User talk:Politics rule/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Politics rule. 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. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
The Presidents of the United States
.jpg)
Welcome
|
Please
Please do not make baseless accusations of vandalism against me. --jsnruf
Oh, and your user page is nice. I'm borrowing some ideas.
afd
Please don't remove the AFD notice from articles as you did at South Dakota United States Senate election, 2008. The notice clearly says not to do that. Doing so is considered vandalism. --W.marsh 02:50, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
April 2007
Please stop. If you continue to ignore our policies by introducing inappropriate pages, such as Texas United States Senate election, 2008, to Wikipedia, you will be blocked. Wysdom 20:14, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to ignore our policies by introducing inappropriate pages, such as Mississippi United States Senate election, 2008, to Wikipedia, you will be blocked. Wysdom 20:23, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Sources
W. marsh i had a quick question. i know we are off to a bad start, but if you could tell me how to add a source, i would apprecate thta.-Politics rule 7:00 EST
- The simplest way is to just add it in brackets after the claim you want to cite. E.g. "Google is a search engine. [1]." You can see better ways to format a citation at Wikipedia:Footnotes and WP:CITE. --W.marsh 23:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi!
Hello there, and thank you for leaving a comment on my User page. Just for future reference, comments should go on the User_talk page (the 'discusssion' tab) not the main name space. Some people might consider that vandalism. Especially when you've dropped by just to leave the letters fu.
So my second bit of advice is to make sure you don't forget to finish what you started, word-wise. Because some people might consider leaving fu (unsigned, by the way... you should always sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~))--as I was saying, some people might consider leaving fu on their User page) to be rather rude, and I'm sure you're familiar with WP:CIVIL and WP:EQ. Since I'm assuming good faith on your part, I'm certain that the letters fu were the beginning of a thought you, for some reason, didn't get to complete. Something, doubtless, completely the opposite of that which the letters fu are typically taken to stand for. Like fulgent. Or fun. Or fulcrum... though... I can't imagine why you would have meant fulcrum, but that's neither here nor there.
I hope you enjoy your time here, and if you need any help, don't hesitate to ask (on my talk page, please :)
Best regards,
Wysdom 23:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
P.S. In all sincerity, try to assume good faith when people flag your pages, leave you comments, revert your edits--whatever it is that makes you inclined to leave such comments. We're all here trying to make Wikipedia the best it can be, so please try to take commentary and criticism constructively--that's how it's meant. Cheers!
Happy to help however I can :)
Let me know a little more what's going on? Who do you feel is harassing you, how are they contacting you, and what are they saying? Let's see if we can resolve the matter with the person in question--it might just be a misunderstanding.
Best Regards,
Wysdom 01:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
P.S. YOu should sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~)... that way your username and links show up automatically :) Makes it easier than looking at the history page to find out who left Comment "X" and reply, etc :)
Please don't remove other users' comments
Unless they're flagrantly offensive/abusive. If there's a dispute about the nature of an edit, address the concern the user who left the warning is expressing by replying to it civilly. Remember to assume good faith :) Deleting a user's warning/comment is only likely to make things worse. We all make mistakes and get into disputes--no one has a perfectly shiny talkpage ;) So don't worry if you think it makes you look bad--it's normal.
Best regards,
Wysdom 01:53, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you. It is good to know that WIKIPEDIANS are here to help one another. I will try to resolve this by leaving a message on this guys talk page, and let u know how it goes.
Blessings, Politics rule 8:06am Est.-4/17/2007
Louisiana election "vandalism" citation?
You've apparently sent me a warning about vandalizing the Louisiana gubernatorial election, 2007 page. I created this article, have made substantial and repeated contributions to the text of the article since creating it, and have been writing and contributing to articles on Louisiana politics and history for over a year now. I've never been accused of vandalism before, so your 'final warning' is a first. If you don't like my edits, please have a discussion with me on the article's talk page or elsewhere; don't wrongly cite me as a 'vandal.' I'd like you to retract your warning, or at least make a note on my page stating that the warning was an error. Praxedis G 14:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- i will retract the warning, i am just still curious y u are debolding Jindal's scores?-Politics rule 3:21pm EST.- 17 April 2007
- I'm posted my rationale for doing so on the talk page for Louisiana gubernatorial election, 2007. That's the proper place to have discussions concerning disagreements over a particular article. Praxedis G 19:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- Alright, I accept your apology. Just a word of advice, though, and please take this in the sense of being constructive criticism, rather than rudeness. I looked around and found your other warnings of vandalism to Professor Plum and the James Bourne editor – (I don’t remember his/her name at the moment). I think you're jumping the gun on declaring people to be vandals. ProfessorPlum didn’t even make an edit to the South Dakota election page; he left a comment on the talk page. He might not have been diplomatic, but the talk page IS an appropriate place to discuss an article. That’s not vandalism. If at all possible, you should try and resolve your differences with other editors amicably rather than just declaring them to be ‘vandals’ right off the bat. I notice you’re fairly new to Wikipedia; I just think that’s a bad habit to be getting into. You’ll have a lot more luck in your relations with other editors if you try to keep things civil. Use vandalism accusations as a last resort. Praxedis G 20:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
'08 Election
Just a fellow Republican stopping by - I noticed that you are pro-life but are supporting pro-choice candidate Rudy Giuliani for President in 2008. I'm not criticizing your choice or anything - I'm just wondering why you favor him over the other candidates. I myself am tied between several candidates - I'm not sure who I support yet. I would really like to see Mike Huckabee win, but unfortunately I don't think he has the resources or the name recognition to get the nomination. Then I turn to John McCain, who is probably the candidate with the best chance of defeating someone like Hillary Clinton, even though I disagree with him in a lot of areas. What are your thoughts? Weatherman90 02:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah I know what you are saying. Mike is by far my favorite candidate in the race, but like you said I don't think that he is known enough to get the nomination. I agree - he would be great as a senator too - I hope he is at least elected to something in the next 4 years since he has a lot of great ideas. Weatherman90 15:49, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
I've looked into things...
