Meta talk:Administrators' discussion index

RFP discussions

Discussions on RFP could be separated? They are not concerns of local administrators and already listed of Stewards' discussion index. --Aphaia 07:27, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Sensible - done, cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:14, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Aphaia (or anyone else for that matter), if you spot something, you can do it too! There may be others as well, thanks for looking and thinking about it! ++Lar: t/c 11:07, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Need to archive

The earliest size of this list scared me. I tried to archive some fulfilled/died out discussions from Babel and Talk:spam blacklist, but there are still many such discussions. If you are sure a certain discussion ended already, please archive it and make this list and the talk itself more helpful. Thanks.

Btw I found sebmol(dewiki) offered bot archiving ... can we utilize such evangelium of civilization? Just a thought. --Aphaia 09:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Something wrong?

Many discussions marked as "data unknown", while all of those discussions are signed and hence dated. Is there anything wrong? --Aphaia 14:02, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Can you be more specific about one that seems right but shows as "date unknown"? I looked at Meta:Babel#Wiki_europe which shows as date unknown and while the post is signed, it's in a non standard time format. So I think that one showing as date unknown makes sense. You may want to nudge Bryan so he knows to look here and answer questions... hope that helps! ++Lar: t/c 16:22, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes:

1. Wikimedia and cyberstalking on Meta:Babel. Last comment unknown.
2. Regular adminship on Meta:Requests for adminship. Last comment unknown.
3. Other access on Meta:Requests for adminship. Last comment unknown.
4. HappyDog on Meta:Requests for adminship. Last comment unknown.
5. Gribeco (approved) on Meta:Requests for adminship. Last comment unknown.
6. Herbythyme (CheckUser) on Meta:Requests for adminship. Last comment unknown.

--Aphaia 17:29, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

• I am going to go way out on a limb and guess that it has something to do with this being the month of September not being recognised by the bot? :) ++Lar: t/c 20:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

That was :) cf my talk. --Aphaia 04:46, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

D'ya think maybe I had that watchlisted and scurried over here to pipe up? :) Anyway it's sorted now, thanks to Bryan. I need to go over to en:wp and set up more uses there. ++Lar: t/c 10:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Slow down, BB :-)

Meta has fewer pages and discussions than commons; you could update this perhaps once a day and lose nothing in detail. Looking at the age of most of the discussions listed here -- I recommend reducing the frequency of BB's posts. -- sj | help translate |+ 14:04, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

See here. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:05, 6 April 2009 (UTC)