User talk:Bigjake
Aaaaaa aaaaaaa + AAA[edit]
AAAAaaaaAaaA aAa Aa AAa aa A aAAAAA aAA AaAa Aa AA AAAA! AAa aAAa aA a aAa a aA a aA aA aA aAAAAAaa AaAa aAAa AAaAAAAAAA a aA A AAAAAA. AAAAaaaaAaaA aAa Aa AAa aa A aAAAAA aAA AaAa Aa AA AAAA! Aaaa? FCYTravis (talk) 07:00, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Talk page[edit]
You feel it's all right for an active user (Grace Note) to not have a talk page? Doesn't that violate our conventions? Everyking (talk) 06:10, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- They're contactable. You're just stirring up shit. Much like I'd be doing if I asked how your RFA went. Right? bigjake (talk) 06:18, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- He can't be contacted, except perhaps through e-mail, and it is unheard of to demand that people contact another Wikipedian exclusively through e-mail for ordinary discussion. I don't think there's any other active Wikipedian on the project with a redirected talk page. I don't feel I'm "stirring up shit": after he attempted a late vote on my RfA, I went to his talk page to see what he had been up to in recent times, and I saw that the page was redirected. I was appalled, because that meant no one could leave him a message, even though he was still actively editing. So I restored it as a blank page—no shit-stirring, I just think all Wikipedians should have talk pages. I would have done that with any active editor. Everyking (talk) 06:38, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- Unheard of? Appalled by not having a talk page? Do you even read what you write? Just because YOU think that all Wikipedians should have a talk pages means nothing to Grace, obviously. You know you're just stirring up shit, I know you're just stirring up shit, and Grace knows you're stirring up shit. Stop being bitter. If you questioned why anyone would vote against you in an RFA, this is a perfect example. Honestly, bugging Grace about a talk page is improving the Encyclopedia how? bigjake (talk) 07:00, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- I'm intrigued. The first page of your contributions list goes back to last year, while the first page of my contributions list goes back to yesterday, so lecturing me about improving the encyclopedia seems a bit incongruous (not to mention few of your contributions are article edits). But aside from that, I noticed that you made no edits from August 10 to September 1, when you voted against me in my RfA. Aside from one minor edit, you didn't make any subsequent edits until you reverted me on Grace Note's talk page earlier today. How did you notice my comment on his talk page? Everyking (talk) 07:16, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- There is no lecture, only a question. Oddly, a question that you haven't answered yourself. I edit when I see it necessary, and add my opinion where I deem it to be helpful. There is no quota on this wiki. As for the rest of your post, I get the feeling that you're insinuating something. I would really hate to think that you're not Assuming Good Faith. Now be straight forward with your language, and if you want to question (or accuse) me, then do so. As for me noticing a comment on someone's page, I simply looked. bigjake (talk) 07:47, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- I will answer your question on the condition that you give me a (better) answer to my own question. Un-redirecting his talk page doesn't directly build the encyclopedia, but it makes it possible for other editors to communicate properly with Grace Note, ultimately benefiting the project. As for your answer: what caused you to look? Everyking (talk) 07:59, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- Conditions? If you're going to answer it honestly, then do so. If not, then go edit something, tag stuff, try to get a barn star, etc. What is the difference if Grace has a talk page that they don't use, or if they don't have one at all? Plus, until someone has an issue with an edit, and can't contact Grace, then maybe the issue of an absence of a talk page should be discussed. Until then, I'm still unsure why you're so bothered with it, other than to harass someone for giving you an oppose on your failed RFA. Really, do you not have anything more important to do? bigjake (talk) 15:18, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- I will answer your question on the condition that you give me a (better) answer to my own question. Un-redirecting his talk page doesn't directly build the encyclopedia, but it makes it possible for other editors to communicate properly with Grace Note, ultimately benefiting the project. As for your answer: what caused you to look? Everyking (talk) 07:59, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- There is no lecture, only a question. Oddly, a question that you haven't answered yourself. I edit when I see it necessary, and add my opinion where I deem it to be helpful. There is no quota on this wiki. As for the rest of your post, I get the feeling that you're insinuating something. I would really hate to think that you're not Assuming Good Faith. Now be straight forward with your language, and if you want to question (or accuse) me, then do so. As for me noticing a comment on someone's page, I