User talk:Atcovi

wikiversity:User talk:Goldenburg111

[1]. That was an error, Goldenburg. The user incorporated Vogone's comment, but then explained why he was supporting. It's a good example of why we don't allow substantial modification of a user's comments. Easily, you can misunderstand them, as you did. That was, in fact, a support comment. --Abd (talk) 21:21, 7 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

thanks for clarifying. --Golden _{burg 111} 21:22, 7 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

Do you mind providing evidence for the above claim? Rschen has never been one to "troll" other editors as far as I know, so I'd really like to see what exactly it is you're talking about. T C N7JM 17:08, 9 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

I have the right to say it without evidence, yet, trolling is not the word. It's participating, and thanks for giving me the opportunity to do a strong oppose. --Golden _{burg 111} 17:11, 9 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

You're right, you have the right to oppose for any reason you want, but it does anger a lot of editors if you accuse another editor of stuff like trolling without providing evidence for it, and yet other would say it crosses the "no personal attacks" line. You don't have to do anything to your !vote, I am just specifying this for you so you know in the future. T C N7JM 17:16, 9 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

• Hi; just FYI, regarding [2]. !vote means not a vote. And basically, steward elections are votes so there is no need for the !. ;-) TCN7JM, you too. --Glaisher [talk] 17:25, 9 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

  Meh. :p T C N7JM 17:28, 9 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

Hi Golden. It's fine to oppose, but maybe you agree that "Strongest Possible Oppose" should be saved for extreme situations, and as far as I know Rschen has never been so abusive to you (or to anyone else) that he would merit such a strident vote. I suggest you take time to reflect, and perhaps change it to simply "Oppose" (if at all), which would be more reasonable – and I say this as someone who doesn't believe Rschen should be an admin, let alone a steward. But again, it's your choice. Take care, DanielTom (talk) 17:39, 9 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

I'm just wondering, when you said to remove MF-Warburg "per INeverCry", do you know what INeverCry's oppose was for? PiRSquared17 (talk) 11:59, 11 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

Goldenburg, you need to be more judicious with a) the contents/reasons of/for your votes and b) your interactions with other voters on those pages. You cannot possibly base your vote on something you don't even have access to, nor do the large majority of editors on this site. You also should not be dragging petty vendettas into your votes either. DanielTom should set a good example: you should probably vote neutral for elections and confirmations you simply need to ask yourself "how has this user benefitted the project"? That doesn't mean just helping you, it means what they do for all of the volunteers within the WMF projects. Although no one can truly force you to change your votes, less people are going to take them seriously with your current etiquette. Just saying... Sportsguy17 (talk) 04:04, 12 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

Here you have the complete list of bot commands, but first you have to request voice to a channel operator in order to be able to use most of the functions. LlamaAl (talk) 06:30, 17 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

thanks. --Golden _{burg 111} 20:27, 17 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

Umm, no. That someone is lost and puts a request, these should not be reverted or simply undone. If you don't wish to move it and fix it onto the appropriate page, then leave it. The whole purpose is to try and be helpful and solve someone's issues, not send them through the hoops.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:36, 17 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

(Golden, I know you want to help, but as a rule it's best to only revert/undo edits that are clear vandalism.) ~ DanielTom (talk) 22:22, 17 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

thanks DanielTom --Golden _{burg 111} 22:32, 17 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

And don't forget to thank Billinghurst, Goldenburg. --Abd (talk) 23:32, 17 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

I don't think a comment like "The wole purpose is to try to be helpful and solve someone's issues, not send them through the hoops" should be appreciated actually. --Golden _{burg 111} 23:37, 17 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

Goldenburg, you need to stop for a few minutes, read what others have to say, take that consideration and think before you type. You have immaturely ignored tons of great advice, including that from myself left above. These are all symptoms of a battleground mentality. You oppose a trusted steward because she was unwilling to help you fix your own wrongdoings, when in reality they were all working there tails to make sure your vote-stacking stunt didn't cost you your editing privileges on the English Wikiversity (sorry to blow it, but saying they are your family members is a sign of sockpuppetry. Goldenburg, I believe you have potential to be an excellent contributor cross-wiki. First of all, try to let the past be the past. Second of all, listen to the advice of others. People can have good advice sometimes. I hope you see the same potential I see. Sportsguy17 (talk) 00:37, 18 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

I did, I thought in my head to, from now on, to revert only pure vandalism and rely on my best judgement. I am working on becoming a contributor, by slowly, not quickly, looking into others points of view and meaning. All I am saying is I don't appreciate the "not send them through the hoops" sentence. --Golden _{burg 111} 01:57, 18 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

Your comment above shows you don't completely understand what I'm saying. Even if you don't like what he said, don't be openly stubborn about it. If you dislike something they said, then just say "thanks". This doesn't just apply to Wikipedia, this applies to real-life interactions. Again, even if you think a certain way, don't display the "battleground mentality", which can seriously give off a bad impression. With regards to reverting, don't make anti-vandalism your only goal for Wikimedia projects: its so much fun to build content. You can learn so many new things, some of which you may even get to display on Wikipedia's Main Page. Read about the English Wikipedia's Did You Know? section of the main page and you can understand one of many fun ways to contribute in ways other than anti-vandalism (that is not saying that your anti-vandalism work is not appreciated cross-wiki ). Anyway, best of luck. Sportsguy17 (talk) 02:06, 20 February 2014 (UTC) Reply