User talk:Nishkid64/Archive 41


Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Vote!

User:Milk's Favorite Cookie/elections - Milk's Favorite Cookie 01:14, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Working Group login

Hi Nishkid64, just letting you know I've sent an email (via the English Wikipedia email function) to you with details about your Working Group wiki login details. Be sure to change your password once you log in, for security reasons! If there's any problems with the login (passwords, username not working, or anything), fire me an email and I'll try and sort them out for you. Looking forward to working with you as a fellow group member! Cheers, Daniel (talk) 03:59, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again!

Soon after the block imposed by you is over, the user is just back to the square; No discussion whatsoever, no consensus, but just started again slapping the template all over ([1], [2], [3], [4]). This is very annoying and happening time & again; and needs to be stopped, please. At the least, after multiple blocks related to that template, the user was expected to start a discussion with wider audience, and should have arrived at a consensus before using those templates. But unfortunately, that has not happened. Even he doesn't even hesitate to involve in revert wars, after being blocked multiple times for revert warring; see the latest revert wars:[5], [6], [7].

And finally here is my main complaint: Severe personal attack on me, calling me racist. Please look into the section: Talk:Veerappan#Removing_WikiProject_templates and you decide if there is any racist attitude displayed from me. On the other hand, you decide how the discussion is totally dragged out of context when I asked the question how the person (of that article) is related to the so-called civilization. I am strongly offended with this personal attack. I request your closer attention into this issue. Thank you - KNM Talk 16:05, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nishkid, I am totally confused and wondered, with what the user's intent on Wikipedia are. Please see this edit which is made after his latest block expiry. He has gone ahead and termed Cinema of Karnataka as Cooliewood. I have never heard that term before, and I am a member of Karnataka wikiproject and a contributor to Cinema of Karnataka. This is most concerning issue because, one of the meanings of Coolie is A contemporary racial slur for people of Asian descent, including people from India, Central Asia, etc. Whats more, even Google search couldn't determine what this user is saying. I strongly request a severe action on this user's conduct and apparent misbehaviour. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you - KNM Talk 16:23, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sir, I a personally concerned about the addition of many topics related to Karnataka, which really cant have a racial classification, such as Kannada literature, Tuluva people, Kannada cinema (Cooliewood is ofcourse an interesting name he has given it). The numerous people he has managed to sign up are an intense effort to lobby for support, though most of them are hardly seen on wikipedia. I realy tihnk this needs to be brought up on ANI and a serious step taken to curb this. A short block is not going to work.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 16:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I believe this is the high time Wikiraja is indef blocked. He has clearly shown his intentions of editing Wikipedia after being given so many chances. No discussions, no consensus, severe personal attacks including accusations of racism on KNM, gross incivility, repeated violations of 3RR and frequent revert wars. Let us also not forget, the account User:Wiki Raja is a sockpuppet account of User:Indrancroos. User:Wiki Raja account was indef blocked because of sockpuppetry, but the user requested admin Aksi_great that, he intends to continue with Wiki Raja account instead of Indrancroos account. Blocklog here. Gnanapiti (talk) 16:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Thank you for the suggestion, and I have started a discussion thread in AN/I and notified the user about it. Thank you, - KNM Talk 17:52, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IP posting BS on talkpages

I don't know what to do about this IP, they are going around on multiple talkpages and posting BS info (see Talk:Jeff Hardy for an example). I have warned the user, but I am not sure if they are violating and policies since he is posting the info on talkpages and not the articles. TJ Spyke 05:16, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UnclePaco back?

64.131.204.90 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
UnclePaco (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

64.131.204.90 is from his IP range and shares his interests. --B (talk) 06:13, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add that the Migusta____ account perhaps deserves outright deletion as an inappropriate username: "Migusta" is a misspelling of "Me gusta" (I like), and the rest is a slang term, considered obscene in the Dominican Republic, for the female sexual organ. The username is in keeping with UnclePaco's style, who is given to using insults of a sexual nature, as you can see in some of his sockpuppets' edits on talk pages. SamEV (talk) 02:42, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FAC request

Nishkid, can you have a look at WP:FAC? I removed a nom (Terra Nova Expedition) because the nominator has another one running, and left him a talk note, but he brought it right back. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:49, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, resolved. Whew, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Me again; twice in one day :-) I could use admin eyes at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Uncyclopedia; Raul isn't always around on weekends. I think I've done all I can do for now by adding {{rally}}, and now we just have to dig through it, but I'm not sure if I should be doing anything else. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's my take as well; we just have to muddle through the reasoned commentary, but I do appreciate having admin eyes on the situation, so I don't have to get into a tug-of-war if anything comes up. Thanks! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:55, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! Kirill 19:23, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What?

