User talk:AndrewRT/Archive 1

Archive

Wikinews
Hi Andrew,

I just wanted to thank you for the work you've started on the Bahá'i Faith pages.


 * Thanks for your comments. Hope you like the wikinews articles and would appreciate any thing you could contribute there too! AndrewRT 21:36, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

A couple comments regarding general Wikipedia etiquette. One is that usually linking to a lot of pages that don't exist as of yet, is not encouraged (the red links)


 * Interesting point. I'm still quite new to wikipedia so I'm not 100% sure yet of what is and what isn't considered appropriate. Can you point me to a wikipedia policy that talks about whether red links are appropriate?


 * I do note that the Baha'i faith articles seem to have very few red links indeed - in fact I saw the first one today! This seems to me to be quite exceptional. Other wikipedia pages I have been involved in regularly create red links so that other contributors can "fill in the gaps" later. I've just tried clicking "random article" a few times and found roughly half the articles had red links in them. Red links can play a good part in keeping the wikispace dynamic - always expanding, always incorporating new ideas. Besides, I only created the links so I could come back and write the articles later - nothing wrong with that.

and another is what is an appropriate article. Links should be made, once the article exists, as the red links take away from the links that do exist. Also people who are not very prominent are usually marked for deletion,


 * Again can you point me in direction of a wikipedia policy that says this? The closest I could find was one that said you shouldn't create an article about yourself. What wikipedia is not states the following:

"Genealogical entries, or phonebook entries: Biography articles should only be for people with some sort of fame, achievement, or perhaps notoriety. One measure of achievement is whether someone has been featured in several external sources (on or off-line). Minor characters may be mentioned within other articles (e.g. Ronald Gay in Persecution of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and the transgendered). See m:Wikipeople for a proposed genealogical/biographical dictionary project."


 * Individual Continental Counsellors are in a position of significant influence in the Baha'i Faith. They do indeed have "some sort of acheivement" to their name. I can't see why it isn't appropriate to have articles on them in the same way that Bishop of Llandaff does - similarly with plenty of red links!

and articles that are non-encyclopedic are also usually deleted. Particullary the article on the diacritical marks on the word Bahá'i, Bahá'u'lláh and so forth is mostly a practice, and is not really encyclopedic. The statement at the bottom of the Bahá'i Faith I think is usually enough. Once again thanks. -- Jeff3000 21:24, 20 November 2005 (UTC)


 * There is some debate within the Baha'i community as to when it is appropriate to use diacritical marks. Indeed I thought to raise it as an issue when I started looking at wikipedia but then found the discussion on the talk pages. I though it would be better to have this as an article then ew people coming to the ages in 5 years time won't start up the debate yet again. Also (more importantly) I can put a link it from wikinews and save from having to explain it all over again. As I'm sure you're aware you can't link to a talk page!


 * I don't mean to have a rant - I recognise that I'm new to wikis and a lot to learn. If you want to recommend an article for deletion go ahead but don't think I wont oppose it. AndrewRT 21:36, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

wiki news
Sorry I didn't mean to be insultive. I should have left an explanation somewhere.

I had two reasons: one is that it made the template twice as wide as it was (a huge asthetic problem), and two is that those kinds of links usually go in the actual article. Cuñado  -  Talk  00:04, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Baha'i stats
Ah well I claim nothing more than heresay :). Hence why I ddin't include it on the article. Where was the original source for the count you came up with? I did a search on statistics.gov.uk and found nothing about the Baha'is. -- Tomhab 23:00, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Juan Cole
Yeaaaah... I got that message from someone a while ago and didn't think it was even worth responding to... I'm starting to regret that as people keep informing me of the Juan Cole situation on my talk page :).

Well anyway since you're relatively new here and no-ones done it I thought I'd add a nice welcome for you at the top. I'm a lot less active that I used to be but still am on wikipedia most days. If you need any help with anything to do with wikipedia let me know - I think I've probably been around the longest out of most people here (although Jeff may just about beat me). I used to concentrate on the Baha'i History pages but got bored when people started to be more interested in Baha'i beliefs etc (as it was all circumstantial).

Anyway, enjoy your time here - edit away and just remember to source everything whenever you're having problems :) -- Tomhab 20:16, 6 December 2005 (UTC)


 * History pages aren't so impressive on first viewing but I found it really facinating finding out what parts of Baha'i myth are based on truth and what aren't. Had to a lot of research into what actually happened in Shaykh Tabarsi, did Azal really make a claim to be HWGSMM etc. Being born a Baha'i I was brought up with all this, but never entirely sure whether it was heresay or real. This I guess gave me an excuse to find out. -- Tomhab 00:34, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Palestinian election
Thanks for adding all that info! When I created that page, I was assuming that it would quickly descend into the morass of Israeli-Palestinian backbiting that seems to inevitably cling to the topic on Wikipedia, so imagine my surprise when nobody else even edited it until now. I'm grateful that someone with more information than I have has contributed.

One question: you have the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine as the major component of both the Martyr Abu Ali Mustafa list and the Alternative list. I'm assuming either that this is incorrect or there's more to this story that needs explaining. Did the PFLP break into mutually hostile factions recently or am I misremembering?

Also, do you know anything about the mechanics of how the proportinal representation of this election will work? Is it just based on the national vote or is it distributed regionally somehow? And are the non-proportinal legislators elected from single-seat constituencies or from multiseat constituencies? Just thought I'd ask as you seem more in the know than I. --Jfruh 19:57, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Baha'i Faith Covenant
Sorry. I thought (rv to Jeff300 last. Disambiguation link at top of page is clear. Issues already discussed in "Baha'i divisions" and "Covenant.") in the edit summary was clear enough. Have added an expansion of this to the Talk page. Thanks for pointing that out. MARussellPESE 13:57, 6 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Ahh. Well, I think discussing Covenant Breaking on the main page is irrelevant. There's plenty of opportunity to see it in "Baha'i divisions" and Mason Remey is already discussed in the "Baha'i administration" section with ample links. MARussellPESE 14:06, 6 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Please give me some time to add my own discussion to the Talk page. MARussellPESE 14:45, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Baha'i Elections
I don't see faults in the Baha'i electoral process. Of course the application of the process can be a different matter. I commented only on the International Convention and appointments to the ITC because it concerns the head of the Baha'i Faith. The electoral process at the national level is often likely to be significantly less mature. Having known some of the House members for decades, I do not have the slightest doubts about their selfless motivation. This does not address the issue of "incumbency", which is instead a matter of inertia among delegates. When asked recently about accusations that the House of Justice is self-selecting, Ali Nakhjavani opined that there will be more frequent changes in House membership in future, when information is more widely available. Keep in mind that there are many delegates who do not have ready access to the internet and other knowledge resources before they travel to International Conventions, but this will change. On your other point, Baha'is are not permitted to nominate or campaign in Baha'i elections because otherwise, I believe, the question of ego arises, which is contrary to Baha'i principles. This places a heavier burden on the electors to ensure that they are well informed, which is a characteristic of Baha'i elections rather than a systemic weakness. --Occamy 22:01, 7 February 2006 (UTC) p.s. I like your user page.
 * Ironically, it was the discussion about Baha'i elections on Wikipedia that prompted me to ask Mr. Nakhjavani and for his personal comment. I don't know if his view is noted elsewhere. --Occamy 17:58, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

ICC
You made a recent edit which mentioned “executive agreements" which many legal experts argue are unconstitutional

Do you know any example of a legal expert who holds this view? Otherwise, this statement is moving towards weasel words? Thanks AndrewRT 18:14, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I have no idea about the question, I just readded what someone had deleted without explanation. Get-back-world-respect 19:29, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Baha'i See also
Andrew, regarding adding the other religion See Also stuff, see Messianic Prophecies (Apocrypha). I figured out how to do the multi-column list to keep the size reasonable. I have not yet changed the list I had added. By the way, I did see a 3-column list in another article. RickReinckens 03:53, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Re your response on my talk page. "See also" lists often are fairly broad, particularly on religion pages. A number of them have subcategories. The ones near the top would be directly on point with the article and the ones further down would be more general. For instance, on a Protestant page those near the top might be various Protestant denominations and general Christian topics, then an Other Christian Religions group with links regarding Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox, etc., then perhaps a Non-Christian Religions section. It's sort of like a thesaurus, where all of them relate to a broad concept and they keep getting further and further away from the specific concept.

When you say, the Bible is inspired but certain specific teachings are superseded, do you mean like Christianity/Judaism where most biblically-based teachings of Judaism were taken into Christianity or do you mean Christianity/Islam where Islam basically says the Bible is true and then tosses it out and essentially starts from scratch? People who are not specifically Baha'i may want to link to other scriptures for comparative descriptions.

Also keep in mind that many people know virtually nothing about any religion's scriptures. I was raised Roman Catholic, I had 90 s.h. in literature and foreign languages undergrad, I spent a year in a Ph.D. program, I'm a lawyer, I later took accounting and passed two parts of the CPA exam (only took two), and I read constantly and with a background like that I was in my mid-40's before I found out there are different Bible translations. (And Catholics don't use the King James Version.)
 * RickReinckens 06:58, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

arrests of protesters - Danish Embassy
Mate, please don't let the dispute between Tom & I stop you from correcting errors or contributing in any way. Please! That's been going on forever & it's fairly mindless anyway. This is an ongoing story that I don't get too much time to contribute to. The changes made so far have been intelligent & progressive. I really welcome them. Go for it! Veej 02:22, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

RE: Foreign Aid
(Also on my talk page)These articles are part of WikiProject Library of Congress Country Studies, but their content isn't limited to the United States. The source documents usually include information about aid from the US, multilateral sources such as the World Bank, IMF, and other donor countries (see examples Foreign aid to Bolivia and Foreign aid to Indonesia). I do not think a name change is appropriate.--Bkwillwm 16:30, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Deleted Comments
Did you really delete my opinion on a duscussion page? You have no right to do that. I stated facts and did not offend anyone. Do not do that again. You should mature a little bit before you go on wiki to edit others opinions. Im sure you are going to delete this opinion of mine also.


 * Err - no I didn't. Please have a look at the history of the page again. It was another user who deleted your comment, not me - I just added my own comment in reply. AndrewRT 10:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

My mistake. You are a true gentlemen. Sorry about that. eddiejamesv

Iraq
Hiya AndrewRT, have left a message on the Iraq discussion board about collaboration. I don't think we need to do a vast amount of work here, but it does need sorting out. Am having a look at the categories first off, which ones are relevant etc to bring it in line with a featured entry such as the Australia piece. Feel free to come back with suggestions. --Zleitzen 13:43, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Heading links
See Manual of Style and Manual of Style (headings). Regards Philip Baird Shearer 19:25, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Apology
Thanks for the words. They are accepted and appreciated. -- Cecropia 08:27, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Vivien Craig
Hi Andrew,

I'll let you know next time I put an article up for deletion that you have started. I just assumed that the page was on your watchlist. By the way it was Wiki-uk who suggested the delete to me, and since he didn't know how do to it, I put up the notice for him. I really don't think that the Counsellors, just for the sake of being Counsellors, are notable enough for being in Wikipedia. They just don't meet the notability requirements of Wikipedia (Of course, if they have done something else, then they should be in Wikipedia). At the same time, it's not my primary concern to go and delete these pages, but because Wiki-uk asked me, I went ahead with it. For example, Wjhonson, has just added some Hands of the Cause, and to be honest, I don't even know enough about them as a Baha'i, and thus the general populace would not know anything about them and thus I don't think their notable enough, even as Hands of the Cause. But like I said, I'm not going to put up delete notices for them, as it's not really my primary concern. Does this make sense? -- Jeff3000 14:56, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

RE:Vandalism
Hi. If a vandal continues to vandalise after receiving the "last warning" (like the one you saw me give our friend 72), or if they harass other users, the next step is to request administrator intervention against vandalism.

I see this particular vandal has already been blocked, but generally you go to the AIV page and report them using the following format: " optional brief reason for listing (keep it short) -- ~ ". If the vandal hasn't quit after the last warning, they will be blocked shortly.

