User talk:Davejohnsan/Archive 2

Article :2PlayMedia
I have forgotten: User:2PlayMedia. Sorry! --2PlayMedia (talk) 23:31, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries, it was a forgiveable error. Out of sight, out of mind. --Davejohnsan (talk) 00:12, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Infobox football biography
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Infobox football biography. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 09:24, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hart of Dixie
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hart of Dixie. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 10:17, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

List of Family Guy episodes
Hey I just wanted to say that I think you did a good job with transcluding the Family Guy pages, but it won't last. Many have tried it, myself included, but there are a couple of editors on who control the page and have a massive case of WP:OWNERSHIP who steadfastly refuse to have the page any other way than their own. You'll see. Give it a few days or a week and you'll be reverted. If you want to keep your changes, you'll definitely have to fight for it. But I'll back you up if there's any discussion. SchrutedIt08 (talk) 23:31, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey, thank you for the heads up. If there any problems, I'm sure there's a noticeboard that will be able to settle any potential problems that arise, but let's hope there won't be any. If there are, it's nice to know ahead of the time that I'll have some backup. I can't believe anyone would have any problems with transclusions, though. --Davejohnsan (talk) 00:13, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Well I'm not sure how much there is to catch you up on. You can see the whole discussion on the talk page but basically the editor GageSkidmore genuinely believes that he owns the List of Family Guy episodes page and will not have it any other way other than his way. Another editor and I have tried to do what you've done (I think about a year ago) but we were both shouted down and overruled. Eventually I just gave up because it became obvious that nothing was going to come of a discussion. But like I said, I'll back you up if you want to restart the discussion and with more editors on our side we might be able to get a majority vote or something. I warned you. Some things on this site never change. SchrutedIt08 (talk) 03:47, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see it now. Gage told me about this discussion (in a slightly defensive tone), but I honestly couldn't find it anywhere--I guess I wasn't paying enough attention since it was right there in plain sight--so I left a message on his talk page. Let's hope it leads somewhere; I doubt a new discussion on this will hurt anything. --Davejohnsan (talk) 04:00, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 November 14
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 November 14. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 11:18, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Heterarchy
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Heterarchy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 12:17, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 13:16, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Glad to hear that! :) --Davejohnsan (talk) 22:46, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

There is no Demi naming edit war
There's no edit warring going on. I made a revision, Tenebrae reverted it. I disputed the revision on the talk page, and explicitly stated I would not engage in an edit war. That's not an edit war. Protection shouldn't be preemptive. Mind pulling back the protection request? --The Cunctator (talk) 23:41, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The page has already been protected; there's nothing I can do about it now. Good luck resolving whatever content dispute was happening. --Davejohnsan (talk) 00:29, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Law & Order themes
I have added references to the Law & Order article, so feel free to verify them. Please do not simply remove content without verifying it first. I trust you will revert your edits and add the same references to SVU and CI so I don't have to. Otherwise I'll do it later.