Are you kidding me? Have you seen the misrepresentation from this editor today? Do try and do a bit of research first, and don't threaten established editors with random blocks, especially not when they're dealing with someone who's a known problem and has a block log as long as my arm. Relata refero (talk) 21:58, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He was claiming that an article that said "neglect" could be used as a source for a statement that said "discrimination". There were several other such instances of misrepresentation in the past hour alone, during which, among other things, he accused me of making a covert attack on his religion. When I pointed out that neglect should not be paraphrased as 'discrimination', he said they had the same connotation. And you are trying to say that "your inability to comprehend that one word does not mean the same thing as another does not portend well for any article you write" is unacceptable? What is unacceptable about it? Is he not apparently unable to comprehend that the two words are not interchangeable? ("Exploitation, Neglect, etc. are all terms with a negative connotation. Pettifoggery isnt going to change the fact that a spade is a spade") Is that not likely to negatively impact any article he writes?
And where do you get off telling me how to handle him, or making strange 'warnings'? If you can handle him better, why are you not trying to fix these articles that POV-pushers muck up on a regular basis? An abdication of responsibility that's only made worse by your coming and telling me that you think I am being uncivil when I have made the utmost effort over months to encourage this editor to avoid making personal attacks. I am this close to taking this to AN/I as an unconscionable abuse of admin power. Relata refero (talk) 22:29, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am flipping out, as you put it, because you have just effectively undermined any future efforts I may make to urge civility on someone who has the utmost trouble with it. And I am flipping out because I have no idea how to interpret a "warning" made obviously with no idea of how and what my own contributions here have been. Whatever. I'm happy to apologise if I was uncivil to you, and I actually deeply regret it if I was. However, I must tell you that if you step into the middle of a conversation in which established user X is pleading with problem user Y to revert themselves after breaking 3RR to "warn" X for incivility, X, regardless of how much they may value civility, is likely to take it badly.
Admin abuse lies in not making an effort to discover what's going on, and to throw your weight around with warnings in that vacuum. Please don't do it again. I don't make complaints easily, and so I won't in this case, but I strongly suggest you revisit your methodology here. Relata refero (talk) 22:56, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You know, I'm not sure that doesn't make it worse. I'm quite calm now, so I can tell you this: you gave me a civility warning without investigating who you were giving it to. Did you pause to ask me? You spoke to Bakasuprman about it - off-wiki - but I was not afforded that courtesy. (INcidentally, he still claims he didn't violate 3RR, and has shown no inclination as of the last time I checked to actually revert the appropriate line.)
Not only was I not afforded the same courtesy as a problem editor, but you didn't take a moment to look through my contribs. In the past three days I've had a discussion with Guy urging him to be more civil, stepped in to reprimand an IP for an antisemitic attack, and admonished an admin for using the word 'troll' at an RfA. I make a point of civility, and believe it underpins our enterprise. Which is something that you could have discovered first; or asked me before a "warning".
Allow me to apologise again if I was initially sharp. Relata refero (talk) 23:16, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
About abuse: I have heard that before, and I understand the point. However, a block warning from an administrator carries more weight, as they are in a position to act on it more directly. Given that, you should be careful about using it.
I do not call into question your good faith. Relata refero (talk) 23:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly think that you are incorrect about your history-warning concept. Note that it neverthless undermines my ability to insist on civility in future. That being said, I accept it as a reason to not have had a look at my history. In the same spirit - of a reminder to someone whose good faith is not in question - I trust you will consider this a reminder that occasionally that attitude can lead to this type of unpleasantness. Admin actions, or warnings given with the weight of threatened admin action, are always better done with full information.
As for "as of 1968", it is nevertheless required, as the 1994 citation quotes a 1968 study. It isnt an independent source. Note that the point that he refused to admit a violation stands; in this too, I'm afraid I mildly disagree with your judgment.
And finally, you haven't yet responded to my original post. Is "your inability to comprehend that one word does not mean the same thing as another does not portend well for any article you write" incivil or, in this case, a simple statement of fact? The only alternative is that he chooses to not comprehend it; if I were to assume that instead, I violate a core policy. Under such circumstances, to continue to call a simple statement of verifiable truth incivility is problematic. You weren't just an outside observer: you were a mistaken outside observer, and you didn't choose to question yourself, much less me.
I have to go offline for a bit now, but if you have any further concerns I will respond tomorrow. Cheers! Relata refero (talk) 00:09, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That is nowhere near a satisfactory response, because it doesn't even begin to engage with the specific points I've made. My characterisation of his behaviour was accurate; there was no other way to make a simple statement. If he is so slapdash about sourcing and accuracy, I question why you are trying to maintain his presence here at this cost. Relata refero (talk) 08:34, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please! That's a terrible assumption. I said "your inability to comprehend that one word does not mean the same thing as another does not portend well for any article you write". Which is true! Each time that a careful paraphrase is necessary, this chap might well completely change the meaning - especially since he is unwilling to have it pointed out! How is this a good portent for anything he writes? And how is that the same as "every article is inaccurate"? Relata refero (talk) 08:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

