User talk:EvergreenFir: Difference between revisions

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

I've closed your RfA as successful. Good luck with extra tools! Maxim_(talk) 23:27, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

	New Admin Torch
	From Girth Summit via ToBeFree to EvergreenFir: Congratulations for your successful request for adminship. Please guard this eternal flame and forward it to the next successful candidate – never break the chain. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:31, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, I like they layout - good job ToBeFree! Yes, congratulations from me too EvergreenFir - welcome to the team, if there's anything I can ever do to help please reach out. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 12:05, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Congratulations, and a good result. I'm glad you went for it and I know you will use the tools carefully and responsibly. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:33, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the CABAL. We have snacks. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 23:36, 15 November 2019 (UTC) [reply]

We don't actually have snacks. Or alcohol. It's all a lie. Best wishes anyway! Take those opposes onboard as the gift of feedback. :) --valereee (talk) 23:40, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Congratulations EvergreenFir. Enjoy your new mop. - MrX 🖋 23:59, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Well done. When you get tired of scrabbling down the back of the sofa to find the right block message, check out my monobook, some kind person put some code there that makes that sort of thing a lot easier. ϢereSpielChequers 00:14, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Congratulations. I've run out of admin T-shirts but I expect someone will find one for you even if it's second hand. Your RfA wasn't an easy ride and I know how you must have felt for 7 days - mine was also quite unpleasant. Many of the oppose votes can be discounted. I hope you will continue to support the process that promoted you and vote as often as possible. You'll also find some more very useful scripts for admins in my js file . Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:36, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Wow!, 250+supports (quite a few opposes but now you can prove them wrong:)) WOOP WOOP! Coolabahapple (talk) 01:00, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! RfAs can be brutal, I know. But it is to your benefit to see it through & not withdraw, although it can get personal at times, especially for female candidates.

You are now an admin! Take it slow at first, read the manual (guidance pages) & ask any admins any questions you might have. We may not have the answer but can probably point you in the right direction! Good luck! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:15, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Nothing fancy or funny to say, just congratulations! Puddleglum2.0 ^{Have a talk?}_{Please ping me in replies! (Thanks!)} 01:40, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Yep, congratulations! Airbornemihir (talk) 02:40, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Hi Evergreen! I don't subscribe to the perception that adminship is a promotion; you can't be promoted when you make no money from the thing. To me it's 100% a trust position, so I don't like to "congratulate", per se. But I will congratulate you for having endured that awful hazing session that is the RFA. Congratulations! You will make a great admin. I trust that you will ask other admins for advice, I trust that you will steer clear from adminning in areas that other people thought you might be deficient in, and overall, I trust you and it's lovely to see more women get the mop. Now clean up aisle five! You might want to peek at my tools file to see if anything might be of use, but I bet there's tons of tools I have no knowledge of that could help you more. Go EvergreenFir! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:06, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Maxim, ToBeFree, CorbieVreccan, Valereee, MrX, WereSpielChequers, Kudpung, Coolabahapple, Liz, Puddleglum2.0, Airbornemihir, and Cyphoidbomb: Thank you all! I appreciate the support and the comments/advice. I will definitely "take it slow" and ease my way into this. As many of you mentioned, Wikipedia's RfA process is rough (especially for women, [in my case] non-binary/genderqueer folks, and trans folks in general) but it was worth it. I hope to gain the trust of folks who are weary or opposed, but I know that will take time.

Valereee - I hear the cake was a lie too. And thank you. I will definitely take the oppose !votes on board. I appreciated their input and do understand (most of) their positions.

Cyphoidbomb - I had decided early on in the RfA process that if I was successful, I'd use the mop icon as that's what this is. Just a glorified janitor in many cases.