Thank you for working things out with Bobet and thank you for your apology to me, as well. Please understand that accusations of vandalism and esp. harassment are very serious business--it';s one thing to mistakenly tag someone's page with a warning--God knows I've done that a couple of times (see the "What's your problem?" subsection/comment on my talkpage >.< Doh!), but quite another to escalate things to the point where they got in this situation without being 150% sure of your facts. I know things happen fast and furious here (Wikipedia is the only reference work known to exceed the speed of sound--no, I can't source that ;D) and it can make your head spin keeping up with watched pages and new talkpage comments and trying to contribute/edit at the same time. It's cool--we've all been there.
Thanks again, and good luck to you.
Best wishes,
Wysdom 01:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
P.S. And if you ever do it again, I'll make campaign donations to the rival of every candidate on your User page ;D
- Lol. I just glad we worked things out. Can i stiil come to you if i have questions?Politics rule 9:51pm EST. 4/18/2007
- Absolutely :) And thank you for the Wiki smile :) Wysdom 02:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Anne Evans Estabrooks
I'm afraid I don't know enough about her to start an article. I know that she is much in the vein of Christie Whitman, but this is from others I have asked about her, so it isn't entirely trustworthy. —Cuiviénen 23:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
South Dakota United States Senate Election 2008
- This was my orignal message to the responder:I created the article, and was "upset" when it was put up for deletion. I just had a comment and question. The comment is thank-you for taking it off. The question is why? Please leave your comment on my talk page. Politics rule 8:48pm EST.-4/18/2007.
response- Well there was a clear consesus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/South Dakota United States Senate election, 2008 that the article should be kept after various revisions had been made to the article. It seems fine as a stub. Be careful to avoid unsourced speculation about this election but its fine in its present form until more information is announced. Next time have faith in the process- I notice you didn't comment in the deletion discussion, you were free to do so. WjBscribe 00:58, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Iowa Senate race
What was wrong with the article? Tim Long 20:33, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
VandalProof
VP is a tool developed by Daniel Cannon, which allows experienced vandal fighters to be more efficient in reverting vandalism. It can be found here, but since you do not yet meet approval criteria, which require a clean history and 250 mainspace edits, as well as a history of vandalism reverting, so we know you know what you are doing. See WP:VAND for information on how to revert vandalism. Prodego talk 00:22, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Debolding Lousiana Poll numbers
- Conversation on that disscution page:
A number of times now, one or more editors - most anonymous - have edited the polling results so that Bobby Jindal's polling figures are in bold-face. I have been reverting this. I've got a couple of reasons for doing this. I've never seen it done on other election pages; someone please correct me if I'm wrong. It seems to me that the anonymous editor(s) are doing this to highlight the fact that Jindal is consistently ahead in the polls. But this fact should be obvious to anyone who looks at the polling tables we've created. Why is the boldface necessary? It just looks partisan to me, and the article should be NPOV. If someone has a good reason why Jindal's polling figures -and only Jindal's- should be bolded, I'm willing to discuss it. PS: This should go without saying, but this not a partisanship issue for me. I've got an interest in electoral politics but am not pro-Democrat or pro-Republican. Praxedis G 14:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- Just saying look at the 2008 senate election. Go to either North Carolina, Minnesota, Oregan, New Hampshire, and even your state Louisiana. look at the polls. The leader is in bold. It just means thta they are winning. i am willing to continue this debate on my talk page under "Bolding winning polls". p.s. this is for anyone to comment on, not just my friend Praxedis G.Politics rule 4:11pm EST.- 17 April 2007
- Well, you're right. Putting the lead candidate's poll numbers in bold seems to be common practice on election pages for other states. (I'd just never seen it in Louisiana election pages, which are the main election pages I edit and monitor.) So I'll leave them bolded. In the future, though, it's best to take these discussions debates to the talk page of the article in question, rather than just jumping to conclusions and accusing people of vandalism. Assume good faith. Praxedis G 20:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- I'd just like to say that I am not any of the users that had previously debolded Jindal's 39% and am sorry for doing so. I don't really want to get into a huge argument, but it was my first time editing that particular page and I thought that the 39% was bolded to signify that Jindal would win outright (as I think it is on other election pages) as opposed to just being in the lead. Now I know better and will not do it again. (As the above poster said, assume good faith.) 68.45.34.67 15:47, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Joe Lieberman, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Orange Mike 21:14, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
2010 Governor Races
Hey Politics, I appreciate your revisions on that page, but I'm not sure I agree with them. You seem to have deliberately added inaccurate information about term-limits for some governors, added speculation about candidates without sourcing, and deleted random punctuation such as periods. Perhaps you can cite all of your additions, while leaving the punctuation (and accuracy) in tact? ProfessorPlum27 06:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)ProfessorPlum27
Re: disagree
