User talk:Rodhullandemu/Archive/05

Vegas

source. If he has played 5 minutes for St Helens, then he belongs in Category:St Helens RFC players. Perhaps you could chase up the person who deleted the valid information from the Johnny Vegas article without giving any reason and notify them that unexplained deletion of information is considered vandalism. I would do it but I've got a huge backlog on my watchlist to deal with. Also, please remember to sign your messages with 4 tildes, regards, King of the North East 16:53, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry for rerminding you to sign, I didn't realise that you were so experienced. King of the North East 18:44, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I read your comment again, I didn't mean that the removal of the category was against policy I meant this removal of reliably sourced information from the encyclopaedia with no discussion, consensus or explaination wasn't right. The guy coming along and removing the tag acted in good faith, simply alerting me to the fact that valid information had been removed from the article. Regards, King of the North East 20:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-Protection

Have you ever stopped and thought that maybe my userpage has never been vandalised because it is semi-protected? (I love entei (talk) 19:39, 23 December 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Page Protection

In regards to the Cunt page protection, I left a note here regarding my reasoning for the protection. But I do realize it is you have the article watchlisted, and are quite adept and quick at the reverts. If you were to request unprotection, I would support it, but I'm under the belief that the article is obviously more subject to childish vandalism than the majority of other articles, so leaving it open to any edit just seems a little, well, odd at times. I just thought I'd swing by to let you know I left my comment at the thread. Merry Christmas! Jmlk 1 7 21:39, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"The difference between Peter Gabriel and Phil Collins is that the former is creepy and the latter is a creep"

I wouldn't be so sure doubting Collins' creepiness - I finally got a hold of Seconds Out on Saturday night. I mean, sure, Willow Farm is an exercise in insanity, but that's no reason to include a maniacal laugh in it, Phil. Will ^(talk) 00:56, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The "Phil" was referring to Collins, not you. My dad, as much of a 70s Genesis fan as I am (he always used to quote Battle of Epping Forest), also shares the opinion that Peter and Steve leaving ruined Genesis, and thusly doesn't own any albums after Wind & Wuthering (which wasn't that bad) - and to be fair, he has a point, as I tend to skip the post-Hackett albums more than the other albums when they appear on shuffle. With the description of Supper's Ready, i would've put either "suite", as that's how it's written on Atom Heart Mother, or "medley". We could aways cop out and call it "track" :p Will ^(talk) 01:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I forgot - Collins does sound weirder on Seconds Out than Peter on Archive and Foxtrot, especially with the "gorgeous as gesse" set of lines. And I just realised not so long ago that the correct lyric is "dad diddly office", not "dad diddly washing" :/ Will ^(talk) 01:40, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 52	26 December 2007	About the Signpost

Wales appoints six arbitrators	Board approves expansion, up to 11 trustees possible
WikiWorld comic: "Molasses"	News and notes: Stewards, Senate testimony, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	WikiProject Report: Plants
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


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) 13:50, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI: A Favour Please

Hey, i have left a message with the user, does this sound okay? Am i able to mark this incident as resolved, or are still wanting more action to be taken? Tiptoety ^talk 03:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I will keep an eye on him and help guide him into the right direction if needed. Let me know if there is anything else that can be done regarding this incident. Cheers! Tiptoety ^talk 03:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure

not sure if you've been notified of [1]DGG (talk) 19:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jerusalem boogie to us, perhaps

In all seriousness, Inkscape, a lot of patience, a steady hand, and Google Maps open in the other tab. Will ^(talk) 01:54, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the revert!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Someone vandalized my Userspace! But a little angel came along and fixed it! Thank you! You can thank others by using {{subst:Vangel}}! Tiptoety ^talk 21:02, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Message on telugu wikipedia

This is regarding the message you left on telugu wikipedia [2] We could not understand what this all about. Can you explain? --Dunnob (talk) 03:14, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorted --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 03:40, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 3

Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate, that landed on WP:100! I paid close attention to everything that was said, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I'm taking things slowly for now, partially because of the holidays and all the off-wiki distractions. :) I'm also working my way through the Wikipedia:New admin school and double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, but I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are several more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status! Thanks again, and have a great new year, --El on ka 05:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Elvis

