User talk:Ceradon

This is Ceradon'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.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10: 14 days

You've been unsubscribed from the Feedback Request Service

Hi Ceradon! You're receiving this notification because you were previously subscribed to the Feedback Request Service, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over two years.

In order to declutter the Feedback Request Service list, and to produce a greater chance of active users being randomly selected to receive invitations to contribute, you've been unsubscribed, along with all other users who have made no edits in two years or more.

You do not need to do anything about this - if you are happy to not receive Feedback Request Service messages, thank you very much for your contributions in the past, and this will be the last you hear from the service. If, however, you would like to resubscribe yourself, you can follow the below instructions to do so:

Go to the Feedback Request Service page.
Decide which categories are of interest to you, under the RfC and/or GA headings.
Paste {{Frs user|Ceradon|limit}} underneath the relevant heading(s), where limit is the maximum number of requests you wish to receive for that category per month.
Publish the page.

If you've just come back after a wikibreak and are seeing this message, welcome back! You can follow the above instructions to re-activate your subscription. Likewise, if this is an alternate account, please consider subscribing your main account in much the same way.

Note that if you had a rename and left your old name subscribed to the FRS, you may be receiving this message on your new username's talk page still. If so, make sure your new account name is subscribed to the FRS, using the same procedure mentioned above.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask on the Feedback Request Service talk page, or on the Feedback Request Service bot's operator's talk page. Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited James Baldwin, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Great Migration and Wedlock. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your RfA

I have closed your RfA per WP:SNOW, since it was apparent it was not going to pass. I feel that this was the right choice and allowed by the RfA page, but if you want it to be reopened, you are free to request a bureaucrat to review my action at WP:BN. All the best. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:10, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

TonyBallioni, I was traveling and did not have access to the internet, but unlikely to have made a difference; it was for the best, more a coup de grâce. Thank you. ceradon 04:57, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would add that I hope that this outcome doesn't discourage you from continuing to contribute. The majority of the comments cast did not take issue with your conduct, merely the time period. I do hope you consider re-applying in future, once at least a year of activity/contributing has passed. That would nullify most of the opposes that were left. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 07:31, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think what sticks in my craw about this is not that the RfA crashed and burned so quickly (those opposing are perfectly entitled to state whatever view they like) but from my viewpoint, it seems inconsistent as we've had cases where "legacy admins" who passed in 2005 (when standards really were different) take time off and come back and make a total pigs ear of things, or gradually become out of alignment with accepted practice and yet it's impossible to desysop them without a large amount of discussion and drama first (eg: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/RHaworth). Stick to writing content for the minute, it's what we're all supposed to be here for. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:19, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would support a fourth RfA from you, in about a year or so. I like your humility. Please let me know if you would like to collaborate on any American Civil War topics. –♠Vami _IV†♠ 00:20, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

bot cleanups

Hello Ceradon, we're going through and cleaning up some very old bot stuff (Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard#Long_inactives_but_not_outside_of_policy) and your bot User:CeraBot is on the list. This is not your active bot User:Cerabot~enwiki. Is there any reason you still need a bot flag on the old bot account? Please ping me on a reply here, or reply at the discussion above. Thank you! — xaosflux ^Talk 14:27, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]