I will continue to adhere to these policies. I hope we can both agree my civility is improving day-by-day, and that you and other admins can provide me feedback on how I am doing.Bakaman 22:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion of a 3RR decision

Another user opened a conversation about a 3RR decision you made today. The discussion's at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Admin Nishkid64 blocking users based on favoritism. Just the messenger in this case, Metros (talk) 03:08, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Really?

From where I'm standing, its because of the attitude that he has made "useful contributions" that has caused one of our three or four most disruptive users to escape proper sanctions. I've looked through his edits, thanks. I don't think he's a net plus to the encyclopaedia. I'm nowhere near alone there, you appear to be in a crushing minority. He's been here for years, if you haven't been able to clean up his tendency to misrepresent sources and be crushingly uncivil and assume bad faith by now, I strongly suggest you stop trying. His positive contributions are nowhere near worth it. Relata refero (talk) 08:27, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Against him?" What kind of battles are you fighting? The last ArbCom had a proposed remedy from Guy. Is that an editor against him? Moreschi? Are these the people you mean?
And he has slipped through the cracks each time it appears because ArbCom is terrified of expanding the scope of a case. And because of this unconscionable attitude. If you were defending him and stepping in on the vast stretches of articles he ruins, that's one thing. But you aren't even doing that. Relata refero (talk) 08:37, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Read the talkpage of that ArbCom. That case had become too unwieldy; the arbcoms hoped for another specifically focusing on editing abuse. Relata refero (talk) 08:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, it was that he has a pattern of misrepresenting and misinterpreting sources, combined with carelessness. It extends across every article I have ever seen him on. That does mean that all the other articles might also be problematic. (It doesn't mean every edit is inaccurate.) And how can you disagree with that conclusion?
And I'm talking of HK2. Even HK1, if a mysterious bunch of users who are never around to restrain him when he's a problem seem to have turned up to vouch for him. Relata refero (talk) 08:56, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Are you joking? If I had the time or patience for that, I would have taken it to ArbCom as they have suggested.
And I'd like to point out what happened the last time someone tried to indefblock him. And I notice that something similar seems to happen each time his editing privileges are threatened. Relata refero (talk) 09:09, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know

There is an article that was created Feb 5, 2008, Asher Wade, could you confirm if it fits the criteria for did you know--Java7837 (talk) 20:04, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added one more reference is it good now?--Java7837 (talk) 00:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Someone vandalized this, just to let you know I reverted it. Thanks. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 23:06, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

William Wordsworth

What do you think of William Wordsworth? It's not the best article at the minute, but there's certainly a lot of material available about him. He's no longer with us, so that should mean the articles stable. To be honest, he's a poet that deserves a featured article - he's regarded as one of Englands greatest assets. Ryan Postlethwaite 00:54, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yey! On a side note, he lived, and died 8 miles from my house so I should be able to get some great pictures. Ryan Postlethwaite 02:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vampire: Undeath

Did you delete Vampire: Undeath? If so, what the hell? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mykal lakim (talk • contribs) 03:37, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting Vampire: Undeath

As soon as the pages are made, you're deleting them. What the hell? Why Can't any other role-playing company have recognition here? I noticed you let White Wolf stay? Are they paying you off to keep smaller companies off the list?