You can visit my personal Armory for tools to combat vandalism. Good luck and welcome to the light side! --Chodorkovskiy 18:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Sistani
His ethnicity is not "offically" known, as he doesn't believe in ethnicity and thinks ethnicity/nationality goes against Islam. His biography page does not mention any ethnicity and you wont find much luck throughout the rest of the internet. What I can tell you is that when I was raised in Iraq, we were always told that he was an arab, but never wanted to make an issue about it. If he is not an arab, then what do you suggest him being of? Persian? If non-Shia knew he was non-arab, do you have any idea the amount of uprising would go against him, for him controling the Iraqi shia? So, I think its almost a must for him to be an arab. Chaldean 23:54, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


 * What he meant in that statement is that he doesn't want to be involved in Iraqi politics directly, since he isn't "Iraqi." He said "Iranian" in a way of being from the state of Iran, ie having Iranian citizenship, not "Iranian" as in Iranian people. Hope that wasn't too confusing. Chaldean 00:43, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Great. Let me know if you find anything. Chaldean 02:06, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

prod
I think that good practice requires that an explanation for the prod nomination should be placed in the template box, so it's picked up by the toolserver, etc (the toolserver is down right now, but that's not the point.) The AfD you refer to was contested, an indication that prod wasn't the best choice anyway. In any event, by policy reprods aren't allowed, so it should go to AfD; I won't object there. Monicasdude 18:42, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Category:Dyslexic Wikipedians
Category:Aspergian Wikipedians which you have included on your user page has been proposed for deletion you can comment at Categories for deletion. The is also a proposal to create an association to meet the needs of users with mental health conditions. --Salix alba (talk) 18:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!
Hi, thanks for the thanks! I enjoy working on them, in my piecemeal way (I'm not much of a writer!). --Cam 00:23, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

nice work
Hi Andrew, I don't know if it's just that we have common interests in current events, but I keep seeing you making good edits on underserved topics. Here's some appreciation in image form. Cheers, BT 02:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Many thanks - always good to be appreciated! AndrewRT 19:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

ICC / invasion of Iraq
One reason I decided to make it a redirect rather than deleting was that it meant the edit history would still be available, which wouldn't be the case if the article were deleted by an AfD. As far as I could tell, most of the contributors were at best misguided as to what wikipedia was, and at worst were merely wanting to promote their point of view. I felt it read like an essay, rather than an article. I noted it a couple of months ago, and no-one has fixed it since. I thought that rather than trying to edit it, I'd give the article a quiet semi-death and let someone else write a more appropriate article. Thanks, Andjam 01:25, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

MKO
Assertion? I do not believe I am "asserting" anything. The MKO like many leftist and Marxist groups was very popular among ethnic minorities, and the "National Council of Resistance" originally included several minority political groups before they were absorbed into the personality cult. I will have a look through my literature to see if I can provide reference. Khorshid 01:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

'Bout them terrorists
Yeah, glad to be of any service, only so many people around us were contributing along the lines of new ideas (thanks!). I'm still putting some thought into this, I'm hoping to have something productive to say by tommorow. Luna Santin 08:42, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Presidents of the DRC
Hi Andrew

When I went through the page translating it from French to English, I noticed that several of the dates in the 1960s overlapped. The period I'm referring to starts with Adam Ndele and ends with Joseph Ileo. First problem: The terms of office of Adam Ndele and Justin Marie Bomboko are overlapping but I don't know which period is correct (or if there were two claimants to the same post). Second problem (and my main concern) was the way Antoine Gizenga breaks up the chronology of the list. Taking a second glance, it seems like he was the leader of a rebellion, but in that case, I'm not sure why he is listed in the main chronology. If this is indeed the case, perhaps he should be moved out of the main list or the situation clarified a bit? Just my thoughts. Regards. Valentinian (talk) 20:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

List of terrorist organizations
Please reread the article's intro. It is a list of organizations considered terrorist by other authorities. As such the PLO qualifies even of nothing in it's charter explictly describes it as terrorist. That being said, what woudl you call an organization whose members hijack a schoolbus and murder its occupants? This is a PLO act listed on its WP page. Isarig 17:18, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Saved Sect
Hi Andrew

You posted a contribution directly below mine on User_talk:Secretlondon, so it aroused my suspicion about how the editor Secretlondon uses WP:Policy to cut articles.

I did read your version, but it was almost cut and paste from the original Sunday Times report. However, I don't see how any of it could be liablous. What I do suggest you do is re-write the aricle into a short 10 - 15 sentence paragraph. But please don't expound who the leading figures are by giving would-be jihadin paragraphs to themselves.

Kind regards, Mike33 14:18, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi again, Andrew, thanks for the post to my user page. Not sure how to spell beaurocrat, lets call them mad admins. mmmmmmmmm is secretlondon CIA? he cut an important source of information just when it hit every daily newspaper. shahidin/jahidin do need to be focused on. The Times today (and the daily mirror????) links back to al-mujjaharoon. paste it back up, but not in seperate paragraphs, and include a current news link. your friend, Michael West Mike33 17:25, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Help me
WP:INSULT is merely an essay, not adopted policy or guideline. It's simply some good advice on dealing with vandals. Happy editing to you! T e k e  17:49, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Test
AndrewRT - Talk 18:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Iraq map
Ummmm... I didn't create that map. All I did was move it from the front page (where it created clutter) to the "Governorates" page. ? Rarelibra 18:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Sarkis Aghajan Mamendo
Is not a Kurd. Please don't assume things if your not sure about them. Chaldean 01:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

List of terrorist organisations, MedCab case about the Hindu section
Hi, could I ask your views concerning the Hindu section in the List of terrorist organisations article? Thanks, Addhoc 14:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Great work!
Just wanted to let you know that I appreciate the great work you're doing on State Parties of the International Criminal Court. :) &mdash; Nightst a  llion  (?) 20:11, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks! AndrewRT - Talk 20:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 04:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Métro vs metro
Hi Andrew. It could be that you still stand by the "oppose" comment at the proposal to rename various Métro categories, but I've added a note to clarify that all of these categories relate specifically to the Paris Métro, and not to metro systems in general. If you still oppose the move, then please ignore this comment. However, it may be that you didn't realise that these categories related specifically to the Paris Métro, in which case you may decide that the move makes sense after all. Regards, Metro Mover 21:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Use of refs in your articles
Thank you for improving Wikipedia by adding new articles and improving the old ones. It would be even more helpful if you could use guidelines for ref formatting (Template_messages/Sources_of_articles) to improve quality of your refs. Thank you and keep up the good work!--Pethr 21:51, 28 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Andrew, thank you for your reply on my talk page. I understand why you dislike ref templates and I'm aware that they are not required. I must admit that I'd love to see them required since they guide editors to provide as much detail about source as would be considered automatic in any academic paper. For example you would not forget to include period after every reference f.e. in Ahmad_Masjed-Jamei article. It might not seem important to you but it is important to maintain standard citations. Also dates wouldn't be linked since they carry no information for the reader (Although retrieved on date is linked, don't asked me why). There s also possibility that one day is some common standard for citations on WP cretated and standard refs then could be automaticaly converted into new form which is not the case with generic styles used by individual editors.


 * Citation of online news can be well done using


 * For example ommission of author name in cited work can be in some countries considered intelectual rights infringement (I'm not sure about U.S.). If nothing else it's a matter of politeness to include name of the author if you are using his work. That's just to demonstrate that those templates are helpful for including as much as possible. It is also important not to place space before refs. And no offense! You're doing great job!--Pethr 01:03, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

"Vandalising" indeed
Please go ahead and "block" me, then. That amounts to nothing. Be my guest. I can always approach you from different IP addresses if and when I chose. There are umpteen. While I do admit that some remarks that people add or make here (like my name calling) do constitute a puerile "vandalism", I would say its just venting one's spleen, which is not a crime - especially when its context is understood. That can be seen by any sensible and mature reader. But this doesn't apply to everything. Not especially to sections like the Pashtun one you accused me of "vandalising". Wikipedia often harbours inaccurate and watered down or in-authoritative, deliberately falsified descriptions which don't do proper justice to the subject at hand. As far as the Pashtun subject is concerned, it is one that not many people are qualified to comment upon, least of all a punk like you. So I suggest that instead of directing your so-called, typically British patronising tone at me and my edits, you should take an objective look at who you are yourself: some damned punk living on an insignificant little louse of an island off the coast of Europe that has outlived its bloated role in the world, and will soon have to accept that fact, if it doesn't give up its insolent clamour to an importance bigger than itself which it thinks is its right, to foist upon others. Recognise that, and tone down your "proud British" arrogance before it is cut in half by circumstances beyond your puny control... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.56.25.42 (talk) 07:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC).

Your edit on User talk:210.56.25.42
Your recent edits could give other users the impression that you may consider legal or other 'off-wiki' action against them. Please note that this is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats are often blocked indefinitely until their legal case is withdrawn or resolved. Please try to keep a cool head and work positively with other editors. Thanks. --Pethr 20:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Ayham al-Samarie
Uh... pretty much the entire thing... I see very little that is stated as fact. This seems to be an opinion piece. 21:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Mainly this text block: "Al-Samarie was fired and kicked out of the Baath Party by Saddam Hussien, not what Alsamari proclaimed to the public that he left the party on his own or because he believes in democracy and liberty. Al-Samarie fired and kicked out of the party due to the involvement of his brother in-law, and his uncle in baghdad, in a conspircy with Syrian baathist to take over the government in Iraq." KazakhPol 21:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure, feel free to remove the template. I still think it could use a cleanup though. KazakhPol 21:45, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome
Archive stamp: AndrewRT(Talk) 19:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC) AndrewRT(Talk) 19:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Jeffmichaud
Archive stamp: AndrewRT(Talk) 19:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC) AndrewRT(Talk) 19:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC) Thanks for your comments. In respect to anti-bahai input I was merely making the point that the san-Guardian Baha'is exercise a lot of editing in the views and beliefs of groups that they themselves deem as covenant breakers. Being that a C.B. is a stated enemy of their Cause, would they in turn reciprocate and tolerate C.B.'s editing their beliefs. I hope that makes sense.

Vandalism
Archive stamp: AndrewRT(Talk) 19:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC) AndrewRT(Talk) 19:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC) Howdy. Thanks for thinking of me first when someone has vandalized a site. I wouldn't bother even editing grammar on a sans-Guadian page, let alone vandalize one. I just got home from work myself, and aren't even sure what specifically has occured. I've spent hours trying to word things more accurately on the pages I am interested in only to have "vandals" with their own agenda revert them back. Reverting vandalism is quite an easy task, so the thought of wasting any time in actually vandalizing something to me seems pointless. BTW, I'm no "Remeyite", whatever that even is. I'm a Baha'i Under the Provisions of the Covenant. User:Jeffmichaud

No worries, mate. I should apologize for being a bit punchy with you. Please don't take anything I have to say to heart. I've been online for the last 8 years defending the Covenant in my own persoanl way, which has put me in the crosshairs of, well, how do you say...meany-pants people. My skins a little thick at this point, and I've been known to be a little reactionary. You seem like your heart's in the right place, and appear to be a true example of Abdu'l-Baha's counsel of: "Consort with all the peoples, kindreds, and religions of the world with the utmost truthfullness, uprightness, faithfulness, kindliness, good-will and friendliness...". Thanks for reminding me what that looks like.

I guess technically I am a Remeyite, although I've never seen that word before. I've never thought of myself as an "ite" of anything. It made me think of these meanies on AOL message boards a few years back who always would call me and the other BUPC "Jensenites". Whatever. We all worship God in our own ways. Take care:) User:Jeffmichaud

hh
Archive stamp: AndrewRT(Talk) 19:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC) AndrewRT(Talk) 19:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC) Re:Why are you editing material on the Talk page? Thank you for responding. On a second careful check, you did not edit any of what I wrote. Sorry if that caused confusion. Yukon guy 09:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

constitution of Iraq
Archive stamp: AndrewRT(Talk) 19:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC) AndrewRT(Talk) 19:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC) Sorry, I was only trying to help you guys, by declaring that I saw one of your pages have been vandalised.

European Union Enlargement - about "vandalism"
Archive stamp: AndrewRT(Talk) 19:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC) AndrewRT(Talk) 19:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC) For your information: The official name of the so-called "Macedonia", is FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA. Obviously, what I did, is not vandalism. Have a look to the official E.U. site and you will take a few information. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.123.212.243 (talk • contribs)

Regarding Nonsensical Edit
I do apologize. It will not happen again; especially as I will soon be creating an account to contribute to articles or perhaps even create them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.160.183.204 (talk) 01:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC).

Northern league is a far-right party
Northern League is widely considered a far-right party in Italy. Here are some of their opinions as expressed by their leaders and policies:
 * Umberto Bossi (leader of the party) himself said that African immigrants, whom he called Bingo-bongos, should not receive popular housing paid for with Lombard money.
 * A minister from this party have argued that boats full of immigrants (mostly black and albanian) should be bombed by the Italian Navy rather than allowing them to set foot in Italy.
 * In June 2005, at a festival organised by the League, a banner was displayed saying "Rape Pecoraro", (referring to Alfonso Pecoraro Scanio, the openly bisexual secretary of the Federation of the Greens).
 * In 2005, Mario Borghezio, MP for the League at the European Parliament, was found guilty of arson, for having set on fire the belongings of some immigrants sleeping under a bridge in Turin in 2000.
 * Their most quoted reasons for seccession are that northerners are of germanic ("lombardic") and not italian stock.

