User talk:Majorly

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a Wikipedia user talk page. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated, and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Majorly.

This is the User talk page for Majorly

Please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~). Place comments that start a new topic at the bottom of the page by starting a new thread. Is your comment missing? If it was trolling, vandalism and such it's probably in User talk:Majorly/Removed stuff. I will normally answer on this page.

Talk page guidelines Please respect Wikiquette, assume good faith and be nice, and bear in mind what Wikipedia is not.

Archives June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007

Contents 1 Hope all goes well 2 Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007. 3 DRV notice 4 Good decision 5 The use of Template:oldafdfull and Template:oldafdmulti 6 Help please 7 Thanks. 8 WP:EA 9 Ping 10 What's wrong with "Good morning, I'm gay"!!?? 11 Protection of 'David and Kim' 12 Greysouthen 13 Omnicide 14 Protection 15 RfA thanks 16 About Slavomacedonian language 17 bureaucratship 18 My RfA

[edit] Hope all goes well

Thank you very much. I hope everything goes smoothly. I'll be in touch with you after I get back. =) Nishkid64 13:53, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 13	26 March 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Tardiness, volunteers, RSS
Patrick and Wool resign in office shakeup	WikiWorld comic: "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo"
News and notes: Board resolutions, milestones	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:06, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DRV notice

An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people/No longer identified. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Otto4711 14:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

As you decided that the close was in error, you could have restored and relisted the article, and closed the deletion review. Since you choose not, to, I have. Even when a deletion decision is under review, deletion review precedent is to always let the original admin change their mind. If anyone wants to challenge that change, we'd need a new review, so the old review is closed. GRBerry 12:56, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yep, thanks for that. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 13:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good decision

I think this was a very good decision of yours, particularly because it was kind to the editor. -- Jreferee 14:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks :) Majorly _{(o rly?)} 14:22, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The use of Template:oldafdfull and Template:oldafdmulti

Dear Majorly, I noticed you closed the deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sideshow Cinema (2nd nomination) and added Template:oldafdfull to the talk page of the article (Talk:Sideshow Cinema). You used the template in combination with "subst:". To keep maintenance of AfD templates easier, they are preferably not substituted, however. In addition, you might want to think about using Template:oldafdmulti instead, especially when the article has been listed on AfD before (see the talk page I mentioned for an example). Since you often close AfD debates, I thought I'd just let you know. Regards, --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 20:07, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

It's the script I use to close them, not me personally. I'll remove the subst: manually each time :) Majorly _{(o rly?)} 20:21, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I suppose you can also change the script, I contacted Mailer Diablo about this too and he changed his script: [1]. Regards, --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 21:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

If you look at my monobook it borrows heavily from User:Voice of All, which is where the "subst" is probably located. I can't remove it, but you could ask him to. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 21:41, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Help please

Your urgent help would be most appreciated here. -- Jreferee 21:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks.

You were one of the first three users to support me; I want to thank you for your support. :) The RfA came to no consensus, but as I said in my nomination, I'll treat it as a "large-scale editor review". Thanks also for the comment on the the quality of the self-nomination. Acalamari 21:15, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem, be sure to take the good advice from it and continue to edit the areas you enjoy... I hope to see your name there again soon! :) Majorly _{(o rly?)} 21:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:EA

I stopped engaging with Ed because he started out trying to whitewash the criticisms and was trying to change the essay for the sake of changing it by the end, and I got fed up with it and him. Everyone else has moved on to other things, and every time Ed tries to get people on his side he is met with complete apathy and comments along the lines of "Are you still arguing over this?", but he seems incapable of taking the hint. I hope you're prepared to protect again shortly... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

If it needs it, then yes of course I am ;) Majorly _{(o rly?)} 21:42, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

It needs it. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 22:04, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Please reprotect it. Looks how much has happened so shortly after you unprotected it. --TeckWiz ^ParlateContribs_@ 22:06, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I've reprotected it for 3 hours as an immediate step, Majorly, could you review it and remove if desired, or extend? Cheers Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 22:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Told you... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Ha! How ironic... Majorly _{(o rly?)} 22:36, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ping

Ping! -- Jreferee 02:52, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What's wrong with "Good morning, I'm gay"!!??