Because, ultimately, we can't include every single poll related to the subject. I don't even think we should include polls of potential matchups until candidates have declared. Should we include evrey single approval rating poll of Kerry since he was last reelected in 2002? The inclusion makes no sense as far as notability is concerned. It is trivial, and the analysis of the poll provided was left wanting. What if all of those people who wanted Kerry to step down don't hate him, but love, I don't know, Ed Markey, and want Markey as their Senator? The poll itself doesn't actually imply anything about Kerry's chances for reelection, yet we were asserting that it showed him in grave danger. —Cuiviénen 14:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Regarding Senate Elections Articles
Greetings and thank you for your comment. Although I am glad you are making pages, I viewed the pages as potentially biased, as every page I tagged only listed one person's name and one candidate's web site.Bladeswin | Talk to me | 18:54, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Adminship
In reply to your comment on my talkpage. I see your doing great work around Wikipedia, but I don't think your ready to be an admin yet. From the purely statistical element, you've made 441 edits and have been with us a couple of month. Its been a long time since anyone has succeeded in a Request for Adminship who didn't have over a thousand (and in pratice nearly 3 thousand) edits and a good three months of editing. The timeframe allows people to get to know you. I also note that you haven't been very involved in vandal fighting and deletion discussions, which are areas where admins have a lot of involvement (and you would be expected to be familiar with the relevant policies). You might want to consider joining in deletion discussions at WP:AFD if you want more experience of admin-related policy discussions. The fact that I don't think you're ready to be admin isn't a criticism - you're doing great work for the encyclopedia (and some of most productive editors aren't admins). I hope you will stay with us a long time and maybe you'll become an admin in due course. Do feel free to get back to me if you have any questions... WjBscribe 23:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.
A few features that you might find helpful:
- Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
- The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including {{WPMILHIST Announcements}} there.
- Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
- The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, offline publication, article improvement contests, and other tasks.
- We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
- We've developed a variety of guidelines for article structure and content, template use, categorization, and other issues that you may find useful.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Carom 15:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Welcome to the Birthday Committee!
|
Welcome, Politics rule/Archive 1, to the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! You have met all of the membership requirements. Any concerns should be directed to Steveo2. See the Birthday Committee Project Page to see our userbox and the Birthday Message Templates. Go to the bulletin board to see any new announcements concerning the committee. Remember, Be Bold! |
BoricuaeddieTalk • Contribs • Spread the love! 22:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Howdy
Thanks for the note on my talk page. I am indeed a Republican, and a proud one. Despite the troubles the party faces, I still think that the GOP's philosophy of individual freedom and personal responsibility are the best out there, and I'm not about to jump ship. As for the '08 races, I'm not sure what's going to happen, but I suspect that unless Fred Thompson jumps in, Rudy Giuliani will probably win the nomination. I think either stands a good chance against Hillary (Obama isn't going to win the nomination), so I'm hopeful we'll do well. As for Congress... I'm not sure. We'll have to see. Cheers! --Folic Acid 14:16, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
re: Happy First Edit Day
Thanks! I can't believe it's been 2 years... Wow. -Mysekurity 02:22, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Birthday thanks
It's a day early, but that doesn't matter. Thanks for congratulating me with my birthday. - Mgm|(talk) 10:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed recently that you have been using your talk page to discuss your political views with other editors. This practice is strictly forbidden in WP:NOT#SOCIALNET. Please refrain from using Wikipedia as a social networking service or you will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Yours truly, BoricuaeddieTalk • Contribs • Spread the love! 16:50, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Hello. From your recent contributions, I believe you are becoming quite hostile because of my comments above. I would like to clarify that I did not warn you because of your political views. I warned you about discussing your political views on Wikipeida because Wikipedia:Talk page clearly states that talk pages "should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views." Also, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not says that you may not use Wikipedia as a place to discuss personal things to make friends. I would like to inform you that I feel insulted by your recent comments on other users' talk pages in which you ask if they have a problem with me, which is a violation of Wikipedia:Canvassing. Finally, I would like to remind you that my name is not "the guy that starts with a B above", but, as my signature says, Boricuaeddie, as in "Eddie, the Puerto Rican". I would appreciate it if you refrain from suggesting that I am prejudiced, or I will request intervention by other editors. Thank you. Yours truly, BoricuaeddieTalk • Contribs • Spread the love! 00:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Hello. This is a reply to your comments on my talk page. I accept your apology. I guess I overreacted. It's just that I felt insulted and was having a bad day. I'm glad you apologized and I hope we came become friends. As to your political views; I don't know much about the voting system in the United States, but are you, being in the 7th grade, allowed to vote? If so, then America is a very strange country. If not, then I don't really know why you are so involved in politics if your voice is not heard in the government. I also want to thank you for the barnstar you awarded me. As to your question regarding the requirements for being on the Birthday Committee, if you look around the project's bulletin board, you would see that the requirements were removed last year. That means that now, anyone can join! Thank you for remaining civil and apologizing. I hope you learn the lesson and don't discuss anything that doesn't have to do with Wikipeida on anyone's talk page. Thank you. May God bless you always. Yours truly, BoricuaeddieTalk • Contribs • Spread the love! 17:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks :)
