Jump to content

User talk:Courcelles: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Brews ohare (talk | contribs)
Line 231: Line 231:


Thanks for any help you can offer. [[User:Brews ohare|Brews ohare]] ([[User talk:Brews ohare|talk]]) 15:39, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for any help you can offer. [[User:Brews ohare|Brews ohare]] ([[User talk:Brews ohare|talk]]) 15:39, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
:The only way to do this is to file a request at [[WP:ARCA]], though I'm not sure it would go anywhere given last week's AE thread. Were I you, I'd wait a few months and file a request. [[User:Courcelles|Courcelles]] ([[User talk:Courcelles#top|talk]]) 20:37, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:38, 7 April 2015

Accounts

I do have an alternate for mobile use, Wanna block it? Darkness Shines (talk) 17:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. It seems stupid to, but I probably should. Courcelles (talk) 19:54, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost – Volume 11, Issue 12 – 25 March 2015

Wikidata weekly summary #151

15:18, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Your request (identification)

Hi Courcelles, you asked several of the candidates to initiate the identification process. I'm a bit confused. It doesn't appear to me - although it's hard to tell given the back-and-forth among the arbitrators and others - that anyone has been officially appointed yet (subject, of course, to identification). Also, as an aside, it looks like HJ has already had his identity confirmed, although I can't tell when. Thanks for clarifying.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:04, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The motion to appoint folks is going to carry in two more arb votes. At that point, I will confirm the appointments to the Stewards over at Meta. You will then get the flags, after identifying. So, everyone should get the paperwork done now to save people work in a day or two. Courcelles (talk) 22:10, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
All done. Even received a very friendly acknowledgment. (I struck the when part in my first comment because it does show when, just like any diff).--Bbb23 (talk) 00:17, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On this note, I just wanted to say thanks for your involvement in leading this process and keeping all of us candidates informed. I think you did a great job, and I'll work hard to justify the trust that the committee has placed in me. Lankiveil (speak to me) 13:09, 31 March 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks. It was very important to me that the process stay on time and under budget... well, sort of, given the budget was zero ;) I've confidence in all the new appointees will be assets to the team. Courcelles (talk) 03:42, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost, 1 April 2015

The Signpost: 01 April 2015

The Signpost: 01 April 2015

Thanks

Why did you have to make an issue out of it when it was clear that I had already settled on this account and was using it exclusively, per WP:VALIDALT; "Clean start under a new name"? There was no disruption being caused. It did not violate WP:SOCK as there was no intent to mislead, deceive, vandalize or disrupt. You could have just left it alone and it wouldn't have been a problem. Instead, you made an issue out of something so minor and non-disruptive and sullied this accounts reputation forever. I took a very long time to settle on this username and you ruined it. My Little Question Can't be This Interesting (talk) 23:20, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have email!!

Hello, Courcelles. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Wikidata weekly summary #152

15:41, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Information on how to proceed to have removal of a ban considered

Courcelles:

I am presently bound by an old ban that arose over controversy concerning the article Speed of light. This ban has led in recent years to actions brought by my addition of "See also" links, corrections of typos and other infractions of the ban that are not germane to disruption of WP. I think it may be time to broach the rescinding of this ban, and hope you can spell out how that can be done. I also would appreciate any advice you might have about the process.

Thanks for any help you can offer. Brews ohare (talk) 15:39, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The only way to do this is to file a request at WP:ARCA, though I'm not sure it would go anywhere given last week's AE thread. Were I you, I'd wait a few months and file a request. Courcelles (talk) 20:37, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]