons that you gave was that the article was of a rather low quality. I've made some improvements to the article, so I'd appreciate it if you'd take another look at the article and perhaps change your vote if you feel that you could. Cheers, JYolkowski // talk 22:27, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
My RfA
For those of you who supported my RfA, I highly appreciate your kind words and your trust in me. For those who opposed - many of you expressed valid concerns regarding my activity here; I will make an effort in addressing them as time goes on while at the same time using my admin tools appropriately. So, salamat, gracias, merci, ありがとう, спасибо, धन्यवाद, 多謝, agyamanak unay, شكرًا, cảm ơn, 감사합니다, mahalo, ขอบคุณครับ, go raibh maith agat, dziękuję, ευχαριστώ, Danke, תודה, mulţumesc, გმადლობთ, etc.! If you need any help, feel free to contact me.
PS: I took the company car (pictured left) out for a spin, and well... it's not quite how I pictured it. --Chris S. 23:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
My RfA
Regarding my RfA, I would like to thank you for your support. Although my RfA did not pass, I am hopeful that a future one will. I hope you will vote again when I try again. Paul Cyr 21:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Just a quick update. The AfD had been illegally closed by the creator of the article. I reopened it and your vote, that was deleted by the same peron, is back in the AfD. gidonb 14:03, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
RfA Thanks
Thanks for taking time to give your opinion on my RfA. I can work on all of the constructive criticism given before I consider RfA again. I hope to see you around Wikipedia. Thanks! Abcdefghijklm 21:03, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
I just saw your comment. You are absolutely welcome to help keep that list up to date if you want to. I update it about twice a month but with some 50 failed RfAs every month, it can get a bit out of date. And there are other pages you are invited to update if you like. NoSeptember 11:37, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
The result of my RfA
Thank you for taking the time to vote in my RfA, which, despite your reluctant oppose vote, succeeded by a margin of 54/6/1.
You said on my RfA that you were troubled by the few project space edits outside of Hangman and would also like to see more edits on Talk pages.
This was indeed true -- I was shocked to find out how many of my projectspace edits were junk edits of Hangman and other related garbage. However, in the past month, I have attempted to increase the amount of projectspace edits by closing AfDs, and help clear out AIAV.
As for your other point, the fact that you would also like to see more edits on Talk pages, I was very perplexed. At the time of my RfA nomination, I had over 1300 talk (User talk, mainspace talk, Wikipedia talk) edits, more than a third of all of my edits (3600). I would just like to know what would have been an acceptable threshold of edits in the talk namespace, if you have the time. If you don't, that's okay, too.
You may be wondering by now why I am contacting you almost a month after my RfA has closed. There were many reasons. First, I am hand-typing all of my responses to peoples' votes. I thought this would be an easy task, but it proved to be diffucult and more labor-intensive than I thought. Second, the FIFA World Cup coincided with the closure of my RfA, and distracted me enough to not respond to the people who voted in my RfA. Third, I also had some issues outside of Wikipedia that I needed to deal with. Last, I took my time so that those who opposed me could see what I have done with the admin tools since I got them. You can inspect my records for yourself: IanManka (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves)
Thank you again for taking the time to vote in my RfA, and if you find anything of concern with the way I admin (if that's even a verb :P), please contact me. Ian Manka Talk to me! 09:19, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for your prompt response, it now makes sense. Ian Manka Talk to me! 17:37, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for supporting my RfA!
