I lived in darwin in the past and was at ntu -(before cdu days) and my daughter was born on floor 6 of rdh (the boys were sensible? they both were born in perth at ground level) - SatuSuro 02:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Northern Territory - do we work from this? SatuSuro02:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My brickie has gone home so I had a chance to check - thankyou thankyou and it looks great - i thought we might maybe get some help from cj/moondyne/longhair - as I have tried asking for comment - but it looks like you have sorted most of it out already - wow! The project is being set up with expectation of very low involvement of other editors compared to other projects thaat get created and initially get drive by volunteers who register and never do anything ... so basically in tune with my experience of Darwin and the NT - this is truly a working persons project -those who are there can do stuff! thanks again - later (please delete my attempt thanks) SatuSuro06:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think I am in for a long night of cat tagging (maybe) thats not the feline variety - maybe I can throw in a few odd bits, I hope you or someone else can cleanup my mess :) SatuSuro10:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be starting an australian territories one up in a month or so (if someone dosnt beat me to it) - must watch carefully during all the setup of this one so I dont have to lean on others for it all... SatuSuro11:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
On your edit to Josh Gattis[1] you said "declining speedy for now - lots of these 2007 NFL Draft stubs popping up right now. speedy may not be the right way to go about this." Hence, What is the right way to go about this? In my opinion,
Notability is not popularity. Popularity does not by itself render a subject notable, nor does lack of popularity render it non-notable.
WP:BIO. A person is notable if he or she has been the subject of secondary sources that are reliable. (They were not present in the article I objected.)
Should I nominate each article independently? Whatever it be, I'll do it after my wikibreak, which I need not only for getting calm but also for taking care of other responsabilities. Regards, Rjgodoy11:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I've been seeing a lot of those popping up while on new page patrol lately, so I'm not really sure speedy deleting them is the way to handle them - a mass AFD nomination maybe? Or just prod the lot? Anyway, we'll figure it out when you get back, enjoy your break :) – Rianaऋ13:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
First, prod should only be used for articles that are uncontroversial deletion candidates... If that were the case, we would not be discussing this subject, and 2007 NFL Draft is an event in progress. Hence, in my opinion AfD would be better.
I think there should be only one single Afd for all the articles in question (if some article's is firmly opposed, there should be another AfD solely for that article)... Does this conform Wikipedia's procedures?
(thanks for your wishes, and not, I'm not avoiding my break... I consider I am psychologically capable for editing at this time, and there are 4 hours before my bus leaves, anyway I won't deal with controversial issues by now) — Rjgodoy09:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, I think a mass AfD would be more appropriate. It's a common thing to do, and I agree that PROD would not be appropriate (I was just thinking aloud at that point). If someone is more opposed to one than the others, they can ask the nominator to take it out of the list. Right now may not be a good time to do this - perhaps after the NFL Draft is over? Whenever that is? (doesn't follow American football) – Rianaऋ09:52, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm back! :) After reading 2007 NFL Draft I understand it is over. Now elected players should walk their own path towards notability. I also understand their are not immediatly notable on a NFL Draft-only basis (for instance, this applies to Mr. Irrelevant). Do you know how did these stubs evolve last week? I don't want to accelerate anything but... do you consider it is time for AfD? Rjgodoy03:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
*insert MC Hammer joke about the latest vandal to your userpage*
Hi Riana. Just wanted to give you a heads up, that any relatively new accounts that are trying to get Dave Batista, Bobby Lashley and especiallyBrock Lesnar unprotected are more than likely a sock puppet of the banned vandal Verdict. He is using open proxies now to create socks which is why he is able to claim a different IP everytime. His sock creation seems to be slowing down, but will only pick up again as he preys on users and admins who may not know exactly the situation. I thought I would let you know so that from now on, when you see a relatively new account that asks for unprotection to these articles you can simply revert, block, and ignore since he now seemingly is also trying to game the system. Thanks! Bmg916SpeakSign14:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, I've been helping Yamla out with the situation for a while, since the articles Verdict targets are under the scope of WP:PW which I participate in. I just think WP:RBI has started to sort of work in this case, as the socks aren't as frequent. But we shall see... Bmg916SpeakSign15:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Riana, for your constructive comments in my recent RFA, which passed with 86 support, 8 oppose, and 5 neutral !votes. I will keep in mind all your suggestions and/or concerns, and will try to live up to your standards. Please, if you have any comments or complaints about my actions as an administrator, leave a note on my talk page, and I will respond as soon as I possibly can, without frying my brain, of course.
