User talk:A3RO/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Thanks for your help...

N5iln has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Thanks! Much appreciated. --A3RO (mailbox) 23:03, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: You're dangerous...

Huh, what do ya mean? :-) One of my recent history merges? Graham87 06:43, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. Nice work! Do you feel me? It's intoxicating --A3RO (mailbox) 06:50, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah! I have the power to do horrible things to the Wikipedia database which can't be undone. Graham87 06:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely yes. Truth be told, I'm addicted to you, don't you know that your toxic. I love what you do, don't you know that you're toxic? Ahhhhhhhhh ahhh ahh ahhhhh! - just spreading the toxicity... and trying to avoid my sleep deprevied mind. --A3RO (mailbox) 07:01, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! :-) I'd never heard of that song before, which shows you how much I've been ignoring popular culture for the last seven years. I had to search for those lyrics with Google. Graham87 07:19, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

LOL! Yayyyyyy! Usually those nerds are the ones who people end up working for... and working it for. LOL --A3RO (mailbox) 15:04, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Story of my life

Turn your robot off. I am trying to make changes to 3-29 FA (US Army) they did beat a soldier all the time and also they did have soldier decapitated when they were driving too fast and rolled a vehicle. Then the drove on for 5 more minutes before the realized their trail vehicle rolled over in another part of town. feel safe with them, don't you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chmg3 (talk • contribs) 03:52, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

The edit I reverted is justified as vandalism. Strictly unconstructive. See your talk page, thanks! --A3RO (mailbox) 04:00, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

For reverting that vandalism to my talk page. :) Tim Song (talk) 20:52, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, you are most kindly welcome dear sir! Mmhmm. --A3RO (mailbox) 20:52, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Reply

@Skater: @Skater:

Give Jimbo time

After all, tiz The Weekend ↜Just M E here , now 03:41, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, yeah. I work for Disney. Calendar weekends are never the same for me. :) --A3RO (mailbox) 04:36, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks a lot for reverting the vandalism on my talkpage! — Oli ^OR Pyfan! 11:02, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome! Happy editing! --A3RO (mailbox) 11:05, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Necco

1/ The revert was tagged with a link to HG and it wasn't clear how robotic this tool is. 2/ if it's "a privledged tool for experienced editors" how come you're giving it to an editor two months old who thought the left side of a diff was the "after" part? 3/ And please read timestamps before calling me a "troll": I reported this immediately after his wrong HG revert, *before* he eventually realized a fault. 62.147.26.72 (talk) 12:28, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

You seem to be confused. I don't think you know exactly what Huggle is. You posted the issue on your talk page, his talk page and then you posted it on the feedback talk page, this is what we call trolling. - making multiple posts about the same discussion in an attempt to exacerbate the problem, especially when it's already been resolved. The user resolved the issue by retracting the warning on your talk page. Also, Huggle requires rollback rights to use which, in a sense, requires an account that must be deemed fit by an sysops. Thanks --A3RO (mailbox) 18:57, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: COIN

Your comment was indented after mine, signifying a response to me; are you telling me to cease and desist, or is it a general statement to the conversation? --Golbez (talk) 20:02, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

At the time of the post, it was a generalized statement to the conversation. However, if you follow the conversation you will notice that User:Bluecanary99 was being a tad bit WP:UNCIVIL, which I had stated. I also posted a similar comment on his WP:WQA alert. Thanks and happy editing! --A3RO (mailbox) 21:16, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

He ended up being blocked it seems. --A3RO (mailbox) 18:26, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikiquette discussion - Revrant and consensus, NPA:

Hi there, you seem to be reasonable familiar with the WQ discussion, I wonder if you could quickly review my comments in here. In particular the exchange at the bottom of the first block of indented edits. I am not happy with the way this went and I am not sure I helped at all. The other guy seems to have a hair trigger, and seems to be unable to understand that a comment about a form of behaviouor is not a personal attack, especially when it is framed in a general context rather than directly at him. Any thoughts would be appreciated. - Nick Thorne ^talk 06:55, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for your inquiry. The dispute was closed becuase the other party admitted fault; however, if you're displeased with the resolution you can forward the issue to WP:ANI for further considoration, however, we try our best to avoid this becuase it might lead to more serious disciplines. Thanks and happy editing! --A3RO (mailbox) 21:19, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I have obviously not made myself clear. I am not querying the closure of the dispute, rather I am asking for feedback on the whether you think my comments were helpful, or not. Obviously the other party took exception to what I said, but did my comments warrant his response or did he simply over-react? I am interested in a 3rd party view of my contribution so that I might be more effective in future. Since you seem to be well experienced in this area, I thought I would ask you for that feedback. Thanks for your time. - Nick Thorne ^talk 00:53, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I thought by stating "I am not happy with the way this went down..." was a reference to not being satified with the dispute closure. Anyhoo, your comments were justified and deemed helpful. A lot of what I like to call nagging tends to develop in drawn out arguements but looking back at the dispute itself, you remained civil and provided yourself in an appropriate manner. Remembering to stay cool is important, even when the conflicting party disagrees, sometimes agressively. While it is impossible to expect everyone on Wikipedia to maintain a sort of professionalism, we can only do our best. In the future, getting a third party opinion is pretty much to only way to go when there are disagreements on content. Thank you for your contributions and happy editing! --A3RO (mailbox) 02:07, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reality check. Sometimes one can get unsure of one's self when a blow up like that happens, it's always useful to get an outside perspective - I know what I was trying to do, but would it seem that way to a reasonable other person? Once more, thanks for the feedback, see you round the Wiki! - Nick Thorne ^talk 02:17, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome! Have a nice evening! --A3RO (mailbox) 02:19, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Comedy edits

