User talk:Aaron Bowen

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place  after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 16:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

CSS and JS skins
Just a note: you've got your monobook.js and monobook.css pages the wrong way round. (It should work better if you swap them!) --ais523 17:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Even though I thanked you (and gave you a barnstar) on your talk page, let me say thanks here again. You really went the extra mile to help me. Aaron Bowen 13:34, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Michael Jordan
I've been studying for exams, so I haven't had a chance to be on Wikipedia the last couple of days. I'll try to look at the article later. Thanks! Zagalejo 14:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I reverted your removal of a well-sourced portion of this article. Why do you feel it doesn't belong? -- Auto ( talk / contribs ) 02:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Jordan FAC
The Michael Jordan FAC has been re-listed (which was probably a good idea). Thought you'd like to know, here's a quick link. Quadzilla99 14:42, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I just commented on it, thanks for the notice anyway. Aaron Bowen 14:45, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your many compliments it's nice to receive praise when you've worked hard on something. Quadzilla99 02:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Sopranos
Thanks for your note on my talk page. I'd be glad to work together on improving the article. It has always seemed like such an uphill struggle. The episode list made it to featured list status so the main article certainly deserves a go of it. I'm not enditing that much at the moment but I'll try and make a start on fixing it up.--Opark 77 17:50, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Great I'll start working on it tomorrow and start by getting it sourced. Aaron Bowen 01:34, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey I've noticed your recent efforts to bring The Sopranos article up to scratch and would like to help out. Maybe it would be easier if the article be built up again from the ground up - though alot of whats already in the article can be incoporated, just needs to be removed from the superfluous information. I've made a preliminary outline on my user page User:Qjuad/Test page. Qjuad 20:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't blame you. Qjuad 09:53, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late reply. Anyway, I won't be able to help at the moment as I'm busy with work until the end of the month. At the end I'll dig out the DVDs and start adding references. Though, that malapropisms section really needs to be trimmed down, but I guess that is pretty low on the priorities list. - Qjuad 04:38, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Replied on your talk page. Aaron Bowen 04:40, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Em Mitchell
I've fixed the userpage mentioned above in response to your comment, and explained to the user in question what happened. --ais523 13:23, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for discovering my plea for help and notifying someone hehe. Much appreciated, thanks again! --Em Mitchell 00:21, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * No prob, I would have done it myself if I knew how. Aaron Bowen 11:24, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Andrew
Thank you very much. Matthew appears to be pursuing a personal vendetta against me personally as much as anything, so I appreciate some fresh eyes on it. Here's to it passing tomorrow! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. Oh, this is starting to piss me off... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 01:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Tbh, I'm not inclined to fight for it until I know the outcome of the previous one - this one will have to be speedied anyway if the previous nom is kept. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 17:18, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/Atheism
Regarding your comment: My bad. I added that Weasel tag, and forgot to remove it after I was done cleaning up the weaselness. Fixed. :) &mdash; BRIAN 0918 • 2007-04-10 16:06Z

dealing with talk page chatter
Regarding Talk:Don Imus: just go ahead and remove all talk page chatter on sight, treat it as vandalism, warn the editors with the uw-chat series of warning templates, and report repeat offenders at WP:AIV. And thanks for what you've been doing so far. — coe l acan — 09:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

WP:Films Welcome!
 Welcome! Hey, welcome to the Films WikiProject! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films and film characters. If you haven't already, please add User WikiProject Films to your user page.

A few features that you might find helpful:
 * Most of our important discussions about the project itself and its related articles take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you [ watchlist it].