Thank you once more,
· AndonicOTalk
Hi Riana, I know that I asked you to remind me to get offline (reducing stress and all), but I just couldn't stay away from Wikipedia. There should be a patch or something for wikipediholics. --Kyoko20:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Re above comment - here should be a page in the humour non article space about that I suspect - is there anything keeping us from removing the construction signs for the NT project btw? SatuSuro04:32, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
User:King Lopez has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Not at all. It was originally protected because a "shock site" owner was spamming his sites into the article. He seems to have vacated the premises and at this point I (and hopefully others) can keep an eye on the article to make sure sites that don't meet WP:ATT don't creep back in.--Isotope2313:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, hopefully. Unfortunately, that user has had a history of waiting for unprotection and then coming back. As it's clear at this point that he's avoiding discussion, I think if it happens again, a block might be more appropriate than protection. Mangojuicetalk14:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll keep an eye on it - I think I've seen this user's edits before, so I will hopefully recognise them if I see a recurrence. At any rate, the article's semiprotected now, so at least he won't come back with new accounts. – Rianaऋ14:17, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the semi. This article's a vandal magnet; no idea why. Will it expire automatically, or should I request unprotection in a while—say, next month? Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks. I personally don't think an expiry should be set; after reviewing the history, there have been less productive edits since sprot was first lifted in February than fingers on my right hand :( Thanks anyway for the quick reply. Happy editing, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for telling me that..anyways I usually tag those names with twinkle which I think are too obvious but I use ARV for those which are hard to understand or those which are not in English and BTW..I thought the last username I reported was pretty clear.:-)..Cheers--Cometstyles15:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
hello Riana, i understand that you full-protected the Rafida article. although of course the protected version is always considered the wrong one, your page protection fell upon the article version which retained vandalism (i would not consider this a content dispute) which was inserted by an single purpose account who has employed the use of multiple sockpuppets to perpetually revert on this (see the article history) and other articles. Dreamz rosez (talk·contribs) itself isn't even the original account. this has been well-documented on the talk page (also see here), has been brought up on AN/I multiple times by editors (latest occasion was by myself[2]), and the editor has been perpetually warring - without discussion - since Nov. 2006. i would request the other version without the vandalism be restored please. regards, ITAQALLAH16:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I was trying to get more information about this from AnonMoos, but s/he appears to have gone offline. I will gladly unprotect the article if it is a single user causing disruption, but being unfamiliar with the article, I was unsure which version was correct, and who was in the right. Should Dreamz rosez be blocked as a sockpuppet, in your opinion? Thanks, – Rianaऋ16:46, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I've dropped the protection to semi, reverted to AnonMoos's version, and have blocked the Dreamz rozez account for 2 weeks (I would block for longer, but would like some input from Swatjester first). Thanks for your advice. – Rianaऋ16:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Riana, can I invite your help for a bit? As you may know, I've been involved in the Virginia Tech massacre and related articles, but one of my main focuses has been firearms articles. There's been a dispute that I've been semi-managing regarding the inclusion of "see also" references in the Glock 19 and Walther P22 articles. Would you mind keeping an eye on the two articles for me for a day or two while I'm travelling back home? I'll give you a short background on the disputes. The first dispute is whether a link to the VT article should be included. On the Glock 19 article, there was an incredibly overwhelming consensus not to include it anywhere. On the Walther P22 article, there was no consensus reached (50/50 split), so we defaulted to returning the article to its original state before the shooting happened (i.e. no consensus defaults to removing the information). I'm trying to keep that decision enforced: that the Glock 19 article is absolutely not going to include it, and the P22 article at this present time will not include it unless the opinion of the community changes. The second dispute is because some people are pissed off about that, they're adding the "POV" tag to the Walther P22 page....a brief view of the page will note that it is entirely written from a technical and operational standpoint: no partisanship. Their adding of the tag, inappropriately, seems like a point violation to me, but I'm not going to be the one to make that call since I believe coelacan is already taking care of that. Anyway, if you don't mind, could you just keep an eye on those two pages for me while I'm travelling? Thanks. ⇒SWATJesterDenny Crane.18:11, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'm about to finish packing and get in the car, but I just noticed now that Griot, one of the pro-inclusion editors, has filed a Mediation Cabal request on both articles. Seems like a WP:POINT violation to me: the Glock 19 article was clearly resolved in a way he didn't like, and the Walther P22 article is at least stable now, again in a way he doesn't like. I've left notes on the respective cases, but I'd appreciate your input as well if you would like. It's always good to have an outside opinion on such things. ⇒SWATJesterDenny Crane.18:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Riana, for your support on my recent RfA, which recently passed 54/1/1. I hope I can live up to everyone's expectations. I will certainly take the constructive criticism I recieved to heart.
