|
User talk:Ultraexactzz/Archive 1
This archive includes edits to User talk:Ultraexactzz from December 2005 through Mid-January 2008. Welcome!Welcome! Hello, Ultraexactzz/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place Arbcom candidate userboxGreetings. I've made a new userbox for arbcom candidates to show on their userpages so that visiters will know they're running.
If you'd like to place it on your userpage, feel free. Regards, – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 02:30, 11 January 2006 (UTC) SuggestionHey there..I noticed that you're new here at Wikipedia, and you're looking for ways to get involved, but I'd like to suggest in the nicest way I can, that you might withdraw your nomination for the Arbitration Committee. It's very difficult to become an arbitrator, and users are usually well known across the community before being selected. Best wishes, -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 06:51, 11 January 2006 (UTC) Voting ResultsI'm stashing this here, because it's a little embarassing - but, I know I don't want to have to search old election returns for the link if I ever want to refer to it for some nebulous purpose. Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/Ultraexactzz. ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 21:42, 26 November 2007 (UTC) heroes.hey! are you gonna fix the Hard Part episode article? I know what you'd say, "what can't you do it??". My answer is, because i have no clue what the exact order is, all i know is that it's wrong. dposse 13:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the recognition. Have a good day. - Gilliam 23:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC) Striking your voteHello Ultraexactzz, Thank you for your interest in the Wikimedia Board Election. The Election Committee regretfully informs you that your previous vote was received in error and will be struck according to the election rules, described below. The Election Committee regretfully announces today that we will have to remove approximately 220 votes submitted. These votes were cast by people not entitled to vote. The election rules state that users must have at least 400 edits by June 1 to be eligible to vote. The voter lists we sent to Software in the Public Interest (our third party election partner) initially were wrong, and one of your account was eventually included to our initial list. There was a bug in the edit counting program and the sent list contained every account with 201 or more edits, instead of 400 or more edits. So large numbers of people were qualified according to the software who shouldn't be. The bug has been fixed and an amended list was sent to SPI already. Our first (and wrong) list contains 80,458 accounts as qualified. The proper number of qualified voters in the SPI list is now 52,750. As of the morning of July 4 (UTC), there are 2,773 unique voters and 220 people, including you, have voted who are not qualified based upon this identified error. In accordance with voting regulations the Election Committee will strike those approximately 220 votes due to lack of voting eligibility. The list of struck votes is available at https://wikimedia.spi-inc.org/index.php/List_of_struck_votes. We are aware of the possibility that some of the people affected may have other accounts with more than 400 edits, and hence may still be eligible to vote. We encourage you to consider voting again from another account, if you have one. If you have no other account eligible to vote, we hope you reach the criteria in the next Election, and expect to see your participation to the future Elections. Your comments, questions or messages to the Committee would be appreciated, you can make them at m:Talk:Board elections/2007/en. Other language versions are available at m:Translation requests/Eleccom mail, 07-05. Again, we would like to deeply apologize for any inconvenience. Sincerely,
WP:CVU statusThe Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 16:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC) Brian AdamsNo problem. Unfortunately when a public person dies people converge to the article's or their talk pages and post tributes - and put in rest in peace messages. I was trying to make sure it didn't get out of hand like it did in the Chris Benoit and Steve Irwin articles. I'm sorry the person died, but we have to make it clear wikipedia is not meant to express that. Fighting for Justice 02:05, 14 August 2007 (UTC) AfDThanks for fixing this. I was following the instructions at Template:AfD in 3 steps. WHat went wrong? I had trouble with this yesterday. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 14:01, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Star Wars (disambiguation)You need to understand that a disambiguation page is not like a normal list page. It is meant only for items that are commonly called by the name being disambiguated (if that's a word). In the case of that page, only a series called "Star Wars" should be listed. Neither of the "Clone Wars" series have gone under just the name "Star Wars" and, so, simply do not belong. At the present time, there is no other name than "Star Wars" for the live action series, which is why it is appropriate for it to be listed. Rhindle The Red 03:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC) Thank you!
