User talk:Dppowell/Archive3

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

Al Boscov[edit]

The fact that you work for the man shows you to be a hypocrite. Dirtybirdy78

Responded on your talk page. Dppowell 18:51, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Panairjdde[edit]

I haven't heard from him in a while? This is too good to be true. Kingjeff 02:18, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ireland flag[edit]

Hey there...just wanted to let you know that I reverted your edit to Ireland, since that's the article for the whole island and not just the Republic. There's been a lot of back-and-forth on adding flags to that page, so if flags are your thing, I'd suggest entering the discussion on the talk page. Dppowell 04:15, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Okay, I didn't know that the flag of Ireland included the whole island. So yes, I agree with your revert. Thanks for informing me kindly. I may re-add the flag closer to the bottom of the article in a more insugnificant place. Thanks again. -- Penubag  04:19, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How it works?[edit]

And how it works? Let me tell you. If you edit looking for consensus, the stubborn editor will win the battle, because he will tire you untill you give up. Then, if you play the stubborn, everything goes well, until you get into an admin and he bans you just because he doesn't like that single edit of yours (he does not mind if you are right or wrong, he just wants to get rid of you).

E.g.: you think that Kingjeff of yours is a good fellow? He wanted so desperately to put a picture of his favourite football player that he did not mind to upload an unfree image on WP. This is bad, I hope you will agree with me, as I hoped everybody would have agreed with me, and I would expect his potentially damaging behaviour to be "punished", wouldn't you? Well, if you know WP as I know it, it would not come as a surprise the fact that it took more than a month of fights to have that unfree picture removed; and he is the good contributor; and I am the bad one.

There are countless I could tell, but I won't annoy you. I am just what WP made me to be. --GodShores 00:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, just a side note: when he uploaded Image:Andreas Ottl.jpg, he claimed to have had it allowed by Bayern Munich: I asked him to fill an official request for permission (I think it is called something-ticket on Commons), and he said he would have done it. Ask him what happened to that request, maybe you will understand why I say a good editor is valued as a bad one.--GodShores 00:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can easily explain Image:Andreas Ottl.jpg. I emialed Wikipedia explaining the free license and all that. So I got a reply a few days later with this picture. (I can't remember how many days). So, I'm assuming that this implies that they agreed to the photo on Wikipedia. I sent in the email to Wikipedia. So, as far as I know, they've accepted the photo. I uploaded 39 Ottl Andreas.jpg on German Wikipedia and they have already comfirmed that this photo is ligitimate. I translated the comfirming template from German Wikipedia on freetranslation.com.

For the publication of this file under the indicated licenses, the Wikimedia Foundation exists a written permission to the publication. The Wikimedia Foundation recovered an e-mail on the 15 November 2006 at permissions-de@wikimedia.org with the OTRS-Ticketnummer tickets#: 2006111510011081 that this permission documents.

Kingjeff 01:06, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see he's already ready to avoid his ban. Kingjeff 01:15, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question about your AIV report[edit]

I asked a question on AIV, you can see it here. Thanks! · AndonicO Talk 00:45, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Panairjdde[edit]

I wouldn't be surpeised if this new account is just a decoy for another account? Kingjeff 01:42, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Pennsylvania[edit]

Hello there!

I'm writing to inform you that we are now forming the first local Wikimedia Chapter in the United States: Wikimedia Pennsylvania. Our goals are to perform outreach and fundraising activities on behalf of the various Wikimedia projects. If you're interested in being a part of the chapter, or just want to know more, you can:

Thanks and I hope you join up! Cbrown1023 talk 03:04, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Irish articles assessments[edit]

It seems that the assessment of Irish articles has fallen off the radar but recently Flowerpotman, Sarah777 and I have been doing a little work on this as well as actually classifying articles (actually Sarah has done the most work). Anyway, you are listed as a member of the WikiProject hence this post.

