User talk:Carbonrodney/Archive

Archives: 1 2

The Meisner Technique School of Acting
I want you to know that am not the teacher of the school. As far as I can tell by the notability page you referred me to, yes this is notable enough. And as for the definition of encyclopedia that you referred me to, there is nothing in the definition that leads me to believe that this article couldn't belong. Especially when I see so many similar ones already in existence on Wikipedia. I just don't understand how you are qualifying some and disqualifying others who are completely comparable to the material you have already set precedence with. I have provided links from 3rd party sources and still nothing. What do you need from me? Couldn't it at least be a stub?? --Jmjrrtt (talk) 17:12, 18 July 2008 (UTC) I am confused by your notability policy. There seems to be a lot of gray area covered, but not much black and white. What makes The Meisner Technique School of Acting any different from The Sanford Meisner Center for the Arts. The Meisner Technique School of Acting is a reputable school, with a reputable director who also happens to be a legitimate actor and a disciple of Sanford Meisner. --Jmjrrtt (talk) 22:42, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Message
No problem, and in case that you may need help, contact me! Macy (talk) 02:56, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

"Weasel-y" language
I meant no offense by my use of that term. It simply describes the language "Some say." I actually agreed with your moving the text to a different section. It's tough to edit articles where you care deeply about the subject matter, as it appears you do here. However, I have no doubt that you are editing in complete good-faith, and I hope you don't leave that article. We need more good-faith editors there, not less. Regards, S. Dean Jameson 05:27, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 07:28, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Mosquito
Under section 79 subsection 1 g of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 a statutory nusiance includes 'noise emitted from premises so as to be prejudicial to health or a nuisance'. The device works by emitting a noise that annoys those who can hear it. There are exceptions to g for defence purposes and aircraft. Section 80 requires a local authority (Local council) to serve an abatement notice where a statutory nuisance exists or is likely to occur. Abatement notices should require the nuisance to be abated or prohibit its occurence. It is an offence to fail to comply with an abatement notice unless it is overturned by a court. Anyone affected by the nuisance can sue to get the nuisance stopped. If the nuisance affects a sufficiently large portion of her majesties subjects, it is public nuisance, which is a serious crime carrying a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. I am a bit rusty on tort law, but essentially the tort of nuisance is comitted when a person does something that affects another persons land, without actually being on their land, that stops the person using their land how they like, or makes it harder or less enjoyable to use the land. A bit rough, but about right I think. Dolive21 (talk) 11:56, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It might be public nuisance, but it would certainly be a statutory nuisance, so the council should serve them with an abatement notice, and those affected could sue under section 82 for an order that the nuisance should stop.Dolive21 (talk) 12:11, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


 * To make the council enforce it would require a judicial review, a very expensive legal process in the High Court. The young people do not have the money for that, nor do they have the money to use the section 82 procedure to enforce it themselves.  The councils are not usually very simpathetic.  Dolive21 (talk) 12:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Wild Bird Magazine AfD
Thanks for that, but you were a bit quick off the draw - see my comments on the AfD nomination :-) CultureDrone (talk) 07:12, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol, no worries, I wasn't having a go at you - I was just surprised when I got an edit conflict when typing in my nomination - people aren't normally that fast ! :-) Here's a question for you though - why doesn't the '....this article's entry...' link on the article link to the correct discussion page ? It's going straight into edit mode - at least it does when I click on it... CultureDrone (talk) 07:25, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Tags on photos
Hi, I have noticed that you have incorrectly tagged several photos you have uploaded. The Australian Department of Defence does not release photos into the public domain and any use of these photos on Wikipedia needs to be justified by a fair use statement (please see WP:FAIRUSE). The following images are tagged incorrectly and need to be fixed: Please be more careful in the future - using the wrong copyright tags can lead to you being banned and could cause trouble for other editors who are trying to do the right thing by using Department of Defence photos under a fair use tag. Image:ADF Commanders 2008 fair use claimed.jpg is a DoD image I've recently uploaded and claimed fair use for which may be useful to you as a model. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Nick Dowling (talk) 10:53, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Image:Sasr.jpg‎ (not released into the public domain as claimed)
 * Image:Tageastbrowning.jpg‎ (not released into the public domain as claimed)
 * Image:Tageastmp5onladder.jpg‎ (do not use US government tags for non-US government works - there is no Australia government tag as the Australian Government does not release photos into the public domain)


