Orphaned non-free media (Image:The Sun (Gotcha).png)
Thanks for uploading Image:The Sun (Gotcha).png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "
my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on
criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.
BJBot (
talk) 05:19, 4 July 2008 (UTC
RFA Thanks
Thank you for participating in my RfA, Rudget!
My RfA passed by a count of 64/3/3, so I am now an administrator! I thank you for your input and thoughts. I value them greatly, but I hope I can do a decent enough job in spite of your concerns. However, since I plan to conduct my adminship in service of the community, I believe the community has a right to revoke that privilege at any time. Thus, if you see me do anything terribly wrong, I will be
open for recall under reasonable circumstances. If you have any advice, complaints, or concerns for me, please
let me know. Thanks again.
Okiefromoklaquestions?21:08, 26 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Thank you for giving your thoughts in my RFA. I will do my absolute best to deal with any situation that I can, and I will ask for advice if I am not sure of something. I have read your various comments, and I will take your concerns to heart. If you see me do something that you do not agree with, feel free to undo it; I will not consider it wheel-warring.
Thank you for participating in my RfB! I am very grateful for the confidence of the community shown at
my RfB, which passed by a count of 154/7/2 (95.65%). I have read every word of the RfB and taken it all to heart. I truly appreciate everyone's input: supports, opposes, neutrals, and comments. Of course, I plan to conduct my cratship in service of the community. If you have any advice, questions, concerns, or need help, please
let me know. Again, Thanks! —
Rlevse •
Talk • 08:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Re:Nev1 RfA
My apologies. I had a feeling I had to wait but wasn't sure, so I rushed in anyway. I'll add it once Nev accepts. Thanks
Craigy (
talk)
17:52, 29 July 2008 (UTC)reply
CHu
Yes, I saw your edit on my watchlist and was testing it out when you pinged. Can your remove the "Endeavor to..." part. A lot of non native English speakers might get confused with the jargon.
=Nichalp«Talk»=19:04, 29 July 2008 (UTC)reply
I'm also thinking of making a nice graphical check list. Something in your face that the user cannot miss out. I'll give it a shot later today.
=Nichalp«Talk»=10:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC)reply
I hope you felt in no way badgered by me. I was simply trying to discuss and hash out the reasoning behind your oppose comment. Best regards,
S.DeanJameson17:54, 30 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Spud IP block
Hello... thanks for your feedback on the IP's talk page. FYI, the 55 hour block was for the 3RR issue, but also takes into account identical behaviour prior to that at
Spud. Cheers. --Ckatzchatspy19:02, 30 July 2008 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure whether I'll keep the Monday or Saturday date, but I'll handle any moves, if necessary. Barring something odd, we'll be publishing within the hour.
Ral315 (
talk)
20:05, 2 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Thanks to everyone who participated in
my RfA, regardless of their !vote. I have withdrawn the nomination as a failure at 19 supports, 45 opposes, and 9 neutral statements.
As has been written and sung, you can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you get what you need — and what I need is to go back to working on our shared project. Not everyone has to be an admin; there is a role for each of us. After reflection, I feel I don't have the temperament to secure community consensus as an admin at any point, and I will not be applying again in the future — and hey, that's all right, 'cause I stay true to the philosophy that adminship is no big deal: I tried, I failed, and now I'll return to doing what I've always done. I have an extremely strong belief in the consensus process, and the consensus was clear. I will be devoting my energies to volunteering at MedCab and working up a complete series of articles on the short stories of Ernest Hemingway, among lord knows what else. Thanks again to everyone who spared the time to weigh in on this one. It was made in better faith than it probably seemed. Mr. IP《
Defender of Open Editing》14:30, 4 August 2008 (UTC)reply
I would say it is misleading to say we are attempting to bring Chicago to featured in the intro. We are continuously improving the article, but it is not likely that the article will even be promoted to B-Class anytime soon. Its traffic patterns make it fall outside of my expertise. I do not generally edit high traffic articles with a mind toward promotion. The reason it lost its A-Class and GA-Class rating was that too many random editors added and changed things against policy. Significant uncited material keeps appearing and who knows about image licensing. I would say we are currently working on the Chicago Featured Topic Drive,
WP:CHIFTD. I am continuing to edit the article. When does it go to press?--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM)
16:02, 2 August 2008 (UTC)reply
I am also a little concerned about the relative comparisons to other WPs based on members. Where does this number come from? I never have felt like there were more than a dozen or two members. --
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM)