simply looked. bigjake (talk) 07:47, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- I'm intrigued. The first page of your contributions list goes back to last year, while the first page of my contributions list goes back to yesterday, so lecturing me about improving the encyclopedia seems a bit incongruous (not to mention few of your contributions are article edits). But aside from that, I noticed that you made no edits from August 10 to September 1, when you voted against me in my RfA. Aside from one minor edit, you didn't make any subsequent edits until you reverted me on Grace Note's talk page earlier today. How did you notice my comment on his talk page? Everyking (talk) 07:16, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- Unheard of? Appalled by not having a talk page? Do you even read what you write? Just because YOU think that all Wikipedians should have a talk pages means nothing to Grace, obviously. You know you're just stirring up shit, I know you're just stirring up shit, and Grace knows you're stirring up shit. Stop being bitter. If you questioned why anyone would vote against you in an RFA, this is a perfect example. Honestly, bugging Grace about a talk page is improving the Encyclopedia how? bigjake (talk) 07:00, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- He can't be contacted, except perhaps through e-mail, and it is unheard of to demand that people contact another Wikipedian exclusively through e-mail for ordinary discussion. I don't think there's any other active Wikipedian on the project with a redirected talk page. I don't feel I'm "stirring up shit": after he attempted a late vote on my RfA, I went to his talk page to see what he had been up to in recent times, and I saw that the page was redirected. I was appalled, because that meant no one could leave him a message, even though he was still actively editing. So I restored it as a blank page—no shit-stirring, I just think all Wikipedians should have talk pages. I would have done that with any active editor. Everyking (talk) 06:38, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
I found something else intriguing: Grace Note is also prone to accusing people of wasting their time and "stirring up shit" when they leave comments on his talk page. You two seem to have quite similar views about these things, and quite similar ways of expressing those views. Everyking (talk) 03:26, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
- Similar, as in using the English language and recognizing when someone is just out looking to ruffle feathers? Yes, I guess we could be considered similar in those respects. So, are you seriously going to continue insinuating things, being annoying, and wasting your time? If so, just let me know so I can start ignoring you. bigjake (talk) 03:50, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
- I am touched by your solidarity with Grace Note, devotedly protecting his talk page from being fouled by the comments of other Wikipedians. It would seem that you two are true friends—indeed, I might go so far as to suggest that you are kindred spirits. What you share is a rare bond that ought to be cherished. Everyking (talk) 04:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
- You obviously see a deeper bond than I, which is alright I guess. Maybe you can write some bigjake/Grace Note fanfic and satisfy those urges. I know nothing about Grace Note but you have shown quite a lot to me. Every day I'm quite satisfied with my vote on your RFA and the more you continue, the more confident I am in my vote. bigjake (talk) 04:24, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
- I am touched by your solidarity with Grace Note, devotedly protecting his talk page from being fouled by the comments of other Wikipedians. It would seem that you two are true friends—indeed, I might go so far as to suggest that you are kindred spirits. What you share is a rare bond that ought to be cherished. Everyking (talk) 04:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
My RfA[edit]
|
Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to maintain the trust you have placed in me. I am honored by your trust and your support. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 02:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC) |
Foxy Loxy's RfA[edit]
Hello, this message is to inform you that User:Foxy Loxy has restarted their RfA. The new discussion is located at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Foxy Loxy 2. GlassCobra 09:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
RFA Thanks[edit]
Bigjake, I'd like to thank you for voting in my RFA. Thanks also for expressing your trust in me, and I hope that I live up to your expectations. Don't forget, if you have any questions (or bits of advice), please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks again, SpencerT♦C 02:54, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
RfA thankspam[edit]
|
|
Special thanks go out to Wizardman and Malinaccier for nominating me, and I will try to take everyone's comments on board. Thanks again for the trust the community has placed in me. A special Christmas song for you all can be found at the right hand side of this message! |
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)