User:TSO1D/archive5

I am not sure how else to contact you
I saw you added a To-Do list to the Romania article. I believe I have solved some of them. If you have time could you review the article a bit and make more suggestions? Thanks Nergaal 23:29, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 2nd, 2007.
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 07:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Germany
Hi! I am sorry that I haven't been able to come back to that article. I have to go out now, but I will take a look at it later tonight. I will also try to see if I there is anything that I can do, like minor cleanups etc. Cheers! Baristarim 16:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot! TSO1D 17:09, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

No, I'm just completely blind - I meant someone else. John Smith&#39;s 20:11, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Just letting you know that I have just created Science and technology in Germany by a simple cut and paste. For now, it's probably ridiculous to link to it from the main Germany article but hopefully this can develop into a more substantial article. Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 22:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. TSO1D 22:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations on the FA star. JMcC 08:18, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you. TSO1D 12:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Transnistria
Mă uimeşti cu capacitatea ta de a propune soluţii de "compromis" care sînt mai pro-separatiste decît actuala variantă (vezi secţiunea referendumului). Mă întreb cînd vei susţine introducerea paragrafului despre poliţia moldovenească care ia rinichii opozanţilor în articolul Transnistria (căci lincul către respectiva agenţie de presă îl susţii). Legat de "border issues", de ce acestea pot fi explicate pe larg (chiar dacă sub alt nume) în Abkhazia şi South Ossetia, numai la Transnistria nu?--MariusM 12:01, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Versiunea secţiunei scrisă de mine reprezenta descrierea evenimentelor principale în cuvinetele mele. Eu nu cred că el avea un caracter pro-separatist din cauza mea. Problema e că referendumul întradevăr a demonstrat că separatiştii deţin susţinerea majorităţii populaţiei a regiunii. Eu nu cred că au avut loc mari falsificări de această dată. Cu toate că nu sunt foarte bucuros de rezultat, nici nu-l pot nega. Deci, când am încercat să reduc secţiunea la patru propoziţii, am vrut să repet conţinutul întrebărilor, rezultatul scrutinului, şi opinia internaţională despre el. Posibil că era posibil să fac acest lucru într-un mod mai concis, cum a şi demonstrat Pernambuco, dar îmi pare destul de evident că nu a fost intenţia mea să fac textul mai pro-separatist. Cât despre border issues, eu absolut nu înţeleg care e problema acolo. Doar nu e o chestie de conţinut, ci doar de stil. Spre exemplu, eu vreau să păstrăm doar un rezumat scurt pentru că detaliile nu îi vor interesa pe majoritatea cititorilor. Dacă ei vreau să găsească detalii, ei pot uşor să localizeze subarticolul relevant. Însă eu am impresia că tu consideri că eliminarea unei părţi a informaţiei din această secţiune cumva susţine perspectiva pmr-istă. TSO1D 14:48, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Dacă tu ai părerea că nu au fost falsificări importante la referendum, alţii (eu, de pildă) sînt de altă părere. Regulile Wikipedia interzic însă să includem păreri personale în articole. Eu aş fi vrut să se introducă şi raportul Comitetului Helsinki din Moldova care vorbeşte despre falsificări la referendum şi presiuni psihologice asupra populaţiei, mi s-a răspuns mereu că aici păstrăm doar un rezumat, amănuntele într-un alt articol (dar de fapt şi din celălalt articol s-a încercat să se scoată amănuntele legate despre contestarea referendumului). De ce susţii ca rezumatul neapărat trebuie să conţină cifrele de 97% şi 94%, cîtă vreme acestea sînt contestate, şi să nu conţină nimic despre dubiile legate de aceste cifre? Singura scurtare reală pe care ai făcut-o a fost să elimini faptul că acele cifre sînt "conform autorităţilor transnistrene", adică să dai impresia că acele cifre sînt adevărul absolut. Părerea mea: nu trebuie să dăm cifre, cine le vrea să caute în articolul separat despre referendum, unde găseşte şi informaţii despre dubiile legate de corectitudinea acestuia. Legat de border issues, în 2006 acestea au fost motivul a 2 crize şi pot fi punct de pornire şi pentru viitoare crize. Sînt informaţii extrem de importante.--MariusM 20:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Bine, dacă consideri că aceasta e necesar, nu există nici o problemă, e uşor de adăugat la versiunea lui Pernambuco: "According to Transnistrian authorities..." Dar eu consider că cifrele reale trebuie menţionate, indiferent de existenţa unor suspicii la adresa referendumului. Totuşi, eu cred că problema nu a fost atât falsificare directă cât o atmosferă nedemocratică. Aici eu sunt absolut de acord cu tine, mai multe organizaţii internaţionale au explicat că ei refuză să monitorizeze orice scrutin organizat de separatişti, anume deoarece circumstanţile regiunii (de exemplu propaganda continuă şi lipsa relativă de presă independentă) nu permit alegeri absolut libere. Această informaţie trebuie adăugată însă la subarticolul despre referendum, şi să fie citată (e.g. Comitetul Helsinki). TSO1D 14:31, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * E o problemă de principiu - avem realmente nevoie de o scurtare a articolului Transnistria? Eu nu simt nevoia unei scurtări, dacă chiar e nevoie de scurtare sînt multe alte lucruri neimportante (Transnistria in popular culture, menionarea statuii lui Suvorov, care e relevantă pentru Tiraspol dar nu pentru Transnistria, chiar şi partea despre traficul de femei care e valabilă pentru întreaga Europă de Est, nu doar pentru Transnistria). Dacă mergem pe idee scurtării, n-are rost menţionarea cifrelor exacte, căci ele se află în articolul separat. Dacă nu mergem pe ideea scurtării, atunci eu zic să punem şi suspiciunile cu privire la aceste rezultate în articolul Transnistria. Cititorii de cele mai multe ori nu se mai duc la articolele principale, mai ales că sînt vreo 10 articole principale la care se face trimitere. De aia trebuie să păstrăm informaţii şi la articolul principal. În cazul border issues, articolul secundar nici nu este despre "border issues" ci despre "Disputed status of Transnistria", ceea ce e altceva.--MariusM 14:44, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * În aceasta şi constă problema, aici nu ar trebui să fie o chestiune de principiu. Eu sunt de acord, că întregul articol nu e prea lung. Însă, aceasta nu înseamnă că unele secţiuni nu conţin informaţie care a prea specifică pentru un articol general. Ultima propunere a fost să includem: ": "There are unsettled border issues with conflicting claims on both sides. Tighina (Bender) and its surrounding area on the river's west bank is controlled by Transnistria, while some villages near Dubăsari on the east bank are under Moldovan control." Eu (şi majoritatea altor utilizatori) consider că aceasta este absolut suficient. De exemplu, Tighina e o problemă foarte importantă, şi evident merită să fie menţionată în articolul de bază. Însă crezi tu, că cineva care doreşte să obţină o opinie generală despre regiune ar fi interesat să ştie că Zagornoe se află în Basarabia dar e controlată de separatişti? Totuşi, această informaţie este importantă, şi dacă cineva doreşte să cunoască aceste detalii, el poate apăsa pe "border dispute" şi va fi redirecţionat la secţiunea specifică din Disputed Status of Transnistria care explică aceste conflicte teritoriale. TSO1D 15:17, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Scoţînd "Zagornoe" economiseşti doar un cuvînt. Scoţînd celelalte sate economiseşti cîteva cuvinte, oricum economia e nesemnificativă. De ce atîta încăpăţînare pentru o economie nesemnificativă? De fapt, se doreşte ascunderea faptului că granţele Transnistriei nu sînt clar stabilite, legat şi de edit warul de la List of unrecognized countries unde se încearcă a se pretinde că Transnistria controlează în întregime teritoriul revendicat. Sînt 11 probleme deschise pe care le-am listat, observ că nici măcar într-una nu se acceptă vreun compromis (apropo, în unele probleme nu ţi-ai exprimat părerea, ar fi bine s-o faci). Pînă la urmă tot la WP:DR ajungem, că altă cale văd că nu este.--MariusM 00:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Referendumul transnistrean
Ce părere ai despre asta? E articol separat, dar nici aici nu se acceptă toate amănuntele nefavorabile. Iar medierea trenează de vreo 2 luni, nu din vina mea .--MariusM 21:20, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Da, evident Alkins e un nebun fanatic. Informaţia despre alte gânduri geniale de ale lui ilustrează cât de lucidă e perceperea lui a realităţii :). Totuşi, posibil că la moment e mai bine să nu introduci schimbări de acest gen acolo. Mai multe persoane care apar pe pagina ceea sunt tot atât de suscepte, şi dacă tu prezinţi mai multă informaţie despre el doar pentru a-l discredita, alţi editori pot să te acuze că introuci o insinuare. Cel mai bine e să aştepţi rezultatul medierii înainte de a introduce alte schimbări substanţiale. Eu nu ştiu de ce procesul nu merge înainte, el ar fi trebuit să se termine deja. Mă voi uita şi eu, poate se poate ceva de făcut. TSO1D 22:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing spelling, syntax, etc in the Transnistrian Referendum article. Please do not delete any sections or add any new sections, or substantially change the meaning, since it is currently in mediation. I am not sure what is happening there. It seems to be dragging out. I would like to know what I and others can do to speed it up. - Mauco 22:08, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Like I told Marius, I don't understand why the mediation is taking so long. You have a very experienced and knowledgeable mediator for the case, and I am certain that he can help. The problem though, is that he is probably busy in other areas, and has not had much time to devote to this process. In these cases, it's probably best for those involved to keep the process alive, through continuous discussion in the hope of a compromise, and by regularly reminding the mediator of the evolution of the case. I'll drop by there to see if I can be of any help. TSO1D 22:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Avem opinii diferite despre ce înseamnă Wikipedia. Eu cred că toate informaţiile exacte şi relevante trebuie introduse în articole, pentru ca cititorii Wikipediei să fie corect informaţi, pentru tine e mai importantă evitarea conflictelor cu anumiţi editori (eu nu fac parte dintre aceştia). Teoria că votul din Transnistria e corect se bizuie pe declaraţiile unor "observatori neutri" precum acest Alksnis. A explica corect cititorilor Wikipediei cine e acest Alksnis, ce a declarat el anterior despre Transnistria, este relevant pentru articol. Insinuare este a prezenta declaraţia lui Alksnis că votul transnistrean e liber, fără a explica cine e Alksnis, dar acest tip de insinuări pe tine nu te deranjează. Problema Alksnis nici nu este parte a medierii - poate ar trebui adăugată acolo, dacă tot a apărut. Dacă citeşti pagina cu medierea poţi înţelege de ce ea nu înaintează - partea opusă mie pur şi simplu nu are argumente şi trage de timp. Pernambuco, de pildă, care a apărut recent şi pe articolele Transnistria şi History of Transnistria ca să apere "neutralitatea" (aceasta însemnînd, fără excepţie, să şteargă ce scriu eu), nici nu şi-a precizat formal poziţia, el doar spune că nu se pricepe la Transnistria şi face reverturi cu singura explicaţie că e neutru, fără să spună ce era neneutru în ce a şters.--MariusM 14:08, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The "toate informaţiile" can not be in every single article. That is what Wikilinks are for. I do not explain (here) what a wikilink is or what Wikipedia is. Instead, I let you click and find out more. The wiki-crosslinking helps you. If you are interested, that is. If you are not interested, then the wikilinks help you EVEN MORE. Because they keep out information which you have no interest in anyway. - Mauco 14:34, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Chestia cu Alksnis nici nu era la articolul principal Transnistria, ci la articolul secundar despre referendum, unde se zice că putem da toate amănuntele (dar asta se zice doar demagogic, cînd e vorba la concret se cenzurează). Ţi-am zis să te uiţi peste medierea care trenează dar e folosită ca pretext pentru a interzice adăugarea de noi informaţii. Mă gîndeam că astfel vei înţelege anumite politici care se practică aici la Wikipedia. Nu ţi-am cerut să te amesteci în mediere, căci din experienţa mea cu tine tu mai mult strici cînd te amesteci. Am adăugat între timp ca "aditional issue" la mediere problema Alksnis.--MariusM 00:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

209.183.138.82
Done. Khoikhoi 00:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. TSO1D 00:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 8th, 2007.
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 07:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

List of films with similar themes and release dates AfD
Hi, you've expressed an opinion in the deletion discussion of this article. I've recently suggested a compromise in hopes of improving the article while keeping both sides happy, and would appreciate if you could revisit the issue. Thanks. --Wafulz 18:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thanks a lot for the star! I am extremely happy that the article has finally made it to FA. TSO1D 12:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Let me pile on some extra congratulations. Your constant work and your patience in responding constructively to criticism of the article have been exemplary. If in the future you need any help on another FA project (although I would assume you're not necessarily interested in going through all this work right away) please let me know if you think I can help in any way. Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 03:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * And I want to thank you Pascal. Your work was crucial to the improvement of the article, and I am very grateful for the support and encouragement that you offered throughout this process. TSO1D 22:05, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Border issues in Transnistria
Recent de la "neimportantele" (după părerea ta) border issues ale Transnistriei s-a ajuns la o nouă ciocnire între miliţia transnistriană şi poliţia moldovenească, lîngă Cocieri. Cîteva relatări: BBC, conflict.md )poziţiile amînduror părţi), agenţia rusească Novosti. De la aceste "border issues" poate începe un nou război, de asta-s importante, asta încerc să explic. Poate ultimele evenimente te-au convins. Te rog intervino la pagina de discuţii Transnistria unde am făcut o propunere de compromis. Vezi şi. Fii şi tu mai rezonabil şi ajută la deblocarea articolului.--MariusM 22:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Eu sunt de acord că disputele teritoriale reprezintă o temă importantă, eu pur şi simplu nu cred că orice detaliu în legătură cu acest aspect a conflictului merită să fie descris în articolul general. Tu-mi spui să fiu rezonabil, însă eu nu consider că poziţia mea este radicală. Eu doresc să includem un pasaj mic unde se explică în termeni generali că există probleme teritoriale, şi să prezentăm o legătură la o pagină unde se pot găsi mai multe detalii. Din toţi editorii activi, doar tu nu eşti de acord cu acest compromis. Cu toate că eu înţeleg logica argumentului tău, eu pur şi simplu nu sunt complet de acord cu tine. TSO1D 20:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Încă o dată mă conving de superficialitatea ta. Nu sînt singurul editor care a cerut păstrarea secţiunii "border issues". Dl.goe a făcut la fel, atît prin reintroducerea directă a secţiunii, cît şi prin explicaţii în pagina de discuţii. În plus, la secţiunea respectivă (care nu deranjase pe nimeni peste 100 zile) contribuiseră editori care n-au mai intervenit acum în pagina de discuţii, precum DC76 sau Khoikhoi. După ultimele ciocniri dintre poliţia moldoveană şi cea transnistreană nimeni n-a mai argumentat contra "border issues". Trebuie explicat ce s-a întîmplat la Cocieri în 1992, căci iată că avem iar probleme la Cocieri. De ce toate problemele deranjante pentru efortul de recunoaştere internaţională a Transnistriei trebuie ascunse în articole secundare? Revin cu cererea să te uiţi peste propunerea mea de compromis, iar dacă nu eşti dispus la compromis vreau să ştiu dacă eşti dispus să participi la o mediere formală.--MariusM 23:03, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Eu cred că aceast subiect nu mă interesează pe mine atât de mult ca pe tine. Eu aş prefera să păstrăm doar un rezumat, însă dacă alţi utilizatori preferă să păstreze întregul text, aceasta tot nu m-ar deranja. Unica pricină de ce eu am încercat să te conving să renunţi la planul tău, este că eu văd că cei mai mulţi contribuitori nu sunt de acord cu tine, şi eu doresc să terminăm îngheţul paginii cât mai repede. Să fiu sincer, eu nu înţeleg, de ce tu insişti să mă convingi pe mine personal. Eu niciodată nu am indicat că mă opuneam categoric la ideea ta, ci doar că aveam o altă preferinţă, care parţial provenea din dorinţa mea de a ajunge la un compromis care ar fi acceptabil majorităţii, şi nu din considerente ideologice, deoarece eu mereu am spus că nu consider că acest conflict are un caracter pronunţat de acest fel, ci din considerente pur stilistice. Şi tu singur ai remarcat recent că majoritatea contribuţiilor mele sunt de caracter minor, în domeniul rectificării ortografiei, deci eu pot să înţeleg de ce tu consideri că eu aş avea abilitatea să influenţez rozuluţia acestei dispute. În fine, eu consider că cel mai bine ar fi să continuăm discuţia la pagina de discuţii a articolului, pentru a putea obţine şi opinia altor utilizatori.  TSO1D 00:04, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Vezi că Mauco e în minoritate pe Talk:Transnistria şi are nevoie de ajutorul tău. Aşa a fost şi la începutul discuţiei despre border issues. Iniţial eram 2 (eu şi Dl.goe) care ceream reintroducerea paragrafului, Pernambuco nu participa la discuţii iar Mauco însuşi se scuza că nu el a şters paragraful ăsta. Ai apărut tu şi ai dat curaj celor care vor ştergerea paragrafului. N-am înţeles nonşalanţa cu care spui că "cei mai mulţi contributori" nu sînt de acord cu mine, cînd, de fapt, situaţia e inversă: cei mai mulţi contributori nu sînt de acord cu ştergerea paragrafului.--MariusM 16:00, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 15th, 2007.
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 06:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!
Well done on your 99% success rate with your RfA! You must be really pleased with that. A Bureaucrat will be along shortly to issue you with a nice shiny new set of admin tools. If you need any help with using them then please ask, I will do my best to help! Regards and happy mopping, (aeropagitica) 22:31, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your support and your congratulations. Although the success rate is slightly lower at 96% after a second oppose vote, I am extremely humbled by the confidence that so many have expressed in me. I will do my best not to disappoint those who manifested an interest in my nomination, and I am very eager to begin serving in that new capacity, though cautiously at first due to my inexperience. TSO1D 22:40, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep up that attitude and you'll be fine. Have fun with your new tools! Re-read the policies as needed, and don't hesitate to ask questions. Be conservative, especially with blocking as it has potential for the greatest consequences. Congratulations on the support you've gotten for the new tools, and use them well. - Taxman Talk 23:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Felicitäri pentru alegerea ta ca admin. Personal mi-am exprimat dubiile asupra capacitätii tale de a face fatä acestei functii, nädäjduiesc sä mä fi înselat. Dacä tot ai fost ales nu-mi rämîne decît sä te felicit. Am si o rugäminte: Unul din sandboxurile de pe pagina mea personalä a fost în repetate rînduri vandalizat. Nu poate fi protejat astfel încît doar eu sä-l pot edita? Am respectat întrutotul politica Wikipedia despre Sandbox. Eu nu m-am ocupat de vandalizarea paginilor personale ale altor editori, dar altii se ocupä de pagina mea.--MariusM 21:20, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Mulţumesc pentru felicitări! Cu părere de rău, nu există posibilitatea să-ţi permit doar ţie să editezi pagina ceea. TSO1D 00:50, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Archive
You did such a good job of archiving, would you try it again? Talk:Transnistria is now ~250K. Although it might be best to get closure on some of the pending items first, like intro. - Mauco 23:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I realize that the length of the talk page is reaching absurd proportions, but I kept waiting to archive the text until a consensus on at least some of the items could be reached or recognized by all users. I will await another day or so, to see how the implementation of the previous decisions will be implemented on the editable page, and then I will archive the text. TSO1D 23:16, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that we need someone to summarize what these "previous decisions" are. If you look at the history log of Transnistria, you can see that MY understanding of this is very far from what MariusM's understanding of this is. Either I am wrong, or he is, or both of us are. If we don't get someone to keep score, he will keep reverting me and I will keep reverting him. Then his friends will revert me, and hopefully someone will come to my rescue and revert him. I know the script. It has happened many times before, on this page and elsewhere. - Mauco 23:26, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Just a reminder TSO1D that you and Mauco are not the only ones involved in Transnistria article and you should not ignore the opinion of the majority of other editors. I was just trying to put back in the article a paragraph which was part of the article for more than 100 days without complaints. Edit war was caused by those who suddenly wanted to remove this paragraph.--MariusM 00:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * "Just"? 9 edits to the page in 7 hours, immediately after unprotection and with no semblance of consensus:

        There is no need to lie, MariusM. You give fellow Romanians a bad name. - Mauco 01:02, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't care about my fellow Romanians, I am at Wikipedia to write an encyclopedia not to make a good name for fellow Romanians. Nice to see that you Mauco are caring about the name of Romanians, in talk page Transnistria you attacked not only me but other 2 editors for having Romanian ethnicity. All my edits were about disscussed changes. You seem not to understand difference between edit and revert.--MariusM 01:43, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * As an example of bad faith: Mauco agreed to remove the paragraph "Transnistria in popular culture", however now he listed the agreed edit as my 4th revert. Also, he agreed to split the "violent incidents" section in "antisemitic incidents" and "explosions" but now he is reporting this agreed edit as my 3rd revert.--MariusM

I told you so...
This is getting old. But exactly what I predicted in my 23:26, 19 January 2007, post here on your Talk page, TSO1D.

3RR William Mauco reported by MariusM

3RR MariusM reported by William Mauco 

Seriously, though: What's the point? Since you are an Administrator, and since it is on Admin's Noticeboard, and since you are familiar with the dynamics of the article, you should comment on both. Besides, you are already involved. Your name was invoked by both sides in the edit summaries.   - Mauco 01:26, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Those two reports should be solved according Wikipedia rules. 3RR is a technical issue. Mauco did 4 reverts, I did only 3. Remember Jmabel's advice - don't use your admin power in conflicts you are involved.--MariusM 01:37, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I see I am too late anyway. However, ten days for both seems a little excessive. I'll if the blocking admin may be convinced to show more leniency given the circumstances. TSO1D 15:06, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Well as I said at Talk:Transnistria, I'll be happy to unblock after three days (which would be the same as the previous edit war block) if I think the page is getting nowhere; I've also said that if people really belive this is being harsh, then I won't revert an unblock.
 * But 'leniency' is the way I'm looking at this. I'm not blocking M/M to punish them; I'm blcoking them and unprotecting Transnistria to give it some time open without their influence. Maybe it'll just go stale and not develop; in which case I'll be happy to unblock. But protection simply hasn't been working on that page. Robdurbar 15:31, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

AfD Nomination: Danny Graham
An article that you have been involved in editing, Danny Graham, has been listed by me at Articles for deletion/Danny Graham. Please look there to see why this is, if you are interested in whether it should be deleted. Thank you. --Jerry lavoie 05:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC) Jerry lavoie 05:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

SEAS
Hi, the article was on afd, I closed the afd and deleted the article, and after that created a redirect to Seas (different capitalization). The redirect has nothing to do with the afd (except it was suggested there), and nothing to do with the article that was previously at SEAS, yet you deleted it. Is there a reason or was that just a mistake? - Bobet 00:28, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry, that was indeed a mistake. I was doing SD patrol and there was an SD tag for Seas mentioning the AFD. I then realized that it was the all capitalized SEAS that the AFD was about, and saw that it was still blue after a consensus had been formed to delete it, so I went to the article and deleted it, not realizing that this was a new redirect, not the subject of the AFD. TSO1D 00:53, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Bellotti Cymbals
Hello. I am sorry to bother you on what you may see as a rather trivial matter, but you were one of the admins responsible for deleting the above article, and I would very much appreciate it if you would read through Talk:Italian Bellotti Cymbals which is where AMA Requests for Assistance/Requests/January 2007/Pajaro4 is being dealt with, and give your explanation for why the page was deleted. Thank you. J Milburn 20:52, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

"mo."
Not a priority, but I'd like to understand what the upshot was of the whole "mo." keep or delete. Multsumesc! PētersV 02:35, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 22nd, 2007.
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 06:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations
Since I am but a sporadic WP-presence, I learnt first now about your admin nomination and successful promotion. Felicitari ! --Vintila Barbu 14:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - January 2007
The January 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 21:40, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

