User talk:Hemlock Martinis/Archive 4

Flemish Renaissance painters
Please stop adding Early Netherlandish painters to the Flemish Renaissance category. It is not appropriate for the likes of Jan van Eyck. Several could however be added to Category:Early Netherlandish painters, which is the usual term in art history for those active in the 15th century. Whether they were part of a Renaissance movement is the subject of much debate and not a suitable basis for categorization. See also Netherlandish. Johnbod (talk) 00:31, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 7th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I see you've created this category page, and then deleted it as a test, but it appears to be being (quite heavily) populated by album. Any objection to me recreating it? Alai (talk) 23:12, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * None whatsoever! --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 08:46, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * On second thoughts, it looks like there's a pluralisation issue here, so I'll kick for touch in the general direction of WPJ-ALBUM. Alai (talk) 18:57, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 14th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Legislation sponsored by Ron Paul
An article that you have been involved in editing, Legislation sponsored by Ron Paul, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Legislation sponsored by Ron Paul. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?

Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:48, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

4/28 DYK
Congrats, but please learn to Archive. Pretty please? -- Bedford 05:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! And sorry about that, looks like I've been a little lax in upkeep. :P --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:41, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Fimbulwinter (band)
Hi- just writing to ask you to reconsider the speedy deletion of the above article. The band contained Shagrath, member of notable bands including Dimmu Borgir and Chrome Division, as well as a member of Ulver, meaning it meets point six of our music notability guidelines. On top of this, there is an article on another Wikipedia, and though this does not confer notability, it implies it should at least be given a chance. If you are still concerned about the article, I will be happy to do a little work on it. Note coverage on Rockdetector and many mentions regarding the history of Dimmu Borgir, but be aware that the dates of the band make internet coverage hard to come by. J Milburn (talk) 17:24, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've restored it and moved it into my userspace; if you're happy with the article being restored, let me know, and I'll move it back. J Milburn (talk) 17:35, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've recreated it after improvements. J Milburn (talk) 21:08, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks fine to me. Keep up the good work! --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Someone you know
Hi, Hemlock. You know me, don't you? First, I apologize for some of the comments that I made about you. I am sorry. You have made some wonderful contributions and I learned about categorization from you. I need you help. Are you willing to cooperate? Thank you. RS1900 11:44, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I didn't expected you to reply. I've to remove few things from your talk page archive. They are personal things. After that, I will not contact you. I am waiting for your response. Thank you, RS1900 11:16, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I apologize for not replying sooner, I've been quite busy for the past few days and my silence was not intentional. I fully and wholeheartedly accept your apology and am glad you've come back to make positive contributions to the encyclopedia. Please feel free to remove your comments from my archives, in the spirit of moving forward. And don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions at all. Happy editing! --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:55, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Hemlock. In the past, I tried to hide facts. I got into trouble because of that. I've to say something. I have send you an email. Thank you. RS1900 11:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Sinestro Corps
You might want to mention the article FAC at the WikiProject Comics talk page. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Done, thanks! --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 07:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Batmobile (band)
Dear people, Can you please tell me why the page of the psychobilly band Batmobile was deleted when it's one of the most important bands of the scene? Was it the way the article was composed? thank you JJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by JJHammer (talk • contribs) 21:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

African museums
Cheers I'm just in the middle of creating 55 new African museum categories and getting some onto here with Mr. Herring  ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦       $1,000,000? 18:11, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Burma Intro
Good edit, much better wording now. Beam 18:35, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:58, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Psst
This helps. Look at it and you'll see why. Caught one today thanks to it.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 17:52, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Awesome job! Do you mind if I update it with my recent discoveries? --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 17:54, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah but follow the format by using Name . Use underscores for names with spaces and if you like add all the names from this.  Discreet edits/edit summaries please.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk)  18:05, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I've alphabetized/categorized it :).¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 20:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Congrats
Sinestro Corps War has been promoted to FA. Well done! Hiding T 11:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you! And thank you for all your help in reviewing the article! --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 18:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Vital Articles Proposal
Just wanted to say that your proposal is great. It's BOLD and well thought out. Because we had to agree as a whole or oppose, I have had to register my beliefs as a weak oppose; but I agree with an overwhelming number of the individual changes made in your "omnibus bill." Plus, it's great to have you back on the project. Postmodern Beatnik (talk) 18:36, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Request for Peer Review help
Thank you for you work as a peer review volunteer. Since March, there has been a concerted effort to make sure all peer review requests get some response. Requests that have gone three days or longer without a substantial response are listed at Peer review/backlog. I have three requests to help this continue.

