User talk:Jmlk17: Difference between revisions
→Claus Pedersen: replied |
Yilloslime (talk | contribs) →Mukilteo Fairies: + Behead the Prophet, No Lord Shall Live |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 55: | Line 55: | ||
<span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS">Dear J, thank you for taking part in [[Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Riana|my RfB]]. As you may know, it was [[Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Riana/Bureaucrat discussion|not passed]] by bureaucrats. <br>I would, however, like to thank you for taking the time to voice your support, despite concerns cited by the opposition. Although RfA/B isn't really about a person, but more about the community, I was deeply touched and honoured by the outpouring of support and interest in the discussion. I can only hope that you don't feel your opinion was not considered enough - bureaucrats have to give everyone's thoughts weight. <br>I also hope that the results of this RfB lead to some change in the way we approach RfBs, and some thought about whether long-entrenched standards are a good thing in our growing and increasingly heterogenous community. <br>I was a little miserable after the results came out, so I'm going to spread the love via dancing hippos. As you do. :) <br>I remain eager to serve you as an administrator and as an editor. If at any point you see something problematic in my actions, please do not hesitate to [[User talk:Riana|call me out]]. ~ [[User talk:Riana|Riana <font color="green">⁂</font>]] 13:47, 11 March 2008 (UTC)</font> |
<span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS">Dear J, thank you for taking part in [[Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Riana|my RfB]]. As you may know, it was [[Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Riana/Bureaucrat discussion|not passed]] by bureaucrats. <br>I would, however, like to thank you for taking the time to voice your support, despite concerns cited by the opposition. Although RfA/B isn't really about a person, but more about the community, I was deeply touched and honoured by the outpouring of support and interest in the discussion. I can only hope that you don't feel your opinion was not considered enough - bureaucrats have to give everyone's thoughts weight. <br>I also hope that the results of this RfB lead to some change in the way we approach RfBs, and some thought about whether long-entrenched standards are a good thing in our growing and increasingly heterogenous community. <br>I was a little miserable after the results came out, so I'm going to spread the love via dancing hippos. As you do. :) <br>I remain eager to serve you as an administrator and as an editor. If at any point you see something problematic in my actions, please do not hesitate to [[User talk:Riana|call me out]]. ~ [[User talk:Riana|Riana <font color="green">⁂</font>]] 13:47, 11 March 2008 (UTC)</font> |
||
</div> |
</div> |
||
== Mukilteo Fairies == |
|||
Hi Jmlk17. I see you deleted [[Mukilteo Fairies]] and [[Behead the Prophet, No Lord Shall Live]] due to expired PROD and an AfD, respectively. I'm wondering if you might be able to restore/userify these article in my userspace, so that I can incorporate any relevant info into [[Joshua Plague]]. Please let me know. Thanks. [[User:Yilloslime|Yilloslime]] [[User_Talk:Yilloslime|('''t''')]] 00:37, 12 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 00:38, 12 March 2008
| This is Jmlk17's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
| Archives |
|---|
|
/Archive1/Archive2 /Archive3 /Archive4 /Archive5 /Archive6 /Archive7 /Archive8 /Archive9 /Archive10 /Archive11 /Archive12 /Archive13 /Archive14 /Archive15 /Archive16 /Archive17 |
Mark Woods
Hey. I like how you deleted a page of mine that received national coverage on Associated Press, CNN, and college newspapers around the nation with you saying it had no significant purpose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Br1antt (talk • contribs) 09:15, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- Simple... still fails notability, and has numerous issues with our biographies guidelines. Jmlk17 09:19, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Claus Pedersen
Why did you delete the company description of MyHoliday.com It is no different that the description of HolidayLettings which is ok, or?
Claus Pedersen (talk) 09:49, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- It seemed to be a spam article. Jmlk17 09:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Ok. But it wasn't. Please restore it again.
Claus Pedersen (talk) 09:55, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- Well, that doesn't really explain it. HolidayLettings is a highly-visited and popular website. Jmlk17 09:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
And? Do you have shares of that company? It's not spam when a larger company has a profile page, but it is when a smaller company has? So if Microsoft decides to send spam e-mails to everybody - then it is ok?
Claus Pedersen (talk) 10:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- Uh, no, I don't own shares. Perhaps the deletion as spam wasn't correct, but the website almost certainly fails notability. Jmlk17 10:06, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
So, it's the lack of references that is the problem? Like HolidayLettings reference to their own press release? I will add a reference to for instanse webuser.co.uk's review of the site from issue 168. Claus Pedersen (talk) 10:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- Some good, third-party sources would be key. Jmlk17 10:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Ok, fine. Please restore the article then. Let me know when it's done and I will update it with third-party references.
Claus Pedersen (talk) 10:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I have added a couple of third-party references. Is it ok now?
Claus Pedersen (talk) 10:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
It's gone again - why? It seems to be the user Ukexpat or was it you? Could you please take a look at it?
Claus Pedersen (talk) 19:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- Was not me... I've been gone for the last several hours. Jmlk17 19:57, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
My request for bureaucratship
Dear J, thank you for taking part in my RfB. As you may know, it was not passed by bureaucrats.
I would, however, like to thank you for taking the time to voice your support, despite concerns cited by the opposition. Although RfA/B isn't really about a person, but more about the community, I was deeply touched and honoured by the outpouring of support and interest in the discussion. I can only hope that you don't feel your opinion was not considered enough - bureaucrats have to give everyone's thoughts weight.
I also hope that the results of this RfB lead to some change in the way we approach RfBs, and some thought about whether long-entrenched standards are a good thing in our growing and increasingly heterogenous community.
I was a little miserable after the results came out, so I'm going to spread the love via dancing hippos. As you do. :)
I remain eager to serve you as an administrator and as an editor. If at any point you see something problematic in my actions, please do not hesitate to call me out. ~ Riana ⁂ 13:47, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Mukilteo Fairies
Hi Jmlk17. I see you deleted Mukilteo Fairies and Behead the Prophet, No Lord Shall Live due to expired PROD and an AfD, respectively. I'm wondering if you might be able to restore/userify these article in my userspace, so that I can incorporate any relevant info into Joshua Plague. Please let me know. Thanks. Yilloslime (t) 00:37, 12 March 2008 (UTC)