User talk:Davidwr/Archives/Archive 6

Thanks Jan09
Hi. Thanks for your recommendation about linking to images on my userpage. Actually, I've been using userboxes for that, and I've even created some new ones. Thanks. Grundle2600 (talk) 13:57, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  16:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Houston colleges
We had already discussed it in the other college page, which is why I made it. I request that it is put back. XxTrillvillexX9 (talk) 23:05, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Arbitrary section: Line of succession to the British throne
I tried to make a statistical argument that shows that the Victoria descendant count is "about" correct, but there are probably 2000 names missing on the lines more remote than Victoria. Including some famous ones.

I could barely edit the article, now. I can't imagine with thousands of more entries. Reconsider, the anti-split people seemed not to present an argument. If not, just put the names back (without reverting to early version). That way the rest of the work is not lost.Pacomartin (talk) 01:29, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * That's what editing sections is for. The only place editing will be difficult is in at the high levels of long sections, such as "Line of succession" or "Descendants of George II (1683–1760)" in the original list.  You can edit the top of the article, "section 0," easily by changing your user preferences to turn that feature on.  If you don't have that turned on, or you don't allow JavaScript, you can edit it by editing http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Line_of_succession_to_the_British_throne&action=edit&section=0.  By the way, I feel your pain.  One of my early wiki projects was to split up List of missing journals which at the time was 400K+ and crashed some browsers in edit mode.  That was a chore, but at least I was the only one involved, so consensus wasn't an issue.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  01:40, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * By the way, one of the strengths of Wikipedia is also a weakness in this case: It runs by consensus.  Unless there's a clear, unambiguous policy issue, technical breakage, or extreme badness, like 1000 editors supporting removing Ronald Reagan as non-notable, consensus overrides correctness.  In this case, the pre-split non-reliability issues have been addressed by language in the article header, and the purely technical issues can be dealt with for the most part by editing sections.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  01:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Only Thing that might Change
Only thing I might change, not the size of it because I fixed it to the size it should be because 390 was too big is the actual picture that I took of the school. To me, that picture seems to dark. If it's nice and sunny tomorrow, I'll take a better picture that I'll put up, or make it the offical picture that will stay on there, so the school can be seen better. If you notice with the summary I left on the article history, I took out that wording "students respond well" also because really didn't get to the point about the school, after reading it. Seemed like it was going off topic. You probably noticed after your one edit and mentioned that it needed citations etc. that I changed the wording, or replaced what was up there. Thought then that the wording needed to go back to what it orignially said after fixing that saw in edit before that where you marked where citations should go, put in citations, or used that as an example to go from. Hopefully everything I'm saying makes since on where the article is at now. That's why I feel the article doesn't need to change anymore. If I think anything else needs to be added, which I doubt there will, then I'll let you know about it and put in that tag, but the article pretty much gets to the point about the school and what's on the site, which is basically what I wanted for the article. Thanks for helping me get the article to where it needed to be. I worked with you and you worked with me and as a team, we got the article to where it needed to be at and I want to thank you. If you see anything else that should be added, then let me know. I know a little bit about the history, but not enough to put a history section about the school. If I can find any history on the school itself, then I'll add it, but lets just say it won't be any time in the near future. I've tried to find some history about it over the internet and couldn't find anything. It use to be the old elementary school, or that building in the picture use to be the old elementary school for a small town outside of Tehachapi, California called Monolith, California. I've had no luck, that's why there's no history about that up there. Want some reference to back that up.--JoeCool950 (talk) 06:57, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * By the way, if Monolith has a local government, it qualifies for a stub article. Typically small towns have their name, population, county, a link to an official web site if any, a link to official US census bureau information to serve as a reliable source, a list of what school district or districts serve the town, and not much else if there isn't anything notable.  If they have notable festivals like Pioneer Days or what-not, those can be in a short list, as can any businesses or historical events or activities, like gold mining.  All in all, they rarely rate more than a paragraph.  They may also get a standard city infobox and if there county uses a template, the county template.  Rural counties typically don't have county templates but some do.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  16:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, Monolith doesn't qualifiy for a stub article, because Monolith use to exist, but now is part of Tehachapi.--JoeCool950 (talk) 07:55, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I do know that Monolith doesn't have a local government. The local government is in Tehachapi.   I'll leave a reference here for you to see if you think it qualifies for a stub to at least explain about what Monolith is.  There's not much left of Monolith except for Monroe, which is ran by the Tehachapi School district, the cement plant, and there's a mobile home park, but no government or local government out there.  Here's the reference though.  Let me know what you think on my talk page.  Let me know if you think it qualifies though for a stub.  We'll have to say there's not much left out there.--JoeCool950 (talk) 08:09, 6 January 2009 (UTC) Note: Changed from to [] form since talk pages don't have reference sections. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  16:52, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * That reference is a Wikipedia URL, I think you meant to put something else. What reference do you want me to check?
 * Also, on talk pages, use either which looks like this:, or Web Page Title Goes Here which looks like this: Web Page Title Goes Here.  The format only works on pages with or  , both of which are usually found only in References or similar sections of articles.  Having several different ways of doing references and knowing which ones to use where takes some getting used to. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  16:52, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * If you type in your search box Monolith, California, when on the internet, you can see what I'm talking about and need to know if it would consider having a stub artile.  Although, let me try putting it on my sandbox, and you can check it out there.  The [] didn't work.  Let me know though, if I can get it to work on my sandbox.  Thanks.--JoeCool950 (talk) 18:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I fixed the [] up so it works. The key is you only use "nowiki" when you want things to be displayed literally, you leave them off when you want them to function as markup code.  Also, based on the reference provided, it's not notable and no article should be written.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  20:13, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