Please, if you have any comments or complaints about my actions as an administrator, leave a note on my talk page.
Thank you again·
--SelketTalk18:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, no dark purple signatures on your page! We can fix that. ;)
Well I have a question. Could you in between protects, blocks, and just plain life, etc. reformat my barnstar page to look like yours? I tried it (note: using show preview :P which is why you won't find it in the history), but it didn't work. — $PЯINGrαgђ 18:31, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nah I am done with hiding, I have just been so busy. But expect to see this activity level continue, no 100 edit days but at least 10 edits. Cheers. ~ Arjun20:46, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dude. Scrubs is like one of the few things on TV I'll even watch anymore. Apart from Curb Your Enthusiasm and Conan. – Rianaऋ20:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Finally, another Scrubs watcher! Although I'm trying to find Season 1 episodes and the first half of Season 2, which I haven't watched because I didn't know that E4 showed it until two weeks ago (and when I did, I squeed), and Paramount Comedy are unreliable with both South Park and Scrubs. Will(is it can be time for messages now plz?)21:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was amused by your "damage report" ... did you know that it doesn't work? ... it looks up the wrong name. Oh and when I glanced at your contributions I could see no major damage.. Be bolder :-) Victuallers20:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I wanted to consult with you concerning this 3RR report. Under normal situations, I would be blocking Anonmoos for breaking 3RR, but what you said when protecting and unprotecting the page makes it look like maybe he was reverting sockpuppets of banned users. I wanted to check with you and see if that's the case. Thanks. Heimstern Läufer21:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Riana, I wonder if I could ask you for a second opinion, or some intervention? Could you please have a look at Kep Enderby and the edit history. Please also look at User talk:220.239.186.48 for a discussion of the problem. A few words from a third party might help the situation. Much appreciated. Gillyweed13:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks...has been a great day. Oh and I have edited over a TV dinner before. That's a good idea. Off to get a TV dinner! - SVRTVDude(VT)23:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi the non-art pages and the arts need separating - Im not a hundred cents in the dollar on that one - is it straight forward? SatuSuro13:30, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wah muchos gracias - terima kasih and all the rest - now I see what you and cj are doing - I understand theres more to it than what was understood - I just love the foobar stuff - must leanr more about it SatuSuro15:05, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Riana. If I understand what you're wanting – separate categories for article and non-article pages – I need to do some testing first, because at present all subproject parameters automatically categorise all tagged pages as articles (even when also categorised as non-article pages). In any event, to categorise NT pages as non-articles, I'll need to add assessment code to the NT parameter – which will require the creation of at least 9 categories (another 5 if importance rankings are enabled).--cj | talk14:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. I've sent you an email, hopefully you'll interpret it as nicer than the ones you have. Remember - abusive emails for sysop activities is a sure-fire way to prove you're doing a great job. Take care. Hugs, Will(is it can be time for messages now plz?)22:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
/me puts abusive emails in junk. Please don't take it badly, as Will says it means you're doing a great job :) Come back when you can :) Majorly(hot!)22:45, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure of your definition of "ick" and not asking but for the two most icky that I can think of I'm sure you know that there are reporting mechanisms available. Email me if I'm not clear enough and/or you want any help.--VStalk23:02, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've only met you recently, but have found your contributions to dealing with conflict wonderful. I've had a chance to look at some of your interventions and you are in a class of your own. Please come back soon. Your kindness and level-headed approach (with a touch of assertiveness) is just what is needed. Gillyweed23:22, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks guys. Don't worry, I'm fine, just life piling up a bit. Take care and thanks for being so nice :) – Rianaऋ00:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Riana, I'm sorry to hear of your loss, and I want you to know that I have experienced the same thing (twice :-[). Remember that time that I almost retired? Well, that was the second time. Remember, if your family friend was in pain, he is no longer. I hope to see you back soon, and remember, think positive (if you do that, you'll be over this in no time at all)! :-) RyanGot something to say?13:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Riana, I have to make this brief, but thank you for message, I will try to thank you properly when I can. I'm sorry about your/your family's loss. I'll tyr to send you a message today or tomorrow, one that I hope will make you feel better. --Kyoko17:13, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have been working on San Francisco police chiefs and wondered whty you deleted Anthony D. Ribera, Chief in the 1990s? I know it did not have a lot of information, but I am entering whatever odds and ends I can find, hoping to fill out the biography over time. 67.101.146.24201:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hank Chapot
