This is an archive of past discussions with User:Eliz81. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Dear Mango, thank you for asking. I haven't thought about the other points yet, and I don't mind letting other users weigh in too before I offer my thoughts on them. ~Eliz81(C)19:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I just don't want to see the conversation focus too much on one small aspect of the proposal the way the previous one focused way too much on what a "confusing" name is. People aren't getting at the core of the proposal because these side points are too distracting. It's hard to know what to do to get good feedback even from the regulars -- I don't want a bare-bones poll because I do want people to have a chance to explain their opinions, but on the other hand, I want more breadth than depth, and polls are good at encouraging that. Mangojuicetalk19:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
It's hard to balance the general with the specific with larger proposals. Perhaps after more dialogue about the proposal and the inevitable tweaks and changes, let's go for a poll. Not everyone is going to feel the need to join in the discussion, but a poll also ensures that before implementing policy change, that there is wide community support for it. If it will help other users join in, I'd be glad to offer broader feedback. ~Eliz81(C)19:19, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Smartypants
This term not only refers to underwear but is an insult in the UK meaning too clever for your own boots or something similar, a childish insult but an insult all the same. Such a term may not exist in the US as I believe pants there refers to trousers. Thanks, SqueakBox18:48, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
I removed the report again. The term exists in the US. It's a very minor insult, often used in a self-deprecating or humorous way. More importantly, there's no username policy against mild insults. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 18:56, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi! Is a regular editor allowed to tag for speedy deletion and how does one tell the user who made the article that the page is tagged? Thanks, I saw that you tagged ShelbyKun's talk page.-BlueAmethyst .:*:.22:03, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much! Actually, I am not really "lost" on Wikipedia. I have edited with my IP for quite some time, so I know what up in Wiki. I am lost with all of the work that I have in the real world (because I have lots of work ;)), so no adoption needed. Thanks again!!-BlueAmethyst .:*:.22:19, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
It was poor enough to fail WP:CSD#A1 but as you're going to recreate no worries at all. Hope you understand why I deleted it the first time! Thanks Eliz81! Pedro : Chat 22:34, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
I do not think this site need to be delated as i fixed and removed al controversal stuff. This is now only list of Smurf cartoons and many other web pages use this list so I think wikipedia should not be an expections.The Tramp 00:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Good work finding that, just luck? or did you know something about this guy already? I have changed my vote to keep, and have added a tiny bit to the article. Tiptoety08:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Just a note, about your oppose
Your comment that "admins are ambassadors for the 'Pedia" is simply incorrect. Admins are janitors, who clean up the project. Jimbo and the rest at the foundation are the ambassadors. Adminship is no big deal (per Jimbo), and thus good editors, who do their work well, should be promoted without incident. You have every right to oppose for whatever grounds you deem admissible. I simply wanted to let you know that I find your characterization of what an admin is VERY questionable, especially as a reason for opposition for such a fine editor as VanTucky. K. Scott Bailey20:23, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Please stop running around berating people for voicing their opinions in an RfA. Not only is it very unbecoming, it's not helping matters at all - Alison❤20:28, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
If the only criteria was the quality of deletions and admin-related edits, then why would we care about civility in the first place? Problem is, we're a community, and an admin is one of the first users they see. Not unreasonable to expect mop wielders to lead by example. You're doing a huge disservice to VanTucky's RfA with your attempting to discount all other editors' opinions who disagree with you. We get it, you think no one should be opposing on these civility diffs. Dissent happens, opinions differ, and attempting to stifle them is counter to the goals of this encyclopedia. You're entitled to your own opinion, as I am to mine, as are the rest of those who voted oppose. ~Eliz81(C)20:39, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply, Eliz. I respect your opinion, and was only offering you mine, hopefully in a way that you did not find disrespectful or attacking you in any way. K. Scott Bailey20:43, 11 November 2007 (UTC)Alison, stop following me around. This note has nothing to do with you.
