Vector
My local time: Monday, 16 December 2024 9:18 pm
User page • Talk page (Current • Archive 1 • Archive 2 • Archive 3 • Archive 4 • Archive 5 • Archive 6 • Archive 7)
Hello, Vector, and welcome to the Simple English Wikipedia! I hope you are happy editing here and being a Wikipedian. Some helpful pages to start you off are Wikipedia:Useful, Help:Contents and Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines.
If you want to meet and talk with other members, you can visit our version of the "village pump" at Wikipedia:Simple talk. Just remember that you should sign your messages on Talk pages by typing "~~~~" (four tildes) at the end of your words.
We have a special page that describes how to write Simple English articles. If you want some ideas of which pages to work on, read Wikipedia:Requested articles or the list of wanted pages.
We are also focusing on core articles until this Wikipedia grows. This list of topics will help show the types of topics we want most.
Even though it is a good idea to research an article (like looking at the discussion page) before making large changes, do not be afraid to be bold! Any changes you make that are not perfect can be fixed later.
If you need any help, send a message to an administrator on his or her talk page. Administrators on Wikipedia will try to help you with your problems and resolve them as soon as possible.
Finally, if you have any questions on how things work, don't hesitate to ask me. The best way to do that is to leave a message on my talk page. Good luck and happy editing! Billz (Talk) 14:38, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
About rollback
changeHey vector, I see that you have added yourself to the rollbacker group. Well, you don't need it because you get it from being an administrator already. Just letting you know. Techman224Talk 00:05, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Steve Crossin
changeHello Vector. Re this, he used to be User:Samekh but is now User:Steve Crossin. He was already renamed. I have added 
Done to the request as it is complete. Regards Kennedy (talk) 09:54, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you
changeThank you for your support in my RfA which passed 24/0/0. I will do my best to better Wikipedia with the administrative tools that the community has seen fit to grant me. Special thanks to Shapiros10 for nominating me and if you ever need anything, feel free to ask! Malinaccier (talk) (review) 18:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Note
changeHi there Vector. Creol has retired from this site. I would really appreciate it if you could please become more active on this project now because we need more bureaucrats at this time. Do you think you could become more active on here? Cheers, Razorflame 18:15, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
WP:RFR
changeVector, could you please review my request please?-- † CM16 t c r 22:36, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Synergy said no, cause it was just removed yesterday, but I need it back to be able to efficiently revert vandalism, so could you re-review it, please? I'm sorry to be a pain about ti but I would really like it's help.-- † CM16 t c r 22:46, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Nevermind. :D Thanks.-- † CM16 t c r 22:47, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Synergy undid it, just letting you know.-- † CM16 t c r 22:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Is there anything I can do to get it back today, I feel out of the "reverting vandalism game" cause using the undo button takes so long.-- † CM16 t c r 22:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Synergy undid it, just letting you know.-- † CM16 t c r 22:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Nevermind. :D Thanks.-- † CM16 t c r 22:47, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
My RfB
changeDear Vector, thank you for participating in my RfB, which ended with a tally of 21/5. I appreciate your support and will do my best in this new role. Thanks. Chenzw Talk 07:47, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- nothing --vector ^_^ (talk) 07:54, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Your request for Checkuser
changeHello Vector, you request for Checkusership did not reach the 25 votes required to be valid (22 people voted). Besides this twice as many people opposed as supported you. Thanks for trying. It would perhaps be good to address the issues identified in the request (you are a bureaucrat after all, and the community is expected to trust you). Sorry it went that way, and good luck. --Eptalon (talk) 22:12, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Changing username
changeHi! Would you like to take a look at my username change request at Wikipedia:Changing username? Thanks, Leo Johannes (talk) 09:32, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
My RfA
change | fr33kman talk 02:20, 1 March 2009 (UTC) |
RfB
changeYou were about 8 hours early, and it was relatively close. Do you think it was the best idea to close it at this time, especially as you voted? Kennedy (talk) 08:26, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- Vector, you were already asked about early closures on MetaWiki. I don't want to have to ask you to stop making such closures, or standing down, but if you can't follow simple rules properly, then I don't think I'll have any choice. Majorly talk 13:19, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- Are you honestly upset about it Majorly? I mean your own CU was closed many days early and you defended the right to close that one early pretty vigourously. (note I am not saying if either should or should not have been closed early) I just find it odd that after arguing the right to close a !vote early you are now threatening someone else for doing it. -Djsasso (talk) 