1) If you are asked to do a peer review, please ask the person who made the request to also do a review, preferably of a request that has not yet had feedback. This is fairly simple, but helps. For example when I review requests on the backlog list, I close with Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, ...

2) While there are several people who help with the backlog, lately I have been doing up to 3 or 4 peer reviews a day and can not keep this up much longer. We need help. Since there are now well over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, if each volunteer reviewed just one PR request without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog. To help spread out the load, I suggest those willing pick a day of the month and do a review that day (for example, my first edit was on the 8th, so I could pick the 8th). Please pick a peer review request with no responses yet, if possible off the backlog list. If you want, leave a note on my talk page as to which day you picked and I will remind you each month.

3) I have made some proposals to add some limits to peer review requests at Wikipedia_talk:Peer_review. The idea is to prevent any one user from overly burdening the process. These seem fairly reasonable (one PR request per editor per day, only four total PR requests per editor at a time, PR requests with cleanup banners can be delisted (like GAN quick fail), and wait two weeks to relist a PR request after it is archived), but have gotten no feedback in one week. If you have any thoughts on these, please weigh in.

Thanks again for your help and in advance for any assistance with the backlog. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:31, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:44, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Retitling of positions
I'm having trouble telling if this is meant seriously; is it or is it not? —Animum (talk) 17:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It is a serious proposal. Parts of the explanation why we should do it are written tongue-in-cheek though, so hence the confusion. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 17:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:05, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:07, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 9, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:58, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/Polish culture during World War II
Thanks for your comments; I've replied there.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:43, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 23 and 26, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 30, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 04:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

PR Request
"Any period in Chinese history", you say? Could you please leave a peer review for 2008 Sichuan earthquake here? It would be very much appreciated. Thanks! --haha169 (talk) 18:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'd be happy to take a look. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:10, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Request for consensus
A question has arisen concerning the name of the article "Anthem of Europe". A discussion has opened up in Talk:Anthem of Europe. Your input is requested there. This is a neutrally worded notification sent to a small number of editors informed by a previous discussion of a similar nature about the article "Flag of Europe" and is intended to improve rather than to influence the discussion. This notification falls under the "friendly notice" clause of WP:CANVASS. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 02:33, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Flag of Europe has been moved again
Flag of Europe has been moved again against consensus. Could you please take some action against the user. Thanks for your time.- J Logan t: 17:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Allegations of apartheid deletion notification
Some time ago, you participated in a deletion discussion concerning Allegations of Chinese apartheid. I thought you might like to know that the parent article, Allegations of apartheid, was recently nominated for deletion. Given that many of the issues that have been raised are essentially the same as those on the article on which you commented earlier, you may have a view on whether Allegations of apartheid should be kept or deleted. If you wish to contribute to the discussion, please see Articles for deletion/Allegations of apartheid (fifth nomination). -- ChrisO (talk) 17:41, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 7, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:39, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 14 and 21, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:30, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Any chance you could help with Niedermayer-Hentig Expedition?
Hello Hemlock, I was wondering if you might be able to help with Niedermayer-Hentig Expedition which is to do with German espionage in World War I. I wanted to see if there was any help especially with prose and c/e, but would also appreciate any other comments, since I wanted to put it up for FAC once PR is done. rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 14:17, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I would be more than happy to help! I gave the article a quick read this morning and it looks very comprehensive and well researched. I won't be able to begin a review today, but I'll go through it more thoroughly tonight and have an initial review done by tomorrow. Keep up the good work! --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 15:33, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Peer review
Hello Hemlock. I was wondering if you might be able to have a look at the Tamar of Georgia article which deals with the medieval Georgian monarch. I've recently nominated it for PR here. Since you have an interest in the Byzantine world, I would very much appreciate if you could find some time to advice on what needs to be done to make the article a GA or FA. Kind regards, --KoberTalk 05:52, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Stranac u noći deletion
I do not see the reason why this article should be deleted as this single was one of the best selling Yugoslav singles and appeared on Idoli best selling album.
 * Make sure the article says that or else another editor will likely come to a similar conclusion. I've restored the article so you can add the appropriate information. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Jonathan Clay
Hi, is it possible to see the Jonathan Clay article which you deleted per CSD A7 earlier? The removal of backlinks appeared a couple of times on my watchlist so I believe the person may be notable - but I haven't seen the article. Thanks, SeveroTC 20:03, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll temporarily restore it. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 20:04, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much. The guy I was thinking of I think is notable under WP:ATHLETE - clearly not this guy. Thanks SeveroTC 20:08, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries. I noticed the links didn't match a musician, but since contribs were bugged at the time I wasn't able to go back and repair them myself. Nice catch! --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 20:12, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

