User talk:Newyorkbrad

To keep conversations together, I will generally reply on this page to messages left here. If you would prefer that I reply on your talkpage or elsewhere, please feel free to let me know.

Archives

Description of archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by .

This is Newyorkbrad's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Welcome!

Hello, Newyorkbrad, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Karmafist 15:21, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

A seasonal postcard comic

It is official

Welcome aboard. FloNight (talk) 22:39, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I look forward to working with everyone. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:40, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on it being official! Keep up the good work you have done everywhere. But take breaks if sanity demands it... balance is important. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 22:48, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for the kind words and for the advice. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on your new appointment as Arbitrator! Good luck, and don't wear yourself out :) Majorly (talk) 22:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:53, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!!! Happy to have you aboard the arbcom committee. Obviously well-qualified and no doubt you will do great. --Aude (talk) 23:09, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats, and everything. Not that it was unexpected... David Mestel^(Talk) 23:10, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CONGRATS, MOST well-deserved. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed. I'd like to reiterate the appraisal above, I hope both you and the community enjoy the results. :) Regards, Rt . 23:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! Kirill 23:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! And to echo above, you're well-qualified, and will do great. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 01:31, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another congratulations here, Brad. The community is the real winner, though. Risker (talk) 01:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I second that. Best wishes in the new endeavors! ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:57, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats :-) WjBscribe 14:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I now extend due congratulation. Well done, Brad. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 14:43, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! Good luck, and keep some aspirin handy. Kafziel ^Talk 15:12, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it was a close call, but I see you barely managed to scrape by! Do you anticipate a recount? (Congratulations!) --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 16:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was surprised that Jimbo had to reach so way far down the list to pluck NYB for this assignment. Some sort of conspiracy, I think ;) NoSeptember 16:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Good job. :) *Cremepuff 222* 18:19, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per NoSeptember ;) — Dihydrogen Monoxide _(Review) 02:51, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never before has there been a candidate more suitable for the position than Newyorkbrad. An unbiased point of view and clear judgement are exactly what we look for in arbitrators, and Brad is exemplary of these qualities. Congratulations Maser ^(Talk!) 09:39, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go NYB! ≈ MindstormsKid 17:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrat's Brad! I know you will do fine. Enjoy your holidays. JungleCat Shiny!/Oohhh! 04:17, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

I just wanted to stay congratulations on having the most supported ArbCom candidacy of all time, and for being successful. :) Good luck with your new tasks. Acalamari 02:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations indeed! Wish you to keep on being the same tireless, always sensible, and dedicated Wikipedian. Happy New Year too. :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 03:50, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/IRC

I'm not sure if I put this note in the right place, but could you or the arbcom please comment on it? thanks --Duk 21:18, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the same page, I've put this, which concerns you. Thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 22:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to both of you for the heads up. Responding there. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:38, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Light and friv

This is just a light and frivolous memoir but on the other side of the world here, I had a lecturer named Brad who spoke about New York frequently. So much that one of my class mates made his computer chime with the theme from New York, New York every time it started up. Possibly not even synchronicity but fun to recall and share anyway. : ) Just cruising ... Julia Rossi (talk) 23:12, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BN comment

"the danger of unnecessary "confirmation" RfAs"... What an astonishingly stupid remark. This is the stuff suited to make at least myself regret I supported your ArbCom bid. There are some who should be desysopped. Most of those would fail any future RfA. There is only danger involved in granting them the bit for life. Please don't protect those people, that's not what you're supposed to do. I dorfbaer I talk I 22:20, December 30, 2007

Thank you for your support in the election. With regard to this comment, I'm afraid I must not have been clear in what I said. It was a reference to the specific scenario in which an adminstrator voluntarily resigns the tools (because he or she is busy, wants to take a break, etc.), and then later decides to resume adminship. If the administrator resigned outside the context of an ongoing controversy, he or she is permitted to regain adminship without a new RfA, whereas if the person resigned (for example) while an ArbCom case against him or her was pending, the "controversial circumstances" clause means that a new RfA is required. Over the past few months, a trend has developed under which admins who could have simply requested the tools back decides instead to go through an extra RfA, mostly to generate positive comments. I understand why an ex-admin wants to do this but the fact is that we usually have a dozen or more new RfA's pending at a time without burdening the community with extra ones. This has nothing to do with the situation in which a sitting administrator becomes abusive and needs to be reprimanded or desysopped. I hope this is more clear. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:27, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very much so, thank you. For the record, I happen to agree that Majorly shouldn't have started that RfA (although it was even worse to later withdraw at that support ratio). But generally, I'm all with Walton as far as his stance on adminship and reconfirmation goes. An RfA cannot determine everlasting community trust, which is albeit only one minor criterion for users to be suitable as admins. I dorfbaer I talk I 10:31, December 31, 2007

Still awake?

Shouldn't you be asleep, Mr. Lawyer? :-P - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 05:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Newyorkbrad (talk) 05:33, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then sleep, darn it! :-P - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 05:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HELPPP!

Newyorkbrad, an editor is threatening to revert my March 4th edits on the US Congress articles, back to March 3rd. It's starting all over again. GoodDay (talk) 23:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Link? Also, you might point him to the prior discussions on this issue, such as at Talk:List of Presidents of the United States. Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've found the discussion and posted to the Project Congress talk page. If the dispute continues I recommend Mediation and would be glad to participate. Please don't become overly upset about the issue, however; these types of things come up from time to time, and it will be discussed and resolved. Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John Buscema

I think you forgot to vote on the enforcement provision. ;-) Kirill 01:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Thanks. (Taste of my own medicine there....) Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:22, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question about signature

I'm not sure about protocol regarding signatures. Is mine too long for acceptable standards? Bellwether ^B _C 03:19, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a problem with it, but I know there are some other editors who would prefer it a bit shorter. There has been discussion on this issue from time to time but I don't believe any official standards have ever developed. Sorry I can't be more definitive. Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:23, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw one user complain once that a signature was "three lines long" or something like that. I knew mine was shorter than that, but I wasn't sure of any standard protocol. Do you know of any, even unofficial standards mine might violate? I don't want to cause any trouble for people using talkpages I might participate in. Bellwether ^B _C 03:28, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Signatures#Length. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:30, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It looks like mine conforms fine with the standards there. Much obliged! Bellwether ^B _C 03:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Hello Newyorkbrad! Happy New Year! Masterpiece2000 (talk) 08:03, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bonne et heuruse année (or as a friend of mine texted me about 9 hours ago - Bon Natali e filici annu novu) indeed...shouldn't you be popping champagne corks instead of hanging out here on New Year's Eve? (Oh dear....what does that say about me?) Risker (talk) 08:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Queluz National Palace

This article, to which you contributed, will be featured on the Main Page on January 5, 2008.[1] Risker (talk) 17:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Newyorkbrad

Congratulations again on your successful ArbCom candidacy as well. Acalamari 18:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Making you aware

I semi'd the IRC ArbCom Workshop and its talk page for 72 hours, looks like an anon using a bunch of Tor proxies reaaaaaaaaaaallly wants to put forward a remedy to have Ryulong desysopped. If I overstepped my bounds or for what ever reason you think I stepped over the line in semi-protecting it, please feel free to undo it :) Congrats on the ArbCom btw. SirFozzie (talk) 03:16, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators active on Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement

Per [2] I will notify them about the case. -- Cat ^chi? 19:57, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I would be interested to see just how many admins have contributed there recently... Thatcher 20:01, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Surprisingly, 9 admins have posted within the last 500 edits, although only five have 6 or more edits. Thatcher 20:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]