User talk:Shalom Yechiel

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/North Killiney

It was formatted fine until this edit, then Sarah777 persists in re-inserting the content every time I remove it. It's a hard life..... One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 00:25, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

WikiBreak

Hi, hope you'll find the time to return, you are a great Wikipedian, we'll be waiting when you choose to return. Tellyaddict 17:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

My (Selket's) RfA

Thank you, Shalom Yechiel, 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· --Selket Talk 18:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your comment here. I hope everything goes well for you and that you have time to return. Cheers, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 19:49, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

DGG

are you there to add your co-nom? or should I paste it in?DGG 00:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

He's on a wikibreak by the looks of things. Perhaps it could be posted in with a note of where it came from. Majorly (hot!) 00:42, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Jesus

wow i dunno how this works.

i guess the truth is, my life is boring. not really but i feel like there's nothing to do at home when really there's plenty. is there something wrong?

anyway, im just a 17 year kid who wants something to do. hahahahahahahahahaha

im soo bored

Admin co-nom

Hello. I've removed the request for adminship co-nomination that 66.65.54.63 added here. If that really was you, please sign in and re-add it. Thanks. WODUP 05:51, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

user:Tamás Kádár

I chaged my user:Tamás Kádár page. Now is the page OK?--Tamás Kádár 21:59, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Somebody deleted my User:Tamás Kádár page, because of some picture which was my personal paintings.. This is a new one user page.--Tamás Kádár 20:22, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

EGTB

The marathon process of getting endgame tablebase to a Featured Article status continues... Can you find and add a source for the claim "Some studies have been cooked, i.e. proven unsound, by the tablebases."? We just got some new input from a new user and I just spent a couple of hours reformatting the references. (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Endgame tablebase) --ZeroOne (talk | @) 13:41, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, scratch that — another user just pointed out that the very next paragraph gives an example with a reference. :) --ZeroOne (talk | @) 21:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Wikipedia is thankless, you know. But in this case, I would like to say "thank you" for your work on Endgame tablebase. Ioannes Pragensis 21:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

thanks

I never expected such a vote count, & i can only hope i continue this well. DGG 21:29, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi dear YechielMan! :) Thanks for your kind words, I definitely hope our vandals also find it amusing enough to reconsider and become good contributors! I know, it may sound naif - but it it actually assuming good faith and showing a little humour earns us one good contributor that we otherwise wouldn't, then the effort was worth it, don't you think? Btw, I just gave you a "warning" - I'm so happy you liked it :) Please, keep up the great work; I've seen you a lot around, and let me tell you, your excellent work is much appreciated. We'll talk again, I'm sure. Have a beautiful day! Phaedriel - 04:00, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Please revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/3WC

Could you please revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/3WC? The original version of the article was a bit confusing, but the station is an FCC-licensed broadcaster, not an Internet-only one, and therefore would be automatically considered notable. --Eastmain 04:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!!

Thank you for the Wikification of my Foucault Process Article --GimletGene 18:45 20 May 2007 (UTC)

User pages

Hi there! Thanks for helping weeding out unnecessary userpages. Did you know you can also use WP:PROD in userspace? HTH! >Radiant< 08:07, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I did. I'm not sure whether you're noticing a speedy tag or an MFD, but most of my action on user pages is now done by PROD. Thanks for the reminder. :) YechielMan 07:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you and here you go

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		Your comment for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Far Cry was insanely funny. I needed that laugh. Whstchy 02:46, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome

Hey YechielMan - Thank you for the welcome note and tips! I really appreciated hearing from you. Michael 03:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

about the old name

I like this name as much as the old one I guess - I'll just have to write down the password somewhere, and tell wikipedia to automatically sign in. Thanks for the warm welcome--Phixxor 05:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Are you serious?

Did you really have to delete my subpages? What was the point of that? They weren't affecting you or any other users in any way, shape, or form. Trosk 12:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

???? Trosk 22:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank You for the lovely Hello!

And also for the advice,too! User:Ladypulaski 9:34, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

My Rfa

Hello, Yechiel. It's been long since the last time I visited you. I hope things are going well. Oh, and thank you so much for your kind support in my recent Rfa, it succeeded! Feel free to shout at me if I ever screw things up =) Have a wonderful day! Yours, PeaceNT 06:37, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Speed sensor - does this look familiar?