 * The project has a monthly newsletter. The newsletter for January has been published.  February's issue is currently in production; it will be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:


 * Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
 * Want to assist in some current backlogs within the project? Visit the Film Tasks template to see how you can help.
 * Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality of every film article in Wikipedia.  Check it out!
 * Want to collaborate on articles? The Cinema Collaboration of the Week picks an article every week to work on together.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Nehrams2020 20:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Fritz the Cat (film)
The article has undergone a copyedit and some additional details have been added that may adress your concerns. You may want to reevaluate the article's status. (Ibaranoff24 21:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC))
 * I tried reorganizing the article and wonder if you would reconsider your opinion. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 21:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for your warm welcome! OldCar 03:24, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure! Aaron Bowen 13:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey
Thanks for the kind words and i hope im here for a long time to. MachoMan420 14:08, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I hope so too! :) Aaron Bowen 14:09, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

subst:
When using certain template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use &#123;&#123;subst:uw-test1&#125;&#125; instead of &#123;{uw-test1}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. It must be used on welcome, for instance.  REDVERS ↔ SЯEVDEЯ 14:43, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

you welcomed me
Hello Aaron Bowen. Thank you very much for the nice welcome. I hope I will be able to contrubite to this woundeful website. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hyper flyin' (talk • contribs) 12:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC).
 * No prob. Aaron Bowen 12:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Aaron Thanks for the welcome Solidarity from Rua Nua!

Thanks for the welcome
Sorry i'm a little late on it, but I was busy elsewhere, so a belated thank you Timeran 15:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No prob! Aaron Bowen 04:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

wow, you are perhaps the nicest person i've ever met, thanx again!! Timeran 14:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Block booking
Thanks for your note. I don't know what I was thinking when I did that. Best, Dan.—DCGeist 22:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

April 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter
The April 2007 issue of the Films 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 notice by BrownBot 20:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

FAC
Hi there, I believe I have addressed your concerns at Featured article candidates/Fighting in ice hockey. Please revisit the page and strike out your opposition unless you have further feedback. Thanks! --Mus Musculus (talk) 23:40, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Tyrus
Seems like this guy makes it a challenge to edit. I suspect that he will continue to be a challenge even after the 3RR block expires, but hopefully the RfC will make a bit of a difference. I'll follow the situation as well, but don't think that extending his block right now would be the best thing to do. Thanks -- Samir 07:49, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I left a message on his talk page. I'm online for the next little bit so I'm keeping an eye on what he's doing.  Thanks for informing me -- Samir 02:48, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Heads up . . . I have a strong suspicion that 69.208.210.158 and 68.253.216.115 are sock puppets for blocked user User:TyrusThomas4lyf based upon the common theme for recent edits as well as the Chicago based IP.  One indication of this can be seen by comparing  and  along with the edit summary at .  Another is .  I've notified two admins, but it's not clear what can be done with anonymous IPs.  Myasuda 14:53, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Sopranos6poster06.jpg
Hello, Aaron Bowen. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Sopranos6poster06.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Aaron Bowen/sandbox. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or    media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 09:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Took care of that blanked the sandbox. Aaron Bowen 22:39, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

english version
I am a Russian composer and producer, living in LA, California and have the English and Russian versions of my article. The user, who did everything correct, went to vocation. I’ve made the info editing and now have the trouble on my article with the some kind of format, which I do not technically understand. Could you please advise me something - how can I make everything correct and avoid these mistakes? --GC 12:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Dear Sir,

Global Warming
Hello, Mr. Bowen. I noticed you undid one of my edits at global warming. I am just wondering what your source is for reinserting "small," when in fact the original never had it and the source doesn't mention "small warming effect." Thanks for you insight! ~ UBeR 02:53, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

