Kbdank71

== Request for Adminship == I would like to thank everyone who supported me for admin. Yeah, I'm doing the cut-and-paste thank yous on your talk pages, but please know, I really do appreciate each and every one of you. == at ninety-eight we'll all rotate == How can you replace that? == It's an encyclopedia, not an experiment in democracy. == Remember that. == About me == Kbdank71, aka Kris, is an engaged computer programmer from New Jersey, USA. == More about me == I enjoy computer gaming, animated comedy, and my Harley. == What I do around here == Wikipedia:RC patrol WP:CFD WP:WSS Annoy my fianc�e Wow. I thought I did more. Guess not. Anyway, here's why that list is so short. I absolutely suck at writing stuff. I've tried, believe me. I'll try and add things to articles I know something about, but seriously, I'm not a good writer. Yeah, I know, I can let others copyedit it and wikify it, but I don't see the point of me spending my time writing garbage just to have someone else write it right. So I spend my time making sure the place runs well, because let's be honest, I could spend all day writing thoughtful, insightful articles (that is, if I could, which I can't, but stick with me here), just to have some yutz come right behind me and vandalize the whole mess. Besides, I don't mind doing that. I contribute in my own little way. I've been to some people's user page and saw huge lists of articles they've contributed to. You won't see that here. Not because I don't have anything to list, it's just that I (and you) can check my "user contributions". I'd rather use this area for other things, like, say, telling you about me (and pretending someone cares). Oh, yeah, the list is also short because I've only been here for a little while, and I don't want to get in over my head with anything. Takin' it slow and learning what I need to. That means fewer mistakes, and that's good for everyone. I'll expand the list as I learn more things. == My Admin Criterion == Seems like everyone is creating their own admin criteria these days. Bandwagon, here I come! User:Kbdank71/Admin criterion == Links == Wikipedia:Categories for deletion
[http://www.tobp.com The Opinionated Beer Page] Beer reviews. (my site)

Kbdank71

Please note that if you post something for me here, I'll respond to it here. It just makes for easier reading. Thanks.

User talk:Kbdank71/Archive1 ==Please place new items at the bottom, thanks!== ==Bots keep redirecting to the wrong place; help please== Dear Kris, hello I am new here and I don't know how to override a redirect or is there someone I must petition? Please advise or help. What do I do about this problem? I am trying to create a short article/stub on a municipality in Southern Italy in the Region of Basilicata in the Province of Potenza, which is named Avigliano (with an O at the end.) The bots keep directing me to a municipality spelled with an A at the end, which is in Northern Italy in the Region of Piemonte in the Province of Torino. Please see these on it.wiki: http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avigliana and http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avigliano Here is the Italian Post Office lookup for towns. http://www.poste.it/online/cercacap/ricerca_cap.php Thank you for reading this, User:San Fele *I removed the redirect and started the stub for you. Basically, if you want to "override" a redirect, look at the title of the article. Right underneath it there will be "Redirected from some article". Click on the link to get to the page you want to get to. Use care when doing this, though, redirects are usually put in place for a reason. Hope this helps. --User:Kbdank71 13:09, 17 May 2005 (UTC) **Your advice was very helpful. Thank you for your time. User:San Fele, 17 May 2005 (PST) ==I am sorry== Over the fact that I forgot to place the cfd tags in the airline categories. Quite a major slipup on my part!--User:Huaiwei 15:03, 13 May 2005 (UTC) == :Category:Formal logic == I wasn't the ''leading'' advocate of keeping the category, I was the ''only'' advocate. And the only person who voted, unless you count User:Chalst, who nominated the CfD. But I admit that my saving the category makes me sort of responsible for repopulating it. I'll do so after I give Charles (who was unable to participate in the deletion debate) Category_talk:Formal_logic to convince me that the category deserves to die. ----User:Isaac Rabinovitch 02:13, 20 May 2005 (UTC) *I would have done it myself, but I have no idea what goes where, so I'm afraid I wouldn't be much help. --User:Kbdank71 13:05, 20 May 2005 (UTC) Isaac came round to the view that we are better off without the category (see