User talk:Dweller

Interested

Hello. I was interested to read your comment at WT:RfA since I had occasionally thought about applying for admin, but whenever I look at the WP:RfA page it looks exactly like a job application. I would imagine there are many editors who, like me, might be willing to help out from time to time, perhaps just to clear up any mess in one little corner of Wikipedia (in my case, more-or-less WP:Mathematics) but do not have the time or energy to commit themselves to taking responsibility for any of the major housekeeping tasks. It has been said that the title of "administrator" is not a big deal but frankly this no longer seems to be true. Richard Pinch (talk) 07:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Unusual candidates - Tinucherian

Dear Dweller, re your quest for unusual candidates, may I suggest you check out user:Tinucherian? He's done 18,000 edits, has no blocks and has the interested in admin box. In User:Tinucherian/Adminship he said he wasn't ready, but that was written more than four months ago. I suspect after my recent RFA experience a nomination from myself would be counterproductive, but I think he might meet your criteria. ϢereSpielChequers 12:14, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

I dunno

I saw your post about nominating "unusual" candidates. I don't know how unusual I really am, but frankly I can't bring myself to write my own nom. I've got over 8,000 edits, never been blocked or reported to ANI, but I seem to have a tendency to accidently piss people off. I consider myself an "editor" in the strictest sense of the word, I go over other's work and help it/criticize it to the best of my ability, but I don't have any bright shiny things to point to like GAs or FAs because that's just not where I'm focused. Whaddya think? Beeblebrox (talk) 23:57, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

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

In response to your post on WT:RFA

I noticed this, and wondered if you would continue to monitor me to see whether I would be suitable to run in say, 4 months time? I seem to fit the criteria - especially in that I have little to no want to write a FA, DYK or the like because I am a massive gnome. As per your instructions, I will request an editor review in two months or so to see how thing are going according to the community. If you have any concerns or queries, or just want to acknowledge that you have read this message, please do feel free to drop me a line. — neuro^(talk) 18:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and also, I might add that aside from my gnometry I spend a lot of time doing anti-vandalism work, and occasionally dwell over at the help desk. I have 65 edits to AIV (I'd say 40 are reports and the rest are extensions of reports), and just under 20 at the help desks and village pumps collectively. As I say, my record so far just shows what I am capable of doing, I obviously am not ready for an RfA at this time, that is even if you think I would pass after the aforementioned time. Thanks again. — neuro^(talk) 19:01, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for giving me a chance!

Well, it's done. For better or worse, my RfA was successful, and I woke up this morning to a very nice +sysop message. Although my final numbers (56/7/2) indicated a comfortable support rate of 89%, I am certain that without your willingness to give unusuals a chance, it would never have happened. I'm also keenly aware that many RfA regulars who feel that significant article work is a necessary precursor to adminship were willing to abstain from voting in my case out of respect for you. I also saw the way that you watched over my nomination during those crucial first couple of days when things were still touch and go. So again, my thanks to you, and please, do let me know if ever I can help with anything. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 12:56, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

PS I imagine one thing I can do is help do editor reviews on your other unusuals, do let me know when one is posted and I will make time to do them. :) Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 12:58, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Eh, as an RfA regular who believes article building is important, the reason I didn't get involved in your RfA wasn't due to respect for Dweller (Sorry Dweller), but more because by the time I saw it, it was well on the way to passing. Now, you might have had a lot of early supports because of Dweller's reputation... but he wasn't the reason why *I* didn't participate. I rarely get involved in with RfA's if there are over 20/30 !votes---unless the candidate is marginal. EG candidates that are likely to pass or fail after 30 !votes will probably not see me !voting---at that point it is rare that even the strongest oppose/support will change the tide. (As I spend 1-6 hours reviewing candidates before !voting, I don't want to waste my time when it really doesn't matter.) I don't "Pile-On" support. I suspect there are RFA regulars who have the same practice---only participating when it matters.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 17:51, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

It's good to know that by inference I'm not marginal ;). I wasn't alluding to you in particular, but I do think that I had a much easier go of it than I would have if I had self-nominated, or had a less respected nominator in my corner. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 23:17, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Contras

I see you've tried to kick-start this. I hope that your endeavours are successful.
Could you keep in touch regarding this case's status? If you need advice or input, or wish me to close the case as stale, do drop me a line.