Afd fixesHey. The article is not yet posted to AfD. Give me a minute. I've edit conflicted twice with you two minutes after creating the nomination page:-)--Fuhghettaboutit 17:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
The Orange BoxNo problem man, I've been trying to tidy up a few infoboxes recently. Apologies if my edit initially seemed heavy-handed =) Fin©™ 19:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC) SorryI have a bad habit of not explaining my edits. Plus I assumed no one was actually editing that page. Nice to know someone is. :-) Serendipodous 18:24, 5 November 2007 (UTC) DON'T MERGE ARTICLEThe content of the other article is questionable and is based on false allegations (no proof was given by the person who changed the article and insisted in that way) so for that reason we have the authorization to build another article. This article is complete and full of references. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simorgh7007 (talk • contribs) 16:40, 7 November 2007 Hi, thanks for merging those, the result seems a lot more useful than all the separate articles. If a merger is done, the last step is (except in very special cases) to change the originating article into a redirect to the target article, not to delete it. This is to preserve the edit history, in order to stay compliant with GFDL. (Also, the titles would usually be something people might look for, so the redirects would be useful, but the qualifiers after the people's names make that one pretty irrelevant.) I did that so there's really nothing more to do here now, thanks. - Bobet 13:19, 8 November 2007 (UTC) Cesar AbreuOkay, thanks for clearing that up. --Coredesat 18:50, 8 November 2007 (UTC) You've run into an old pal of mine, the banned user AntiCommieMike, whom I believe to now be writing as an IP or as OakCreekGuy. He is obsessed with communism and Frank Zeidler, and has decided that I am the living incarnation of same. Sorry; thanks for trying to moderate the discussion. --Orange Mike 01:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Uh, thanks! Just didn't have anything else to do tonight... -- ArglebargleIV 05:02, 15 November 2007 (UTC) RfAI considered not spamming talk pages but not saying "thanks" just isn't me. The support was remarkable and appreciated. I only hope that I am able to help a little on here. Please let me know if I can help you or equally if you find any of my actions questionable. Thanks & regards --Herby talk thyme 12:41, 16 November 2007 (UTC) I see your comments at the patrolled pages page as well and feel like this article is an example I am having with it - at the same time you nominated the article for speedy deletion the article was marked "patrolled" without the article being deleted. Assuming you did not mark the article for speedy deletion this article may have passed everyone by as a patrolled article and no one would've noticed it as it had been patrolled. Instead I am finding myself having to check every article irrelevant of if they have been patrolled or not. –– Lid(Talk) 03:53, 17 November 2007 (UTC) AFD ofFaith Benson-McKnightNo problem. Thought I got them all, so I definitely agree with adding that one. Thanks for the catch.Horrorshowj (talk) 04:21, 17 November 2007 (UTC) 24 DeletionsIs there a way of re-listing them as one AFD?--Lucy-marie (talk) 15:19, 17 November 2007 (UTC) Hello, Ultraexactzz ... I'd appreciate your feedback on my Deletion warnings protocol ... there is a thread here on my current talk page (click Re : AfD(s) for Ben RudnickNoted with thanks. - Cheers, Mailer Diablo (talk) 19:36, 19 November 2007 (UTC) ThanksNothing florid, nothing fancy. Just thanks: for the compliment, and for the support. I'll try to wield the Mop-and-Bucket with grace and humility. --Orange Mike 04:03, 20 November 2007 (UTC) Cairo Opera CompanyHi. I'd love to help, but my Arabic is at the "cat sat on the mat" level, so translating the article is a bit beyond me. --Gene_poole (talk) 06:02, 20 November 2007 (UTC) ArabicNo problem, I'm ready for any serves for Wikipedia, I have seen your message at my talk page at Arabic Wikipedia, you can leave a message there, I'm an active user ;)--OsamaK (talk) 13:42, 21 November 2007 (UTC) SpimeAn editor has asked for a deletion review of Spime. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Artw (talk) 15:32, 23 November 2007 (UTC) Vocelli's PizzaYeah, thanks, I don't know the tags to create the 'archived debate' enclosure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avruch (talk • contribs) 19:27, 23 November 2007 (UTC) My RfA
Click show to open your card! → → →
This RFA thanks was inspired by User:Iridescent's and User:The Random Editor's RFA thanks which were both inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks. Thank youFor kind words. Don't think we've met before. I really appreciate the gesture. DurovaCharge! 21:25, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
ArbComThank you for your questions. I have however decided to withdraw my nomination as I do not think I am ready. Thank you however for taking the time to ask me a questions. I'm glad to see you continued with the project beyond your nomination after your 13th edit! Thanks again. LordHarris (talk) 17:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Blogs As Reliable SourcesYour statement that blogs are not reliable source is in direct contradiction to Wikipedia guidelines. Nowhere does it make such a blanket statement. I am a subject expert on media, with many published articles in various magazines and I was an editor in chief of two magazines, in addition to being a published author. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.93.222.223 (talk) 16:32, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