As you have some experience with the Elvis Presley article and the problems discussed on the related talk page, could I possibly ask you for a short statement here. Thanks. Onefortyone (talk) 02:12, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Ive chilled.. ive got another fag on my back now.

probably wikipedia is full on computer fags.

you not included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Olirampling (talk • contribs) 12:42, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Desperately Unfunny Dan

Please see talk page on the article...or ignore, since you have reverted your own change.Kransky (talk) 13:45, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll ignore it, since we now have a reliable source: ourselves. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 13:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm

Don't know that [3]this edit was such a good idea. ^Avruchtalk 02:27, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do, because I've seen it all before. I doubt if I'll be sued. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 03:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your frustration is understandable, but they aren't terrorists - they're just bored kids, doing something they think is funny and irritating but harmless. They're largely correct, at least with regards to WP:AN/I or pages that are closely watched. There is an effectively unlimited number of unbanned IP addresses, so we will never be able to just 'kill 'em all'. Efficient reversion tools are the answer, or a re-evaluation of the idea of letting IPs edit. Either way, nothing is gained by taunting them. As for the guy who says he can just 'reboot his router'... Only the last part of an IP address is controlled by a router, so now that he's pointed it out the router range can be banned - problem solved. ^Avruchtalk 15:17, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just an update

Hay, this is in reference to the article that was copied into the toranto star. I just checked their website, and it appears the writer is still working for them...but her articles are all her own now. No word on the donation, but I will imagine that somthing was contributed because the thought makes me smile. Coffeepusher (talk) 20:17, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Aphrodite's Child

No, there's no problem, now that I see that the band has an article and produced notable music. If the anonymous user who put the name in there had provided more information, I would not have deleted in the first place. Thanks for your message, and for clearing this up. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 02:27, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 02:32, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for letting me know, seems I was a little too bold for some, but all in good faith, there is no chance of the article being deleted. Random Fixer Of Things (talk) 01:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, fair enough, but somebody probably should close it. Random Fixer Of Things (talk) 01:33, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You may made a mistake

I was spell correcting articles yesterday and it seems you rollback one of my edits with out much of an explanation. The diff is here. If you see, I change that spelling because I look at multiple dictionaries such as dictionary.com and other such resources. Can you look at that edit you made closely to see if you made a mistake? PrestonH 05:24, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Beatle IP

That IP user is an editor with the nickname "the Falsifier". Some of his edits are valid. But most have false information buried within his edits. His edit patterns resemble, or mimic, the edits of the "toy town vandal" who frequents many movie and TV shows relating to childrens entertainment. It is easier to simply revert him rather than try and prowl through and determine what small parts can be saved. Wiki admins User:KnowledgeofSelf and User:Wiki alf are both very familiar with this user and what he's about. Feel free to report to either of them if you cross paths with him. (although right now Alf is having local ISP troubles and is only online sporadically until he gets straightened out). Hope that helps Have a nice day. 156.34.210.254 (talk) 22:08, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. He used to just frequent Kiss and Van Halen related articles.(occasionally The Police) Branching off into Beatle territory is a new realm for him. It isn;t always the 70.X range either. Sometimes it's 98.X and sometimes it's the 60.X range. Not all anon editors can be as perfect as me :D . If you spot him just let KoS know. I don't think he ever sleeps :D . 156.34.210.254 (talk) 22:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January 2008

Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thank you! Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 17:43, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't matter, a recent final warning is always required. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 17:50, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey

Thank you for refering to my edit to Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey as a good faith edit as opposed to vandalism. Some people like to fling "vandalism" at people like you'd fling mud. I agree with you, the source I added wasn't great. I am in the process of adding sources to the article (which is currently unsourced), and that happened to be the first. I'll look for a more notable source, and also look for sources for other things mentioned in the article. Feel free to help! Wakedream (talk) 19:30, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny Keogh - 2 Pints

You've hit the nail on the head! PREVIOUS SERIES making him a previous character, this doesn't lessen his importance to the series it only illustrates he is not in the cast! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidsworld (talk • contribs) 22:06, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, my opinion is that he doesn't need to be moved to a new section, as he's still a main character, even if he's not in episodes being aired at the moment. So keep him where he is. ^anemone│_projectors 11:11, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ARTHUR & LUKE GELL