|
Thanks for contributing to my successful RfA! | |
| To the people who have supported my request: I appreciate the show of confidence in me and I hope I live up to your expectations! To the people who opposed the request: I'm certainly not ignoring the constructive criticism and advice you've offered. I thank you as well! ♥! ~Kylu (u|t) 02:35, 19 July 2006 (UTC) |
Just wanted to drop off a very quick note — I've asked the nominee a question to clarify their position on assuming good faith and on anonymous editors. Thought I would let you know in case the response would be of interest to you with regards to your vote on their RfA. Thanks. — Mike (talk • contribs) 15:20, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Joshua Trupin
While sweeping through cleaning out candidates for speedy deletion category I came across the Joshua Trupin article. It cannot be speedy deleted under A7 because it does make an assertion of notability, albeit a weak one. Generally speaking, failing to meet Wikipedia:Notability (people) inclusion criteria does not necessarily qualify a page for speedy deletion, unless in addition to failing WP:BIO it also greatly fails to assert notability or importance in any way. For borderline cases such as these, my suggestion would be to use the {{prod}} template instead; if no one contests the proposed deletion within a period of five days, the article can be deleted on the spot. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 17:33, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Crisspy's RfA
No, sorry that was a mistake on my part while trying to properly format the comments. It is indeed standard practice to include the edit count. Sorry about that, Gwernol 16:40, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, not only did I manage to remove your addition I also managed to remove my own Oppose opinion :-) So sorry again for the clumsy editing. Best, Gwernol 16:56, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Sean Black
Thanks for your message. As you point out, Bureaucrats have a certain measure of leeway and I took advantage of that. I believe that this was no normal RfA, since Sean had already served, quite commendably, as an admin, took a break, and asked to return. Given the extensive support, I therefore regarded it differently. As you know, it is very difficult to remove an admin. In fact, once an admin, and once under the scrutiny faced by active admins, people are bound to face opposition. Nonetheless, there is no really pragmatic way to remove admins (yes, it can be done, but it occurs so rarely it is not worth mentioning). Had Sean not given up his adminship, the questionable comment would never have been a consideration for removing him. GIven that he received 72 % support, it should not be a reason to deny it to him now. Had he received less support, I would likely have acted differently. In fact, I think Sean was rather brave for giving up his adminship. I wonder how many other admins would be elected again if they were to do the same thing. Danny 17:35, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Your RfA
Hi there; the noise level around here has risen quite a bit in recent days, but even so I'm surprised I'm the only one commenting so far on you closing your RfA. I was sorry to see you withdraw, but hopefully the constructive criticism you saw will make your next application sail through. Feel free to let me know if/when that happens, as I don't always watch RfA every bloody 5 days... -- nae'blis (talk) 13:42, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your note
I certainly agree with you that single incidents should not be proclaimed as evidence of a larger trend or evidence of a candidate's true character. I personally hate when people to that. But just for the sake of clarity, I considered that evidence secondary to the inexperience assertion of the oppose side, and I certainly did not want to portray you as careless or apathetic, but merely as someone who is still learning. I'm happy to support a newcomer, so long as his or her record is spotless, and even brilliant. But unfortunetly, this is all too rare, and most users with less than one year of experience earn an oppose vote from me (even though I myself have only been here for several months). So, don't lose heart--in a few months try again, and maybe put some diffs showing experience and knowledge of policy in your nom, or in response to an oppose vote. The great thing about a failed RfA is that you have plenty of feedback as to what you need to work on for your next one : ) Thanks again for your note, AdamBiswanger1 19:55, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Your RfA
First off, I am sorry your RfA failed. My main reason for opposing your nomination was that you are reletivley new, secondly your edits; I notice quite alot of your edits are category adding etc.
What i look for in an admin is'nt just the ability to constantly refresh RfA, TfD, IfD or AfD etc but it is a contributor, i find people who set these goals of riding wikipedia of images or just new page patroling etc generally turn bad and sour. I dislike this and do not want to see it happen to you, with power comes the responsibility to useit wisely. Weather or not it seems that you would use your powers often intimidation can often be (unknown to the admin maybe) important. Generally those that turn sour often end up in wars and assuming bad faith.
Thirdly your edit count; When discounting category adding etc/AfD'ing your disting pages is lower. If you do ever decide to run for RfA or are nominated for RfA you can expect my support if:
- You try and contribute more to articles then you spend adding to article categorys/fighting vandalism/AfD'ing etc.
- You stay a good editor, from what i have seen you are a very good editor and deserve support and could probably make a fine admin.
My advice: Leave it at least 3 months, work on your distinct edits. Also dont let your RfA get you down, your self confidence may be a bit lower as it failed but you are still a good editor and you should not let a failed RfA get you down. ;-) Matthew Fenton (contribs) 19:57, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
- I suggest that you wait for at least 3 months before reapplying for adminship. I see no other problems.--Jusjih 01:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Re:Your RfA
Thanks for the message. I think you're taking the right course by withdrawing and waiting. You need more experience writing the encyclopedia which is, of course, the primary goal of the project. That will come with time. In another three or four months, if you've been making contributions, I will have little or no trouble supporting your RfA.
