User talk:The Rambling Man
 | Advisory notice This admin has been declared persona non grata by a couple of other "competent" admins, please refer to them (Writ Keeper and Bishonen) to help you out if you need something urgent. |
|
no archives yet (create) |
April Fool?
Wikipedia:Today's_featured_article/requests What should we have on the front page on April 1? --Dweller (talk) 16:32, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
List of nominations and awards by Bruno Mars
What else can I do to improve this page? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_awards_and_nominations_received_by_Bruno_Mars
It's been nomianted for months. Thank You MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 23:55, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
- You probably ought to list it at FLC, I can't see it there, so nobody else will find it other than people you approach directly. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
- It's here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_awards_and_nominations_received_by_Bruno_Mars/archive1, it has been archived because of the bot closure. Should I nominate the list again? MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 13:12, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
- I raised this with a delegate here. You might like to continue the discussion with him. Cheers, and good luck. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:19, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank You. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 14:29, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
John Johnson
Hi, thanks for reviewing my article. But can you please tell me what do you mean by "I asked for other input at GAN, but nothing was forthcoming" Thanks! RRD13 (talk) 06:56, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
- I added a note to request additional reviews, especially since I'd modified so much of the text myself, but nobody volunteered. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:36, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Hey TRM! Long time no hear. Could I trouble you to review my FLC nomination, which has been opened for approx. a month now? For a change, it's not a baseball list, and it being a football list instead should make it a bit more interesting for you. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 01:55, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
- I'll see what I can do! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:39, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
- Ping (almost a week has passed). But if you're busy, don't worry about it – I understand. —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:24, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for your feedback TRM! I've addressed all your comments, with all but two fixed (I need further clarification on one, while I explained the problem in the other). Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 19:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
- Addressed the rest of your comments. I found a way to make the ntsh work, but there's a slight drawback. —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:23, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
- Great! It works. —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:29, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
- Addressed the rest of your comments. I found a way to make the ntsh work, but there's a slight drawback. —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:23, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for your feedback TRM! I've addressed all your comments, with all but two fixed (I need further clarification on one, while I explained the problem in the other). Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 19:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
- Ping (almost a week has passed). But if you're busy, don't worry about it – I understand. —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:24, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
re: Sally Kellerman
I saw your edits for the Sally Kellerman article - looks wonderful. Thank you.
That being said, what are some other suggestions you may have for this page so I continue to work on it further?
Thank you :)
Topic banned?
Forgive my confusion; I thought that some time back (quite early in the year?) you'd been community banned from the Reference Desks? Nyttend (talk) 02:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
- No, absolutely incorrect. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:01, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah. I think that the other two users were topic banned, but not TRM. On other matters, persona non grata? → Call me Hahc21 14:54, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
- Yep, a few admins have made it clear they don't trust my judgement through their own judgement calls. But it is telling how quickly this particular admin "reverted" my edit without any actual reason to do so, despite having 200k+ edits. That's how things work around here these days. A bit like the admin who incorrectly blocked me because he couldn't tell the time. Sad, but true. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:10, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
- Well, depends. It's true that they (might?) believe you are persona non grata, though it isn't true that you are, otherwise you would be banned for the time being. Anyways, unless there is a big community discussion about your judgement, it doesn't matter what a couple of users say. That's how I split the waters and put what matters on one side, and what doesn't matter on the other ;) → Call me Hahc21 00:26, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
- Yep, a few admins have made it clear they don't trust my judgement through their own judgement calls. But it is telling how quickly this particular admin "reverted" my edit without any actual reason to do so, despite having 200k+ edits. That's how things work around here these days. A bit like the admin who incorrectly blocked me because he couldn't tell the time. Sad, but true. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:10, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah. I think that the other two users were topic banned, but not TRM. On other matters, persona non grata? → Call me Hahc21 14:54, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
You are persona mucho grata to me and to lots of other editors. Not sure why you'd prefer their opinions to ours. Ours come with fluffy kittens, bunting (you can't beat a bit of bunting), meat pies, rose-tinted spectacles and, of course, dressing gowns. --Dweller (talk) 15:01, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
- My thanks, of course. Has been interesting seeing how some experienced admins dispense their variation on "justice" and "fairness" and how quick they are to block/revert based on false premises.... I'll take your kittens any time D-man. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:04, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Antes de Las Seis GA Review
Hi Rambling Man! I just wanted to notify you that all issues you had pointed out in the GA review of Antes de las Seis have been addressed. Are there any more to address? Thanks, --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 16:05, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, yes, I'll get back to the review soon. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:57, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
re: Sally Kellerman
Hello, I think I made the necessary edits to Sally Kellerman's article. Could you please review it again and if it meets the standards, please notify me so I may nominate the article again. Thank you.
Bunting
.jpg)
|
Dweller's Bunting Award |
| This page was somewhat lacking in bunting. You can't beat a bit of bunting, so Dweller presented some to you. Hurrah! Dweller (talk) 15:10, 1 April 2014 (UTC) |
JSTOR Survey (and an update)
Hi! Just a quick update that while JSTOR and The Wikipedia Library discuss expanding the partnership, they've gone ahead and extended the pilot access again, until May 31st. Thanks, JSTOR!
It would be really helpful for growing the program if you would fill out this short survey about your usage and experience with JSTOR:
Cheers, Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:47, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
FAC review?
Can't remember if I pinged you or if you are too involved to do an FAC review, but I have Mucho Macho Man up, and hope to get it blessed for this round of the wikicup, any help would be appreciated, including FAC reviews from any of your trusty talk page stalkers. Montanabw(talk) 00:52, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Page protection
Hi, I am the former HCCC14 (and, confirming what I have said before, the former HCF). As you can see, I've gone back to being an IP so that I can edit in peace if and when I choose to use the site. You say you will "deal with" a certain troll and you "will win". Okay, I wish you well and, if I should spot anything you haven't, I'll let you know. You may like to begin with this predictably childish taunt that has followed our difference of opinion yesterday. As my membership is cancelled, would you please revert that post and put protection on both the talk page and the sandbox, given that he even attacked the sandbox the other day too. Sorry we had words but it is probably inevitable when two people seek the same end by different means.
I'm going to convert this IP address now and start work on a Hampshire-related article that's been on my list for some time. I might get involved with tours again in due course (I see SGGH has already done one!). I shall miss the watchlist, HotCat and Twinkle but I shall enjoy the peace of mind knowing that to escape a problem all I have to do is switch the hub off and on. Good luck. 109.156.151.45 (talk) 09:58, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
- You probably already know this, but editing as an IP makes your location and identity much easier to determine than editing from a user account. And you don't need me to remove posts from your own account's talkpage, nor to protect it considering you've abandoned it, the IP edits can simply be made on your IP talk pages... The Rambling Man (talk) 10:05, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
- H'mm. Yes, I'm very much aware of that. You've got me thinking. I'll take some time out to make a decision. Thanks. 109.156.147.39 (talk) 11:43, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
What the hell?
Why are you reverting all my edits. If this is a wiki war, I don't want it. I reverted two of your edits, completely unrelated. This does not mean you get to revert all of my edits. Nedgreiner (talk) 18:04, 3 April 2014 (UTC)