See User talk:Maniac1978 for more on speed sensor and wheel speed sensor. Would you be able to help tidy this up? I only discovered it while categorising uncategorised articles, so would like to carry on with that. I suggest deleting speed sensor, or simply cutting it down to a stub that gives an overview of speed sensors, with a section on wheel speed sensors. Carcharoth 13:11, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Looks good to me. I recommend a merge/redirect of "speed sensor" to "wheel speed sensor", but I don't intend to help execute the merger. YechielMan 13:32, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

OK. I went the stub route instead and created a new category. The stub needs expanding to an overview article, so hopefully someone will do that. See Category:Speed sensors and speed sensor. Thanks. Carcharoth 14:22, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Clamster5

Between the edits where you commented neutral and signed, someone struck your neutral as that of an IP. I changed it back. —AldeBaer 17:24, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. As I noted in the edit summary, I simply forgot to login before writing the comment. YechielMan 17:42, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Yep, had interpreted it that way. —AldeBaer 20:44, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

RFA

Thanks so much for supporting me in the RFA. I am grateful for your response, and it really means a lot to be appreciated. Thanks again! hmwithtalk 15:05, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Black Falcon RFA

I've started an RFA for Black Falcon. Since you had previously offered to nominate him, I thought it would be only fitting that I tell you about it so you can co-nom if you want. It's at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Black Falcon. Mangojuice^talk 20:51, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello To You Too

Hi Yechiel,

Thanks for your "hello". Do not concern yourself with me - it's just typical teenage nihilism, I guess. --MosheA 10:10, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Help with my RfA

		The Special Barnstar
		For pointing me to deletion review to come up with an answer to question number 5 at my RfA. It worked perfectly and I was able to find what I needed. Thanks! GoodnightmushTalk 02:19, 23 May 2007 (UTC) 22:41, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Editor Review

Thank you for commenting on my editor review - your observations and suggestions are very helpful. --Haemo 02:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

And Thank You for my review as well. -- LeCour^T:C 16:02, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

i know you!

Yechiel, i know you, you leigned at adams street and came over to my house alot--we go way back!Rubidubi 01:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Your RfA

There's a question on your RfA which you need to answer quickly to avoid a snowball, I fear. Good luck --Steve _(Stephen) ^talk 01:37, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for the heads-up. YechielMan 01:49, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi. ... I see that you withdrew your RfA. ... I am surprised at how many people opposed you for the googlebombing issue, which took place 17 months ago, and also that two joke edits could outweight 6000 positive contributions. I truly hope this will not discourage you too much and will not make editing Wikipedia any less enjoyable for you. As for "what will convince [people] of [your] integrity", I'll leave that to the opposers, as I am already convinced. Best, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 22:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Though I share your frustration, my opinion is that you should disclose everything the next time you run. At the very least, if you don't disclose the information, someone else surely will. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 22:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention

I'm a bit confused about this. I thought the purpose of the report page was to solicit admin attention, not general discussion. So when you responded there, I assumed you'd passed an RfA while I was on wikibreak, and were declining to block Mr. "Blow Me". Because of this, I wound up going through other channels, which took a lot of time. I may well have needed to do that, anyway, as the admin who later responded didn't think the name was offensive enough. At the same time, I feel your commenting there was a bit misleading. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 02:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I did not intend to mislead you; it was a misunderstanding. The WP:UAA system is new, so confusion will last a while until everyone figures out how it really works in practice. My comment was to clarify the basis for blocking or not blocking the user, rather than to issue a final ruling. Perhaps I should have made my intention clear by introducing the word "Comment" as is common in other discussions.

As I understand it, the reason UAA replaced WP:RFCN is that the discussions were becoming excessive, and deciding that a username violates policy is a simple matter in most cases. (If you read the relevant MFD discussions, it's more complicated.) Although I'm not an admin, I find the issue curious, and I happened to stop by when your case was active. I think it's helpful to provide administrators with additional information they might need, since you didn't clarify what about the username was offensive. In the future, if you see an unclear post on a noticeboard, you are free to clarify its intent - and again, I should have used the word "comment" in order not to confuse you. The word "administrators" in the page title is not meant to scare you away. :)