Category talk:Logic), which means that we have a consensus to delete. I've resubmitted the page on Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 May 20#Category:Formal logic --- User:Chalst 19:34, 20 May 2005 (UTC) ==:Category:Viking battles== I see you have marked this category for deletion, but I couldn't find it on WP:CfD. User:Fornadan 15:48, 21 May 2005 (UTC) *That discussion was archived this morning. You can find it here: Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 May 14. --User:Kbdank71 16:53, 21 May 2005 (UTC) :You consider this to be one of the Fooish Battles ->Battles in Fooland cats? I'm not sure that fits. User:Fornadan 18:15, 21 May 2005 (UTC) ::Actually, I do believe Viking wasn't on the list of ones to move. --User:Kbdank71 14:39, 22 May 2005 (UTC) == Battles in... == Why are you changing categories to "Battles in..."? I'm not sure how extensive this is, since so far it has only appeared on my watchlist for Peloponnesian War battles, where none of those battles you labelled are actually ''in'' Athens. Athens is a city, not a country. User:Adam Bishop 17:51, 21 May 2005 (UTC) *Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 May 14 --User:Kbdank71 14:35, 22 May 2005 (UTC) That page shows no evidence of a consensus to move, and I think your judgement was poor in this case. See Wikipedia talk:Categories for deletion#Moved from main page (Fooish battles --> Battles in Fooland). I suggest the least you can do is to retract the proposed moves from WP:CFD and put the articles back where they were. User:Gdr 11:49, 2005 May 23 (UTC) **All due respect, there were four people who agreed with the move, and only you who were against it. That in my mind was a consensus, and as such, my judgement was just fine. --User:Kbdank71 13:19, 23 May 2005 (UTC) Five editors voted for the rename. But none of them work much in the area under discussion and their arguments were based on a misconception about the purpose of the categories. New evidence suggests that there is in fact no consensus for the renaming. So you need to undo your mistake and move the pages back. User:Gdr 13:39, 2005 May 23 (UTC) *I did not make a mistake. As several people have told you, the consensus was to delete. If you would like to renominate these categories, please feel free. If the consensus (the consensus at CfD, not the "consensus" of everyone at Wikipedia) says they should stay, then they'll stay. --User:Kbdank71 13:48, 23 May 2005 (UTC) **And in you need to comment further on this issue, please keep it to the CfD talk page. Even if you do convince me that this should be reversed (which you haven't yet), I cannot reverse a change based upon consensus without another consensus. So your arguments here won't accomplish much, I'm afraid. --User:Kbdank71 13:51, 23 May 2005 (UTC) *Please contribute to the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Categories for deletion#Moved from main page (Fooish battles --> Battles in Fooland), then. User:Gdr 14:04, 2005 May 23 (UTC) == Smile! == Well .. if your most recent contribution to your user page is any indication, it looks as though you could use a hug. Anyway, I just wanted to visit and let you know that, contrary to the current fallout over the battle categories, there are still people here who appreciate the tireless efforts you put into keeping this place in order. --User:Azkar 19:21, 23 May 2005 (UTC) :Thanks, I really needed that. --User:Kbdank71 22:56, 23 May 2005 (UTC) ==Uni and college cats== In all honestly, although I opposed the deletion, it's probably a good idea, especially now that each provice has it's own cat. Origionally, I didn't think there were enough articles for each province to have their own. --User:Spinboy 18:06, 25 May 2005 (UTC) ==Re:CFD== *Hi, I noticed you marked :Category:Comic book creators for deletion but never added it to WP:CFD. I've removed the tag for now. If you definitely wanted to delete this category, please make sure you complete both parts of the procedure. Thanks! --User:Kbdank71 19:17, 26 May 2005 (UTC) I actually listed it @ CFD and withdrew it before anyone voted, since a more wide-ranging discussion about the related cats. had got underway and I thought it best to wait until that was done and all the relevant ones could be CFDed together. Forgot about the tag tho - ta :) - User:SoM 19:22, 26 May 2005 (UTC) == People from Detroit == I was wondering why the category- People from Detroit- was deleted. Just wondering what justification/policy is behind it, not necessarily in disagreement with it. --User:Mikerussell 00:24, 2005 May 27 (UTC) *The category was listed at WP:CFD for a week, and the consensus was to delete it. You can find the discussion