Thanks for taking the time to note my first edit day, Politics rule! Nice to meet you :) Take care, – Rianaऋ 11:50, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
MSTCrow Talk
I haven't updated my talk, as the commentary is in the history, but I prefer that others not delete material from my talk page. Adding additional commentary in the thread would be fine. Thanks. - MSTCrow 06:16, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Re: Meditation
I've responded on my talk page. Daniel 11:59, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Adminship
Hi. I spotted your post elsewhere and thought you might like some advice. There's an ongoing discussion right now at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship#MAKE_LINDENS_FAST.21 about the types of edit potential admins "should" consider doing. You will also want to consider an Editor review at some point when you have more experience. And once you've done that, drop me a line and I'll probably be pleased to invite you to the Virtual Classroom to help prepare you. Cheers. --Dweller 13:43, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello
hey, so whats up with all the politics stuff? Karibear 19:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't know you. Karibear 20:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
I was just looking at random user pages and saw yours so... i commented. Is that a problem? Karibear 20:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
I was just kinda bored atm. I support Bush too :) Karibear 20:42, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
You're part of the wikiproject dogs and i want to join... how do you join??? Karibear 20:47, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I am like computer retarded. lol Karibear 20:52, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you! :)
For your beautiful and kind words, and your wonderful gift, you've not only earned my gratitude, but a new friend too :) Thank you so much, my dear Politics rule! Love, Phaedriel - 07:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey there!
Hi Politics rule, I Arnon Chaffin wanted to tell you if you needed any help please let me know I'll be more than happy to help you,Take CareArnon Chaffin Got a message?☺ 13:53, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Yep ask anytime.Arnon Chaffin Got a message? 19:26, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey thanks
Thanks for the birthday committee welcoming. Karibear 15:06, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- I concur, thank you for the birthday wishes. Have a great day. --Valley2city₪‽ 21:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Re:Mediation
Hello. This is a reply to your message on my talk page. I think you are a little confused. Mediation is a method to resolve disputes with users who constantly violate Wikipedia policies. I believe User:Orangemike is not violating policy. In fact, he is warning those who have. I can understand if you, along with other editors, feel a little bothered by his warnings, but there is no mediation needed, unless it actually becomes constant harassment. I think you should assume good faith and not make the same mistake he warned you for again. I hope this helps! May God bless you always. Yours truly, BoricuaeddieTalk • Contribs • Spread the love! 23:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- Hello. Mediation should only be used in extreme cases. Before mediation, if you feel bothered by a user's conduct, you could formally ask what other users think about the user's conduct by using Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment or Wikipedia:Third_opinion. Also, please do not remove content from other user's talk pages, as it is considered poor Wikiquette. Instead, you can cross out your comments by using <s>TEXT</s>. I hope this helps! Yours truly, BoricuaeddieTalk • Contribs • Spread the love! 23:34, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Re:Dorgan/Conrad
Dorgan and Conrad's situation is a bit confusing. Conrad is senior senator since he has been serving since 1986, although not the same seat. Dorgan has been serving since 1992. I hope that clears it up. Weatherman90 01:02, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Weatherman90 is correct. Conrad is the state's senior senator. Conrad has been serving continuously since 1986. I just graduated from UND last week and Conrad was our commencement speaker...he was introduced as the state's senior senator. --MatthewUND(talk) 02:25, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Requests for mediation/Sri Lankan Civil War
The idea of mediation is that it involves the parties to a dispute and a mediator. I'm not really sure where you fit in to this process. Have you been involved in discussions of this image? I can't say that I find your contribution to the discussion very helpful... WjBscribe 01:14, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well frankly I find it rather unhelpful for someone to wade in and so strongly take a side in the dispute. The idea is to reach a compromise. I find it strange that you have so suddenly taken an interest in the fairness of Wikipedia's coverage of the LTTE when you do not edit in these areas. If you truly feel that you should be counted as a party to the mediation then you should remain, but if I am reading this right and you are not involved in the politics of this dispute, it might be better if you sat it out. WjBscribe 01:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- I would suggest you look at helping out with some of the earlier stages in Wikipedia's dispute resolution process, before things have gone so far that formal mediation is needed. You could look at Wikipedia:Requests for comment where issues that are causing trouble are raised and editors are invited to express their views on the relevant talkpages. I suspect you will be most interested by Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Politics, though you will see that the table contains pages for other topics as well. There is also Wikipedia:Third opinion where people ask for a third party to express a view on an issue in dispute. WjBscribe 01:38, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Your page