Best regards. YechielMan 02:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I assure you, I am neither confused nor "scared" by the process at WP:UAA. Non-admins posting their opinions there is really not the point of that page. The page is not a discussion page, it is only to post usernames believed to be in violation of policy and then have them blocked, or not, much as the process works at AIV. Only an admin can enact the block, so it is only proper, imho, for an admin to reply there. When dialogue clutters up the page, it winds up being moved elsewhere. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

• That's a reasonable point, and does reflect the original intent of Ryan Postlethwaite and others who started UAA. I'll keep a little more restraint in my future visits there. YechielMan 03:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

As an admin with UAA on my watchlist, I appreciate all comments and opinion about a name! --Steve _(Stephen) ^talk 06:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

RfC

Just wanted to let you know that I opened an RfC on myself in response to the concerns raised during my RfA over my actions in the Gary Weiss dispute. The RfC is located here and I welcome any comments or questions you may have. CLA 09:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

adobeacrobatreader

Hey there YechielMan, just thought I'd come here to offer you this advice as I saw what you wrote about that "adobeacrobatreader" article on your RfA, and your views are reflected by process. The process for speedying such articles goes like this: 1) Identified as duplicate, redirect to existing article. 2) Identified as unlikely redirect, speedy under CSD R3. Just thought you might find this helpful! Have a nice day, - Zeibura S. Kathau ^{(Info | Talk)} 16:52, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

RapidWeaver

1. My changes to RapidWeaver contain useful content. 2. This article was in the process of being created in multiple saves, and was deleted way to soon after the initial creation. 3. IT IS NOT ADVERTISING FOR ANY COMPANY. ESPECIALLY NOT BLATANT ADVERTISING. I am not promoting any company, product, group, service, or person. I am unaffiliated. It is intended to be all inclusive resource. 4. IT IS NOT SPAM. Taylorluker 16:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

RapidWeaver discussion

No, there is no misunderstanding on my part. The work I was doing was originally intended to be on the RapidWeaver page. When that work was deleted in its entirety, I took the exact same work and posted it on my user page. I made some additions to that work, on my user page. Then someone deleted my entire user page. Right, I would of been happy to remove the price list, no one even mentioned that before either deletion. Actually, two people, on separate occasions decided to remove the whole project that I had been working on. I am not advertising in any way. I am simply listing the prices as a reference.

If one looks at the list, without the prices, there is no remote way it can be construed as being an advertisement. The current RapidWeaver lists the third party developers with less thoroughness, clarity and detail.

The bottom line is this: Where can I put the work that I have done? Preferably with the prices, worse case without the prices. Ideally, the invaluable links and information will be accessed by everyone. THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS THAT SOMEONE CAN NOT JUST COME, RANDOMLY ON A WHIM, WITH GIVING WARNING, WITH DEFINING, DISCUSSING OR DEFENDING THEIR ARGUMENT, WITHOUT ASKING ME TO CHANGE THE ARTICLE, AND DELETE THE ENTIRE ARTICLE (WITHIN SECONDS).

our comments

G'day Yechiel,

thanks for your message. Regarding your "harsh tone", don't sweat it. I've heard (and said!) worse. You're a long way from being uncivil, so no worries. The article Edward Behr (food writer) was clearly not a speedy candidate; whether it should be deleted by AfD or not is debatable (which is why it's being debated, ahem). If a user wants to point to an article you incorrectly tagged for speedy deletion and say, "That's why I don't trust him with the ability to delete stuff", that's his business, but it doesn't strike me as an entirely unreasonable thing to say.

As far as good faith goes, you may find it useful to re-read your nomination at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward Behr (food writer); I am not the only one to jump to the conclusion that you nominated the article for more reasons than a genuine belief it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Something like, "I nominated this for speedy deletion, but it was rejected. However, I do not believe the article is appropriate for Wikipedia, so I am bringing it to AfD." would have done wonders for your reputation, as opposed to, "I have an axe to grind. I tagged this page for speedy A7 deletion, it was declined, and someone used it as a reason to oppose my RFA."

I also commented on your RfA, and you responded. Walton has already pointed out an approach you may not have considered re: speedying duplicates. You've already answered your own question about blocking. Look, at the end of the day, you did something (in my own view, which may not accord with anyone else's) rather petty. I don't believe the article should be deleted, and I don't support your RfA. However, I have nothing against you, and may support a bid for adminship, given time and a demonstration that you can let things slide. No worries. Cheers, fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 10:50, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Your request for adminship.