Mykal lakim (talk)Mykal Lakim —Preceding comment was added at 03:46, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Vampire: Undeath

It just blows my mind that someone on this site would follow my postings and remove EVERYTHING i make as soon as i make it. I mean, to stalk someone just to delete material? What gives? The material is viable material, describing a role playing company, the games made under the company and other related information. You can't say G.A.M.E didn't have a page, because i've written it 5 times and it keeps getting deleted. I find it weird that White Wolf (a better known company) can stay on this site, yet a smaller company cannot have pages here. Who do i complain to if you're going to be this way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mykal lakim (talk • contribs) 03:50, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Vampire: Undeath

You're gay. Admitting to me something like that? I'm going to boycott your website and advise every person i run into to boycott your site. It's unfair for someone to stalk another person's entry to delete it before they can even finish the editing. You say G.A.M.E hasn't got notability, yet i've had over 500 orders in the last month for my gaming series (Exalted). I have a .com in which i do advertising for Yahoo!, Google, Sirius Radio and many other companies. Yes, i'm a smaller company, but I have notibility for anyone who takes the time to actually check into it. There's a Yahoo! Group, fansites, Myspace account for myself and the company, there are blogs, forums, chats, and the official website. I have everything that meets notibility. What i apparently lack, is millions of dollars. Sorry bub, i'm not in it for the money. I'm in it because i love what i do. And since information is free, i'll be posting your posts on my website so others are warned not to use your site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mykal lakim (talk • contribs) 12:41, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

persian gulf

Hi, regarding you protected the persian gulf article. While the mediation is ongoing but the recent edit-dispute was not related to it at all. It was a dispute as to enhance the article in another perspective. I am not sure indefinite protection of the page is the best answer. and what you called edit-war wasn't really a war, it was an editor making some changes which others had opinions on it and as you can see on the talk page they started talking about it before you protect the page. That mediation can go on forever, I am not sure we should just close down imporvments on the article even those complelty out of scope of the mediation. Please consider revising the full protection.Farmanesh (talk) 01:03, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your answer, I don't know where I should leave my answer, here or at my talk page?
Whthere there is edit war or not is one thing, and having an 'unlimited' protection is another. You conditioned opening protection to the finish of mediation but the recent edit war had nothing to do with mediation and it was on a totally different topic. Thats why I don't see the unlimited protection justified, even if there was no mediation there would have still been this edit war.
I think we agree this is a highly debated article but just unlimitedly locking it is not the way. It just needs constant overlook and occasional protection but not 'unlimited' one.Farmanesh (talk) 03:36, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{Oldprodfull}}

Hello, Nishkid64 ... please see this talk page and tell me what you think of my newly created Template:Oldprodfull ... would you use it, or update it if you encountered it?

Also, what are your thoughts on my proposed WP:FLAG-BIO protocol?

Happy Editing! — 72.75.72.63 (talk · contribs) 14:33, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Vampire: Undeath

My company wasn't created yesterday. It was originally founded in 1995 and took off in 1999. And I did read your guidelines and it still seems as though i am not getting a fair shake here. Who do i contact to get a hold of someone who can actually do something about this? I'm sick of having my stuff deleted without a good reason and i'm sick of being told my company isn't good enough to be posted here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mykal lakim (talk • contribs) 02:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reading

No matter how many times i read that thing it still says the same thing and i still notice the same thing. Someone's not reading my posting clearly. Hmmmm... was it that they were just running around deleting information without bothering to actually read what it said? I think so. My companies think so. Employees think so. Damn dude.. looks like discrimination again. No matter where you run, you've dug yourself a hole here. And no, i won't throw you a ladder to climb out. Who do i contact about this matter? You have a superior, i want their e-mail. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mykal lakim (talk • contribs) 02:30, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2007–2008 Writers Guild of America strike

Do you realise you left the talk page as well as the talk page archive behind in your move? I can't fix it myself since the page exists but as an admin I guess you can... Nil Einne (talk) 15:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for February 11th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 7 11 February 2008 About the Signpost
Features and admins
Features and admins
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles

Hi ...