...has a red link (IRAQ conflict). I lowered case the characters, hope you don't mind. In any case, feel free to revert it :) ~ Regards PeaceNT 03:55, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Don't mention it. See ya! PeaceNT 11:09, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, dear. You're so kind. I'll sure talk to you again soon. Best, PeaceNT 15:44, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Birthday Committee
Uhh... No, I'm not in charge anymore. I suppose that no one really is at the moment. Why do you ask? Steveo2 10:55, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for the nice award and happy birthday!!! O yeah I got a gift for you here enjoy its where you got tons of user boxes,Take care-Arnon Chaffin Got a message? 12:38, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
I added to my award section and deleted beacuse it causse a problem on my user talk it over laps other threads, but I kept it in the best place.Arnon Chaffin Got a message? 20:02, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I think it's time somebody gave you your first service award. Here you go! Yours truly, BoricuaeddieTalk • Contribs • Spread the love! 22:23, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Congrats :) PeaceNT 02:07, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Dorgan and Conrad - which is senior senator
Thanks for your question on my [[User_talk:Dcmacnut|talk page] regarding Byron Dorgan and Kent Conrad. Conrad is officially the senior senator. It's rather complex, and the description is his article doesn't explain it very well. This is the story as recounted to me by Senator Conrad himself. Conrad decided against running for reelection in 1992, so then-Congressman Dorgan ran for the open Senate seat. When Sen. Quentin Burdick died in September 1992, Governor George Sinner encouraged Conrad to run in the special election to fill the vacant seat. Conrad won the special election, and resigned his old Senate seat and was sworn into complete Burdick's term on the same day. (This makes him the only Senator to have served in both of his state's senate seats on the same day). Dorgan had won the general election for Conrad's seat and was appointed and sworn in to fill the remainder of Conrad's expired term. Since Conrad was sworn in prior to Dorgan, that makes Conrad the senior senator, if only by a few hours and even though technically Dorgan succeeded Conrad. Since Conrad had been a senator since 1987, the order of the swearing in was probably designed that way to recognize Conrad's previous service. I seem to remember Dorgan commenting that he wanted Conrad to remain senior senator so he waited until after Conrad was sworn in to take his own oath of office. I can't back that up with a source other than I remember hearing Dorgan tell the story once.
Finally, Conrad had to run again in 1994 for a new senate term, since the special election in 1992 was to fill the last two years of Quentin Burdick's term in office. Hope that answers your question.Dcmacnut 01:06, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- I have made some minor changes to Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan's pages. Let me know what you think According to Conrad's official bioguide he was sworn in to replace Burdick on December 14, 1992. Dorgan took office to fill Conrad's term on December 15, according to Dorgan's bioguide.Dcmacnut 01:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Senior Senator
You will need to ask MatthewUND about this. I'm more of the sports contributor for North Dakota. Leopold Samsonite left this unsigned comment.
Signpost updated for May 21st, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 21 | 21 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| 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 05:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you!
I am amazed by you kindness, dear Politics rule. Thank you so much for the sweet gift! Btw, you richly deserve the first service award :). Yours, PeaceNT 12:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your beautiful words, and don't worry if some Wikifriends out there are "angry" sometimes, they might be going through a really bad day. When things turn out alright, people will be nice :) Love, PeaceNT 12:45, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Governor Sinner page
Your edit's regarding his governor years look fine to me. However, we may need to look for a source to back up the "encouraged Conrad to run for Burdick's seat comment." That's what I heard Senator Conrad say at an event in Bismarck last year, but we may need secondary cooraboration. Jocelyn Burdick may have also played a part with urging him to run, but don't quote me on that.Dcmacnut 14:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the adminship anniversary message. They were sent a day early but they're still appreciated. Thanks again. :) -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 17:14, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- No need to apologize. Might as well have sent it today, actually, since I'll be offline tomorrow (flying back home to Vancouver from California). :) -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 22:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
WPMD Leader
There really is no leader of WikiProject Maryland. I see WikiProjects as more of a collaborative effort by a group of members. As the founder of both WikiProject Maryland and the roads subproject, I'm usually responsible for alot of the maintenace work, so I guess that makes me the closest thing to a leader. But since this is a wiki, everyone is pretty much on the same level. If you want to make a minor change to the project, go ahead and do it, and if you want to make a major change, get consensus from the other members and do it. That's pretty much how it works. Anyway, welcome to WikiProject Maryland.-Jeff (talk) 20:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you so much!
