User talk:Bearian/ArchivesEndJanFeb2008

Thanks, will get them up
But not this very minute, I am actually busy lol! in a few hours =) -- Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 02:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

RFA
, Thank you for your support in my RFA which passed 43/0/1. I would like to especially thank Bibliomaniac15 for being my nominator and admin coach. I would also like to thank Rudget for being my co-nominator. I'm sure that I can live up to the community's expectations as an administrator, and not totally mess everything up. Thanks again for your support! Malinaccier (talk) 17:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks
I'm sorry you felt I am inexperienced to become an admin. I hope that by performing more edits on Wikipedia in the next few months that I could possibly change your mind by my next RfA, possibly around May 2008. - Jameson L. Tai  talk ♦ contribs 05:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

My Rfa
My effort to regain adminship was unsuccessful. Thank you for taking some time out of your day to voice your opinion.--MONGO 05:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello, re: Dispensa's Kiddie Kingdom & Castle of Toys
I authored this page, just saw now that it has been deleted. This entry is not an advertisement, Dispensa's Kiddie Kingdom & Castle of Toys closed in 1984 and has been demolished. Can the page be restored? Thanks. DanR1245 —Preceding unsigned comment added by DanR1245 (talk • contribs) 20:00, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Bryant & Stratton College
Thank you for the message. I'm writing that now. It is now in the Thai Wikipedia, th:สมัคร สุนทรเวช. --Manop - TH (talk) 18:24, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I edited and cited a source now (Samak Sundaravej). The source's in Thai language. Let me see if I can find in English. Thank you for your hard work as an admin.--Manop - TH (talk) 18:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Help?
Hi Bearian, I'm hoping that you might be able to offer some advice with an issue I'm dealing with on WP:WQA, where I've been volunteering and trying to help.

A complaint about User:Hopiakuta was filed at WQA. This editor has been having some edit and personality conflicts and making some personal attacks (such as changing someone else's user signature to "liar" several times). There's an entire file on this editor over at WP:ANI (here:). Apparently though, there's a complication, which is that the editor has a legitimate brain injury and thus may be editing in good faith and perceiving things differently. I suggested that it go over to WP:ANI again, but it was closed without resolution.

The editor who posted the WQA alert has asked me for help, and at this point I'm not sure what to tell him/her. IMHO it seems that something should be done, because despite whatever Hopiakuta's intentions may be, he is repeatedly being disruptive and upsetting other editors--but because of the other aspects of the case it doesn't seem like a cut-and-dry NPA/incivility issue. I yelled for help on my page and the admin who responded suggested an RFC...can you offer any advice on what should be done here? Thanks for any help. Best, DanielEng (talk) 08:32, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your help here! Best, DanielEng (talk) 03:34, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Lyndon LaRouche
I do not disagree with your edits at Lyndon LaRouche, but wonder why only certain people can edit there. The article should be unlocked. Do you have the power to unlock it? CM (talk) 18:54, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Could you tell me, under Protection policy, what your rationale is? Thanks.  CM (talk) 19:01, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Cato
I appreciate your cooperative spirit on the Cato Institute article. Thanks! Binarybits (talk) 21:01, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Note
Thanks for taking a closer look. I know you have your job cut out for you. Do I have the right to bring this to the AN/I page without fear of getting blocked? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthon01 (talk • contribs) 21:08, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
This was totally unexpected. Thank you for the recognition. Anthon01 (talk) 04:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks
I am not one for sending round pretty pictures, but after my recent RfA, which passed 68/1/7, I am now relaxed and this is to thank you for your support. I will take on board all the comments made and look forward to wielding the mop with alacrity. Or two lacrities. --Rodhullandemu  (Talk) 21:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Ultraexactzz is now an Administrator
My RfA was successful, and closed with 44 Supports, 6 Opposes, and 1 Neutral. For your support, you have my thanks - I fully intend to live up to the lofty yet not-a-big-deal responsibility you have granted me. For those who opposed my candidacy, I value your input and advice, and hope that I may prove worthy of your trust. Special thanks to both Rudget  and  bibliomaniac  1  5  for their expert coaching and guidance. I look forward to serving the project, my fellow editors, the pursuit of higher knowledge, et cetera, et cetera. Again, you have my thanks. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 01:34, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi Bearian! Thanks for your welcome message. Good luck. Laughologist (talk) 12:05, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks from Happy-melon
I just wanted to say thanks for your support for my RfA, which closed (74/2/0) this morning. Your comment and support was very much appreciated. Happy‑melon 15:57, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue V (January 2008)
The January 2008 issue of the WikiProject Universities 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 for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! &mdash; Noetic  Sage  22:04, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Kate Mullany House
Hi Bearian -- Thanks for developing the Kate Mullany House article, which i had contributed to at a stub level. I was interested to read that it had gotten the Historic Site status. I wonder, further, would it be possible for you to take/provide a picture of the house? It is one of the relatively few sites on the List of National Historic Landmarks in New York that is lacking a pic. I and some others are trying to bring that list up to Featured List quality, but we have no participants in the Albany area now and can't get that pic, and I am guessing you have some connection to the area from your other contributions. Also, i just started Kate Mullany as a minimal stub. Any which way, thanks again! sincerely, doncram (talk) 23:17, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!
Hi, just dropping by to say thanks for supporting my RfA, I totally wasn't expecting to get so much support, it was a really pleasant surprise. Melesse (talk) 04:30, 4 February 2008 (UTC) 