 * For some dumb reason the Template:Non-free promotional tag isn't available at the point where images are uploaded and has to be added later. This is the appropriate tag to use for DoD photos, though note that a fair use statement is required for each article the image is used in (Image:SASR Iraq.jpg is an example of an image where fair use is being claimed for a couple of articles). The images should only be used for instances were it's not possible to find a 'free' alternative and the photo is very important to the article. Nick Dowling (talk) 11:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Yep, they all look good now. However, wasn't the first photo from Iraq? Nick Dowling (talk) 00:11, 19 July 2008 (UTC)


 * As stated above, those images are not released into the public domain and require a fair use statement so they fall under WP:NFCC.  « ₣M₣ »  16:35, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

University High School
Your edits are incredibly irrelevant. I can number many odd additions you have made. 1. You correct others for adding "hearsay" but you add incredibly uncalled for information on the principals. Eg. "sex scandal???" 2. Add (special) is useless 3. Adding "Academic" is arbitrary as the topic is already curriculum. 4. Your information on French being compulsory is false! 5. The poetry competitions are not compulsory. 6. Your summary of Unihigh's special maths class includes irrelevant information. Eg (across the state, year 9 is typically low in new information...) 7. Your criticism of the acceleration program is incredibly subjective and inappropriate. Eg. "best teachers" 8. Your student body section is full of titles without any information! 9. The bridge plan is quite possibly is unlikely 10. Your "extra curricular section" may seem appropriate, but your comments are at times irrelevant and false. 11. Ultimately, your edits damage the integrity of the article and hence the school. So I will once again re-edit. Someone111111 (talk) 15:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok, yes i must admit my previous was quite angry, but i just felt your edits were inappropriate and because i currently go there i wasnt that happy. 1. The sex scandal was not the only thing, things like "sharing the name with a famous beatle" wasn't very great either. The idea of getting others attention by adding random isnt what i think i appropriate. 2. Considering uve already put it as a header obviously means the Bryce house is different from the others. 3. Adding Academic is pointless, because the title Curriculum is quite obvious that it relates to that. 7. Yes, my argument that it affects the school's integrity is flawed but had the criticisms been substantiated like u said i would've left the edits. Furthermore you suggest things that would be far too subjective to be substantiated like the "best teachers". Many teachers that are deemed teach the main stream class. Had you added something like they restricted the choice of some other subjects like drama to accommodate compulsory Latin, it would have been more appropriate. 8. Ok i was a bit hasty when i deleted the titles but i dont think it is significant enough to add when information on these are quite limited and expected from high schools. 9. Yes you fixed it but u still left the bridge plan. I criticized in 1 as i was trying to indicate hypocrisy when u added the information on the principals. 10. I tried to add content, by adding information on the language school that you deleted. Yes i may have deleted the sports section to hastily but you information on the Music school is also not completely true. Finally, I am incredibly sorry for being harsh and to a certain extent rude, but i do believe at times editing must involve DELETING if appropriate. Yet I am still not convinced that your actions are appropriate as you say i should not delete yet you still delete mine. Furthermore you cite pages on wikilove and mastodon yet you write in an condescending manner.

I am once again apologetic for writing such a blunt note. Someone111111 (talk) 08:58, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi again, I was extremely glad to read your last note, I am again truly sorry for being very blunt and rude before, I tend to get annoyed very easily. Yeah i guess there is some restrictions to year 7 subjects but im not entirely sure now, because of a lack of people choosing Indonesian they dropped that subject. For the LOTE thing, the school now allow Year 7s to choose between German and French, because there are more German teachers. I am glad you can compromise and I will try my best to compromise too especially not completely deleting things. If you like you can send ideas about the topics and as a current student i will try my best to add with new information on things like the extra curricular stuff,, though i would like to keep the principals section without the extra info. I am a current year 12 so im not particular sure how the school operates in the other sub-schools, there have been many changes. I hope we can maintain friendly correspondence Someone111111 (talk) 12:29, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Your rollback request
Hi! I regret that I must inform you that your request for the rollback permission has been denied. You can discover why by checking the archives at Requests for permissions/Denied/July 2008. SoxBot X (talk) 12:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:Rollback request
Hello,. You can [ remove this notice] at any time by removing the Talkback template.