A new task force under wikiproject Europe
Hello,

I've noticed that you are active in the area of Europe. I just wanted to let you know that a European Space Agency task force has been set up to improve the presently very poor condition of articles about ESA and related topics. If you are interested, please join the task force here. We sure could use your help. Thanks.U5K0 (talk) 19:23, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Redirect of Sharm-el-Sheik resort-Red Sea resort Egypt
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Sharm-el-Sheik resort-Red Sea resort Egypt, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Sharm-el-Sheik resort-Red Sea resort Egypt is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Sharm-el-Sheik resort-Red Sea resort Egypt, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 17:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Dispute: AfD nomination of Queen Samantha
You nominated Queen Samantha, an article I created, for deletion. In fact, Queen Samantha is a notable, hit-charting legendary disco artist, perhaps one of the best known singers from France in the 1970s and 1980s to chart here in the USA. Her song "Mama Rue" is an international worldwide hit. (Randyfx (talk) 17:14, 20 August 2008 (UTC))

Signpost updated for July 28, August 9, 11 and 18, 2008.
Sorry I haven't been sending this over the past few weeks. Ralbot (talk) 06:12, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:12, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

What is Vandalism? I understand it is destroying other's property and in this case deleting other’s entries.

Please guide me and help me understand the following:

Wikipedia/Sayyid Is this site catered for Shia Sayyids only or it is personal / private web page and entries about non-Shia Sayyids is not allowed???

My interest is only genealogy and I am not interested in Shia versus Sunni debate. Quite a few my Gilani relatives have adopted Shia faith and I still respect them and care for them.

There are entries about Sayyid families (of Shia faith) which have not been termed as “weird" or "vandalism” and finally removed by you.

As I understand this page is providing definitions of Sayyid from Shia perspective only. For instance Sayyids with Gilani and Bukhari last name are totally ignored. Perhaps they should stay away from this site. WIKIPEDIA will have incomplete and skewed information.

If this is a page monopolized and vandalized by Al-Zaidi then please guide me how to start a page for documenting Sunni Sayyids or any other topic.

You can reply me on Sikandar.Gilani@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.36.32.134 (talk) 09:45, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

What is Vandalism?
What is Vandalism? I understand it is destroying other's property and in this case deleting other’s entries.

Please guide me and help me understand the following:

Wikipedia/Sayyid Is this site catered for Shia Sayyids only or it is personal / private web page and entries about non-Shia Sayyids is not allowed???

My interest is only genealogy and I am not interested in Shia versus Sunni debate. Quite a few my Gilani relatives have adopted Shia faith and I still respect them and care for them.

There are entries about Sayyid families (of Shia faith) which have not been termed as “weird" or "vandalism” and finally removed by you.

As I understand this page is providing definitions of Sayyid from Shia perspective only. For instance Sayyids with Gilani and Bukhari last name are totally ignored. Perhaps they should stay away from this site. WIKIPEDIA will have incomplete and skewed information.

If this is a page monopolized and vandalized by Al-Zaidi then please guide me how to start a page for documenting Sunni Sayyids or any other topic.

You can reply me on Sikandar.Gilani@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.36.32.134 (talk) 09:47, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Hi Hemlock. Admin Master of Puppets unblocked me a few months ago. I was previously cleared by the checkuser but another user, Bobblehead, was creating socks and fearful that I found out and put a RFCU on him got me blocked saying that I was a sock even though the checkuser disproved it. Once he got me blocked, he successfully got the checkuser request cancelled.

Since then, I have not disappointed Master of Puppets (who unblocked me) by editing constructively. Actually, I'm still pissed off at Wikipedia and how POV pushers like Bobblehead, who is using Wikipedia as a political campaign tool, block others that he doesn't like on the sock excuse.