New straw poll
You are a user who responded to Use of logos on sports team pages. As someone interested in the discussion a new straw poll has been laid out to see where we currently stand with regards to building a consensus. For the sake of clarity, please indicate your support or opposition (or neutrality) to each section, but leave discussion to the end of each section. — BQZip01 — talk 23:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the comment... I was just expirementing... rajalberini (talk) 00:53, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

AfC news
Dear AfC participant, If you no longer wish to receive messages from WikiProject Articles for creation, please remove your name from this list. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Msgj (talk • contribs) 14:11, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Msgj and Tnxman307 are organising the AfC challenge! It's a little competition to help improve some of the articles created through AfC and we are hoping that everyone will get involved. For level 1, you just need to bring a stub up to Start-class. Level 2 is improving a Start-class article to C-class. And so on. To get involved or for more information please see the competition page.
 * 2) Those of you who haven't reviewed an article recently might not have noticed the new process that was implemented this year. Reviewing articles is now more enjoyable than ever :) You might like to give it a try. All articles waiting for review are in Category:Pending Afc requests. (Please read the updated instructions.)
 * 3) Please consider adding AFC status to your userpage to keep track of the number of articles waiting for review. At the time of writing we are officially backlogged, so help is needed!
 * 4) There is currently a proposal to bring the Images for upload process under the umbrella of WikiProject Articles for creation. The rationale is that both processes are designed to allow unregistered users to take part more fully in Wikipedia, and partipants in each process can probably help each other.

Merry Christmas, if that's okay


Dravecky (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to their talk page with a friendly message. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dravecky (talk • contribs) 17:31, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Sakanaction
The tour has not happened just yet. It is taking place next year. When it does, I will post more about the tour. I have the tour schedule but I do not think that is necessary to put up. So the tour is still able to talked about as a future event. It will occur in a few months time. Torothetiger (talk) 21:09, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MFD User:DJ_WikiBob/Sandbox_2
nein, go ahead —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ironholds (talk • contribs) 19:02, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

The Buddha and His Dhamma
While going through edit history of the article The Buddha and His Dhamma, I found that you have removed the table of contents. I didn't understand the rationale behind this. Will you please explain? Ganesh Dhamodkar (Talk) 05:37, 12 January 2009 (UTC)


 * It's rare to put tables of contents of books in articles about them. It's also a very likely copyright violation.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  16:21, 12 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for spending your time to explain. Ganesh Dhamodkar  (Talk) 02:29, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

What in the world?
What in the world is this?:

Committed identity: b9aff890ed99c8ba000d13fc7f96c260c260fdae is a SHA-1 commitment to this user's real-life identity.