I really appreciate the little birthday banner! ^_^ --Sergiusz Szczebrzeszyński |talk to me||what i've done||e| 12:30, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
GAC backlog elimination drive
This form message is being sent to you either due to your membership with WikiProject Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. A new drive has been started requesting that all members review at least one article (or more, if you wish!) within the next two weeks at GAC to help in removing the large backlog. This message is being sent to all members, and even members who have been recently reviewing articles. There are almost 130 members in this project and about 180 articles that currently need to be reviewed. If each member helps to review just one or two articles, the majority of the backlog will be cleared. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :{{GAReview}} underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the GAC talk page. --Nehrams2020 00:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- I don't have any specific requests for you to do, so you can do whatever one(s) interest you. I've done about 10 in the past few days, mostly based on how long they have been in GAC or if they interested me. It's probably best to try and review the older ones first as it's not too fair when someone reviews an article that was nominated in the last three days (which I've seen in the past). So whatever your interests are in, go for it. --Nehrams2020 17:44, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Reply to Block
Hello. This is a reply to your message in my talk page. I think you are overreacting. He only made two vandalism edits. I don't think the user should be blocked for that. The same thing happened to me some time ago. I just warned the user, and he stopped vandalizing and became a registered editor of Wikipedia. I think you did the right thing by semi-protecting your page, but I think the blocking is a little over the top. I would also like to inform you that "admins are just normal users with a mop and bucket". They are not figures of authority nor are they superior in any way. They are just like us, but with the community's trust and a mop and bucket to help cleanup vandalism. I suggest you read the essay Wikipedia:What adminship is not and WIkipedia:Administrators and remember that, as Jimbo Wales said, adminship is no big deal. Finally, please remember to always use edit summaries. Thank you. Yours truly, Boricuaeddie Spread the love! 16:22, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- Agree, and WP:ANI is a better place to bring this up. Let me know if you have any questions I can help you out with. Happy editing! Prodego talk 20:33, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- For Vandalism it is WP:AIV, cheersArnon Chaffin Got a message? 20:45, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- I see you like vandalism fight eh? I offer my tool(not really a tool just a help) Check it out and please read it and understand,RegardsArnon Chaffin Got a message? 20:55, 25 May 2007 (UTC)P.S I made it myself :D!
- Its a tool, you see it on vandalism window its like the recent changes page but It offer templates with it and more info and how to deal with vandalism enjoy,Arnon Chaffin Got a message? 20:59, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Edit count
It depends what you are looking for. If you want mainspace, use mainspace, ect. Prodego talk 14:39, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ah I see. Just so you know mainspace edits are article edits. Usually editcount is all namespaces (total). You can check other people too, here, for example, mine. Prodego talk 20:32, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
cheney
You apparently added a "bias" tag to the article, but didn't indicate why in edit summary or on Talk, so it has been removed by another editor. If you think the article is not neutral, please explain on Talk and you're free to re-add your tag. But an unexplained tag on a page usually won't stand. Thanks Tvoz |talk 02:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not questioning whether you think there's bias or not - apparently you do, so you're entitled to put the tag on. My point was that you shouldn't just put it on without an explanation on the Talk page - I gather the other editor removed the tag because you gave no explanation for it. You should re-post the tag if you are concerned about bias, with an explanation that is as specific as possible, so editors have a chance to correct the places where you think there is bias. Or, make changes yourself to anything you think is POV. But bear in mind that the article needs to be balanced, and critical commentary provides balance - it can't be a pro-Cheney article or anti-Cheney. Has to be neutral. Hope this helps. Tvoz |talk 07:53, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
WTF?
I fail to see how my contributions were vandalism. I'd like to know why you came to that conclusion. I see other posts on this page alleging that you have made baseless accusations of vandalism, so I'm ignoring your comment. You have no authority to block anyone from editing posts, so don't bother with the empty threats.
- The thing is, your warning is meaningless because you have no authority whatsoever to issue one. So can it.
- The thing is, I have no idea what "vandalism" you're talking about. I note that you put in quotes in your last message. Was it actually vandalism, or simply a punctuation error (as I've seen in other "vandalism" accusations you've made)? If it's the latter, than I strongly suggest that you temper your reactions to these "vandalisms". Thank you.
- Alright cool man. I don't agree with your politics (I'm a die-hard liberal), but you're certainly a dedicated Wikipedian. See you around!
Signpost updated for May 28th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 22 | 28 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| 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 06:44, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Welcome to WikiProject Catholicism!
Hello, Politics rule/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikiproject Catholicism! Thank you for your generous offer to help contribute. I'm sure your input will be much appreciated. I hope you enjoy contributing here and being a Catholic Project Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to discuss anything on the project talk page, or to leave a message on my own talk page. Please remember to sign all your comments, and be bold with your edits. Again, welcome, and happy editing! --Thw1309 16:07, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Re:Congrats
Hey, thank you! I still feel thrilled like my rfa just passed yesterday. See you, dear! Peacent 16:52, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, you asked too many things, mate :) I'll go through the questions, one by one.