13:37, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- I don't recall arguing "vigourously" - or at all in fact. I just accepted it. The problem here is that TRM's RFB was on the very edge - 76%. Another oppose would have killed it. Vector closed it early. Well he didn't even close it, he just promoted, without any reasoning. I'd expect a bcrat to know better than that. RFCUs are often different because they require a certain number of votes in order to be valid, so it was that mine was closed when it was blatantly clear it was successful. TRM's was nowhere near as clear cut. Majorly talk 15:21, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- PS I wouldn't have been so bothered had it been clear cut to promote. I've promoted people early before. Nothing wrong with it generally, but I really hate it when inactive people (Vector) come in every now and again, and get it wrong by promoting a user they voted on, early, when the vote was very close and should have had a more impartial look at it. Majorly talk 15:25, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with your reasoning, I just didn't think there was a reason to get hostile. Rfx isn't all about numbers if I recall, its also about arguements as we have had people promoted below the so called thresholds of 65% and 75% I believe though I may be mistaken. I personally couldn't have seen this one go any other way especially since there was so few hours left. -Djsasso (talk) 15:34, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- I think that perhaps it could have gone another way though. If someone removed their support, or opposed, (or both) then it would have been a totally different result. For a Crat to promote (and neither close the request, nor inform the candidate), eight hours early when its so tight, shows bad judgement in my eyes... Kennedy (talk) 15:45, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- Like I said I don't necessarily agree that it was the right decission. It was the comment I had issue with, if his sounded more like yours I probably wouldn't have said anything. -Djsasso (talk) 16:01, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- I'd have appreciated a response Vector, its been two weeks, and you have edited since. I think closing this RfB at this time was not the correct decision, and would appreciate your response to the above. Thanks Kennedy (talk) 08:03, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
- Like I said I don't necessarily agree that it was the right decission. It was the comment I had issue with, if his sounded more like yours I probably wouldn't have said anything. -Djsasso (talk) 16:01, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- I think that perhaps it could have gone another way though. If someone removed their support, or opposed, (or both) then it would have been a totally different result. For a Crat to promote (and neither close the request, nor inform the candidate), eight hours early when its so tight, shows bad judgement in my eyes... Kennedy (talk) 15:45, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with your reasoning, I just didn't think there was a reason to get hostile. Rfx isn't all about numbers if I recall, its also about arguements as we have had people promoted below the so called thresholds of 65% and 75% I believe though I may be mistaken. I personally couldn't have seen this one go any other way especially since there was so few hours left. -Djsasso (talk) 15:34, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- Are you honestly upset about it Majorly? I mean your own CU was closed many days early and you defended the right to close that one early pretty vigourously. (note I am not saying if either should or should not have been closed early) I just find it odd that after arguing the right to close a !vote early you are now threatening someone else for doing it. -Djsasso (talk) 13:37, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Crat cat
changeHi Vector. Category:Wikipedia bureaucrats now exists - perhaps you'd like to add yourself? Cheers, The Rambling Man (talk) 18:35, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
My RFB
changeHey, thanks for your support in my RFB which was closed (early) yesterday successfully, 16/5. I hope I can live up to your expectations and provide Simple English Wikipedia with a reliable and effective service. All the best. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:32, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Comments regarding your status as a Bureaucrat and Admin here
changeHello Vector, your last closure of an RfB caused some concern, in particular:
- You closed a request where you had voted yourself. At the moment there are enough bureaucrats so that we can implement what has been done for a long time: A bureaucrat can comment in a RfA/RfB, but if he votes he leaves closing to someone else. This is mostly done to guarantee some kind of neutrality when looking at these requests.
- Closing a request also means that the respective page should be updated with the result, and perhaps a rationale; why the result is as it is. In addition, the resp. page should be archived, the archive updated (with the tally), and the respective candidate should be informed of the result. All you did in the last request, is use your tools to grant the status; please also do the paperwork.
- It is fine to close a request early, if the result is clear, and if it is unlikely to change. In your last closure the result was not clear (to the point that the change in one vote would change the support percentage to be below the required minimum). Bureaucrats are not slaves to the numbers, they look for consensus; yet waiting those extra eight hours would have given us more legitimacy, in that we could clearly have said that the support percentage was above the one needed at the close of the vote.
