| Revision as of 14:35, 30 August 2006 editJohn (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers215,597 edits RfA thanks← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:07, 31 August 2006 edit undoJoehazelton (talk | contribs)313 edits My humble questionNext edit → | ||
| Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
| | Thank you very much for participating in my ], which closed successfully today with a result of '''(62/18/3)'''. I will go very carefully at first, trying to make sure I don't mess up too badly using the tools, and will begin by re-reading all the high-quality feedback I received during the process, not least from those who opposed me. Any further advice/guidance will be gratefully accepted. I hope I will live up to your trust! ] 14:35, 30 August 2006 (UTC)} | | Thank you very much for participating in my ], which closed successfully today with a result of '''(62/18/3)'''. I will go very carefully at first, trying to make sure I don't mess up too badly using the tools, and will begin by re-reading all the high-quality feedback I received during the process, not least from those who opposed me. Any further advice/guidance will be gratefully accepted. I hope I will live up to your trust! ] 14:35, 30 August 2006 (UTC)} | ||
| |} | |} | ||
| ==Joehazelton and a Humble question == | |||
| My humble Wikiquestion is - are editors even held accountable for libel or slander, as in real life, considering the reach and readership of Misplaced Pages. What checks and balances are in place for rogue editor & admin, sophisticated in the policies, but manipulating said polices to achieve the same results. | |||
| In reading and researching, it would appear that many Editors and Admins, are behaving, contrary to the lofty goals of the Wikiproject, in order to forward personal or political agenda. Also what evidence is necessary to prove and rebuke and discipline such editors and Admin that are consistently and repeatedly violating 3RR and NPOV policy, if not in name, but certainly in sprit and in fact accuse other editors, who perform legitimate edits for the very thing that these rouges are engaged in? | |||
| Is what Wikipdia critics say is true, in that Wikipdia is the play ground of the faceless and nameless, who are not beholding or accountable to the rule of law or is Wikipdia truly has respected place, with proper review, oversight or accountability for actions, contrary to stated and publish policy? | |||
| My experance, so far, with due respect, would be the first, rather then the later. | |||
| Humbly submitted and expecting the gods to block me do to my question of what is right or wrong. In closing, be warned that if a thing is abuse so much, and hurts to many people, truly hurts them, then there will be back lash and a noble project will die. | |||
Revision as of 13:07, 31 August 2006
 Archives |
|---|
List of flops in entertainment
Not a problem. Two episodes, two weeks - when it comes to reality TV, it doesn't make much difference. — stickguy (:^›)— || talk || 18:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
GIen's RfA: Thank you!
|
 Jahiegel for your Support! |
PS: YES YOU'RE RIGHT HARRY POTTER USES A BROOM! (BUT GOOD MOPS ARE HARD TO FIND!!)
Although we've never had any real direct interaction Joe, I've always admired your work. Your user pages are hysterical (though as it seems to be very similar to mine I suspect most "get" your humor??) And I love your userboxless userbox page; and... I believe if we each handed Dubya a brain cell - he'd finally have two to rub together. Your support was appreciated more than you know, Kia Kaha my friend - GIen 06:18, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
re. AN/I discussion
Thanks for your words, which are much appreciated. A direct and skilful approach to Publicgirluk to begin with would have saved all this fuss, and brought out the truth one way or the other. Now we shall probably never know for sure. C'est la vie! Tyrenius 05:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
barnstars
Didn't mean to ace you out! :) Your comment added to the niceness for Tyrenius I am sure... Happy editing. ++Lar: t/c 06:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
RfA message
|
My RfA video message | |
Stephen B Streater 08:40, 28 August 2006 (UTC) |
My RfA
Thanks!
 Thank you very much for your support on my recent Request for Adminship. The request was ultimately unsuccessful - which wasn't entirely surprising - and so I'll be taking special care to address the concerns raised by the opposing !voters before running again. If you have any feedback for me, please don't hesitate to leave it at my talk page. Thanks! |
RfA thanks
|
Thank you very much for participating in my RFA, which closed successfully today with a result of (62/18/3). I will go very carefully at first, trying to make sure I don't mess up too badly using the tools, and will begin by re-reading all the high-quality feedback I received during the process, not least from those who opposed me. Any further advice/guidance will be gratefully accepted. I hope I will live up to your trust! Guinnog 14:35, 30 August 2006 (UTC)} |
Joehazelton and a Humble question
My humble Wikiquestion is - are editors even held accountable for libel or slander, as in real life, considering the reach and readership of Misplaced Pages. What checks and balances are in place for rogue editor & admin, sophisticated in the policies, but manipulating said polices to achieve the same results.
In reading and researching, it would appear that many Editors and Admins, are behaving, contrary to the lofty goals of the Wikiproject, in order to forward personal or political agenda. Also what evidence is necessary to prove and rebuke and discipline such editors and Admin that are consistently and repeatedly violating 3RR and NPOV policy, if not in name, but certainly in sprit and in fact accuse other editors, who perform legitimate edits for the very thing that these rouges are engaged in?
Is what Wikipdia critics say is true, in that Wikipdia is the play ground of the faceless and nameless, who are not beholding or accountable to the rule of law or is Wikipdia truly has respected place, with proper review, oversight or accountability for actions, contrary to stated and publish policy?
My experance, so far, with due respect, would be the first, rather then the later.
Humbly submitted and expecting the gods to block me do to my question of what is right or wrong. In closing, be warned that if a thing is abuse so much, and hurts to many people, truly hurts them, then there will be back lash and a noble project will die.