User talk:Salvidrim!/Q1 2013 Archive

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

 2011 - Q3–Q4  2012 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4   2013 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4   2014 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4   2015 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4   2016 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4   2017 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4   2018 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4   2019 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4   2020 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4   2021 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3–Q4  2022 - Q1–Q4  2023 - Q1–Q4  2024 - Q1–Q4

Happy New Year!


Satellizer talk contribs — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Happy New Year!


CURTAINTOAD! TALK! — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hey Salvidrim! Wishing you a very happy New Year :) CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 09:09, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Closed discussion at AN/I

Thanks for that. I (I'm an admin, by the way) have long despaired about the crap that's aired at WP:AN/I. I used to follow debates there, I used to take part, and I would from time to time enforce (through blocks, occasionally bans) decisions. But it seems to have become just a forum for a few editors to play with rules, chunter on at each other, and say things like "see the discussion five days previous". Not a lot to do with what we all allege we're here for – producing an encyclopædia. A plague on all their houses. Happy New Year (for Tuesday) Tonywalton Talk 00:57, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

The problem is that despite all the crap that goes through AN and AN/I, there are instances where it is useful and needed, and there needs to be people ready to help when those instances happen. However I can easily understand how it could quickly tire and sour someone! I'll wish you a Happy New Year too, but I'll stop short of wishing plague on anyone... for the moment. :) Salvidrim! 01:00, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Meh. I'll wish a plague on you. You say you're happy to be nominated as an admin – looking at your record I'd be happy to do so. Shall I? Tonywalton Talk 01:04, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
That's quite the suggestion. I'd be honoured to accept and know I could increase how much help I can give around, which can only be good, however I am concerned that I may not have the generally expected quantity of experience and am worried about the impacts a failed RfA would have. However if you honestly believe that it's a good moment, I'd be happy to accept the nomination. At the very worst it'll be a teaching experience on my work with Wikipedia. :) Salvidrim! 01:08, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
In any case, I'll take a harsh RfA over a plague. ;) Salvidrim! 01:09, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
(ec)Happy to do so. Being an admin isn't really that big of a deal; we get a couple more buttons on the interface ("delete", "block" and that's about it) and get 500 times more salary than the ordinary editor (unfortunately 500 times zero is still zero). Thing is we're expected to have a bit more sense regarding disputes and rules; your record seems to indicate that you have. I'll leave it a few days so you can read WP:RFA to see what questions are usually asked – these aren't a formula (though some are standard) and anyone can ask anything else, so it's not a "crib sheet". Prepare yourself for a few days then I'll put the nomination in around next weekend. One thing, your edit record will be scrutinised in some detail, so if you've past disputes be prepared to defend your stance (or to apologise for it; having an argument in the past isn't a bar to being an admin). By the way, "a plague on both their houses" is a reference from Shakespeare. Tonywalton Talk 01:22, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
I know it isn't that big a deal, but some people monitoring RfAs seem to Oppose over trifles. I've watched a number unfold even though I've only cast my voice at a few, so I know what to expect, don't worry about me. I am not stressed by being scrutinized -- in that context, I expect and welcome it, as I hope there is some mesure of judgement applied to who is granted the bit. There are few things in my history that may be seen as negative, I believe -- except the rather short length of it. In any case, I don't want to over-prepare for the questions -- I'm not a bot who spouts pre-calculated answers. I'll see what's asked, I'll ponder and think, I'll reply honestly. Then I may cry softly curled up in the corner. Who knows. :) And thanks for the explanation of the reference, I'm not exactly familiar with the works of Shakespeare, unfortunately! Just make sure to ping me when you're ready to send it off to RfA. Salvidrim! 01:33, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict)You know you have my support! RFA can be extremely brutal though, so definitely be prepared. Sergecross73 msg me 01:26, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
I take criticism as a learning experience. You people worry far too much for me. If I was afraid or harsh words I wouldn't agree to go through with this. Bring on the brutality... what doesn't kill me makes me stronger(cliché) and words rarely kill people. ;) Salvidrim! 01:33, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Not necessarily a cliché, it's Nietzsche's was uns nicht umbringt, macht uns stärker. It's not necessarily "brutal", to be honest. My RfA wasn't, as I recall. There might be some embarrassing re-hashing of a trivial dispute but IME it's only "brutal" if there's a reason – yours or someone else's – to be so. Read WP:RFA, see the procedure and the questions and the answers, and if you're still happy with it I'll nominate you next week. Remember though this is a nomination to be WP admin, not initiation to be a follower of the Great Bull!Tonywalton Talk 01:50, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Well I must say you're sending me to rather interesting articles tonight! And as I've said, I have read WP:RfA extensively and will gladly accept your nomination, whenever you're ready. Next weekend does seem appropriate. :) Salvidrim! 01:53, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Mine wasn't "brutal" either, but I've observed many, especially in preparation for mine, and have seen many go terribly wrong. While Salvidrim has nothing to hide, I have seen "periods of inactivity" be an rationale for opposing, and that would be my main concern here. Just speaking based off of what I've seen in the past though. Personally, I'd not only give my support but likely argue with the opposers. :) Sergecross73 msg me 03:43, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Don't you dare go easy on me! Salvidrim! 03:52, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy new year!

Happy new year! I wish you a good new year and hope you are having as good an evening as I am :) Hope the holidays treat you well! Noom (t) 22:20, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Not proud

I'm not very proud of the welcome (parts of) Wikipedia have given you Lol not happy with the welcome I have gotten either. Talk about Bitting the new guys head off! A Wiggin13 (talk) 07:43, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, I guess part of the swift and harsh reaction was based, at least in part, out of concern for your own safety -- it happens sometimes, as I'm sure you're aware, that younger (and not so younger) users post personal information and it backfires strongly... this is something we try to avoid actively. However, obviously, the actions posed in your case were clearly not the nicest nor most civil way of helping. While some editors frown on perceived immaturity or behaviour that indicates a user is here more for the social and less for the editing, that does not excuse the attitudes you've had to face so far. However I believe that life is one big learning experience, and that by lashing out at users who shown genuine interest and competence, we not only risk depriving the project of potentially vital contributors, but we also risk stifling the user's own personal growth as a human being... which is why I have a tendency to show more patience and open-mindedness with new users than others. Perhaps the years of dealing with less constructive editors have soured and disillusioned some, but I sincerely hope I will never fall to a point where I am unable to see a newcomer's potential. :) Salvidrim! 07:51, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Lol. Plus it was the fact that just looking at my page you can SEE 2 reasons and one is a very BIG one that I can be kind of touchy about my pages and the way he handed it kind of REALLY upset me!A Wiggin13 (talk) 07:57, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Yea, well, the way it was handled wasn't ideal, but I hope you understand the reasoning behind the reaction. :) Salvidrim! 08:00, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
I do and I hope you understand my rather emotional reaction. A Wiggin13 (talk) 08:05, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Salvidrim!. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 00:09, 3 January 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Skamecrazy123 (talk) 00:09, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Rfa