The Northern League claims they are not far-right. But their actions speak for themselves. Is this a respectable right wing party for you? 84.90.18.136 22:11, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I am no supporter of the Northern League. But the article on them does not describe it as a far right party. If you think it is, I suggest you have the discussion there, and once the consensus has agreed that it is, you can then describe it as such elsewhere. Until that is the case, please be consistent with the main article. AndrewRT(Talk) 00:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Note
Jeff is distorting the truth. The page was widely advertised and had a lot of positive response (as noted on the talk page). The issue actually is that he disagrees with the underlying idea (that too many categories are a bad thing), but since this underlying idea is widely accepted, he takes a different approach and claims that the guideline is out of process.  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  12:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Matt Beaumont references
Hi, in the edit summary you ask for references. Could you be a bit more precise?

What I can offer straight away:


 * Beaumont's web site, which offers a list of his publications and the fact that he is married with two children (already linked, s.v. "External links")
 * The Wikipedia article on Jamie Kane, with 18 items under "References" (should I copy them?)
 * e, which is (a) comic and (b) epistolary
 * amazon's search results
 * Barry Forshaw writing that "the idea of the first e-mail novel could have been a disaster but instead is a minor comic triumph." (Note that I modified that a bit because (a) I'm not so sure whether Forshaw is telling the truth or exaggerating / advertising the novel and (b) User:68.226.91.222 claimed here that Carl Steadman had written an "e-mail novel" in 1994 and I did not want to contradict them.)

What I cannot provide:


 * Beaumont's birth or marriage certificates (If I could, I would already have added his date & place of birth)

So what exactly would you like me to do?

Any more tags anybody? NPOV? Copyvio? No global perspective?

Best wishes, &lt;KF&gt; 23:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi KF and thanks for getting back to me. I will clarify on the article talk page. AndrewRT(Talk) 21:35, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Very impressive
Hi AndrewRT,

Your arguments, particularly the last contribution, at Articles for deletion/2007 Plot to Behead a British Muslim Soldier were the best I've seen for a long time. I've recently been hanging around the deletion pages because I think there are too many editors who constantly contribute to them and are too quick to vote "delete". I hope you'll stick around to keep contributing your good sense. Incidentally, although your last post is clear, I wouldn't label anything "Keep" twice because it makes it more difficult for the administrators toting up votes (even though they're more recommendations than votes, and the decisions aren't settled by arithmetic). Anyway, I hope to see more of your comments in the future. Noroton 18:31, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for you kind comments. To be honest I'm getting a bit disillusioned with wikipedia due to this debate - if the decision goes against me on this point and WP:NOTNEWS I might just walk away from the project. I don't want to waste my time contributing if someone else is spending all their efforts deleting my work - as King Canute would have it, no one can resist the tide! AndrewRT(Talk) 19:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

US keys
Thanks for the tip that you left on my talk page about getting tildes on an american keyboard. Much appreciated. Ms medusa 20:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Your comments on my page
Are totally unfair. I revert pure vandalism from somebody who is deleting without cause and explanation something.Alain10 20:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)I am reverting vandalism from somebody who, without cause and explanation, has been deleting repeatedly reference to "Iran international crisis". Who are you to make this comment? Alain10 20:20, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I left the same message on their page too. Revert warring in always discouraged on wikipedia and it takes two to war! Please find another way to resolve this dispute - such as fo instance engaging in discussion on the talk page as the other user has already started. Incidentally vandalism (see WP:VAND) is a bad faith edit, and I would hesitate to describe the other person's edits as bad faith, even if they are against policy. AndrewRT(Talk) 21:04, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that there is something which is not fair here. The link to Iran international crisis was there since 24 December 2006 and nobody had any issue with it. Suddenly, one person, Gerash77, decides on 9 February 2007 to suppress it, without any explanation. I recreate this link and he enters into this edit war! And the worse thing is that I am accused by you to create this edit war!! Gerash77 created this edit war. he should leave the page as it was before 9 February 2007 and enter into real discussion. Since you are an administrator, I count on your neutrality. Thanks. Alain10 19:33, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not an administrator and I am neutral on whether the topic is included in the template or not. I am not, however, netral on edit warring - it is always unacceptable. If you look at the page history Gerash deleted quite a few links from the template - including some election links that I had added. I am sure it was a good faith attempt to rationalise the template, not an NPOV attack on your addition in particular, and I am also sure that we can come to a mutually agreeable solution by discussion. AndrewRT(Talk) 11:30, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Template references broken. Template:Iraq War Box
Hi. The infobox template idea would be good if the references could be maintained. Some of the references are used by other locations in the main article also. So putting the box in a separate template breaks many references, not just the ones in the infobox. I copied the infobox code back into the main Iraq War article, and left a copy in the template page.

The Iraq War page is very busy, and edited by many people. And viewed by many people. So this problem needs to be fixed before removing the infobox code solely to the template page for transclusion. And there is no room to put a references section in the notes part at the end of the infobox. Space is already at a premium in the infobox. Many discussions over that already. Plus the references in the main article would still be broken.

Please see the template on this page: Casualties of the conflict in Iraq since 2003. I edit both that page and the template on it. Since the template references do not work for using as references in the main article, there are some duplicate references. Click the reference numbers to see what I mean. --Timeshifter 15:41, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi Timeshifter. I'll have a read at what you say and try to get my head around it. I won't pretent to understand it fully at the moment! AndrewRT(Talk) 00:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Level 0
I just replied to your question at "Level 0", in case you hadn't been watching it. -- Ben 22:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know! AndrewRT(Talk) 21:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Eluned Morgan
I've moved the article on Eluned Morgan and expanded it a bit. I wouldn't have left it so long were it not for the fact I spend most of my time on cy.wikipedia and fr.wikipedia. Cheers. Enaidmawr 02:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Ive moved the other one to Eluned Morgan (politician) and updated the disambig page at Eluned Morgan. AndrewRT(Talk) 13:09, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

GA Nomination for Amendment to the Constitution of Iraq
I have failed your good article nomination of Amendment to the Constitution of Iraq. Please see this article's talk page for my rational on why this article does not meet the GA standards. If you have any questions of me, please feel free to ask. -- Johnny06man 18:15, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

sdfsdf

ICC: 2003 invasion legality
Hello AndrewRT - I'm seeking your advice about how to most constructively assist in making this article more useful to the Readers. I'm new to this process. The article has a definite POV that requires appropriate challenge to better attain a NPOV. Please let me know if my contributions are invalid, I do make mistakes.


 * For example, see the talk page today about my claim (supported by the ICC Prosecutor) that there are no known military crimes from this invasion that are not getting handled properly by national jurisdiction. Isn't this an important fact for the Reader to learn?

If SideShowBob Roberts (SSBR) has problems with my use of this document, he should challenge ALL references to the Prosecutor's Report, not just my use of it? My understanding of Policy is that the burden for citation is upon him and not me, since I offer a valid source? He may post a valid source suggesting that the Prosecutor's Report is in error?

The article misrepresents the Prosecutor's report in that it suggests that "gravity" thresholds are allowing 12-20 war crimes to go unpunished when the report does NOT say that. Raggz 00:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi Raggz. I have some sympathy for what you are trying to do. If you look at the main contributors to the two articles, most of them appear to be internationalist liberal europeans (myself included). Although we have done our best to make the article both NPOV and accurate there are inevitably ways in which challenges from people like yourself would be positive.


 * However, source documents always have to be properly understood. Statements should not be introduced into wikipedia article if they are inaccurate or misleading - regardless of whether they are properly cited. Please could you have a look at my comments on Talk:The International Criminal Court and the 2003 invasion of Iraq if you have not done so already - particularly answering the point on "no known military crimes from this invasion that are not getting handled properly by national jurisdiction" which is, in my view, misinterpreting the prosecutor's statement.


 * Your point about gravity not meaning that the crimes are unpunished - rather left to the national authorities - is a point well made which deserves mention in the article The International Criminal Court and the 2003 invasion of Iraq


 * The article about the Legitimacy of the invasion of Iraq is not one I am happy with. There are two issues here - first the legality (i.e. was the invasion in conformance with international law or was it an act of aggression) and secondly other issues (e.g. should they have invaded, was the invasion conducted properly etc). The latter is a messy subjective area, in my view best avoided. The former could be the basis for a good article discussing the legal pros and cons. My view is very clear - the invasion was illegal, but I accept there is a minority that argues otherwise. By signing the UN Charter, the US and Britain agreed that they wouldn't use military force in another country unless certain limited circumstances were met (e.g. Security Council authorised it, the other country requested it, self defense). When they invaded Iraq they broke that promise. The vast majority of international legal opinion agrees with me on this. However, it is very difficult to get anyone to go on record saying this because of the political implications - remember the US is the worlds only superpower and its a foolish politician who unnecessarily antagonises the US for no gain. Kofi Annan is one person who did put his head above the parapit and say this. So did the chief legal officer of the UK Foreign Office. Others could be cited if need be.


 * I hope this is useful to put the context to you. I repeat what I said at Talk:The International Criminal Court and the 2003 invasion of Iraq: please discuss any substantive changes on the talk page first, so we can avoid any unnecessary misunderstandings.


 * Thanks for your contributions here. AndrewRT(Talk) 09:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate your input. I will look carefully at the statement you challenge, I share your committement to accurately citing sources.

I believe that at this point we can and should conclude that it has been legally challenged without success (because this is a fact). Accurately stating the facts should help both sides? This helps the opposition, helps those who disagree with those who made the decisions. The new format should permit an organized and coherent attack on the decision to invade, not from a legalistic view, but from a public policy view. I hope you write this. The key here is that when discussing the Court of Public Opinion you can cite opinion, authoratative opinions (like the UNSG) and meet citation standards. We can interpret the rules to make the article better, and a coherent well-supported summary of the issues would GREATLY help this article. The opposition view is a description of an important POV? Should we relax citation standards (a bit) if the purpose is to enhance this key part of the article?

I would support a really good summary that made the oppositions point more than one that made a muddy mess of this point. It is time for the opposition to understand that the international legal battle was lost. It is time for the opposition to move on, to make productive use of their energy to actually accomplish necessary reforms.

I'm happy to debate the legality of the war, and accepting all of your points, expect that I would prevail. The "minority" you refer to are largely Americans who support attacking preemptively when necessary. Article 51 permits preemptive attacks, but not aggression. Now we know that the intelligence was bad, another fact. At the time we thought that the intelligence was accurate, that preeemptive war was justifiable. I can assure you that the American people at that time believed that our cities were under direct threat. IF you accept this claim, then accept that the invasion was intended as a self-defense act. Under US law you may shoot and kill anyone that you "reasonably" believed were a threat to your life. If the gun turns out to be a realistic toy, and you made a reasonable decision based upon what you believed to be true, no crime is involved. Some believe that the Administration "cooked" the intel, this would be a crime if proven, but there is no evidence of such. All there is is evidence that the Administration had a pov going in that the bad intel reinforced, which means there was no evidence to support the hypothesis. I will win any debate about legality if I can prove that the US felt threatened and acted on a reasonable basis of defense - given what was then believed to be true. This doesn't make the decision to invade wise or correct, only legal. You write the argument from the opposition, I write the other pov (as above), would this help the Reader? Raggz 20:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry Raggz, I should have made it clearer that my only problem with your use of the Prosecutor's letter is that you misrepresent his words. You claim that all war crimes that were committed during the invasion of Iraq “were properly investigated and prosecuted by national governments”.  Nowhere in his letter does the Prosecutor say this.


 * As I've said before, when you make a controversial claim in an article it's not enough to cite a reliable source: the source must actually say what you claim they say.


 * In this case, the burden is on you to either find a reliable source who states that all war crimes committed during the invasion have been prosecuted, or to edit your claim to reflect what your sources actually say.


 * Sideshow Bob Roberts 14:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * It is true that my POV filters what I read and understand. It is also true that usually when you read a source differently, upon reflection, I have come to your POV. Still, I am likely to continue to read and view the world through my POV filter - so you may again have occasion to challenge my interpretations.


 * I will review the Prosecutor's letter, but am convinced that he states that every case that came to his attention was being investigated by National authorities. This is a very significant detail. The "gravity" section from my POV suggests that he is defining for future cases a "gravity threshold" as a precedent for refusing such cases in the future. The article takes a different view, implying that he is suggesting that 10-20 war crimes have been committed with impunity. He does not state this. I expect to edit the "gravity" text to reflect my pov, not to insert it (because I can't support it) but to remove the present bias that is not supported.


