User talk:Jayron32/Archive4

USRD Newsletter - Issue 12

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot 22:19, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Imperial Triple Crown Jewels


Your Imperial Majesty, it gives me great pleasure to bestow these Imperial Triple Crown Jewels in recognition of your contributions to Wikipedia. May you wear them well. Durova Charge! 20:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks


VanTucky (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. I was just looking at your old GA review of The Vancouver Voice. Now that I've reviewed a bundle myself, I see that you were more civil about the nomination than I would have been if I was in your place. The article is definitely a quick fail! So thanks for being sincere and for giving that review more respect than it deserved. VanTucky (talk) 21:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

GAR for Cincinnati Kid
Hi, I hope you'll take another look at the article before the GAR closes. I think I've addressed your concerns. Otto4711 21:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

HI
HI WE ARE THE GROUP LOS PANCAKES FROM THELMADATTER ENGLISH CLASS...

WE WOULD LOVE IF U COULD BE OUR MENTOR... THATS WHY WE ARE WRITING YOU.

IF YOUD LIKE 2, U CAN ANSWER US HERE:

User: Thelmadatter

Then click in group pages

and then in los_pancakes

If you can help us write in our discussion page... thanks a lot —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.254.101.49 (talk) 22:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

HI!!
Hi, my name is Oscar, I am a member of the group ZYANYA06, I would like to know if you are interested in helping us in our project, we would really appreciate your help, the link to our site is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/ITESM_Campus_Toluca/ZYANYA06, we would like to know what are you studying and where, we need to know this just for telling it to our teacher and it is a way of proving that we are really making a good job and not making out everything. Well thankyou for your attention, I will be looking forward your answer. Yacopop 00:24, 12 September 2007 (UTC)YacopopYacopop 00:24, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Joseph Priestley
If you have some free time in the next few weeks or months, would you consider reviewing Joseph Priestley? I have put it up for a scientific peer review. I noticed at the Chemistry Wikiproject that you have an interest in the history of chemistry and I really need someone to check my work and perhaps explain a few concepts better than I can on that page. Thanks. Awadewit | talk  04:22, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 13

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot 19:20, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

GAC backlog elimination drive
Thanks, but I was already awarded this barnstar... (see above)... Can't take credit for getting the same award twice! --Jayron32| talk | contribs 01:43, 16 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm fully aware of this problem/issue. You got another one because someone (not a co-ordinator of the drive) randomly awards people right after the drive closed and before reviews are completed. OhanaUnitedTalk page 01:46, 16 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah. --Jayron32| talk | contribs 01:49, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

GA Review question
Since I saw you commented on the GA Review for the NBA on CBS article I just nominated, I was wondering if it's appropriate for me to notify the user that listed the GA today. I'm not sure what the protocol is as it's not listed on the GAR page. Thought you could help, thanks! --  Noetic  Sage  06:01, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

USRD Inactivity check and news report
Hello, Jayron32. We had a few urgent matters to communicate to you:
 * 1) Please update your information at WikiProject U.S. Roads/Participants, our new centralized participant list. Those who have not done so by October 20th will be removed.
 * 2) There are important discussions taking place at WT:USRD relating to whether WP:USRD, WP:HWY, or the state projects should hold the "power" in the roads projects.

Regards, Rschen7754 (T C) 23:21, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

gar and fact tags
hey you gar'd several articles citing 2b and put no fact tags. Please add fact tags where you perceive a need for them. Thank you. --Ling.Nut 04:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * To do so would open me up to accusations of making WP:POINTs. The articles I have nominated have almost NO inline citations, and are WELL below standard.  It is not an issue of one or two fact tags.  There are dozens of places where they are needed to remain GA standards.  --Jayron32| talk | contribs  04:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Re:SMILE!
Thanks. I did need that. :)

I know many appreciate the work I do in GA, but I tell ya... it's exhausting at times. I'm totally burned out on reviews. I promised to do one that's been waiting forever, but that's it. I'll finish the Psychology sweeps when I can. I'll focus on other things in the project. I don't know what yet, but we'll see. I can't leave, just can't do it. But I can't do anymore reviews right now. I'll have to force this last one.