While working on this sandbox, I stumbled across Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles ... after looking at a few random articles, I believe that I may qualify for inclusion ... I've rearranged the introduction, and deleted some cruft ... I guess that I've changed my mind, and now I would like to make this autobiographical article worthy of inclusion (it started as a "learning exercise"), and I would appreciate any help in "pruning" it to get it ready for moving to article space. :-)

Thank you for your continuing help and advice! -- Dennette (talk) 13:48, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

edit war

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Sikhism. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Ajjay (talk) 05:17, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYKTX

Thanks for your note and your work on DYK. If you ever feel like giving me some guidance on how to get my first GA, it looks like you're well qualified! Thanks, HG | Talk 23:49, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK Tourist Attractions in Bangalore

Thank you. I am so happy my contributions are adding value to Wikipedia.

Tinucherian (talk) 02:05, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for clearing up the bit of a mess on my talk page. Looks like a bunch of friends are rushing to their friend's defense. Or not-so-friend in one case. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OhanaUnited's RFA

RE:RE:

In fact being a cadet officer are for the privilaged few and is a part our history and an extracurricular activity. These cadets work hard to run the school and should be apart of its website. Also in reguards to "College Acceptance", for the past 4 years Hargrave has had 100% of college acceptances. If I were to put, "For the past 4 years Hargrave Military Academy has had 100% college acceptance and are well under way to achieving this goal for the 5th year. Here are the Current College acceptances:"? Iceromeo1470 (talk) 15:41, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

_____________________________________________________________________________________ Hargrave Military Academy I have undone your edit to Hargrave Military Academy. These list of college acceptances and current cadet officers is not necessary. The article should have general information about the school. See WP:SCH#S for more information. That link will answer your questions regarding the structure of articles on schools. Nishkid64 (talk) 19:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Please read the link. All school articles should follow that format. Your additions are unnecessary, since they are just lists of current students. Nishkid64 (talk) 20:05, 19 February 2008 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Iceromeo1470"

Boganda

Thank you. Actually, it's surprising he isn't better known: I first read about him here, said "hmm, it would be nice to have a real Wikipedia biography of his", and within a few days turned one out. A picture would be nice, and there are several on Google images (fair use), but I'm not sure about PD/free license images. In terms of completeness: I used all the more usable sources from Google Books, and filled in a little from Web sources. I imagine a library might contain additional material, but keeping in mind that we do have a good sampling of sources, and that he is, all things considered, not that famous, what we have now does seem complete to me. However, should you uncover more, I'd be most curious to see it, and yes, I agree the article has FA potential, if not just yet. Biruitorul (talk) 18:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, the biography does sound nice, if it can be tracked down. Well, with or without it, I look forward to seeing the improvements you'll make there. Biruitorul (talk) 14:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New mailing list

There has been a mailing list created for Wikipedians in the New York metropolitan area (list: Wikimedia NYC). Please consider joining it! Cbrown1023 talk 21:26, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

McCain

Thanks for the note, Nishkid64. We've had withdrawn noms in the past when the principle editor agreed the article wasn't ready, well before declarations of support and oppose got underway. I offered that option to Wasted Time R early on, I wish he would have taken me up on it (since FAC is not PR), but now we've got a FAC underway with significant Support declarations, so respecting consensus, it's too late for a withdraw on that basis. Surprisingly, the best appraisal of the article so far has come not from reviewers, but from Wasted Time R. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:55, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, see Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Archtransit, Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Dereks1x, Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Archtransit and AN thread and ANI thread. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:59, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't shocked, and neither were the people who know his footprint. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:03, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block reset

In order to punish sock-puppeteering, you reset an indefinite block to a 1 year block. Nice one. 128.122.253.212 (talk) 04:30, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK : Tourist attractions in Mysore : Thank you

Thank you for accepting my article Tourist attractions in Mysore for DYK.