22:10, 2 August 2008 (UTC)reply
I just noticed that you deleted one question for a copyedit summary reason that I do not understand. I was going to augment my answer with a second difference. I think our project is different from most other projects in that we vote on our
Category:Top-importance Chicago articles, which we keep at 0.2% of the articles in the project. I think I just chose the first 15 or so myself and then we started voting. The first significant turnout occurred for the selection of the 21st through 25th articles. We also had a good turnout where we chose 26 through 38. Notice the future 32nd through 38th Top-importance articles have been determined by consensus within the group to be
Magnificent Mile,
Haymarket Riot,
Daniel Burnham,
Chicago River,
Lake Shore Drive,
Museum of Science and Industry (Chicago), and
Chicago Tribune as the project grows.— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
TonyTheTiger (
talk •
contribs)
02:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)reply
The project just benefited from the work of
User:MisfitToys who is the lead editor of
Billy Pierce. He is not officially a member of the project although he proofreads a bunch of our articles and has done other GAs that the project claims. I guess it would be fair to add a clarifying statement at the end of the paragraph that says "Some of the articles have been produced by editors who are not official members of the project, but project members have heavily contributed in the discussions leading to their promotions or in the editorial work for many of the articles."--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM)
14:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Many thanks!
Thank you...
...for participating in
my RfA, which closed with 119 in support, 4 neutral and 5 opposes. I'm honestly overwhelmed at the level of support that I've received from the community, and will do my best to maintain the trust placed in me. I 'm also thankful to those who opposed or expressed a neutral position, for providing clear rationales and superb feedback for me to build on. I've set up
a space for you to provide any further feedback or thoughts, should you feel inclined to. However you voted, thanks for taking the time out to contribute to the process, it's much appreciated. Kind regards, Gazimoff22:08, 4 August 2008 (UTC)reply
...I really should have taken a little more care before jumping into the position. Unfortunately, I have two other reports nearly ready to go by now - would you mind sharing it?
Shoemaker's Holiday (
talk)
13:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)reply
You may do whatever you wish, you've already done a good job with this week's report I see. Thank you for taking care of it, you may carry on with the weekly report if you see fit. Regards,
Rudget18:38, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Rudget, there's still a link to that Chicago report on the 11th (it's a live link now), and it still has a lot of inaccuracies. How is that being handled? If it's not going to be run, can the page be moved elsewhere?
SandyGeorgia (
Talk)
19:33, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
I must apologise for the confusion in the redirects there. Feel free to contact Ral if you wish, any further wikiproject reports will be being conducted by
Shoemaker's Holiday (
talk·contribs). I had recently started the report again (beginning of July, I think) but I figured I can't be bothered with it anymore. I hope that's okay.
Rudget18:40, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Sorry to see you go Rudget. You have been a great asset to have on Wikipedia; it's always sad to see someone like you go. I hope you see these messages in the future, and possibly consider a return in the near future. Best wishes,
D.M.N. (
talk)
21:10, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Well that's just bollocks. Rudget, you've decided that you are untrusted because of a "decision" in the making at OTRS? Bollocks.
Keeperǀ7602:02, 11 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Don't let one incident, one opinion, bring you down; you have many people on this talk page who will not hesitate to say that you are fine user. —
Animum (
talk)
02:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC)reply
I'm letting you know that my RfA passed just an hour or so ago, due in no small part to your nominating statement. Thanks once again. On the subject of your 'departure'... I wish my French wasn't quite so awful. It's always sad to lose an editor and I hope that it's not permanent. Remember that the community showed faith in you after the incident Cometstyles refers to, and you have proven yourself to be a trusted and exemplary editor. I don't share Cometstyles' opinion and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Thanks again and good luck.
Nev1 (
talk)
21:23, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Thankyou
Just a little note to say thankyou for participating in
my successful RFA candidacy, which passed with 96 supports, 0 opposes, and 1 neutral. I am pleasantly taken aback by the amount of support for me to contribute in an administrative role and look forward to demonstrating that such faith is well placed. Regards, WilliamH (
talk)11:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Dropped that too. I might need it again sometime, only when I need it though. :) I'm sorry for all this drama, I never thought I'd be one to do it.