Best, Anthøny (talk) 11:49, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Request for new user name

A drain on system resources? Is that a joke? What do I do then, open a new account? Gamer Junkie ^{T / C} 19:55, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

You've sparked a thread at BN: Wikipedia:Bureaucrats'_noticeboard#Changing_usernames. I think you have a point. NB Per the note at the top of the page, I'm not really "in" at the moment; sorry for not following this up further right now. --Dweller (talk) 08:56, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

I apologise if I came off as rude above, but there were other editors who have had name changes because they do not like their current user names. This is the first (and almost certainly last) time I've requested anything at all since becoming a registered editor in April 2006. I would really appreciate it if you could reconsider. Gamer Junkie ^{T / C} 09:10, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		I, Gamer... er... The Cake is a Lie :), hereby award you The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar, for going out of your way to make a fellow editor's day that much better. Very much appreciated. The Cake is a Lie T / C 10:54, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

FLC

Hello, the FLCon is currently running and unfortunately part of the problem with it is that most of our current regular reviewers are entrants. I would hate for people to lose in the contest solely because of a lack of reviewers, so could you please take a look at some of the following FLCs if you have time?

• List of Honorary Fellows of Jesus College, Oxford
• List of acquisitions by Hewlett-Packard
• List of universities in Nova Scotia
• List of Governors of Arizona
• List of St. Louis Rams head coaches
• List of Vancouver SkyTrain stations
• List of Soul Eater chapters

Thanks for your time, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 14:19, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Dweller, Gonzo and I have been discussing a potential "FL sweeps" that would help us root some of the less criteria meeting FLs and I was wondering if you had any opinions/ideas. You can find a little more about the discussion here. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 04:31, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

FLRC

Well, Gonzo is on a wikibreak, so we are down one delegate. Once again, I am firm in my belief that we do need two delegates, so I would like to appoint a new one, and I have a few ideas which I am discussing with Matthewedwards. I'll e-mail you in a bit. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:18, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Just came here to give you the heads up about Gonzofan. Got beat. :) Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 08:14, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi again Dweller, I don't want to rush you, but if you could let me know what you want to do (because I would like to resolve this), that would be great. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 13:18, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

oops, do we need to also remind Dweller about the Tues/Saturday GimmeBot thing? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:02, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot about FLR. Dweller, the GimmeBot will now only be run on Tuesdays and Saturdays at around 23:59, so you should try to only do your closures on that day (it shouldn't that big an issue because there isn't as much traffic/demand for closures at FLR). You can find out more here: User talk:Marskell#Update on FAC/FAR/FL closings. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 15:18, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

RFA

Why don't you try to close RFA on Magioladitis 2? I think you still haven't done one and you will be around when it closes. Prep it ahead of time so you can +sysop right away and then do all the other stuff. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:04, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Unusual candidate

I think that I would be a good admin, and an unusual candidate. I have not made any slip-ups in the last few months. Don't let my slowish editcount fool you (about two-hundred-and-something a month, 1500 in total), I think I have made the right call on almost everything. If I had about 2000-2500 edits what would you think about nominating me? SpecialK(KoЯn flakes)

Hi. I wouldn't worry too much about editcount at this stage. It's more quality than quantity that counts.

Questions:

1. Are you always civil?
2. Any experience in adminny areas?
3. Have you had a ER?

Regards, --Dweller (talk) 11:41, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

In response to your questions:

1. Yes, can't think of any times I haven't.
2. Yes - CSD (a lot of), Afd (sometimes) and RFPP (I've got Jamia nestor salted and Jeff Katz unsalted)
3. Yes (WP:Editor review/Universal Cereal Bus)

Thanks, SpecialK(KoЯn flakes) 18:09, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Note to all watching this page

Hi. My contribs are (and have been for some weeks now) limited at the moment by a variety of RL issues, notably medical*: hence the banner at the top of my userspace.

I'm sorry if I've been neglecting matters of late, but any time I've had here has of necessity been restricted to things that can be attended to without too much time and/or careful thought invested.

Most issues that people post here about don't fall into this slot - especially my FLRC work and my campaign for nominating candidates at RfA.

The exception is Crat work. I'm painfully aware how few active Crats there are and am trying to keep on top of the issues.

Sorry again. I hope to be "back to normal" (if I'm ever "normal") in a few days, but I really cannot guarantee it. --Dweller (talk) 11:57, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

*and before anyone feels too alarmed, I should clarify that I have no plans of "logging off" IRL in the foreseeable future.

Wow, I hope you get better soon. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 17:31, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Adminship

As with my last RFA i despise my editing habits. Immediately after my first RFA I did change my habits and spread out over more areas and got involved with many discussion and i am sure I could find diffs from that period.

Unfortunately my last few thousand edits have been mainly automated vandalism reverting and that has taken u a majority of this months edits in total for me. My reason behind this are for some reason all of the vandalism bots managed to stop working and maybe semi automated vandalism reverting programs failed for people meaning although there was the same amount of vandalism more of it was slipping through the cracks.

One diff I have managed to find is this which isn't really a discussion but more a friendly conversation.

