User talk:Balloonman

Home Talk Contributions Blocks Deletions Moves Protections monobook.js Userspace

Archive box
Archives
Apr 06 - Jan 07 Jan 07 - Jun 07 Jul 07 - Nov 07 Nov 07 - Feb 08 Feb 07 - Mar 08 April 08 May 08

{{Talkback|Balloonman|RE: }}

[edit] Thank you

Balloonman,

I wanted to thank you for your thoughtful nomination statement for my recent RFA, which I'm sure was a major factor in its success. I also wanted to just clarify, that when I said here that I wanted to get some "polishing done", I didn't mean polishing of my resume, I meant polishing my understanding of Wikipedia's policies. I hope you didn't think I was trying to "game the system" - I certainly wasn't. There were some stuff I was rather foggy about which lead to a decent number of opposes at my RFA. Anyways, just wanted to clear that up. I hope things have settled down for you.

P.S. Is mine the first RFA that passed without the nom supporting? (Don't worry - I know things got pretty hectic there, you probably just forgot!). I've posted an in-depth RFA analysis at User talk:Xenocidic/RFA and your comments are invited. Templated RFA thank-spam below. xenocidic (talk) 02:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

templated rfa thank-spam

[edit] Thank you for your support

So...how do I use these things? ;>

I would like to thank the community for placing their trust in me during my recent request for adminship, which passed 72 13 2 . Rest assured, I have read each comment thoroughly and will be addressing the various concerns raised as I step cautiously into my new role as janitor. In particular, I would like to thank Balloonman for putting so much time into reviewing my contributions and writing such a thoughtful nomination statement after knowing me for only a brief period of time (and for convincing me that I was ready to take up the mop now, rather than go through admin coaching).

To my fellow admins - please let me know right away if I ever take any mis-steps with my new tools. Should I make a mistake, and you reverse the action, I will not consider it to be wheel-warring (but please tell me so I can understand what I did wrong).

To everyone - please feel free to slap me around a bit if I ever lose sight of the core philosophy of Wikipedia as I understand it - the advancement of knowledge through the processes of mutual understanding and respect. As always, feel free to drop by my talk page if I can be of any assistance. =)

Sincerely,

~xenocidic, 01:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

ROFLMAO! Didn't realize it, but I suspect that you are the first to pass without nom support. If you ever do have questions feel free to ask me or anybody else... the opposes did raise some legitimate concerns. For some reason, eventhough I spent hours looking at your edits, I forgot to check out your speedies.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 03:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Nice! Didn't break WP:100 but at least I set a record. Thanks again, man. Be easy. xenocidic (talk) 05:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

So what was the reason for not supporting? Did you simply forget to do it? Or was it prearranged? Enigma ^message 05:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

If I were to hazard a guess, he probably just had other things on his mind and forgot. xenocidic (talk) 06:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Sometimes, when the circus is in town, other things are forgotten. DOH! Good to see you've not left us, Balloonman. Lara❤Love 07:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RFA - a new date?

Hi! Sorry about not transcluding on Friday. I really wanted to, but r/l got in the way. Had I have gone into it then, I wouldn't have been around as much as I had intended, and I would hate to fail the RFA on that. The way I see it is that you have put so much effort into my coaching, for me to go in to it on that day with the r/l problems getting in the way, I might have failed, and thus undone all that work you did. I know this week is out of the question, as I understand you are off next week. When will you be back?

[edit] Lemons, lemonade

From the vitriol of SandyGeorgia's talk page a few months ago, I was able, I hope, to turn lemons into lemonade. I wrote this for myself, but I was thinking of you and Sandy when I did. If you find it useful, great. If not, at least I like it ... --Moni3 (talk) 19:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry...

...for the tone of my comment here last weekend about your 180° turn on DHMO's RFA. Long on adrenaline and short on common courtesy. I'm still upset at how you did that, but since I claim to be a grown up, I should have found a better way to express myself, or even better, hit the "Cancel" button and had a cup of tea instead. --barneca (talk) 00:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and NP... I do plan on posting on what I really meant... I posted on DMHO's RFA at a bad time and worded myself very poorly. If I had given it more thought, I think I might have been able to avoid most of the drama and hurt feelings that resulted.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 01:15, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Military, er, things

Hi Balloonman. Wanted to check what your thoughts were on another potential proposal; somebody suggested merging the main categories military bases and military facilities to 'military installations.' We could set up whatever permutations of subcategories were necessary to define what was or was not a base or a facility under that main category - be interested to hear your thoughts on what was best. What do you think? Kind regards Buckshot06(prof) 11:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] a request for assistance on wikipedia

What's up? I notice you're one of the most sought after friends and mentors on wikipedia. I'm looking to improve my effectiveness as a negotiating/contributing editor. Negotiate as in help bring together opposing sides to consensus and npov. Anyway, the reason I'm contacting you is that I trust your opinion.