The best advice I can give you is this: remain positive, and treat your RfA as a large-scale editor review (I did these with mine). You are a person able to learn from your mistakes, and that's an excellent sign. Everyone has made mistakes both here on Wikipedia and in real life, YechielMan (I certainly have). My other suggestion is that you avoid another self-nomination; it may not be wise to self-nominate again. However, these are only my suggestions so you are free to ignore them. :) Good luck. Acalamari 22:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment about not self-nominating again. I came to that conclusion independently, so it's good to see it confirmed. YechielMan 18:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

My advice

Next time, don't mention the I vandalized thing. You might want to edit a 1000 thousand more times, so your disruptive edits are well hidden. It's what I would do. RuneWiki777 22:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

You should make a fancy signature for yourself. Some people rate others according to their sigs. People like others that have fancy ones. Makes yours flashy, then apply again!

These two strike me as Incredibly Bad Advice. People actually wander around Wikipedia spouting stuff like that? Good grief. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 13:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Your recent vandalism: May 28

Since you have admitted to editing as 69.201.182.76 (talk · contribs) I have found some more "joke" edits and vandalism, for which you were warned on your IP page.[1] I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but this reinforces my feelings that you are not really a "reformed" vandal. Further, it seems you are not averse to using alternate identities to vandalise in secret. In particular, the Devil's Advocate vandalism is quite harmful, as it disrupted links to 10 pages. The placing of speedy deletes on pages for a joke, one of them a featured article, did not result in deletions,[2] [3], and arguably one of them, Vandalism (band) is nn, but your reason really wasn't funny, and one really worries what would have happened to some of those pages were you granted the admin tools. *shakes head in dismay* - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 23:01, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh my god!! You did this much vandalism?! RuneWiki777 18:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Guilty as charged. I encourage you to monitor the editing patterns of my IP address if you are concerned that any of this is likely to continue. I certainly don't intend to resume my wayward activity under any account or IP. YechielMan 18:21, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

User:YechielMan/Other stuff/RFA review

As you probably know, I supported you strongly in your RfA. And I stick by that now, despite your (honest, which I applaud) showing off all of your vandalism etc. Personally (and this opinion obviously isn't echoed by the majority) I think that your honesty, combined with the fact that you haven't done anything "bad" in a very long time, means that opposing you is madness. Sheer madness.

My only comments are concerning the being a dick section. I know you don't have to withdraw, but it does look good to see someone mature enough to "quit whilst they're ahead." Concerning the AfD, I still personally think that you just shouldn't mention RfA outside the RfA page (except on your user page with the RfA banner)...it just annoys people.

Anyway, I really don't know how to help you. But if you need to talk etc., I'm always happy to. Good luck next time. G1ggy! _{Review me!} 23:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Second most of that. Man, I'm really sorry about what happened. I'm not sure though whether there is much you can do right now besides not doing fun edits. Seems to be rough times at RfA. Just stick around and continue business as usual. Please keep in mind that this comes from someone so unpopular that even if I pushed some 10 or 20 articles to FA status (which I intend to do real soon now), any attempt at RfA would get snowballed before I could even type in w-i-t-h-d-r... However, this is just a quick first note. I'll read your subpage closely and may comment more in-depth there. —AldeBaer 01:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Parallels

I understand your frustration very well. If you glance over at my RfA, you'll see many of the oppose reasons on your RfA are similar to mine. It is, unfortunately, all too easy to dig up the past and new users simply don't know better. It is extremely difficult to get people to see us as we are now, and not as those who made some immature edits so long ago.

I changed my vote from Neutral to Support. This has got to be one of the most major mistakes I'll ever make. It was supposed to be that you wouldn't abuse them ! Wouldn't! And now, your RfA is closed and I can't fix it. At least it made a few laugh. Cheers! Dfrg.msc 06:00, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On June 5, 2007, a fact from the article Ribbon diagram, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:00, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

My RfA ...

Hi. My RfA was closed as "successful" not long ago and I have been sysopped. I want to once more say thanks for nominating me. As for your RfA, I'll just reiterate my hope that you'll not let this bring you down. If you remember, please let me know when you're ready to run again and I will support you in whatever way you think best. Best, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 05:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello

I've made a comment here like the old windbag I am. Please take the advice in the spirit with which it's intended. --Dweller 13:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)