here: Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 May 18 --User:Kbdank71 12:58, 27 May 2005 (UTC) == Re-catting == Hi there! I noticed you re-catting a lot of howto and guideline pages and such, and just wanted to say keep up the good work! Yours, User:Radiant!User_talk:Radiant!meta:mergist 18:04, May 31, 2005 (UTC) == How do I... == Hi Kris, you commented that I wanted to delete the :Category:Carolina Panther players, but I didn't quite follow protocol. Could you explain to me how to add it to CFD? I know how to add the thing within the page, but I'm not sure how to make it appear on the page itself. If you could leave me a message on my usertalk, I'd appreciate it. BTW, where in Jersey are you from (I'm Union County myself)? User:FutureNJGov Answer left on Anthony's talk page: *Ok, here's how you get it listed. Go to WP:CFD, and scroll down to today's date. Click on "edit" all the way to the right. That way you're just editing that day. I usually copy one of the other listings and plug in the information I want to add. That way, if it's not right, at least I'm not the only one. :) Click Save page and you're done. Not sure if you know about transclusion (if not you can read about it here: Wikipedia:Transclusion costs and benefits ) Transclusion is why you can't just click on "Edit this page" for CFD. Each day's worth of nominations is actually a transcluded subpage. I hope that didn't totally confuse you. --User:Kbdank71 13:25, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC) *I've lived in Jersey all my life, moving all over. Right now I'm in West Milford, in Passaic County. --User:Kbdank71 13:25, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC) == CfD == Hey Beland, I was wondering if you'd like to take care of your nomination from Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 May 16 for :Category:Wikipedia style and how-to. Be honest, I'm not quite sure what needs to be done. --User:Kbdank71 16:29, 26 May 2005 (UTC) :I will be happy to do so. Thank you for helping with CFD decision followup, by the way. -- User:Beland 01:24, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Coast & countryside cats == Hi, the coast and countryside articles should be categorised now by their county name (e.g. Wiltshire coast and countryside -> Wiltshire) rather than into English coast and countryside by county, as this too was part of the CfD. Thanks, User:Steinsky User talk:Steinsky 15:35, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC) *Ah, gotcha. I read that as the opposite. My apologies. --User:Kbdank71 15:41, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC) **If you haven't finished could you please stop? There was no concensus. Only one person supported the nominator and a second objector has now emerged. This must effect about a thousand articles and it makes a mess of all the county categories. User:CalJW 03:07, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC) ***I should have pointed out before that "coast and countryside" is the term used by the National Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty, which is the largest private landowner and preeminent conservation charity in the UK, so it is hardly unconventional. User:CalJW 12:20, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC) ***By my tally, there was a consensus. If you want to moan about the outcome because it wasn't to ''your'' liking, then by all means, put in an RFC for this. --User:Kbdank71 13:58, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC) ****The level of support for the suggestion was a pitiable justification for such a major decision, and I think you should have shown more caution, especially as you know so little about this subject area that you misunderstood the proposal. I do not believe cfd notifications were put in place in all subcategories as they should have been. You have wiped hours and hours of people valuable work on the whim of a couple of people. This mass deletion is quite different from deleting a single category. There should be a much higher support requirement. Why should I waste time on Wikipedia when work gets wiped out like this? User:CalJW 22:48, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC) *****With all due respect, none of the ''articles'' were deleted. There is no way I will believe that it took anyone "hours and hours" to simply ''categorize'' them. As for the CfD notifications, yes, they were added to all of the subcategories, I checked them myself. If you don't believe me, then I'm sorry, but that's your problem. Aside from that, I don't know what else to say. That's how CfD works. I think you might want to step back from this and take a deep breath. This isn't the end of the world, nor of Wikipedia. Remember, this is a community effort. Regardless of how much time and/or effort you or anyone else put into this, that doesn't mean someone else can't come in and change it. Every edit screen says If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, do not submit it. This isn't your Wikipedia. If you stop acting like ''your efforts'' are ''yours'', you might find that editing becomes less stressful. --User:Kbdank71 23:51, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC) ==Balamurali Ambati== Hi! Can I ask why his category for world record holders was removed? Thanks.