Any reason for not being nominated for WP:RfA? Apteva (talk) 03:53, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Wow, you're the second one to "formally" put the idea out there this week. Look a few sections up, I think Tonywalton already has plans to nominate me this weekend. :) Salvidrim! 03:57, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
I didn't notice this before I commented, but if you pass (and even if you don't) I would strongly suggest that you add a clear talk page link to your usual signature. Admins need to make it easy for the most clueless of newbies to work out how to contact them. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:27, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestion -- it had been on my mind for a while. I trust the changes I just made will resolve that particular concern. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 04:37, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
I can't seem to click on the added character? Espresso Addict (talk) 04:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
That's because you're already on my talk page. ;) Salvidrim! ✉ 04:44, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Duh, that would explain it! Not just clueless newbies... :) Espresso Addict (talk) 04:49, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Don't worry, nobody's perfect. For example, I hadn't thought of using a non-breaking space instead of a space, and it promptly broke stuff. ;) Salvidrim! ✉ 04:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Another userbox

Hey Salvidrim! Here is a userbox you might like to put on your user page:

Help Desk
This user volunteers at the
Wikipedia Help Desk.

And I hope that you will become an admin soon. Cheers! CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 03:26, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion, however I monitor the Help Desk too infrequently to honestly consider myself an active volunteer. :) Salvidrim! 04:07, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

New Albion

Thanks for your edits on Theories on the location of New Albion.

Please see Talk:Theories on the location of New Albion

I've put some notes about the suggestion to merge this into the New Albion article there.

Thanks.

MikeVdP (talk) 17:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Akhanda Samrajya yoga

I have re-drafted Akhanda Samrajya yoga in order to remove confusion as also added a few more citations that are all reliable. I am to request you to remove the tags. Thanks.Aditya soni (talk) 13:29, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

CSD

I've a pretty fair idea of the place (having deleted over 20,000 pages - with about four I know of going on to DRV and failing - and restored 98...). Any queries welcomed. Peridon (talk) 16:29, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the generous offer. In any case, I believe access to deleted contribs to be invaluable to becoming familiar with CSD, so that's where I'll first go -- I may look at your own extensive history of deletions, if you don't mind, and inquire about any cases for which I have a question. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 16:32, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Sure. I came to the mop from CSD - I'd been tagging for about three years after getting through reverting a bit of vandalism. I did some AfD work, and according to Anthony Bradbury (who nominated me) I had quite an accuracy record in both (and 12,000 edits without using any automated tools). I tend to keep out of the boards, except to throw spanners in now and then... I stick mainly to improving the overall content of Wikipedia by removing junk, and also by passing rescue cases to those who enjoy digging and rewriting. Look at my /links subpage. It's got the Admin Dashboard which makes finding things easier, and some useful links at the bottom. Peridon (talk) 18:42, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Yea, I like making my own templates (as my userspace shows) for personal use, I already have some sort of a mini-dashboard, I expect I'll be vastly expanding it with plenty of new clerking areas. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 18:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter (4th Quarter 2012)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 5, No. 4 — 4th Quarter, 2012
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q4 2012, the project has:

Content

Project Navigation
To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 02:56, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

UAA

I wrote that message in part because there had just been an oppose that mentioned your UAA answers. I dont actually spend a lot of time at UAA but I do get the impression that there is a lot of difference of opinion, so there's no "right" or "wrong" answers. And my answers, really, would differ from yours only in a few places. I really don't think Testicle (talk · contribs) is an appropriate username, but we've got people with usernames more obscene than that contributing. Also I would be really suspicious of a user named CensorWebclient101 (talk · contribs), or any similar thing, and my first instinct would be to block them immediately. However, you're right in that we should wait for them to edit first in most cases. On the other hand, every instance I've seen of an account whose username attacks another editor has started vandalizing right away and so the situation wouldn't even come up. —Soap— 05:09, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Testicle (talk · contribs) isn't against the letter of the username policy, although it clearly qualifies as a pretty bad idea, IMO. If the editor continues editing constructively he may find it preferable to change it himself; however I remain convinced it is nor inappropriate, merely... a very poor choice. I know there is precedent against such names, even without the evidence of vandalism: Penis (talk · contribs), Vagina (talk · contribs).
As for CensorWebClient101 (talk · contribs), I agree with everything you said -- I don't think there is any chance of such an account to be created, and then stay unused. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 05:17, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Quick Thanks

I just wanted to thank you for your partial and fair feedback regarding my incident I registered earlier this evening; I just saw your replies now. I thought I handled it the correct way, and left it as it was. Thanks again. — ANAHEIMER (TALK) 07:33, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I haven't looked very deep in the history between you too, and I do wonder how you happened to see his particular post; however I'm assuming you're not wikistalking him. But considering his reaction, I think it may be best to avoid further conflict by leaving him alone, personally, and seeking outside help should his behaviour or edits require action. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 07:59, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Oh no, not at all. That's not my nature at all. I wrote a response late last night on my discussion where I indicated how this happened. In short, I simply went through my recent contrib history, clicked on the Brea Police Department page I recently had edited, seen it had changed, looked at the history of edits, seen who had did it, and I saw his comments, and due to the edit comments he left-- I was curious (given his initial nature) and that's where I had seen him leave those "idiot" remarks on Vercillo's talk page. And then any dialouge left is what you already have seen. To be honest, for as long as I have been an editor, I don't spend too much time on here, and let alone do I invest too much resources due to my schedule. Honestly this has been a one-time incident where something like this has ever happened. He reacted as he did, and I remained calm and polite. But you are correct about assuming the good faith; I don't go around reading the records (wikistalking) looking for things. I appreciate your feedback. — ANAHEIMER (TALK) 16:43, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit filter on Tailsman67?