I keep seeing this on users wikipages, but I try to read the explanation and it makes no sense whatsoever. travb (talk) 03:29, 13 January 2009 (UTC)


 * If I ever get locked out of my account, I can "reclaim" it by emailing the "original" information to an administrator. He will then run it through SHA-1 and if the result matches what's on my user page, and if the string were not "easy to guess" and not so short as to be guessed by a brute force mathematical attack, then the account will be unlocked and I'll get the newly-reset password.
 * This is useful if you share your computer with family members who might accidentally or deliberately reset your password, for example. These days, SHA-1 and MD5 should not be used, use SHA-512 instead.  I really should go back and change mine. Read Template:User committed identity for more information. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  03:42, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Just for the record
Heh, that was a good one! Might be an indication that you're addicted when you start making wiki-related yo mama jokes. :) –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  03:39, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the barnstar. [[Image:718smiley.svg|20px]] I note, however, that it was originally 's idea. :) –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  04:01, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Where was it his idea? I may have to make it a joint award. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  04:03, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, actually, it was Wehwalt's idea. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  04:16, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Looks like someone else already honored him.  Oh well, now he's got 1.999... barnstars.  Or he would if I didn't change mine to an endorsement of his existing one. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  04:37, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

RfA question
I answered your humorous question at my RfA, though I doubt it'll help you decide. :)


 * CRGreathouse** (t | c) 05:13, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * That depends, it is a European or African commissariat?

RFA standards
Thanks for linking me. Bearian (talk) 23:21, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Cookie!


Maddie! has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Maddie  (formerly Ashbey)  00:24, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Burp. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  02:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Blocked user
''I left a message. If he requests unblocking and seems sincere and demonstrates he knows the rules and intends to follow them, please consider unblocking him. I don't know this guy but I do know sometimes people at his stage in life jump into a project not realizing it's not a playground, but once they do realize it's an active worksite and that their input is valued, they take it seriously. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  03:02, 16 January 2009 (UTC)''


 * Absolutely. There's a conditional/probationary unblock path to follow, where the user selects an article to improve and works on it on there userpage to show they are redeemable. Blocks are only to protect the project, and he seemed to be making unconstructive edits at a high rate. If he shows he can constructively edit, the he neds an unblock. Cheers, and thanks for the note. Dloh  cierekim  03:08, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


 * At one time, "second chance" was part of a guideline or essay, but it was meant for users who had been blocked for at least a year. I can't seem to find it now. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  03:19, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Comment needed
Your view at Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion was not clear:


 * I am interested in gauging your opinion on changing the name from Articles for Deletion to Articles for Discussion

Thank you. travb (talk) 17:41, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * RE: Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion
 * Herding cats
 * I give up. travb (talk) 23:25, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't feel bad, more than half of the ideas I've thrown out in the past few months went nowhere. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  23:49, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/Kanonkas
Thank you David for voting in my successfully closed RfA! I'm glad that you trust me. Ping me if you need anything! Best regards, -- Kanonkas :  Talk 20:08, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Your candidacy was a no-brainer. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  22:53, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello!
he he he he... -- Mix well ! Talk 01:03, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thank you. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  04:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: 78.150.158.199
Hi

Aye, I'm fairly sure it's the same sock - its current targets are mostly related to Leon Jackson, which is how I spotted the latest IP sock, but it still maintains an interest in Michelle McManus and other Scottish topics (its ideal target is Scotland, but that avenue of pleasure has been semi-protected).

It's IP changes periodically; it's editing under 92.25.164.51 now.