  • The first thing that needs doing is to work on the WikiProject template. Actually there are two templates both of which get recorded by the assessment statistics bot that collects the ratings and creates the listings in the category Category:Ireland articles by quality. The two project templates are {{Irelandproj}} listed on the main project page and {{WikiProject Ireland}} listed on the assessment page—the first allows both quality and importance rating as well as nesting but no reviewer comments, while the second allows quality rating and comments but the importance does not seem to work and comments are not included. This needs to be fixed, so we use one that works fully—can you help?
  • The next thing is to decide if we just let editors assess as they wish or to create some criteria or guidelines for rating the quality and importance of the Irish articles. Personally I am in favour of some guidelines—some will be easy to decide while others are a little more complex. What do you think?
  • Some projects make lists of articles for assessment while other go after groups of articles by category. What should we do? A mixture of both by using a "To do list"?
  • As of the last assessment statistics bot run on Sunday, August 20, only 1462 articles have been tagged, of which 1156 have been assessed for quality but 660 of these have no importance value.
  • Besides these 1462 there must be hundreds more untagged articles that should be tagged when we get the template issue mentioned above fixed.

We are not bad in our assessments but some projects have all their articles assessed while others are lacking more than we are. We can really use a few active editors to bring assessments to the fore. Please reply on the assessment talk page as to what you can do. Please help out. ww2censor 17:14, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation pages[edit]

Hello, just wanted to drop you a friendly line about disambiguation pages. As per the style guideline for disambiguation pages, only the words being disambiguated get wikilinked, rather than the normal practice of linking all interesting terms. As such, I reverted your change to the O'Brien disambiguation page. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. --Kralizec! (talk) 18:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Early Christian Ireland[edit]

If you are minded to write something, feel free to take whatever you like from here. I don't see that I'm likely to get back to this before 2008. Best wishes, Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:45, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your RfA[edit]

I've now updated the talk page of your RfA with your edit count. Good luck. Rudget Contributions 13:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't know about the pubs, at 14. :) But, Manchester is all good, apart from maybe the odd Greek invasion. Rudget Contributions 15:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Young Ireland Book list[edit]

I have left a post on the Great Famine article talk page. I would rather you had used the talk page first, than just reverting. Possibly you could address this, and we can use the talk page. Thanks in advance, --Domer48 13:09, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations[edit]

I'm pleased to inform you that, consensus having been achieved, you are now an administrator. Please read all the material on the administrators' reading list before testing out your new privileges. For instructions, please see the administrators' how-to guide. Best of luck — Dan | talk 22:36, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats[edit]

Good job! There are some good reading links in the post above. Beyond that, please don't hesitate to ask any questions. Good luck. IrishGuy talk 22:54, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great job! It seems IrishGuy covered all I was going to say :)   jj137 (Talk) 23:08, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About your RfA[edit]

The admins' T-shirt. Acalamari 23:17, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on passing your RfA! Here is your new T-shirt, and when you have the chance, don't forget to visit the school for new admins. Good luck! Acalamari 23:17, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice! Pre-shrunk, I hope. ;-) Dppowell 23:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

I wanted to thank you for your considered opposition to my RfA. Your concerns are valid--and I understood your opposition more thoroughly when I saw the candidate you nominated. I may never have an editorial record like Hb,ws...but I hope I can approach you with any questions I might have while wearing the admin hat. Dppowell 23:29, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I hope you understood my opposition and I see you don't hold it against me; please do feel free to get in touch at any stage if there's anything you need. Stifle (talk) 23:32, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops[edit]

I see now that I ought not to have left you a message about it at all...I missed your instructions. The talk pages blur together when you're posting to a bunch of them in rapid succession. Sorry! Dppowell 23:35, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. The only thing you've done is made me have to re-archive because I did my October archiving an hour early... be a good new admin and don't reply for another 23 minutes, eh? :) Stifle (talk) 23:37, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your RfA[edit]

Congrats Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 00:12, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your RFA thanking[edit]

Note, you have a table missing a |} at the end of the "thanks" you just sent out, it is breaking talk pages. Happy editing, and welcome to the sysop club! — xaosflux Talk 01:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your first day on the job and you're already fucking up. =( Just kidding—from a random sample, it looks like your fixes are actually breaking the tables. east.718 at 02:48, 11/1/2007
Looks like you're adding |} to the end of a line: it always needs to go on a new line. Cheers, east.718 at 02:50, 11/1/2007

Hibernia[edit]

Thanks, I hope these edits were helpful. RandomCritic 02:58, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Username report[edit]

Regarding my comments at WP:UAA[1], I wasn't sure to remove the blocked user(since the bot wasn't) or leave it to an administrator to remove it.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 03:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship[edit]

The others are being silly, of course you get more than a lousy t-shirt:

File:Plunger 250x410.jpg You might want to use an industrial cleaner to get those mineral deposits off the plungers.