I'm looking for approximately 3 things to consciously try to communicate better or get across more efficiently on wikipedia. I'm not in need of a full time mentor or coach, and wouldn't want to bother you anyway since your so busy. But something like watch my contributions for a week or the like. You know what I mean!

If you have the time, I will be your selfless slave. Or just really appreciate it, your choice. Thanks, Beam 03:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your WT:RfA post

I wanted to say that it cleared up a lot and your actions make more sense now. The one issue I have is that it doesn't completely jibe with what you said at his actual RfA. There, you said you were teaching him a lesson. That's the part that really got to me. The way you wrote it now, though, I can easily forgive you for what you did, because it appears much more as an honest mistake. The question is always the intent behind it. Enigma ^message 06:07, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I was letting him run despite my firm belief that his RfA would fail---I thought by jumping the gun, that it would fail. That was the lesson that I was thinking about. Again, I handled it very poorly.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 06:13, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

That you were convinced it would fail isn't such a big deal. The question is whether you actually nominated him to teach him a lesson, or whether the nomination was in good faith and you merely thought that failing would teach him a lesson. I think what a lot of people were shocked by was your saying that you were nominating him at RfA to teach him a lesson. WP:POINT. Again, it's much more understandable now. Enigma ^message 06:20, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

That's what I mean by I handled it poorly. It was definitely the later. I wasn't nominating him to teach him a lesson... I nom'ed him because I was hoping to ease the path to what I thought would be a difficult RfA. If I was strictly out to teach him a lesson from the getgo, I would have not nomed him... or opposed him from the getgo. I thought in failing the RfA (which I believed would happen) he would learn a lesson---not to rush things and that actions (off wiki blogs) have consequences. I thought that a run in August (or even july) would likely pass, but that a failed nom now would mean waiting until next year.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 06:24, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

A very important thing here on Wikipedia is transparency. I think your post on WT:RFA was well written and helped clear the waters. I commend you for your work to straighten all this out and tie up the loose ends. But it's over now, time to let it go. Kind of reminds me of my essay, which sort of applies. Useight (talk) 07:31, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request

I'd like to request that you be my coach for a future RfA, possibly in 3 to 6 months. I am aware of a vacation you may be taking (correct me if I'm wrong) and I'm willing to wait. — _Maggot^Syn 06:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Beam and maggot

Without even looking at either of your edit histories (which is something I always do before accepting coachees.) I humbly accept your requests. I think the two of you are a little loco, but hell you'd have to be a little loco to ask me right now. I thank you for your trust. I'm going to be going on vacation on Saturday and won't have access to the internet while I'm gone, so it'll be a few days before I can follow-up with either of you.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 06:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Thats fine. Have fun on vacation. And I prefer Syn or SM. :) — _Maggot^Syn 06:51, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RFC: Removal of magic methods - what next? More input please!

As I mentioned earlier, I thought I might have to send out a post to all the RFC participants. Well I'm doing so, so here is your copied and pasted invite ;-). StephenBuxton (talk) 12:51, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi! As someone who has taken part in the RFC in Project Magic, I thought you ought to be aware that it looks like a consensus is being reached, and it is probably now just a case of dotting the i's and crossing the t's. If you could pop over to the discussion and add your thoughts, that would be great. StephenBuxton (talk) 12:51, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

As there have been no objections to the draft guidelines I created a while back, I have taken the bold action of making them the current guidelines. You can view the change here. If you disagree with the revised changes, or have any further comments on the change, please feel free to raise it on the project talk page. Thank you. StephenBuxton (talk) 12:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vacation

Have a good one. I look forward to your return for selfish reasons but will mask that by saying take your time and take it easy! Beam 19:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I actually don't leave until first thing tomorrow, but I don't know how much I'll do today on WP.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 19:23, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Start your vakay early and avoid Wikipedia! Beam 22:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I have returned!

I have returned to the pedia for now. I just saw the big mess that happened. I'm sorry that happened. I'm not really all that interested in being an admin anymore. My schedule looks very full now. Very full. I will return to you when I am ready, though. Thank you for what you've done. – Obento Musubi (C • G • S) 07:51, 7 June 2008 (UTC)