- You are not very active on this Wikipedia, if I look at your contributions, they were less than 50 in February of this year, and only 3 in March. Most of them are related to your role as Bureaucrat here. The problem I personally see with this is that there are many people here on SEWP that contribute more edits than you, and that they are neither Admins nor Bureaucrats. Our Criteria speak about familiarity with editing - Admins and Bureaucrats are there for their community; most of the ones I know do not limit their editing to the roles given to them as Administrators or Bureaucrats.
Given the points above, I see several ways forward:
- You get more active as an editor here. Remember that Admins and Bureaucrats are a team, they should cooperate to make this site better. Given your current level of editing, it is extremely hard to justify your role as a Bureaucrat and Admin here - It may have been needed at the start, but times change, and people/functions/roles should adapt.
- You request that your role as Bureaucrat, and possibly Admin be laid down, and continue editing here as a normal user, with rollback.
I think it would be appropriate to get a reply from you - Simply being silent does not solve problems, it only makes them bigger. Please be advised however, that if I do not see a reply from you until the end of this month (April), I will request for a vote on Simple talk for your privileges to be revoked. I am very sorry it has come so far, but I hope you understand the position we are in. --Eptalon (talk) 19:59, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for your reply; I am looking forward to you becoming more active again. Sorry for all the inconvenience I caused. :)--Eptalon (talk) 15:25, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- I'd like to see you become more active. Stopping by just to close an RfA is not really acceptable. As Eptalon says, a crat must be active in the community. I must request that you do become more active here, or I would be looking to initiate the aforesaid vote on your tools. Kennedy (talk) 15:30, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Spam
change| |  Supports and 1  Oppose. I will do my best for the project!Barras (talk) 15:17, 9 May 2009 (UTC) |
I added my req. here: Wikipedia:Changing username/Archive 3 as the page said. Could you rename my account now please? Thanks in advance. J. B. A. (talk) 14:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
- Vector is not active at the Simple English Wikipedia. Our active bureaucrats are Chenzw, Eptalon, Kennedy and The Rambling Man. :-) Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 20:23, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
My RfB
change| | I promise to do my best and justify the trust the community has placed in me! fr33kman talk 20:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC) |
Thankspam
change| | I promise to do my best and justify the trust the community has placed in me! Pmlineditor Talk 10:35, 12 September 2009 (UTC) |
Rename me
changeHello. I want to have my username changed from Snake311 to Slipknot1. Thanks, —§ stay (sic)! 01:03, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
- Go that way Griffinofwales (talk) 01:04, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Done --vector ^_^ (talk) 21:05, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, —§ stay (sic)! 22:26, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi!
change
|
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| Thank you for being so quick and efficient in fighting vandalism! Will you please do me the honor of accepting this barnstar? I am certain you deserve it for your great job at being an administrator! Keep up the good work, and God bless! Classical Esther 07:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC) |
Simple News: Issue Nineteen
change
|
| ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||
Simple News Issue 20
change |
| ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||
Simple News Issue 21
change |
| ||||||||
|
| |||||||
The purpose of protections
changeHi Vector! You protected a page because of edit war for one complete months. I think the protection in this case was valid, but I doubt that the time used is useful. Could you please explain why you set the length of the protection to one month and not to something like a few days? Furthermore, would you mind to shorten the length to something more valid? Thanks in advance! Barras talk 19:38, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Simple News: Issue 21
change |
| ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||
Simple News Issue 24
change |
| ||||||
|
| |||||
Simple News: Issue 25
change |
| ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Thanks
changeThanks for giving me rollbacker rights. Best wishes!--Piast93 19:52, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
RFA thanks
changeThank you for supporting my RFA, which ended in a pass, 19/0. Best, Albacore (talk · changes) 01:52, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Changing my username
changeHello Dario, Could you change my page name from "Elastico Tequila" to "TSE_LLC" please? The current name could conflict with articles. Thanks, I really appreciate your time and work keeping this site clean.
Rights removal
changeIn accordance with Wikipedia:Inactive administrators your rights have been removed. If you do become active again in the future you may go through a new RfA to receive them back. Thanks for your service. -DJSasso (talk) 15:43, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Being myself native in a latin language, I feel quite orphan both your bureaucrat and sysop rights being removed without prior notice... Good luck in your new activities anyway. Michel Alençon aka ONaNcle (talk) 13:27, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
My RfA
change
|
The Orashmatash barnstar | |
| Vector, thanks for supporting me to become an administrator. I will do my best in this new role! Orashmatash (talk) 17:34, 8 January 2012 (UTC) |