User talk:Frankie/Archive 1

Reverted edit
Your change to the page Help:Minor edit was determined to be unhelpful, and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. Thanks. --Slgr @ ndson (page - messages - contribs) 21:41, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks - Looking back, I really didn't think it through - patitomr (talk) 00:19, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to WP?
I've been on Wikipedia for 2.5 years now, how come your welcoming me? Adam mugliston Talk  07:37, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * So that's why you check the history section. My apologies - frankieMR (talk) 18:43, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Not a proble, I was just wondering. Adam mugliston  Talk  18:44, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Tb

 * There's no need to stuff both films in one article. They don't have to be the same size - frankieMR (talk) 00:03, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
Request re-evaluating your recommendation to undelete in light of the fact that all issues raised have been addressed. Mangopr (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC).
 * Hello. Are you referring to Rahul Bhandari (AfD)? - frankie (talk) 06:18, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

RE: List of prepaid mobile phone brands: struck excess !votes
I am new to this. Are we reasoning or voting? Will I be at a disadvantage if I do not raise an army of supporters? Tpiwowar (talk) 20:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * First of all, it's not a vote. The decision whether to delete the article is made by achieving consensus. Votes like keep or delete are used to indicate where do you stand in the matter, but the discussion is closed by an administrator who weighs what the consensus is. Knowing that, it is standard to !vote only once, and after that you continue to participate by just indenting your response, or you can put Comment at the beginning to make it clear. AfD is not meant to pile up people to turn a desicion, is about whether the article meets the policies and guidelines, in this case referring to WP:NOT in particular - frankie (talk) 22:30, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

McAndrews Estate
Obviously I'm a partisan and disagree with your opinion on the notability of the topic, but I do appreciate your thoughtful response to my request for clarification. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wespomeroy (talk • contribs) 19:39, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your words. I wish I could've rephrased my opinion on the subject itself other than just restating that I don't think it has enough coverage, but as you said we've come to the point where we simply disagree on whether the "quota" is met, so we would just be running around in circles. Ideally speaking, I think that consensus is what comes out by unifying such dissensions in light of the spirit of the project. See you around - frankie (talk) 19:52, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

On Changing Username
Hi Frankie, I don't speak much english and more or less understand, my actual user account is in the Spanish wikipedia, IrwinSantos, I want to have that name as my user account in the other wikis here too, a global account.--Aioros1990 (talk) 03:52, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hola Irwin. Si tú eres el poseedor de la cuenta en es:WP entonces no debería haber ningún problema para que logres unificar tu cuenta globalmente. En este punto se necesita que pongas un mensaje en tu página de discusión en es:WP que confirme que eres la misma persona. Fuera de eso, a mi parecer no hay ningún problema extra, así que una vez hecha la confirmación sólo te resta esperar a que un burócrata realize el cambio. Por favor, déjame saber si tienes alguna otra duda.
 * Hello Irwin. If you are the owner of the account at es:WP then you shouldn't have any problem unifying your account globally. At this point it is required that you place a message at your es:WP talk page that confirms that you are the same person. I don't think there is any other issue, so once the confirmation is made you just have to wait for a bureaucrat to make the change. Please let me know if you have any other doubt - frankie (talk) 04:09, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Bueno la confirmación es si confirmo en mi página de discusión en es:WP que esta también es mi cuenta, acabó de hacerlo, o es de otra forma, sobre lo del burócrata es un burócrata de aquí y cuanto tiempo más o menos puede demorar, disculpa por hablar en español pero asi me puedo expresar mejor, gracias.--Aioros1990 (talk) 04:40, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Ese mensaje es suficiente. Afortunadamente los burócratas en WP no son como a los que estamos acostumbrados en la vida real. Los cambios de nombre simples se realizan rápido normalmente (de 1 a 3 días a lo más), puesto que el nombre solicitado no existe, así que no requiere usurpación. Te recomendaría que te desconectes de esta cuenta (Aioros1990) hasta que se haya realizado el cambio para evitar posibles conflictos al transferir tus contribuciones, a menos que se te pida que proveas alguna información extra.
 * That message is enough. Luckily WP's bureaucrats are not like those we are used to in real life. Simple username changes are normally done quickly (about 1 to 3 days tops), given that the requested username doesn't exist, so usurpation is not required. I'd recommend that you log off from this account (Aioros1990) until the change has been made so to avoid possible conflicts while transferring your contributions, unless you are requested to provide some extra information - frankie (talk) 04:59, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
FYI. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:15, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for placing that message. I'll keep an eye up for the article; hopefully Adgrawl will address the issues - frankie (talk) 17:29, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