I am telling you this because Master of Puppets is on vacation. Please protect me. Here's the deal. I edit constructively and you make sure that POV pushers don't try to block me. I will honor the bargain by editing well so you can take credit for getting constructive edits written for Wikipedia. Actually, I'm so pissed off at the POV pushers that I think I'll stop editing for a while. Why help a website that is cornered by biased people...see how they destroy Wikipedia? Oprahwasontv (talk) 00:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * FYI: This is a sockpuppet of the community-banned, who (Oprahwasontv, that is) was unblocked without any apparent discussion, and has proceeded to attack the users in good standing who were involved in the block of his many, many socks.. Tvoz / talk 03:54, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * FYI, Tvoz is a POV pusher who abuses Wikipedia as a campaign tool. This user also violates COI by writing about her company, creating an article about it, and using her sockpuppet husband to edit the same article.  This user conspired with Bobblehead so that Bobblehead would create socks, get them called Derek socks, so that once there was a couple of dozen socks, Tvoz could use that excuse to ban anyone she wanted with the sock excuse.  Even if the checkuser proved innocence (like me) she or Bobblehead just uses a flimsy excuse of "behavior".  Well, Tvoz and Bobblehead act the same so are socks according to her definition.  Don't believe me, just run a checkuser on Tvoz and her sockpuppet husband, both who blatently violate COI and attack others, like me.   Tvoz is the reason that I am so ticked off at Wikipedia because it can be manipulated by people trying to use it as a politician's campaign tool.  Because of this, I hate editing and usually don't. Oprahwasontv (talk) 04:10, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Tvoz fails to say that the checkuser cleared me. Tvoz also failed to say how the admin who unblocked me did so as a compromise for unblocking me and blocking Tvoz, who meets the criteria for being blocked.  See how incivil Tvoz is, butting in and attacking me. Oprahwasontv (talk) 04:12, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Colonialism isn't just history
For the 266 thousand square kilometers of Western Sahara, Spanish colonialism ended in 1975 but Morocco stepped in and self-determination is still being awaited in 2008. It's on this list that I would like you to peer review, Peer_review/United_Nations_list_of_Non-Self-Governing_Territories/archive1. Enjoy! :)--Thecurran (talk) 15:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 25 and September 8, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 21:35, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Vital article vote
I have declared some of your votes invalid pending your reply at Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:15, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Declaring unilaterally that my opinion is invalid is like saying Pluto's not a planet. Nevertheless there is an underlying misunderstanding, and I have replied to your comment on the relevant talk page. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:34, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 15, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 05:36, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 03:13, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Hong Kong
Was there any reason to move a paragraph in the Economy of Hong Kong article, or was it just mischief? Absent any discussion or obvious reason for the change, it has been reverted. DOR (HK) (talk) 02:34, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I wasn't aware that the India article was the benchmark for all others, but discussing before changing prevents misunderstanding, particularly where a high-quality article is concerned. DOR (HK) (talk) 02:26, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

British Empire
Nice work on the intro there. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 23:18, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Arbcom Elections - Questions page
Good morning. I've posted the remaining General Questions to your Questions for the Candidate page. With those questions, and the ones you've already answered, you now have the complete list. Good luck with your candidacy, UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 14:46, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom questions
Hi. I'm Ral315, editor of the Wikipedia Signpost. We're interviewing all ArbCom candidates for an article this week, and your response is requested.


 * 1) What positions do you hold (adminship, mediation, etc.), on this or other wikis?
 * 2) Have you been involved in any arbitration cases? In what capacity?
 * 3) Why are you running for the Arbitration Committee?
 * 4) How do you feel the Arbitration Committee has handled cases and other situations over the last year?  Can you provide an examples of situations where you feel the Committee handled a situation exceptionally well, and why?  Any you feel they handled poorly, and why?
 * 5) What is your opinion on confidentiality?  If evidence is submitted privately to the Committee, would you share it with other parties in the case?  Would you make a decision based on confidential information without making it public?
 * 6) Why do you think users should vote for you?
 * 1) How do you feel the Arbitration Committee has handled cases and other situations over the last year?  Can you provide an examples of situations where you feel the Committee handled a situation exceptionally well, and why?  Any you feel they handled poorly, and why?
 * 2) What is your opinion on confidentiality?  If evidence is submitted privately to the Committee, would you share it with other parties in the case?  Would you make a decision based on confidential information without making it public?
 * 3) Why do you think users should vote for you?
 * 1) Why do you think users should vote for you?
 * 1) Why do you think users should vote for you?

