User talk:Dabomb87: Difference between revisions

Archives

Template:Multicol July 2007 – August 2008 September–October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 June 2009 July 2009 Template:Multicol-break August 2009 September 2009 October 2009 November 2009 December 2009 January 2010 February 2010 March 2010 April 2010 May 2010 June 2010 July 2010 August 2010 Template:Multicol-end

This page has archives. Sections older than 3 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present.

Hi

I am guessing that you either did not see or did not pay any attention to the GOCE tag at the top of the page and that is why I have just had the edit conflict ?

Chaosdruid (talk) 17:47, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes, I'm sorry about that! To be honest, I got to the article through a section link, so I never saw the banners at the top at all. Feel free to overwrite my edits. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:50, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No probs - I just wanted to draw your attention to avoid any more ECs - I normally do the dashes at the end, though, if I had done them first that might not have happened ... lol Chaosdruid (talk) 17:52, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey dude. So, you have a couple to close which I inadvertently voted in, plus it'd be interesting to see your thoughts on two sudden issues - the AFD of a current FL and the MOS issues brought up here by User:Jack Merridew. As ever, keep up the good work, I took the liberty to extend out your (and my) tenure at Matthew's useful closure page, by the way. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:47, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and what's happening with any RFA stuff that may involve you??! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:48, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finally, this really isn't being dealt with so perhaps you could look it over and decide if it should continue to run. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:52, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I often think a news ticker would be useful... I have noted the FLCs where you are "involved" and am waiting for existing reviews to finish up (or for new reviewers to opine) on those, seen and watchlisted the AfD and will comment there in due course, and commented on the WP:ACCESS issue (this RfD may also be of interest). Agree on the Ciara discog; will close tomorrow unless there are major developments there. As for the other ... thing, here. You've been doing well too, partner. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 18:59, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, the Stephens City article is up for FAC and was reviewed by User:SandyGeorgia last night, apparently I had some reference problems (mostly italicizing incorrectly) but more importantly, prose problems. So, since fresh eyes help, is there anyway you could go through the article piece by piece and check it for prose. User:SandyGeorgia said she will check it again on Saturday. I asked User:Wehwalt (who have been actively helping me on this) prior and he recommended you. Thanks...Neutralhomer • Talk • 15:14, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a look. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:25, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finished copy-editing; commented at the FLC. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:14, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First off, thank you for taking a look. :) I have addressed your concerns at the far bottom of the FAC page. Please let me know if there are any further questions or concerns, as I will be glad to tinker or edit more as necessary. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 16:29, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, I was taking a look at the FL promotions, and my initial thought was to choose Listed buildings in Rivington, but I see that a picture from it has already been included. Should I pick another one? Jujutacular ^talk 15:59, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's quite all right. We'll alter the caption to mention that you picked the list. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:00, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was wondering why you closed the FL discussion for Ciara discography. I was still working on resolving the errors and was still in progress of completing and had not stopped working on the discog. Candyo32 18:49, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See my comment at the closure log. An FLC cannot continue indefinitely; it is not peer review. You can resubmit after you have addressed the remaining comments and the opposers have verified that their concerns have been resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:30, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am watching it, but I haven't had time to fix the things. I will get to it tomorrow.--LAAFan 23:40, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is kind of hard to edit when people come and start accusing me of sock-puppetry, hating on certain people for being from a certain place, and copyright violations (I haven't uploaded anything). Could you help, please? Augustus Loren 1982 (talk) 18:18, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Based on your contribution history, I can't blame WFC for drawing those conclusions. What do you expect me to do? Dabomb87 (talk) 18:32, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus christ, you have any idea how many people are from South America? How many of us like our competitions? We might as well eliminate those pages and get it over with because it sounds like no one can edit them now. Any why did you erase all of my commentary of the feauture list page? Everything that I mentioned perfectly disregard everything he said (which was basically accusing wildly, as well as trying to find the smallest thing to shut this down). Why is he so keen in this list not making it to become a FL? Augustus Loren 1982 (talk) 18:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm disappointed but understand your position Dabomb. Regardless, I'm not going to waste this charity's money, or my time, by filing an SPI when a block is clearly warranted. In the interests of assuming innocence until the man wandering through the scene of the massacre waving a blood-covered sword is proven guilty, I will refrain from making further "allegations", have no further interaction with the user, and revert any attempt he makes to interact with me on any page other than this "FLC". Regards, --WFC-- 18:55, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just took a look at WP:SPI, and you're right, it would probably be a waste of time. However, I'm not an admin and I haven't interacted with the editor enough so I have asked the folks at WT:FOOTY to take a look. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:57, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks (didn't realise you weren't an admin!). --WFC-- 18:58, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So basically...I am stuck between a hard and a rough place...I can't edit because editing is now, incredibly, forbidden. Why? If I do and I give some bad vibe, I might get kicked out for nothing. If I don't, I look guilty and might get kicked out for nothing...I am asking you as a FL director...is that how wiki treates newcommers?