- Tinucherian (talk) 17:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Coaching Re-confirmation

Hello, previously you expressed interest in participating in the Wikipedia:Admin coaching project. We are currently conducting a reconfirmation drive to give coaches the opportunity to update their information and capacity to participate in the project. Please visit Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Status to update your status and move your entry to the Active list. Also, please remember to update your capacity (5th table variable) in the form of a fraction (eg. 2/3 means you are currently coaching 2 students, and could accept 1 more student). Thank you. MBisanz talk 09:28, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

I know it has been a while but thank you for the unblocking. This guy seems pretty rude and i know now that i ahould be insulted to be associated with him. Thank you again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkhelmet322 (talk • contribs) 18:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


wow!

How do you make cool userbar things? (the GUI on your userpage) its really cool :) help me make one please :) Fejj the ritual (talk) 00:49, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for February 18th and 25th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 8 18 February 2008 About the Signpost
From the editor — From the editor
Features and admins
Features and admins
Volume 4, Issue 9 25 February 2008 About the Signpost
Michael Snow interview
Signpost interview: Michael Snow
Features and admins
Features and admins
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:11, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Persian Gulf

I think that your protection of the Persian Gulf page was an overreaction to a slight disagreement. I made a few (major) edits and someone told me to talk about them first. so I opened a discussion on the talk page discussing some changes. If there is another reason that I don't know about please inform me.

P.S. Cool userpage! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ardeshire Babakan (talk • contribs) 17:38, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RATEMYCOP.COM

A couple months ago you deleted ratemycop.com from wikipedia. Well the site is live now, beta testing. It's revolutionary in the sense that it has over 120,000 officers in the data base to rate. As an example http://www.ratemycop.com/index.php?st=CA&dept=13867. LAPD has 9000 officers listed. Where else in the United States would you find this? Definitely worthy of wikipedia. Additionally it has made the news recently. http://www.kutv.com/content/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=49094c36-ec83-4306-954a-eca063c62693

Thank for your reconsideration.

Gino Sesto —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ginosesto (talk • contribs) 22:38, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you take a look?

Hello, since I am an unregistered user with no real clout on Wikipedia I wonder if you could look into a dispute I've been having with user Relata refero on the Mission (Christian) article here. He seems to be quite determined to censor. As you appear to be someone with a more balanced view I will abide by your judgement should you decide to intervene. 63.196.193.250 (talk) 00:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uh oh, similar problem at Religious violence in India where user Otolemur crassicaudatus says that the Christian Science Monitor and a primary source, Baptist World Alliance, are not reliable sources. Says he's going to "report me" after just one reversion of his deletion of these sources. Wow, does he think this is supposed to be a Christian article? 63.196.193.21 (talk) 15:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Re:Wow

yeah i think; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nishkid64

the thing with talk, articles, vandalism, barnstars, userboxes how do you get it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fejj the ritual (talk • contribs) 04:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

how long does it take? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fejj the ritual (talk • contribs) 04:56, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crusadewatch as source

Is Crusadewatch RS? What you think? Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 07:24, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, this IP edited my comment in talk page [8] , I changed it back to previous comment [9].

Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 12:50, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you



Milhist Coordinator elections
Thank you very much for your support in the recent Military history Wikiproject elections. I went into it expecting to just keep my seat and was astonished to end up with the lead role. I anticipate a rather busy six months :) --ROGER DAVIES talk 13:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haut-Koeningsbourg castle, Alsace.

user:Nikkul on Mumbai

Don't know what to do with user:Nikkul. He's back on Mumbai, going against all consensus. Suggestions? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Coaching

I was wondering whether or not you would be able to coach me, if you could talk to me on my talk page that would be great. Tom.mevlie (talk) 07:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments moved to talk

Nishkid, I moved this discussion to the talk page, so PMA's objections to a mere request wouldn't sidetrack the entire FAC. Hope that's OK with you, regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:11, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted user pages

Hello again, Nishkid64 ... would you please restore the User pages listed on this page? I asked the deleting admin, but they were recalcitrant and said that I should go to WP:DRV to get them restored ... I am concerned about the redlinks created on beau coup article Talk page signatures, and that without the {{User Alternate Acct}} tags, the User Talk pages will be deleted as well. Happy Editing! — 141.156.217.11 (talk) 15:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]