IRC cloak request
IRC cloak request - frankie (talk) 19:13, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Jamyang Tashi
A tag has been placed on Jamyang Tashi, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion  tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the article's talk page directly to give your reasons. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DASHBot (talk) 23:00, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Translation
I see that you were recently doing some sorting at Translators available. Would you be interested in helping me get a translation wikiproject going - maybe a reboot of WP:ECHO with enlarged goals (not just FAs), or maybe just a new wikiproject from scratch? I think it would be useful to get people interested in translation working together, to motivate more translations of good content from other wikis. (I think little contests and drives a la WP:WIKIFY could be good.) Thoughts? Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:30, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You know, I'd love to take part, only thing is that I'm not so skilled on the organizational side of things. That said, WP:ECHO looks good as a starting point. What do you think of a board to list articles? So members don't have to go find them at the other wikis. Also, looking at WP:WIKIFY there is a link to get a random "unwikied" article, which is surely prompting for a category to get it. Is there a category or some other way to query if an external article has no en:WP counterpart? - frankie (talk) 14:58, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Gorezone Magazine
Thanks for your deletion vote...the references you found were to the original Gorezone, published in the 80s when I edited the parent magazine Fangoria. The fact that these guys usurped the title was one of the reasons I was eager to see their lies booted out of the wiki.

I'd like to write an entry for the original Gorezone, but there's not enough in reliable sources to count for more than a tiny stub. Bustter (talk)
 * For what i could see the original Gorezone would qualify for an article, but given the time of publication it is most likely that online sources will be scarce. At this point, I guess the best thing to do would be to cover it at Fangoria (for what I could see, the only mention is that Fangoria Films used the label "Gore Zone" in 1996, but it doesn't talk about the magazine), and let it fork out in the event more content surfaces - frankie (talk) 15:39, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Electric power transmission
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Electric power transmission. 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) 11:08, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on User:Jwillbur/TemplateList
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on User:Jwillbur/TemplateList. 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) 01:39, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, tl is very nifty - frankie (talk) 02:37, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Leonard R. Brand article
Hi Frankie, I noticed your list input on the Leonard R. Brand article for deletion page. I am rather new to such deletion discussions and found the listing process interesting. I have looked over some of your dialogue on this your user talk page and am impressed with your evident experience and sound advice. I sure would appreciate your counsel on the Leonard R. Brand article. It has been an intense few days trying to improve the article and responding to the critical support offered by a fellow editor. Any advice you can offer would be appreciated. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 19:15, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi DonaldRichardSands. I haven't been following that discussion in particular, and I had just listed it the same way as I did for other discussions from that day's log. I've read both the article and the discussion now, but I'm afraid there not much advice that I can offer you, but I'll give you my general opinion. When it comes to inclusion of an article, it is required that the subject meets Wikipedia's standards of notability, whether it is in a general manner, or by means of some of the secondary guidelines, such as WP:PROF or WP:AUTHOR, which are the ones that have been argued about at the AfD. With a project such as Wikipedia, where the work is done by people of many different backgrounds and capabilities, the notability guidelines help to ensure that the encyclopedia actually represents society and culture in, well, an encyclopedic manner, as opposed to having heaps of indiscriminate information being poured over. I think this particular case is borderline, and any given editor may argue in perfectly good faith (as they have) for either inclusion or deletion. If there is one thing I would disagree is with the nominator's dismissal of Mr. Brand's influence within SDA academia. It is one thing that third-party sources are required to certify that the coverage does not come from the subject itself (which hints heavily of self-promotion), but it is another thing to consider invalid the reputation achieved simply because those who follow his work happen to be like-minded (which is actually the reason why they follow his work, and which would also be true for many other realms, not just the SDA church).
 * I hope you don't find this response too extensive, and please don't hesitate to ask if you have any doubts. If the article is kept, make sure to keep WP:V, WP:NPOV, and WP:NOR present as you work along, as they are meant to ensure that the project stays on its tracks. If the article is deleted, I hope that you still stick around to work on the area. I know it is very frustrating to see your hard work suddenly go to waste, but we could really always use a couple extra hands, and I bet there are many articles on the matter that could use your enthusiasm. There's always the possibility that circumstances may change in the case of Mr. Brand in a way that would allow for inclusion, as usual. Best regards - frankie (talk) 17:13, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Your efforts have not gone unnoticed