Bonjour, Salvidrim. I have been considering an addition of an edit filter to prevent abuse from Tailsman67. Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:38, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, he often posts his name ("~Tailsman67~"), so that might be one thing, but he has a tendency to editstalk me and SergeCross73, and as such doesn't follow much of a pattern I could lay out for the purpose of building a filter. Perhaps Serge could be more helpful (and he watches my page, so he'll reply to this at some point). :/ Salvidrim! ✉ 00:49, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) This may not necessarily be an easy thing to do. If you think it's necessary Wikipedia:Edit filter/Requested is where to request it. It should be possible to filter any sockmaster but it can be very difficult.--Jasper Deng (talk) 01:01, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

At least with me, and probably Salv, being admin, its pretty easy to block him now, considering he only stalks us. Sergecross73 msg me 01:04, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Early Congrats!!!

Allow me to present you with the admin t-shirt! ZappaOMati 03:35, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Please don't forget the mop! CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 07:24, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

I know it's premature, but things are looking good, and I don't know how much I'll be online tonight, and I wanted to be first: Congrats on (likely) Adminship!! Sergecross73 msg me 01:10, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

With an hour left and 80%+, I think it's fair to make assumptions like this. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 01:12, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Definitely could use another mop handler around here ... hopefully not jinxing it by saying "Congratulations!" too soon! --McDoobAU93 01:13, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Best of luck being an administrator here at Wikipedia! Warmest regards, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:16, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Good luck being a sysop! Wishing the best for your future endeavors! ZappaOMati 01:59, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

An early congratulations on being handed the mop. Use it well! -- LuK3 (Talk) 02:52, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Allow me to jump the gun as well. Congratulations! AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 03:20, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

I also would like to congratulate you (early, but I don't think you'll have a problem). I know there was a significant amount of opposes in there, and that RFA is a crazy place, but you deserved this. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia and for being willing to accept the role of administrator. It's a difficult role, but I think you'll do well. Vacation9 04:18, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations for the mop. CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 07:24, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Congrats on (likely) Adminship!--Nnnnkkkk (talk) 10:56, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh dear, it seems I did miss a lot last night...would you prefer I delete this section for now? Or feel free to do whatever you want with it yourself. Sergecross73 msg me 14:28, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

So many people have already commented though... I wouldn't delete all those comments. Anyway, as Hahc said on the BN, he'll still probably be promoted. Vacation9 16:18, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Well, that's the reason I was asking first instead of just doing it, I just don't want undecided !voters to come across this "early celebrating" and hold it against him, especially since I started it (albeit when his percentage was much higher, but still.) Considering the discussion is still rather active on both sides, I can see it being open for a while longer still. Most of the people who left initial messages are long-time collaborators, so I doubt they'd be offended. But it's up to you Salvidrim. Sergecross73 msg me 18:12, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Eleventh hour RfA update

Hello, Salvidrim!. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Salvidrim.
Message added -- Trevj (talk) 04:56, 13 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Thanks for the notification; I replied before your talkback notice came in. I have no intention of avoiding confronting the issue. Salvidrim! ✉ 04:58, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. I placed this in case you weren't checking the page but may have had email notifications enabled. Thanks, anyway. -- Trevj (talk) 05:03, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
No problem. I have a gadget to receive Watchlist notifications, so I did see it. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 05:04, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
OK. Anyway, I think that you deserve credit for continuing to go about your normal business here during the process, rather than playing safe and just sitting back. But it's a pity that none of us spotted this sooner! -- Trevj (talk) 05:17, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
I indeed debated with myself as to whether I should cease editing while the RfA was ongoing, but I decided that wouldn't be very honest, so I carried on as normally as possible. Perhaps not the wisest of decisions, as it seems there was cause for distraction, but I'll live. Salvidrim! ✉ 05:20, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
No one can be criticised for being honest! Cheers. -- Trevj (talk) 05:42, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
I've always wanted something like that Salvidrim - what's the name of that gadget? It seems super useful if you don't want to be constantly checking a page. Vacation9 12:52, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
It's a Chrome extension called "Wikipedia Watchlist". :) Salvidrim! ✉ 21:08, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

RfA Update

In case you don't already know, your RfA has been closed pending a CratChat. The chat is located here. This is going to be an interesting one. Just wanted to let you know. Thanks for the Chrome Extension as well, I'm certainly going to use it. Vacation9 23:34, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Fully aware, thanks. I'm keeping a watchful eye on the proceedings, even though I feel actively contributing, at this point, isn't helpful, unless directly asked to do so. Salvidrim! ✉ 23:36, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
  • The CratChat is going well so congrats on your promotion.—cyberpower ChatOnline 02:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Looks like you're going to be granted the bit very shortly (and I agree, there is an overall consensus that you can be trusted with it). Hope I continue to see you around. Take care. =) Kurtis (talk) 06:40, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Hmmm..."looks like you're going..." is a bit premature, but so far it certainly is going well for you. I have no doubt you noted the concerns brought up in your RfA and that you will learn from it. If you are handed the bit, it's always a good idea to use it sparingly and slowly get used to its awesome, awesome powers. If you aren't, then you'll get it next time, provided you keep your nose clean. All the best, Drmies (talk) 16:03, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  • So far it's going well = "looks like you're going..." in my mind, Drmies. =) Kurtis (talk) 20:29, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Who knows what's going on in your mind, Kurtis. I distrust people with beards. Drmies (talk) 20:40, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Ani Notification question

I did notify as per policy at [[1]]. I figured since they wanted to redirect to that page anyways would work just as well. Happy editing. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 08:40, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Yea, I noticed that after posting. I guess there's no being too careful and sometimes it may be preferable to notify "too much" than not enough. No harm done in this particular case. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 08:43, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Actual Congratulations

I would like to wish you a congratulations for being promoted to administrator! This has been a hard journey for all of us, bringing the discussion to a cratchat. You have gone through even more scrutiny than usual, but you still made it in. While editors will be watching you for a bit, you deserved this promotion and will do well with the tools. I, along with many other editors, believe that this was an isolated mistake that just happened to be during your RfA. I wish you good luck with the tools and whole-heartedly congratulate you on being promoted through the bees' nest that is RFA. Vacation9 22:27, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Way to go! Glad this was an "almost" — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:32, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Congratulations on becoming a mandatory discussion item on every future RfB ! Hallelujah! —Soap— 22:40, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  • And now you finally get my congrats too :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Good luck and hope for the best. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:19, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  • I never made it around to supporting your actual RFA but I was there in spirit! You defiantly have style. Blocking yourself as your first action, love it! ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 00:26, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Congrats, finally. It's been a hair pulling week for me too :)--v/r - TP 01:07, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
  • My sincere congratulations.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:24, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Congratulations. Wish you all the best with the admin tools. Torreslfchero (talk) 10:36, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Congratulations on surviving a somewhat challenging RFA, and welcome to the caba^H^H^H^HUnion of Applied Mopwielding. j⚛e deckertalk 22:30, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Only somewhat challenging, eh? Hate to see what a challenging RFA looks like. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:18, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
    I prefer the terms "highly interesting". ;) Salvidrim! ✉ 02:37, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Belated "official" congratulations.

