User talk:Spike

Wiki created
Hello, I would like to tell you that I have created your wiki. You can now access it at https://themirror.miraheze.org. You should automatically have been granted administrator and bureaucrat rights, if that's not the case then please leave a notice on Stewards' noticeboard so we can fix it immediately. Do not hesitate to ask questions if your question was not answered in our FAQ. Also, if you want a extension, gadget, or anything else, please ask us here. Thank you for choosing Miraheze, and we wish you good luck with your wiki! -- Void  Whispers 15:50, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

[You've got mail]
Reception123 (talk) ('C' ) 16:59, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I saw it and replied. FYI--sending me an email sounds an audible alarm here; by comparison, with my current settings, posting to this page and having Meta give me an Alert are silent until I check Miraheze.  For Meta to give me an Alert that I have email is silly.   17:32 4-Nov-2017


 * PS--Ignore the above; I see from the Edit Summary on Meta that the problem is that this isn't true for all recipients and you had no way of knowing.  17:43 4-Nov-2017
 * Yes, we have had several reports that noreply@undefinedmiraheze.org ends up in spam sometimes (especially for password resets) so I'm never sure whether the user will actually receive the email. To confirm, did the one I sent go to spam or Inbox? Reception123 (talk) ('C' ) 17:45, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I replied by email.  17:51 4-Nov-2017

Proposal 5
That proposal is irrelevant and invalid. The entire point of the RFC is to allow me to re-enter the Miraheze community at least on a restricted level, and therefore a proposal to “just go away” is unhelpful.

Additionally, you said “If love of Miraheze were the basis, then OP (who is not subject to any of the old IP range blocks) could have created a new identity and resumed editing” — believe me, if I could do that, I would’ve done so a long time ago. However, the inconsiderate Miraheze staff won’t let me do that, and that’s why we are here. Amanda123 (talk) 22:10, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Wiki created
Hello, I would like to tell you that I have created your wiki. You can now access it at https://rfobasic.miraheze.org. You should automatically have been granted administrator and bureaucrat rights, if that's not the case then please leave a notice on Stewards' noticeboard so we can fix it immediately. Do not hesitate to ask questions if your question was not answered in our FAQ. Also, if you want a extension, gadget, or anything else, please ask us here. Thank you for choosing Miraheze, and we wish you good luck with your wiki! Reception123 (talk) ('C' ) 19:15, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I was going to say that was a matter of seconds, but the log says it took 4 whole minutes. Thanks!   20:01 6-Nov-2017

Template as a sign
Hi!

English Wikipedia, which is perhaps the wealthiest-resourced wiki in the world, prohibits using in signature, and I ask you if you can do same for us (and you). There are few good reason, which I'll paste from enwiki:

I think mentioning malfunction should be enough reason to consider you not using template as a sign. If you wish, I can do the one-time substitution using my bot (so it doesn't flood RC). Thanks! &mdash; revi  12:32, 30 November 2017 (UTC)


 * If this becomes Miraheze policy, I'll obey it; but citing a widely ignored Wikipedia policy (notoriously ignored by their Admins) does not make it policy here. This seems like a non-problem on the order of the penalty formerly assessed by the National Football League against players dancing after touchdowns.  I have no problem seeing posts here that are directed to me.  Wikipedia's stated alternative, spilling the code into posts rather than invoking a template, was actively discouraged on Wikia Uncyclopedia, and  and I discussed it on Meta as well; it makes it tedious to read posts via diff reports.  If vandalism is a concern, you are welcome to semi-protect my (two) signature pages.  I have not changed the source in ten weeks, but do eventually plan to petition for a username change, after which the signature templates would make it easy to re-point to a new talk page.   15:12 30-Nov-2017
 * Your ping did not trigger. And it will not, unless you change it, per my suggestion.
 * I do not understand your 'National Football League' stuff. I haven't watched Football in my whole life, so I have no idea what you're talking about.
 * This is about performance rather than vandalism. Whenever you (or somebody else) change the template, that triggers all the page to be re-rendered, which will be bit of a burden (maybe not to worry right now, but what if that page is transcluded on enough pages?) for the jobqueue. &mdash; revi  15:26, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me about the Mirror
I was too busy to read it, but I can use it in my argument that the WMF and Miraheze need to collaborate. See wikiversity:User:Guy_vandegrift/Blog/Draft_space_governance--Guy vandegrift (talk) 11:36, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Oy, no one has time to read it. You might cite our Gazetteer of wikis, a terse, author-written guide to the content here?  There is still something missing. WikiMedia Foundation members need to observe stop lights but this doesn't prove that they and the Traffic Patrol "need to collaborate."   12:07 18-Jan-2018

on Spike-from-NH
Hi, I just want to make sure whether Spike-from-NH is actually you. He claims to be you, but seems more like... someone else I know on another wiki.-- 12:05, 19 January 2019 (UTC)modded.-- 12:06, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay; Miraheze has elected to be unreachable from my kitchen-table browser and I only come to this other PC when necessary.


 * I am from NH, but have never used that username at Miraheze, and I have not edited on Meta since my listed edit of 5-Jan. I have edited my rfobasic.miraheze.org several times this month, and am here tonight to consult it.  This editor is not me.  His 6 edits to the dormant satire news wiki themirror.miraheze.org you have mass-deleted.  (I researched this in detail before comparing the three characters, which I cannot see, to your username!)


