User talk:CryptoDerk
The article Drunken Tiger has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- lacks coverage in 3rd party sources. Provided references are primary or unreliable (blog) sources
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RadioFan (talk) 13:59, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Well boy howdy
[edit]Well, hello! Are you enjoying your retirement? Hopefully the Foundation has provided you with a sufficient pension at least for a small bungalow on the south coast? Cheers, Herostratus (talk) 02:33, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Suspension of admin privileges due to inactivity
[edit]
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative privileges of users who have been inactive for one year, meaning administrators who have made neither any edits nor any logged actions in over one year. As a result of this discussion, your administrative privileges have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these privileges reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. RL0919 (talk) 20:17, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Help?
[edit]Why am I blocked :( CryptoDerk (talk) 06:04, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
CryptoDerk (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I am a former admin, desysopped due to inactivity. I don't know why this account is blocked. I apparently own it (and Cryptoderk with a lowercase d), and yes back in the day lots of people were imitating me (on en and other wikis) because I made the first vandalism fighting software, but now all I want to do is get on so I can update my user page! See user talk at User:Cryptoderk too!
figured it out... I signed up for the lowercase d account to prevent anyoone from taking it and vandalizing with an account that looked like mine... in the meantime, other vandals used my name on wikis I hadn't signed up on to vandalize those wikis... then someone blocked the imposter accounts on all wikis, and got the one on en, even though I technically owned it and never used it to vandalize
Accept reason:
I've unblocked Cryptoderk and see no autoblocks - please let us know if you still can't edit. Max Semenik (talk) 06:44, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Notice of change
[edit]Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through WP:RFA. Thank you. MBisanz talk 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of FreeLIP
[edit]
The article FreeLIP has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Non-notable software. Arjen Lenstra wrote it, but notability is not inherited. D. J. Bernstein mentions it on his website, and GScholar knows about it, but doesn't count more than five citations (after deduplication). None of those discuss the package in any significant level of detail.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 13:27, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Range problem
[edit]The article Range problem has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Fails WP:V. "Strong range problem" doesn't occur in GScholar or GBooks. GScholar gives lots of hits for '"range problem" Turing machine', but I can't find anything that corroborates the definitions in this article (copied from the WP:SPS PlanetMath).
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 12:51, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Strictly listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Strictly. Since you had some involvement with the Strictly redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Si Trew (talk) 00:14, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Strict is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strict until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Si Trew (talk) 00:16, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Strictly listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Strictly. Since you had some involvement with the Strictly redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Si Trew (talk) 00:21, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Pears listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Pears. Since you had some involvement with the Pears redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 08:35, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, CryptoDerk. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]Hello, CryptoDerk. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)