OK, the crat chimed in, now go forth and fight vandalism, clean up redirects, and handle AfDs! :) -- Avi (talk) 22:39, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

PS we all make mistakes, and get involved in edit wars when we get emotionally involved. Please use this as a learning experience. In general, walking away when one is heated is often the best result. Wikipedia is anything but permanent. -- Avi (talk) 22:43, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Me, saying stuff

Well... while I cannot honestly say I ain't relieved it's over, I think we can all agree this RfA, and the ensuing 'crat chat, was certainly interesting. I have decided I would not comment on how the RfA proceeded; it's done, and going back on it is pointless. However, there's a few things I feel the need to address. Apologies if this ends up scattered and trivial.

I am not someone who commonly regrets stuff. I make mistakes, like everyone. I admit it, apologize, fix what I can, then learn and grow from it. I must say I am not proud of myself for the 3RR misstep, especially during the RfA, but to say I am ashamed that I showed some humanity would be exaggerating. I am angry at myself, at my own lack of attention. The fact I slept a full night's worth between the 3rd and 4th revert certainly influenced my perception and I am unhappy that I let it happen. I believe the self-imposed 1RR will help me make sure that never, ever happens again and will ensure I develop stricter editing habits. As some editors pointed out, I would've deserved a block, had I been reported; I could not agree with that more empathically. I believe this violation of one of Wikipedia's most unequivocal policies shouldn't be silenced and ignored -- forgiven, certainly, but not forgotten. For that reason, I will block myself (boldly ignoring the fact it's not recommended) for a short, symbolic period of one hour for 3RR violation. I think it is important that this violation should be noted against me, and will do so myself. You are free to disagree, but I think it must be done.

As for my feelings during the RfA, you will note I decided NOT to reply to the early congratulations before the process was over. Some asked me privately whether I was considering withdrawing after the 3RR violation was brought forward -- I did entertain the idea. I was shocked and dismayed at myself, and the community's opinion notwithstanding, wondered if the RfA was still appropriate... however, after sleeing on it, I decided not to withdraw for two reasons. Primo, the fact that above a hundred editors had voiced their support gave me pause. Secundo, I knew I would be back at RfA within 6 months or so, and would pass then (as many have stated), and believed it wasn't correct for me to subject the community (and myself!) to this again if this RfA would ultimately have succeeded, so I decided to let it run its course. I think a failed RfA, as it was, still left a better impression than a withdrawn RfA after a stupid mistake. Good thing I stuck with it, it seems.

As for the general RfA process itself, I know Wales' stated intention to make major changes... I was the first RfA started the 2013, and the first 'crat chat since 2011 (and the 'crat chat with the highest percentage of supports, as pointed out by MBisanz), so it is certainly an interesting phenomenon to study for the future of RfAs (or whatever the process of sysop selection ends up being called). It was a very unique experience for me, but in the end? I enjoyed it. The questions, the supports, the mistakes and the discussions. Maybe I'm crazy! :) Salvidrim! ✉ 23:12, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Hear hear... (you don't really need that penitence though) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
    I don't consider it penitence, I consider it honesty. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 23:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
Well, nobody can say you're not a good sport. (Also, in my experience, if you had been reported to AN3, you would have gotten a warning, not a block. I hope you'll keep that in mind if you ever decide to work there ;-) ~Adjwilley (talk) 00:01, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
False. You replied to me!  ;)  ;) -- Just kidding! Congrats! Looking forward to continuing to working with you, now as Admin! Sergecross73 msg me 00:30, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Congratulations for winning the real mop!!!

You might like to add the topicon on your userpage: {{administrator}} (Shows administrator topicon - CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 01:16, 15 January 2013 (UTC))

You might also like to add the userbox on your userpage: {{User wikipedia/Administrator}} (Shows the administrator userbox - CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 01:16, 15 January 2013 (UTC))

You might also like to add another userbox on your userpage: {{User:EVula/Userboxes/admin since|year=2013|month=1|day=14}} (Shows how long you have been an administrator - CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 01:16, 15 January 2013 (UTC))

Enjoy being an administrator!!! CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 00:28, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations!!!--SPhilbrick(Talk) 01:04, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Congrats. — ΛΧΣ21 01:24, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
(ec) As with User:Curtaintoad's messages above I propose Category:Wikipedia Administrators whose first action was to block themselves ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 01:26, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
How populated would it be? Salvidrim! ✉ 01:28, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
I think it would be very populated! ;) CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 01:36, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
You are the first I have ever heard of or seen. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 01:39, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
If it's me, then thanks Addshore! :) CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 01:42, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
  • OMG I thought Addshore was just being fun! Salvi indeed did block himself D: A symbolic gesture, and a good one. — ΛΧΣ21 02:42, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
You thought I was joking? HAH! Nope! Salvidrim is doing everything perfectly since the mop as far as I can tell :) ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 03:01, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Don't stop here! Your first vandalism block looks good so my oppose rationale is no longer valid. There's more you can now be trusted with.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:46, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

RFPP

First, congratulations! Second, this right here has to be one of the most humble and most good-humoured things I have ever seen here on WP - a class act.

On Spanish Inquisition, I understand the RFPP decline. I suppose I was looking at it from a longer-term perspective - almost three months with nothing but vandalism and reverts as edits. The rapid-fire vandalism was just frustrating. Thanks for taking a step back and looking it it properly - the decision was the right one. Good luck wielding the mop! Stalwart111 04:15, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the good words! :) Salvidrim! ✉ 04:20, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) And I was wondering, how is your adminship going? :) CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 04:22, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Nice!