 * Thanks boss! - frankie (talk) 20:05, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Leonard R. Brand
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Leonard R. Brand. 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) 09:35, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

"Need help"
FYI, please see my comment here in a thread started by a pretend "newbi" ("VirtualInitiative") whom you made a completely reasonable attempt to assist based on assuming good faith in his posting "Need help" in "Wikipedia talk:Miscellany for Deletion" regarding my user page. Thank you for the absolutely correct advice you gave him/her, but this "help" request was actually a ruse being perpetrated by a community banned user in furtherance of his/her long practice of Wikistalking many Wikipedians since 2005 (including myself for more than two years) using more than 300 registered (12) and anonymous IP (295+) sockpuppet accounts. I'm sorry that you got snookered here, but you are just one of a great many Wikipedians who have been taken in by this long term WP abuser. Centpacrr (talk) 10:29, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, it's good to know — frankie (talk) 17:06, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Verifiability
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Verifiability. 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) 23:35, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:WHO Directory of Medical Schools
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:WHO Directory of Medical Schools. 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) 03:05, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

User:Davesterrett2
Hi Frankie, Thank you for taking the time to help me. I added all references to Dave Sterrett in order to provide independent reliable sources. Could you please inform me if I did this correct? If so, could you please help me to change his user name to "Dave Sterrett". When I created the article, I did not realize that the username would be the title. Also, am I correct in saying that it takes 4 days for an article to be created before adding a photo? Again, I thank you for taking the time to help me. (Davesterrett2 (talk) 17:33, 5 September 2011 (UTC)).
 * Hi, Davesterrett2. I have read the article and reviewed the references, but I'm still not sure that notability is met, though I also feel that this might be a borderline case. The references are independent, which is a good thing, but I don't think the amount of coverage amounts to what is normally expected for a Wikipedia article (aside from the link above, there's a secondary guideline outlined at WP:AUTHOR that you might want to check). Take those from religion.blogs.cnn.com and usatoday.com for instance, the focus is certainly on Oprah, and then the book is mentioned as part of it. For notability is not absolutely necessary that the subject receives the prime focus, but mentions need to be more than passing, and with almost all of the references taking the same form I think notability for the book is not too far, but maybe not for Dave Sterrett in particular, which would require references that review his other works as well, or better yet, that review Sterrett as an author in a critical manner. I know that you've put a lot of work on this, but sometimes it just happens that reviews are not to be found, and that is simply a reflection that the subject has not gotten to the required point of recognition by society, which is what an encyclopedia looks to include. This may change in the future, as it usually does, and when that time comes then an article will be due. Again, I do feel that this case may be borderline, so while I personally wouldn't support its inclusion at this moment, let me invite you to place a request for feedback so you can get another pair of eyes to check the article, it may just be that they hold a different opinion.
 * As for the article itself there are a couple of issues with the tone, in that it struck me as slightly promotional at certain points, such as stating that "Sterrett has been covered in major media outlets, including CBN, Christianity Today, CNN, ESPN, Jamie Foxx XM Radio, WorldNetDaily, Christian Post, The Dallas Morning News, Chris Fabry Live!, and USAToday", which does seem to take the actual coverage (which is about Oprah) out of proportion. We are not here to sell anything to anyone, not products and not persons either, and maintaining a neutral point of view is essential for the project. Also much of the information from the biography section is not supported by the references, except the radio participation, leaving the career and ministry mostly unreferenced. Verifiability is a major concern with any article, but even more surrounding a biography of a living person, and I think that section will need to be trimmed unless there are references (be them online or offline) to support it.
 * As a last note, in response to your question, I wasn't aware of that "4 day restriction", and it seems to me that there is no such thing. What is required for images is that they be released under a license that allows for their inclusion in Wikipedia, which is itself licensed under the Creative Commons ShareAlike (CC-BY-SA) license. Personally I'm still working to wrap my head around how licensing works, but here's a snippet that I've copied once as a reference, you might find it useful:


 * To use a picture on Wikipedia, we need permission from whoever owns it.
 * If it is your OWN picture - then you can just upload it yourself, at "Commons", saying "It is entirely my own work" - at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Upload.
 * If it is NOT YOURS, then the owner can give permission in two ways;
 * A) They could put it on a website (flickr, or their own site) with an appropriate licence, such as "Public Domain" or "Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike" (that is an option in flickr)
 * B) They could email us permission. You could ask them to do that, by sending them an email saying something like "Hi, I've written a page on Wikipedia, and I'd really like to add a picture - but as Wikipedia is FREE, we can only use freely-licenced pictures. If you have any which you can give permission for, please send me an email back with the text below, and the picture(s) attached."
 * -Then add a copy of this: http://enwp.org/user:chzz/help/myboilerplate (having filled the form out)
 * -And send the email (attached picture file + completed form) to: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org.


 * If you have more doubts about this, let me suggest the help desk, where surely someone more experienced with the subject will be able to assist you. And of course, feel free to leave me a note here if you want to, I'd be glad to help with what I can. Best regards — frankie (talk) 03:31, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Frankie, thank you for your feedback. I will continue to work on the notability in references (I understand what you mean), as well as apply your advice to the other sections. I will send you a message upon my changes. Again, thank you for taking the time to review and offer me advice/help... I really appreciate it! :) (12.154.32.82 (talk) 18:20, 6 September 2011 (UTC)).

Frankie, I tried my best to take into account your advice and edit the page. I added more references, as well as deleted a significant amount of extraneous background information. Could you please review and inform me if the content on this page would be acceptable to be published? Thank you so much for your help!!! -sb  Davesterrett2 (talk) 19:39, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Jeff Szusterman
Per consensus at the mass AfD, I have relisted every entry individually. --  Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 18:26, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Verification?
Hi, I have requested in WP:CHUU and you wrote "Please log in to your home wiki and make an edit at your talk page certifying this request."

What is exactly home wiki and I should make an edit with which account? And will it be a global SUL account? Mehran Debate 13:00, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Probably your home wiki will be fa, you can use fa:Special:MergeAccount to turn your "Mehran" account into an SUL (which will be accepted as confirmation). – xeno talk 15:26, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Limitations on copyrightability: Ideas and facts vs. expression; merger doctrine; scènes à faire in IP law in Canada
I acknowledge your bad faith suppression of my comments at the noted page. It's a typical deletionist tactic. Your reference to the legal disclaimer is completely irrelevant. Eclecticology (talk) 08:36, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry that you see it that way, and I assure you that the revert was only procedural in nature — frankie (talk) 16:42, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Suicide
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Suicide. 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) 07:35, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Human
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Human. 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) 08:17, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ginsberg's theorem
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ginsberg's theorem. 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) 09:16, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Category talk:Lists of people by nationality
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Category talk:Lists of people by nationality. 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) 09:17, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Quotation mark
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Quotation mark. 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) 10:16, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Katrina Kaif
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Katrina Kaif. 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) 10:18, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Jalgaon State
Thanks for tidying up. I had to go to supper immediately after making the move, came back to sort out links etc, and was pleased to find you had already done it. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:03, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * My pleasure, and thank you for the quick admin support :) — Frankie (talk) 20:18, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. 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) 11:16, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (companies)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (companies). 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) 12:16, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Citing sources
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Citing sources. 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) 14:16, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

RFA thank you
Thank you for your comment and support at my recent successful RFA. Being now the new fellow in the fraternity of administrators, I will do my best to live up to the confidence shown in me by others, will move slowly and carefully when using the mop, will seek input from others before any action of which I might be unsure, and will try not to break anything beyond repair. Best,  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 22:01, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:President of Croatia
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:President of Croatia. 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) 14:17, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In José Luis Sánchez Rull, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Mexican (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) 10:42, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Citing sources
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Citing sources. 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) 15:16, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics. 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) 16:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:.ss
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:.ss. 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, 28 December 2011 (UTC)