Microbiology
Hi there, welcome to the Wikiproject! If you have any questions or suggestions, please drop me a note on my talkpage. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:34, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Welcome as well to MCB! Tim Vickers (talk) 16:54, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Restriction enzyme is the current MCB collaboration of the month. There is also a list of ways you can get involved on the main MCB homepage. Tim Vickers (talk) 03:16, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Reducing size of fair use photos
Hi Melesse,

I don't know if you are doing it manually, or using a script to do this... but you should either not forget or edit your script to account for fair use tags... The DoD images I uploaded, which you reduced, need to have their tags updated to reflect this. --Carbonrodney (talk) 12:44, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I do them manually. Updated to reflect what? Melesse (talk) 04:47, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

You go to Uni High?
Is this Aaron in year 8? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.108.85.231 (talk) 12:27, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Ooooo
you got me son! 77.49.214.80 (talk) 18:12, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

User:The Clart
I've delisted him from WP:AIV for now: he hasn't edited for a while, and is on his final warning. Just report him again if he does it once more, or if any suspicious socks turn up. Thanks for the report, anyway, and have a nice day. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 07:02, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Need Help
Was wondering if I could get you to take a look at this collaborative effort I'm trying to start. I was wondering if we could get the whole team in on it too. Any feedback or comments would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance! DxNate, 29 July 2024 User-Talk-Contribs

+Rollbacker
✅ - I'm convinced that you can use this tool wisely, but any administrator can take it away if you misuse it, so use it wisely! Any other questions, drop a line to my talkpage Fritzpoll (talk) 09:53, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

RFA thankspam
Thanks for your support in my RFA, which passed with 140 supporting, 11 opposing, and 4 neutral. I will do my best to live up to the trust that you have given to me. If I can ever assist you with anything, just ask.

Cheers!

J.delanoy gabs adds 20:24, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

RFA thank-you
Thank-you for your support of me at my recent RFA, which was successful. I have appreciated everyone's comments and encouragement there. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

POV accusation (JH War Crimes)
WP:AGF please. A criticism by political opponents is not notable - it is routine and expected that a politician's opponents will call him nasty names. I left the Valder accusation of War Crimes in the Howard Govt article because Valder was a Liberal. --Surturz (talk) 13:46, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I note that an admin reverted your edit with the summary that "bad faith accusations are not tolerated". I leave you to draw your own conclusions. --Surturz (talk) 13:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Everyone has a point of view. Edit summaries will sometimes reflect the person's mood/frustration - I know a scan of mine probably won't turn up a perfect 100. But accusing someone of vandalism simply because they disagree with you in a content dispute is a very serious allegation. Note from WP:VAND: "Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism." I think personally it's a fair application of WP:NOT and WP:UNDUE - and I may note I have disagreed with many past edits by Surturz in the John Howard arena, as any watcher will attest. (I'm certainly of an opposite political orientation, and even have the Kevin07 t-shirt to prove it.) I've also spent a fair part of my evening dealing with real vandalism by a prolific sockpuppetteer despite being bandwidth-limited by my ISP until the end of the month. It would seem you are rather invested in this particular edit/news item, and I suggest stepping back and entering some form of dispute resolution with those whom you disagree. Any other "solution" is going to result in an endless edit war. I've been around the John Howard article long enough to know the environment there - in fact, I have an essay about it which I one day hope to launch as a guide to handling difficult editing environments. Orderinchaos 14:05, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * As the material being removed was not there 2 days ago, I question whose edit was unhelpful. In general Wikipedia's consensus procedure holds that in order to add something contentious to a contested page, one has to obtain consensus on the talk page first - this was not done. Also, sometimes we get waves of activists coming through John Howard pushing some obscure point almost to the level of madness, and it's difficult to determine where they've all arrived from. For the most part they are not historically speaking editors of the article. As for not accusing him of vandalism, your actual words were: "POV editing like your recent edits on John Howard [...] are borderline vandalism." Your edit summary read: "POV removal, even borderline vandalism." Orderinchaos 14:24, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Not an "official process" by any means. If people want to properly deal with the things John Howard did in office, acting like the Socialist Alliance is not going to win them credibility either here or at The Hague. The ICC get thousands of dud requests every year, must we have reference to every last one of them here? Putting on my non-Wiki persona here, trying for a prosecution on AWB, or raising a commission of inquiry into the bailout of National Textiles, or having a Royal Commission into the "regional rorts" affair with very open terms of reference that would flush out the Coalition parties' misappropriations and possibly claim a few scalps, would all be quite effective measures to push for which would not be radical but which would be extremely embarrassing for the conservative side of politics, especially if any individual MPs were found to have personally benefitted (eg giving grants to their own companies). This one has no chance of going anywhere, just like the Aboriginals' appeal to the ICC some years ago. Orderinchaos 14:42, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks
— CycloneNimrod Talk? 15:43, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

