I'll admit it's a bit of a pill to swallow, because I take pride in doing the interviews and monthly question- even if it does take me a forever and a half on occasion- but it really should be done as soon as possible.
So yeah, go ahead and put it up. Make sure to include an opening paragraph with his quote in it, okay? Might seem stupid to specify that, but I just think it's something necessary to make the interview more engaging and personal for readers.
Hello Kagimizu. Ultrasonic9000 here. I write this because I want to apologize for my behavior. Our discussion about the tab templates went a little out of hand in my opinion, so I want to make this right. You may not know this, but I am not a flexible person, so whenever change appears in a way that rubs me all wrong, I get pretty defensive about it and try to prevent it (at least anything reckless about it).
I am sorry if my opinions have upset you, but I ask you to not let it hurt your view on SNN. Just direct it at me. Your solution about changing the redirects may not be as bad as I made it out to be. In honesty, I just wanted you to understand that there would be drawbacks to the sub-article method you talked about. Then again, if something as the Star Wars wiki can pull something like this off, who am I to judge?
Dude, I've been around SNN six years, going on seven. A little tiff isn't going to hurt my view on SNN as a whole so much that I'd pack my bags and leave completely. My problem was- is- that I can't understand your logic as to how it's deceitful or hiding information, when the intention behind it is to make the information connected and accurate. No offense, but you did come off as quite a stiff.
Unfortunately, I've been on the opposite end of this conversation, so I can relate. No harm done.
Hey, I'm running for administrator again and I would appreciate if you could look at the nomination. I'm really trying to have another shot at this because I feel I could put the tools to good use. Thanks.
I understand that you are busy and all but I would like to take the opportunity to remind you of some things that you need to ensure that you do with the next interview process as it is approaching rapidly:
Make sure that inactive users are not included on the poll. Mystic Orb won this poll by a landslide and he is no longer editing this wiki.
Make sure that you include eight users on the poll. You included six this time which is okay but it was decided in a previous site discussion a couple years back that the poll is to include eight candidates.
Make sure that the previous three featured users are not included on the poll, which you did.
Within the next couple of weeks you'll have to set up an interview with BlueSpeeder (as he is the runner up), so try and make sure it gets done in a timely matter.
Apologies about Mystic Orb. I use the Community Portal as my point of reference for the top editors, and in the past any inactive Users have been removed from the list. Due to lack of knowledge on recent wiki activity, I have to rely on that page as my point of reference in tandem with the additional rules.
As for doing six rather than eight.... I recall the discussion you're mentioning, but I know there was a reason I've been doing six for the past several months. I just can't for the life of me remember why. No-one's ever had an issue with it though.