I have had some discussions / conversations on my talk page also and some short talks on the Huggle feedback page due to my involvement with the development. Please ask if you would like more. ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 15:32, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

3 !votes before transcluding

Hey Dweller, just a thought. One thing that I've grown accustomed to doing when I nom a candidate is to put a hidden note in the SUPPORT and OPPOSE sections asking people not to !vote until the RfA goes live. Addshore had 3 supports before it was transcluded... which has been known to create problems. Even as a nom, I won't !vote until it goes live (of course, I don't !vote on my noms until 100 supports or the last day, but that's besides the point.) As for Addshore... I'll have to look at him closely. I opposed strongly when he ran previously, but that doesn't equate to what I'll do this time... and like I said, if there are a lot of supports/opposes before I get involved, I might not !vote.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 18:46, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Your sig

Is this better? Dendodge Talk^Contribs 13:52, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

I appreciate you fixing up all the backlinks for List of Roman Catholic dioceses. Nice to see other folks using the article!

ITN

Hi! In terms of this, I don't think that a study's results are really POV. For example, if a study conducted on gravity finds that it pulls objects downwards, would we have to say "study claims that gravity is a downward force"? I wanted to see if we could resolve this so that we could get that ITN update up. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 16:16, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, nevermind, I sorta see what you're getting at by that per your comments on Tone's talk page. I replied there as well. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 16:21, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!

File:Halloween Hush Puppies.jpg

Photograph of my Halloween-themed Hush Puppies plush basset hounds in my bedroom.

As Halloween is my favorite holiday, I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Halloween! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 21:11, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Question

I'm not interested in running up yet - but would you consider me an unusual RFA candidate? ;) Best, Ceran →(sing→see →scribe) 14:07, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to bother, but are you a checkuser? Ceran →(sing→see →scribe) 18:11, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I knew that, just too lazy to look up if you had them on Special:User ;) Ceran →(sing→see →scribe) 22:32, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, I lost interest in becoming an admin for a while. I'd now like to become an admin but I don't foresee a specific month. Ceran →(sing→see →scribe) 11:28, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Date Stamp

What do you mean by "Do tell"?

I remember from the tutorial pages that ~~~ gets you your signature without the date stamp, and is usually used to sign votes, ~~~~, most commonly used, for talk pages, and ~~~~~ for just a time stamp. Leujohn ^{(talk, stalk me?)} 13:01, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh you are a crat? Them maybe you can give some insight into WP:Tutorial (Talk pages) section 3, last sentence. It states:

Also, signing your message off is done by:

• Writing ~~~ for the name (try2BEEhelpful), or
• Writing ~~~~ for the name and date (try2BEEhelpful 19:09, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)), or
• Writing ~~~~~ for the date only (19:09, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)).

You should usually sign with both name and date, but votes are often signed with names only.

I would agree with you that an RfA is not a vote, but a consensus. In fact, I would say that most operations on the 'pedia is consensus, not vote. If that is true, I wonder what the word "vote" is doing there. Maybe we should change it. Leujohn ^{(talk, stalk me?)} 13:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Leujohn, are you sure it said vote and not !vote? The latter works by consensus and is supposed to be on quality of argument, hence you don't get through RFA unless you are in the 60-80% band - a bit similar to blackballing though not quite as stiff a challenge. ϢereSpielChequers 18:25, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Question about an unusual RFA

Hello, Dweller (or anyone who happens to see this). I am a rather active user here at the English Wikipedia, as can be verified through my contribs, although that's besides the point of what I am about to ask you. I have been working on developing a tool for Wikipedia sysops that makes it much easier for sysops to patrol AIV and easily block users there. Without sysop status, of course, it is very difficult for me to test the tool, and due to this, I have been relying upon other admins. However, as you may or may not know, it is very difficult to develop an application in this manner. I was wondering whether or not it would be appropriate for me to submit a (perhaps temporary) RfA for myself so I could more easily develop this tool. I have been around for around five months, but only been particularly active for the past month or so. Let me know what you think, _David^WS _(contribs) 21:56, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

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

Pollock

I suspect my better half might take a browse.... you could try User:SandyGeorgia but I'm not sure whether cricket players are in her areas of expertise. SGGH ^speak! 22:37, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

flagpoles

No problem! Can't quite remember why or how I discovered you'd lost the image, but figured the page didn't make quite so much sense without the picture, and just happened to know of an alternative (again for some long-forgotten reason). Gwinva (talk) 03:18, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

FYI -- I sent you an email through the wiki email tool.