Since that fellow admits himself/herself/itself a gay, why do you still block him/her/it!? I don't think it will offend anyone... --Edmundkh 10:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

User names that imply sexual orientation are not allowed. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 10:45, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Huh? Sexual orientation? What do you mean? --Edmundkh 11:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Gay could mean homosexual. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 11:45, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Protection of 'David and Kim'

I thank you very much for protecting 9am with David and Kim. I trust, that the fats added by humble me stand the test. If moire footnotes are required, I suppose I shall be able to help.

Furher to that, my edits to

• Iain Hewitson
• Network Ten

are apparently not easily acceptable to some.

I kindly request you keep these pages in the corner of the eye too.

Articles about tv programmes do not need to be following a promotional scheme!

Let it be noted, I surely accept the usual 'in the flow' edits. Wholesale reverts of well considered recalibrations of articles are nevertheless uncalled for.

I thank you kindly for your attention in this matter. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oalexander-En (talk • contribs) 11:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Greysouthen

Hi,

wondering if you can help with this one. User:Cjmcgreevy (Contribs} has moved Greysouthen to Grooglefishdotcome, and then later blanked the page.

Does the blanking need reverting and then a request made at Wikipedia:Requested moves or do we just list it at Wikipedia:Requested moves in the Uncontroversial proposals section?

Keith D 13:50, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I moved it back. You can tag it with {{db-move}} should something like that happen again. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 15:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I will have a look at {{db-move}}. Keith D 22:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Omnicide

Hello,

I have a question in regards to the page on Omnicide. I'm confused by your decision to redirect the page to human extinction. Here are my reasons:

• The original basis given for nominating the page for deletion was that it was a not notable neologism. In response to this, I edited the page to show showing multiple independent sources for the term (a total of six). I think that the page now satisfies Wikipedia's notability policy quite abundantly.
• After these edits, requests to redirect the article were based on the claim that omnicide was just a synonym for human extinction. I think this is a simple (somewhat bizarre) mistake, which should by apparent to anyone who reads the article carefully, and which both I and one other user have explained in the deletion page for the article.
• Subsequent to the edits I performed, two users other than myself have advocated for keeping the article, and two have asked for redirect/merge, so 'rough consensus' does not seem to obtain.

I'm new to this aspect of Wikipedia, so that could be my problem. Is there something I'm missing? I'm quite in the dark.

Yours,

Chris Christopher Powell 14:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

If the page was improved significantly, you can simply recreate the page again. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 15:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Hm, you haven't answered my questions, and now I wonder which version of the page you've seen or which revisions you think I was referring to. But thanks just the same. I will try to recreate the page when I've had a chance to do some more research on the topic. Christopher Powell 23:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Protection

Hi Alex. I'm somewhat surprised by your protection of 9am with David and Kim, especially in a state containing libellous remarks about a living person. I would have thought a more appropriate response would have been to warn Oalexander-En (talk • contribs), the only 'warrior' in the supposed edit war, of the three-revert rule. I was tempted to ignore the protection and remove the addition again, but I thought it prudent to ask you to undo your action first. Thanks, --cj | talk 06:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

That would be fine, do what you think is best. Thanks for checking first! Majorly _{(o rly?)} 11:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RfA thanks

Thank you for your Support on my recent nomination for adminship, which passed with a final tally of 89/1/1. If there's anything I can help with, then you know where to find me. Cheers. - Michael Billington (talk) 11:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About Slavomacedonian language

Can you tell why you consider as vandalism the change of the term macedonian in slavomacedonian? Another admin constanly reverted my changes. What kind of consensus is this? the particular article for the "macedonian" language is one-sided. Among the many mistakes they claim that "macedonian" language is spoken in Greece. This is one of many LIES. You can visit CIA World Factbook Greece and check it... (see the languages) [2] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.239.236.63 (talk) 17:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] bureaucratship

Hi Majorly, and thank you for offering to serve the community in this extra extent. Good luck.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 21:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

It's my pleasure – thank you for your kind support. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 21:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Seconded. Thanks for volunteering. · AO ^Talk 23:18, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I do hope it goes well :) Majorly _{(o rly?)} 23:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

Thank you for your support, and subsequent congratulations, in my recent RfA. Good luck in your current RfB.--Anthony.bradbury 10:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)