 * The intent of these edits seems to have been to install one satire news article from the Wikia Uncyclopedia "UnNews" news service, which I left and started The Mirror. Your mass deletion correctly claims a copyright violation.  The author of the original article is admin Romartus, an adult and a friend, who has better things to do than either to flog his articles on my inactive wiki or to claim to be me.  (Romartus's article on Wikia Uncyclopedia was vandalized by the insertion of Vietnamese and Arabic text, which seems to be independent from the edits here.)


 * Thank you for patrolling The Mirror, and your hunch as to the editor's true identity is worth following!  00:24 26-Jan-2019


 * PS--I see that he is registered as a bureaucrat and sysop on uncyclopedia2.miraheze.org, with which I have never been involved. I strongly object to any use of that username on any Uncyclopedia fork at Miraheze, as the overwhelming implication is that the user is me, and this is fraudulent.   00:28 26-Jan-2019
 * OK, thanks for your information. It's now an issue that a Stew handles, and I think the issue will be dealt soon.-- 01:14, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Uh, thanks for your footnotes, but that case is still a copyright violation because your wiki is licensed under CC-BY-SA, which is incompatible with CC-BY-NC-SA.-- 04:54, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I haven't studied this enough to contradict you, as my content is all original. Cheers.   05:39 28-Jan-2019

, the attempt to keep alive the classic Uncyclopedia. 18:26 5-Sep-2019
 * No problem, good luck keeping it going. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat) · CA · contribs · Rights - ) 20:02, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Withdrawal of RfC
Hi. I've seen that you decided to withdraw your RfC. I think that's a shame, and the fact is that not many users are on Meta and check the Community noticeboard frequently, so I wouldn't take it as a surprise that there weren't many reactions to your draft RfC. With the drafts I made, usually I ask users to take a look separately for them to do so. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 05:38, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Very well, I'll move it to mainspace. You can delete the redirect and do whatever is necessary to list it as an active RfC.   13:00 24-Jun-2020
 * I've left my thoughts on the final proposal on the page. I feel that we can find a common ground. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 17:38, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Style conventions for struck votes in RfCs and permissions requests
Hi Spike,

Thank you for your good-faith WikiGnoming in the current active RfC. While I do understand your desire to not have struck votes "count" in terms of the numbered lists, and this was my first inclination as well on the Wikimedia wikis; however, as was explained to me, this style convention explains well, I think, the reason why it is undesirable to change list styles (i.e., ordered and unordered) at the same hierarchical level. Thus, I have partially reverted some of your edits (#1, #2, and #3) with these edits (#1, #2, and #3). Admittedly, in the practice, our practices have been somewhat inconsistent in past RfC and permissions requests discussions, so some sort of AWB or manual minor wiki maintenance work would likely be helpful at some point in the future; however, this is quite low on the priority list of wiki maintenance.

Anyway, hope that helps, and thanks again for your other maintenance and contributions. :)

Cheers,

Dmehus (talk) 22:46, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Follow up to your good-faith notice of the creation of a RfC
Hi Spike,

As promised here, I am following up with you here on your user talk page. While I can appreciate your wanting to move forward with the creation of an RfC to change the default RC value for all wikis, I have moved the RfC to this subpage of your userspace for a several reasons, which I'll itemize in turn:


 * 1) In this comment, you indicated your reluctance to changing the default RC value globally so as not "upend" local wikis' procedures. As just one alternative, I suggested that  might engage local wiki bureaucrats, or a steward, where the bureaucrats are not active, to change the default maximum RC value on wikis he monitors as a way to minimize the global change while not infringing on local wikis' autonomy by setting the maximum default RC value for all wikis, some of which no doubt Avengium doesn't even monitor
 * 2) In that same comment, I suggested the preferred alternative would be to have us all agree on a proposal to move forward with on community noticeboard, whether in a thread on the same noticeboard or as a separate sub-section of that discussion, on which we'd all vote and other users would be encouraged to participate in the discussion
 * 3) Since your proposed RfC contained only one global proposal, and did not contain contain competing proposals, we generally like to encourage community noticeboard discussions for such matters, with RfCs mainly relating to proposed new global policies, global groups, local Meta user groups, and particularly when more than competing proposal is involved

I'm happy to move forward with your proposal, but for the above reasons, I would like you to clarify your original position. Did I perhaps misunderstand your original counter proposal, or perhaps your proposal wasn't as clear than otherwise originally envisioned? In any case, I'm hoping you can clarify that. Additionally, I would also like to know why you've proposed increasing the maximum default RC setting to 180 days, when that wasn't even really discussed (45-60 days was discussed, as I recall). So, I am hoping you might be able to shed some insight there.

With those clarifications, as I say, I'm happy to move forward with your proposal, but if we're only going to propose your single proposal for discussion, I think we should copy it over to the community noticeboard thread, in a new sub-section of the discussion, as opposed to creating a separate RfC. If, on the other hand, we decide to propose several alternative proposals, then a RfC makes the most sense.

Thanks so much for your attention to this message, and I look forward to hearing back from you soon. :)

Cheers,

Dmehus (talk) 03:09, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Signature
Hi,

Would you mind using the standard date format as otherwise it breaks the new reply links? I'm not sure when but there is the possibility that the software will enforce it in future.

Thanks, ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  16:35, 27 March 2021 (UTC)