Cheers, This flag once was red propagandadeeds 22:08, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I wish there was a way to watchlist Special:Contributions/whatever. But that would be wikistalking :) .  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  22:24, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


 * ;-) Fortunately the sock has a fairly limited range of current favourite articles - they change, but I add their other articles to my watchlist so I generally see new IP socks pop-up. There are a couple of admins who are good at spotting the registered socks, too, which is good because I'm uncomfortable labelling registered editors as SSPs - the IP socks all have the same ISP so I can sanity check myself quite easily.
 * Cheers, This flag once was red propagandadeeds 22:30, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

My (failed) RfA
Dear David, thank you very much for participating and for asking me silly questions to which I failed to respond. Itsmejudith (talk) 12:04, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Too Young
She's still too young to create an account she's 6. Mayme08 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 23:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC).


 * I don't think Wikipedia has an age limit to have an account. However, most children that age are much too young to edit without help, whether they are registered or not.  If you want to use your account to make edits on her behalf, that's okay, as long as you make sure all of those edits are within the rules and you take full responsibility for them.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  01:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes Sir Mayme08 /(talk)/ —Preceding undated comment was added at 01:45, 20 January 2009 (UTC).

RE: Removal vs. strike
Duly noted. I'll let that editor decide on his course of action, then. Glass  Cobra  03:12, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

EFD
Haha, I couldn't put anything else, as it wouldn't be as amusing. Blue Wagon (talk) 22:30, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

RfA thankspam
Denbot (talk) 22:41, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Plagiarism finder
Heh, thanks. [http://www.dustball.com/cs/plagiarism.checker/? Here] is an excellent tool for catching plagiarism. Doesn't catch everything, but it does a very good job. // roux   03:06, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

WT:EFD followup
David, I've responded to your threads on the EFD talk page, and started another that you may be interested in. Glass  Cobra  02:32, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Lastbroken
...alright, I'll do it: SPI request opened! Cheers, This flag once was red propagandadeeds 17:13, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I was wondering how many days hours it would be before someone asked for a check. I suspect you are right but I hope it's just a coincidence.  I figure if he is a sock, after a few days it will be blindingly obvious.  I have a deep reservoir of good faith.  If this guy does turn out to be a sock, rather than speedying Just For You (Michelle McManus song) I'd prefer to do like Articles for deletion/Michelle McManus discography, where I'm asking the article be redirected and protected to prevent "re-creation" by anyone, including future sockpuppets.  If it's not a sockpuppet, I'll probably redirect anyways after a suitable discussion period, but without the protection and voice of authority that AFD brings.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  17:26, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I suspect I have a lot less good faith, but I'm mindful of that and trying to improve - hence I'm trying to avoid being quite so confrontational (whereas recently I would have simply reverted all edits from an SSP, I'm now ignoring all but the most silly and letting SPI work its magic).
 * The AfD approach sounds good.
 * Cheers, This flag once was red propagandadeeds 17:31, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Conversion from acres to km2
You are right. I confused the figure 244,742 with 244.742 because in Italy we usually separate decimals with the comma and not the dot, though lately the dot is also being used. Thank you for your answer, --Gabodon (talk) 22:13, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

blast your eyes!
And I was just off to bed! ;-) --Cameron Scott (talk) 00:28, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Note
Please be aware of Administrators'_noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement.  MBisanz  talk 02:16, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for bringing this to my attention. It was a result of not seeing the relevance and an unclearly-written injunction.  I've commented there.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  02:42, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Pantego Christian Academy
I started the article, but feel free to contribute to it. - also, please look at the talk page. Thank you :) WhisperToMe (talk) 02:35, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks nice. I added the athletics section.  I see you restored the Pantego article's text, with a reference.  I feel no shame in being wrong since it motivated you to improve the encyclopedia like this :).  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  03:06, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Jonathan Stark dab page
yes...i made the change before i realised Jonathan Stark (screenwriter) was a redirect to Jonathan Stark (actor). --emerson7 20:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
StarM 05:05, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

mail
you have mail.--- Balloonman  PoppaBalloon 18:01, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