 * After I review my statement and the actual quote, I may revise the article's text. My nclination is to directly quote him. If that doesn't work, we can discuss this further? Raggz 19:42, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Alaibot and redirects
Not precisely: it's coded to skip anything that conforms to the redirect syntax, which that article didn't.  (i.e., it wasn't a "working" redirect.)  What to do with malformed ones isn't entirely clear;  trying to fix them automatically is likely to be error-prone, and skipping them would lead to them being left unfixed (and possibly also some pages not intended to ). I'm open to suggestions, though... Alai 00:57, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * ok i see what to do in future. AndrewRT(Talk) 21:04, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Quick question
Hi! A quick question: Would you mind stating your opinion on whether 2007 Swazi general strike is notable or not? There's a discussion on the talk page, but with rather limited input from just two users up to now. Thanks! — Nightstallion 14:37, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Done AndrewRT(Talk) 21:37, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Response to helpme tag on Template:Al-Maliki_Government
Hi AndrewRT. I have done all the formatting issues on the template in question - please let me know if you need any other changes. Hope that helped. Rfwoolf 13:52, 4 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Many thanks - I was tearing my hair out! AndrewRT(Talk) 23:17, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Signatures in templates
How do I design a template that automatically adds a signature, based on the person who substitutes the template in. I've seen it done before but cant remember how. (P.S. is the one I'm trying to create)

Many thanks! AndrewRT(Talk) 21:24, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Add the following lines to the page's coding:



That should do the trick! – Animum  22:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC) 

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Islamic Dawa Party.svg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Islamic Dawa Party.svg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:17, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Replied on article AndrewRT(Talk) 21:43, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

United States and the International Criminal Court
Hello Andrew, you will find a number of edits to help attain a NPOV in the ICC/US article. We differ on our povs, so we need each other if the article is to attain the NPOV goal. The article really shows an attempt to be fair and to elucidate this topic. I could challenge (or delete) many many unsupported statements - but I have not because in most cases they are farly stated. There are NPOV issues you cannot correct on your own, so I did. Feel free to correct mine, just keep a spirit of fairness. You have begun an excellent article, it flows well. With time this could become a great article, necessary citations will get added with time. Raggz 05:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Responded on your talk page and the article talk page. AndrewRT(Talk) 11:54, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Request for Comment
Hi Andrew,

I intend to start a Request for Comment about Raggz's behaviour. I have no doubt that he'll ignore the outcome but I don't know what else to do at this point.

I'd be grateful if you'd read this draft RfC and let me know what you think. In particular, have I said anything inaccurate, inappropriate or unfair? Have I made any procedural errors?

Also, maybe you'd consider certifying that you've tried but failed to resolve the problem (I need one other editor to do this in order for the RfC to proceed).

Regards, Sideshow Bob Roberts 14:30, 16 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry I've been away a bit but I've just got your message. I think an RFC would be a good idea. I've added a couple of items on your draft page, and softened the wording a little - please let me know if you agree or not. In fairness to Raggz he has tried to come to me (I think he sees me as a neutral observer) and sought my help in balancing his edits. I haven't done this procedure before so I can't help in terms of "procedural errors" I'm afraid. I am happy to put my signature when it's needed - please let me know where and what else you need AndrewRT(Talk) 23:39, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Template
Stop overtemplating. This is a ridiculous response and quite insulting. Garion96 (talk) 20:48, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Perhaps, but it was also a ridiculous question in the first place. This is wikipedia, an online encyclopedia, not a lost persons bureau. The village pump is for discussing wikipedia matters. AndrewRT(Talk) 22:31, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Then explain so to him. But do not respond to a person looking for his father (assuming it's true, AGF here) with "do your homework". Garion96 (talk) 22:59, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * If there was a template or  I would have used it, but there wasnt so i used the nearest one. AndrewRT(Talk) 23:04, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I saw you already changed it, appreciated. What is wrong with words, if there is not a fitting template to use, simply do not use a template at all. Garion96 (talk) 23:07, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Civility isn't just for regulars. Responding to lost newcomers on the Village Pump isn't your job or anything; if you had just ignored the question then somebody would have directed to him to the right place or the question would have gone unanswered, either of which would have been better outcomes. Like they told us in preschool, if you can't say anything nice don't say anything at all.P4k 00:38, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * There was nothing incivil in what I said - it was a firm correction to someone who was misusing wikipedia. Check out WP:NOT. We have a job to do - creating an encyclopedia. Lets get on with that, and lets not get distracted along the way. AndrewRT(Talk) 21:34, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Erm, are you sure? I did consider a little uncivil... and a little mean. Perhaps a kinder explanation, of where the question belongs would have been better, I'm sure that the poster did not deliberately want to "distract you from doing your job" --Puchiko 14:04, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I too found your response uncivil and inappropriate, and your comments above about "PISSOFF" unacceptable. Please read WP:BITE - we won't build an encyclopaedia by being rude to new users. DuncanHill 16:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Lebanese presidential election, 2007
Hi there, I hope you don't mind if I edited the entry about the Lebanese presidential election. I think the overall result is currently good. I can't rule out that there will be POV edits, so I'm going to keep the page watched anyway. Regards, -- FrancescoMazzucotelli 01:34, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm happy with those edits - thanks for that. I still think however that a majority of 72 means you have 72 more seats than the opposition! AndrewRT(Talk) 23:19, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Accession of Turkey to the European Union
Template:Accession of Turkey to the European Union 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. Balloonguy 18:15, 29 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I cant find the listing at the TFD page. Pls help! AndrewRT(Talk) 23:51, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

International Criminal Court Review Conference
Hi Andrew, I've left a few comments over at Talk:International Criminal Court Review Conference — I hope I'm not being annoyingly pedantic! All the best, Sideshow Bob Roberts 14:31, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Not at all - thanks for the comments, and thanks also for leaving a msg on my page - I'm afraid my watchlist is so full of junk I never look at it now! I've replied on the page please let me know if you have any other issues. AndrewRT(Talk) 17:48, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Politics of Australia and Canada compared
I've started adding references to the article They weren't that hard to find, and the fact that the Canadian Prime Minister has made (unfavourable) comparisons between the Canadian Senate and the Australian one shows that leaders from the two countries aren't averse to comparing notes.

I would have thought that the whole advantage of Wikipedia was that people could add references, which is more constructive than advocating deletion. If you think there's something wrong with the article, you can correct it. Quiensabe 02:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your message. It's not the article I had problems with - as i noted on the nomination I thought it was a rather good article in fact. What I was concerned wiith was the principle of articles that say Politics of [x] compared to [y]. With nearly 400 "Politics of" articles i could see a whole load of article coming up like Politics of Andhra Pradesh and Texas compared which I was struggling to understand. I think I'm confortable now with the idea that these articles are valid if either (a) there are reliable sources that make the comparison directly or (b) the comparison article merely states facts side by side rather than infering any kind of synthesis idea. (e.g. Canada is more democratic than the US). Please let me know your thoughts on the proposed guideline I created Comparison Articles and Original Research. AndrewRT(Talk) 13:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 14:12, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/United Nations Parliamentary Assembly
Hello, I have created an article about the UN Parliamentary Assembly, a proposed world body that would be similar to Europarl. Please review and vote on the WP:FAC nomination. Thanks, Sarsaparilla (talk) 01:36, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I made some revisions to the article. Would you like to review your comments left on the FAC page to see if they are still applicable? Thanks, Sarsaparilla (talk) 16:06, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:44, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Accession of Turkey to the EU
Dear Sir,

My point of view is mine. How are assuming that it is less neutral than yours or than the others expressed on this page ? I really don't think that a neutral point of view exists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.204.65.5 (talk • contribs)


 * Thanks for your comment. The Neutral point of view is a key foundation of wikipedia. It means that facts are stated neutrally and the balance of views is expressed, not that our views never differ or anyone's views are more valid than anyone else's. Although I can entirely see that the views of the European Armenian Federation on Turkey's EU bid may be interesting and valid, it is a little misleading to describe them as a "Fair point of view" as you did. Even they would probably admit to being biased! AndrewRT(Talk) 22:08, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear Sir,

Thanks for your reply. Just two comments :

1 - The controversial article on "Accession of Turkey to the EU" is full of very subjective opinions (but always enlightening Turkey's image). For instance, the allegation that "During World War II, Turkey fought alongside the Allied powers." is merely false. The opinions that The political reform program of the Erdoğan government continued. just fits the Turkish propaganda (actually, just words, no reform) and is by no way a fact...and so forth.

2 - The permanent recall of the European Commission's positions is also a clear bias as the EC has progressively become the best agent for Turkey in the EU against the European opinions. (check for instance the repeted positions of Olli Rehn or Günter Verheugen)

In this regard, the position of the European Armenian Federation has at least the same legitimity.

Does it mean that Wikipedia partakes to the global political correctness ?


 * I would be grateful if you could let me know any non-neutral or inaccurate statements in this article (or better still if you could note them on the talk page of the article) and I'll try to correct them.
 * You state "Turkey fought alongside the Allied powers is false". I quickly checked the article Participants in World War II and it does appear to be true. Are you sure you're not referring to World War I?
 * I understand the abolition of the death penalty, crackdown on torture etc were clearly done by the Erdogan government and were part of a programme of reforms explicitly aimed at european accession. Do you disagree? If so, which part do you disagree with? That the reforms happened, that Erdogan did them, that they were done as part of a european accession programme?
 * The European Commission has a clear legal standing in regard to the accession of Turkey to the EU. They are the ones who will decide whether to recommend their accession, with the final decision left to the European Council. Their opinion is clearly very important, and I cannot see how it would be right to equate their views with those of a pressure group. AndrewRT(Talk) 21:19, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism?
I am confused about your calling my editing of the page vandalism? I am citing a recent text by David S. Noss,"A History of the World's Religions" 12 ed. Pearson-Prentice Hall. Christianity is not a majority religion in Kenya; Shamanism is the the majority with a majority of Sunni Muslims in the north eastern boarder mostly with Somali/Ethiopian refugees. Please reference my citation and do not make false claims against me please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RPTrainor (talk • contribs) 02:21, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Federalism in Iraq
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Federalism in Iraq, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Federalism in Iraq.

It was merged with Federal government of Iraq. Int21h (talk) 00:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I've only just seen this tag. I'm afraid I dont agree - please can we talk on the reinstated article. AndrewRT(Talk) 11:49, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

'''Sorry, we weren't able to suggest any articles for you. Something is probably wrong on our end.'''

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:14, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Cases before the International Criminal Court
Hi Andrew, I've suggested splitting Cases before the International Criminal Court into two separate articles and I'd appreciate your feedback. All the best, Sideshow Bob Roberts (talk) 12:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Bob. Thanks for the message and the suggestion. I've left my reply on the talk page. Best wishes AndrewRT(Talk) 23:50, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi again Andrew. I don't know if you're still interested in the ICC articles, but I've suggested renaming Cases before the International Criminal Court to International Criminal Court investigations and I'd appreciate your opinion here.  Hope you're well, Sideshow Bob Roberts (talk) 02:40, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:04, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Always good to hear from you Andrew. If you need help with Iraqi related pages, please do ask of me. Chaldean (talk) 00:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey Andrew, someone else has made the case for the other side at Talk:Persian_Mesopotamia. Chaldean (talk) 23:11, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
I removed your rollback rights as requested by you (before self-rollbacking,the error?) on WP:RFR. If you need them back, just contact me on my talkpage. Happy editing, Poeloq (talk) 22:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks it was driving me mad! AndrewRT(Talk) 22:29, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Compliments
Compliments for you work on the Politics of German states! --Checco (talk) 09:28, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Many thanks! i thought they needed doing : AndrewRT(Talk) 22:28, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Template:Politics of Germany by state
Hi there. Why is no title in the header? can you fix it (I can't)? I think it looks better and is more usefull with a title -- Sebastian scha. (talk) 13:09, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * How odd. I'm sure there used to be one - I'll look into it. AndrewRT(Talk) 16:56, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The parent template has been changed recently - I've left a comment at asking someone to look into this. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. AndrewRT(Talk) 16:59, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Now corrected AndrewRT(Talk) 18:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, thx. Sebastian scha. (talk) 20:05, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 08:11, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Tocino
He is stupid.84.134.65.233 (talk) 17:49, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * (please leave on here). Report to WP:ANI#84.134.65.233 AndrewRT(Talk) 21:32, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Lisbon treaty
No harm intended. Actually, the cleanup and stub tags alert admins not to delete the article. So I added an tag instead. Bearian (talk) 14:58, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Proposal discussion resumed
Hi.