Not the promotion, but what you did right after it. That made my day for tomorrow.—cyberpower ChatOffline 05:06, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Ha, that was indeed classy. And you've addressed a concern that a lot of people have - you do have the courage to block an admin! :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 05:20, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
    Thumbs up icon Stylish! Congratulations on passing your RfA. -- Trevj (talk) 08:31, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
  • (as a minor note, your rollback icon is still on but I won't bug you by doing it myself). Hopefully you'll clamp down on the rampant RPP and AIV backlogs we've been having lately.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:59, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
  • To be quite honest, I haven't used standard rollback in months, since I started using Twinkle, and I prefer being able to leave edit summaries. I just didn't think it was worth it to request its removal. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 08:02, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
    • I like that spirit although I personally would use regular rollback in place of Twinkle at times during mass vandalism attacks. Très bien!--Jasper Deng (talk) 08:04, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the land of the Mop

Well done on your promotion! Brookie :) { - he's in the building somewhere!} (Whisper...) 09:17, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

grats from me too, and an unusual first admin action, not in blocking yourself as that is surprising common (amongst the thousand most active editors it is the most common reason for a block), but deliberately blocking yourself and leaving a 3rr note in the block log takes style. Anyway once you've discovered what a faff it is to find the right block message for people have a look at my monobook, some kind person left a nifty script there that gives you a dropdown menu for blocking and templating. ϢereSpielChequers 13:41, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Congratulations from me too. I was there in the crowd but I was so taken up with following the events that I actually forgot to vote! --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:55, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Syndicate screenshot

Hi. As an editor with an interest in video games, and an admin with access to information about deleted files, is there any chance you might be able to shed any light at Talk:Syndicate (video game)#In-game image - which platform?, please? Cheers. -- Trevj (talk) 15:59, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Congrats

Looks like I'm the last to find out... (Been busy offline. Still busy offline...) Getting the mop is like passing a driving test - it's a licence to go solo. Unfortunately, many who pass the driving test reckon they needn't learn any more. That doesn't usually apply to those who get Wikimops. Never think you know it all. Never be afraid to ask, even if it's something stupidly simple. (I still ask some questions that look like a helpme from a newbie. Don't care. It's quicker than trying to find out the hard way.) Good luck, and keep calm. Peridon (talk) 21:02, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks; I believe the day a man stops learning is the day he starts dying, so I intend to learn stuff every day for as long as I can still breathe. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 21:05, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
It also helps to ward off Alzheimers, so it's said... Peridon (talk) 21:53, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Oops!

I was wondering why that was suddenly the bottom section! — Francophonie&Androphilie(Je vous invite à me parler) 01:51, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

And I wondered why the last few section links in the TOC stopped working. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 01:57, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Belated congrats

Hopefully, you won't take my initial reservation personal, and it certainly wasn't meant to be. It was a rough week, I'm sure. My RfA wasn't so long ago, and I remember it quite vividly. If you have any questions or if I can help in any way, you should always feel free to ping me. I know how intimidating the tools can be for the first few weeks, and I'm always willing to help a fellow editor. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 03:08, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the generous offer. You're (obviously) one of the admins whose example I try to follow, behaviorally, and as you're active on AN-AN/I, I always learn from your approach and opinions. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 03:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
In case you didn't know, I had to agree to CSD mentoring during my RfA to alleviate concerns, making me the only admin to agree to "sanctions" during his RfA. While it was technically unenforceable, I did 3 months per the strictest interpretation under Boing! and DGG, so I understand and respect your reasoning for the self-block, although I don't think it was required nor would I have blocked an editor for a singular lapse in judgement. I tend to trust people who are a little more harsh with themselves than they are with others, as it shows they know the bit isn't a stick, but is instead a tool. The really important stuff we do doesn't use the tools, after all. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 14:25, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity, has anyone ever been blocked during a serious RfA? Peridon (talk) 15:28, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

98.192.226.42

The IP 98.192.226.42 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) has apparently been edit warring on Pete (Disney) for months now, and originally under 71.200.156.168 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). I think it's time for a lengthy block.—Ryulong (琉竜) 07:32, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Can you point me to any previous discussion that ascertains consensus that this Pete should be likened to a cat, as you seem to prefer, or is that fact unequivocally supported by a source in the article? Because at the moment, I see warring behavior from both sides during the last day and a number of discussions over years where no consensus was formed either way. The IP user has been warned (and hasn't edited since), and I trust that your experience makes you familiar with our rules on warring, so I have no doubt you aren't likely to act inappropriately. In any case, I strongly recommend that since the species seem to be a recurrent point of discussion for years, that a strong consensus be formally established. I recommend an RfC, with notifications of appropriate WikiProjects (at the very least Disney). I don't think protecting the page to be appropriate -- if violations of our policies on warring happen after the IPs final warning, blocks might happen, but this is a content dispute and I'm just not seeing the extensive warring that would justify protection until consensus is formed. If further things happen, feel free to ping me back and I'll be very happy to help. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 07:56, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Also, I've been unable to find any evidence of you discussion the content of the edits, so please make sure that happens! Talk pages are there for specifically that reason. The IP(s) obviously had a different opinion, and unless consensus or strong sourcing backs a position up, his status as an IP editor doesn't make his opinion less valid than yours. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 07:59, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
And while I understand your concerns about his previous patterns of editing, I am concerned that they weren't much warned and am reluctant to block until they've had a chance to respond (or ignore) the warnings. I will keep an eye open, however, so do not worry. Salvidrim! ✉ 08:02, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Just be careful it's not Bambifan, he's shown up a bit recently. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • I have no experience (but some passing knowledge) of that particular... person. However, the mention raises red flags to me, but I'll for the opinion of a more experienced Bambi hunter. Salvidrim! ✉ 08:10, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • It may not be (I'm not an experienced Bambi hunter myself, either... never played Russian roulette...) but persistent editing of a Disney-related article... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:19, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict)During a good part of last year (2012) I would often find him creating vandalism cross-wiki in my patrolling as a member of the SWMT. Although I don't know if this behavior matches him (not the kind I usually saw), the IP looks suspect based on a cursory glance at its digits. Unfortunately CheckUser or an SPI don't look possible unless someone else who knows this LTA better in terms of his behavior editing articles comments.--Jasper Deng (talk) 08:21, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Been getting home from work. I doubt this is Bambifan (because he's never touched Power Rangers or other dinosaur related pages in the past). This just appears to be someone who really thinks Pete is some sort of canine and who believes that a certain Power Rangers robot is modeled after a dinosaur that was discovered years after the program. They've made a total of zero constructive edits to the project. It's just easier to be rid of them.—Ryulong (琉竜) 09:09, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • As this is an IP (which can change) an indef would definitely not apply. A good long block, okay, if this is not dynamic, but if it is ... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:58, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