He's attacking me again, shall we give him one last chance? Off2riorob (talk) 10:36, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Na, I reported him here Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism Regards. Off2riorob (talk) 10:42, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, just report 'em. They'll eventually get the picture. Thanks and happy editing! --A3RO (mailbox) 18:05, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Murali

I'm not sure what you mean - I added Murali Kartik to the page Murali because he has "Murali" in his name. This hardly needs citing :) This also seems to be consistent with other name pages, which list people with the same name. Or am I missing something? 81.142.107.230 (talk) 11:13, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I thought the name was 'red-linked' and was just a dubious addition. I added the name back to the list and took the notice off your talk page. Thanks and happy editing! --A3RO (mailbox) 18:09, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

RfA

I think you accidentally !voted twice in Mjroots' RfA, so I indented your second !vote. Feel free to switch if you prefer. -- Soap ^Talk/_{Contributions} 19:06, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Oops. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I believe I voted yesterday on all the RfAs and I guess this one filled up really quick. Anyways, thanks for telling me. I removed my duplicated vote. Happy editing! --A3RO (mailbox) 23:31, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

ACC?

I don't think I have the power to delete accounts anywhere. I am just a humble admin, not a 'crat. Rich Farmbrough, 23:43, 22 September 2009 (UTC).

The RAC. account? It's registered under EricV89 and I figured admins could do it 'cause they are the ones who can grant the acc rights in the first place. I guess I can trying contacting one of the ACC Admins. --A3RO (mailbox) 23:45, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Done. Your ACC interface username is now A3RO. --FastLizard4 (Talk•Index•Sign) 22:25, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. --A3RO (mailbox) 22:50, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

My wikiquette case

Hi. I appreciate your comments on the wikiquette noticeboard. I would like to take this up as a user RfC but I don't know if it will be accepted because a prerequisite is that two users should have tried to sort the matter out on the talk page of the user in question. And that isn't the case. I posted a message on the talk page of the RFC, but haven't had any replies yet. Any further advice? Thanks. Itsmejudith (talk) 11:25, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

RfA support

Thank you for the kind words of support in my RfA nomination - I gratefully appreciate them. Pr3st0n (talk) 23:24, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) - Good luck in all your future work. Happy editing, such a kind person. --A3RO (mailbox) 23:54, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

--A3RO (mailbox) 04:06, 25 September 2009 (UTC

Re: Your edits

Seriously, check out the site that was added which you reverted, www.urconnected.ca. It is an official University site, launched of prospective students. As someone who works for this university, traveling on the road and meeting with future students, I'm pretty confident I know the institution better than you do. Thanks.

After reviewing the site, the link can stay. However; you represent a conflict of interest by being affiliated with the school; you also made a personal attack. Anything edits of the such will be reverted and you will be blocked from editing. --A3RO (mailbox) 04:06, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

School corporal punishment

Hello, you were quite right to revert various unhelpful or unnecessary good-faith edits. However, the sequence of four edits before that, from a different anonymous user, were also at best pointless and at worst factually incorrect, so I've rolled the article right back to before them. Hope that's OK with you. -- Alarics (talk) 10:00, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

The rollback only reverted that user's edits. I don't look at previous revisions before that time; so feel free to edit it as appropriately as much as you like. Thanks and happy editing! --A3RO (mailbox) 23:35, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Ellen

I'm sure you mean well, but editorializing about whether Ellen's move to Idol is a good career move is really outside the scope of article improvement. Wikipedia tries to stay away from predicting the future, so even if a standard source makes predictive comments, it's not really relevant to the article. Only time will tell. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 00:46, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the removal of others' comments, normally that's not done, but when those comments have nothing to do with improving the article, they are fair game for deletion. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 00:53, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I'm aware Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Actually if you read the links I provided, the two have already begun to fight. There isn't a controversy section in the article but this defiantly provides a stepping-stone for it. The information provided following the comment was relevant to the article and in a sense, supported my claim. Thanks and happy editing! --A3RO (mailbox) 02:05, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

ACC

Dear Eric,

Welcome back to ACC. You just closed an account that I was handling - it was marked in the ACC interface as such. It is very confusing to those of us working on a request if someone closes it whilst we are working on it, as we may end up closing an account as "Taken" because someone else creates it whilst we are working on it. This is the point of the "reservation" system - it is to avoid two people working on the same request. Thank you for understanding. Regards, -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 07:19, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't pay attention to the reserves that much. If I find out the appropriate action, followed by timely research, then I feel I have a right to close it; regardless of who reserves it. If I work faster, than I work faster. Botta bing, botta boom. The reserve request system is just a tool. --A3RO (mailbox) 09:07, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Spoken Word

The discussion before yours was improperly closed, thus hiding your section. It has now been fixed, and you may now repost your query if you want. Rami R 14:23, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I was wondering what happened there. Happy editing. --A3RO (mailbox) 14:27, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, A3RO. You have new messages at Stifle's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.