Caulde19:15, 10 September 2008 (UTC)reply
No worries; if you ever need them... just ask Bibliomaniac15. ;) As to not having time, I solved that problem in a different way: the big, ugly, blue semi retirement template. :P ·
AndonicOEngage.19:39, 10 September 2008 (UTC)reply
I would have been a useless administrator this year, by any means. I have such a busy year ahead, I'm just glad I've got two of my GCSEs out of the way.
Caulde19:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Ick, I hate school. So glad I'm too old for it. I'm also very glad you didn't disappear completely. Wikipedia is supposed to be fun. A hobby, with no paycheck. If it ever goes beyond that for you, then you should hit
this link and fix an article. That's what it's all about anyway, don't worry about the rest of the shit (excuse my language). I've been doing that a lot more myself lately. This isn't supposed to be stressful. My life is stressful enough, this is my outlet. It should be yours too, when you are fed up with school/life/etc, drop a few simple edits into a few articles, nothing more, nothing less. Again, glad you've stuck around, you are valued here :-)
Keeperǀ7619:34, 10 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Nice to see you back Rudget. I don't approve of these dramatic retirements, nor do I approve of the system whereby administrators are allowed to simply ask for their position back after having given it up rather dramatically. Still, Keeper's right, wikipedia needs to be fun, else it's just an unpaid job. --
Malleus Fatuorum (
talk) 00:14, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
PS: I'll save you from my analysis of Essjay's illogical and inconsistent ramblings. :-) --
Malleus Fatuorum (
talk)
00:24, 12 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Signpost updated for August 25 and September 8, 2008.
Thank you for your participation at my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to act in ways that earn your full confidence, even though I don't have it now. Cirt (
talk)
01:38, 16 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Entry for the 2009 WikiCup is now open. The winner of the 2008 edition was
Jj137, with
Sunderland06 as runner-up. You made it to group stage of the cup. If you wish to enter for next year to improve on last year's position, please add your name to the WikiCup page and you will be informed when the new cup begins. Thanks!
Hi Caulde. I would like to thank you for your support in my RfA and the confidence expressed thereby. It is very much appreciated. :) The RfA was closed as successful with 73 supports, 3 opposes and 4 neutral. I would especially like to thank
WBOSITG for nominating me. Best wishes and thanks again, —
αἰτίας•discussion•23:15, 18 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Hello Caulde (heh, I will take some time to get used to your new user name). Thank you for your message and words on my talk page. :-) Although I much appreciate your capability of, in your mind, seeing me as a bureaucrat in the future, I don't think I'd ever attempt an RfB in the future. We're all volunteers on Wikipedia, and since we're not getting paid then we must be here because we like Wikipedia. I, for one, am here to enjoy this experience, not the opposite. And an RfB is the opposite. I understand your reasons for relinquishing the tools, although I hope you ask them back sometime. The Kosovo wars seem to have ended, you wouldn't have to put up with me. Too much. ;-) Best regards, Húsönd04:24, 21 September 2008 (UTC)reply
I've prepared it for you on pieces of paper and will email the photos to you. Hopefully my writing is readable. Outline from 938 AD until now. My USB has fallen off my cord and hopefully my USB is at home and not on this morning's bus. But the originals are still in the camera, although some stuff on my USB is not on my home hard drive. YellowMonkey (bananabucket)
02:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC)reply
User:YellowMonkey/Viet_library are some of the books I use. Karnow is the best for a brief overview of history before 1930 - about the first 100 pages. Jacobs is the best for a sketch of Diem. Hammer's "Death in November" and Jones are best for the {{Buddhist crisis}} of 1963 that resulted in Diem being toppled. Hammer's "Struggle for Indochina" is the best for the First Indochina War, which I don't know much about. Prochnau is about US journalists getting beaten up by the secret police of Diem's brother Ngo Dinh Nhu. McLeod is the best for the pre-French era. Has about 10 page overview of Trinh Lords and Nguyen Lords and 30 more about the establishment of the Nguyen Dynasty. Very detailed about early French-VN contact. Marr's book is the authoritative one for 1885-1920. It is 70% about the activities of Phan Boi Chau and his supporters, but the first 70 pages give good introduction to the start of French colonisation about 1860-1890. YellowMonkey (bananabucket)
02:41, 26 September 2008 (UTC)reply