IP is definitely edit-warring. As to it being Bambifan, I don't think so. IP geolocates to Maryland, and while there have been Bambi attacks coming out of that general part of the country (Virginia, not Maryland, though), those were very rare. Further, this doesn't match Bambi's usual style or target articles. Don't think it's him. --McDoobAU93 15:33, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Blocked for 48hours since they continued warring after final warning. Will see after if it continues and can increment as needed. Salvidrim! ✉ 16:11, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
    Considering this IP's been doing the same edit to Pete (Disney) since at least November, I think it's safe to say that it's not a dynamic assignment.—Ryulong (琉竜) 07:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
    I understand that and I think something could've been done earlier, but considering that particular IPs clean block log and the fact he hadn't been strongly warned until now, I prefer a shorter block than can be incremented if disruptions resumes than something more drastic right away. Salvidrim! ✉ 07:17, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
    I concur with the preceding assessment (by Salvidrim). (to Ryulong) But just because it doesn't seem to be changing doesn't preclude dynamic-ness. For example my current IPv4 address is technically dynamic but has not changed in all 11 months I've been with my current ISP. I believe these are called "sticky" IPs.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:21, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

So, about that....

Hey, Salvidrim, just to be double-clear: anything that involves personally identifiable information (which basically means anything that you can't find out from a quick glance at someone's Wikipedia user page), and especially things of that magnitude, should never be posted on Wikipedia, and especially not in a place as heavily-trafficked as ANI. The standard operating procedure is to direct people to the Arbcom mailing-list; Arbcom can handle it from there. But it's vitally important not to even suggest posting it anywhere on Wikipedia itself. Privacy is really important, and especially as an admin, it's really important to always be aware of it. No harm done; just keep it in mind for the future, okay? :)

Also, you might want to think about slowing down and easing into things a bit at first; I know I did...

Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 06:08, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

  • I can definitely say "lesson learned". The user came to me because I had interacted with them on their previous issue at AN/I (before I became admin), so that's why I got involved; I wasn't entirely sure how this should be dealt with and thought defaulting to AN/I (so that someone more experienced could refer to the proper venue) was a correct solution. It seems I may have taken that decision a bit quickly though -- realizing the privacy issues of this particular situation, I should've asked for an admin opinion privately before recommending a course of action. Salvidrim! ✉ 06:20, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
For all your admin work so far. ;) CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 01:02, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi

Hi. While I could go to RFPP, you're probably the admin whose had the most experience on this page; could you please take a look at Yoshi and see if it needs indefinite semi-protection, as it has been semi-protected twice or thrice now and the vandals just keep on coming back. Thanks! =D (Oh, and CONGRATULATIONS for the RFA!) Satellizer talk contribs 22:11, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm rather prudent when it comes to any indefinite action, but I just SPP'ed it for a while, hopefully it'll discourage the recurrent vandals. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 22:16, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. :) Satellizer talk contribs 22:18, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

FYI

I'm sorry if I've been posting too much on your talk page, but this is to let you know about this, where I mentioned your information page. --Jasper Deng (talk) 00:57, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

He hasn't been banned for even a month, and this is atleast the second time he has tried this kind of crap. I personally am not interest in any offers, he's failed to show consistent improvement in over a years worth of time. Sergecross73 msg me 01:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
I've stopped responding to his messages on my fr.wiki talk page, but I think you did, so it seems he's trying to contact you on other projects now. My apologies. I recommend ignoring him outside on en.wiki. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 09:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
For the record I posted on your frwiki talk page after he posted on my simplewiki talk page. I then discussed with an frwiki admin and got your talk page there semi-protected for a year. Hopefully he'll get the message, but if not, I'll just have to ignore him.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:10, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

eSports (Pro gaming) taskforce

Hi there, you indicated interest in reviving, renaming, and reorganizing the Pro gaming taskforce of WP:VG. I have created a section on that taskforce's talkpage regarding this in case you'd like to join the discussion! —Entropy (talk) 23:52, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm planning on reorganizing this taskforce's project page pretty soon. I know you don't want to be directly involved in this taskforce, but would you be up for discussing potential changes to the main page? Also, if you're still in favor of renaming the taskforce to eSports, how do we go about doing so? Thanks! —Entropy (talk) 04:03, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm certainly happy to help with implementing changes. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 04:08, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Glad to hear it! If you'd like to discuss it over IRC, I'm Entropy on the Freenode network; otherwise we can just use talkpages. I've already removed inactive users from the list of participants and contacted the rest. How would you like to begin? I think renaming the taskforce is a good first step. —Entropy (talk) 04:20, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Considering there are little active members, I think that'd be the first step. Renaming the Taskforce pages, mentions of the Taskforce within the project, and the template parameter. There also should be a free image picked to represent the eSports Taskforce articles in the WP:VG article banner. Once that's done, what'll remain is the actual content of the Taskforce's pages, guidelines, scope definition, etc. Obviously I'm mostly experienced with WP:NIN, so most of what I can suggest organization-wise will be similar to that project, so I'm hoping you'll be able to bring forth ideas. For the record, the only article that would be in the scope of the eSports Taskforce that I have been active with is SMITE. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 04:52, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Also, as a fellow Canadian geek, I'm not proud to say I haven't had time to try out IRC much. I'm generally "on top" on all things Internet-related, but for some reason, I haven't had a reason to jump into IRC before now. Expect me to be there sometime this weekend. What's your preferred client? Quick note -- your userpage says you're Ecliptica, not Entropy? :) Salvidrim! ✉ 04:57, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Sounds good, I'll get started on everything this week. And no worries about IRC, it just seems to be one of the preferred methods of communication around here. And right you are! I am actually Ecliptica on IRC, sorry for the mistake! I'm usually idling in #wikipedia-en. —Entropy (talk) 05:01, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
One more thing, did you want to rename the taskforce to Taskforce eSports or eSports? I think the latter makes more sense as none of the other WP:VG taskforces actually use the word taskforce in the name. —Entropy (talk) 05:04, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 Done —Entropy (talk) 07:07, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
I'll wait before changing the WP:VG banner parameter until I am ready to do an AWB run to replace them all at once to avoid "breakage" (this weekend) and will create the category page to go with it. Salvidrim! ✉ 07:33, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Sounds like a plan! Thanks for the help! —Entropy (talk) 09:23, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phoenix (wargaming magazine)

Please userfy this to me, as you suggest. Warden (talk) 16:25, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done At User:Colonel Warden/Phoenix (wargaming magazine). I removed the maintenance templates and categories. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 17:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