I'm contacting you because you were involved in the discussion concerning the renaming of the lists of basic topics.

I ran into resistance when I attempted to rename the set.

Therefore, the name change hasn't been completed, because the previous discussion wasn't widespread enough, nor announced in enough places.

I've submitted a new proposal at Village pump (proposals).

The Transhumanist 06:35, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Switzerland
Please remove Switzerland from this map:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/Union_for_the_Med.png —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.62.229.177 (talk) 21:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out! I've corrected. AndrewRT(Talk) 22:20, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Union for the Mediterranean
Hi.

Your map of the proposed Union for the Mediterranean has a mistake; Switzerland will probably not be part of it, as it is no member state of the EU. You should color them grey, not blue.

Best wishes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.77.190.139 (talk) 22:21, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Corrected thanks for letting me know. AndrewRT(Talk) 22:38, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Sebwhite
I have no objection to the split. He had added statements like Hospitals providing general, emergency, or psychiatric care are inherently notable, which I vehemently object to. Kww (talk) 13:33, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Atlases
HI I've replied there. Hope my comments are useful. Basically an atlas should be used for verification purposes not to assert notability even though many atlases are very selective about what is included and only include places which they believe are of note. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦      $1,000,000? 13:58, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for this. However, your comments there seem to say that an atlas is sufficient to demonstrate notability, but those above seem to agree with the developing consensus that they are not, on their own, sufficient. AndrewRT(Talk) 14:08, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Presidency Council of Iraq‎
As the Presidency Council of Iraq‎ is a collective head of state just like the Swiss Federal Council, aren't List of state leaders by date and List of current heads of state and government factually wrong? — Nightstallion 19:00, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think you're right, yes. Good spot. I'll correct those articles. AndrewRT(Talk) 20:24, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Autonomy for Bolivia
A tag has been placed on Autonomy for Bolivia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. andy (talk) 22:07, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Shahristani small.jpg on Commons
Hi! Thank you for your uploads to Commons. I have nominated Image:Shahristani small.jpg for speedy deletion there: the licence on Flickr is CC-BY-ND, which doesn't allow derivative works. Commons only accepts files for which derivatives are allowed (e.g. CC-BY, CC-BY-SA). If you have any questions about that, feel free to ask me, either here or on Commons. Cheers, Pruneautalk 23:08, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Absolutely right - my mistake - go ahead. AndrewRT(Talk) 23:10, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice
Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 21:40, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

WM UK v2.0 board
Hi! Thanks for volunteering for the Wikimedia UK v2.0 board. We've made a page for candidate statements, so please add yours here, and sign the declaration (it's quite long and scary-looking, I know, but being on a board is a serious thing!). The proposed deadline for statements is 13 September, but we'll make a final deadline soon. Good luck! --Tango (talk) 02:41, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. I am fully aware of where it is, I put the declaration where it is at the moment. ;-) I have just been busy. My statement will be up soon enough. :) KTC (talk) 00:29, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Cheers! AndrewRT(Talk) 22:23, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK 2.0 Voting is open :-)
A warm hello to all those signed up as guarantor members of the soon-to-be-rebooted UK chapter! Voting is now open over at meta - there's tons of information online over there, and the mailing list has been very active too. Discussion, comment (and even the inevitable technical gremlins!) are most welcome at the meta pages, otherwise please do send in your vote/s, and tell a friend about the chapter too :-) Privatemusings (talk) 22:29, 20 September 2008 (UTC) I'm not actually involved in the election workings, and am just dropping these notes in to help try and spread the word :-) I welcome any or all comment too, but 'election related' stuff really is better suited to the meta pages :-)

Wikimedia UK 2.0 question from voter
Hi Andrew. I have read your statements etc., and have two questions for you. 1) What is your reluctance for the CRB check? You are a Charted Accountant and so can't have a record to do that so I'm a bit confused. (I've gone through 7 of them and it's very simple (and private) process); 2) Your talk page doesn't show much interaction with other users, why is this?

Thanks, and you are under no obligation to answer any of these. :-)  fr33k man  t -  c 19:51, 21 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Freekman. Many thanks for your questions - I've answered them here. Please let me know if you have any further things I can add. AndrewRT(Talk) 20:24, 21 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the answers, make perfect sense to me! My comment re: the talk page was really a comparison of other's who've been around awhile and their pages. I've decided that it is possible a poor comparison however and have disregarded it when voting. :-) Thanks and good luck!  fr33k man  t -  c 23:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * BTW, I have some code for you for a "new message" button at the top of your talk page;


 *  fr33k man  t -  c 23:51, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

IAEA
note to self - need to finish Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency AndrewRT(Talk) 22:32, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK
Thanks for the heads-up, and congratulations! I look forward to working with you. Warofdreams talk 21:24, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:03, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

V&A
Hi Andrew, Pharos has referred me to you re the V&A after I heard about the V&A via the UK list, and I'd like to get involved. I've put a mention on Meetup/London 16, but current plans are that I'm going to be  skipping that so it might have to wait for Meetup/London 17 in January.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  11:55, 27 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, Andrew, it would be very helpful if you could fill this role as the contact person. This is not to diminish the role of others at all, but it is extremely helpful from this end to have a clear line of communication between our groups, when we may have half a dozen museum-wikimedian copperatives as part of this project.  Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 03:46, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:54, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

commons:File:WLA@V&A.svg
This image doesn't display at all in Google Chrome. I've posted a note on commons:File talk:WLA@V&A.svg, but I'm guessing it's the ampersand that's confusing matters. Figured you might wanna take a look :o)  — OwenBlacker (Talk) 14:34, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for flagging this up. I've uploaded it again at commons:File:WLAatVandA.svg so I'll see if that works! AndrewRT(Talk) 20:51, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK Newsletter - December 2008 Issue
Summary: You can now join Wiki UK Ltd, which hopes to become the official UK chapter of Wikimedia in January. The organisation is planning its first Annual General Meeting, where members can vote on who is on the board, and put forward and vote on resolutions. The organisation is already supporting activities such as a bid to hold Wikimania 2010 in Oxford and the exciting Wikipedia Loves Art project at the Victoria and Albert Museum. We also bring you news of the the recent Wikimeet in London.

In this month's newsletter:
 * Chapter formation
 * Membership
 * AGM
 * Wikimania 2010 - Oxford bid
 * Wikipedia Loves Art
 * London Wikimeet

''Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.''

Newsletter delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 16:35, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Dr. Kaveh Moussavi, Oxford University
In regard to your question, if Dr. Kaveh Moussavi is a notable person you better read the UK judgments from

- Justice Laddie 29-July-2001 and

- Justice Langley 29-May-2002 (12 month committal to prison!) and

- The Florida Bar 30-May-2008 in regard of "Unlicensed Practice of Law Investigation of Khaveh Moussavi TFB Case No. 20082019(13B)"

which are self explainatory. Please provide me under [deleted] with your email address and I will email you these public documents.

72.184.183.148 (talk) 00:14, 27 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. My question was whether or not he was important enough to have a wikipedia article on him, not any value judgement about whether he is a good person or not! I would be grateful if you coudl email me the documents - I've emailed you. AndrewRT(Talk) 00:24, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia Loves Art wiki pages organization
Hi Andrew. It would be really great if you could fully merge Wikipedia Loves Art at the Victoria and Albert Museum into Wikipedia Loves Art, and maybe shift some of the to-do stuff on the former V&A front page to the Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Loves Art talk page.

From the Brooklyn Museum's perspective, they really want this to be as "clean and organized and simple" as possible, so it's easy for them to present this to other potential museums (and we want as many as possible), and I think this change would ameliorate some of their concerns. Thanks for your help.--Pharos (talk) 20:05, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Baha'i Faith... (regions)
Hey - just an FYI, I switched to using - see Bahá'í Faith in Chile for example. It covers south, mid Americas and the carribean....Smkolins (talk) 05:16, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi smkolins - thanks for letting me know about the change. I've created a new nav template (copied below) for North America - seems like there's plenty of source material out there for a BF in USA article (for instance) which would be good to get started! The Caribbean is also covered there. Do you still think that LatAm/Carib is a better template to use for these countries? Please let me know what you think. AndrewRT(Talk) 17:35, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I think the NAm template is a good one and it's ok to overlap with the latin/Carib/South.... The problem with a USA article is rather too much information rather than too little - it would almost certainly need to break out into several pages not to mention linking to a good number of existing articles. Actually the only thing more complex would be a BF in Iran and a BF in Ottoman Empire. It would also be good to have some of the best printed materials available in hand for citation and almost everything I've done so far was based on web-accessible materials. I've been very slowly warming up to this kind of project while working through the other 160ish countries.... So far the big articles have been UK, India and maybe Turkey. Places like Hong Kong and Russia are also going to be major undertakings since they had a leveraging history on their regions.Smkolins (talk) 21:48, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * also I have a technical question on the templates - some seem clickable to a possible region article (and show so in the browser) while others are not clickable. I think it would be good to have them all clickable to an eventual article - a continental summary kind of article. However I know almost nothing about the template process and what makes them clickable or not....Smkolins (talk) 21:50, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * The US article will certainly have plenty of information to draw on! I was thinking of getting involved in a project like this too, so I might give you a hand!
 * On your technical question, this is down to the construction of the particular "Topic" template which it is based on. Looking at Category:Bah%C3%A1%27%C3%AD_Faith_by_country, Asia Europe and LatAm have in but the others have an "if" statement which doesnt' link if the page doesn't exist. I've put a message on the topic pages requesting this change so all of them have this feature. AndrewRT(Talk) 00:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that technical part. For the country articles, more hands are certainly in order from my pov! I've done the vast majority of the work on the 40ish countries so far (with occasional input from a couple other editors.) Only the UK attracted allot of attention (and still is now that someone started a Scotland article which I jumped in on as it was pretty skeletal and now we've got a post asking for England....) The whole reason I began the series was because the oft quoted "second most widespread religion" quote is a pretty abstract statistical thing and there should be - and is - a great deal of reality in lives spent and communities run behind such statements and that should be reflected in Wikipedia too. Latter I found out Christianity, Islam and Judaism have got lots of those pages. Even if your "real" goal is to shoot for a US article I'd suggest at least working on a few countries to get familiar with the basic approach and relevant online materials even though a good amount of the materials for the US wont be online. I hate to sound like it's a thesis but honestly after getting a few countries done like this the next step I imagine would be drawing up a list of recommended sources - like the biographies of notable US figures and beaf up their entries as well as compile information for the general article which would be compiled in a sandbox. To Move the World, Copper to Gold, Thornton Chase, etc, plus a whole slew of articles about more particular subjects like the Baha'i community of Kenosha, what Woodrow Wilson had in his library, to the role of Baha'i veterans in Vietnam and other wars.... the pioneering campaigns... plus regionalizations.... papers that profiled the LA community, instances of difficulties and how they were resolved or not.... plus trying to ferret out as many third party refs as possible....Smkolins (talk) 03:35, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Request for comments
Hi there,

Is a bit long, but can you comment at Template_talk:Euro_adoption_future? It will be very much appreciated.

Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 15:43, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

v+a sun1feb _ filming a doc
I had a short time at the London Meeting today.

For my web2.0 art service and as a potential pitch to Sky.Arts I proposed to Theresa Knott and James W that the V+A first day and the 2nd Sunday meeting could make good trad tv, commissioned/licensed broadcast. They would both make good TV talking heads.

They suggested I contact you as well.

Camdentowner (talk) 20:48, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

jonathan s pettigrew producer : maxusart4web2.0

¦camden town¦london¦uk¦us.europe¦ m/c_+44(0)7799.064.610 search_maxusart


 * hi Jonathan,
 * I'd love to get involved - are you coming along on the 1st? I've been coordinating things with the V&A people - do you want me to get them involved at all? AndrewRT(Talk) 21:58, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Jammu and Kashmir state assembly election, 2008
Template:Jammu and Kashmir state assembly election, 2008 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. VasuVR ( talk,  contribs ) 10:21, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Wike Loves Art
Hi

I am doing a short 3 min global.art.news piece at the V+A on Sunday 1 February, hoping to have Theresa and JamesW to talk to camera about Wikipedia and the Art project.