I recommend reading my essay outlining what you can now do that a non-flagged account can. There might be a couple interesting things that you didn't know. Keegantalk 03:50, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go slow, be civil and communicative, and confidence comes with time. Happy editing to you, contact me any time with questions. Keegantalk 03:56, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good luck to you, and better you than me. Admins have a thankless job, that's for certain. K. Scott Bailey 14:19, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pile On Congratulations[edit]

Well done. Now get on with it. :) 07:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Yep, congratulations and good luck! My talk page is always open if you ever have any questions, although I suspect you'll be fine. Neil ☎ 10:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Preity Zinta FA[edit]

Hi there. The Preity Zinta article has recently achieved A-class status. Due to the wealth of support I have decided to now nominate for an FA class article which I believe and judging by the comments of others is pretty much up to. In my view it is better than some existing FA actor articles. I would therefore be very grateful if you could give it a final review in your own time and leave your comments and views at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Preity Zinta. Thankyou, your comments are always valuable. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 10:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sexybeast6989[edit]

I wondered which aspect of the username policy this name violated? sbfw | talk 04:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because he has the name sexy? sbfw | talk 04:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Less suitable than my current one, you mean? And it was a series of numbers, I seriously doubt it was intended as 69 in the sexual way. i (talk) 04:42, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would rather you would. I almost removed the name myself, but I thought it better to let an admin review it. i (talk) 04:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


White Devil (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)[edit]

Excuse me.

User:White Devil has several final warnings on their user page. Edit history shows that each time one is received, editor cools it for at least a week, then resumes same vandalism. [2] [3]

This is the 2nd time in two weeks a block was denied because this editor hasn't been active since final warning issued. I'd say this vandal has found a method to evade block.

This account has few or no good edits, and may be vandalism only. I think a block is in order. / edg ☺ ★ 05:35, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: User:White Devil[edit]

See #1 on WP:AIV: "The vandal is active now, has been sufficiently warned, and has vandalized after a recent last warning, except in unusual circumstances." Last Tuesday doesn't count as recent in my book. What you describe may be unusual circumstances, but there appear to be some good-faith edits in the history and I'd prefer to give the benefit of the doubt. If you feel strongly about a block, I'd suggest summarizing the situation on WP:ANI. I'm not opposed to the user being blocked, but I'm trying to play it by the book. Dppowell 05:54, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you are not opposed to the user being blocked, may I simply repost this to WP:AIV so that another admin may review this? I think playing by the rules means I do not have permission to vandalize up to last warning every 2 weeks. The proposal that I should have to escalate User:White Devil to the Corps of Administrators because this vandal WP:GAMEs the system so trivially seems pointlessly bureaucratic. / edg ☺ ★ 06:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Henrik's RfA thanks![edit]

Thanks for supporting my RfA, it closed today with a final tally of 39 supports, 1 oppose and 1 neutral. As always, if you ever see me doing anything which would cause you to regret giving me your support, let me know. henrik•talk 18:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK[edit]

Updated DYK query On November 6, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Radagaisus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:35, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for your friendly message on User talk:Athinaios#GA nomination for Fayum mummy portraits. Everyone is really nice today... Interestingly, we seem to share some interests... athinaios 16:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

James M. Cahill[edit]

Hi there--he actually went to New Brunswick's St. Peter's High, not St. Peter's Prep in Jersey City. I'm slowly creating a page for the high school here; I'll wikify Cahill's entry when it's ready. Dppowell (talk) 18:54, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • After I made the edit, I looked at his bio and I realized it couldn't have been St. Peter's Prep. I was doing the research, but I'm glad you spotted the error. Thanks for the correction! Alansohn (talk) 19:10, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhat-Belated RfA Thanks :-)[edit]

Input needed in response to continuing personal attacks[edit]

You posted a warning [4] against personal attacks at the talk page of 83.70.246.228. Please note the IP editor's other postings which appear to violate WP:NPA which appeared before your warning: [5] , [6] , [7], [8]. Please note the other posting which appeared after your warning: [9]. Your input would be helpful. Thanks. Edison (talk) 03:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dppowell/Archive3&oldid=1091504171"