Hey there, Junglecat. Welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you enjoy being a Wikipedian and decide to stay! Here are a few good links for newcomers (or "oldcomers" for reference):
By the way, you should sign and date your comments on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. Three tildes (~~~) produces just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!
Great, just what we need around this place... more cats. :) Cheers. --Lord Voldemort (Dark Mark) 18:02, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
Hello. Jim Bart 18:06, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I really wasn't kidding about the discussion not being a vote, and I think it's a rather important point. Do you really think the numerical outcome of that particular poll will have a binding effect? -GTBacchus(talk) 19:22, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
This user believes that ALL categories of WIKI users will be deleted soon. |
You might ask "What the %*$# is this???" As the Category:Wikipedians by politics is being considered for deletion, I thought I would create a new userbox. I tried to think of a society that limits or censors individual alliances, affiliations, etc. The first thing that came to mind was the old Soviet Union. So here you go (the red flag and all). I wouldn't be surprised if someone tries to censor this. I hear people say that Wikipedia is not a democracy, it is an online encyclopedia. While this is true, keep in mind what this project is all about. It encourages even new users to be bold and submit information. And they did. And now, change is in the air.
Yes, by comparison to some of you, I am new to Wikipedia. And, now I see a community that seems to squabble over politics to the point where you don't trust your own categorical affiliations. I will admit that having user political categories is an idea that should have not been allowed to happen. However, it did happen (and not overnight, might I add). Why not look to other ways to prevent the problems caused by them by holding users accountable for their own actions? Why not allow users to have a freedom of association? etc. etc. And, BTW - This will affect many of your cute little userboxes.
You might think I'm psycho. You are right. I am just as crazy as you folks. And, being a little crazy may not be a bad thing... ;-) JungleCat 18:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the compliment. Mine was actually designed by user:Phaedriel, who takes orders and does not charge. Here's what it used to look like before she got to it. Cheers. - CrazyRussian talk/email 22:25, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Hey JC, thanks for supporting my RfA, which registered a tally of 104/4/7. Which means...
|
That's the first time in a long time I've had an edit conflict. :) Oddly enough, for a very long time I had decided not to vote in Phaedriel's RfA, but I finally caved. It also took a long time for me to figure out whether I was going to be a neutral or a support, but support won out in the end. Yes, Nick is very busy; lots of things going on (for both of us, really, but he's the one working full time). :) I'll pass on your regards tonight. :) Have a great day! Srose (talk) 17:23, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Maybe such things should actually be shown and not be deleted, so that others (who are serious) can see the kind of animal we're dealing with when it comes to Israel's enemies. --Daniel575 15:35, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
I did, both of them, after you alerted me, dear Junglecat :) Thanks for your kind wishes, hun, I feel awful tho, just got up for a moment to check my messages, so although I should really put a notice at AN/I about this, I'll go back to bed and do it when I don't feel like I'm about to throw my liver up :( Big big hugs, Phaedriel ♥ The Wiki Soundtrack!♪ - 16:07, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Just now saw your note to me the other day. I also got a guffaw out of that vote! :) --Aguerriero (talk) 23:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Could you please take another look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Browning (Texas politician)? I fixed the article James Browning (Texas politician) by replacing the hoax text with information from a number of sources on the real Texas politician by this name. TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 00:48, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your encouragement and tips. I really appreciate them.
--Robcotton 01:03, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
i saw the pic that you added to the cb radio page the other day, great looking radio. is it yours? do you still talk on the cb? i was big into CB for a while myself and haven't been for a few years now. i like the current cb article now but am trying to think of ways to maybe improve it. take care, im 10-7 Lenn0r 01:46, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi,
I am of the school of thought that one's biases should be openly declared, not hidden. You went back fairly far to find "Fuck the South" (my most intemperate moment -- I am sometimes sensitive regarding my family's sociological history.) My hatred of Mr. Bush is well-known and open. I avoid editing these topics because of my attachments, also.
To my mind, though, the AfD you mentioned was fairly far from those matters; that question was an administrative one of how the encyclopedia should classify living persons and others. There is no question that some terrorists of Pakistani origin exist -- the question was whether such a list, as opposed to a category, was needed.
Now, as to my being open to recall: it isn't something I fear, and I am not tentative in my actions because of it. My own requirements for my recall are actually more stringent than the category in general: for my resignation all that is required is that one user (non-newbie/vandal) claim abuse of my admin authority in good faith. It only takes one established user, but he/she must seriously allege abuse: not "I don't like this guy" or "I disagree with this" or even "this was a mistake". I don't abuse my authority, to the best of my knowledge, and I'm quick to admit and to remedy my mistakes, like one at DRV yesterday. If I ever did make any serious Wikipedian feel that I'd abused my position, I'd be the first one to call for my removal. Whatever our political differences might be, I imagine we share an admiration for Cincinnatus (and the American Cincinnatus). I take my duty to follow his example quite seriously, and I either leave my biases at the door, or refrain from acting where I cannot do so. This does not mean, though, that I will hide who I am: I believe openess is important, and I disclose whatever information might be relevant to my work here to that end. Best wishes, Xoloz 15:25, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
P.S. I did actually edit the Bushes' disambiguation page once, as routine clean-up, and I managed to keep my cool!
File:Scarlettanager99.jpg | Hello, Junglecat, and thank you for the support on my recent RfA. The final tally was 72/1/0, and I have now been entrusted with the mop. I'll be tentative with the new buttons for a while, and certainly welcome any and all feedback on how I might be able to use them to help the project. All the best, and thanks again! — Deville (Talk) 03:23, 25 August 2006 (UTC) |
![]() |
![]() Junglecat for your Support! |
PS: YES YOU'RE RIGHT HARRY POTTER USES A BROOM! (BUT GOOD MOPS ARE HARD TO FIND!!)
Thank you for your support of my RfA, which has passed with a final tally of 76/1/1. With this overwhelming show of support and approval I am honored to serve Wikipedia in the task charged to me and as outlined in my nomination. Happy editing to you! Teke (talk) 17:43, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi,
It's fine now, so I suppose your suspicion about your browser was correct. I love these admin tasks where I don't have to do anything, so call on me anytime! :) Nice little article too! Best wishes, Xoloz 14:49, 29 August 2006 (UTC)