User talk:KTC/Archive 8#Precious

I missed your talkback when you posted it, but I didn't find any post here when I came looking for it. Did this have something to do with oppa? μηδείς (talk) 23:45, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

:You already saw and replied to the message it was associated with. I'm not sure whether you saw my subsequent reply though. -- KTC (talk) 23:50, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

|-

| valign="top" style="border: 2px #30B060 solid; padding: 1em; width: 45%; background-color:#F0FFEA;" |

;Project news

• Five changes have been proposed to the AfC policy. Join the discussion here.
• Another change has been proposed to the courtesy blanking policy. It involves CSDing distributive submissions. Discuss it here.
• The beta script still needs testing. Learn how you can help here.
• The backlog is at emergency status and another drive has been proposed here and suggestions on changes to the structure have been proposed here.
• Discussion on updating the backlog notification is underway here.
• A discussion on whether autoconfirmed users are allowed to skip the backlog is going on here.
• Discussion on users not adding categories and not checking copyvios is going on here.

;Backlog newsInformation may not be current due to caching. {{purge|Click here to purge this page's server cache.}}

• There are {{#expr:{{PAGESINCATEGORY:Pending AfC submissions|R}}-2}} pending submissions in the backlog. You can help!

;Article rankings

{{ArticlesByQuality|topic=AFC|project=Articles for creation}}

| valign="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Dom497/GA_Newsletter_Fall_2012" style="border: 2px #30B060 solid; padding: 1em; width: 45%; background-color: #F0FFEA;" |

;From the Editors

• This is the very first newsletter for WikiProject Articles for creation! If you find any errors or have suggestions on what to improve/include in future newsletters, please leave a message here.

;Contributors to this Issue

• {{user|Dom497}}
• {{user|Nathan2055}}

;Notes

{{reflist}}

|-

| colspan="2" valign="top" style="border: 2px #30B060 solid; padding: 1em; width: 55%; background-color: #F0FFEA;" |

Script corner: Stable: v4.1.15 - Beta: v4.1.16b2

• v4.1.16b2 is now available in the beta channel! Reviewers can use the beta version of the script by following the instructions here and should report bugs here! Release notes can be found here as well as in the source code.

• If you are JavaScript savvy, please contact {{user|Nathan2055}} if you wish to help with development.

|-

| colspan="2" valign="top" style="border: 2px #30B060 solid; padding: 1em; width: 55%; background-color: #F0FFEA;" |

Reviewing articles and more since 2005!

|-

| valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%; " |

|}

|}

• For all you do. We need more Wikipedians like you :)
• I really hope you survive the RfA battleground. I think you will make a wonderful admin. Don't let the negative nellies bring you down, these RfAs bring out the worse in people, and it will pass. Be well. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 05:52, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Admin T-shirt2.png

Congratulations, I've just closed your RFA as successful. It was clearly in the "promote" range of the community, but the comments of those who opposed you do need serious consideration. I hope you can prove them wrong and use your experience to the good. Well done again, and if you need to talk to me (or any other 'crat or admin) about anything, don't hesitate. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:54, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

:Well done! GiantSnowman 18:57, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

• Congrats! Hope you put the new tools to good use. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 19:02, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
• Congratulations. Go Phightins! 19:06, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

::Good luck with your new tools! Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you everyone. I will do my best to make sure I don't end up here. -- KTC (talk) 20:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

:Congrats.--v/r - TP 21:30, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

::Congratulations. Nice to have another UK admin. ;-)  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:33, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

:::Congrats! — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 22:43, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

::::Left you some bling on your userpage and here...  7  01:40, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

:Congratulations - you've earned them. Edwardx (talk) 10:55, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Excellent. Knew you'd make it. Wield the mop with care! —Tom Morris (talk) 15:59, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

• Congrats, KTC! AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 16:00, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Well done and welcome aboard. — Hex (❝?!❞) 22:26, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

• Belated congrats and Happy New year from me as well. When you've discovered what a faff it is to hunt for the right block template feel free to check my monobook for some well useful admin scripts that various kind people have put there for me. ϢereSpielChequers 11:00, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

I just wanted to point out that when you deleted this page, you missed the talk page. Cheers. Sir Sputnik (talk) 17:52, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

:An ominous start. What's next, deleting the main page or blocking Jimbo? I'm kidding, for I'm sure that when and if I become an admin, I'll goof something up very quickly. You're going to be a fine admin. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 18:19, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Per WP:BAN those types of proposal are normally kept open for a minimum of 24 hrs to get a wide cross section of input.

I do not say this because you called the existing consensus as it is wrong - no consensus there, indeed - but the discussion was not exceptionally harsh or disruptive, and I don't want precedents floating around on such proposals being prematurely closed or SNOW closed ( prior policy versions and the discussion that led to them explicitly banned that, though it's loosened up ). The first time a premature ban gets enacted that later consensus revokes, the policy will be discredited, and people always want to snap decide and call them early.

I would appreciate uncalling it, unarchiving, waiting at least the bare minimum 24 hes, reclosing.