Dear Dweller: I sent you an email through the wiki software, and I just wanted to let you know I had done so. Thanks. ⇔ ∫Æ_S dt @ 05:44, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Rename

Could you rename me?--Nazzzz (talk) 13:20, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Done.--Nazzzz (talk) 13:27, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, could you look again?--Nazzzz (talk) 13:39, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Ooops!--Nazzzz (talk) 14:58, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Adminship

Hi Dweller, thank you for your kind note – I'm glad to know that you'd consider nominating me for Adminship. Unfortunately, my activity on Wikipedia is pretty sporadic (certainly has been over the past couple of months). I tend to go into hibernation on Wikipedia a lot due to work/outside activities so I don't think I could consider running at this time. Perhaps if things taper off in the future, I might be able to look into an RfA. Thank you for your consideration, though :) AreJay (talk) 15:56, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which recently passed with 123 in support, 22 in opposition and 6 neutral votes. Just like to say thanks for the nom Dweller. Couldn't have done it without you. •If you want to reply to this message please use my talk page as watch listing about 150 pages is a bit messy• ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 19:23, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Graeme Pollock

It's a definite B but you'll need a lot more content for an A. I've changed the rating to B on the talk page and you can see there the criteria we use.

We don't actually have any A-class articles and personally I don't see the point. I regard B as the base camp for attempts on GA and FA. If you look at the B-class rating criteria you'll see they are quite demanding in terms of the basic quality concepts. You could propose this for GA now but I guess they would ask for more content and come up with a list of other things still to be done; even so, it isn't far short of GA.

I'm just old enough to remember Graeme Pollock as a player. He was a brilliant batsman. In my view, he was the second best in the world in the sixties after the incomparable Gary Sobers. Good luck with getting the article onto the DVD. ---BlackJack | ^{talk page} 16:58, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 17:01, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Graeme Pollock

Howdy Dweller, I had to do a fair amount of clean up in the article; an abundance of adjectives were littered about. Also, some things need specifying and some things citing. There are some paragraphs that require citations (you'll see whole blocks of uncited text), some of the cricket terminology used may be slightly difficult to understand for someone who isn't familiar with the sport. Perhaps if you gave a very brief description of it (e.g. "Pollock scored x runs (a run being he blah blah blah)" etc.) in parenthesis or between commas. In terms of actual content: A bit more on his youth career perhaps? Playing style is bare (Are there any sites online that do analysis of cricketer's style?), can any more be written? Personal life: Is Pollock married? Kids? et al. Apart from those things (that shouldn't be that difficult to handle) it looks okay! Feel free to point out anything that I've turned into a problem that actually isn't a problem. Take care, Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 19:16, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't think an explanation of cricketing terms needs to be added, it would needlessly clog up the article: surely the purpose of wikilinks is to provide information on technical terms? Nev1 (talk) 19:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

See my reply on Scarian's talk, :-) --Dweller (talk) 19:47, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Scarian's comments are the sort of thing I expected, really, though I agree entirely that we must use wikilinks to deal with terminology as otherwise we would lose focus. Having recently got an article through GA the impression I have is that they are particularly keen on citations and you could literally need a citation in every single sentence. They deplore things like standalone sentences; starting a sentence with "then" or "now" and the like; too many adjectives (as above); any hint of POV or non-objective tone; etc.

One thing I'm at odds with them about (on the GA talk page) is their interpretation of "broad coverage" as applied to a short article (probably irrelevant to Pollock as this article has quite a wide scope). The issue is that some GA reviewers expect a lengthy article even when the scope is restricted by lack of data. My argument is that the coverage should encompass the entire scope of the topic and not lose focus. There is a subtle difference there and I think it is important. Actually, if you can persuade User:Wizardman to do the GA review, I think you will find he will do it right but he does expect a high standard of article (rightly so). Good luck. ---BlackJack | ^{talk page} 07:33, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Admin nomination of User:Red Thunder

I would be happy to co-nominate Red Thunder with you, as he is my former adopter (graduating as soon as he replies). I have only been here for 1 1/2 months, but have rollback and close to 1000 edits, so I think I would be credible enough. If there is anything I can do, let me know on my talk, or leave me a talkback template. Thanks! Jock Boy (t/c) Sign 01:02, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello Dweller. I would also like to nominate Red Thunder for adminship. I've been watching him for a few months now, and I have seen everything positive from his edits. I'd be happy to nominate/co-nominate him. But please note I have not made many nominations for adminship before here on the English Wikipedia. I have done a few nominations at a different Wikipedia (see simple:User:RyanCross/RfA noms), but maybe only one or two here. I hope that is fine with you. I'm sure Red Thunder will do fine. His last RfA was back in April, and it looks like he's improved since. – RyanCross (talk) 06:22, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Please see Red Thunder's talk page. --Dweller (talk) 11:27, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Can you fix this

,H.Á.G,G,E,R?. thanks 211.30.109.24 (talk) 11:42, 7 November 2008 (UTC)