- First off, how do I get to be a nominated? Well, I'm not entirely sure until now why my nominators happened to notice my work, my best guess is that I was rather lucky. I think a user could be nominated if another editor highly regards their work here and wants them to become a sysop! Anyway, people who run the rfa process don't really need to be nominated, they could be bold and nominate themselves. So, that leads to your second question, when do I think you could be nominated? Hey, the golden time comes when your work here is sufficient enough for the community to be able to look at your contributions and decide that they can trust you. Speaking of that, you might find Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship a helpful page. Oh, and the third question, please please don't take offence, dear, but I honestly think you're not ready yet. People who participate in RfAs usually look for candidates with 3-month experience and 2000 edits (at least), though there could probably be exceptions for outstanding cases (they're just rare, really!). I've seen your brilliant work and I believe you're destined to become a wonderful administator in the near future, it's just that you're still too new to the community. Please keep on what you're doing, there should be no rush, and time is the key factor. Have a beautiful day. All the best, Peacent 17:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Re: Alleged vandalism of 2008 U.S. Senate page
Tipper Gore strongly considered a bid for the U.S. Senate in 2002, and rumors of a renewed quest have similarly circulated among political insiders in the run-up to the 2008 election. You'll notice that the pertinent table column is marked "Possible opposing candidates" and not "Announced opposing candidates" or "Declared opposing candidates." If you object to such a broad treatment, that is a grievance best aired on the Talk page. Besides, there is absolutely no concrete evidence that Tom Kean, Jr. or Kathleen Sebelius, for example, have any intention of pursuing their party's Senate nominations in 2008, and yet you have not hesitated to add their names to the rumor mill in the past. Likewise, you added Bobby Jindal's name in Louisiana despite the fact that he is mounting a gubernatorial campaign for the fall 2007 election.
Please exercise greater discretion before recklessly accusing your fellow contributors of vandalism. This is not the first time that you've made such unfounded claims. In fact, I encourage you to read Wikipedia's guidelines on the subject. Quoting chapter and verse:
Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Apparent bad-faith edits that do not make their bad-faith nature inarguably explicit are not considered vandalism at Wikipedia.
Given your history of tendentious and partisan edits, puerile comments left on the talk pages of other Wikipedia users (see above), and often tenuous command of basic English grammar, syntax, punctuation, and orthography, I would refrain from such self-righteous enforcement of Wikipedia policies until you have established some small measure of scholarly authority. --PWilson 21:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
- I HAVE RESPONED TO THIS COMPLAINT ON HIS TALK
Politics rule 21:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
...
I hope I didn't get you upset by what I said yesterday, and I just wanted to drop by to wish you well, and please keep up the nice job you've been doing. Your friend, Peacent 12:22, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- That's a relief to hear from you. You made me happy! Best, Peacent 15:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Picture
How do you put a picture on your userbox?
Politics rule 14:59, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Replace the third parameter of the {{userbox}} template with an image instead of text. For example, a black and white userbox with a picture of Clinton would be
{{userbox|black|white|[[Image:Bill Clinton.jpg|44px|Bill Clinton]]|This user thinks...}}
- which would look like —METS501 (talk) 15:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
This user thinks...
Suggestion
Hello. Just a quick suggestion. I think you should remove the userbox that says "This user thinks that Bill Clinton sucks donkey balls - literally as well as figuratively." I believe that is classified as libel and you may get in trouble if you keep it. Also, I haven't seen you around working for the Birthday Committee lately. Something happening? Yours truly, Boricuaeddie Spread the love! 15:00, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Signpost updated for June 4th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 23 | 4 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| 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 07:51, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for signing my autograph book! Bmg916Speak 00:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Former Wyoming U.S. attorney Mike Mead
This is to inform you that there is another Mike Mead who is a musician so I changed to link to the yet to be written article about Wyoming attorney Mike Mead. Steelbeard1 12:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Your userboxes
Excuse me if I'm confused. Your userpage states that you are Pro-life, yet you also would like to see the death penalty used more often? That's kind of a bit contradictory, don't you think? Just thought I'd point that out, in case you made a gaff. Bennelliott • Talk • Contributions 18:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XV (May 2007)
The May 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 15:42, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Edit Summary
Hi, politicsrule, I notice that we edit several of the same pages. It's helpful for other editors who watch pages you edit if you leave a brief edit summary for them, so they can see what you did. It saves us time checking. Thanks. --Cjs56 01:18, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 11th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 24 | 11 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| 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 02:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Rye and Judd Gregg
Hi! I noticed Judd Gregg doesn't mention that he lives in Rye, NH. Can you provide a reference for that? Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 15:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- NP - Just checking :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 17:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
wow.......
You like george bush? wow, your sick, man........I guess you like killers...
Please Stop being so contreversial!
