User talk:65HCA7/2017 archive

Archives[edit]

2015

2016

Whoops![edit]

Hi YITYNR. Thanks for reverting my accidental rollback on Organ (anatomy). I clicked "rollback" accidentally while scrolling through my watchlist and you beat me to fixing the error. I appreciate it, and sorry for making extra work for you! Ry's the Guy ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:48, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rystheguy: No worries - everyone makes mistakes sometimes! I've done it too; it's kind of embarrassing. :D

Have a great day! YITYNR ^{My work • What's wrong?} 21:51, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, you too! Ry's the Guy ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:51, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RfA[edit]

Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. ) Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:52, 23 July 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Cullen328: You're welcome, and I'm confident you'll make a great administrator :) 65 HC A7 11:13, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Cullen328[edit]

I easily fully accept that you did not perceive "mafia-like..., fully inappropriate" verbiage at all. I do not even assume this were intended by Cullen328, but I perceived the verbiage this way, especially the advice to "take care", and Cullen328 did not comment any further to his reply, which I still consider to be remarkably beyond of saying "I'm good with that". In spite of opposing to all the PC-derived crap of urbanity, civility, safety of spaces, I still try to adhere to a higher level of sensitivity, more fully de rigeur, than you seem to expect from an admin to be. Purgy (talk) 10:46, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Purgy Purgatorio: But it's obvious that the sentiment was "I'm okay with your vote, and I hope people don't give you crap for it." It is fully appropriate for people to say that, even the second half of it, considering people can gang up on each other around here and Vertium, the guy who voted neutral, himself expressed discomfort with said ganging-up. Your vote comes across, as K6ka said, as an oppose vote for being civil. And I don't know where you're from or what it means to you, but where I'm from "take care" is a polite thing to say, along the lines of "Okay, have a good one!"

Either way, I fail to see how Cullen's comment was the least bit inappropriate, uncivil, or offensive. 65 HC A7 11:13, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Chelsea[edit]

Hey mate, I'm just trying to keep the vandals off the page Davide Zappacosta. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prawny007 (talk • contribs) 14:09, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Prawny007: I was trying to take care of the vandalism spree too (which has now ended), but your edit reinstated a fairly obvious test/vandalism, which I reverted, thus making your edit nonconstructive, hence my v2 warning on your talk page. I appreciate your other edits to that page, which were indeed partial or full vandal reverts, but this edit was indeed nonconstructive; if this was just a mistake, please let me know. 65 HC A7 14:16, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I reverted an edit which was in turn another revert of a unproductive addition to the page. This was indeed a mistake and I'm glad it was corrected. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prawny007 (talk • contribs) 14:22, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Prawny007: All right; no worries. Have a great rest of the day! 65 HC A7 14:35, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You too mate! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prawny007 (talk • contribs) 14:22, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks![edit]

Hi 65HCA7, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated! ansh 666 20:26, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ansh666: You're welcome, and I'm confident you'll make a great administrator. Have a great day! 65 HC A7 21:33, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blog Inquiry[edit]

Hey 65HCA7,

Hope you're doing well.

I came across your page through researching the edits of a few music-related Wikipedia pages and wanted to get in touch as I'm currently working on a blog to discuss best practices / tips for Wikipedia and thought I'd reach out to see if this is something you'd want to be involved in.

Let me know your thoughts. I would email you but I already emailed a few people today and that action is currently throttled for me. Please email me back (on my user page) if you’re interested. Thanks!

CMCreator900

CMCreator900 (talk) 23:50, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

CMCreator900: Could I by any chance have more information or a link? 65 HC A7 21:39, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes reviewer granted[edit]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

Alex Shih ^Talk 00:11, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Shih: Thank you very much; have a great day! :) 65 HC A7 11:42, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why revert partial vandalism only?[edit]

Erm why did you only revert part of this edit, when the rest of the edit was obvious vandalism too? It allowed the remaining vandalism to stay for a day because other editors (or at least I did) thought you had already screened that edit for vandalism. Please take care to ensure that you are not letting obvious vandalism through in the future. Bennv3771 (talk) 15:09, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bennv3771: That was just a simple mistake; I legitimately did not see the "BEING A DADDY" portion. If I'd seen that, I would have reverted it, no questions asked; that's stupid and childish vandalism. Sometimes I am just focused on "getting the vandalism", get carried away, and don't scan all the revisions. 65 HC A7 15:26, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, 65HCA7. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ha ha![edit]

Yes, whatever on Cedarville University, but .... :-) MaynardClark (talk) 14:30, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]