The Sopranos
Aaron, I haven't really ever watched The Sopranos. It looks like a good show, and I actually did see part of the episode where he punched holes in the wall. HBO does have the best. I would look at the other TV shows that are FAs, and then copy the format. It would be good to have the Sopranos as an FA.-BillDeanCarter 00:54, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the sentiments. I don't know if I'll stay retired.  I went through a period where a lot of my stuff was being deleted.  I'm still working on one of the articles, so that keeps me around.  Good luck with the Sopranos article.-BillDeanCarter 02:38, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the recognition, I'll try to keep it up. Tayquan holla My work 22:19, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Jordan
It's fine. I was unaware of that. John 06:36, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome.
Thanks for welcoming me. I look forward to a productive and enjoyable future with this community. Nic007 06:15, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. Aaron Bowen 12:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Global warming
Hello, Mr. Bowen. I noticed you reverted one of my edits, and then self-reverted. I was going to say, the entire section was not discussed, so it would be pretty silly to say I was at fault for not discussing. Also, some people have chosen to label a two sentence inclusion as "major edit" that warrants automatic reverting because it wasn't previously discussed. I find this explicitly contrary to WP:BOLD, but to each their own. Anyway, I'm glad you've undone your edit, and hopefully we can discuss some potential edits regarding the new information. ~ UBeR 04:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:GA/R
Hello. Let me first say thank you for your participation in the GA/R process. We are in need of more editor participation. The reason I'm dropping you a line, though, is because you've based a couple decisions on "1c issues". The problem is that there is no criteria 1c.
 * 1a - Prose and grammar.
 * 1b - MOS, lead, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, list incorporation.
 * 2a - Refs & sources used.
 * 2b - Reliable sources for quotes and challengeable material.
 * 2c - contains no OR.
 * 3a - Broad in coverage.
 * 3b - Focused.
 * 4a - NPOV.
 * 4b - All views.
 * 5 - Stable.
 * 6a - Images tagged and captioned.
 * 6b - Lack of images okay.
 * 6c - Non-free images have fair-use rationale.

It appears from your comments that when you refer to 1c, you may actually be referring to 2a or 2c. It's not a huge deal, but it can be confusing to others and particularly frustrating for the custodians of the article for which you are critiquing. I look forward to your continuing participation in the process. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Regards, Lara  Love  T / C  17:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Responded on Lara's talk page. Aaron Bowen 21:31, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

May 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter
The May 2007 issue of the Films 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 has been an automated notice by BrownBot 21:13, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome!!
You posted the first message to my talk page! I have a couple of questions about my changes you reverted.

Can you tell me why saying that Bush won the recount is evidence of a point of view? It seems like important evidence. Also, the fact that Gore asked for manual recounts, that it wouldn't have happened otherwise, is also a relevant fact. The election would have been over after the recount if it weren't for Gore creating lawsuits and encouraging manual recounts. If you want me to substantiate that and add that to the article, I would be happy to.

I feel like you just reverted my change whole cloth. Furthermore, saying just "rv POV" is not a very useful edit description. KeithCu 04:24, 3 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Ow, c'mon that was blatantly POV: Aaron Bowen 21:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Here's another one of your diffs, covering three edits: Aaron Bowen 21:41, 3 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Saying Bush "won the recount" is a point of view? Why mention that there is a recount if you don't say who won it? I live in WA and there was a governor's race where the different recounts where won by different people. The point of an encyclopedia is to inform, and these are relevant facts. Also, saying that it was democratic counties that gore asked for recounts is also informative. I think you are confusing facts with POV.
 * I don't know why you would revert one change, and use another change as proof of it. However, I don't think it is interesting to mention that he lost the popular vote. Saying this delegitimizes the electoral college. If Bush had wanted to win the popular vote, he might have employed a different strategy, like spending advertising dollars in Texas to get everyone possible to vote for him. Even the wording makes it seem like somehow the popular vote is somehow important. The Clinton one doesn't say: "Although Bill Clinton only got 43% of the population to vote for him..."
 * I'm not going to play these games where you insert POV edits and then act all naive and pretend like you don't know what people are talking about. Take that elsewhere. Aaron Bowen 00:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I read that I am to assume others are working in good faith, and as I do. You assume I am not, and have not answered the substance of any of my points.KeithCu 00:30, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * If you are working in good faith and with an NPOV then on average half of your edits will make Bush look worse and half will make him look better right? It's like flipping a coin what are the chances you'll land on heads ten times in a row? Very low. Well...look at your edits. I guess it will average out over time though, right? Also, AGF doesn't imply editors should be naive. Like I said take it elsewhere. Aaron Bowen 00:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Interesting, but flawed theory, because it assumes that the encyclopedia is already perfectly balanced. I read this encyclopedia and see it is full of bias, via errors of omission, and includes irrelevant facts which are written to make Bush look bad. Furthermore, you have not explained how my edits are biased, and are only attempting to say that because you think I have perspective that my edits are not valid. For example, you have yet to explain how saying he won the recount shows a bias? Do you think that mentioning Bush won the recount makes Bush look better?KeithCu 00:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I'l make my comment and allow you one more comment before I start deleting your posts, there's no need to spam my talk page. Anyone with a moderately neutral outlook can see the POV in those two diffs (stop playing naive) and there are more edits like that on the article. Okay now make your final comment and move on. Aaron Bowen 00:49, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think I'm spamming, but having a conversation. Is that not what these talk pages are for? You, meanwhile, are attacking me and not responding to the substance of any of my points. I also think you are confusing facts with POV. You think a sentence which says there was a recount, but doesn't say who won it is informative. An encyclopedia which mentions details (that there was a recount), but not the important facts surrounding those details (that Bush won it) is stupid. One may as well remove the confusing, uninformative sentence, then. Furthermore, I have made a number of other points that you have not responded to either. The bottom line is that you are not assuming good faith.KeithCu 01:08, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