Whether the song sounds the same is irrelevant. The fact is that it is used for some UK broadcasts, and thus is relevant to the article. Avengah (talk) 04:12, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * "Please do not simply remove content without verifying it first." How am I supposed to verify something that doesn't have a source? When someone adds in content, the burden of proof to provide a source for it—if it needed—lies on him or her, not on anyone else. And someone may need to correct me on this, but I'm pretty sure YouTube videos don't count as a reliable source, especially ones published by a fan or critic. If you can find a reliable source for this alternative theme song, then I'll have no objections to its being mentioned on the articles pages, as someone else can be the judge of whether or not it's worth of being included; at this point, I still think there is enough merit to challenge or remove it. --Davejohnsan (talk) 14:29, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I've found a couple of other sources. Let's see:, and an email from Channel Five which is on a forum. I know this is not a reliable source, but the link is here anyway for your perusal: . Do you think I should add any or all of these? There isn't much more I could find with Google, so this is the best I can do at the moment. Avengah (talk) 19:37, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Again, I don't think any of those count as qualified sources, nor do I think at this point that the alternative theme song is even worth being mentioned at this point. However, I'd like to seek a second opinion on this if you don't mind. --Davejohnsan (talk) 02:14, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * If we could compare the UK version of SVU to the American version, there is no doubt there would be differences. But this is the Opening Credits we are talking about. Not even 50 seconds of an episode ~ simply one would think is not needed. I agree with that one. YouTube isn't a reliable source in this case, as anyone can make a video, that is completely false. But barring that, even if it is the theme, which I don't doubt it is, it simply wouldn't be worth mentioning. Also, I personally am a AllThingsLawAndOrder fan, but if there are no media outlet sources pointing to this theme ~ then it should remain out of the article, until such source is found. -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 02:46, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, there is a source I have thought of. You know the "Demand 5" service that Channel 5 provide? It allows you to watch episodes online. I could link to that page. It will legally show the full episode, including the alternate credits. It might be region-restricted or it might not, but at least it is a reputable source - it's Channel 5 themselves. Avengah (talk) 12:32, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, here it is. Good enough? Avengah (talk) 12:33, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I live in Australia, by the way :) but unfortunately, that isn't a reliable media source. When I say media source, I stress the word, Media - that being newspapers; news etc. not companies website or the channels website etc. -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 12:35, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't get it; why is this? The channel shows episodes of Law & Order and the spin-offs, as do its sister channels 5* and 5USA, and 5USA+1. They have a website where you can watch some of their shows on-demand. Why is this not acceptable? I don't get it. How can it possibly be unreliable, when it is the actual channel themselves? Avengah (talk) 12:49, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you have a source that isn't region-restricted by any chance? --Davejohnsan (talk) 00:34, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm trying to get one. I've sent an email to Channel 5, asking them for a source that would be acceptable by Wikipedia's standards. Hopefully they'll reply in the next working day or two. Avengah (talk) 16:39, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Portal
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Portal. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 08:15, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of life
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of life. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 02:16, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ram Dass
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ram Dass. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 21:15, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Eric Illsley
Hello, the source for describing Eric Illsley as a fraudster can be found two sentences later: "When he pleaded guilty to three counts of false accounting on 11 January 2011, he became the first sitting Member of Parliament to be convicted of a criminal offence in the scandal".

As there is clearly a proper source for the phrase, I have undone your revision. 81.178.182.102 (talk) 18:37, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * My apologies for not noticing that before I reverted your edit. I will strike through the erroneous warning I issued on your talk page, but you have the option to remove it entirely if that's what you prefer. Thank you for the assumption of good faith! --Davejohnsan (talk) 18:55, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Conviction
Hi Dave, just a question - did you ever watch Conviction (2006 TV series)? The show with Alex Cabot?

I'm totally lost to which bureau the show's set in... Is it the Homicide Bureau (of the DAs office)? thanks, -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 00:28, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No, sorry, but the Homicide Bureau sounds very plausible judging by the episode descriptions. If you have a Netflix account, you can watch one of the episodes instantly to confirm, though. --Davejohnsan (talk) 00:35, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep it's Homicide! :) I've put the peices together of a puzzle: Tracey Kibre is Homicide Bureau Chief from 2005-2006, Alex replaces her in 2006; then Christine Danielson replaces her in 2007 (SVU S9:Snitch; Danielson is A. US attorney in S12) - I love how it's all connected! :P Thanks, -- MST  ☆  R   (Merry Christmas!) 08:37, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 10:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Zebras (Law & Order: Special Victims Unit) passes GA review
Very nice little article. Well done!

Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 23:12, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much, but I really only deserve credit for nominating it. Most of the credit should go to the creator of the article, who wrote most of it. By the way, I'm very impressed by the work you did before you started the review. --Davejohnsan (talk) 00:13, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Excellent job Dave! 'Bout to reply to your post on my talk. -- MST  ☆  R   (Merry Christmas!) 01:53, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Zebra
Cool, thanks Dave! Happy to see it made GA! —  Hun ter   Ka  hn  02:54, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Zack Nichols page
I noticed you put a "primary sources" tag on the page for Zack Nichols. I'm wondering your reasons, since primary sources are to be avoided when associated with living persons that make statements - their accounts may not be accurate and neutral. (Tommy Wiseau is a good example; he's always changing his statements about the production of The Room.) However, Zack Nichols is a fictional character and the information on that page is from the television show on which he's featured. How is that a primary source and not considered reliable or neutral?Bobbyandbeans (talk) 22:15, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I think I meant to use the InUniverse tag, but we can debate which tag is more appropriate later. The issue with the article is that almost all of its sources are episodes from CI, which are considered primary sources, and as such limits the article to an in-universe perspective. Take a look at sources for Adrian Monk as an ideal example of an article about a fictional character: It uses primary sources and secondary sources to give the article a more healthy balance of an in-universe and a real-world perspective. While I'm not saying the the Zack Nichols article needs to be improved to meet the standards of a good article, it should, at the very least, have a few external sources so that it meets the standards of WP:MOSFICT. I hope this clarifies the basis of my decision to tag the article. --Davejohnsan (talk) 23:50, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Law and Order character
While I can understand the edit, it really feels like you are trying to end run the Infobox character‎‎ discussion. And that is a mild description.

And I'll add something to my comments there: While I can see WG/TFs and WPs creating there own templates, using a pass through to by pass overlap because there is a dislike for the lay out isn't even close to the same thing.

- J Greb (talk) 05:09, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * So the Law & Order task force can't opt to keep the "Last appearance" field? I'm just curious to know, because even though I understand why it was removed, I honestly don't see how the concerns that led to its removal apply the L&O franchise. If the CSI character infobox template still has it, why can't we? o.O --Davejohnsan (talk) 05:36, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * There are two valid options that I can see - and applying one of them at this point essentially reads as throwing in the towel and lessening your points at Template talk:Infobox character. You've made it fairly clear that you are arguing from the stand point of a single taskforce rather than about the general principle.
 * Rework and replace the template markup from scratch using Infobox instead of Infobox character. This would allow for the clearing out of the 4 generics and possibly give the taskforce later flexibility.
 * If the "last" field is going to stay out, offer up a compromise that move lbl/data1 to where "last" currently is. That makes the field an "opt in" to use.
 * - J Greb (talk) 15:17, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:King of the Hill (soundtrack)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:King of the Hill (soundtrack). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 23:15, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Richard von Krafft-Ebing
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Richard von Krafft-Ebing. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 12:15, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
... for removing silly comments from my userspace, Dave. I appreciate it. Have a nice weekend. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 17:42, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. You have a nice weekend, too. --Davejohnsan (talk) 20:27, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Season 14
Should we start a S14 section at List of Law & Order: Special Victims Unit episodes? Even if the show weren't to proceed to a S14 -touchwood they do- we have information to start with - Hargitay and ICE-T already locked in... -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 04:37, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I think it's way too soon to start a season 14 section, but the renewal is definitely worth mentioning. Don't let me stop you, though. :P --Davejohnsan (talk) 04:40, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay! I'll see what I can do... :P BTW can you answer my question to sections above? Thank you! -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 04:43, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Sorry about that; "real life" has been eating up most of my time. --Davejohnsan (talk) 04:48, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space
Hey there Davejohnsan, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Davejohnsan/sandbox.


 * See a log of files removed today here.
 * Shut off the bot here.
 * Report errors here.
 * If you have any questions, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:03, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Career History
Hey!