Hope that you would be interested to help

Camdentowner (talk) 20:56, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

students at brum
User:Matt.smart, User:Kavanagh21, User:Haridan,   User:Daduzi (not sure if he is), User:Asdfasdf1231234,. I found them all in Category:Wikipedians_by_alma_mater:_University_of_Birmingham. I think this would be the way to go, ask a stude, assuming we don't think there'll be a huge amount of us, as they might get us a room somewhere there to use. Sticky Parkin 22:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Excellent idea! Many thanks for your help AndrewRT(Talk) 22:54, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Birmingham
Hey, I'm afraid I'm not the best student to contact in regards to your problem. I'm only in my first year of study and am therefore unaware of how you would go about booking a room, however you'd be best to contact the Guilf of Student reception on 0121 251 2300, or go directly to the University. Regards, Asdfasdf1231234 ( talk ) 17:16, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for getting back to me! AndrewRT(Talk) 23:36, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Favour
Hi Andrew,

I would love to help you with this, but I'm afraid I have very little to do with BUGS (now known as simply guild of students - see here). You can contact the guild directly on 0121 251 2300 or check here but I don't have any specific contact names for you. That said, I'll see if I can find someone who can help you with this - there are certainly plenty of suitable rooms.

All the best! matt . smart talk 10:52, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia loves Art Goal List
Who is supposed to be producing this? There is little sign of ongoing discussions. The Visual arts project only found out about this whole thing by accident last night; as an active project with many of the editors in the best position to know what is actually needed on Commons, they should surely have been informed much earlier? Johnbod (talk) 15:41, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Why have you removed the link to the V&A sub-page/ The information is very far from all on the main page, 7 other museums have their own sub-pages. Johnbod (talk) 19:16, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK Newsletter - January 2009 Issue
Summary: We lead with the exciting news that we are now recognised as Wikimedia UK by the Wikimedia Foundation. This means that we can shortly open a bank account and approve membership applications. Planning is also underway for a new website and for the upcoming Annual General Meeting. Meanwhile, we continue to support Wikipedia Loves Art, which will launch on 1st February and the bid to hold Wikimania 2010 in Oxford, and bring news of recent and upcoming meet-ups.

In this month's newsletter:
 * WMF approval and chapter formation process
 * New website
 * Annual General Meeting
 * Wikipedia Loves Art
 * Oxford Wikimania bid
 * Meet-ups

''Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.''

Delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 19:56, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

V&A on the 1st
Is there a group meeting time/place? Ironholds (talk) 04:30, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Contact
Andrew,

I sent you an email in reply to your query re. Wikimedia UK on Wednesday. Just wanted to check that you got it as I haven't received an acknowledgement (or any other emails on the mailing list from you)... -- LondonStatto (talk) 03:59, 9 February 2009 (UTC) (The Other James F, as I think should be my name! :) )

I would like to get involved
Hi Andrew,

Keen to get involved in anyway I can help.

Haven't been involved in it for a while. But my MA project was; http://www.thewikiartist.com

about two years now.

How can I help?

@thewikiartist Twitter —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.7.240 (talk) 21:54, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:08, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Meetup/London 19
Hi, I hope you will be able to come to Meetup/London 19, as it would be useful to evaluate the Wikipedia Loves Art event.Harrypotter (talk) 00:09, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK Newsletter - February 2009 Issue
Summary: The chapter is now up and running, and we have now opened our bank account. We have a new website, and are putting plans in place for the first Annual General Meeting. Meanwhile, February has seen the successful Wikipedia Loves Art at the Victoria and Albert Museum, bidding to host Wikimania 2010 has opened, and the Government's Intellectual Property consultation has closed. We also bring the regular news of meet-ups, and a new feature highlighting press coverage of Wikimedia in the UK.

In this month's newsletter:
 * 1) Chapter formation process
 * 2) Website
 * 3) Annual General Meeting
 * 4) Wikipedia Loves Art
 * 5) Oxford Wikimania bid
 * 6) IP consultation
 * 7) Meet-ups
 * 8) News coverage

''Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.''

Delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 20:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Meetup
A reminder that the Manchester meetup is this Saturday. Hope to see you there!  Majorly  talk  18:56, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reminding me! Cant make it unfortunately :( AndrewRT(Talk) 22:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

The Welsh Wicipedia
Regarding the message you left on the Welsh Wicipedia to Gareth Wyn (Sgwrs Defnyddiwr:Gareth Wyn), whose account has been dormant for the last few years. Please send me any text for translating into Welsh. It's good to know that you recognise that Welsh Wicipedia has an important role to play in the newly formed company. I will also keep an eye on any issues which you will raise, relevant to our nation. Diolch yn fawr. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 14:05, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Meetup/Manchester 5
Hey there. I notice you were interested in attending Manchester 4; we're in the process of organising another one for some time in April. Hope you'll pop along to the page to organise a time and date appropriate for you :). Ironholds (talk) 23:17, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK Newsletter - March 2009 Issue
Summary: With everything in place for the chapter, other than charity status, we have organised the first Annual General Meeting - your chance to influence the chapter's future and stand for the board. The bid to hold Wikimania 2010 in Oxford is coming on nicely. We also bring you the usual details of meet-ups and news coverage, and details of how to propose a project, and possibly get funding.

In this month's newsletter:
 * 1) Chapter formation process
 * 2) Annual General Meeting and Board elections
 * 3) Oxford Wikimania bid
 * 4) Project funding
 * 5) Meet-ups
 * 6) News coverage

''Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.''

Newsletter delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 18:25, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your recent work on Iraqi/Kurdish/Assyrian related articles. :) Oh and thanks for [this] too, I'm very bad at spelling. Iraqi (talk) 20:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:48, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Replacing PROD tags
I suspect you may shortly be shot down in flames - PROD tags are not supposed to be used if the article was previously PRODded or had been through AfD. Apologies if you already knew this. Kevin (talk) 21:41, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I did know that - I wasn't aware that any of these articles had already been prodded or AFD'd. Have they?? AndrewRT(Talk) 21:43, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * All except 2 had been prodded/deprodded this week. Kevin (talk) 21:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Another way to help would've been to find the sources. Hiding T 09:34, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Which I have done for some of them. Prodding them is also a way of pushing others - particularly the article creators - to find sources and hence get a good result. It is, after all, primarily their responsibility to do that. AndrewRT(Talk) 11:56, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

WP:PROD in action
*groan*  Enigma msg  18:12, 10 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes indeed! What's the solution, taking them to AFD, changing the PROD rules or some kind of user dialogue/warning? AndrewRT(Talk) 18:17, 10 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I guess I'll take them to AfD. However, this is the perfect rebuttal for people who claim the system works. It does not work. It especially does not work for BLPs. Articles rightfully tagged for deletion, only to get removed by a bad contributor, thus forcing anyone who wants them deleted to go through AfD. I can't view deleted contribs, but my guess is that maybe 10% of his PROD removals were good ones. Some of the BLPs still not deleted are instructive.  Enigma msg  19:21, 10 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes indeed. Have you seen my "mini-project" at User:AndrewRT/Unreferenced BLPs? Results are instructive! AndrewRT(Talk) 23:03, 10 April 2009 (UTC)


 * :)  Enigma msg  00:54, 12 April 2009 (UTC)


 * The good news is most of the garbage is now getting deleted at AfD. The bad news is that it took 9 more months to get junk deleted because of a simple bad faith editor going around removing PRODs willy-nilly.  Enigma msg  08:41, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Welsh Template:WMUK WikiProject
Well, there it is, the Welsh version. Any thing else which needs doing? Take care with the last three links. If you need any more, let me know. :} Llywelyn2000 (talk) 22:01, 15 April 2009 (UTC)


 * That is fantastic - many thanks for that! I'll drop you a line next time we need something! Hope it goes down well at the Welsh projects & on the Welsh Wikipedia. AndrewRT(Talk) 22:33, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Cluster Munitions Convention.svg
Hi Andrew, you have prepared the map File:Cluster Munitions Convention.svg which shows the current state of international acceptance of the Cluster Munitions Convention. I have two points about this map: First, you can find an up-to-date list of state parties at the website of the ICRC, see here and a corresponding list of state signatories here. With Austria's ratification earlier this month, the current number of state parties is six. So if you find the time, you could update the map. Second, there seems to be a graphical problem with the map. Parts of the world on the right side (New Zealand, the outmost eastern part of Russia and the outmost eastern part of Antarctica) are outside of the boundaries of the globe. Maybe the problem is due to the fact that the globe itself seems to be accidently shifted to the left because the left border of the globe is outside of the image area. I don't know whether this is a general problem of the SVG file or whether it happens only on my screen due to problems with SVG viewing in my browser, but perhaps you can check it out. All the best, --Uwe (talk) 07:47, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for drawing this to my attention - I'll have a look at it when I have a moment and see if I can fix. (not signed so it isn't archived again)

Wikimedia UK Newsletter - April 2009 Issue
Summary: Wikimedia UK has held it's first AGM! The AGM included numerous speakers talking about a wide range of topics, ranging from collaboration with the BBC to reaching out around the world with Wikipedia on a DVD! A number of official actions were also taken - including the passing of six Resolutions, the election of the new seven-person Board, and the first new Board meeting! Also this month, an overview of the Chapters meeting in Berlin, of which two of our number were present, and details of the upcoming meetups this month!

In this month's newsletter:
 * 1) Annual General Meeting
 * 2) New Board
 * 3) Chapters Meeting
 * 4) Meet-ups

''Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.'' —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skenmy (talk • contribs) 19:22, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

updates
Hi,

I've updated the stats with the recent ratification by Mexico (May 6). The map will need to be updated as well. Have you subscribed to the UN treaty collection? They'll email you when a country signs/ratifies a treaty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.112.185.1 (talk) 19:17, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK Newsletter - November 2008 Issue
Summary: Wikimedians in the United Kingdom are working to set up a chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation, which will aid and encourage people to collect, develop and effectively disseminate knowledge. A board of five members has been elected, and a company has now been set up. Membership applications are now invited, and will be processed as soon as we have a bank account. The organisation needs the support and involvement of people like you.

In this month's newsletter:
 * Creating a chapter
 * Elections
 * Status of Company Formation
 * Membership
 * Getting involved

''Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.''


 * All read - please archive AndrewRT(Talk) 16:24, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * All read - please archive AndrewRT(Talk) 16:24, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK Newsletter - May 2009 Issue
Summary: Whilst our application to HMRC has not yet been successful, we're after your views on the proposed New Chapters' Agreement, your suggestions for a Wikimedia UK conference next year and your ideas for initiatives to start! We also bring you updates on Wikipedia Loves Art, Other Chapters' Activities, Meet-ups and Press coverage.

In this month's newsletter:
 * 1) HMRC Application Status
 * 2) New Chapters' Agreement
 * 3) Wikimania 2010 (and beyond!)
 * 4) Initiatives
 * 5) Wikipedia Loves Art
 * 6) Other Chapters' Activities
 * 7) Meet-ups
 * 8) Press coverage

''Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.''

Delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 20:24, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * All read pls archive AndrewRT(Talk) 17:00, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Max Kowalski
Dear AndrewRT,

I am a musical recitalist/lecturer researcher from USA, I have written the latest article on Max Kowalski, 1882-1956, holocaust composer.

I feel that my 15 years of research and travel to England and Germany, finding his last family members, being left his personal collection of 17 printed song cycles and 14 manuscript works by his daughter after her death,gives me some rights and claim to be his biographer.

In addition, my work in translating his songs and performing and recording his works on CD (Suzi More songs Max Kowalski, 1882-1956, Opus 1) as well as my delivering my papers to learned audiences such as the 2000 Jewish Music Conference in London, should entitle me the right to appropriate space for his story on the Wikipedia pages.

I am unsure why I have had my article booted off the pages and have seen your name connected with one of the people who may have booted it off.

If I needed to add a bibliography, I could have done this but I didn't really understand the lingo being used on this encyclopedia. As it is, I have rights from the Leo Baeck Institute for the Kowalski picture and for other pictures of articles and playlists used in my original 36 page article.

Claude Torres had truncated my article for his french website and that is what he placed on the Wikipedia pages for me.

If I need to come back on and do it again with the bios and sources listed I will do so if only someone could ave used the English language to tell me so.

I am very upset because I feel that a great composer such as Max Kowalski was deserves recognition even if it is alongside the pages of Dungeons and Dragons and Elves and Gnomes as I see the majority of people who seem to get their article recognized on here feel are important. I also see that the posters think that pictures of their mountain vacation trips and their dogs are very important. Those are things that I expect to see on Facebook, not an encyclopedia.

I am sorry that I do not know how to get to each of the people who found my Max Kowalski page and deemed it unnecessary compared to their own feeble works and projects just because I do not know the correct protocol and lingo.

Max Kowalski is probably turning over in his grave over my stupidity.

Please write me back with some clues.

