User talk:Chenzw/Archives/Nov 2010

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

This is a Wikipedia user talk page. If you find this page on a site that is not Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. The page may be old and the owner of this page may not have a relationship with sites that are not Wikipedia. The original page is located at http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chenzw/Archives/Nov_2010.

Wikimedia Foundation

This is the User talk page for Chenzw, where you can send messages and comments to Chenzw.

Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.

Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming

Help out

I see that you are a Singaporean on your user page. Don't mind helping out in WikiProject Singapore? Help for this WikiProject is greatly appreciated. Thanks! Hydriz (talk) 15:00, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Bot false positive

Hi, I just thought I'd let you know that your bot made a false positive revert here, and I wasn't sure what triggered it: [1] Kansan (talk) 02:50, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit summary pattern matched: /\bbreas7\b/i is the note it left in #Wikipedia-simple-admins if that is of any help.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 02:52, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Your bot is really starting to annoy me. This is not vandalism [2]. I was fixing grammar and spelling.--RaptorHunter (talk) 03:07, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, the change was good: I wonder why the bot reverted it. Perhaps it's because the change summary was in capitals, RaptorHunter. —Clementina talk 03:09, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

The pattern that actually matched was /!!+1+(one)*/i. It matched as your edit summary contained "!!1". I am sorry, but this is not going to be removed from the bot's configuration. The bot will, however, no longer revert you once you are autoconfirmed. Chenzw  Talk  12:37, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Simple News: Issue 25

The Simple News

← Previous issue

Issue Twenty Five

15th November 2010

Announcements Mosque, Japanese American internment, Copper(II) sulfate, Bald Eagle, Zinc and History of the United States are currently at Proposed Good Articles - your comments are welcomed. Dan Kelly, The Lightning Thief, Gettysburg Address and Fra Angelico have been promoted to Good Article status. 1910 Cuba hurricane has been promoted to Very Good Article status. The Simple English Wikipedia now has 50 good articles. User Articles Ancient Apparition - Simple News returns, Did you know wants YOU! This month sees the return of Simple News after several months of inactivity. The Did you know project is looking for more hooks and active participants. Wikipedia turns 10! Wikipedia turns 10, find out where the birthday events are taking place and join us in celebrating the birth of the world's best free collection of knowledge.		Administrator News Congratulations to... Barras whose request for checkusership was successful. Peterdownunder whose request for checkusership was successful. Commiserations to... Hydriz whose request for adminship did not pass. Djsasso whose request for checkusership did not pass. තඹරු විජේසේකර whose request for adminship did not pass. Hazard-SJ whose request for adminship did not pass. Hoots whose request for importer did not pass. Bluegoblin7 whose request for bureaucratship did not pass.

Feedback

About

Subscribe

Archives

Newsroom

Grunny (talk) 11:28, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Question

Sorry, but can't this be extended like others were in the past? Two additional supports aren't much, and it seems the policy isn't absolutely clarified in regards to meta, either (spoke to someone who thinks that 25 votes in total is enough, and apparently it may be the practice on sr) - but in any case, couldn't a few days' extension be warranted, if it's possible that the vote could change? -- Mentifisto 04:07, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I am very sorry, but I will not overturn my own decision (of closing the RfCU today). If you want, however, you can speak to another bureaucrat about this. (by the way, the meta policy does state that requests for CU-ship must have "at least 25-30 editors' approval") --Chenzw  Talk  04:53, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

It is discretion that a crat can use to extend (or not) an RFP when dealing with its closure. If you decided that the project had decided not to elect the candidate within the stated policy then that's good enough for me. fr33kman 04:59, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Extension of Mentifistos RFA

Hello Chenzw, Mentifisto sought an extension of his request, since he is olnly two votes short. Since other extensions have been granted in such cases (with candidates farther away from passing), I have extended the request. I am sorry to have overturned your decision, but it looked like the right thing to do. --Eptalon (talk) 12:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC)