User talk:Dorftrottel

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. T O O L B O X    ] user page talk page email contributions edit count if all else fails I have no particular agenda on how to handle user talk. I'm confident we'll figure out a way to get the essential points across to each other anyway. Chances are, I'll reply on your talk page and watch it for a reply from you. If you'd rather put it here to avoid a fragmented discussion, you're welcome to copy anything over together with your latest reply. Also, please don't hold back: Nobody is perfect and I'm grateful for any constructive criticism and advice you may have with regard to specific edits or my conduct in general. — [ aldebaer⁠] click here to leave a message (Remember to provide a subject/headline and to sign your talk page post with four tildes: ~~~~ ) I am not really into barnstars and wikilove... ...but I'll make an exception for you: Barnstar gratefully moved to my userpage. RFA Thanks Click there to open your card! → → → Dearest AldeBaer, Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 96 supports, 1 oppose, and 3 neutrals. No matter if you !voted support, oppose, neutral, I thank you for taking the time to drop by. I'm a new admin remember, so if you have any suggestions feel free to inform me of them. I would like to give a special shout out to Hirohisat, Wizardman, and Husond, for there original co-nominations. Thank you once again and good day. Тhε Rαnδom Eδιτor Credits This RFA thanks was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks. So unfortunatly this is not entirely my own design. Some new quotes If you're interested, I found some new and interesting quotes. See my user page. - Ta bu shi da yu 15:31, 21 September 2007 (UTC) Reply You are right about WP:WAF being a how-to — it really needs a better template than {{tl:style-guideline}}. I am unsure as to why you told me Succinct plot summaries are not inappropriate content, they just shouldn't make up the major part of the article.; I am aware of it and agrees with it. G.A.S 16:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC) No problem; thanks for the clarification. I still think the fiction guidelines should be clearly split between notability ("Do we need an article?"), content ("What should we write?") and style ("How do we write about it"/"How do we present it?"...); whether in one guideline, or more than one. Comment? Regards, G.A.S 22:06, 21 September 2007 (UTC) I completely agree, but how should we go to work on this? G.A.S 21:44, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Thank you; I appreciate it. Regards, G.A.S 21:56, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Please participate, WikiProject James Bond collaboration WikiProject James Bond:Collaboration of the fortnight (two weeks) The new collaboration for this fortnight is (September 22, 2007 - October 6, 2007) is Never Say Never Again Please contribute by editing this article, in an attempt to get it to good article status For more information see the page here or contact SpecialWindler. CHECK OUT THE TALK PAGE, FOR THINGS YOU CAN DO ON Never Say Never Again Moonraker failed for GA status. If you would like not to recieve these messages please add your name to this page SpecialWindler talk (currently offline) 05:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Help:Archiving a talk page I think things are working out. I can be a bit pushy at times. I apologize if I went too far. I am working on it. --Timeshifter 10:52, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Retracted comment Just wanted to let you know that I caught this comment before you reverted and that I whole-heartedly agree with it. My instinct at first was to ignore his original comment, but I just felt it was too egregious to let go unchallenged. I also understand not wanting to pick a fight, but thanks for the sentiment. ;-) Ronnotel 15:50, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Interesting. I usually don't read comments on RfA's. Not sure what the kerfuffle was all about. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 02:18, 24 September 2007 (UTC) Inadvertently? Nope. Very intentional. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 02:15, 24 September 2007 (UTC) Edokter RfA Dear AldeBaer, Thank you for your participation in my Request for Adminship, which ended succesfully with 26 supports, 3 opposes and 1 neutral. A special thanks goes to Rlevse for nominating me. I appreciate all the support and constructive criticism offered in my RfA. Please do not hesitate to point out any errors I will make (unintentionally of course), so I won't make them again. Please contact me if you need anything done, that's what I'm here for! — Edokter • Talk • 12:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC) Thanks! My RFA Thanks for your support in my request for adminship, which ended with 58 supports, 1 opposes, and 1 neutral. I hope your confidence in me proves to be justified. Addhoc 18:12, 24 September 2007 (UTC) Removing comments Would you care to explain what this is about? — [ aldebaer⁠ ] 08:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC) Edit summary has adequate explanation I think. -- Cat chi? 08:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC) Explanation yes, justification no. — [ aldebaer⁠ ] 08:51, 25 September 2007 (UTC) Edits do not require a justification last time I checked. This isn't a court. -- Cat chi? 08:52, 25 September 2007 (UTC) You inappropriately removed another user's relevant and good-faithed comment. It's against policy, so please don't do it again. — [ aldebaer⁠ ] 08:54, 25 September 2007 (UTC) He is canvassing. That is what is against policy. The post was not made in good faith either and there is evidence supporting this. -- Cat chi? 08:57, 25 September 2007 (UTC) This is not canvassing as in WP:CANVASS. I suppose you indeed have somewhat strong evidence if you're not even assuming good faith with him. But please please tell me that evidence, it's what I meant when I asked about justification for removing the comment. — [ aldebaer⁠ ] 09:02, 25 September 2007 (UTC) The reason I cannot assume good faith anymore is because of the evidence presented here and at the Ned Scott RFC. User has a strange fascination with my edits. Advertising an AfD to a delete-prone environment that has a good chance of turning into a flamewar can't be a good thing. -- Cat chi? 09:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC) Ronnotel's RfA I'm limiting thank you spam to just those contributors who made an extra effort on my behalf. I am truly grateful for your support and I hope to live up to your expectations. Ronnotel 13:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC)