RfD of File:BOKE sees.jpg edit

Dear Proofreader77, I have proposed the deletion of an image you've uploaded, File:BOKE sees.jpg, because I suspect it's copyrighted and therefore 'non-free'. Please feel free to share your thoughts about this on WM:RFD. Kind regards, Mathonius 19:22, 10 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

See my comment at WM:RFD. From my own video (which I shot as an application to the series, but which was not selected for use by them). Proofreader77 19:35, 10 September 2011 (UTC)Reply
Oops, sorry. I uploaded it here first by mistake. Then uploaded to commons. Thanks. Proofreader77 19:47, 10 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi edit

Re [1], I agree that sometimes it's good to break a tense atmosphere with a less common interlude or approach like a sonnet or joke. However, there is such a thing as taking that approach too far and annoying people who try to have a "serious"—and by that I mean conventional—discussion. It's difficult to judge other people's tolerance for that over the internet. My vague impression is that your current status on enwiki stems from that type of issue. ASCIIn2Bme 00:04, 15 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Welcome, ASCIIn2Bme. Note that my response was to this reply. To get us on the same page (or to see if we're on different ones), question: What is your impression of the appropriateness of the remark I make a rhetorical comment regarding? (Will save the broader discussion of the nature of my status for later -- meanwhile perhaps guess how many times I actually had to resort to sonnets ...  :-)
-- Proofreader77 00:14, 15 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
Give that I just called some VIPs on enwiki Arbcommissars, I'm afraid I might join you in writing poetry here soon. Alas, my sense of humor (such as it is) is not accompanied by any sense of rhyme, so w:free verse is all I can hope to produce. ASCIIn2Bme 01:09, 15 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
One upon a time in a land long, long ago (um, AOL! LOL) ... a young woman quite effectively mocked me for being long-winded. Obviously I could not reply to her with a long-winded reply ... and so the thought struck me to reply in a sonnet -- which stunned everyone and brought a round of applause. Not quite the same response on Wikipedia. :-) Cheers. -- Proofreader77 01:17, 15 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Comments edit

This was clearly offtopic there. The RfD page shouldn't be used to discuss all sorts of en.wiki cases. Nemo 09:17, 17 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Noted with objection (for the record) -- Proofreader77 (talk) 09:38, 17 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi. What happened? edit

Your edit message says something about identity disclosure, was my identity involved? Alanscottwalker (talk) 19:56, 18 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Not yours. Don't know why they oversighted your comment, too. (Perhaps a mistake.) Proofreader77 (talk) 19:59, 18 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
Both revisions contained the privacy violating comment added by, so both had to be oversighted. Mathonius (talk) 20:02, 18 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
Sorry, what does that mean for me or my comment that my comment is oversighted? Alanscottwalker (talk) 20:05, 18 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
Question @Alanscottwalker: Did you reply to the attack topic? (I didn't see that when I reverted ip) Proofreader77 (talk) 20:12, 18 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
No, it was not there (I did not see it) when I replied. I take it, the answer to my question, above, is: "nothing, really" but just want to be sure. Alanscottwalker (talk) 20:18, 18 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
I didn't think you had, but will not speculate further. But yes, "nothing really" is the answer (unless there is a secret file of editors who are branded as evil folk who have required oversighting. ;-) -- Proofreader77 (talk) 20:34, 18 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Database (race condition?) errors edit

[a copy here also] FYI I've seen people add a comment that (due to some kind of technical error) erased someone else's comment (without giving an "edit conflict" error warning). Your adding a comment while (?) I was deleting a topic might have had a "race condition" which caused a similar but reverse error. (Don't ask me for a clearer explanation, but I'm fairly certain the oversighting of your comment was necessitated by a technical glitch -- which can never be proved to have happened, so you're doomed to infamy ;-) --Proofreader77 (talk) 21:42, 18 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the info. Alanscottwalker (talk) 23:43, 18 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks edit

For the heads-up and commentary. SJ talk   14:39, 22 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Much appreciated. (See your talk for fuzheado tweet exchange :-) -- Proofreader77 (talk) 00:51, 23 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Mentioned edit

Hi Proofreader77,

I quoted you here. Sorry I did not keep your nice formatting. I hope you do not mind. Cheers.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:30, 23 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, Mbz1. Anything I post is available for quoting (with or without fancy pants formatting :-) -- Proofreader77 (talk) 00:36, 23 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Teahouse talk and two directions edit

Hi Proofreader77, yes you are correct that my answers were a little confusing. I first answered on the Teahouse talk page, but I realized that this person might be just confused and not antagonistic like I first imagined. So I decided to go to their talk page and explain what happened. I thought they might not even go back to the Teahouse talk page to see my not-very-helpful reply so I left it at that. Thanks for the compliment! heather walls (talk) 01:43, 9 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Just didn't want them to get hung in an infinite loop. :-) And you're very welcome. Cheers. -- Proofreader77 (talk) 02:24, 9 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Notes edit

  Comment If someone is invited to the Teahouse amid community issues, then perhaps the Teahouse hosts have greater responsibility to follow up (as someone is "vaguely" alluding to here, and rebuffed (in the usual way that the obvious must be ignored ;-) Proofreader77 (talk) 19:42, 9 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

CollaborativeDance edit

Please fill out our brief Teahouse survey! edit

Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts and staff at Wikipedia:WP:Teahouse would like your feedback! We have created a brief survey meant to help us better understand the experience of new editors on Wikipedia. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you either received an invitation to visit the Teahouse, or edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests page.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

J-Mo, Teahouse host, 15:35, 20 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Message sent with Global message delivery. Orschstaffer (talk) 04:59, 5 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Greetings edit

From Orschstaffer, would like to discuss some global ideas on the School Assignment Project. Orschstaffer (talk) 05:09, 5 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Replied on your talk, but you're probably better off replying here if you wish to follow up. -- Proofreader77 (talk) 06:13, 5 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
O=MC4Orschstaffer (talk) 10:10, 5 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Greetings from the desk of O=MC4 Orschstaffer/Principal,

This is a school assignment♭, Presently I am researching/developing a WikiProject for a classroom assignment. Please be patient with my attempts to Improve Wikipedia and the global Wiki interface. O=MC4

Curious if you been paying attention (watching me) to my progress on the school project? I am still developing it for proposal to the Foundations's Projects ie. ambassador school, etc, my prime objective would be to Improve Wikipedia by styling a classroom experience in the various aspects of editing wiki. It is a school assignment, I believe we have talked recently. As most of my work so far has been on Wikipedia, this Meta account, Orschstaffer, still baffles me, If I understand correctly, Meta is more technical software for interactions of the global community. For instance, linking from wikipedia to meta-wiki, and vice verce. ( And lets not forget the Wikiversity, and other Foundation Projects.Orschstaffer (talk) 17:07, 7 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

First, about Meta ... It is a bit of a mystery (to most) what the purpose/function of Meta.wikipedia is. Most likely (although I don't know), it is unlikely you'll have much reason to be editing on meta -- but you may want to take a look at Research:Projects.
NOTE: In the text above, I corrected a couple of links which should have been specified as being located on en.wikipedia with w:
COMMENT: re your meta talk (discussion) page -- You appear to be using your talk page as a sandbox, and that will probably confuse people who are expecting the "talk" (i.e. "Discussion") page just to be a series of conversation topics.
RESPONSE re "watching you" -- I am probably the wrong person to ask to provide ongoing guidance. Due to the "social" aspects of en.wikipedia, I am blocked from editing en.wikipedia at this time. While that status may change in the future, at this time I cannot touch en.wikipedia (if I follow the rules, and I do). SO: While I certainly applaud your passionate interest in Wikipedia, we should probably attempt to find someone else to be your guide. If you would like me to, I can email some experienced editors and see if I can find someone who is more appropriate.
-- Proofreader77 (talk) 23:36, 7 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
I like that word, Research. I use it generally before develope. Thanks. So just toss a w: to link over to Wikipedia, I am on Wikiversity also, and now Commons, I pretty sure I will be into every project available before it is over. Social aspects of en.wikipedia, libraries are generally quite. Oh yeah I'll be in the library too. I find guidance a wonderful tool mostly, until they get in my way. I cram everything in, do most things backwards, and rarely listen once I get my mojo on. I get confused, quit, sleep and dream of the solutions to problems that baffled prior. However, yes, thank you, I would love to collaborate on several topics, especially with the goal of Ambassador Program. I am beginning to prepare a syllabus of learning, training and producing some featured articles. I intend to accomplish these goals through the schoolhouse, which I forsee being the gateway to editors and others into this wonderful world of knowledge. I am creating my meta pages to replace the sandboxstuff,hehe. Orschstaffer (talk) 05:25, 8 June 2012 (UTC), O=MC4Reply