RfC
Many thanks for your responses, laid out neatly, point by point. I'll leave them for others to address, for the time being. Perhaps you'd like to add a response addressing the point I and others made about the lack of media coverage? If this is notable, then how come we Wikipedians have spent more time and effort on it than the entirety of the world's media outlets? --Pete (talk) 22:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your note - I appreciated it. I am sure I won't stay away indefinitely but a break will do me good --Matilda talk 05:11, 4 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Your contribution history is interesting in the lack of things I'd expect to see in the history of a major party in a dispute. I'm genuinely curious now as to whether this is one of our old friends revisited. Orderinchaos 07:46, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Please come clean with the details of your previous editing identity. I am genuinely interested to know now, especially after examining your contributions. There is a reasonable basis for an RfC/U here. Your actions are not those of a new editor who happened upon this article. Orderinchaos 08:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * As for the matter - it is indeed drama. There is an existing RfC - comment on that if you must. Orderinchaos 08:10, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter
Sorry about the delay. AWB has been having a few issues lately. Here is the august issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 20:27, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

What are you doing up there?
You are listed at the top of the Typo/Members page with the quote "what am I doing up here?". How'd you get up there? It's cute but unless there's a good reason should should break the order of the page. Jason Quinn (talk) 23:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for August 2008
SoxBot II (talk) 21:45, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

D&D articles for Wikipedia 0.7
Hi there! :)

As someone who's worked on D&D and/or RPG articles before, I'm inviting you to participate in our goal to both improve articles that have been selected to be placed in the next Wikipedia DVD release, as well as nominate more to be selected for this project. Please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 04:10, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for September 2008
SoxBot II (talk) 20:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for October 2008
SoxBot II (talk) 02:50, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject: Dungeons & Dragons
Hi! I’ve been working on a lot of ‘’Dungeons & Dragons’’ articles lately and saw that you were a member of WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons), and am inviting you to rejoin Wikipedia’s D&D group. I've been hard at work removing tags placed inappropriately on D&D articles, as well as modifying articles to remove tags that were placed legitimately. In addition, I have been compiling related articles together so that the articles are longer, making it easier to remove tags and to have short articles on lesser topics by just putting it into another appropriate article (links to such compiled articles can be found on my userpage). Check out the project here, and ask any questions that you may have here. Thank you for your time. Drilnoth (talk) 20:32, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Editor review
Hi,

I came across your editor review. Do you intend to transclude it to the main page to get some reviews, or can it be deleted? Best wishes, – How do you turn this on (talk) 15:35, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for November 2008
SoxBot II (talk) 02:59, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Australia newsletter,December 2008
The December 2008 issue of the WikiProject Australia 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. This message was delivered by TinucherianBot (talk) 07:12, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for December 2008
SoxBot II (talk) 17:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Rosa Whitaker
Hi, I've made changes to this page and would appreciate if you looked at them. Is there anything else I can do and if not how do I get rid flags at the top of the page. Patloubar (talk) 17:23, 15 January 2009 (UTC)patloubar

Wambeen declined speedy
as Google Books shows this to be an Aboriginal mythology figure. Also, there was a source in the article. Dloh cierekim  16:19, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No prob. It happens to us all. Cheers,  Dloh  cierekim  21:35, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Ivan Teodorovich
I notice that you have put Ivan Teodorovich, the first People's Commissar for Food following the Russian Revolution up for deletion. Unfortunately you did not say why you felt this was appropriate, making it somewhat hard to argue against. I would be grateful if you could return to this page and make clear why you consider a prominent Bolshevik like him should be deleted. ThanksHarrypotter (talk) 10:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

thanks
thanks - I am just finishing it off now :) tuxlie  10:02, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Why are there other dictionary terms then?
Wikipedia may not be a dictionary, but this was a requested article. If it should not be created, delete it from the requested articles page, please.