168.61.17.216

This user, 168.61.17.216 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), evaded the block by using another IP address, 142.4.109.81 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), which is currently blocked for six months. I wonder if extension of blocking is necessary. --George Ho (talk) 06:45, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

User:Materialscientist has set up a filter to catch the user's edits. I recommend pinging him for further assistance. The user seems to rotate IPs frequently and I haven't been able to find evidence that the user returned to previous IP addresses, so I'm not sure how much good a block extension would do. Salvidrim! ✉ 06:53, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Help

I edited the Mario series template and added the newly announced 3D Mario Wii U game. However, you removed my change to the template and stated on my userpage that I should create the page first. I can't create articles, so what should I do now? 67.86.9.161 (talk) 03:00, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) See WP:AFC for instructions on how to make an article without an account. Vacation9 03:19, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Well, if the game doesn't even have a title yet, it probably doesn't warrant an article yet. And since things without articles typically don't belong on templates, it probably doesn't belong on the template yet. Sergecross73 msg me 03:22, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm not specifically saying that article should be created; I'm saying it has to be created before being linked to from the template. If you want to draft it in your own sandbox I'll be happy to review it for you personally. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 06:46, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!

Glad to see a new admin getting to work on the substantial RM backlog. Your contributions are appreciated! --BDD (talk) 23:26, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm always happy to close requests in my general area of work, WP:VG. Whenever I can I try to help out with general RMs, WP:AN/RFC, etc. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 23:29, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Salvidrim!. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Reporting_User_Hari7478.
Message added Hari7478 (talk) 12:26, 25 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Special:Contributions/Thorin Lindenshield

Hey Salvidrim. First off, belated congrats on becoming an administrator. Secondly, can you look at this editors contributions? I feel like something suspicious is up with it. GamerPro64 15:45, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Aye, definitely something going on. It seems the issue is being handled here, as you've noticed. I am unwilling to start an SPI because it would surprise me greatly that Khanassassin would sockpuppet in this way; however I don't object to it because uninvolved editors may have a clearer view of the situation. Hopefully they'll respond to the concerns shortly. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 01:07, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

For making me grin

The Barnstar of Good Humor
For reminding me that even AN/I can produce chuckles with this. The Bushranger One ping only 18:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
I think a bit of levity is crucial to avoid growing sour and tired when dealing with AN-AN/I. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 01:09, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

News Group Newspapers

News_Group_News­papers which you declined a G7 SD on is not the same thing as News Group Newspapers. The first one contains a hidden soft hyphen, an inviable character. That's why the character wants it deleted, it's creation was unintentional. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 05:44, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I will freely admit that even after reading the RfD request, I have a hard time seeing the difference between [2] and [3], although I understand the latter seemed to have some unnecessary, invisible character in the middle of it. Since it's at RfD now it'll likely be deleted anyways, so CSD may be unneeded, but this is certainly something to keep an eye out of. Thanks for letting me know! For the record, although my choice of word may have been poor, I wasn't declining CSD per se, as the request was valid, but rather contesting it as I believed the redirect was useful. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 06:00, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
If you think it's useful you should vote keep at it's RFD. If someone wanted to keep a page or redirect, I'd probably decline a G7 if I were an Admin. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 06:10, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Well considering the arguments at RfD and the fact that News Group Newspapers exists, I understand why this one is unneeded. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 06:15, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Two questions

Did you want to work on OTRS? I have some time this morning, although tomorrow is better.

I won't have time today now, perhaps tomorrow. Can you let me know your status? I don't see your name int he list of agents. Are you approved recently, or looking to become one?--SPhilbrick(Talk) 15:55, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Can you help me out with a favor? I asked at IRC but no response. The subject of Taryn Khanam wants to nominate for deletion. I don't know the process well enough to help. She has started, and may think she is done, but it clearly isn't.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 14:24, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I asked at help desk.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 15:55, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Oof, sorry. My sleep schedule is a bit out of whack, I just got up now. Of course I'm interested in OTRS volunteering, hopefully you'll have some more time to for mentoring. I'm not in any list or whatnot, I'm seeking guidance before applying. Salvidrim! ✉ 21:59, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Can you clarify what you are looking for?

I see a few options:

  • You want a better understand of the process, so you can decide whether to apply
  • You want a better understand of the process, so you can write an informed request for approval
  • You want someone to talk to as you are doing the process, to help make sure you are doing it right.

I thought you were looking for the third, and I am happy to do that for you, but that wouldn't start until after you have applied and accepted.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 13:04, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

  • For the moment, kind of the second. Guide me through the application process, etc. However if you can make yourself available for mentoring once I have OTRS access, it'd obviously be greatly helpful. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 17:05, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply, ironically, I'm swamped with OTRS work.

The application process is straightforward. this is the page to throw your name in the hat.

I don't know whether you are more interested in Permissions type work, which involves checking to make sure someone is giving proper permission for images, and sometimes, text, or for the info queues, which are roughly like the help desk, but from people who know even less about our processes.

I've seen you actively in the Help desk, so you should mention your experience there.

Some days it can seem thankless, but when you can help someone, there is a higher rate of thanks than there is at the help desk, so there's that.

After the application, some nameless people (OTRS admins, I guess) convene in a smoke-filled room to determine you future, whether with a throw of dice or intense review of your history, I couldn't say. Then there will be smoke, and you will probably be confirmed, unless you have some skeletons I don't know about.

Once confirmed, the OTRS software is confusing at first, at little dated and quirky, but it works. I will be happy to monitor your first few tickets and be available as a sounding board. There is also an email list for questions.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 15:37, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Alright, I'll read some more on it and eventually dive in. I'm interested less in permissions than in other queues. As for old and clunky interfaces, believe me, where I work I've had my share... managing files in a DOS-based environment (without a mouse cursor) made me ready for anything. Thanks for the info! :) :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 21:59, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

God of War FAC

Hey, do you have some time to review God of War (video game)? --JDC808 ♫ 19:43, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Falsion, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Star Fox (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I've created a new logo for the eSports task force at Image:ESports Logo.png. Let me know if there's anything you think I should change. It seems to scale well enough at 40px. —Entropy (talk) 22:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I've added it to {{WikiProject Video games}}, although I think the "Sports" text could be a bit sharper. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 22:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Sure thing, I'll make it a bit easier to read and upload a new version. —Entropy (talk) 22:29, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for all the hard work! Salvidrim! ✉ 22:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