Shouldnt luke gell be put in the template box as he is now officialy a cast member and also shoudlnt arthur be put in minor characters on the characters page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.30.153.141 (talk) 18:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Non-canon

Main reason for the non-canon tag is the major injuries to the cast, viz. death... seems the NHS are great in the North-West if they revived the corpses and re-attached limbs to allow service as normal for series 7. Maybe don't mention how Hayley was last seen, and remove my additional comment?AirdishStraus (talk) 23:45, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Thanks

Hi Rodhullandemu - thanks for your participation in my request for adminship. It passed 52/0/0, and I'm now in possession of a shiny new mop. I'll remember what you said during my RfA, and let's hope that if I ever feel inclined to jump into something headfirst, they'll remind me why you supported giving me the mop in the first place, and I'll pull back. Anyway, if I can ever help you with anything, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 08:27, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rudget!

Dear Rodhullandemu, my sincere thanks for your support in my second request for adminship, which ended with 113 supports, 11 opposes, and 4 neutral. I would especially like to thank my admin coach and nominator, Rlevse and Ryan Postlethwaite who in addition to Ioeth all inspired me to run for a second candidacy. I would also like to make a special mention to Phoenix-wiki, Dihyrdogen Monoxide and OhanaUnited who all offered to do co-nominations, but I unfortunately had to decline. I had all these funny ideas that it would fail again, and I was prepared for the worst, but at least it showed that the community really does have something other places don't. Who would have though Gmail would have been so effective? 32 emails in one week! (Even if it does classify some as junk :P) I'm glad that I've been appointed after a nail biting and some might call, decision changing RFA, but if you ever need anything, just get in touch. The very best of luck for 2008 and beyond, Rudget . 16:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC) [reply]

berwick

QI is useless as a reference. See WP:V. I had a problem with the word propagated in the version I RVd ... it may be true but suggests that our rendition was in some way arising out of the QI coverage, which is wrong. Curious - to me - is NPOV since either version (berwick was at war; the whole thing is a myth) is curious. Bottom line: the current version is IMO better wording than the version I RVd. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tagishsimon (talk • contribs) 02:02, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January 2008

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In the future, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. Soxred93 | talk count bot 14:29, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January 16th, 2008

Thanks for the meassge but you could have just taken the tag off without telling me. However, a shorter introduction to Doctor Who would be nice as too many people will be turning away due to the sheer volume that they have to read before the main section begins. yettie0711 (talk) 19:10, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

I think you should go for RFA now, without further delay. You have strong contributions, and if you promise to take your time and ease into it, you'll do well. Just don't run off and start blocking people right away. If you want to screw up, make sure you screw up the articles, not the users. :-D I also think it's helpful to get coaching after you pass RfA. Jehochman ^Talk 02:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Admin

Thank you so much for showing your confidence in me as a user here, it is much appreciated. I would also like to commend you for all of your great contributions to the project. The reason i have not held another RfA is because i am honoring my promise from my last RfA to wait until someone else has nominated me. Plus i have been waiting for the "right time", but to be honest i am not sure when the "right time" is, who knows it may be now, or in 5 months. :) Tiptoety ^talk 02:26, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would be honored to have you as my admni nominator. Like you stated my first RfA was pre-mature and was me not completely grasping what a administrator does here at the project. My second one had some contreversial issues in it, which i have fixed sense. One issue is that i had a userbox stating that i was a police officer, when in fact i am only a police cadet, I have sense removed that userbox along with any others that have been viewed as controversial. The decision to nominate me is 100% up to you and if you feel that the concerns raised in my previous RfA's have not been adequately dealt with by me, then feel free to let me know and i would be happy to improve and wait. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 06:02, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and FYI if you are going to nom me, could you wait until later tomorrow? I am going to get some much need shut eye right now, and have school all day tomorrow. I will be available to answer all the questions and such later tomorrow. Thanks, Tiptoety ^talk 06:31, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Home now. :)Tiptoety ^talk 00:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I will work on that! And thank you again for showing your confidence in me! Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 04:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree with you in the fact that there are many users who see RFA as a numbers and not what the user has contributed to the project, and I once again thank you for showing your confidence in me. In regards to your quest towards adminship i would be more than happy to nominate you, though like you, would need to do a thorough look through of your contributions and sadly your edit count. If you are up to the task daunting task of the mop and buck that is? Tiptoety ^talk 05:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 3	14 January 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: A new weekly feature
Special: 2007 in Review	Wikimania 2009 bidding ends, jury named
Controversial non-administrator rollback process added	Supposed advance draft of Jobs keynote surfaces on talk page
WikiWorld comic: "The Nocebo Effect"	News and notes: Fundraiser ends, $500,000 donation, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Tutorial: Fundamentals of editing
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