--User:Jondel 00:01, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC) *Jondel, Hi. The discussion that ended with a consensus to delete the category can be found here: Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 May 28 --User:Kbdank71 13:55, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Thanks Kbdank71 == Thanks for your support on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Seabhcan. == Why the "recat spree"? (computing) == Er, could you please state the rationale behind your recent quest of recategorizing loads of :category:computer terminology articles into the rather more general category of :category:computing? --User:Wernher 23:18, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC) :Wernher, Hi. The discussion that ended with a consensus to delete the category can be found here: Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 May 28 --User:Kbdank71 18:50, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC) :Here also: Category talk:Computer terminology :: Hi, thanks for the information; I should really have known better and looked at the pages you told me in the first place, so I'm sorry for wasting a bit of you time in this regard. Oh well. :) --User:Wernher 02:10, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC) == My RFA: Thanks == Thank you for your support on my RFA. Now that I have been promoted, I promise to be as hardworking and fair with the admin tools as I have been with the other areas here on Wikipedia. See you around and happy editing. User:Zzyzx11 User talk:Zzyzx11 00:41, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC) == ArbCom == I know you think I am going about this the wrong way. But I wonder if you think ''any'' of the points I am making are good ones. Either way, why not say so? User:Psb777 21:36, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC) *Paul, yes, I do think some of your points are valid, however, the way you are presenting them completely overshadows their validity. Let me ask you this: Have you, at any time since this started, went to him and said, "Look, I'm sorry for what happened. But that was a long time ago. What do you say to dropping this, and we can go our separate ways?" Granted, you would both probably have to agree not to step on each other's toes, which included staying away from, what was it, artificial conscousness? Wikipedia is a very large encyclopedia to get lost in. Have you tried that? Ignore for the moment who is or was at fault. In other words, can you show him (and perhaps the arbcom) that you are willing to end this in an amicable manner? Because if not, me saying anything publicly about you making good points will probably fall on deaf ears. It has to come from you, not me. Am I making sense? --User:Kbdank71 13:17, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) Kris, it is a character flaw that I want to reply by showing how everyone ''else'' is at fault. I understand that you are saying that me admitting some fault might provide a way to allow this sorry mess to be tidied up. Also, I know it does not look like it perhaps, but I am prepared to admit I was a bit heavy handed with Tkorrovi on a ''few'' occasions. Indeed, you might have seen in my User_talk:Psb777/draft that I am not arguing that ''nothing'' I said could be construed as personal insult. For the few occasions where I overstepped the mark I am essentially arguing mitigation because (a) I was provoked, (b) I was truthful, (c) the cases are few and isolated and (d) it was all a long time ago. But none of (a), (b), (c) or (d) is acknowledged by anyone on the ArbCom. The essential initial mistake[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Psb777/draft#Errors_by_the_ArbCom] made by the ArbCom, which if acknowledged, would have meant none of this time wasting would have occurred, was made by Grunt when, on accepting the case within only two hours of Tkorrovi's RfA, says "there is a full scale edit war going on"[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration&oldid=11611524]. The ArbCom have made it