User talk:Cadillac000
Nomination of Top gear series 1 episode 1 for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Top gear series 1 episode 1 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/Top gear series 1 episode 1 until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 template from the top of the article. TBrandley 18:55, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
thanks
Hi Cadillac, its cool 20010808 thanks for fixing what I messes up I did that on purpose to see what people would say and do because there are some people who put random stupid stuff on here and it was to show that people do that stuff. Yeah I found out how to talk on here. Hope we can talk more.
what did I remove
thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.98.133.142 (talk) 21:40, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Removing Essay tag from Fly tying
I've removed the essay tag you recently added to the Fly tying article. The tag is not helpful as it provides no information as to what in the article makes you believe it is an essay. If there is specific information in the article that needs better sourcing, then please identify it and discuss on the talk page. Thanks --Mike Cline (talk) 13:42, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, that makes sense. I was doing a general copy-edit anyway and tagged it for later review. Looking back, the copy-edit tag adequately summarises the tone issues I tried to convey. Thanks for the notification! --The one that forgot (talk) 19:53, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:37, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
CVUA
|
CVU Academy Graduate |
| Congratulations, Cadillac000, on your successful completion of this CVUA program from the Counter-Vandalism Unit Academy. You completed your final exam with 90.84%. Well done and congratulations. You can keep a copy of your progress through CVUA at your Counter-Vandalism Unit Academy page. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:31, 20 January 2015 (UTC) |
Your RfA
Hi Cadillac000. I think you should withdraw that RfA, It's never going to pass, and your editing history to date is too little even to use the RfA as some form of feedback from the community, and some people may even pile on with harder comments than mine and that would make you feel unnecessarily uncomfortable.
I've checked your edits and you are actually doing a good job. I see you recently graduated from the CVUA, which is good, but with only just over 500 mainspace edits you would barely qualify for AfC reviewer, for example, so you can see that adminship is still a very long way off. When you get fed up of reverting vandalism, you may like to try your hand at WP:NPP - but only when you've got a lot more experience, and if you want to do that I'll help you all I can. Keep up the good work and don't hesitate to leave a message on my talk page if ever you need any help with anything. Regards, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
- Jut FYI, given your request to Kudpung to withdraw the RfA, I've closed it for you. I'd just like to second Kudpung's sentiments—you're on the right track, but you'll need a lot more experience before you would make an effective administrator. Stick to the things you enjoy, and if that takes you into areas where you would find the admin tools useful, consider re-applying towards the end of the year at the earliest. If you need a friendly admin to ask for advice on anything, I'm available, as I'm sure is Kudpung. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Good Answer
Good answer to my question, I will readily give you support on your next RfA, good luck and be well.--AldNonUcallin?☎ 12:58, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 22:52, 15 February 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I think you have done the right thing by withdrawing. The opposers have been kind to you in their comments because like me, they see you have great potential for adminship but it's not for any time soon. When you have read WP:Advice for RfA candidates (which I wrote, BTW) and followed all the links and reviewed a few unsuccessful RfAs, you'll see that the opposers can often be quite unpleasant, if not downright nasty with their comments. With your experience now at RfA, I would like very much for you to help us keep RfA a friendly place by voting on as many future RfA as possible - doing thorough research of the candidate first, of course, rather than just piling on and following how others have voted. I also think that if you were to read WP:NPP, WP:CSD, WP:DELETION, and WP:NPT (phew! that's a lot of reading!) you will be able to do some valuable work by patrolling at the New pages Feed; you'll need to get it right though, otherwise you'll get grumpy old admins like me yelling at you ;) Happy editing! --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:21, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Resilient Barnstar |
| I think you handled yourself very well at RfA. Hopefully you take this as an opportunity to grow and learn, rather than as anything negative or critical against you. Cheers! Gaff (talk) 00:09, 16 February 2015 (UTC) |
Invitation to a discussion
Hi. A discussion is taking place at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship#Add Withdrawal instructions (part deux) where your input would be particularly appreciated. Please consider commenting there. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:36, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
What does it mean "to patrol an article"?
I got a message you had done so for an article I wrote (Temple Beth-El (Hornell, New York). deisenbe (talk) 23:11, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited El Hed, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page North Lebanon. 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) 08:56, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Durga (TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bengali. 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) 09:25, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Dog meat
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Dog meat. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Peter May (disambiguation)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Peter May (disambiguation). Legobot (talk) 00:09, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Camel toe
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Camel toe. Legobot (talk) 00:08, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Please comment on Template talk:Infobox basketball biography
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Infobox basketball biography. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Somalis
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Somalis. Legobot (talk) 00:05, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
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) 16:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Blocked
{{legalblock}} [[User:TomStar81|TomStar81]] ([[User talk:TomStar81|Talk]]) 01:29, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- On second glance this was the wrong open tab, I've unblocked you and reported myself for the error and the correct account I meant to block for legal threats at WP:ANI. My apologies for the inconvenience. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:37, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
|
The Purple Barnstar | |
| For your graciousness with my mistaken block of you account I hereby award you this Purple Heart. I will make it a point to be extra cautious with my tabs from now on to make sure this sort of accident doesn't happen again. TomStar81 (Talk) 04:08, 24 February 2016 (UTC) |
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Cadillac000. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Survey Invite
I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they affect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take 5 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics.
I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on Wikipedia that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.
Sincere thanks for your help! Porteclefs (talk) 15:34, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Cadillac000. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
now we know...
... that the mayor of Swindon is a wiki enforcer. You must be. Nobody else would care so much. Is it okay I call you Maureen? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:418:4014:1:0:0:0:10 (talk) 08:59, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
I am not attacking you. I am just saying that you are the only person who cares about Swindon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:418:4014:1:0:0:0:10 (talk) 09:03, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
I already commented on the content. The article was cherry picking historical buildings and green spaces. You deleted my comment.