Melesse (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Nativity Parish
I deleted Nativity Parish despite the hangon tag. You're right in that schools don't count in terms of A7, but that's not what the article was tagged for in the first place. I deleted it as a G11 since it was a blatant ad for the school. --Coredesat 01:10, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Help on exchanging an image
Hello Bearian, The page "Klaus Ebner" contains a photo. On Wikimedia Commons there is a newer and better version of this photo (i.e. same name). In my opinion it would make sense to delete the local version of the photo here and use the photo out of Commons. However, I've not the slightest idea how to do this. Could you help? --Torsten Wittmann (Karlsruhe) (talk) 09:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Please help me on this issue. The old picture is still here. Commons holds the new one, which is already integrated in all other languages. Torsten Wittmann (Karlsruhe) (talk) 13:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Link to new image in article, request for speedy deletion of existing in place. Should be all done now. Edmund Patrick ( confer work) 15:20, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

UST Global - Follow Up
Hello Bearian,

I can see the “Clean Up” tag for the UST Global article in Wiki from January 22. Thanks a lot for initiating and willingness to work on the UST Global page.

Once again I would like to seek your advice to remove the recent updates by the user Stevejross in the UST Global page. Also I noticed the comments from another editor EdJohnston, who is actively involved in UST Global Wiki page for a long time and I am keeping here the link from the User talk:Stevejross on this regard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Stevejross#UST_Global_again. I believe this will be supportive to my request.

Adding to my appeal, as per the Wikipedia: Verifiability policy, “Any material that is challenged, and for which no source is provided within a reasonable time (or immediately if it's about a living person), may be removed by any editor.” This is accepted by the user Stevejross in your user talk page saying that he worked to find supportive information and for that he took time from November 2007 to Jan 15, 2008. My modest request is to remove the part about the founder of the company as well as the link to an external site regarding the arbitration press release which is against the fundamental Wiki policy NPOV. I have stated all my points in this talk page few days before. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bearian#UST_Global.2C_Once_again_need_your_help

Also could you please check this link http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=UST_Global&limit=500&action=history that shows the revision history of UST Global page, and in this page you could easily notice the first three edits that user Stevejross made in UST Global wiki page dated Feb 6, 7 – 2007. This is enough to prove that user Stevejross views and his updates that he makes in the UST Global wiki page is not consistent and purely self promotion.