RfC
do you think it is a good idea to post on village pump the name of the RfC? Ikip (talk) 07:22, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, but be sure to do it in a neutral manner, like "There is a request for comments concerning xyz, see link to RFC. your sig here." Under no circumstances suggest people should comment one way or the other - keep it neutral.
 * On the talk page of the RFC, say where you announced it. For policy RFCs, it should be on Village pump (policy).  Be sure to read WP:CANVASS first, anything it says overrides anything I just said. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  07:26, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

NOT Thankspam
Thanks for your response to my question on WP:VPM, I never thought of using that type of statistics on wikipedia, stupid of me now never to think of this, it could revolutionize the way I do research. Another user responded with: User:Knulclunk/Random which is a wealth of information. The editor did use Special:Random though. Ikip (talk) 03:21, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

RFA
Any plans for Requests_for_adminship/Davidwr? I'm doing my monthly cleanup of the RFA namespace and wanted to know if it needed deleting or should be left.  MBisanz  talk 21:41, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Please keep it in play. Things keep happening on- and off-wiki to push this off.  For the past month I've been "a week away from letting it go live."  I want as few distractions as possible during the first day or so, and that won't be in the next few days.  I'm hoping for early February.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  21:45, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Okey, sounds good.  MBisanz  talk 23:24, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Good grief... I might actually be retired before he goes live... and I'm talking about retired from my job, not Wikipedia!--- Balloonman  PoppaBalloon 23:32, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you retiring at the end of the month? Look on the bright side, I might actually be dead before you retire.  Can zombies run for administratorship? :) davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  23:34, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I would strongly support your RfA. Ikip (talk) 11:45, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Final version
As a contributor to the discussion regarding sports team logos, I am soliciting feedback as to the latest version of that guideline. Your support/opposition/feedback would be appreciated. — BQZip01 — talk 21:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Wow

 * Fantastic! I hope he takes up the challenge! Aaroncrick  (Tassie Talk ) 11:00, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Now you know, david, why we are so desperate to hurry you through RfA - because that's the kind of AGF and helpfulness we need in an admin :-)  So Why  11:11, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Assuming good faith doesn't require the bit. It's so easy even a caveman new Wikipedian can do it.  I forsee one of the downsides to having the bit seeing just how many people abuse the assumption of good faith.  I hope it doesn't ruin me. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  12:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Of course it does not require the bit. But seeing that we unfortunately have a number of admins who shoot first and ask questions later, I'd prefer more who are patient with newbies to balance them out. AGF does not mean you cannot punish those who abuse it - but if you don't assume it in the first place, you will hit some who don't deserve it. So don't worry about that, I am a huge assumer of good faith and I turned out to be a pretty okay admin (if I may say so). Btw, when did you plan on running again? ;-)  So Why  12:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * When? I haven't decided. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  12:51, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

User:Notsooldafterall
Aye, I'm pretty convinced I've slandered an innocent bystander. I'm happy to let the SPI request proceed as it'll clear the victim (at which point I've promised a grovelling apology). First time I've made a mistake re: Nimbley6; it's been educational for me.

Cheers, This flag once was red propagandadeeds 16:51, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Really, it should be up to him. I know he said "go ahead and check me" earlier, but the principal of "don't checkuser unless necessary" should govern unless he wishes otherwise.  I would apologize now, and if you turn out to be right, then you turn out to be right. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  16:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Cool. I've left a note on the SPI page noting that a probable Nimbley6 IP has just reverted Notsooldafterall, and that I don't believe Notsooldafterall is a sock. Off to apologise now... Cheers,  This flag once was red propagandadeeds 17:13, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

File:Crystal Clear app email.svg
You've got mail. – <font color="#E45E05">iride <font color="#C1118C">scent  17:01, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * What he said. ~ mazca  t 20:10, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