George W. Bush
First, please refrain from personally attacking other editors in your edit summaries. Second, I think the part you removed is a fair characterization of Bush's campaign tactic, whether or not there was real "Clinton fatigue". It should probably be reworded more neutrally and accurately, and be put back in. "Clinton fatigue" is a concept that was reported on widely, so I'm sure that it can be sourced that this concept was out there, whether or not it was valid, and that Bush capitalized on the concept in his campaign. It doesn't look like hero-worship so much as inadequate research and writing. - Crockspot 12:40, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Please. Someone's coming in a little late here, everyone single one of his edits systematically makes Bush look better and Dems look worse. It's tireseome. Since Clinton left office with the highest approval rating since World War II: saying the country had grown tired of him and all the polls show it is a flat-out lie, the truth is somewhere in between. If you look over that user's edits and the conversation above, he's a single purpose account. I went a little far in the edit summary but WP:AGF does not say to continue to assume good faith in the presence of evidence to the contrary. All of his edits should be looked over for bias and undue wieght problems. Aaron Bowen 14:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not arguing that "Clinton fatigue" was or wasn't a realized phenomenon, I'm arguing that it was a concept that was bandied about in the media during the 2000 election, and Bush did try to capitalize on it. As for AGF, you'd better have some pretty good evidence before you toss it under the bus. There are a lot of apparent SPA's, for example, User:EECEE, who edits a very narrow range of articles (all related to John Kerry), and is obviously sympathetic to that subject, but I have never given up AGF on her, and have even worked productively with her on occasion. If you have legitimate beefs with an editor's edits, take it up in a way that addresses the content, not the contributor. And fyi, I never noticed that editor until I saw their message on my talk page this morning. I'm sure they contacted me out of courtesy, because I have a vocal history with that particular article. - Crockspot 16:54, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * If I want to spend my time on removing anti-Bush bias doesn't make me biased. I have explained that concept before on Aaron's talk page, but he didn't acknowledge it or respond to it. I see wikipedia as filled with anti-republican, anti-bush, anti-conservative bias. Anyway, this is only a general argument, not an argument for removing any particular edit. Each edit needs to be looked at on its own merits. If it is well documented, it might make Bush better, but so be it, it makes the encyclopedia better.
 * Furthermore, the polls Aaron cite also demonstrate Clinton fatigue! The bottom line is that Aaron doesn't have Clinton fatigue now, so he thinks that the country didn't have it in 2000. That is a illogical way to argue.KeithCu 00:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I have Keith's edit histories see my comments above. Also, the fact that both of you repeatedly ignore that Clinton left office with the highest approval rating since WWII (again), and that Keith could be here for 300 years before he even inadvertently puts something negative in about Bush. Basically AGF doesn't imply being a completely helpless ignoramt fool. Also, please stop spamming my talk page the both of you. Aaron Bowen 01:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Even if what you say is true, the point is that Bush campaigned on Clinton fatigue. Call Bush stupid, but that he campaigned on Clinton fatigue is a fact, and Clinton's approval rating doesn't change that. Furthermore, I did respond by pointing out other relevant aspects of the same poll you cited which also showed Clinton fatigue. Furthermore, my edit history is irrelevant as I have explained that before, and you have not responded to. I may put in anti-bush stuff at some point, but not yet--there are plenty of other people who have beat me to it. I'm trying to make wikipedia more NPOV. I am responding here because you are simply reverting my changes rather than attempting to improve them. I actually found a quote where cheney used "weary." Is that not evidence that Bush campaigned on clinton weariness? KeithCu 02:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Have a look at Crockspot's edit history, as well. He reminds me of nothing so much as Winston Smith in 1984. These wingnuts are doing their best to re-write history, so that Bill Clinton wasn't a popular President, George Bush was, and Ronald Reagan (who was non compos mentis during much of his Presidency) was the savior of Western civilization. Reality means nothing to them, only artifice. This has been a public service.