BTW, WFC...I am the man waving that blood-covered sword...except that it was used in self-defense from a mob. That should teach you a little about appearances. Augustus Loren 1982 (talk) 19:06, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I must say I also considered blocking this account as a sock (based on my limited familiarity with Jamen Somasu, sockpuppetry didn't seem unlikely), but I decided to give it a little more time; we'll see what the people at the football project have to say. AL1982, it is quite unusual for a newcomer to immediately start an FLC, and bound to cause suspicion—whether that suspicion is justified or not I'm not yet prepared to say. If the suspicion is incorrect, I am sorry. Ucucha 19:10, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please...I'm a Marine. I work with computers and I have edited pages similar to wiki. I would have to give the taxpayers their money back if I can't figure this website out in a few hours.

Based on your comments at this talk page and the now-closed FLC, and your edits elsewhere, I am almost certain that you are not a newcomer. Wikipedians can extend their assumptions of good faith only so far, and you are near the end of that leash, I'm afraid. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:12, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, just let me know when you decide to give me the ax. People have told me about wiki and I have abstain myself from using a username because of a lack of interest. Now I know why.

BTW, this is the year 2010; that means that most people in the civilized world have touched a computer, know what a forum is, know what wapedia is and all those other wikiwannabe websites...I would be more amazed if someone came in and pretended not to know. Augustus Loren 1982 (talk) 19:17, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your knowledge of Wiki processes goes past the standard familiarity, though. Here's my advice, take it or leave it (if you truly are not SuperSonic/Jamen, which I truly doubt at this point, disregard this): take a long break from Wikipedia. Don't even try to get around your block though socking or other means. If you can show that you are willing to be patient and learn from your previous mistakes, there will be editors who will be willing to let you return. By continuing this pattern of behavior though, you are eliminating the already-small chance you have to get back into the community's good graces. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:27, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm drowning in work that is ready to nominate. Just saying. Courcelles 21:06, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to add another one. Your FLCs are usually low-maintainence, and you've done more than your share of reviews. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:25, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...though on skimming quickly through just now I see that you are the nominator or co-nom on three FLCs, so perhaps it is better if you wait until at least one is closed. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 04:42, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I was just wondering as to your reason for the closing the List of Saw media FLC. I am assuming it's because it was unedited for several days, which makes sense. However, I have corrected every single one of the commentor's complaints with the exception of a few things I have given select reasons and precedents for keeping. Therefore, I was wondering if you could take a look at the article from a non review standpoint and see if I have any reason to renominate? It would be greatly appreciated. If you feel there is substantial work to be done, I will take it over to Peer Review, although I haven't had any feedback on my previous PR for other articles. GroundZ3R0 002 06:23, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Considering you've now submitted the list three times to FLC, and it's been deemed not ready by each time, I would strongly advise you to go through some kind of peer review process first. Don't just slap the PR tag on the page and hope for a lot of good suggestions though; you need to actively seek out editors who can offer subject-specific advice. WikiProject Video Games is a large and active one, and if you look around I'm sure there will be plenty of users who would be happy to take a look (especially if you return the favor). Another good technique is to look at current video game FLs (see Wikipedia:Featured lists#Video gaming) and look at their page histories to identify editors with similar interests. Good luck! Dabomb87 (talk) 14:53, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]