User talk:Weasel
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Your userpage was briefly delisted by a rogue admin
 |
This user believes that only articles need reflect a NPOV, and that displaying political, religious, or other beliefs using userboxes and user categories should not be banned. |
You have a userbox Template:User UN which links your userpage to United Nations Wikipedians. There is currently a movement to ban userboxes from Wikipedia which are shared and which create Lists of Wikipedians. Certain admins have taken it upon themselves to preemptively sabotage and/or delete such categories and template. Here is the incident report which reported damage to yours, in which hundreds of userpages were delinked from categories without the users' knowledge. They have been stopped, barely, and the damage reverted— for now.
There is a Wikipedia:Userbox policy poll, which if passed, will make required by policy the damage done to categories and templates such as User UN/United Nations Wikipedians. If you do not want this to happen, I urge you to vote Oppose. in the poll. Support is currently running at about 66%, and your vote could make the difference. It is said to require 75%-80% to be deemed reflective of consensus.
Thank you,
StrangerInParadise 23:50, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] New Pro-cannabis userbox
 |
This user is pro-cannabis. |
If you would like to have this on your userpage, just add {{User:Disavian/Userboxes/pro-cannabis}} to your userpage, and the box at right will appear on it. Also, if used in your user space, the page will be listed on Category:Pro-cannabis Wikipedians. If you would like to share it with someone else, type {{User:Disavian/Userboxes/pro-cannabis|stamp|right}}
Also, consider weighing in on the Wikipedia:Userbox policy poll.
Stand up and be counted while you still can,
StrangerInParadise 23:50, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] My RFA
Thank you, Weasel, for voting on my RFA, which passed 95 to 1. Now that I have the mop, I hope I can live up to the standard, and be a good administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. —this is messedrocker (talk) 21:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Schlink
No problem. I'll revise to something like "at the time, was a practicing judge".
And thanks for the compliment (I must admit that that article was mostly written at a time when we were less clear about what constituted original research when discussing the themes of a novel which may have been widely read but about which there was less criticism that could be cited. A lot of the theme discussion is really me (though, I like to think, the generous quotes help support it)). Daniel Case 18:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