Regarding your comment on my talkpage, Undertow's advice was why I chose to approach you on your talkpage, instead of at the RfA. I simply wanted to dialogue a bit about your reasoning. You explained it, and that's good enough for me. I disagree, but that happens sometimes (well a lot) on Wikipedia. Best regards, K. Scott Bailey20:45, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Also Alison isn't following you around, at least on here. She and I have each other's talk pages watchlisted. If anything she's stalking meeeee ;) ~Eliz81(C)20:57, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
That's fine. My only point in the post-script to my reply to you was that the note I left was for you, not her. And I'd like to ask you in good faith: do you find my comments here to be in any way berating you? If so, what portions do you find so, as I did not intend my comments to be viewed in that way? K. Scott Bailey21:03, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
You've commented excessively on your views on the matter. Telling me that you thought I was wrong, well I knew that was a given when I added my oppose !vote. You have a WP:POINT you'd like to make about the 'unfairness' of opposes on the civility diffs provided. If this is the case, questioning the judgment of each editor individually becomes tiresome, because as I said, you're one opinion, and so is everyone else on here. None of us are being irrational or bad faith in our opposes. Diffs have been cited. If you're looking for a constructive way out, perhaps write an essay about RfA and the pitfalls you perceive in the process? A single comment about the opposes on the RfA page? As I said, notice that none of the opposers are trying to tell the supporters they're wrong, because that's not the point of RfA. By selectively campaigning for your point of view, you're putting editors on the defensive. Hope this helps explain it a little. ~Eliz81(C)21:09, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Also, comments above like I find your characterization of what an admin is VERY questionable is not the opening of constructive dialogue at all. It is an attack on the editor. Wording matters a lot here. ~Eliz81(C)21:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
That's a place we may have to disagree. I view the statement you highlight, not as my personal opinion of YOU, but my personal opinion of your CHARACTERIZATION of VT. If you felt berated in any way, I apologize, without reservation. As I said, this was most certainly not my intent. K. Scott Bailey21:17, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
...thank you for your participation. I withdrew with 83 supports, 42 opposes, and 8 neutrals. Your kind words and constructive criticism are very much appreciated. I look forward to using the knowledge I have accrued through the process to better the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers and Wikidudeman for their co-nominations.
...for your participation, criticism, and support in my recent RfA, which succeeded with a final count of 90/1/1. I appreciate all of your kind words, criticism, and suggestions. I extend a special thanks to Acalamari for his nomination, and Dihydrogen Monoxide and Husond for their coaching and nominations. If you need help in any administrative matters, please contact me.
Thank you again and, best regards, Neranei
This RfA thanks inspired by VanTucky's which was in turn inspired by LaraLove's which was inspired by The Random Editor's, which was inspired by Phaedriel's original thanks.
I was just trying to be funny about the whole thing. I didn't mean to do any offencive words to you or on the artical. i am sorry and i hope you will forgive me. I'm to bad for this. I didn't know that the things I said in my hold on page were bad. SSSSSooorrrryyy!!!!--Cutiegal618 (talk) 19:21, 17 November 2007 (UTC)Becky
Great job!!
I havbe just been looking aroud at you userpage and it seems to be very nice and clean. I read you articles you have created, they are so awesome and amazing!!!! and for that I would like to reward you with the Society Barnstar for doing so good File:Society barnstar.jpg (but the image wouldn't show up) keep up the good work!!! PS my friend cutiegal618 is so sorry for being bad I was with her when she was doing that. She was so mad that she almost atempted to delete one of your artices,yet I stoped her. And all of this is true I swear!!! --Pomergirl (talk) 12:52, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Today (Australian TV program)
Hi, I see you have been editing the article Today. I am unsure whether you are aware that I have placed this up for Peer Review? I would appreciate it, if you would kindly give your own review, suggestions or perhaps opinions on the article's quality and its suitablity as a FA or GA. Please go to the article's discussion page, click on the link to the review page, and leave your thoughts. Thanks --Tjkirk (talk) 09:31, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Please don't bite the newcomers
Eliz, here you warned a user from another wiki who simply didn't know our local name for User: namespace. Please try to look deeper into the situation before slapping a warning. Cheers, MaxSem(Han shot first!)20:57, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Roll up TV, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Roll up TV satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roll up TV and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Roll up TV during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Jmlk1706:54, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
...Sorry for the template Eliz! I know not to template the oldies around here lol, but Twinkle did it! :) Jmlk1707:07, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations on your successful request for adminship. I am glad you passed, and you are welcome for the support. For information on using your new tools, see the school for new admins; you will find it very useful. Good luck! Acalamari02:39, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
On another note, yes, I have seen your contributions. You gave good reports to AIV and RFPP, and now you can answer those requests instead. :) Acalamari02:39, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
...for helping me navigate the waters of my surprisingly peaceful RFA, which closed successfully with 85 supports, 1 oppose, and 0 neutral.
I would particularly like to thank Acalamari and Alison, my nominators, and everyone who watched the page and ran the tally.
If there is anything I can do to be of service in the future, please feel free to contact me.
If you hate RfA thankspam, please forgive me. I promise I won't block you in retaliation for deleting it. But I may force you to drink red wine and stay up till 3am watching the election returns with me.
And forgive me if I need a Wikibreak now and then (like now. I'm exhausted!). You wouldn’t want to see me climbing the Reichstag, now would you?
Off to flail around with my new mop! (what?!)
Kathryn NicDhàna♫♦♫ This RfA thanks inspired by Neranei's, which was inspired by VanTucky's which was in turn inspired by LaraLove's which was inspired by The Random Editor's, which was inspired by Phaedriel's original thanks.
There's a red wine stain on my carpet. First admin task :)
Congratulations, I have closed your RfA as successful and you are now a sysop! If you have any questions about adminship, feel free to ask me. Please consider messaging me on IRC for access to the #wikipedia-en-admins channel. Good luck! --Deskana(talk)10:54, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Yayy!!! I'm so happy for you :) You made it!!! Squeeeeeeee!!!!11!!!one!! Well done :) - Alison❤11:07, 22 November 2007 (UTC) (yes, I stayed up until 3am for this)
Thanks you all!! I deleted a test page, yay. With a lolcat summary to boot :P I'll be sure to write more when I have time, but thank you everyone SO MUCH for your support!! :P ~Eliz81(C)18:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Yes, congrats. I found the post you mentioned. Since you are an admin, it looks like you did follow my advise. I am happy to see that I had some positive impact. To learn a little about how to work your new tools, check out the New admin school. To display on your user page how long you have been an admin, just post the userbox string: {{User:EVula/Userboxes/admin since|year=2007|month=11|day=22}} Best! -- Jreferee t/c14:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your kind words, I'm blushing. Your goodness shines through your every action, Eliz, but at your request for specifics, I'd say this and this sprang to mind. :P (And don't worry, I was not stalking you all around Wikipedia, just happen to watchlist you talk page since long ago and notice how you brilliant you are in dealing with all kinds of issues!) Hope you're having fun with the mop and bucket, you rulz, girl! PeaceNT (talk) 16:40, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi, when you relist AFDs, in addition to adding the template, you need to remove them from the old AFD page ([2]) and add them to the new one ([3]). TThe diffs should illustrate what I mean. If you don't do this, they aren't really relisted. Thanks! --W.marsh15:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Recently you closed this AfD with the result "merge and delete". As a new administrator, you may be unaware that such an outcome actually results in a violation of the GFDL by destroying the edit history and attribution of the merged content. In the help page for merging and renaming pages, it says "Merging — regardless of the amount of information kept — should always leave a redirect or, in some cases, a disambiguation page in place. This is often needed to allow proper attribution through the edit history for the page the merged text came from. Superfluous redirects do not harm anything, and can be helpful in finding articles, e.g. from alternative names." In order to preserve the attribution history of the content which was merged into Ellen (TV series), please restore the List of Ellen guest stars article and replace with a redirect to the TV series article. Thank you. DHowell (talk) 04:40, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