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) 08:55, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Hemperor

A fine note it is: he easily qualifies as the most incoherent established editor I've seen. Acroterion _(talk) 02:06, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Prisoner

Thank you for your message. Now we have two editors that don't support your opinion and despite that you keep deleting a fact despite your own admission it might be true. So the natural question to ask is why don't you just tag it using a myriad of tags such as a fact tag instead of removing the fact like you did? Dr.K. (talk) 05:42, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I never asked for anything more. Cheers.--Dr.K. (talk) 17:05, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback. Please adjust it any way you see fit. The lengthy citation is for the benefit of some readers who wouldn't believe the fact and are not inclined to search the website to find the exact quote, (I had some bad experiences in other articles and that's how I got into this lengthy citation habit). Other than that, I am in complete agreement with you. Dr.K. (talk) 03:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please be my guest and shorten it as desired. (BTW as far as any original research concerns, the recitation came verbatim from the website. These were not my comments). Dr.K. (talk) 03:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For catching vandalism on my userpage.--Urban Rose 02:51, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

admin coaching

You still looking for a coach? I'd be happy to help if you are. - Revolving Bugbear 13:41, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind offer. I was thinking of nominating myself in any case, since User:Jehochman seems to think I'm ready; on the other hand, a second opinion is always worth having. Please take a look through my stats (on my User page) and contribs, and see if you can identify areas for expansion and improvement. We could take it from there. Thanks again. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 16:12, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing. I had a brief look through before, but will look further. Just as a warning, there are some people who are put off by self-noms ... but if I find that I agree with Jehochman (who seems to have pretty good judgment, historically), I will nominate you myself if you like. I'll get back to you ASAP. - Revolving Bugbear 16:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's what I think: I think you could pass an RfA now, provided that there aren't any problems that I missed while looking through your contribs. You seem to be a level-headed, intelligent, hardworking editor. You also have racked up an impressive number of edits in a relatively short time. That being said, there are a few things people will want to know:

People will want to see "article writing". Have you been involved in any GAs, FAs, or DYKs? I passed without any FAs or GAs, so it's not vital, but you will want to be able to show that you appreciate what kind of work goes into building an article. I personally don't have any such requirement as long as the candidate shows that he appreciates the work of the encyclopedia in general, but some people do.
I see you've done a lot with CSD, and judging by your deleted contribs, you seem to have gotten it right a lot. That's a good sign. I don't see a lot of AfD work, though, since about October. This isn't a problem per se, but if it comes up, you'll want to assure people that you plan to ease yourself in to things that you haven't had a lot to do with as yet.

That's all that's occurred to me so far. - Revolving Bugbear 20:01, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mind if I ask which cases, just for my own knowledge? I can't imagine it will change my mind, I'd just like to have a quick peek. - Revolving Bugbear 20:42, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see nothing of concern. Interestingly enough, I seem to have gotten myself involved in the aftermath of this case, without having any idea you were involved. Small world, eh? But like I said, I don't see any reason for concern.

So I guess it's up to you. If you are ready to proceed, I will happily give you a nomination. If there are things you would like to work on further, I'd be happy to help. - Revolving Bugbear 21:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mistakes are par for the course, and if you're willing to own up to them when they're brought up, I think people will not hold them against you. I will go ahead and draft up a nom and let you know when I've finished.

Cheers! - Revolving Bugbear 21:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ready to take the plunge?

Revolving Bugbear would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Revolving Bugbear to accept or decline the nomination. A page will be or has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rodhullandemu/Archive . If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

... :) - Revolving Bugbear 21:58, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you're waiting for something in particular, but you haven't transcluded yet. Technically I'm allowed to as well, but I don't want before you're finished with the page. - Revolving Bugbear 23:29, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you make your case well. Some editors might ask for names in response to question 2, but otherwise I don't see any problems.