Be honest, what do you think about this? -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 05:40, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It's neat, but I think it's too comprehensive for the list of characters page. In my opinion, the page really should only give a general view of each character, with a link to its main article if it has one for more information. On top of that, there is a huge inconsistency: Not every character has this timeline. Or at least not every ADA has one. --Davejohnsan (talk) 17:18, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I know, I know. I've only started with ADAs, only because ADAs are my favourite occupation in the franchise. The dates are more clear with them, than that of characters like Stabler or even Benson. One season they say he's been a cop since '92 - a few seasons later it's '89. I'm still not happy that pictures of the characters can't be added - if they were allowed, I'd stick 'em in the occupation template, because there's heaps of room.
 * I'm always trying new ideas for that article..
 * On a seperate note. Novak and Cabot are my favourite ADAs - but my favourite EADA is obviously Sonya Paxton. Is it possible in me creating an article? I mean I have more information... and I have seen characters that are on a recurring bases have their own article, Liz Donnelly, and Barry Moredock are just two to name.. -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 03:02, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Not that you really need my OK to do it, but I think you should find some real-world context on Sonya Paxton before you create an article on her. Are there any articles that explain her departure in season 11 and/or return in season 12? or maybe even why she was was killed in 12x17? --Davejohnsan (talk) 04:47, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I think I read somewhere that she couldn't do too many appearances because NYC is a long trip from Chicago.. I'll see what I can find. Thanks, and it's good to ask someone who's familiar with the subject, you know :) -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 04:50, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Possible ref for a Reception section, if you want to use the only line that mentions Sonya Paxton. Look through here, too. --Davejohnsan (talk) 04:58, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Check out my sandbox and tell me what you think. --Davejohnsan (talk) 02:22, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Can I help you edit it? :) -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 05:06, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * What do you think about this? Feel free to edit ~ and or make corrections + add content if you wish, thanks :) -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 11:47, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Perfect! I'd say Sonya Paxton is now ready to have her own article. --Davejohnsan (talk) 14:30, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * That's great to know - just saw the article now :) -- MST  ☆  R   (Chat Me!) 04:36, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Sonya Paxton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ADA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Davejohnsan (talk) 14:17, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Joseph Smith
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Joseph Smith. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 01:15, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help
After some months, I "finally" visited my own userpage. Thanks for your kind words and basic information about how to contribute. Will try to do more on Wikipedia, as I'm beginning to understand what this is all about.Jonny2BeGood (talk) 22:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I'm sure you'll get the hang of it soon. Davejohnsan (talk) 00:25, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
The information I placed on Olivia Benson's wikipedia was accurate. She has been cited as having tension with both attorneys: Neal Baer hinted at her relationship with the first ADA, and the other, Casey, was described to have tension by the actress who plays her, Diane Neal, on her twitter.
 * Sorry, but I'm not going to undo my edit. The two sources in that particular section only address the sexual tension between Cabot and Benson, not Novak and Benson (and to my knowledge, the tension between the latter pair isn't sexual; it's just plain old tension from difference of opinion). The main problem with your edit was that you were replacing information backed up by those sources with information that wasn't. If you want to write about the tension between Novak and Benson, start a new paragraph (preferably with a source to avoid the possibility of including original research). Davejohnsan (talk) 00:23, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Article Feedback Tool/Version 5
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Article Feedback Tool/Version 5. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 14:15, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

GAN Scorched Earth (Law & Order: Special Victims Unit)
Hi,

I have started a review of your nomination at Talk:Scorched Earth (Law & Order: Special Victims Unit)/GA1 and made some comments there. Please contact me if I can be of any help. Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 22:27, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. How much time will I have to address the concerns? Never mind; the answer was right in front my face. I'll do my best to address them as soon as possible. Davejohnsan (talk) 22:33, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about the time. It's not set in stone, as long as there are signs that you are working on it! MathewTownsend (talk) 22:44, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Should I place my questions about your concerns here or on your talk page? Davejohnsan (talk) 23:41, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ocean County Sheriff's Department
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ocean County Sheriff's Department. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 03:15, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Dovid Katz
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Dovid Katz. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:15, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Message
NCISfan2  (talk)  15:40, 8 February 2012 (UTC) nvm. NCISfan2  (talk)  17:29, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2008 Mumbai attacks
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2008 Mumbai attacks. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 04:15, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 17:15, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Thor Heyerdahl
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Thor Heyerdahl. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 05:15, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 18:15, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Intelligent design
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Intelligent design. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 07:15, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Structuration
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Structuration. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 20:15, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 09:17, 29 March 2012 (UTC)