User talk:Corvus cornix

Please reconsider

Hello, I hope that you will reconsider. Four plus years of contributing and over 33,000 edits? That's impressive. Thank you for all you've done to make this a better encyclopedia. And then one administrator mistakenly uses the word "vandalism"? That person was wrong to use that word in this case. Please let it pass. I hope that you will return soon. I wish you well. Cullen328 (talk) 06:13, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

At the very least, read what I said at the talkpage there. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 06:25, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

You know, I don't read it as "four accusations". I read Silver Seren backpedalling on the word "vandalism". And now I see Magog the Ogre standing up for you and offering the excellent advice to all concerned to be very careful about accusing people of "vandalism", using much more colorful language than I use. I note that, where I live at least, it is late on a Saturday night. Perhaps some people are less inhibited than usual. Perhaps some said things that they will regret upon reflection. I don't know you, but have seen your name many times. I respect what you've done for Wikipedia. Sometimes, it is best to treat other's poorly chosen words the way that ducks treat falling water. Let it roll off. Just my thoughts, and I bid you peace. Cullen328 (talk) 06:32, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

By the way, having noticed that you blanked your user page, I took a look at the page history and then noticed you started the article on Christine Craft in 2007. I have heard her many times on KGO radio over the years, and have a lot of respect for her. I remember her discrimination lawsuit from decades ago. Well done. Cullen328 (talk) 06:42, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

It's plain to see that the admin got your dander up. But be careful what you say. His user page has indicated his adminship since December of 2008. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:03, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Please do not leave in a huff...

...leave in a minute and a huff! LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:29, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

+WP:TROUT, following Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Plenty_of_trouts_to_go_around_here

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

Ahhhh! That's better!

Fainites ^barleyscribs 15:17, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Best wishes

Hi, Corvus cornix. I am sorry this bad thing happened to you. Please don't abandon your wiki-career over this. The opinion of WP:Randy in Boise shouldn't matter to you (even if he is an admin). Regards, --Diannaa ^(Talk) 21:07, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately there are too many Randys who are admins here, because umm ... they promote each other in that MMORPG known as WP:RfA. It's not surprising that at some point some of them throw their weight around. Tijfo098 (talk) 06:34, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm no admin, and had I gotten that template, I would likewise have ridiculed its poster, for being totally oblivious. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:46, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

However, looking at the article in question [1], I don't think that having it promptly unredirected/restored was something surprising per WP:BRD. There are enough critical sources there that would probably make the article survive an AfD. Tijfo098 (talk) 07:45, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

It should matter, though, that you "templated a regular", which is considered impolite, and also didn't do any investigation to see if he really was an admin. So this "bad thing that happened to you", is around 50 percent of your own making. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:34, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I have to agree with Bugs here on the point that you should know by now how to tell if someone is an admin or not. But whether the guy is an admin or not should not matter in this sequence of events as there was no use of the tools. MrDarcy spoke in a very condescending manner after Corvus cornix made some mistakes (redirecting a worthwhile article and templating a regular rather than discussing). Both failed to do a little basic research and find out who they were dealing with before they started interacting, and made some mistakes for that reason. Corvus cornix, there were not four people on the ANI board who called you a vandal. The only one who used that term was SilverSeren, and he retracted it a little further down. Please consider resuming editing. People think highly of you and want you to come back. Sincerely, --Diannaa ^(Talk) 16:12, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Let

.. your calmer sense prevail . Rich Farmbrough, 02:34, 25 April 2011 (UTC).

Speedy deletion declined: Me TV (TV series)

Hello Corvus cornix. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Me TV (TV series), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A2: The article is being re-written in English, and I could not find it at another langauge Wikipedia, only on mirrors. Thank you. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 03:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow

In this issue:

• Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
• Research: The most recent DR data
• Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
• Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
• DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
• Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
• Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->

--The Olive Branch 18:56, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Islamic Assembly of North America

The article Islamic Assembly of North America has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Defunct group centered in a small city. Tagged for notability for almost 6 years.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sorry for the template. Bearian (talk) 22:24, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

MYSPACEDOTCOM listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect MYSPACEDOTCOM. Since you had some involvement with the MYSPACEDOTCOM redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:08, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Promenade Pictures for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Promenade Pictures is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Promenade Pictures (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Edwardx (talk) 15:46, 2 November 2019 (UTC)