Kudpung

Whoof that was a tough one to witness. I felt like your nom was an excellent one, in choice of nominee as well as content of the statement. I hope it won't get you down! VQuakr (talk) 16:58, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

You blocked this editor eight years ago and I'm still cleaning up the mess. Look at all the photos at Bastrop, Louisiana. I just cleaned Sterlington, Louisiana. Oh my! Magnolia677 (talk) 23:54, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

You've done so much to improve the user experience on Wikipedia due to your active effort. You've always been better at Wikipedia than me. This space won't work as well without you, but for each of us there comes a moment. I'll live in hope that you grow uncomfortable without us. Until then, know you've earned my friendship and respect. I'm so proud to call you my wikifriend, a rank you joined when you opposed my first RfA twelve years ago. You were right then, and I have every reason to suspect you're right these days. BusterD (talk) 17:34, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for what you said in memory of David. - I remember Requiem compositions today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:15, 26 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello again. You are no longer active now, which is a shame, and it's sad to see another old sparring partner ScottyWong retiring too. But I was pondering whether to attend the Wikimania in Singapore and, as you're based in a nearby country, wondered whether you are likely to attend. As we both attended the HK Wikimania together, it would be nice to know whether there will be any familiar faces there.

If not, I may content myself with virtual attendance as it is otherwise not a good time to travel from the UK. So I'll look out for you in that astral form too.

Andrew🐉(talk) 13:43, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Do you remember me Kudpung? I was the tenth signature here and I believe you sent a message on my talk page back when I was just a stupid newbie getting into trouble. A lot's changed since then but we remember you still. Hope life is going good for you outside of WP. Fathoms Below (talk) 20:30, 10 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Fathoms Below. I do remember because I had already significantly reduced my activity. It was about a closure or something. I hope I was giving you good advice though I don't remember what it was about. I see you are an admin now, congratulations. Keep up the good work! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:51, 10 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Heh, my RfA was a mess of my own making. Hopefully it'll be the only major train wreck of 2024. Not sure about how much you've looked at but we've had a handful of other good things happen. Hey man im Josh, Novem Linguae, and Clovermoss have also been promoted in the meantime. May I say congratulations to them on your behalf? Or you can talk with them yourself of course. If this is too much chit chat I'll leave you to your guide. Fathoms Below (talk) 21:25, 10 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have not edited for two years but as I have to consult the encyclopedia daily - as an encyclopedia - I have not been out of touch. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Welcome back Kudpung. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:16, 25 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

I wanted to mention that your absence has been felt, especially at NPP. I hope you've been well, and I was glad to see you listed at WP:NPPTOP. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:56, 15 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the inspiring discussion with John! - I find today's birthday child particularly inspiring, by enthusiasm and determination. That was - believe it or not - a pictured DYK in 2021, without the last line though. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:33, 9 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Today's story is about Edith Mathis, who portrayed young women by Mozart. The video of a 1993 interview has videos of her performances. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:59, 13 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Dear Kudpung, this is in response to the post you made to my page about excessive draftification, probably in response to my post to Joe (and, I think you also posted to Talk:Laurence D. Marks which I don't normally edit for obvious reasons). I tend to do NPP on academics/science topics, so I had not seen until a few days ago draftification by a less experienced user. Earlier today I went to check the articles and found that SafariScribe had already reverted quite a few by the same user, hence I am adding him here to the discussion.

I would definitely support your suggestion to limit Draftification to users with reviewer rights (NPP/NPR). I think most of them are fairly careful, and while a few may be a bit too gentle in their reviews (IMO) I have not seen abuse. I think Joe is pretty careful about adding NPP rights (and possibly other relevant admins, I have only interacted with Joe to date). I would allow extended confirmed users to tag for notability etc, that would be fine. Perhaps open a RfC at WT:NPR? Ldm1954 (talk) 23:26, 19 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi Laurence. Thank you for your feedback. Joe is a very experienced admin and a regular contributor to NPP both as an admin at PERM and a reviewer. Some research has begun into why backlog drives are possibly less effective than they were and I have not seen any misuse of the draft system by regular NPP right holders. A proper RFC for a new policy would be best launched on a NPR sub page, and supported by stats and empirical evidence. The stats are being gathered but I don't think we're ready for it just yet because it indirectly concerns a topic that might involve one or two other refinements to the Curation Tools and how we can better help new user who register with the prime intent of creating an article as their first edits. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

OK Ldm1954 (talk) 23:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)Reply