ArbCom electionsThanks for helping out with the moves. :) - Mtmelendez (Talk) 13:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC) Question from Ultraexactzz - Arbcom Elections 2007Best wishes in your candidacy, and in your tenure on the committee should you be elected. I'm asking this question to most of the candidates, so I apologize in advance if you've already answered a similar question from another editor. Some background. I was an avid reader of the encyclopedia until December 2005, when I decided to begin editing. I had started to delve into the workings of the project, reading about AfD's and the ANI and, most interestingly, the work of the Arbitration Committee. When elections came around in December 2005/January 2006, I thought that a fresh perspective might be of value to the committee. So, in my haste to pitch in, I made my 13th edit (!) by nominating myself to the Arbitration Committee. Needless to say, it did not go well. However, I did find some editors who supported my candidacy on moral grounds, offering encouragement and concuring that a different perspective was of value in the committee's work. Looking back, it got me thinking, as this round of elections begins: What is the most valuable trait for an arbitrator? Your statement and answers to other questions will address this at length, I'm sure, but if you had to distill the essence of being an effective arbitrator into one word, what would that word be? ~~~~ I asked this question of all (or almost all) candidates in the 2007 ArbCom Elections, November 2007. I post it here for archival purposes. ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 15:46, 10 December 2007 (UTC) ACE2007 Comment Moving(Moved these here on 16:11, 19 December 2007 (UTC). ZZ Claims ~ Evidence )
==[[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Vote/CANDIDATE]]== Good morning. I have indented your vote on [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Vote/CANDIDATE|CANDIDATE'S]] voting page in the Arbitration Committee Election. In order to vote, editors must have [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007#Process|150 mainspace edits]] as of 1 November 2007. Per your User Contributions, you had fewer than that number. Accordingly, your vote is removed from the count - though, I note that it remains on record as a statement of your position. Please feel free to post any questions you may have at my talk page, or at the talk page for the election. Thank you for your interest in participating in this year's election. Best, ~~~~ Mining in South AfricaThanks I was the one who added this missing article to the list ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 14:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
--Royalbroil 14:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC) Yes it was a shocker all right. One of just many ones Wildlife of Brazil was also missing!! . In plays a huge role not only in South African but in the African economy too. Diamonds and gold pretty much affect markets across the world. Good start anyway. Regards ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 14:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC) User:Chelsea ToryHi - to vote in the ArbCom elections, users need to have 150 mainspace edits, not total edits. If you look at the link I gave on Giano's page, Chelsea Tory only has 88 (and only had 79 on the cut-off date of 1 November). Thanks, BLACKKITE 15:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC) ArbCom Elections - Request
ReformatingIf you follow the links from the talk page, you will see that I expected the move. No problem. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC) Re Giano II Vote talk pageHi there - I see you just put a "resolved" ticky on it. I think Giano had asked for that section to be archived. If that isn't possible, do you think you could put in one of those show/hide boxes? In a weak bid to hide my technical incompetence, I will rely on the fact that I have voted and wish to keep the page as impartial as possible. Thanks. Risker (talk) 04:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
DanFrankly I don't mind either way :) >Radiant< 22:04, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Mainspace EditsAccording to http://tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/Tool1/wannabe_kate I have 155 mainspace edits. Why did you say I had less than 150? Yaksar (talk) 04:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC) Re: Arbcom ElectionsI already voted too. :) So if you move my comment, that's okay by me. I just want people to see it & think. -- llywrch (talk) 21:30, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for verifying the indented votes. I have left a message for Giano on his personal talk page about them, as I did an independent check as well. I note that a couple of them appear to be indented for possible "sockpuppet" reasons and I will leave it to him, as the candidate, to let me know how he wishes to address that issue. Given the current sensitive climate when it comes to sockpuppets, I am leaving you this message here rather than on the vote talk page; I hope you don't mind. Risker (talk) 02:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC) vandalism- skank
RfA thanks
--Michael Greiner 18:47, 13 December 2007 (UTC) Thank you for your encouraging comments. --Michael Greiner 19:07, 13 December 2007 (UTC) User:Ultraexactzz/Voting2008Looks great! - Mtmelendez (Talk) 10:55, 14 December 2007 (UTC) ThanksThanks for the processing - I think things got a bit too heated for me to work on the committee, at least this year. Maybe at some future time, not immediately after a case. Adam Cuerden talk 13:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC) Arb questionAs promised - q.31 for you. Hope it's up to the same standard as others! :) Best, and thanks!