Thank you... Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 09:07, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Glucarpidase, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Recombinant (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:31, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

{{talkback|Freshacconci|Rollback|ts=02:41, 2 January 2013 (UTC)}}

freshacconci talktalk 02:41, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

WP:ANRFC lists Talk:Education of the deaf#Merger proposal which contains Talk:Education_of_the_deaf#RfC:_Deciding_on_the_target_name, an RfC that has been open since October 2012 (as a finale to a discussion started in April 2012). Discussion ceased in November 2012. I'm not an admin, but my assessment of the consensus is that there is support to merge the three similar articles Education for the deaf, Education of the deaf, and Deaf education into the latter article (Deaf education). Since you're a newly minted admin you might like to take this on - the discussion is fairly short, so you should be able to knock it over fairly quickly. Cheers, --Surturz (talk) 12:15, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi -- would you mind restoring the content of Lovers (Saturday Night Live) to the location User:theoldsparkle/lovers, so that I can merge the content to Recurring Saturday Night Live characters and sketches introduced 2000–2001? I'd appreciate it. Theoldsparkle (talk) 15:05, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

:{{done}} -- KTC (talk) 15:19, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

(Crediting your fine RfA to Darkwind.) Maybe I can use it as a lesson to double-check before posting. Congrats to your own success, I still follow RfA, although I haven't voted recently, unless I knew the editor fairly well.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 00:32, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

:Don't worry about it. It's not a competition and I'm fairly sure it'll be eclipsed very soon by Ocaasi anyhow. :) KTC (talk) 00:35, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

I see it is already semi protected but if I'm not mistaken the user that just vandalized it is not autoconfirmed? Can you tell me was this just a error on my part or what? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

:Eagle2012a is an autoconfirmed account. 168 edits since June 2012, way more than are required for autoconfirmed status of 4 days and 10 edits. KTC (talk) 16:25, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

::Oh Ok, been so long since I had to worry about that and it didn't show me his user rights perhaps cause he was blocked? Oh well thanks for the reply. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:27, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

:::Special:ListUsers doesn't state if an account is autoconfirmed unfortunately. I don't know where you can find out that information other than manually calculate it yourself. KTC (talk) 16:34, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

I see that you've revdel'd the BLP violations at Rajev Paul. May I trouble you to do the same at Wikipedia:Help desk, where someone drew attention to the bad text by copying it? The revisions are [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&diff=531110201&oldid=531109292 this one] and the following revision by SineBot. Thank you. -- John of Reading (talk) 19:59, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

:{{done}} KTC (talk) 20:08, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello KTC! I'm notifying you because you've been active at Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage. There is currently quite a backlog there and if you have a second to deal with the requests there that would be great. Thank you! Vacation^nine 19:07, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

I've added a comment to Calu's request, but just wanted your okay before declining it, seeing as you seemed to be dealing with that one. Thanks - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 20:20, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

:I merely made a simple observation. Feel free to handle the requests as you see fit. KTC (talk) 20:50, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

{{talkback|Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage|ts=23:51, 6 January 2013 (UTC)}}

I replied to your question about my CSD log. It's a Fox! (Talk to me?) 23:51, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey KTC,

Your rationale for [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Small_Corners&diff=531770955&oldid=531768812 this revert], would be most wonderful. Thanks, -- MST☆R ^{(Happy New Year!)} 11:41, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

:WP:CSD#G7 requires either the tagging itself to be done by the substantial author of the article, or "the sole author blanks a page" which are interpret as a deletion request. An IP [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Small_Corners&diff=531768700&oldid=531726929 blanking the page] does not satisfy either of those criteria as we have no way of knowing that the IP is the same person as the user who created the article in the first place. As such, I have reverted to the pre-blanking version. KTC (talk) 11:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

::Right, it must have been a coincidence that some new IP stumbled on this recently created article, and decided to blank it. Well that's quite convenient of them. Thanks for the explanation though, -- MST☆R ^{(Happy New Year!)} 11:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Lynette_Nusbacher. Insomesia (talk) 11:25, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Someone is complaining that you didnt sign [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lynette_Nusbacher_(2nd_nomination)&diff=prev&oldid=531972343 your statement at an AfD]. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:38, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

:Speedy! ;-) -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:42, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

:Dear KTC,

:I think protection is not a solution. This article is already in biased condition. Making protected will make the condition worse. It will bring wrong message to the world. Would you please hover over the article and make a comment, whether it is biased or not. One of previous editor make this article fully junk. Every where you will get negative tone. If you think protection is best for this article, then please remove NPOV information or rename it by "Criticism of International Crimes Tribunal (Bangladesh)". Thank you.--Freemesm (talk) 17:19, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi,

since you protected the article a few days ago, I just wanted to inform you that at Self-determination editor Wee Curry Monster is again edit warring me to keep a source out of the article and refusing to go to the talk page where the discussion is still ongoing. Regards. Gaba p (talk) 19:40, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

If you wouldn't mind, please comment here. Mr T^(Talk?) [{{fullurl:User_talk:Mrt3366|action=edit§ion=new&preload=User_talk:Mrt3366/new_section}} ^{(New thread?)}] 16:15, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

{{talkback|Talk:Progressive_utilization_theory|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Progressive_utilization_theory#Protected|ts=15:36, 10 January 2013 (UTC)}}

Abhidevananda (talk) 15:36, 10 January 2013 (UTC)