You're not an admin?
How can this be?? You are admin material! Would you like me to nominate you? <font face="copperplate gothic bold"> Simon <font color="OrangeRed">K <font color="DarkCyan">S <font color="ForestGreen">K 22:09, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Simon - please see Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship. Pedro : Chat  22:12, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, didn't see Balloon's thing over there. I have read it and I understand. Sorry for any inconvenience. <font face="copperplate gothic bold"> Simon <font color="OrangeRed">K <font color="DarkCyan">S <font color="ForestGreen">K 22:20, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

blenheim high school
actually, the accusations put in by the user "Bloons" is true DuttyYo (talk) 10:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia entries are not the place to record every bit of information about the subject of an article. The issues here are sourcing and encyclopedic content.  There are many true things about most schools that were never published in independent, third-party sources.  There are also many things about most schools that have been published but which are not considered encyclopedic.  See my comments at Talk:Blenheim_High_School. The bullet points address encyclopedic importance or in this case lack of it. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  11:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Jeremy Lusk
I was replying to the original IP poster, so no, I wasn't having a pop at you or anything. I didn't realise indentation denoted whom you were replying to! I always just indent in from the previous poster. You learn something new every day! Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:56, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Runaway Successes
Hi David, thanks for that lovely note. I suspect you could have become the 100th participant - but it looks like I'll be a few short of getting into the wp:100 (which is probably for the best, I don't think I've earned over 90% support. 80-85% was about the level I hoped for)...  Were <font color="FFA500">Spiel <font color="FFC0CB">Chequers  18:43, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You still might make it... 24 hours left and one of your noms hasn't voted yet...--- I'm Spartacus!  The artist formerly known as Balloonman 19:14, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh yes I was wondering about that;-) Also some of the opposes are still per Iridescent, but Iridescent struck that oppose almost four days ago!  Were <font color="FFA500">Spiel <font color="FFC0CB">Chequers  19:53, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I never !vote on my own candidates until the last day or they break 100 (unless it looks like the RfA is in serious danger of failing.) I'm not superstitious... but I don't want to jinx it ;-)  It started as a joke, where I forgot to ! vote and I think it was Keeper who accused me of waiting to get the 100th vote.--- I'm Spartacus!  The artist formerly known as Balloonman 20:15, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I waited until the final hour for my one and only RFA nom. He passed 66/0/1.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  20:45, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I missed voting on one of my candidates and voted on another 14 minutes after the scheduled close on another. Luckily, it wasn't closed until about an hour and a half after the scheduled close.--- I'm Spartacus!  The artist formerly known as Balloonman 04:47, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Nighthook
Was there a problem with the old one? Looks like it's gone at very short notice... which is a damnsight unfair as there's no way I can go online in the middle of the night with a faulty internet connection... thanks for assisting... :) --➨♀♂ Candlewicke STundefined 19:51, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The old hook was for two wikipages and there was a problem with Kevin McAleer. See here for the acceptance of the alternative hook for just Nighthawks and the text of the problems with the old one.  The new hook is currently in T:DYK/Q3 but it will eventually make it to the main page/T:DYK and from there to the DYN archives.davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  20:55, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * By the way, had nobody fixed it in time, it would've expired. Half a loaf is better than none.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  20:57, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

EDF
Hi David: Yeah, now I do! :) It wasn't til I saved my changes that I read the top.  (I'd followed a link from Misza's talk page.)  And by the time I tried to undo it, Misza I & II had already dropped by to vote.  But I've removed my additions now... Thanks! MeegsC | Talk 23:08, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Editors for Deletion
Yes, I know the humor point, but surely some comments for those that may not know what the account does is not unreasonable. Even if added with a straight face. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:09, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  23:12, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Jeremy Lusk DOD
If someone died 11:03PM PST, but they were in the "CENTRAL" time zone, then they died the next day (after midnight). The reports were made as the family lives in California, but the date of death as per Jeremy Lusk's own blog should be Feb. 10.

I could be wrong but the NY Times reported Feb. 10, and those that reported Feb. 9 gave the time of death as of 11:03 or 11:30 PST, which would be the next day in San Jose, Costa Rica. Ryoung 122 08:08, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Good point, let's continue this discussion on the article talk page. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  14:47, 12 February 2009 (UTC)