George W Bush article
1. Can you explain to me how explaining what he campaigned on is "glorifying it?" This seems to be a flaw of logic. 2. Your comment that he is my hero is a baseless personal attack, which is inappropriate on wikipedia. 3. If you did not follow Bush's campaign very closely, you might not know what he campaigned on. Therefore you should be careful before you make edits to. I actually found a quote where Cheney used the word "weary!" You did not respond to that. 4. Even within the poll you referenced, I found relevant info: "Sixty-seven percent of Americans say he's not honest and trustworthy. Seventy-seven percent say he lacks high moral and ethical standards. And just 44 percent view him favorably "as a person." Even the data you supplied play into the weariness angle. 5. The country might not be weary of Clinton now, but we are talking about the 2000 campaign. I believe you are letting your current opinion of the situation cloud your perspective of what people were thinking back then. KeithCu 00:02, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * If you want to help me make that edit better, fine, I would appreciate it! But do not just revert my edits--that is demoralizing and demotivating. I'm doing my best the make the encyclopedia better. You should consider that if you do not like george bush, you are probably not going to be a good person to describe his campaign. Have you considered that idea?KeithCu 00:33, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Moved George W Bush weariness discussion to the talk page
I created an entry on the George W Bush talk page. You can respond, we can get a 3rd opinion, etc. KeithCu 03:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

The Fountain (film)
The tag was there because the film needs more reviews, since the RT rating shows that it was pretty divided. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:31, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I was looking to have subsections under it, but there was nothing major about its box office performance or its awards/nominations. There's only three reviews of the film, which doesn't give the reader the best idea of critical reaction to the film.  Hence the reason for the tag's existence. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 18:34, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

IMDB Criticisms
Hi there; I just wanted to say that I liked your criticism section for the IMDB article. In my experience, IMDB is not very respected save as a means for self promotion. In that respect, I've seen people lie about their credentials more than once on there. So, as I said, nice job :) AleBrewer 16:57, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you're talking about. I removed the criticism section to the talk page. Aaron Bowen 20:07, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
You're very kind, any science problems on pages you are interested in, please feel free to ask. TimVickers 14:27, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome! Wikdot 16:19, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Brian Adams (wrestler)
Thanks for taking the time to review the Brian Adams (wrestler) article I have been working on, I appreciate your time! You commented that the article is still mostly written from an "in universe" position, I was was really hoping you could elaborate on what you see so I can try and address your concerns. I thought I had corrected the problem of it appearing in universe, but maybe I've missed it. Thanks! - T-75| talk | contribs 22:04, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