Thanks,

--Axmann8 (talk) 10:17, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Recent AfD
As I wrote at: Articles for deletion/Ivan Teodorovich


 * Strong keep, snowball keep Abuse of AfD, the nomination was put up 5 minutes after the article was created, and the nominator then has the audacity to state "insufficient information to warrant a full article" I challenge  the nominator to write an article in 5 minutes that has sufficient information to avoid zealous deletion.  This is not the first time the nominator has done this, Flydubai was nominated 3 minutes after creation. and I suspect the other 15 articles that the nominator has put up for deletion, which were deleted, are the same.

Ikip (talk) 16:00, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm watching your talk page, so let's discuss this there. -- Carbon Rodney 22:56, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

  My comment (moved from lkip's talkpage)

I am quite insulted that you think I am abusing AfD - and also that you selectively quoted "insufficient information to warrant a full article: and I don't mean the wikipedia article is incomplete, I mean I searched for documents or biographies of this fellow and came up with nada." such to misconstrue my entire reasoning for AfD nomination.


 * Before nominating any article for deletion (that isn't a CSD), my first step is to try to find information to add to it. In this case, I couldn't find any sources on the topic of Teodorovich (and I readily admitted - twice - that this could be my failing in research) and considered the possibility of expansion from a stub very unlikely. Still, the current references don't discuss Teodorovich and merely mention him in passing.


 * At no point did I claim Teodorovich was not noteworthy, though this is what many people seemed to read. After the first comment, I attempted to clarify my reasons. I know that the author of this page is doing quite a bit of work on related pages and I don't believe he or she has bad motivations in starting this article or has done sub-par work on it in anyway: I just don't see any direction for it with the information I researched. And once again, I have stated multiple times that if someone found more than I could then I would unhesitatingly reverse my stance.


 * FlyDubai: When I nominated it, it was a single sentence talking about a company about to emerge into the sector. I wasn't the only one who thought it should be deleted and if you read my reasons for deletion, I think you will find them very moderate and hardly the comments one might use if they were abusing the system. The article has now been expanded and the AfD discussion resulted in a keep - not a problem for me: my aim is not to blast an article I have some personal vendetta against, my aim is to open a dialogue about its relevance and let my fellow Wikipedians discuss its suitability.


 * With respect to the other 15 articles, if you think myself and everyone who chose to discuss the deletion of those articles were abusing the AfD process then please deal with those AfDs on a case-by-case basis instead of making wild accusations without reading any of the 15 AfD discussions.

I don't mean this as a provocation, but you should read WP:CIVIL as it is the only thing I request on my talk page and, although I'm guessing you were either suffering from wikistress or genuinely thought I was abusing the AfD process, I think your post is in many ways quite uncivil. -- Carbon Rodney 22:55, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Putting two articles up for deletion which were created 3 and 5 minutes ago is an abuse of the AfD process. If necessary, I can request to see the history of the other 15 articles you put up for deletion, and determine whether they were also put up for deletion right after they were created too. If you will state that all those articles you nominated went through AfD and were voted to be deleted, so therefore they should have been deleted, I will counter that Wikipedia AfD logs are full of articles which were deleted for no good reason, in fact, User:TonyTheTiger  made good article class out of 5 previously deleted articles, a journalist recently had an article on a prestigious journal speedy deleted, and the 2 millionth article on Wikipedia was deleted. All really bad deletion decisions. There are many more.
 * Do you think it is civil to put an article up for deletion that the editor just created 3 or 5 minutes ago? Did you recieve such treatment when you created Science_Realm or Exils? Maybe your attitude toward deleting other editors contriubtions would be different if you had recieved the same treatment. Ikip (talk) 00:45, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * My apologies for my comments. I was wrong. I am sorry. I refactored out most of my comments on the AfD. You apppear to be a very active editor, who has made a lot of good edits and contributions to this project. Ikip (talk) 14:22, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