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

Realms_of_Kaos

When you you adjudicated on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Realms of Kaos, you deleted the page, and the talk page, and a redirect to it at 07:41, 2 February 2013, but you forgot to delete the talk page archive: Talk:Realms_of_Kaos/Archive_1.--Toddy1 (talk) 18:33, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your vigilance! Seems I had also overlooked Talk:Realms of Kaos: Revolution, which I've now G8'ed as well. :) :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 19:19, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Userpage

I think I fixed the height problem with my userpage - since you were the person who noticed the problem, do you think you could tell me real quick if I actually did fix it? --TKK bark ! 13:56, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

  • As of now it displays perfectly in my browser, even with different zoom levels. Excellent work! :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 08:14, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Awesome, thank you!--76.178.227.151 (talk) 12:32, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Oops, that was me, I apparently didn't see the big 'YOU ARE NOT LOGGED IN' banner. --TKK bark ! 12:33, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi

Just a wee heads up that WP:VIETCON which you cited is in effect a disputed essay which has never been verified and is counter the most recent RfC. It isn't surprising it agrees with the editor who wrote it. All the best regards. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:19, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

I will agree the issue is larger than the article itself, but while the essay is disputed, its current text is what is used; if there is consensus to change it, it'll be changed, and articles can then be renamed to match the new consensus. Frankly the close of the RM could've in theory gone both ways, but in the face of cleanly divided consensus I opted for the simpler solution. Feel free to request a MRV if you believe my close was incorrect. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 21:27, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
I thought it was 3:1 or 4:1 in favour of Vietnamese names: Ictu/Judith/Norty/Beagel, that's 4 correct? Did I miscount? I won't take it to MRV no, if you believe you were fully informed. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:17, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

RM backlog

As a new admin, I hope that I can encourage you to take a stab at closing a dozen of the RM backlog requests. The way WP:RM is set up, requests can be closed at any time, but are not intended to remain open for longer than seven days, meaning that all should be closed before they reach the WP:RM#Backlog. In other words, after the backlog is cleared out, standard procedure should be to close all of the requests just before they reach the backlog. In some cases, though, this means relisting, which also should be done before reaching the backlog. Closing instructions are at WP:RMCI. If each new admin closes a few requests the backlog can be cleared. Apteva (talk) 04:40, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

  • Hm, I try to chip in when I can, and certainly close a few each week, but my weekday availabilities are still rather limited. But don't worry, the RM backlog is at the top of my clerking list whenever I find some time. :) :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 04:59, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Wasteland 2 discussions

Hello. Can you please take a look at these two discussions regarding the recent Wasteland 2 edits over at WT:VG and the Wasteland 2 talk page? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:59, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the recent banning discussion at WP:VG

Hello again, Salvidrim. ProtoDrake was concerned that the issue with Niemti, who is currently the subject of an RFC, was not yet brought up at AN or ANI as noted in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Square Enix#Character designer question and also the proposal to ban him from the VG project is now in the WT:VG archives. I seriously do not want to cause too much drama, but what would be the best and efficient course of action? I would think a thorough summary of the evidence should be made before we bring this matter up to AN or ANI and bad results will occur when a report is taken to AN/ANI prematurely - really good evidence should be needed first, with a few clear cases that onlookers can understand. Any thoughts about this? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:18, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't feel I have enough time to devote to the issue to be truly of help. If and when there is some sort of community discussion, I don't want to have to just "throw it out there" and run away. I want to be able to assist, discuss and take part as much as possible. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 03:12, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
Okay, then. I have no doubt that there will be some sort of community discussion going on around here soon. I will see if I can bring this matter up at WT:VG or on Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Niemti before taking this to ANI/AN if possible. :-) Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:21, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Heads up, Fladrif has proposed a ban on Niemti at at his RFC. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:47, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I am already aware, I have the whole shebang watchlisted. Please try to avoid putting yourself in situations that could lead to canvassing accusations. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 00:54, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Oh, I get it now. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:58, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello again. I would like to apologize if I have done anything wrong here and I just realized that I was being too aggressive in pursuing the ban on Niemti. So, basically, what I did was probably wrong as some of the cases that I did back in August was inconclusive on my part and the fact that I got swept up in the controversy against my better judgment has left me puzzled. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:14, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Hatam Ali - proposed BLP deletion

Hello Salvidrim. I saw your name as declining the first BLPPROD of this article. At that point there was a reference in the article - here, but it gives the subject's age as 43, while our article says he was born in 1990. At present the article is up for proposed deletion again for lacking sources. My inclination would be to do the deletion, but I am wondering if a second PROD is even allowed, or if BLP trumps everything. The only link provided as a source (in English) is to goalzz.com. That link only confirms that a player by that name exists, played for Sulaymaniyah, and scored a goal in December 2012. It gives no confirmation of anything else in the article such as age or personal stats. Should we allow the rest of the info to stand without being sourced? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 15:10, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

A rejected WP:BLPPROD doesn't prevent a subsequent WP:PROD whatsoever. If it was proposed for deletion and was uncontested, that's all that matters. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 20:24, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

IP disruption

That user 184.152.58.203 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is back adding the disputed genre from the Resident Evil 6 after being blocked. Isn't it time to block the IP or protect the article again? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:32, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Protected. Sergecross73 msg me 03:03, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Ah, got it. Thanks! Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:15, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
No problem, I don't mind filling in for Salvidrim when he's wrapped up in real life stuff. (Assumeably.) Sergecross73 msg me 00:38, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
"wrapped up in real life stuff" is a humbling understatement... I barely have time to go on Facebook, let alone do much Wikipedia work. :/ :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 01:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Sorry things are hectic, hope all is well. :) Sergecross73 msg me 02:02, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Oh, don't worry, my life has never been better. I am just taking on a lot more responsibility at work, and 10 hours days tend to eat away at my free time. :) :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 02:09, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Manual clerking at WP:ANRFC

Hi Salvidrim. In response to your comment here ("Not sure what bot clerks this, but I rm all closed (incl one i just did), moved one to premature, remove restarted discussion"): WP:ANRFC is not clerked by a bot because many of the requests remain on the page for weeks. An archiving bot would prematurely archive many of the requests.

The board is clerked manually. When requests are archived from WP:ANRFC, they are moved to archives like Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure/Archive 6.

Thank you for the good closes you've done at WP:ANRFC. Best, Cunard (talk) 04:47, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Salvidrim!/Q1_2013_Archive&oldid=1082582766"