User talk:Bucketsofg/Archive 7

Thank you for your support

Thank you for your support in the RfA on my behalf. It is an honor to have received your expression of confidence. To be chosen as an administrator requires a high level of confidence by a broad section of the community. Although I received a great deal of support, at this time I do not hold the level of confidence required, and the RfA did not pass. It is my wish that I will continue to deserve your confidence. Sincerely, --BostonMA ^talk 20:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Your Arbitration Enforcement

Further to you banning of me described here, can I assume that you will not be (a) extending the courtesy of replying to my questions here, nor (b) substantiating your reasons for banning me, beyond the claims you have already made? --Iantresman 14:08, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hello, I'm Aeon an AMA advocate that is representing Alan.ca. He claims that you refused to add a sourced fact to the Judy Marsales article. If you could give me your verison of events I'm sure we can settle this to everyones satisfaction. Æon ^{Insanity Now!}_EA! 21:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for taking time out of your editing to answer back. I will forward your reasponse and encourge Alan to do as you suggested. Thanks again Æon ^{Insanity Now!}_EA! 00:57, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Deiphon

FWIW I am not related to the other "Bourrie" suspects. Just wanted to make a helpful comment with some anonymity. Cause of all the problems this issue has caused people. I am very sorry for that. --Deiphon 23:55, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Bucketsofbile

There is a user who posted with this name on the Mark Bourrie page. You probably know better than me but I think that you can request that user names like that be changed. The Bourrie/Kinsella pages have been largely unwatched lately and there are some recent problems. Check your email. --JGGardiner 06:12, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

3RR blocks

Your comment to User:Michaelsanders that most 3RR blocks come without warning disturbed me. A person should really be given a first warning before being blocked. I won't undo the block because I don't believe in wheel warring, but the block really was unfair. User:Zoe|(talk) 23:13, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the consideration. It's really a kindness to new users to give them a warning before blocking them, though in egregious cases, I've been known to block on sight, too.  :) User:Zoe|(talk) 23:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for unblocking me. Michaelsanders 01:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

A heads up for you: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR#User:Michaelsanders_reported_by_User:Milo_H_Minderbinder_.28Result:.29. Cheers. --Milo H Minderbinder 16:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Can I ask you a question: since the first two reverts he has cited are to a different version, does it still count? Michaelsanders 16:35, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Ukrainian history

Please, review following : Talk:Non-German_cooperation_with_Nazis_during_World_War_II#Yarillstremenog_issue.

Thanks in advance for your opinion, it will be valuable for us. --Galkovsky 09:00, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

For future reference...

When you block someone for vandalism, it's a good idea to check their most recent contributions (case in point: Urethra242, now permablocked for username reasons). DS 16:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed vandal from list?

You removed a vandal from Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. IP 67.68.1.34 placed by me. You stated in the history "removed one (no vandalism after final warning) not empty)" ?? Look at his history which is why I reported him there rather than give another last warning which looks rather redundant. His last warning was at 22:49 for a repeat edit to Spermatozoon and then at 23:48 see [[1]] for being a vandal at Leonardo da Vinci. Which is where my report came from. So should I relist him since, yes he did vandalise after final warning? Please let me know. Thanks.--Xiahou 00:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I misread 23:48 as 22:48, with the warning at 22:49. I've blocked him. Thanks for pointing that out. Bucketsofg 00:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

no problem. Just been frustrated. One of the bots keeps claiming it makes rv's for me and warns them when the history shows its me. Sorry if I sounded snappy. Ironic thing is when I read the times myself the first time I did the same. :-) Thanks again. Take care. --Xiahou 00:45, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

AfD closure

Hey there... you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2007 Ohio Weather Events and deleted 2007 Ohio Weather Events. I just wanted to bring to your attention that 2006 Ohio Weather Events pointed to the same deletion discussion (although this wasn't made completely explicit in the AfD test). Personally I think it would be justified to delete that article, too, based on this AfD - but I won't do so myself, since I participated in the deletion discussion... _└ ^UkPaolo/_talk^┐ 22:24, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Newyorkbrad's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning, as well as for your kind comments accompanying your !vote. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 20:15, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Buckets... Alan2012 here (quackwatch talk page)

Thanks for your note about civility. You're right, I'm uncivilized. Please read and consider my remarks in their entirety and in context, however. -- Alan2012 04:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

New sock(s) of HalfOfElement29?

Hi Buckets, since you blocked HalfOfElement29 I'd like to make sure you're aware of my post at WP:ANI (Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#New_socks?) regarding Snowpapa (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) and Rwqf (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). (See also the RfC at Talk:Atlantis.) Thanks. --Akhilleus (talk) 05:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, it's at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/GoodCop. Have a good Wikibreak! (Or, you know, period of decreased wiki-activity and increased work-activity.) --Akhilleus (talk) 06:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thoughtless blunder

I've removed your user name from the BLP principle I proposed in my Arbitration case. I should have done this when I first posted the quote; it was a thoughtless blunder on my part. I apologize.

--Rgfolsom 18:30, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Bucketofg, I want to correct my blunder, but the remedy regarding you and Bearcat doesn't distinguish between edit/administrator. If anything, what I read in the statements, findings of fact and proposed decision speak more to your role as an administrator.

--Rgfolsom 16:59, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

A page you created is under Deletion Review

FYI: Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_January_27#Marsden-Donnelly_harassment_case Kla'quot 23:40, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks, but I've washed my hands of all that and don't want to get re-involved. Bucketsofg 23:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I completely understand. I'm heading in that direction myself :) Kla'quot 01:49, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay

If your conflation of articles with project space documents has interfered with creation of a more accurate encyclopedia, then please forget it. James S. 19:17, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Nicholas Strunk

Hi - You recently closed an AfD for Nicholas Strunk, and I see you've taken steps to salt the page, which I think is a good idea. However the template placed on the page claims it to be under deletion review, and the link points to Wikipedia:Deletion review#Marsden-Donnelly_harassment_case. Am I missing something? Thanks for your attention to the matter. -- Antepenultimate 01:54, 1 February 2007 (UTC)