thanks a lot


Ikip (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, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Talkback
Wuhwuzdat (talk) 19:12, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Croatia
There is no point in speaking about my bad english. Nobody has writen section History and so ..... Tell me statements which are problem and I will explain on your talk page so that you can edit mistakes. I am on wiki today until 18:15 and sunday from 07:00 --Rjecina (talk) 16:50, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Croatian ruling dunasty has become extinct in 1091.
 * Wife of second to last Croatian king (called Zvonimir) has been sister of Ladislaus I of Hungary and she has called brother to take Croatian crown (last king is not important because he has been priest).
 * Ladislaus I of Hungary has been crowned and accepted in nothern Croatia, but not in southern (Litoral Croatia). Nobles of southern have elected in 1093 Petar Svačić for Croatian king. Petar Svačić will be killed by Hungarians in 1097, but Croatian nobles will refuse to surrender and they will continue war until 1102. In 1102 Croatian nobles and Coloman of Hungary will make agreement (often referred to as the Pacta conventa) about personal union (2 kingdoms = 1 King).
 * When succession has been put in question Kingdom of Croatia and Kingdom of Hungary have elected different kings after which there has been war. In 1290 Hungarian nobles have elected Andrew III from bastard line for new king. Pope has supported Charles Martel grand child of Hungarian king Stephen V (daughter line) and Kingdom of Croatia has elected Charles Martel.
 * In 1387 Hungarian House of Anjou has become extinct. Hungarian nobles have accepted inheritance through women line (daughter of dead king) and elected Sigismund. Croatian nobles have refused inheritance through women line and elected Ladislas of Naples (he was proclaimed king in 1388, but crowned only in 1403) which has been closest living relative through of dead king if we do not look women line
 * This has helped ?--Rjecina (talk) 15:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for February 2009
SoxBot II (talk) 03:11, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Rjecina
Hi, I am having a report on User:Rjecina, because he is accusing me and other editors of being everything evil (disruptive, SPA, vandal). It has to do with his natioanalistic POV and altering history of Croatia and neighbouring countries on Wikipedia. As you have also come accross him, I thought that you might be interested. Please, if you would like to leave a comment, you can find a link to the report on my talkpage. Thanks--Bizso (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * it's not between us two. it's to do with more people. The reason I contacted you is to get more people to discuss this issue on the board because I saw topics that were there for more than half a year and nobody cares about them. This is a quite complex case, not just 4 Revert edits, but a lot more. I hope that people at least bother reading through all the text (just one of my concerns)--Bizso (talk) 05:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC) Also, Rjecina has an ongoing thread on me so if you want to you could leave a comment there, too. There's a link to those on my talk page as well. All I want to avoid is that this initiation die off in 1 or 2 days due to lack of discussion.--Bizso (talk) 06:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVI (February 2009)
The February 2009 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) 21:40, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 13 March! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:19, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Ethnobotany WikiProject
I recently drafted a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Wikiproject_Ethnobotany. proposal for an Ethnobotany WikiProject] ... check out the project proposal for more details. I thought you might be interested due to your interest in gardening.

Cheers! Jrtayloriv (talk) 06:26, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. We will be selecting coordinators from a pool of eighteen to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on Saturday, 28 March! Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:23, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Webaroo Technology (India) Private Limited
A tag has been placed on Webaroo Technology (India) Private Limited, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of Webaroo Technology (India) Private Limited and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 22:52, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Webaroo (software)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Webaroo (software), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Software with no assertion of notability.

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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, 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.  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 00:03, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVII (March 2009)
The March 2009 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) 02:07, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for March 2009
SoxBot II (talk) 02:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Conjurer (film)
A tag has been placed on Conjurer (film) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 23:41, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Cool!
Excellent! Thanks! :) --  edi  (talk)  03:15, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for April 2009
SoxBot (talk) 10:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Reply
Roger that. The edit seemed quite dubious at first glance (wasn't making any points for or against material in the article), so I assumed it was trolling/commentary. I do try to be careful with Talk Pages, of course. =) DP 76764  (Talk) 17:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009)
The April 2009 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) 22:36, 5 May 2009 (UTC)