Expecting a quick action from you,

Sincerely Chella123 Chella123 (talk) 19:36, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Re Anthon01 & Homeopathy blocks
Bearian, Anthon01 pointed out this diff at his user page to me. He could do a better job himself, of documenting what's going on, but be that as it may, I see a block, a barnstar, and a ban from Homeopathy (which is his current problem). Does this material refer to an ANI, or some place else where his editting has been documented as in violation of the Homeopathy warning (which I think just expired, incidentaly)? Anthon01 is not as competent a scientist as some, but in my experience he makes a substantial effort to play fair in the edit warring, and these guys are prone to getting steamrollered by more sophsiticated wikilegalists. This really bugs me, the "pro-science" side seems to be a much bigger problem with excessive contentiousness than the pro-alt-med side, which is supposed to be populated with quacks. Pete St.John (talk) 22:08, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Bearian, thanks for your reply at my Talk. I'm happy with your explanation, but (for me at least) the discussion isn't closed per se. My concern (not yours, or even Anthon01's) is not any one incident, but the pattern of protracted wikilegalism battering down opposition. It's too easy for the more sophisticated (in terms of wiki policy and guidelines) to steam-roller honest but less sophisticated contributors. My experience so far is that Anthon01 is trying as hard (if not as effectively) at fair debate towards consensus, as anyone, but that eristic, anti-conseneus techniques (such as calling for blocks of the less sophisticated contributors) wins disproportionately. In this particular case, I'm wholly opposed to regarding homeopathy as a contemporary methodology for medical treatment (it's significance is purely historical, anthropological, and, because it's kept alive as a contemporary treatment, political) but the "pro-science" camp using eristic, disruptive, uncivil, anti-consensus-building rhetoric and debate tactics is worse for science than homeopathy itself (openness to questioning being critical to modern science). I wish it were at least possible for the excessive wikilegalists to be warned for it, but they evade specific wordings of specific guidelines visible in local contexts; that is, it's only the pattern over time that violates policies, not actionably any one diff, making it extremely difficult to object effectively to the behaviour. I don't mean for you particularly to do anything about this, I just want you to understand why I care about this. Pete St.John (talk) 19:48, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Bhasmas
The context and the refernce to the added text are added.I hope it meets your observation.Thanks. Ys--Nvvchar (talk) 09:16, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Oxford Round Table
An editor has nominated Oxford Round Table, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. ColdmachineTalk 23:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

List link
List_of_Wikipedians_by_number_of_edits. Bearian&#39;sBooties (talk) 03:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

RFA thanks
 .: RFA thanks :.

I haven't officially fallen off the face of the earth....
Hi Bearian,

I just wanted to stop by and let you know that I haven't forgotten about doing my coaching tasks. I got absolutely slammed at work last week, and the situation will probably last through next week, too. I'll do my best to keep up when I can, but finding the right combination of necessary time and brainpower will be a bit difficult until this all calms down. Sorry! -- jonny - m t  15:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Bhasma
Mr Bearian, I have an alternate text (with references) for the introductory para which may be suitable for incorporation.The text is as under.

Bhasma[1] in Ayurveda has been defined as a substance obtained by calcination. Bhasma is a process by which a substance which is otherwise bio-incompatible is made bio-compatible. In this process of preparing Bhasma called Bhasmikarana, metals (like gold, silver, copper etc) and gems (like ruby pearls, diamond, etc) are incinerated at extremely high temperatures after treating with some herbs or herbal juices so that it becomes a very fine powder (ash), whereby it looses its metal form and are purified to remove impurities. Thus, Bhasma a unique Ayurvedic preparation, in Ayurvedic healing methods, is reported to have excellent medical properties. It is stated to be known in the Indian subcontinent since the seventh century B.C. and [2]^ as given in the article

The procedure for preparing these medicines is time-consuming and complicated. It is an elaborate process involving Sodhana and Bhasmikaran. The classical texts of Ayurveda prescribe in great detail the way the above processes need to be performed. If suitable could be incorporated. I am in the process of obtaining refrences for the other paragrahs of the articles but the text may also need change.--Nvvchar (talk) 07:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your editing data!
You may be interested to know that your editing patterns have been used as a sort of baseline in a sock puppet investigation. I hope you don't mind. Cool Hand Luke 05:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

ANI FYI
Someone has asked for a review on ANI about a block you placed earlier today. Here's a link if you're interested in commenting. --Onorem♠Dil 16:11, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Brian, I don't understand this block myself but I don't want to unblock User:Decoratrix until you've had a chance to look at it. Regards. --Rodhullandemu  (Talk) 16:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I actually didn't realise I'd unblocked him, as I realised half-way through that I should contact you first. Sorry for that. My reasoning is on User Talk:Decoratrix. --Rodhullandemu  (Talk) 17:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem, I just didn't see a substantial reason for the block, and didn't want to antagonise an otherwise useful editor, but your BLP warning to him is useful. --<font color="7F007F">Rodhullandemu  (Talk) 18:24, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Arbitration procedure
I appreciate your attention to the requirement that all parties to a request for arbitration be notified of the case. However, the purpose of the notifications is to make sure that each involved party is aware of the case and has the opportunity to submit a statement. If a party has already submitted a statement, then obviously he or she is aware of the case and so another formal notification is not really necessary. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:57, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:Trinity United Church of Christ
No problem. It didn't look correct.  jj137  (talk)  02:33, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

6 feet...
I don't think it's notable, but I have a more rigorous standard than many. My view of albums: if they didn't chart (top 10, top 40?), they are nn unless there was some big news item: enough dirty words to send Tipper Gore into a perpetual novena; some prosecution for indecency, or the like. I would also hold bands to some more rigorous standards than a national tour (not even as a headliner) or 2 albums from basically any old label. If national tours count, next time I'm in Monaco or Liechtenstein or Singapore, I'll belt out a few show tunes across the town (country) so I can have my very own article here. :-) The hills are alive... Carlossuarez46 (talk) 01:17, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I can has thankspam?
<div class="NavFrame collapsed" style="border-style: none; text-align: left; border: #339922 solid 2px; -moz-border-radius: 10px; background: #66CC66; padding: 5px;"> <div class="NavHead" style="-moz-border-radius-topright: 10px; -moz-border-radius-topleft: 10px; -moz-border-radius-bottomright: 10px; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft: 10px; background: #CCFFCC; text-align: center; padding: 2px; font-size: 160%;"><font face="century gothic" color="#17450F"> Quick, let's delete the front page!

Don Sakers
Glad to add a smidgen of polish. By the way, I wish you hadn't deleted those redlinks from the science fiction fandom "See also" list: these are both topics deserving of their own articles, which is one function of a redlink. -- Orange Mike  |  Talk  19:23, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

OhanaUnited's RFA
<div class="NavFrame collapsed" style="border-style: none; text-align: left; border: #30B060 solid 2px; -moz-border-radius: 10px; background: #30B060; padding: 5px;"> <div class="NavHead" style="-moz-border-radius-topright: 10px; -moz-border-radius-topleft: 10px; -moz-border-radius-bottomright: 10px; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft: 10px; background: #F0FFEA; text-align: center; padding: 2px; font-size: 160%;"><font face="trebuchet ms" color="#7d7d7d">.: Thank you! :.

Spears Motorsports
I'm puzzled about your adding the wikify. There are plenty of wikilinks IMHO. Do you mean something else? I completely agree with you about adding references. Royal broil 20:25, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Spam in User:Newyorklenin
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on User:Newyorklenin, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because User:Newyorklenin is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting User:Newyorklenin, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 01:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Silva-Braga
Thanks for noticing that I'd done the assessment!! I don't normally do assessments for the project, but the person who did seems to be missing in action and there was a huge backlog. Your article was one of the better ones on the list, and one of the most appropriate. I put it on my watchlist and may do a little reference formatting on it, which is what I usually do on the WP:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (along with massive filmography clean up). Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Recall
Hello Bearian! Unfortunately, I'm unsure of the exact state of the recall process at the moment, as I'm not following it very closely. As far as I know, each admin's recall standards are set by him or herself; we don't have any set standards or probationary periods or anything of that nature in stone. I very much doubt that you'd be recalled over a few errors; we're all human, and I know that I've certainly made my fair share of mistakes as well. I wouldn't worry about it too much if I were you. :) GlassCobra 05:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