plain that they are unwilling [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration#Statute_of_Limitations] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Tkorrovi_and_Paul_Beardsell/Proposed_decision#Principle_proposed_by_Psb777] to accept that any mistake could have been made here. Paraphrasing Ambi, Rual456 and others: "The ArbCom does not make mistakes becuase it is trusted not to make mistakes." So, I think the ArbCom is also in need of your admonishment to admit some fault. I do not know how to go forward except to show how ridiculous this all is but I am unable to do so without upsetting everybody. So, you will see I have requested an advocate at Wikipedia:AMA_Requests_for_Assistance. Everything has gone quiet at the moment while everybody, hopefully, considers their position. In the interim thanks for your constructive comments. User:Psb777 20:19, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) But to address more directly some of your points: Yes, I eventually stepped away from artificial consciousness 11 May 2004 upon realising I would never get Tk to provide a reference for a claim he was repetitively inserting. Save 27 / 28 Mar 2005 I have not edited the page. I am moderately but widely active on Wikipedia. Or, at least I was until this distraction. I did suggest Tk drop it all on his Talk page but perhaps I could have done so in a way more calculated to obtain his agreement. At your suggestion, I will later today draft a joint statement to which all (Tk, ArbCom, me and, if appropriate (Sannse thinks so) Matt Stan) may be able to put our names. User:Psb777 20:30, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) *(Sorry, we were apparently editing at the same time; I got an edit conflict. I see you have answered some of my questions. Some of the below still applies, though.) First off, the phrase "The ArbCom does not make mistakes because..." is total horseshit, no matter who is saying it. We're all human, we all make mistakes. I'll repeat that: We all make mistakes. That said, am I going to second-guess the ArbCom on this or any other matter? Probably not. We should indeed trust them; they're not on the ArbCom because they were the 100th caller at a radio station. THAT said, it ''doesn't matter'' if everyone on earth is 100% wrong and you're 100% right. At this rate, you're going to lose. So I ask you again: Have you tried apologizing? Have you tried to bury the hatchet? --User:Kbdank71 20:44, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) *I just read your idea about drafting a joint statement. I think that is a great idea. I've found that fixing the problem yourself is always preferrable to someone else doing it for you. You have your best interests at heart, someone else may not. Good luck. --User:Kbdank71 20:44, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) ==Thanks for your support== Thank you for voting on my RFA. Have some PI! I was pleasantly surprised by the sheer number of supporters (including several people that usually disagree with my opinion). I shall do my best with the proverbial mop. Yours, User:Radiant!User_talk:Radiant!>|<">meta:mergist 08:03, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC) == TL:Stub == ...has been unprotected per your request. Yours, User:Radiant!User_talk:Radiant!>|<">meta:mergist 13:43, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC) *Thanks much. I'm done with it if you want to protect it again. --User:Kbdank71 13:59, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) **Re: Free software games, the idea was to split it between 'open source' and 'freeware' games. The present category contains mostly open source games, so that would be the appropriate name. User:Radiant!User_talk:Radiant!>|<">meta:mergist 15:11, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC) ***Btw - considering you're main cleaner-upper of CFD, I had assumed you had been an admin all along (and I'm rather surprised how you're doing that without admin rights, too). Since Kate says you have ~8710 edits, and since you meet your own admin criterion, would you like to be nominated? User:Radiant!User_talk:Radiant!>|<">meta:mergist 15:11, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC) ****Well, it would certainly make things easier. Sure, thanks! --User:Kbdank71 15:19, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) *****Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kbdank71. Best of luck! User:Radiant!User_talk:Radiant!