Username abbreviationIn your signature's abbreviation, are you aware that, phonetically, it means dick in French? I mean, I'm not asking you to change it, just thought you should be aware of it. Happy editing! Icestorm815 (talk) 01:21, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate! I paid close attention to everything that was said, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. And yes, I will definitely avoid any use of tools on situations where I have been personally involved. I'm going to take it slow for now -- I'm working my way through the Wikipedia:New admin school, carefully investigating the admin tools and double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, but I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are several more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status! --Elonka 07:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC) RfA Thanks
RfA thanks
Allan BerubeThanks so much for creating the entry on my dear friend Allan Berube. I have added to it and asked other to keep adding, editing, and improving it, so that it becomes the most complete source of info on Allan's life and accomplishments. I am rather new at editing Wikipedia entries so I am learning on the job. Again, thanks. Jonathan Ned Katz jnkatz1@aol.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by jnkatz1 (talk • contribs) 17:51, 23 December 2007 (UTC) RfA thanks
Dear Ultraexactzz, here is a little note to say thank you for your kind support on my request for adminship which succeeded with a final result of (72/19/6). Now that I am a sysop, do not hesitate to contact me with any queries you have. I would be glad to help you along with the other group of kind and helpful administrators. Thank you again and I look forward to editing alongside you in the future. — E talk 12:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ron Paul campaign 2008 appearancesI thought it was a pretty clear case of WP:SNOW; but didn't overtly cite that. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC) Apostrophical section titles...like these mean that people can (if they feel the need!) refer to #Section 1 and #Section 1' distinctly. Otherwise, only the first Section 1 would be referencable in this way. Splash - tk 13:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
ApostrophesYou're right, that is why I added them. Just letting you know :) Equazcion •✗/C • 14:06, 4 Jan 2008 (UTC)
The project spawned from Betacommand's threadFor your consideration: WP:TODAY. Lawrence Cohen 17:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC) WP:ACE2008Hey ZZ! I saw your comment. I think that Penwhale meant that the 2008 Elections page should be made in April 2008, but the elections still held in December. If the page is created in April, it gives us six months to organize, notify, and change the process, in time to start the nominations in October-November. What do you think? - Mtmelendez (Talk) 16:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Ultraexactzz, the following guidelines on the version I have constantly reverted to has been established by several, if not many, past discussions and by MoS guideline: ===================================================================== ===================================================================== =============== REPUBLIC OF CHINA ARTICLE GUIDELINES ================ ===================================================================== ===================================================================== Note 1: Simplified Chinese shall remain in the introductory sentence per [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (use of Chinese language)#Simplified and Traditional]] Note 2: Please do not add Simplified and Hanyu Pinyin to the infobox. Note 3: Please refrain from adding flags to the dablinks. Note 4: Please refrain from adding " (Taiwan) " everywhere, as it is misleading and is also poor form. The anon. has been unresponsive in the past to the requests for discussion, as well as willing to act with the intent to disrupt and violate WP:NPOV. nat.utoronto 13:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC) Non-free book coverA book cover cannot adequately be "describing the book's contents in the context of the author's life and career", as mentioned in the non-free use rationale for Image:AudacityofHope.jpg, it can only show the book's cover. Therefore the current non-free use rationale for the use of Image:AudacityofHope.jpg in the Barack Obama article is unsatisfactory. – Ilse@ 18:02, 8 January 2008 (UTC) Yes, it was of course meant as a joke. The nominee has five times more talkspace edits than I have edits altogether! I would have thought it was obvious, but never mind. Thanks for moving it back! Lankiveil (talk) 08:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC). It looks good, but...I was not aware that the FUR had to be templated. I know that makes it easier on the bots, but is that a requirement of the policy? Other than that question, it looks fine to me. Bellwether BC 18:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
RFAYour interested in a RFA, you do great work around the project, and would make an excellent admin. Thanks Secret account 04:11, 10 January 2008 (UTC) OK, have racked my brains, but can't see the link between the acronym above and the Show Preview button...what am I missing? Giles Bennett (Talk, Contribs) 14:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
RollbackHeh, heh. :) I'm glad you're putting the rollback tool to its proper use. Good luck. Acalamari 17:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC) RicxsterWell, I am sorry if I feel insulted when my integrity and career is attacked when it has been my raison d'etre for the last 11 years. I wager you would be to. Is it unreasonable to demand apology when such rampant untruth and hypocrisy is in play? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricxster (talk • contribs) 22:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC) When all that is required to rectify and forget this defamation is an apology. I think I am entitled to such when the attack was so direct, core and monumentally insulting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricxster (talk • contribs) 22:10, 10 January 2008 (UTC) RfA thanks (2)
Ohmpandya's RFAHello. Thanks for the comment of "oppose" on my RFA. However, I have already gone threw admin coaching. Would you like a link to it? Ohmpandya (Talk to Me...) 17:36, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
RfA Thanks (3)Hi Ultraexactzz - thanks for your participation in my request for adminship. It passed 52/0/0, and I'm now in possession of a shiny new mop. If I can ever help you with anything, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 09:23, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
|
Portal di Ensiklopedia Dunia