Susan Morehead (talk) 13:55, 25 May 2009 (UTC)Susan Morehead (aka. Suzi More)Ps-I hope I signed this correctly.


 * I've replied on your talk page. AndrewRT(Talk) 22:31, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

thankyou AndrewRT
Dear AndrewRT,

You are so kind as to write me back, I have spent some time tonight trying to find out where I found your name and it was either when I looked up pages on Mandarax or I had gone to the contact Wikipedia and found one of the Board members and I saw your name on his page and used it. I don't know why but somehow hoped you would respond.

I do not have a degree in Literature although I did take many undergraduate courses in literature and comparative literature, I studied Italian, German, Latin, a little French, Provencal (language of the 13th century troubadours) and Portuguese) but as for skills in writing, I am subject to long and run on sentences and when I write very important things like my last article, I usually get help with editing by my very good friend and accompanist, Vicky Griswold.

My background is that of a Musician and Composer, an Operatic performer for many years as well as a recitalist of classical programs, including Italian Art Songs and Early Music and Avante Garde (many programs of American Songs including Niles, Rorem, Copland, Ives and Bernstein) I performed music of Living American Composers, Women Composers, Black Composers, Black Women Composers, American Operatic Programs and then, I began research into the Holocaust composer, Max Kowalski.

I was researching, writing about and performing the music of Kowalski and in the beginning I did a beautiful performance of William Grant Still's "Songs of Separation" and arrangements of his Spirituals (I am very close friends to Still's daughter, Judith Still who runs a music publishing company in his name) along with two of Kowalski's cycles, opus 1 and Opus 16. The name of this program was called "Song of Struggle and Spirit." I also teach Voice and theory and Orff in an Art School in New Jersey for over 25 years now. My life has been only Musical projects and the Kowalski project is the first thing I have done where I have needed to write in an in depth and concise manner.

I started writing my own original songs which were enough for an album "Blue" and then I had a good friend, Kendell Kardt do the arrangements on the synthesizer. That I placed on the web on CDBaby and is sold on many digital sites as well as a children's CD and the Opus 1 of Kowalski.

I wanted to originally add a picture and short bio to the "Composers influenced by the Holocaust because when I saw it in my research, I saw that there was nothing on Kowalski and because I had so much to offer, I wanted to do the edit.

Claude Torres who has a very beautiful page on the Holocaust composers on his French website was very pleased to get the Max Kowalski picture and he abridged my article which is 35 pages in length, so he did a very good job on the article and when I saw the Wikipedia article and saw it needed editing I copied my shorter article and tried to add the picture but had problems, so I asked Torres to try to do it for me, so he tried and the rest is history, he added only the article and picture but forgot the various other things like the bibliography and the discography and the other sources that I finally cited today when I read and reread the rules of Wikipedia and put them on my user page.

I do not know if I have done everything correctly, if so, I would like to try to re-add the Kowalski article to the "Composers influenced by the Holocaust" but I am not sure how to add the picture of Max that is from the Leo Baeck Organization.

I am waiting to see comments and then see if I have done things correctly. I don't have much time to do these things, I am very busy with my teaching and performing and I have serious health issues that I am dealing with.

I am Suzi More on my recordings but my copyrights are Susan Morehead, I dont like this name but I married a man who had this name, and I am getting remarried next year so I may just change it but it's not so easy to make all those changes.

I am so thankful that you have written me back and shown me your concern.

Susan Morehead (talk) 01:28, 26 May 2009 (UTC)Susan Morehead (Suzi More)

The New Arrival!
Many congratulations! :-) Best wishes to all three of you! Colds7ream (talk) 16:32, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Cheers! AndrewRT(Talk) 22:08, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

thank you for the advice
Dear Andrew, When I have time this weekend, I will do that, today I was taking some papers off a shelf and I had a stray paper flick into my right eye, I had to leave work to go to the Dr. who did tests anfound that I scratched my cornea. Came online to check mail and now I will go back to bed, the doctor told me to rest the eye till she sees again tomorrow. I have had a very bad run of bad luck this past year. 69.116.164.220 (talk) 01:45, 28 May 2009 (UTC)Susan Morehead

KRG
Hey AndrewRT Sorry for my late reply. I noted that you left a message for me about my additions on Kurdish related articles. Thank you for that. I can do a lot of edit in Iraqi_Kurdistan_legislative_election,_2009 if you want, I think the results table is way too ugly. Also, I want to upload pictures but I am not sure if pictures from news agencies are allowed. Can you help me more about what pictures are allowed actually and how to add them. I already know about photos from Flickr and already added some photos which can be seen in the Iraqi Kurdistan article.

By the way, I am Kurdish from Iraqi Kurdistan. If you have any questions, just ask me. What's your background actually if you don't mind me asking? And are you interested in Kurds? I see on your page that you have interest Baha'i faith. Tell me more. I'll be hearing from you.

Greets KRG-Editor —Preceding unsigned comment added by KRG-Editor (talk • contribs) 23:28, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Andrew, Thank you for your reply and it's interesting that you took interest in post-Saddam Iraq. To tell you honestly, Iraq will not be heading to the Iraq which it was since its creation in 1921. It will be a very decentralized Iraq with different nations living under the umbrella Iraq. Most people in the West did not know that Iraq was very diverse and that its different people have very different views of what Iraq should be. To stop discussing that, I'll just try to look for photos and let you know if I need your help. I want this Iraqi_Kurdistan_legislative_election,_2009 to be seen more, it needs more hyperlinks in other pages. Any thoughts in which pages? Regards, KRG —Preceding unsigned comment added by KRG-Editor (talk • contribs) 19:47, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Entry entitled Lancashire
Your entry for Lancashire is like the curate’s egg, “good in parts”, but other parts are extremely misleading, because in many instances it fails to take account of the fact that there are three areas designated as Lancashire.

The smallest area is that administered by Lancashire county council, part of which lies within the traditional West Riding of Yorkshire. This should be referred to as “the administrative County of Lancashire” or “administrative Lancashire”.

Slightly larger is the area currently covered by the High Sheriff and Lord Lieutenant, consisting of “administrative Lancashire” plus the boroughs of Blackburn with Darwen and Blackpool. This should be referred to as “the Ceremonial County of Lancashire” or “Ceremonial Lancashire”.

The largest area is the traditional historic and geographical county of Lancashire, which came into being in the twelfth century and has remained unchanged ever since, this should be referred to as “the traditional County of Lancashire”.

Despite changes to administrative areas, including those made under the 1972 Local Government Act, no legislation has ever changed the boundaries of any of Britain’s traditional counties. Lancashire therefore still stretches from the River Mersey in the south through to the River Duddon in the north. We have on file many statements issued by both central government and the Duchy of Lancaster Office, confirming that the traditional county of Lancashire has remained unchanged since it was first created in the twelfth century. Therefore, the name “Lancashire” used by itself should mean the traditional county. When referring to the other areas of the county the name “Lancashire” should be prefixed by the words “administrative” or “ceremonial”. When your present entry fails to make these distinctions it is misleading. People consulting your online encyclopaedia ought to be able to rely on its accuracy, otherwise it is valueless.

I would draw your attention to the following misleading entries .(Pages are given as they appear in my print out from the site.)

Page 1 Paragraph 1 The entry regarding population should read - “The population of the administrative county is 1,168,100, whilst the population of the traditional county is in excess of six million.”

Paragraph 4 Should begin - “The administrative county was subject to a significant boundary reform in 1974, whilst the boundaries of the traditional county remained unchanged.”

Paragraph 4 line 5 . Should read “Today the administrative county borders the administrative counties of Cumbria and North Yorkshire and the unitary authority areas of Blackburn with Darwen, Blackpool, Bolton, Bradford, Bury, Calderdale, Knowsley, Sefton, St Helens, Rochdale and Wigan. (Ref. Ordnance Survey Administrative Map of the UK.  Note: OS has not recognised any of the metropolitan counties since their councils were abolished in 1986).

Page 1 The heading Geography should read “Administrative & ceremonial geography.”

I would also point out that the flag illustrated on page 1 was registered for the traditional county of Lancashire, not for the administrative county. It does not pertain to the area of administrative Lancashire that lies within the traditional county of Yorkshire. The wording under the flag ought therefore to read “Flag of the traditional county of Lancashire”.

Page 2

Under the heading politics the title in the left hand box –

ought to read “Members of Parliament for Ceremonial Lancashire”, otherwise you ought to list all the MPs with constituencies within the traditional county.

Page 3

Line 1 under the heading Area since 1974 Should read “Administrative Lancashire is now much smaller than the traditional county due to local government reform.”

Page 4 Geography Divisions and environs

When the councils of Greater Manchester and Merseyside were abolished in 1986 they ceased to be the top tier of local government and were removed from maps by Ordnance Survey. So geographically this entry should read - Line 6 - “The ceremonial county, the area including the unitary authority areas of Blackburn with Darwen and Blackpool, borders Bolton, Bradford, Bury, Calderdale, Knowsley, Sefton, St Helens, Rochdale and Wigan. (Ref. Ordnance Survey Administrative Map of the UK).

Geology, landscape and ecology The last two lines As you use the name “Lancashire” you should include all the Lancashire rivers, including the Mersey. If you only intend to list the rivers in ceremonial or administrative Lancashire you should prefix Lancashire with “ceremonial” or “administrative”.

Page 5 Duchy of Lancaster

Palatine of Lancaster should read “which includes areas that were removed from administrative Lancashire as part of the 1974 boundary changes.”  (Again you need to qualify Lancashire.)

Economy Line 3 should read “Lancashire is historically the location of the port of Liverpool.”

Line 8 Barnoldswick is in Yorkshire unless you qualify Lancashire as administrative Lancashire.

Page 6 Line 1 should read “non-metropolitan administrative county of Lancashire”

Education

Line 1 the word “Administrative” should prefix Lancashire

Paragraph 2 should read “Administrative Lancashire” unless you include the universities in Liverpool, Manchester and Salford which are all Lancashire universities.

Transport Here again you need to qualify which Lancashire you are referring to.

Unless you refer to “Administrative Lancashire” you should include stations at Liverpool, Manchester and Salford.

Both Liverpool John Lennon and Manchester Airports serve “the county” of Lancashire

There are ferry services operating from Liverpool in Lancashire.

Demography Here you have qualified which type of Lancashire this information refers to, which is how it should be.

Page 7 Beginning Some settlements

West Yorkshire, Greater Manchester and Merseyside ceased to be administrative counties in 1986 when their councils were abolished. Warrington and Widnes ceased to be part of administrative Cheshire in 1998 when they became part of the new unitary authority areas of Warrington and Halton. Cheshire ceased to be an administrative county on 1st April 2009.

If you are referring to administrative areas then you should list the current top tier of local government i.e. the metropolitan boroughs and other unitary authority areas that are wholly or partially within traditional Lancashire.

Page 8 Sport

Cricket

Line 4 should read “Due to changes to administrative county boundaries, the club’s home ground, County Ground Old Trafford, is now outside administrative Lancashire, being in the metropolitan borough of Trafford, but is still within the traditional county.

Football

the word “administrative ought to be inserted here.

The entry reading the six professional teams based in Lancashire is incorrect and was corrected by the Lancashire Football Association but was changed back again. The correct information about football in Lancashire provided by the Chief Executive of the Lancashire Football Association to which all teams within the traditional county have first affiliation is that there are now eight teams in the Premier League they are:- Blackburn, Bolton, Burnley, Everton, Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United & Wigan.

I trust that you can arrange to have the entry about Lancashire corrected for the benefit of those who rely on your site for information about the county.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.12.171 (talk • contribs)


 * As per our previous correspondence, please could you raise this issue on the article's talk page - Talk:Lancashire. We welcome your input if it helps us improve our encyclopedia, and the best way to do that is to engage with our community. However, I do not accept that the current article is "extrememly misleading" or "valueless" as you state, and making statements like that is not a good way to start a discussion with the community. AndrewRT(Talk)(WMUK) 10:06, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

removed tagging
FYI, see the diff, the process here, would be to utilize WP:CFD. // Fra nkB 04:16, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know. You would only use CFD if that was the result of the discussion, surely? I'm not sure we're at that stage yet? AndrewRT(Talk)(WMUK) 14:21, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Urumqi riots
Thanks for this. I tried to do it earlier but was having some formatting difficulties, and it was just during a brief class break so I never got around to finishing. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 19:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

File:UK First leaflet.JPG listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:UK First leaflet.JPG, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. J Milburn (talk) 16:11, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:UK First leaflet.JPG
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:UK First leaflet.JPG. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 15:37, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * "Please go away and read WP:BITE"? Are you serious? If I see a non-free image without a rationale, I will nominate it for deletion. You are given several days to fix the issue- if the image was deleted instantly, then your complaint may have merit. What do you propose I do instead? Leave it be and hope someone fixes it? J Milburn (talk) 16:06, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * That's the standard summary that goes out to many, many users daily from Twinkle. "Please add a rationale" will just be ignored. The edit is to notify you of a potential deletion, I really don't see what's wrong with the summary- it's an attempt to get you to notice the fact that an image you have uploaded will be deleted if the issue is not fixed, probably by you. I'm certainly going to continue using it, as are all the other Twinkle users- I advise you suggest some alternatives over at the Twinkle talk page, if you feel it should change. J Milburn (talk) 21:26, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK Newsletter - July 2009 Issue
Summary: This month, we bring exciting news about our Wikimedia Foundation Grant, as well as news on our chapter Initiatives (get involved!) and our opt-out of Phorm. We also talk about Business Cards, a recent interview of our Secretary for use in university courses and Wikimania 2013 - which seems a long way off! We also include our regular features of chapter activities from around the globe, press coverage, and meetups!