I suggest pitching in at Wikipedia:Articles for creation, which is terrific writing practice. You'll get an good grasp of the kind of articles the project needs and an idea of what the project does not need. Last night I spent an hour writing about a prehistoric worm or mollusc or something, another chunk of time writing an article about the Order of Daedalians, and yet another hour or so writing about a family of insects called Cixiidae. I'd never write articles like these on my own, so I learned something, burnished my writing skills, and made a real contribution to the encyclopedia all at the same time. There's a huge backlog at AfC, and plenty of work for everyone. Take a look at one of the completed dates to learn how to judge the good stuff from the bad, and jump right in.
Anyway, with a more rounded body of contributions your next RfA will have a much better chance. If I can help in any way, please let me know. Happy editing - Baseball,Baby! balls•strikes 21:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
My RfA
 |
Thank you so much for voting in my recent RFA. It passed on the relatively narrow vote of 38/8/8. It was also one of the least-participated-in RFA nominations in several months, so pat yourself on the back, and join the party on your left, but first, take your cookie!
NOTE: I can't code HTML to save my life. I copied this from Misza13. I guess I should write him a thank you note as well. Cookies sold separately. Batteries not included. Offer not valid with other coupons. May contain peanuts or chicken. Keep out of the reach of small children, may present a choking hazard to children under the age of 3. Do not take with alcohol. This notice has a dark background and therefore may be eaten by a grue at any time. The receiver of this message, hereafter referred to as "Pudding Head" relinquishes all rights and abilities to file a lawsuit or any other litigious activities. RyanGerbil10, Jimbo Wales, and the states of Georgia, North Dakota and Wisconsin are not liable for any lost or stolen items or damage from errant shopping carts. |
 |
Thank you so much! RyanGerbil10(The people rejoice!) 03:47, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
my RfA
Cheers! - CheNuevara 17:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks from Yanksox
 |
Hey, Eluchil, thanks for supporting my RfA, which registered a tally of 104/4/7. Which means...
|
|
Hey there! I've just created a WikiProject Narnia members' user-box. If you want to add it to your userpage, just edit in {{User Narnia-WP}}, which will expand to:
| Narnia | This user is a member of the WikiProject Narnia |
Cheers! --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 11:13, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
My RfA
Nitcentral
Thanks for your participation on the page to discuss the Nitcentral article deletion, but I'm not sure I understand your position. You voted to endorse, which means to endorse the original decision to delete, but the argument you provide seems like an argument to overturn the decision. May I ask what your position is? Thanks. Nightscream 00:35, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. Nightscream 00:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Invitation to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy
Hi there! I've noticed that you've edited articles pertaining to the Eastern Orthodox Church. I wanted to extend an invitation to you to join the WikiProject dedicated to organizing and improving articles on the subject, which can be found at: WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy. This WikiProject was begun because a need was perceived to raise the level of quality of articles on Wikipedia which deal with the Eastern Orthodox Church.
You can find information on the project page about the WikiProject, as well as how to join and how to indicate that you are a member of the project. Additionally, you may be interested in helping out with our collaboration of the month. I hope you'll consider joining and thank you for your contributions thus far! —A.S. Damick talk contribs 03:55, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Alexa Ranking
I didn't noticed your response on my talk page until just now, so thanks. Do you think being slashdotted is notable enough? andrew 12:37, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
RfA thanks
|
Thank you very much for participating in my RFA, which closed successfully today with a result of (62/18/3). I will go very carefully at first, trying to make sure I don't mess up too badly using the tools, and will begin by re-reading all the high-quality feedback I received during the process, not least from those who opposed me. Any further advice/guidance will be gratefully accepted. I hope I will live up to your trust! Guinnog 14:52, 30 August 2006 (UTC)} |
Re: Ganfon's RfA
Hi. Thanks for bringing that situation to my attention. Indeed, the candidate had withdrawn. In RfA, a request is considered withdrawn if the candidate her/himself removes it from the main RfA page. Well, here is when he added his request to the main RfA page, and here is when he removed it, thereby withdrawing. I've closed the RfA properly. Thanks again, Redux 18:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)