On your user page, you have around 25 userboxes expressing very contreversial ideas, such as your opinions on Scooter LIbby, George W.Bush, and Global Warming. This is not accepted on Wikipedia, so please do something about this. In addition, I have removed your Hillary Clinton Userbox, as it contains a hate messsage. PLEASE STOP! THIS CAN BE PUNISHABLE BY A BLOCK! -BigBrotherIsWatchingYou 15:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
My recent RfA
Thanks for your support in my recent, unsuccessful RfA. It's much appreciated. IvoShandor 16:27, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Several Comments
Hello. Just wanted to check how you were doing. I see you have been getting some comments regarding your userboxes. I suggest you don't get to upset. Everyone has a right to express their POV (point of view). As long as you don't have controversial userboxes (like the Bill Clinton one), I'm sure you will be allowed to keep them. I also recently saw that you started participating in RfA discussions. Congrats! I only have a small suggestion. Remember that edit count isn't everything. Quality > quantity! Happy editing! Yours sincerely, Eddie 22:06, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hello, again. I just saw your message on my talk page. I'm honored by the fact that you think I'm ready to become an admin. However, I do not think I am ready to become an admin and will wait until Húsönd, my future admin coach, thinks I'm ready. Thank you. Yours truly, Eddie 22:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hello, again. If you're interested in looking for qualified admin candidates, you should join Arnon Chaffin and several other users at Snowolf's Admin scout group. Also, you should start archiving your talk page, as it is becoming quite long. Happy editing! Yours truly, Eddie 22:25, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thaks for the First Edit Day wish. --ASDFGHJKL=Greatest Person Ever+Coolest Person Ever 01:18, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Re: Userboxes
Seeing as I hate all userboxes and think they should be deleted, I can't really give you a non-biased answer. ^demon[omg plz] 12:58, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
RfA
Thanks for being part of the "come back" chorus.
I'm not sure I understand your question regarding my edit history, I was unable to find a gap. The number of edits in each month since registering are:
2006/10 100
2006/11 212
2006/12 324
2007/1 482
2007/2 1008
2007/3 462
2007/4 330
2007/5 411
2007/6 222
I think the peak of 1000 was because I nominated 3 articles for peer review at one go, which was too much work, so, I'm unlikely to do that again. Consequently, my monthly edit numbers have essentially reached a plateau of about 400 a month. Best wishes, DrKiernan 11:36, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- Once again, thank you for support. Not just at RfA, but generally. DrKiernan 12:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- Still a few opposes coming in though, so it's kind of borderline. I think I may have reached a plateau in support as well as my number of edits! ;-) Anyway, I'm just about to sign off now, and won't be logged in again until Monday morning, so I've basically done all I can. Thanks again for your support! DrKiernan 13:49, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Re. Eddie
Hello PR. I am not coaching Eddie as I'm currently coaching 3 other users. I just provided a quick review. Eddie still has to attain more experience before attempting an RFA, but he's definitely on the right track. I might indeed offer to nominate him, but if you're interested in co-nom, you must ask him, not me. It's the candidate who accepts or declines nominators. It's fine with me btw. Regards, Húsönd 14:45, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hello, Patrick (I don't know if that's your name. You left me a message some time ago under that name. I'm sorry if that's not your real name). I am honored by your offer to co-nom me. As Húsönd said, I still need some experience, so the RfA might not come for a couple of months. If you're still interested in being a co-nom by then, I'll be happy to accept your offer. I also have a small suggestion regarding your participation in RfA discussions. Please remember to use the word !vote instead of vote, as your participation in RfA discussions is not really a vote, but rather a participation in consensus-building. Please come to me if you have any questions about RfA. Happy editing! Yours sincerely, Eddie 18:42, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
DrKiernan
Hello. Thanks for keeping an open mind about DrKiernan's RfA and taking the time to rethink your opposition. I have to agree with you that we are in bad need of active admins. However, since we can't seem to find too many of these, low-activity admins are also needed. Actually, we wouldn't have such recurrent backlog problems if we had another two or three hundred admins chipping in only now and then. The only question we really have to answer in RfAs is whether or not we are confident that the user will have an overall positive impact as an admin, no matter how slim that impact may be.
On a completely unrelated note, I went through your user page to get to your talk page and I don't know if anybody has ever mentioned this to you but it's, how shall I put this, a little bit on the heavy side as far as politics-related userboxes. For one thing, it's not really in-line with the relevant guideline but more importantly it is quite simply a bad idea. For one thing, nobody really cares if you support George Bush, Hilary Clinton or Donald Duck and whatever information you might have on your userpage that's relevant for other users (such as, say, membership in wiki-projects) is completely drowned in the rest. Also, it's unlikely that anybody will change their mind about Fidel Castro or the war in Iraq by looking up your page but it's extremely likely that if and when you find yourself in editing conflicts about politically charged articles, others will see you as someone with an agenda and will have doubts about your objectivity. Pascal.Tesson 23:08, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for caring
Hi - thanks very much for your congratulations (and your support). I'm not (quite) an admin yet - not closed yet - but thanks all the same :). Formal thanks to follow later. ck lostsword|queta!|Suggestions? 16:14, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your support in my recent RfA, which passed successfully at 40/2/1, making me Wikipedia's 1,250th administrator. Your comments were much appreciated, and I will endeavour to fulfil your expectations as an admin.
ck lostsword • T • CFile:Ck lostsword copy.png
- There you go!