Hi Hank, the article was deleted because it wasn't referenced very well, and had little assertion of notability. However, please feel free to recreate the article, as it was proposed for deletion and won't be immediately redeleted. Do be aware that it may still be subject to a deletion discussion if another editor feels it isn't up to scratch. Regards, – Rianaऋ03:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Little sweet R, tho I should have left already, I didn´t wanna go without hugging you tight, trying to give you a little bit of strength and warm that you sure need right now. This is but a sample of everything I wanna tell you, and I can't right now. You're too valuable and bright, dearie - we all know that, and love you for it. Have a hug from your old friend, be strong, and keep an eye on your mail ;) Love ya, Dzasta! Phaedriel 01:44, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Depends how you feel about it really. I enjoyed having him around and sounds like you didn't/don't. He did alot of good things and the final brouhaha I felt he was tagged a bit to be fair. Anyway, Wikipedia's a big place...cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs09:37, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Who says I didn't? I appreciate the work he did, but we should not beg people to come back. It's not relevant to our goals as an encyclopedia, never works, and invariably creates pointless drama. It's a bad idea. We should respect the decisions of others. Period. MoreschiTalk09:48, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have actually communicated more with him than the on-board exchanges. Anyway, we'll see. He's free to politely decline. I am happy with the gesture and you can make of it what you will, including not devoting any more time to it. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs10:08, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Riana, thank you very much for your kind message on my talk page. It was very heartwarming for me to read, especially at a time of uncertainty in my life. I'm both humbled and flattered by your words; humbled, because I'm not sure I deserve such praise; flattered, for reasons that I think are obvious.
On your RfA, I described you as "friendly, knowledgeable in many areas, always willing to help others", all of which you are, and so much more. Not once have you made me regret supporting your candidacy. If anything, your kindness, your wisdom, and your good humour have only confirmed your merit of becoming an admin, and more importantly, made me proud to call you my friend. I'm touched by your words, and I pledge to also support, defend, and sustain you, especially in your time of need. You too are a wonderful person, Riana, never forget that, no matter what other people say.
Please spread the word about Wikipedia Weekly, we're trying to spread the word so that people know about the project, we've got some cool guests lined up and it makes it much more fun if people tune in!
You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery - if you do not wish to receive such notifications please remove yourself from the list.
These words might not mean much to you - or anything - but the general outlook I've drawn from your userpage is that you've been subject to some nasty trolling. My friend, don't let these scoundrels get you down - you're too good for that. It is a sad fact that the best contributors to this encyclopedia are subject to the worst abuse - the only defence we can have against that is to never let them get us down.
Chin up, Riana, my friend, and hopefully I shall see you soon.
Maybe semi protect the article? They are obviously ignoring the message, except maybe to point out that we've been on the computer too long, and that we are "stopping truthful posts"...[5] --Kzrulzuall Talk• Contribs08:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, sorry to bother you, but I currently have an Editors Review going on, and someone suggested I should increase my mainspace edits through copy-editing, and to ask you how to best go about that. Thanks. (If you didn't understand me, which unfortunately happens a lot, please let me know) --Smokizzy21:27, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Riana, I would like to have your opinion about this change to the header on my user and talk pages. I'd ask Elara herself, but I don't think she would be able to answer anytime soon. Do you think the change is fine? For that matter, do you mind being included in the header? I can change it if you want.
It's things like this that make you think that the world doesn't make any sense.
Howdy! I perfer Good Evening:) Either way, hope you are having a good day. - SVRTVDude (VT) 23:15, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