In this month's newsletter:
 * Wikimedia Foundation Grant
 * Chapter Initiatives
 * Phorm
 * Business Cards
 * Wikimania 2013
 * Wikipedia in universities
 * Other Chapters' Activities
 * Press Coverage
 * Meet-ups

''Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.''

'' Delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 20:09, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Elections
My friend, excellent job with the page. I'm gonna start working on this page now: Iraqi Kurdistan legislative election, 1992. Make it more in depth. Iraqi (talk) 00:35, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Many thanks! Give me a nudge if you think any particular page needs work - and let me know if I can help with the 1992 election page. AndrewRT(Talk)(WMUK) 15:49, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the hand my friend. I have many offical Iraqi election documents, so if you ever need any info, let me know. I am now working on the earlier January elections template that you originally started. But not all governorate have been done, so I started working on a few: ex - Template:Al_Muthanna_governorate_election,_2009 Iraqi (talk) 16:42, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Could you please voice your opinion here: Articles for deletion/Chaldean Syriac Assyrian Popular Council Iraqi (talk) 19:35, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

What do you think? Iraqi (talk) 00:21, 10 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Great idea about the template Andrew. Heads up on one thing thou; In the KRG, there aren't any "Alliances", like the way there is in Baghdad's gov. But of course, this might change with the coming elections. It should be very interesting :) Who do you think I should vote for? :D Iraqi (talk) 02:24, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Your signature
Hi, per our signatures guideline, could you please remove the external link from your signature? I appreciate that Wikimedia UK is certainly a cause that we British Wikipedians should be supporting, but the use of signature advertising like that nis not really the way to do it. J Milburn (talk) 20:52, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I wasn't aware of this guideline so thanks for bringing it to my attention. However, having looked through the guidance it seems that only applies to external links - for internal links it states "Brief additional internal links are generally tolerated when used to facilitate communication or to provide general information". Many of the talk posts I do are as secretary of Wikimedia UK, so it makes sense to link to the website like that. You don't get much smaller than 4 characters. AndrewRT(Talk)(WMUK) 21:28, 13 July 2009 (UTC)]
 * Just come across this confirmation at WP:SPAMMER: (see #7 at the bottom) "However, external links to Wikimedia projects are exempt from this rule." AndrewRT(Talk)(WMUK) 22:16, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I see you're right. Apologies. J Milburn (talk) 22:48, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps use the WMUK interwiki link rather than the external one? Mike Peel (talk) 20:10, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
 * yes maybe, but I am starting to think it might go against the spirit, if not the letter, of the rules anyway. What you you think? AndrewRT(Talk)(WMUK) 22:29, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the rules were written with Wiktionary, Commons and the like in mind. Personally, I don't think it's needed- this isn't a "you're breaking the rules" comment, I just think covering the group on your userspace and talk page as you do is acceptable. J Milburn (talk) 22:35, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Re:Test file
No problem, I'm sure your image was doing something more productive than most others anyway. While I'm here, I hope there are no hard feelings about our run in recently. I apologise if I was sharp with you. J Milburn (talk) 22:33, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No hard feelings - and I apologise too for my sharpness. AndrewRT(Talk)(WMUK) 23:55, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Motto of the Day
Hi there, AndrewRT! Thought you might be interested in Motto of the Day, a collaborative (and totally voluntary) effort by a group of Wikipedians to create original, inspirational mottos. Have a good motto idea? Share it here, comment on some of the mottos there or just pass this message onto your friends.

MOTD Needs Your Help!

Delivered By –p joe f (talk • contribs) 12:06, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Cambridge meetup 1 August
FYI, the fourth Cambridge meetup will occur on the afternoon of Saturday 1 August. Wikimedia UK people are getting a message about this, in the interests of general communicativeness. Charles Matthews (talk) 13:52, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Signpost converage
Wikimedia UK denied charity status

Wikimedia UK—the local chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation in the United Kingdom—has been denied charitable tax status by HM Revenue and Customs, according to a report from Charity Finance dated June 2009. The chapter reportedly plans to appeal the decision. A bit late to the party aren't they. :D Someone should probably point out things have moved along since then. ;-) -- KTC (talk) 03:21, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Mike's been in touch. Odd story really! AndrewRT(Talk) 10:27, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

North East Midlands photos
Re: this message of yours: no, that's a very bad idea. First, creation date (as here) doesn't tell you anything about an eventual publication date. And second, the Commons regards the copyrights in both the source country (the UK) and in the U.S. A U.S.-centric license such as PD-US (pre-1923) is not applicable at the Commons to non-U.S. works. The example image could be used only if it could be ascertained that the photographer (Edwin Gordon?) died more than 70 years ago (PD-old). If the photographer died 1926 or later, the image would also be tagged as Not-PD-US-URAA at the Commons.

If you can ascertain a publication date pre-1923, you could, however, upload such images here at the English Wikipedia locally and tag them with PD-US-1923-abroad.

Lupo 20:12, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * yes, good point about publication vs origination date: we would have to be sure it was actually published before the date. I'm not sure I understand about the UK/US dual compliance issue as you stated - in that case, why were the National Portrait Gallery photos uploaded in contradiction to UK copyright law? AndrewRT(Talk) 21:51, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * btw, however you look at it, it wouldn't be a "very bad" idea. If it didn't comply with copyright policies it would simply be deleted, surely? AndrewRT(Talk) 21:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The NPG images were uploaded to the Commons because the Commons deviates for PD-Art from its policy that a PD image must be PD in both countries and considers only the U.S. copyright status of the photographic reproduction. That was a political decision. Commons does still consider both copyrights for the paintings shown, though. For these photos, it would thus be necessary to show that the photos themselves (as opposed to their digital reproduction) were PD in both countries.
 * As to the "very bad idea": I understood your message as inviting mass-uploading of these images to the Commons. That's why I wrote "very". Deleting a lot of files is a lot of work. Furthermore, re : "If it didn't comply with copyright policies it would simply be deleted, surely?": in theory, yes, but we don't catch everything that gets uploaded even if it fails the Commons' rules, so it's not that sure that they would get deleted. Besides, as the NPG event has shown, uploading such images may incur some risk for the uploader. Some people even make the same arguments the NPG made regarding digitizations of photos, claiming sweat of the brow in digital restoration (dunno if that would hold up under UK law, though). Lupo 23:41, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


 * ok, makes sense. Interesting distinction for PD-Art, which possibly gives us a way to resolve that particular dispute. I take your point about mass uploading - yes I can see that would cause problems. Generally I think it's good to have thorough discussions about these things before embarking on anything like that - so that issues like this can come up! AndrewRT(Talk) 23:46, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
I noticed your comment at Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion in relation to a proposed new criterion:

""Support I and many others have been deleting articles on this basis for a long time, for obvious reasons. Might as well bring the policy into congruence with what's being done.""

Can I check that I understand you correctly? Are you saying that you have used your admin rights to delete articles under the CSD procedure which don't match the current criteria? If so, could you give some examples of such articles.

The policy on the use of Administrator tools states that "When a policy or communal norm is clear that tools should not be used, then tools should not be used without an explanation that shows the matter has been considered, and why a (rare) exception is genuinely considered reasonable." Can you explain whether you have complied with this or not?

Thanks AndrewRT(Talk) 22:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, I have speedily deleted some articles that may not have met CSD criteria. I gave some examples elsewhere in the discussion thread. If you're interested in findng any of my out-of-process deletions, you can surely find them in my deletion log. If you have questions about any of them I'd be happy to discuss them with you individually. causa sui  ×  00:09, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for getting back to me. I've had a look through your deletion log and most of your deletions are marked with a CSD code, but those that aren't might just be deletions following PROD/AfD. Do you recall this one:


 * 19:38, 28 May 2009 Causa sui (talk | contribs) deleted "Kosh panama" ‎ (WP:NFT)


 * Is this one an example of a speedy deletion of an article that didn't fall into a CSD category? In that case, can you explain why this is a reasonable exception to the then-current policy? AndrewRT(Talk) 00:30, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Sure. The content of the article was:
 * Kosh is a idiom in panama that means cigarettes is commonly used in the panama high society.It referd to all kinds and brands of cigarettes. This idioms was created during 2008 for the junior years students in the top 7 of wealthier privates schools in the city of panama
 * The article was speedied the day before by under A7. I didn't think it met A7, though it obviously didn't meet basic requirements for inclusion and had no chance of surviving an AFD, so I deleted it with the summary WP:NFT.  causa sui  ×  00:35, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 17:50, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Flagged Revisions
You may may be interested in WikiProject Flagged Revisions. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 07:55, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK Newsletter - August 2009 Issue
Summary: Our Initiatives are starting to be developed - please get involved! In this newsletter, we also announce the results and prizes for Wikipedia Loves Art, and we bring you the latest on our Charity status application, in addition to our regular features on Other Chapters' Activities, recent Press Coverage and recent and upcoming Meet-ups.

In this month's newsletter:
 * Initiatives
 * Wikipedia Loves Art prizes
 * Charity status update
 * Other Chapters' Activities
 * Press Coverage
 * Meet-ups

''Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.''

Delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 08:28, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Malik Dohan al-Hassan
Hello! Your submission of Malik Dohan al-Hassan at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! ≈ Chamal  talk ¤ 08:37, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Aaron Berkman article
Many thanks for your prompt assistance. What do you suggest I do re formatting, headings, categories, linking, etc.that you mention? The article is in my own words, I do own the painting that I want to upload and I have used the same painting image in an article about Berkman that I submitted and which is posted on WPAMurals.com. Jeanette HendlerJeanettehendler (talk) 16:11, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

picture problems
HI- I am trying to insert a picture on my Aaron Berkman article. I uploaded the image and then when I went on my article to insert the image I put in and it did not work. The picture shows up as being uploaded on wikimedia commons but when I try to put it in my article it does not work. Please help! Thanks Jeanette (Jeanettehendler (talk) 18:51, 26 August 2009 (UTC))

andrew--many many thanks for your help. the article disappeared for a couple of days and i had just about given up when there you did your thing and here it is again. really appreciate your taking an interest. best, jeanetteJeanettehendler (talk) 19:25, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 19:04, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK Newsletter - June 2009 Issue
Summary: This month, we have details on our response to HMRC, updates on our Initiatives and Membership drives, as well as our regular sections on Press Coverage, Upcoming Meetups, and activities from the other WMF Chapters around the globe. We're also pleased to announce that we now have a Paypal account! We also want your input on the future of this newsletter - get involved! We are hoping to get the July issue out very early in July in order to fit with our new distribution schedule, so don't be surprised to see two newsletters in quick succession.

In this month's newsletter:
 * 1) HMRC Response
 * 2) Initiatives
 * 3) Membership Drive
 * 4) PayPal
 * 5) Press Coverage
 * 6) Other Chapters' Activities
 * 7) Meet-ups
 * 8) Newsletter Feedback

''Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.''AndrewRT(Talk) 15:51, 22 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Message to Bot: Please archive AndrewRT(Talk) 15:51, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK Newsletter - September 2009 Issue
Summary: This month, our Initiatives Director explains our Initiatives, we update you on our Membership (including some new benefits for members!), keep you informed on our Charity Status application, and update you with our regular sections regarding Other Chapters' Activities, Press Coverage, and UK Meet-ups!

In this month's newsletter:
 * Initiatives
 * Membership
 * Charity status update
 * Other Chapters' Activities
 * Press Coverage
 * Meet-ups

''Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.''

Delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 12:32, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Read - please archive. AndrewRT(Talk) 20:16, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:56, 18 October 2009 (UTC)