71.205.245.233
User:71.205.245.233 has requested unblock at User talk:71.205.245.233. Looking at his contributions at Special:Contributions/71.205.245.233, I only see two edits which were reverts of other editors' vandalism. I don't see any vandalistic edits. Is there a reason why you blocked it, without warning, for a month? Metros (talk) 20:37, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry for joining the bandwagon here, but I have to agree with Metros. And I think someone that edits twice, to revert vandalism on Wikipedia should really get a better reply than a flat "I have unblocked this IP". I'd be very angry it that happened to me. Keep in mind that some PR work can go a long way on potential contributors. And on a side note, blocking someone for a full month, without warnings, for some childish vandalism is really, really overkill... I hope you'll reconsider next time you perform a block. -- lucasbfr  talk 20:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Cate Edwards 2
Hi. I notice that you removed the AfD tag from Cate Edwards and noted on its talk page that the debate closed as No Consensus. However, the debate was not properly closed, nor does it appear that it was closed and re-opened. I read it as a Redirect, and closed it appropriately, before seeing that you had already removed the tag. I defer to your earlier close, and have changed my close of the debate to your No Consensus ruling, but wanted you to know why I redirected that article after you had removed the tag. Sorry for any confusion. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 21:15, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Cary, North Carolina
Out of curiosity what was wrong with them. What I did was put them in a table so that is was much neater.   CWii ( Talk  22:14, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay then. Sometimes we miss those things.   CWii ( Talk  00:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

99-year lease
Do more. Bearian&#39;sBooties (talk) 03:03, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Ugly Betty (season 3)
The current Arbcom ruling (which I strongly disagree with and think should be ended ASAP) does not say that AFD's should result in being kept. It just means that the AFD has to stay open until the injunction is lifted (with the AFD being relisted like it normally would if there was no consensus). It also appears that articles are only affected if it's for notability. This was because nothing about the season is verifiable (so it's WP:V) other than that there will be a season 3. We don't know when the season will air, what any of the plotlines are, who be appearing, etc. Only that there will be a third season. So it can still be deleted.  TJ   Spyke   09:21, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Everyone's a critic
The whole discussion at ANI seemed to pass me by. Avg said he was going to escalate there but didn't by the time I logged off. Any way, there are lots of Greek (and other) nationalists who dismiss the fact that a major ethnic cleansing occurred in Greece in the 1920's. see Population exchange - the Graeco-Turkish one ought to be listed unless the radical elements has again tried to remove it. Their argument that beacuse there are only a few Slavs left in Greece so how could there be 10% in any where ever is akin to making the same argument for Jews in Poland - few left, so could never have been any to the level of 10%. Oddly, they don't make the claim in reverse, that there are few Greeks in Turkey, so lets purge Turkish articles of Greek placenames. :-) Such is nationalism/racism. It's illogical. I have regularly added equivalent names to all articles: Greek to Turkish (and other) placenames, Latin all over the place, but if you dare place an "inferior" race's (whence barbarian = "non-Greek") name on a Greek place - it's almost like drawing cartoons of a prophet around here. And as for not responding, there's quite a thread on Avg's talk page unless he's deleted that too for effect. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 15:39, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey, could you offer some help?
Since you're one of my most trusted editors in terms of assessing genuine notability, could you please look at the Marika Michalowska article and the AfD debate if you find the time? Thanks.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 23:18, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Union High School (Washington)
Hi, as you know, for GFDL reasons if the content is to be merged into the existing article (which I think clearly it should be), then the page under discussion cannot be deleted. I wonder if you would consider changing your recommendation to 'merge and redirect', please? TerriersFan (talk) 04:33, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