>|<">meta:mergist 12:26, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC) == pro bowl by year categories == Hi - Do you know if in the process of deleting the nfl pro bowl by year categories they were converted to lists (as several people suggested)? And, do you know if anyone made any attempt to respond to User:FutureNJGov's assertion that he/she won't be contributing anymore if the CFD vote ended up delete (which it did)? I notice this user hasn't made any changes since June 5. If we've driven this user away, I think it would be a great shame. If by deleting the categories (without preserving the information in lists) we've lost the user's contributions, it would be doubly shameful. Just curious. Thanks. -- user:Rick Block (user talk:Rick Block) 18:55, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC) *Hi Rick. Not as far as I know, no. I thought of how to do it as I was about to depopulate the categories, and couldn't come up with a good solution. With several years having no articles in them, and several more having just one or two, it didn't make sense to have one list per year. Top it off with the fact that the main :Category:NFC Pro Bowl players and :Category:AFC Pro Bowl players were being kept (and with the deletion of the subcategories, they would be empty), I thought it would be a better idea to just recategorize the players' articles under those. Do you think a list would serve visitors better in this situation? If so, I'd be happy to create one. As for driving him away, it would certainly seem that way. He appeared to take a "My way or the highway" attitude with this issue. Did he even respond to your query about lists vs categories? Aside from leaving the categories exactly the way they were, I don't see a way we could have kept him. And I agree, losing him is a shame. --User:Kbdank71 19:25, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC) **S/he didn't respond to my query, although who knows what might have happened if there had been some way to put the CFD on hold for a bit. I'm trying to gently prod User:MusiCitizen into converting the analogous baseball categories into list or article format so if User:FutureNJGov ever comes back we'll at least look consistent. I think categories are in general tremendously overused. The AFC/NFC pro bowl categories don't really bother me, but I definitely think "by year" should be in list or article format. -- user:Rick Block (user talk:Rick Block) 04:17, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC) ***FYI - the user's back and has accepted my offer to work with me on lists in lieu of categories. Don't know if we'll keep him/her, but I'm willing to try. Thought you'd like to know. -- user:Rick Block (user talk:Rick Block) 18:33, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC) ****Good deal! Please let me know if I can be of assistance. --User:Kbdank71 18:38, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) *****Hey, just wanted to apologize for being a dick about the whole deletion thing. I guess it was because I was new to the whole Wiki thing and I thought of this idea and I was working on the whole thing myself, and I was insulted and offended that everyone else thought my idea sucked. So instead of handling it like an adult, I got all "take my ball & go home" for awhile, but I've come around, and now I'm working with Rick Block on making each Pro Bowl an article, because it's more information and more specific than a basic category. So once again, sorry for getting all immature about the whole thing, and I really enjoy working in the Wiki community, so if any more of my ideas aren't well received, I'm sure I'll handle it much better than I handled the whole Pro Bowl thing. If there's anything we need your assistance on, we'll be sure to ask. User:FutureNJGov 15:03, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC) ******Don't worry about it. I understand that it's hard sometimes not to take things like that personally. I'm glad to see you're back. Seriously, if you have any questions about anything at all, just drop me a line. (BTW, are you seriously going to run for Governor?) --User:Kbdank71 15:11, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) *******2029 is the goal.. hopefully you'll still be in Jersey and you'll vote for me when I run, lol. User:FutureNJGov 16:04, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC) == Wikipedia:Naming policy poll == ...has been unprotected and re-catted. Good job on all the archiving! User:Radiant!User_talk:Radiant!>|<">meta:mergist 07:05, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC) == Renaming categories == Thanks a lot for renaming the 2 categories that I created with the wrong capitalization. Did you manually have to correct each linked article? If so, then I'm sorry about leaving this tedious work for you! I thought there was some bot that would make such renaming much easier.
