User talk:Into The Fray

Boo...
I noticed this shortly after you left us, (watchlists are wonderful things), but I guess I closed my tab and never commented. I will miss you and your work here. I'll especially miss the person who gave me teh best barnstar evar. Anyway, I wish you the best in your RL endevors.  seresin || wasn't he just...?  06:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:600px-Slime.png
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:600px-Slime.png, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -- Kelly hi! 23:50, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Membership of the Counter-Vandalism Unit
As you may know, the Counter-Vandalism unit is inactive. So for reviving the WikiProject, we will need to sort out the members. So if you are active, please put your username at the bottom of the list at Wikipedia talk:Counter-Vandalism Unit.

You are receiving this message as a current member of the CVU.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Counter-Vandalism Unit at 00:28, 30 October 2011 (UTC).

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)
Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page. In this issue: Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->
 * Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
 * Research: The most recent DR data
 * Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
 * Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
 * DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
 * Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
 * Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 19:09, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

=Speedy deletion: Société Mondiale des Créateurs== Hello The Fray, Thank you for letting know about the problems encountered concerning the above article. I have responded to the motives stated (G11 A7). I do not have much expertise in the wikipedia procedures. Please let me know if you thing that my response is not appropriate. I would then have the chance to maybe produce further arguments. Best regards, Alain Souloumiac — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alain.souloumiac (talk • contribs) 06:48, 4 July 2015 (UTC) Alain.souloumiac (talk) 07:34, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Meat article
PLEASE STOP REMOVING MY EDIT TO THE ARTICLE "MEAT" UNLESS YOU CAN EXPLAIN A VALID REASON WHY.

I HAVE DONE NOTHING WRONG AND HAVE CHECKED THE GUIDELINES TO MAKE SURE NUMEROUS TIMES. SO IF YOU PERSONALLY DO NOT LIKE MY STATEMENT, WELL MAYBE YOU ARENT EDUCATED ON THE DIETARY WAYS OF HUMANS.


 * I make no claim to expert knowledge of meat or dietary habits of any creature (other than yours truly). For what it's worth and understanding you are unlikely to read this, your edits come with an obvious bias (on a subject I have no personal opinion about), in making them you remove genuinely sourced copy and are obviously here with an agenda. Beyond that, you were previously warned and blocked for these on a different IP, which makes you now further in violation of policy.  Into The Fray   T / C  00:53, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Please tell me what is wrong with this statement added to the "meat" article!

"Most scientists agree that humans are naturally herbivorous, therefore making the typical act of slaughter needless, but some studies suggest that humans are natural 	omnivores

I have stated no personal point of view whatsoever and have added reliable citing!! I DO NOT UNDERSTAND!

I CAN TAKE OUT THE "THEREFORE MAKING THE TYPICAL ACT OF SLAUGHTER NEEDLESS" PART IF YOU WANT, EVEN THOUGH ITS COMMON SENSE, WITH THE PREVIOUS KNOWLEDGE OF HERBIVOROUS TENDENCIES IN HUMANS.

And i am not here with an agenda! I am simply stating facts (sourced of course) that no one cared to add before. And if my sources are considered 'not reliable' please tell me what WOULD consider them reliable.

I am editing for the same reasons most people are -- to bring the public better information! And I think it is wrong to blast out that we are automatically omnivorous, just because we choose to eat meat! But I am respectful of studies who argue that point of view, and i included them still in the sources!! WHAT ELSE IS THERE FOR ME TO DO DIFFERENTLY??
 * I have tried to explain this to you and will not proceed with an endless argument. Please stop posting to my talk page.  Thank you.  Into The Fray   T / C  04:07, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

bill ackman
hi. On Monday you reverted my edit re bill ackman because it wasn't sourced. see my edit

but it was sourced. the source was the cnbc article: http://www.cnbc.com/id/100331139, which was already in the article. I merely tried to add balance from a source already used. thank you for further comment/guidance. Michmeander (talk) 03:08, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi there Michmeander. I took a look at the article history and the source and agree, it is sourced.  I reverted my reversion and then did a little copy edit to your addition.  It looked like an attempt at inserting a personal view.  I apologize for the mistake.  Thank you for letting me know about it.   Into The Fray   T / C  03:18, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey
Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:


 * 1) Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
 * 2) Editor-focused central editing dashboard
 * 3) "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
 * 4) Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
 * 5) Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded User wikipedia/RC Patrol (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, — Delivered: 01:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:13, 28 September 2017 (UTC)