June 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter
The June 2007 issue of the Films 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. Please also, if you have not already, add your name to the Member List. Nehrams2020 07:14, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

scrolling ref
I agree with your opinion about the idea of deleting the scrolling ref. It's ugly! I saw it on the Jennica ''Talk 05:18, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

July 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter
The July 2007 issue of the Films 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 BrownBot 20:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

August 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter
The August 2007 issue of the Films 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 BrownBot 03:04, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Films roll call
Hey fellow Wikipedian! Your username is listed on the WikiProject Films participants list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active on the project. If you still consider yourself an active WP:FILM editor, please add your name to the Active Members list. You may also wish to add   to your userpage, if you haven't done so already. We also have several task forces that you may be interested in joining as well. Also, elections for Project Coordinators are currently in sign-up phase. If you would be interested in running, or would like to ask questions of the candidates, please take a look. You can see more information on the positions at WikiProject Films/Coordinators. Thanks and happy editing! An automatic notification by BrownBot 22:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

The Sopranos
Hi again Aaron, I have a few weeks off and would like to take another stab at The Sopranos article. Any assistance would be valued.--Opark 77 16:58, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Films September 2007 Newsletter
The September 2007 issue of the Films 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.

Please note that special delivery options have been reset and ignored for this issue due to the revamp of the membership list (outlined in further detail in the newsletter). If you would like to change your delivery settings for future issues, please follow the above link. I apologize for the inconvenience. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 22:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

The Sopranos FA
Hello, Aaron. I notice you've made some significant contributions to The Sopranos article, nice work. I wanna let you know that I'm currently working on a new one, intended for FA status. Instead of adding bits and pieces to the current article, I've decided to rebuild it from scratch, keeping the parts from the old article I demand worthy...of keeping. If you wanna help out, any help would be appreciated. A season-by-season summary in the style of The Wire's ditto is something that would help out tremendously. The references are already there, thanks to Opark 77 (in the talk page that is). –FunkyVoltron talk 03:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:ProseTimeline
Template:ProseTimeline has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 16:59, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films August 2008 Newsletter
The August 2008 issue of the Films 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Questionnaire
As a member of WikiProject Films, you are invited to take part in the project's first questionnaire. It is intended to gauge your participation and views on the project. At the conclusion of the questionnaire, the project's coordinators will use the gathered feedback to find new ways to improve the project and reach out to potential members. The results of the questionnaire will be published in next month's newsletter. If you know of any editors who have edited film articles in the past, please invite them to take part in the questionnaire. Please stop by and take a few minutes to answer the questions so that we can continue to improve our project. Happy editing! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:15, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Miracles (Insane Clown Posse song)
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Miracles (Insane Clown Posse song). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Miracles (Insane Clown Posse song). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Ian Snell "Single Season Curve Record"
This very oddly-worded statement you questioned relates to the single-season strikeout record by a team called "The Altoona Curve". If it was "The single season Pirate record" or "The single season Mariner record", it would make sense, but with Altoona's name, it is quite confusing. It has been fixed. 67.170.59.75 (talk) 06:25, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Juwan Howard/archive2
As a reviewer at Featured article candidates/Michael Jordan, I thought you might consider commenting at Featured article candidates/Juwan Howard/archive2.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:31, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

a user who may need a friend
hello Mr. Brown. my name is User:Dfrr. there is a user named User:Trimethylxanthine who you first welcomed to wikipedia when he was first registered. anyways you do not have to send him any messages (you can if you wish) if you do not want to. but you should tell people about this use. i have already let User:StuRat User:Conifer User:MrWooHoo User:Tamfang User:Davejohnsan and many other users have gotten this message from me. so lets send him barnstars wikiloves messages anything to make him feel that other users know about him. so i will tell you what. i will be doing the same exact thing thank you and have a very good april Dfrr (talk) 09:11, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

A cute kitten for you!
hi Aaron Bowen here is a cute kitten for you i think you will like it.

Dfrr (talk) 06:46, 9 April 2015 (UTC) 

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!