As a word of warning, be prepared for a lot of questions, and some complicated ones, at that. There seem to be a lot of people active at RfA this week and they're digging pretty deep. When you get a question, make sure you take the time to think it over. And it's okay to say you're not sure, you would have to think about it, or even you would seek a second opinion -- good judgment sometimes means knowing you don't have all the answers.

By the way, I referred to you as "he" in my nom, just because that's my default. (I'm trained that way -- at my job, whenever I draft, I'm supposed to refer to all people as "he" unless otherwise specified.) If you'd rather it say something else, let me know or feel free to change it yourself.

I think you're ready. Good luck :) - Revolving Bugbear 23:40, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

your reversion of my edits

You weren't wrong but you were not correct either - I was editing so that the dates were consistent, rather than American style one place and British another. As for edit warring, I do believe you began it by reversing my edits for seemingly no reason. I believe you did the same on another page I edited, giving no valid reason and deleting important information. Why do that? Revenge? Thats a bit petty.

According to the guidelines you posted on my talk page, edits should not be made without substantial reason to do so... and I had substantial reason to do so, since there was no consistency - British dates were mixed in with American style, resulting in a poor-looking site. Hence, SUBSTANTIAL REASON TO DO SO. This also falls in line with the guideline which states that changes should not be made if there is a proven stability of style - and as I said, there is no stability of style as mentioned in the guidelines you posted - as I said American and British style dates were mixed - since there was no stability my edits are valid and stand.

Last, I didnt give a reason because I just figured out how to respond. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sblachly (talk • contribs) 19:26, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hoserjoe

While trying to maintain my cool about the issue, I forgot to notify the user. I've only ever been on the other side of ANI, and never reported anyone, haha. Thanks. the_undertow ^talk 00:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to ask that you focus on the issue here (which is not hormones or derangement): it is the deliberate deletion of careful, thoughtful, properly sourced content by Lara?Love without an explanation. Hoserjoe (talk) 07:17, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to do with me. I was just filling in the gaps in process. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 16:53, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

Damn, i missed it, i wanted to have at least co-nominated you, i guess i slacked off, sorry. Anyways just letting you know that i asked you a few questions on your RfA, feel free to take your time. Good luck! Tiptoety ^talk 01:46, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Centralized TV Episode Discussion

Over the past months, TV episodes have been redirected by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [4]. Even if you have not, other opinions are needed because this issue is affecting all TV episodes in Wikipedia. --Maniwar (talk) 02:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, screw it! :)

Rod, after sitting and thinking for a bit, and changing my !vote to neutral in your RFA, I have come to offer an apology. I should not have templated you, especially with a vandalism warning. You are a great asset here, and I look forward to nothing but positive interactions with you from here on out! Respectfully, Jmlk 1 7 03:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Secret Circular of the Brahmin Samaj of Balaghat

You had written:

Jeffrey pops in and out so may not see this for a little while. Sure you can recreate it, as long as you establish its notability and provide references. It's only the old version that's gone & there's nothing preventing you from starting it again. If you want to use some of the old text, however, you'll have to ask an admin to restore it & to copy the text to your sandbox or some other user page so you can work on it.

Thanks. I plan to get started on the article soon.--ISKapoor (talk) 07:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which closed unsuccessfully with 25 support, 18 oppose, and 6 neutral. Thanks for stating your rationales why I should not be granted this time and I'll try my best to deal with it. I'll look forward working with you. --BritandBeyonce (talk) 07:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

images

I will take care of this ASAP. - Revolving Bugbear 16:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Returning

After much thought and deliberation I have decided to return. Many wikians contacted me by various means and I truly appreciate the support from all of them. Man, did I need that wiki break! I have learned from it and will use the experience to improve. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:26, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jade Goody

No it is true, read Sunday Sport dated January 20, 2008, page 16, bottom section. Antun Gustav (talk) 15:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you re User:Hopiakuta

Thank you for letting me know, I am quite happy to consider this issue to be in the hands of someone else now. -- Roleplayer (talk) 23:19, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]