User talk:A Raider Like Indiana/Archives/2007/August

Your recent RfA
I'm sorry, but I've closed your Request for adminship prematurely. Simply put, you've only been active for a few months, and only have got 750 or so edits on Wikipedia; while edit count isn't the only determining factor, and numerous people have their own personal standards that they judge RfA candidates by, there was no chance that the RfA was going to pass.

I'm sorry about this, and hope you don't take it personally. If you continue to contribute to the project in a positive fashion, I'm confident that you could possibly run a successful RfA in the future. You may want to consider submitting yourself to Editor review for feedback on where to get some good experience, and when you're ready for RfA again, there's a great Admin coaching program for you to use, as well as a guide to requests for adminship.

If you have any other questions about becoming an administrator, please don't hesitate to ask me. Good luck! EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 14:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry your RFA did not pass. Try again soon when you have more edits. Politics rule 14:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Not just edits, but overall experience as well. Some of the concern was for very little involvement in the project namespace, which is an absolute must for any administrator candidate. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 14:39, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I understand, and thank you for telling me. User:A Raider Like Indiana 17:56, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. If you've got any questions, feel free to drop me a line. :) EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 02:58, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. :) User:A Raider Like Indiana 00:02, 1 August 2006

Welcome to the 1.0 Editorial Team
Hi Raider, and welcome to the team! Please take a look at the projects - but I see from your user page that you are interested in improving the core topics. This would be very welcome, as we have a lot of poor to mediocre articles on many important general topics; the best place to start would be to pitch in and help at the core topics collaboration. This recent article also gives a good description of where things stand and where they may be going. Please feel free to ask for help. Thanks, Walkerma 05:36, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure, no problem.  A Raider Like Indiana  05:38, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

metre --> meter
hey, i saw your edits in North Sea and wanted to let you know that technically we're not supposed to change british spellings (eg. metre) to the american (meter) and the brits will leave our spellings alone. just like with american units, the only way to have it the way we like it is to beat them to the punch and write it first or change it to the abbreviation "m." Jieagles 19:12, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I thought it would look better for the article. But yeah, I understand this is a "English" encyclopedia. I think the abbreviation would be better.  A Raider Like Indiana  19:15, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, with a geographical topic relating to the UK (but not to the US), the convention is to use UK spellings throughout. Likewise Gulf of Mexico should have US spellings. Walkerma 16:38, 2 August 2007 (UTC) (a Brit living in the US!)

Image:Windows 2000 Professional.png
is a screenshot of default installation of Windows 2000 SP4. It's a distro with the SP integrated, you know what it's like.

The title screenshot of Windows XP displays Security Center, which was added in SP2, and that doesn't seem to disturb anyone.

I'm gonna revert the image back to my version. --tyomitch 12:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Windows XP came with Service Pack 2 in its CD integrated. However, Windows 2000 was never integrated with SP4.  A Raider Like Indiana  15:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It was, at least in the MSDNAA release. See Talk:Windows 2000 for another evidence. --tyomitch 16:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * That's fine. I was just wondering or not that the Win2k screen shot should be the RTM installation without a Service Pack. I will not revert it.  A Raider Like Indiana  16:21, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Windows 2000 Professional.png
is a screenshot of default installation of Windows 2000 SP4. It's a distro with the SP integrated, you know what it's like.

The title screenshot of Windows XP displays Security Center, which was added in SP2, and that doesn't seem to disturb anyone.

I'm gonna revert the image back to my version. --tyomitch 12:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Windows XP came with Service Pack 2 in its CD integrated. However, Windows 2000 was never integrated with SP4.  A Raider Like Indiana  15:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It was, at least in the MSDNAA release. See Talk:Windows 2000 for another evidence. --tyomitch 16:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * That's fine. I was just wondering or not that the Win2k screen shot should be the RTM installation without a Service Pack. I will not revert it.  A Raider Like Indiana  16:21, 3 August 2007 (UTC)