Please respond on my talk page. We'll probably go to press on Tuesday, but late responses will be added as they're submitted. Thanks, Ral315 (talk) 10:25, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.
Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 11:00, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Retitling positions
I don't think I'd got round to saying what a good idea the retitling was! Bit of overdue fun but with a serious underlying message, good luck in upcoming elections, tpbradbury (talk) 18:38, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

vatican IR
Ah! well, we needed a redirect to then. Anyway, I'll go ahead and do the merge. Lihaas (talk) 20:11, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Saw you moved it, but you just deleted the info that was on the holy see page. I didn't quite read it, but some of it could well have been worth adding to the merged pages. Lihaas (talk) 20:23, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The existing page was a redirect to the diplomacy section of the Vatican City article, there was no content there. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 20:27, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Sinestro Corps War
Oh dear, for some reason it never occurred to me that the actual candidates would stumble upon my little sandbox page. I figured a few WikiFriends (and enemies?) would occasionally stalk my contribs and see it there. My comment should have had a wink smiley like ;) because my intent was not at all to demean your work! Actually, I'd only made the comment because I initially thought the Sinestro War Corps was perhaps some facet of the Sino-Japanese War or something. --JayHenry (talk) 00:49, 26 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah well, see, I still would have worried, even had you used smileys, that I'd insulted your hard and good work on the article. The comment on my chimpmanzee page drips of elitism which wasn't the intended tone.  So, uh, what have you been up to the last year? --JayHenry (talk) 01:37, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Admin required?
Hi Hemlock, User:AnthC isn't a persistent vandal so not sure that wp:aiv applies, so I thought I'd refer to an admin and ask how to handle this. Looking at their most recent contributions is this editor helping us build an encyclopaedia?  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  13:09, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Re:
Thank you for the visit. I like your statement, but your answers to questions sounds a little weak to me.--Caspian blue 01:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry that my oppose vote makes you curious, but I rather would like not talk about it and my reasons are pretty much similar as others in the oppose part.--Caspian blue 02:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Just one note, I don't think you're not much "qualified candidate", but I feel that you would more fit for beuraucratship than the heated drama ArbCom.--Caspian blue 02:30, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