(No need to reply on my talk page - I'll watch this page for a while) — User:SebastianHelm User_talk:SebastianHelm 19:32, 2005 Jun 10 (UTC) *No problem at all. Yeah, I did it manually. No need to apologize, though, there were only about 28 articles to move. I think someone has a bot that can do it, but I don't mind doing it myself. --User:Kbdank71 19:40, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC) **User:Pearle (User:Beland's bot does things like that. User:Guettarda 19:55, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC) ***That's what I thought. For categories that don't have many articles to move, I'd rather just do it myself than bug Beland for the help. --User:Kbdank71 20:12, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC) ==Is nomination in CFD = a vote?== Been wondering this for some time...is the one nominating a category for deletion also counted in the votes?--User:Huaiwei 15:03, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) *I can't answer for anyone else that may archive, but when I do it (which is most of the time), yeah, I count the nomination as a vote. --User:Kbdank71 15:10, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) **Oh I see. Thanks for the clarification! :D--User:Huaiwei 16:31, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) ==Rfa== Before I vote, can you please explain why you wanted all of the LGBT categories deleted, and why the people who worked to create those were not notified of the move? User:CDThieme 03:48, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) *For the same reason I voted to delete :Category:Democrats. If someone is notable enough to be in Wikipedia, it's not because they are a Democrat, it's for some other reason. Same thing for the LBGT categories. As for why people weren't notified, you'd have to ask the person who nominated the categories. If I were to guess, I'd say it was because the current procedure does not mandate such notification. I hope that answered your questions? --User:Kbdank71 16:53, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) ==grammatical number of category names== hi. i see that you have renamed [Category:Language isolate] to [Category:Language isolates]. sometime earlier another category i made was renamed, i.e. Consonant → Consonants (but apparently not Vowel to Vowels ?). it wasnt obvious to me that categories should be plural. this is also not stated at Wikipedia:Naming_conventions. addtionally, someone was a little irritated that i am naming things incorrectly. so, i put a note at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions#category: singular? plural? to point this out. perhaps you can offer your opinion there? thank you. peace — User:Ish_ishwar User_talk:Ish_ishwar 20:10, 2005 Jun 14 (UTC) *Opinion offered. --User:Kbdank71 20:30, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Thank you == Thanks for supporting my administrative candidacy! User:Schissel : User_talk:Schissel 17:44, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC) == :Category:Actors from California == I'm on the verge of listing this for deletion as an unnecessary subcategorization, and an irrational one because acting isn't a profession that has a significant nexus with a particular state (unlike holding political office, for example). I'm currently involved in a discussion with its creator, who intends to create ''more'' California-specific subcategories, which will likely include similarly irrelevant intersections of profession and residence. I've long been dissatisfied with the current...state...of the people by state subcats, because of the lack of criteria for inclusion and the lack of importance that state affiliation has for most individuals in the U.S. both in the public's eye and their own life. Dividing these by occupation compounds the problem and needlessly entangles the broader organization. I'd appreciate it if you could drop by User talk:Postdlf and add a comment of your own about what we should do about these. I really would hate to see the occupations by nationality subcategories senselessly subdivided by political subdivision. User:Postdlf 23:03, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Thank you == Hi Kbdank71, I know this is a bit overdue, but I wanted to thank you for supporting me on my RFA. Thanks to everyone who gave me support votes, I am now an admin, and I have been using my new powers to help further Wikipedia. Thank you! User:Linuxbeak | User_talk:Linuxbeak | User:Linuxbeak/Desk 23:47, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC) == Thanks == Hi! thank you for supporting my successful admin candidacy. I hope that you will always feel that I am a responsible administrator. User:JeremyA 05:34, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Congratulations! == Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an Wikipedia:Administrators. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the Wikipedia:administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- User:Cecropia | User talk:Cecropia 12:59, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Thanks, and you're welcome! == Hi Kbdank71! You got to me first, so I'll start off by saying that you are very welcome! Thank ''you'' for supporting my adminship, even though I didn't really meet User:Kbdank71/Admin criterion ;-) --User:Sjakkalle User talk:Sjakkalle 13:43, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC) ==Congrats== Congratulations - and no problems with the support. There's a shiny new mop with your name on it here somewhere... User:Grutness...''User_talk:Grutness 13:48, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Thanks! == Thanks for supporting me on my RfA. It's always nice to get some positive feedback. I hope I can put my new abilities to some good use. -- User:Grm_wnr Esc">User_talk:Grm_wnr 17:42, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC) == My RFA == Thank you for supporting my RFA. User:Guettarda 23:56, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Pearle requests == Not a problem...thanks for all your work in keeping CFD running. -- User:Beland 00:50, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Doug Stanhope == There appear to be some subversive edits being made to the Doug Stanhope article. If you wouldn't mind, could you please take a look? User:Hall Monitor 18:25, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC) * Could you define "subversive"? I'm seeing edits, but nothing I would define as subversive. Granted, the pic of the dildo may be over the top, but that's easily removed. --User:Kbdank71 18:30, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC) ** The list of items auctioned off on eBay, for example. User:Hall Monitor 18:31, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC) *** Sounds odd, and probably not encyclopedic, but again, I wouldn't call it subversive, and it's easily removed. I don't think I'm understanding the dilemma here. --User:Kbdank71 18:39, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Operas by title == (In reference to Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_June_13#Category:Operas_by_title) I saw that you concluded that, in your judgment, :Category:Operas by title should be merged (I disagree that this was the consensus, but I am not the deciding administrator so I will try to abide by the decision). The category still exists, with all of its members, and no deletion or merging has taken place. Would it be un-wikilike for me to empty the category, since nothing has been done for the past 10 days? Thanks much. --User:BaronLarfUser talk:BaronLarf 04:05, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC) *Actually, that's being taken care of my a bot. I agree that there were more votes to delete the category and not move the articles anywhere, but there seemed to be a stronger argument by a few that the structure should be kept. Since techinically, after the move the category will be deleted, I thought it prudent to take that course. If someone wants to do something with :Category:Operas at some point in the future, well, that's another Cfd. --User:Kbdank71 13:10, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) ==CfD: Controversial books== Could you take a look again at the Cfd you voted on? I think you've misunderstood the category and what the word "Controversial" means. It is not hard to establish whether a book was sufficiently "controversial", i.e. that it generated controversy. And it is not necessarily a negative term -- the Bible is/was controversial, the Koran is/was controversial, the Origin of Species is/was controversial, Machiavelli's The Prince is/was controversial. It has no bearing on their validity -- more than anything else, it means the book had an impact of some sort, it generated discussion, disagreement, assent, etc! If you could reconsider this, I would very much appreciate it, I think it is a useful and interesting category. Thank you. --User:Fastfission 04:45, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) *The funny thing is, I do agree with you. But I'm against changing my mind on deleting it for one reason: "Controversial books" or even "Books deemed controversial" to me means "Wikipedia deems these books controversial", and I can't agree to that. Now if we were to say "Books deemed controversial by group x", that would be more factual and complete, but then you'd need to create one for each group, and that would get messy. So that's why I just say delete it. I happen to be in the minority, though, so chances are excellent it'll stay. --User:Kbdank71 13:26, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Where is it? == Hi Kb: you nominated :Category:Israeli history for renaming, but I am having trouble finding exactly ''where'' the vote is taking place. Where did you place it? Thanks. User:IZAK 05:30, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) *Actually, I didn't nominate it. The discussion that led to "History of foo" has long completed. Of course, many people didn't see it and are unhappy, and as usual, it's back on Cfd for an extra seven days. If you take issue with History of Israel, I suggest you get on over to CfD and make your opinion known. --User:Kbdank71 13:28, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

See other meanings of words starting from letter:

K

KA | KB | KC | KD | KE | KF | KG | KH | KI | KJ | KL | KM | KN | KO | KP | KR | KS | KT | KU | KW | KX | KY | KZ |

Words begining with Kbdank71:

Kbdank71
Kbdank71
Kbdank71/Admin_criterion
Kbdank71/Archive1