Jump to content

User talk:Conifer/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 10

The Signpost: 26 March 2014

hello

do you mind me copying your welcome to User talk:121.75.17.32 (500 millionth edit) onto User talk:178.221.85.35 (600 millionth edit)? Double sharp (talk) 04:22, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Sure, go ahead. Feel free to modify it if you want. Conifer (talk) 05:33, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 April 2014

The Signpost: 09 April 2014

The Signpost: 23 April 2014

The Signpost: 30 April 2014

The Signpost: 07 May 2014

The Signpost: 14 May 2014

The Signpost: 21 May 2014

The Signpost: 28 May 2014

The Signpost: 04 June 2014

The Signpost: 11 June 2014

The Signpost: 18 June 2014

The Signpost: 25 June 2014

The Signpost: 02 July 2014

The Signpost: 09 July 2014

The Signpost: 16 July 2014

A year and a half after you opposed my RfA

I am inviting you to leave me some feedback, 18 months after you opposed my RfA. Do you still believe I am not fit to be an admin? Do you believe I have been able to improve past the concerns you have brought up? Do not be afraid of being too harsh, I am specifically welcoming criticism as I believe it is the best way to improve and I am always looking to learn from my mistakes. I am particularly looking for feedback as to whether you have objections to myself lifting the self-imposed 1RR restriction I had agreed to towards the end of my RfA. If you don't have time to comment, don't fret it either, this is nothing I'll lose sleep over. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  19:48, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 July 2014

The Signpost: 30 July 2014

The Signpost: 06 August 2014

The Signpost: 13 August 2014

The Signpost: 20 August 2014

The Signpost: 27 August 2014

The Signpost: 03 September 2014

The Signpost: 10 September 2014

Nomination of Pok Pok for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pok Pok is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pok Pok until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Si Trew (talk) 23:05, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Pok Pok

The article Pok Pok has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Patent WP:PROMO. Creator only has entries from Wikipedia Signpost, has not created or edited anything other. Not WP:WORLDWIDE.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Si Trew (talk) 23:06, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the message at my talk. I've pinged you but will add here in case you miss it. In no way was I casting aspersions on you personally. I can see how it may have seemed so, just as in my eyes the article seemed very PROMO. Glad it isn't: I've already withdrawn the nomination and it's been closed (you have lots of new references to follow up!). It was in no way personal to you. I did check your edit history, but my Internet link failed so perhaps it just gave me the most recent etc. There has been a spate of Portland redirects at RfD, my usual hangout, so perhaps I was over suspicious for which I apologise. I certainly meant you no harm and if you feel I have, anything I can do to say sorry more publicly I surely shall. I am not in the habit of hurting people's feelings. Si Trew (talk) 03:25, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 September 2014

The Signpost: 24 September 2014

i have no idea how to cite

Listen i don't know how to cite i tried doing this on another page but it got screwed up but i got it from wayback machine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfrr (talkcontribs) 19:43, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

@Dfrr: You can use any of the citation templates—{{cite web}}, {{cite news}}—in the editing toolbar and include the archived URL as a parameter. See Help:Using the Wayback Machine, especially the "Working with cite templates" section. Conifer (talk) 22:11, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 October 2014

The Signpost: 08 October 2014

The Signpost: 15 October 2014

A beer for you!

Dude i say NO TO MAX LIGHT RAIL. Dfrr (talk) 07:42, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 October 2014

The Signpost: 29 October 2014

The Signpost: 05 November 2014

The Signpost: 12 November 2014

The Signpost: 26 November 2014

The Signpost: 03 December 2014

The Signpost: 10 December 2014

The Signpost: 17 December 2014

The Signpost: 24 December 2014

The Signpost: 31 December 2014

The Signpost: 07 January 2015

The Signpost: 14 January 2015

The Signpost: 21 January 2015

The Signpost: 28 January 2015

The Signpost: 04 February 2015

The Signpost: 11 February 2015

The Signpost: 18 February 2015

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

The Signpost: 04 March 2015