User talk:Synergy

Spotlight relaunch

Some users have decided to try and relaunch the spotlight project, and I am informing all users that were on the previous list of participants.

We thought that, rather than discuss it, it would be more effective to simply start, and try to make it work again. Therefore, we are currently working on an article.

Anyone is welcome to get involved, so please come to the #wikipedia-spotlight channel on the freenode IRC network (see the IRC tutorial for help with IRC). You can get instant access using freenode webchat.

 Chzz  ►  17:21, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Question

Hey Synergy! :) Just thought I should ask whether you did see this comment of mine. Or should I interpret the silence as a “no”? ;) Best, — Aitias // discussion 23:22, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I ignored it. I'm taking a break from training right now and I figured I should leave any admin requests to the admin clerks until I'm ready to train another admin. I just haven't been editing regularly as of late. Best. Syn 17:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Keeping the Peter Griffins straight

I note that you merged WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Petergriffin9901/Archive sock puppeting case into WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Zach Benjamin/Archive. So far as I can tell, you did this based on the behaviour of PeterGriffin11298. Did you have any evidence supporting this, or was this just a case of hitting the wrong Peter Griffin-based id? There are six different ones, and I've satisfied myself that they are unique.

Petergriffin9901 is currently on probation with me as his mentor (see his unblocking terms), so if he's actually been socking again, I need to know. If he hasn't been (and I don't think he has ... he seems to be playing straight), I'd like to get the report cleaned up.—Kww(talk) 17:20, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Since my wikibreak (school registration, family, etc), I honestly do not recall why it was moved, but it was done for a good reason. I'd appreciate if you would contact one of the main filers (submitters of evidence) or two clerks in particular since I've been of no help :) They are PeterSymonds, or Tiptoety. From there I believe you'll find an answer or two. If not, apologies, but I haven't had socking on the mind in a while. Best and sincere apologies. Syn 21:04, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

John Christie (murderer)

Hello there. I've requested a peer review for the article on John Christie (murderer) and I'm looking for feedback from people interested in serial killers. John Christie was a British serial killer from the 1940s and 50s who murdered a number of women but was also controversially involved in another murder trial, where he gave what's now considered perjured evidence against a fellow tenant. The case generated a lot of controversy in the UK. I'm hoping to turn the article into a featured article, so I'm looking for any comments about potential problems or if there's anything that needs improving. The peer review is available here. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers,

Wcp07 (talk) 08:42, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello back and sorry for the late response. I see you have plenty of things to work on, addressed by others. Good luck. Syn 00:30, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Hometech

After going thru some of Hometech's edits and Nichalps edits, I feel he may be a sockpuppet. Besides that he also VERY rude. Is there anything I can do to help? Also, are existing rollbackers allwoed to comment on requests by others?

Regards,

--Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:44, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

My advice is to present any "evidence" to an admin for review. Also, be mindful of outdated accounts. I take it you are commenting on an SPI case. Anyone may leave comments or present evidence so long as it is not disruptive. Syn 19:24, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Yo...

Namaste, Synergy. I'm posting to let you know that I have listed you as an editor who had an unsuccessful RfA in the not-too-recent, not-too-distant past on the talk page for RfA's here. If you are interested in running for administratorship (or not), or if you would like to make any comments, feel free to join the discussion. If you might be interested, but would like some private confidential feedback from experienced observers, I would be happy to propose this via the new vetting service. Regards,  Skomorokh  18:24, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads up. Syn 00:05, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Sad to see you gone from Simple Wikipedia

Hi there. It is sad to see you gone from Simple Wikipedia, but why don't you try the Simple Wiktionary? You might find it much less drama-filled than the Simple Wikipedia. Anyways, good luck in your future endeavours, and cheers, Razorflame 04:10, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I didn't leave, I'm just on break from editing. For personal matters. Best. Syn 01:21, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

That is good to hear :). Hope to see you back sometime in the near future then :). Razorflame 17:15, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Ping

I have sent you an e-mail. --Tenmei (talk) 01:45, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your time and consideration. As a gesture of appreciation, may I share a rhetorical question from the Analects of Confucius: "Is it not pleasant to learn with a constant perseverance and application?" --Tenmei (talk) 16:06, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. Your welcome. Syn 01:27, 20 January 2010 (UTC)