List of Irish people in World War II
As you have contributed to this list, you might have a view on this: Articles for deletion/List of Irish people in World War II. Folks at 137 (talk) 19:46, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey buddy
When I'll eventually need a navbox for several articles on the Han Dynasty, you'll be the first person I'll come to. :) If you'd like to make any other sort of contribution, feel free! I'm determined to make Han Dynasty and several sister articles all featured articles by the end of December. Cheers!-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 19:26, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom vote
You've brought up some excellent points in your oppose rationale, and I'd like the opportunity to address them. First off, the Editorial Council idea was not very well presented to the community. It changed too much along the way and I never clearly illustrated some aspects of it. My intent in proposing EdCo was never to circumvent or ignore consensus, but rather to solidify it. I view Wikipedia's encyclopedic content as a great ship, one which we all have built. We as the community are the sails, and when the winds of consensus come up we can carry the encyclopedia far. However, I've grown increasingly weary of the constant POV pushing and edit warring, especially in the nationalistic and ethnic conflicts. Those fierce storms are a great threat to the ship we built. They're distracting from the actual construction of an encyclopedia, which is why we're all here in the first place. Take a look at the most recent conflict to boil over in the naming of the Ireland-related articles as an example of how widespread within the content these disputes can be. These conflicts led me to decide that something had to be done, and so I proposed EdCo. I saw EdCo as a rudder for this fine ship, something that can guide us through the choppy seas of editor discord and the powerful storms of POV warriors. I stupidly tried to find a middle ground between binding and non-binding, and instead of achieving both I got neither. I've learned from that mistake. I'm toying with the idea of proposing a purely advisory, non-binding content-related committee at some point after the election in response to the concerns raised about EdCo, but nothing's certain right now. This rudder is not meant to represent elitism or a power trip, but stability and order. When I wish to strengthen ArbCom, I do not mean that I wish for its power to grow. Rather, I wish for it to use the power it has already been granted. This year was aptly described by one editor in their voter guide as ArbCom's annus horribilis. I completely agree. The Cla68-FM-SV case, with its ill-conceived merge, its shoddy implementation, the shady actions of some arbitrators, and the ineffectiveness that grew so bad it required the return of Newyorkbrad to sort out, represents all that went wrong with ArbCom this year. I want to fix these problems. I want boldness, speediness and common sense to return to ArbCom, and I believe I represent those three qualities. I may not hold every position you do, but I hope you share my belief that ArbCom needs to be fixed. ArbCom does not deal with content issues. Period. That is a view I have been steadfast in, so much so that rather than granting that power to ArbCom I proposed an entirely separate institution (EdCo) to help with it. I give you my word that should I be elected to the Committee, I will not let it become a forum in which content disputes are addressed or resolved unilaterally. I believe I'd written quite enough, so I'll end it here. I won't ask you to change your vote - your rationale is well-thought out enough to justify it. I'm glad to see voters like you are putting some thought and doing some research about the candidates, even the ones as minor as me. :) I will ask that you consider my views, put the same thought into them as you did my candidacy, and perhaps be a voice when I propose the non-binding content advisory committee after the election. Thank you, and happy editing! --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 07:35, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I respect what you have said. And I fully understand the thinking behind the EdCo, and in some senses I both empathise and sympathise with the idea. However, in some cases (like the current Ireland dispute) there are no easy answers, and nor should we attempt to shortcut the necessary (and necessarily lengthy) discussions in order to propose a solution which prevents drama rather than arrives at the right answer. We are not building this encyclopedia (probably one of the really great things in the history of mankind - the people of the world coming together to store and make freely available the sum of all human knowledge) to make friends, and disputes ARE going to occur. I find that through the crucible of heated debate comes the clarity of balanced, fair, and hard knowledge. I would not like to support anything which attempts to circumvent that clarifying process in order simply to save the feelings of a few individuals. Where individuals behave so badly that they are preventing progress, we need some way of either influencing them to behave better, or if that fails, then removing them from the area in which they are causing problems. We already have several dispute resolution processes, and I'm not sure where EdCom would fit within that. Thanks for getting back to me. And I wish you luck with the elections.  SilkTork  *YES! 19:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Arbcom evidence
Thanks for clarifying that - the Wikipedia Signpost summary page seems to have been about as accurate as the Dodgy Dossier. However I'm afraid that I'm something of an absolutist as far as secrecy is concerned - if evidence can't be disclosed to the person it's being used against, then in my opinion it shouldn't be used at all. Cynical (talk) 06:44, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 03:39, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Arbcom
Hi. Thanks for clarifying your position, I really appreciate it. You don't need to worry about changing your mind, I think that it is very healthy - a lot of Wikipedia's problems are caused by people blindly refusing to admit errors or change their minds. I have to confess that I like a lot of what you are saying - your answer to Rschen7754's last question sums up a lot of my own feelings - you just happened to flirt with two of my bugbears: rigid, unquestioning enforcement of policy and ArbCom creating policy.

At this point, I am happy to strike-through my oppose vote as you have gone some way to address my concerns about my two major issues. Good luck with the nomination! I'll see you around. Rje (talk) 01:33, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Dang! I'm a bit busy in real life atm, so I was too late to switch my vote. :-( Even so, you're a quick learner, which is probably more valuable than any other skill. I'll certainly support you next time! :-) --Kim Bruning (talk) 21:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Arbcom Vote Explanation
It's a bit off-putting that you're asking me to explain myself for how I voted, though I see where you're coming from. I spent several hours on Saturday reading through candidate statements, questions, voter guides, etc. and I decided on seven candidates that I liked for various reasons. I marked "Support" for them and "Oppose" for everyone else. There was nothing in your statement nor answers to questions that struck me as an outright negative. Cheers. Switzpaw (talk) 05:59, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Arbcom
My view is much the same as Geogre's. I was unimpressed with your handling of a situation involving Giano awhile back, but truly it was nothing personal in the least. I could certainly envision supporting your candidacy should you choose to run again next year. Best regards, SDJ 23:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I realize it was awhile back, but for those who have been burnt by such actions (my personal experience was with a previous account), it's a hard "sin" to forgive. As I said though, mine was not a vociferous oppose, and I would be very open to supporting your candidacy next year. SDJ 00:03, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Arbcom Vote Question
Hemlock, Thanks for your note, in the interest of time I didn't list my oppose reasons. On your page specifically the reason was the voting system; in that this was indeed a vote, and the rules of the voting appear to allow additional 'support' weight via making 'oppose' entries (in lieu of abstain) towards all candidates I wasn't specifically supporting. On some of the candidates I opposed there were more specific reasoning, but here you were just not in my top support area. That's why polls are evil! — xaosflux  Talk  02:56, 15 December 2008 (UTC)