New mailing list
There has been a mailing list created for Wikipedians in the New York metropolitan area (list: Wikimedia NYC). Please consider joining it!  Cbrown1023   talk   20:42, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

K. S. Balachandran
You gave me notice that this chap is up for the chop, but I haven't edited it. I agree for what it's worth, but I shan't chime in at afd lest it be seen as a soliciation - I don't participate there as much, too much heated drama over articles that are basically shit but procedurally enough people want to keep them or our standards are sufficiently lax. P.S. I was thinking that the Category:Prima donnas currently on the chop block could be refactored into a user category and I might add myself. :-O Hope you rode out the big storm in NY. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey Bearian, could you comment on this diff? Not sure what's going on, but the notice was deleted from WP:AIV. As you're the only admin to have commented at that AfD, I presume the editor refers to your account, which seemed odd. Just an FYI. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 01:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I should clarify, the comment regards an issue with the AFD for the Balachandran article. Thanks, UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 01:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Not at all - the concern from was that an admin account was compromised in some fashion, and yours was the only one I saw - thus, I left the notice for you as your account certainly did not appear compromised. Later, Edibility clarified that two unrelated diffs (from another editor) had caused him some concern, as per User talk:Edibility. At that point, I should have let you know that it was a false alarm, but missed it. I haven't reviewed the article itself in detail, so I defer to your judgement in the matter - but I might comment later. Sorry for the confusion. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 15:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * No worries at all about your third nom, as it looks good. I've had a bunch, but they were all procedural fixing-up-someone-elses-buggered-formatting noms. Good times. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 15:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Nope, all is well
I was only worried about the security issue, but with user:Bearian'sBooties all seems well and taken care off, just to reiterate what I said then, I don't/didn't/haven't ever doubt(ed) your ability to be a fine admin, ever. :P Dureo (talk) 02:36, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Research on the RFA process
Hello, I am an anthropology student researching the Wikipedia Requests for adminship procedure. As you recently voted in this process, I was wondering if you would be willing to answer a few quick questions.


 * Do you believe that the current RFA process is an effective way of selecting admins?
 * Do you notice a difference between users who are nominated vs selfnoms?
 * Is a week an appropriate length for process? Should it perhaps be longer or shorter?
 * Do you think the user's status in the community changes while the user is undergoing the RFA process? How about after the RFA process is over?
 * Was the candidate Q&A beneficial in helping you choose to support the candidate?

If you are willing, please leave your answers on my talk page or e-mail them to me.

This research will not be published academically, as this research is primarily to demonstrate the feasibility of doing online ethnography in online only communities such as Wikipedia, though I intend to make my findings available on Wiki. Your name will not be associated with any information you provide in any published work. If you have any questions please let me know. Thank you. --Cspurrier (talk) 18:46, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Admin Coaching Re-confirmation
Hello, previously you expressed interest in participating in the Admin coaching project. We are currently conducting a reconfirmation drive to give coaches the opportunity to update their information and capacity to participate in the project. Please visit Admin coaching/Status to update your status. Also, please remember to update your capacity (5th table variable) in the form of a fraction (eg. 2/3 means you are currently coaching 2 students, and could accept 1 more student). Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 08:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Non-notable bible chapters
Hello. On a recent AfD, you proposed that a guideline be created to cover articles written on a chapter-by-chapter, verse-by-verse, or lection-by-lection, basis about the bible.

The proposed guideline has been written here - Organisation of Bible articles, and I wonder if you would like to comment on it.