A very special thanks to Ritchie333, Vanamonde93, and Samwalton9 for all their support and encouragement. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:02, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• I'll say congratulations to echo the above, but per Cyphoidbomb you've just got some extra buttons now :) I hope you find them useful and continue to play an integral part in the upkeep of this encyclopedia! Sam Walton (talk) 08:08, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Congrats - well done on staying cool, I know it can be tough when the opposes start coming in, but I feel confident you can show them their concerns were unjustified - you're going to be a great addition to the mop corps. Have fun with all these sparkly buttons in really unhelpful places! Nosebagbear (talk) 14:15, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Felicitations and welcome to the team. There is a learning curve but it's not very steep. Feel free to drop me a line with any questions or if you need help with anything. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:09, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Very happy to see this was successful. Best of luck, and if you need anything, feel free to drop me a line. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:58, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oops, sorry for mis-identifying you. I'll try to remember in the future. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:03, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Congratulations EvergreenFir! Best wishes to our newest admin. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:29, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Congratulations and welcome to the team! – Muboshgu (talk) 03:57, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• 🎉🥳🎊🥂🍾 and relatively unscathed!! (sorry for being so late, but I've been preoccupied). ^Atsme _Talk 📧 00:10, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, posted this in the wrong place previously; my bad!

Annoyed that I didn't notice the Rfa until it was too late. Would've have given you an enthusiastic support. Congratulations! You'll be good at it. Mathglot (talk) 08:20, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Fuentes

Congratulations on blocking a flamer, and being told that you used good judgment. By the way, I came upon that article in a different context, and have nominated it for deletion. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:28, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on having the power to block trolls. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:28, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert McClenon: thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) 03:26, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Let me add my very belated congratulations, apologies. I'm very pleased to see you with the mop and glad I notice your RfA in time to take part! Doug Weller talk 09:04, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove my WP:AIV report as stale after less than an hour? Normally its 4–8 hours. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 05:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mvcg66b3r: My apologies. I'm still getting used to this, but my experience is that 2 hours is "stale". But that just may be the admins I've run into. I was trying to clear the backlog. I'll take another look at the one reported. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mvcg66b3r It looks like the user was only given a level 2 warning and I see nothing in the filter log. Mrschimpf gave a welcome template to the user. Let's see if they will stay and be productive (per WP:BITE). If the user continues to be disruptive, and you get to a level 4 warning, please re-report to AIV. Or ANI if you want another admin to review. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, You declined my request for speedy deletion of the List of Billboard number-one singles of 1955 redirect because "it appears there are still articles linking here and the redirect is still of use." Yet that is exactly why it needs to be deleted because the article and its history was unilaterally moved without discussion from that to List of Pre–Hot 100 number-one singles of 1955. So a G6 deletion will allow all the links from other articles to point to the article after it is moved back to where it was while maintaining the history. Thanks. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:58, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars: Ah, okay. Thanks for letting me know. I'll correct that. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:27, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2019 Hong Kong protests. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Islanders–Rangers rivalry. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, EvergreenFir. As you seem not only to be keen on reducing Wikipedia's gender gap but have also recently created a couple of interesting women's biographies, you might like to join the Women in Red wikiproject where we collaborate on creating articles about women and their works. We have an interesting set of priorities month by month as you can see from our plans for December below.--Ipigott (talk) 14:15, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WiR: December 2019