My 3RR
In the future, you will gain a lot more respect as an admin if you investigate issues before passing judgement on them. While I do not dispute your ruling regarding my 3RR, the simple fact is that there have been three editors engaging in 3RR violations in that article and that the article, itself, has suffered from editors who are not working in alignment with the three pillars of Wikipedia (and, when they violate it, do not provide justification for doing so) and, further, have pushed aside alternative views with the claim that they should be discussed and then refusing to participate in a discusson of them. The article has become a hot bed of edit warring ever since Terjen started regularly violating the 3RR and Ramsey2006 started violating policy. Again, I do not dispute your ruling regarding my violation of the 3RR, I'm simply suggesting that you will gain more respect in the future as an admin if you actually investigate cases before ruling on them. If it had been me, I would have pointed out that all three of us had violated the 3RR, gave us all a 24 hour time out and locked down the article at the point before all edit warring started.-Psychohistorian 13:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 29th, 2007.
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 18:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:MILHIST Coordinator Elections
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 11!

Delivered by grafikbot 11:43, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Help over at CAT:CSD
Hi, and congrats on your promotion! Per this discussion, I'm dropping a friendly note to some of the recently-promoted admins requesting help with speedy deletions. I am not an administrator, so if you don't feel comfortable diving into deletions - or if you need more info - please don't come to me, but I'm sure that Cyde Weys would be happy to guide you if you want to help. Any help is great, but I'm sure that Cyde and others would deeply appreciate it if you could put the page on your watchlist and do a bit of work there on a regular basis? Maybe weekly? Thanks in advance! Anchoress 18:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Haha, no problem
It was I, Daniel, that gave you the indulgence and the cool as a cucumber award, TSO1D. Continue the good work on wikipedia, Sr. Admin. Remember: As soon a coin in coffer rings, the soul from purgatory springs. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pinkzeppelin (talk • contribs) 00:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC).

Signpost updated for February 5th, 2007.
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 05:30, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 12th, 2007.
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 05:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Military History elections
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by February 25!

Delivered by grafikbot 15:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 19th, 2007.
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 07:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 26th, 2007.
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 08:38, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - February 2007
The February 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.

Delivered by grafikbot 17:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.
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, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.
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 05:48, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Past Leaders
I've put down a list of heads of state on the president of transnistria page. Would you say its accurate? im not sure of the early constitution and im getting conflicting reports over who lead the supreme soviet.. how does this sound? i think there is an error:

1 Different sources list him as "Provisional" Chairman of Supreme Soviet and Igor Smirnov as Chairman at same time. 2 Was imprisioned from August 29, 1991 until October 1, 1991. Andrey Panteleyevich Manoylov was acting Chairman of Supreme Soviet.

Vital Component 3/16/07

Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.
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 07:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007.
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 14:30, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIII - March 2007
The March 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 20:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 2nd, 2007.
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 05:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 9th, 2007.
Special note to spamlist users: Apologies for the formatting issues in previous issues. This only recently became a problem due to a change in HTML Tidy; however, I am to blame on this issue. Sorry, and all messages from this one forward should be fine (I hope!) -Ral315

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 08:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 16th, 2007.
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 06:40, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 23rd, 2007.
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 07:08, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 30th, 2007.
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 06:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIV (April 2007)
The April 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 15:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 7th, 2007.
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, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 14th, 2007.
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 03:35, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 21st, 2007.
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 05:45, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 28th, 2007.
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 06:56, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 4th, 2007.
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 08:06, 5 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 16:09, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 11th, 2007.
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 03:15, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 18th, 2007.
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 09:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 25th, 2007.
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 08:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 2nd, 2007.
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 08:18, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI (June 2007)
The June 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 15:04, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 9th, 2007.
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 08:18, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 16th, 2007.
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 20:18, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 23rd, 2007.
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 06:55, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.
Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315

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 00:38, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007.
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 09:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 13th, 2007.
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 21:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 20th, 2007.
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 05:58, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 27th, 2007.
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 06:54, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 3rd, 2007.
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. R Delivery Bot 05:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 10th, 2007.
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. R Delivery Bot 21:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 17th, 2007.
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 03:49, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 24th, 2007.


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. R Delivery Bot 02:41, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 03, 2007


Automatically delivered by COBot 03:13, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.
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 10:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.
Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315

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 14:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.
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 06:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)