Clinkophonist (talk) 18:45, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

re: Who is this person?
Hi, sorry to bother you, regarding this edit to AN/I are you asking who I am (Ascidian) or who 58.177.85.161 is ? regards, Ascidian (talk) 21:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for clarifying. regards, Ascidian (talk) 10:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Not sure why you contacted me?
Hello, I do not know why you contacted me and welcomed me to wikipedia. I've been here for AGES, so no welcome needed thanks. Do you have issue with an edit I've made or are you just being friendly? Also, I do sign my edits with four tildes, so again thanks for ... nothing. BTW: You should be aware that comments on a users talk page go at the BOTTOM, not the top, usurping the messages that are already there!!!!!!! Fr33kMan (talk) 00:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for the welcome tag. I personally don't look for that sort of missing tag on a users talk page. I consider that a users pages are pretty much private space unless I've got a message for them I leave other peoples talk pages alone, but that's just me and I understand that you do and that's cool. Also, I have not made any legal threats here at wikipedia and challenge you to show me where I have. I have reported the Steven Seagal thing so that his management people can provide proof that he is, or was, a cop. BTW: I do have a picture of him with the police force, in uniform! Cheers and have a nice day. Fr33kMan (talk) 01:06, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Rotaract?
If they are so notable, why is the article devoid of references? I'm not gonna fuss at you about pulling the speedy, but I have tagged it as unreferenced and queried the supposed notability. (This is fallout from a member of a group in India, who queried why her article had been deleted when other youth groups from the U.S. without references were left to stand. I had to admit, she had a point, in an WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS kind of way; so I tagged the groups which met that description.) -- Orange Mike  |  Talk  14:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, no problem; I bear no ill-will against Rotaract or the other groups per se but do have serious questions about the issue the young lady raised, so I'm trying to hold this article to the same standard used on hers. -- Orange Mike  |  Talk  16:37, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Paul Tillich
I doubt if there's any proven COI; Tillich doesn't have any relatives called that, and there's been no self-identification with any known holder of the same views. I assume it refers to the Saul -> Paul conversion (Saul being the non-Christian persona of Paul, this editor's contention being that Tillich was an atheist). But choosing such a username implies rather a fixation with the subject. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 00:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

RfA
I don't like to do this, but can you double-check my contribs if you think civility problems are still a serious issue for me? I don't think I've ever seriously violated WP:Civil, my main flaw has been abrasiveness and phraseology that comes across as disrespectful. It also I think got made an issue early on in the nom and is being being taken for granted as a fact when I don't think I've really been that bad. No-one can ever accuse me of violating policy or being seriously editorially irresponsible. Many of those diffs also come from a while ago, and some in a period where I was completing an 80-page paper to a tight deadline (no excuse, I know). This RfA came as a bit of a surprise to me, but I get the feeling if I'd gone through this 3 months ago all the skeletons would have already been brought out of the cupboard and I would have been adjudged as "changed" by now. User:Deb doesn't like me because of the developments on the Scottish kings pages a year and a half ago, as in here. That's probably a bad sign nevertheless, but frank conversations between peers aren't the same as "civility issues", are they? Besides that, I think it's unfair to think a user functioning as a normal content user would be as conscientious as someone who knows they have the role of an admin ... a little unfair ... though I understand that one has to base their judgments in these matters on something more than good faith and psychic predictions. All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 02:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your good faith advice and time. The second link was quite funny! I must at some stage find out what wikipedians write those things, and give 'em a barnstar or something. All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 02:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

UST Global - Clean Up
Hi Bearian, I just wanted to follow up with you regarding the status of Cleaning up the UST Global wiki page. Let me take you to my points that I have posted in this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bearian/ArchivesJan2008#UST_Global.2C_Once_again_need_your_help, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bearian#UST_Global_-_Follow_Up. Could you please tell me how we can resolve these issues in the UST Global wiki page? The confusing information in the UST Global wiki page is detrimental to the company UST Global, and as per wiki policy, any article content will be based on NPOV which is not followed here. My humble request to you is to guide me on how to clean up this article? Thanks for helping me. Chella123 (talk) 02:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I dobbed you in
I dobbed you in :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:23, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

....yeah, though left-of-centre noms (i.e. those of admins of <1yr standing) appear to be pretty risky...food for thought anyway :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 18:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

re: Worldwide Digital Cordless Telecommunications
Why would i care? --Boothy443 | trácht ar 07:35, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Invite
Jccort (talk) 16:04, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

User talk:New Concept Mandarin
What is the problem with this name? He's asking for unblock. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 11:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)