December 2019, Volume 5, Issue 12, Numbers 107, 108, 144, 145, 146, 147 Check out what's happening in December at Women in Red... Online events: New: Parliamentarians / Classical musicians / 2019 deaths / Geofocus: Arab world Continuing: Suffrage / #1day1woman / Stub Contest Editor feedback: Check out the conversation regarding: Disappearing articles Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Ipigott (talk) 14:15, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keith Johnston (talk • contribs) 16:16, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So given that Bacondrum has consistently demonstrated a disinclination to discuss in Talk when any of their edits is challenged (via revert), how are other editors expected to behave? As I understand, when I revert another editors change, it behoves on them to explain their change (and not on me to explain the WP:STATUSQUO). —Srid^🍁 21:36, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sridc: Yes, but even if you are "in the right", WP:3RR is a bright red line that should not be crossed. The only exceptions are things like vandalism and BLP violations. In the future, if someone edit wars like this and you think they are "in the wrong", start the talk page section (like you did) and wait for others to weigh in (it may take a bit, but there is WP:NODEADLINE). You can also use WP:3RRN if someone is edit warring and crosses the 3RR line. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:39, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. My only hesitation towards waiting is that the user in question (Bacondrum) is known to make numerous changes throughout the article in a short period of time. So, suppose I wait for discussion (which may not happen in the next 24 hours), by the time we will have arrived at a consensus to re-establish the prior status quo, the article would have been changed significantly to make the revert to status-quo complex. I think in situations like it would be best for both editors to stop editing, and discuss the change before making any further changes. But since Bacondrum wasn't willing to pause their edit-spree, I guess the edit-protection turned out to be a blessing in disguise. —Srid^🍁 21:49, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bacondrum is now going through my past contributions, and in Feminazi they just removed my recent addition of the "POV" tag (violating it's principles).[1]. They are hounding me me in the Talk page as well. How do we deal with this? —Srid^🍁 22:14, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sridc: That sort of behavior would be best brought to WP:ANI. Be sure to post the {{ani-notice}} on Bacondrum's user talk page if you do post there. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:47, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I probably shouldn't do that while Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Feminazi is in effect. However I'll note (if you don't already know) that I've already reported two ANI incidents regarding Bacondrum in the last month. Being a new Wikipedian, I didn't accumulate sufficient evidence of their harassmentent, so those incidents did not result in any sanction against them. —Srid^🍁 23:16, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sridc: Yes, I agree that you should let WP:DR play out. I'm not terribly neutral on this topic, so I'm not sure I can or should give much advice. If you feel that the perceived harassment continues, I'd recommend messaging another admin who is uninvolved for advice. EvergreenFir (talk) 23:21, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case you didn't see it or had forgotten, User:Kevin Gordon passed away a few years ago. Anyone signing with a typographical variation of his name should be blocked on sight. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:39, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Newyorkbrad: I hadn't forgotten (mentioned it in the block reason) but thank you for following up. That signature was an immediate indication of trolling... I just was not sure which/who it was. Zzuuzz marked that account as belonging to an LTA sock. EvergreenFir (talk) 00:01, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. And belated congrats on the successful RfA. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:57, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 09:44, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well based on his talk page history, it appears as though he is uncooperative with other editors as he simply deletes anything that casts him in a negative light. Would an indef block be likely for him the more he insists on his hoaxes? Blake Gripling (talk) 03:10, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Blakegripling ph: yes. I opted for the escalating block because not all of their edits are vandalism/hoaxes. Hopefully it'll stop, but if not then an indefinite block would be likely. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:37, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like a competency case perhaps? Not to insult him or anything but at least that's how I see it. Blake Gripling (talk) 05:32, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I would have protected the article for longer than 48 hours, as there has been a two to three month period were nearly all of the IP edits were disruptive and some of the edits had to be revdeleted because they contained grossly offensive material. Anyway, we'll see how it goes.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:52, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What's with the talk page removal you pillock? No warnings and no opportunity for self-representation. You say it was vandalism yet where is your evidence poof? One non-constructive edit and it was self-reverted, and then a APPROPRIATE comment at Jewish humor, meaning a Jewish joke that someone needed to add. I dunno what you're protecting, but the jokes you Zionists tell about yourselves are NOT the same as the jokes non-Zionists tell about YOU. And when you hear those jokes, the mask slips and everyone sees you have a chip on your shoulder. Us Irish are not like that, we joke about ourselves and take no offence of non-Irish repeating those jokes. Now you are your buccaneers get the fuck out of Palestine and leave the Arabs alone. You may be rich, you may be powerful, but you are still SCUM, and don't worry, I know you'll block my account and talkpage access but at least I made my point. And if anyone is really being blocked it is you, because as an admin, you have access to this what I write to you, but like all admins and zionists, you are too chicken to step up to the plate and provide a response to me because you are a dyed-in-the-wool coward, and in the end, sure my talkpage and possibly range will be starved of oxygen, but you are the one shutting your ears and it is your conscience that is hurt when it cannot sleep at night. Palestine is Arab. And Britain voted to leave the EU, so go forth and multiply dogbreath. 188.29.17.185 (talk) 10:16, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]