User talk:Awiseman/Archive/2008/May

GWU - section on tuition
Andrew:

Please consider removong or at least modifying the section on tuition in the GW article. It is harmful to the image of your alma mater and it isn't fair to have it, since no other college articles focus on tuition. And President Knapp has made a firm commitment to reduce tuition costs. Please consider this request, especially if you love GW as much as I think you do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by UltimateColonial (talk • contribs) 16:48, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note, but we need to include all aspects in the article. The high financial aid is also mentioned though. --AW (talk) 16:52, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)
The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)
The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 06:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Reasons on UAA
When you post a username on UAA, you need to provide a reason why the username needs to be blocked.

User:F**kthapoliceNWA appears to be a good-faith user. If you are actually bothered by the name, I would suggest talking to the user and looking for other solutions besides the brute-force solution of blocking.  r speer  / ɹəəds ɹ  20:25, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I didn't think in needed an explanation. I'm an admin myself, but I thought I'd submit it to get other opinions. --AW (talk) 21:20, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Warning?
Your recent contribution(s) to are very much appreciated. However, you did not provide references or sources for your information. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a drive to improve the quality of Wikipedia by encouraging editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. If sources are left unreferenced, it may count as original research, which is not allowed. Can you provide in the article specific references to any books, articles, websites or other reliable sources that will allow people to verify the content in the article? You can use a citation method listed at How to cite sources. Thanks!
 * You dumped this on my talkpage; I just spotted the hidden comment "first level warning". If you have an issue with my edits related to referencing sources there are politer ways of addressing them than issuing "warnings"; I regard the deposition of this template on my page as a breach of WP:CIVIL and must warn you that incivility will not be tolerated on Wiki (or so I'm told). As you appear to be an Admin I'd have thought you'd be aware of the need for civility. If you wish to discuss anything I suggest you don't do so by pasting templates on my page - which I regard as an aggressive and uncivil action by an Admin. Sarah777 (talk) 17:00, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll respond on your talk page. --AW (talk) 15:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The remarks are factually correct; most of the rest of the text is unreferenced - why pick on a few sentences? Is there a reason other than concern for "verifiability"? One of the "three" (whose edit I reverted) commented "Gloriously sycophantic, indulgent and unsubstantiated. IRA folklore" in his deletion of the information. Hardly a WP:NPOV edit. Sarah777 (talk) 23:56, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, the last edit by User:Ian Rose removed only the unverifiable "conversational" language - a much better effort; so I'm happy with the current state. Sarah777 (talk) 00:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Glad we're in agreement. I understand you are interested in this article, but please don't be so quick to take offense, that template is just a basic everyday one - more of a suggestion than a warning, despite the inside comment. --AW (talk) 00:41, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry I snapped - I've a...checkered... history with the world of Wiki Admins and tend to knee-jerkingly assume the worst! I'll increase my dosage of anti-paranoia pills... [[Image:Face-grin.svg|30px]] Sarah777 (talk) 02:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hehe, sounds good :) --AW (talk) 02:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Merge Casa Italiana (Nazareth College) into Nazareth College (New York)
It's been a month, and I'm not sure if anyone else is going to comment. I say go for it, whenever you feel ready. Aepoutre (talk) 21:56, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

History of Montserrat
Hi, your suggestion to merge the History article to the article about Montserrat has not led anywhere. Why not state your proposal on the Talk:History of Montserrat page. I would give my support.--AssegaiAli (talk) 11:45, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, will do --AW (talk) 18:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)