Thanks for the support. You're great!  Lara Love  04:38, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
I'm so happy that History of American football has made FA and thank you for the barnstar, but I feel like I let you down. Editors were still coming by and criticizing the prose after I had copy edited it! How helpful was that! I hope I can do better next time! (Happily, poring over the article has given me tidbits to discuss with my students.) Awadewit | talk  05:12, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Diddo... to all of it. There are people criticizing the prose?! That's terrible. We have failed miserably, Awadewit. We are shameful! ;) Although, it did make FA, so I guess some liked the prose!  Lara Love  05:16, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * You both did great. For the record, I generally disagreed with the changes suggested after you two did your work.  I made them anyways to basically get those people off my back.  My opinion was if the changes requested didn't make the article worse (they didn't) and it was all that was holding up the vote, then there was not reason NOT to make them.  I never said they made the article better, but since the people asking for the changes cared alot about it (and me not so much) I made the change.  Pandering?  Sure, but us Type B personalities have to get our way too sometimes... --Jayron32| talk | contribs  05:21, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * You graciously conceded [insignificant points]. :) Awadewit | talk  05:41, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Will you Adopt me ?
I saw your name in the Adopter's list so i am asking you.

I am not new to Wikipedia but i want to learn more and i think that i dont know most of the things

Thanx

Do reply

Regards,

Rohan Toprohan 17:12, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 14

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —O bot  (t • c) 01:20, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

GA/R backlog
Thanks for the note about this. I'm actually meant to be focusing on my real work, but shall allow myself one GA/R a day for a few days to try to help to tackle the backlog.--Peter cohen 10:32, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

re:
yeah, can u help me in making those user boxes, like i have in my user page or like u created the one which says, user has been adopted..........and all those Picture license Toprohan 07:16, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks


has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Renewable energy commercialization
Hi Jayron. You kindly did a GA review of this article some time ago, and I've been trying to improve it further since then. You mentioned that the writing needs further work in places, and I'm wondering if you may have time to have another read through it and do a copyedit please. There would be no rush. Just if and when you are able... regards, Johnfos 02:30, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Content review workshop page
Jayron32, you expressed interest at the village pump in a workshop approach to the various content review processes. Marskell put together a page at Content review/workshop, and after some discussion with him (which you can read on our talk pages if you're interested) I'm going to see if my idea and his can be made to converge. I've posted some notes on the workshop page and the associated talk page. I'd be glad of your participation; I don't think we need a whole lot of editors jumping in right away, but getting some experienced FA and GA hands to try to reach consensus seems like a good way to get started. If you're interested, I hope to see you over there at some point. Mike Christie (talk) 12:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

James the Brother of Jesus book
The creator of the page noted the possibility of using the title as well. Unfortunately, as you can see by hitting it above, that's now a redirect to James the Just, and kind of necessary as that's one of the names he is referred to by in the Bible itself. James the Brother of Jesus (book) might work, though. I'll suggest it next time I talk to him. Thanks to everyone for pointing out that the 200 character limit refers to the visible text, not the encoded text. I didn't know that and on that basis thought including the whole title would actually be the shortest way to include it. John Carter 16:16, 7 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, using the (book) disambiguation is the correct way to handle it according to the MOS on article titles and disambiguation. --Jayron32| talk | contribs 15:28, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Official Invitation to GA Sweeps
I would like to invite you to participate at GA Sweeps. We decided it's time to give GA a good sweep to ensure the qualities of all GA articles. You recevied this invitation because we felt that you can improve and uphold the quality of Good articles. This is the reason why only experienced reviewers who are established (trusted) within the project should participate in this sweep initially.

Please take a look at the project page and see if you wish to participate in the Sweeps. OhanaUnitedTalk page 15:39, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:LAME
Read the talk page:

I give up. I'm not going to bother contributing to this page, and after my FAC finishes, Wikipedia anymore. Do with the page whatever you want. You find the Good and Right thing to do. Centy  – [ reply ]• contribs  – 00:25, 10 October 2007 (UTC)


 * You will be missed... --Jayron32| talk | contribs 00:28, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy of Excel Students
Just a question here; I see you're an experienced editor and I've only been using NPW for a few weeks- why didn't you tag this one as ? Just curious. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 01:36, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help. I agree the exact tag is irrelevant and I go by the "look and feel" of the page. I don't know the exact priorities for deletion except that db-attack comes pretty high on the list, but your advice has assisted me. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 01:46, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Hogettes
Uploaded to commons. Image:2Hogettes.jpg  Lara  ❤  Love  04:43, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * User:LaraLove/Notebook. Ignore the vandalism list at the bottom. I don't normally draft articles, so I'm using a page that's normally used for other things.  Lara  ❤  Love  17:31, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah
Howdy, i have changed my comment and it is much more 'Wikipedia Appropriate'. I guess i was just a little annoyed about it thats all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.57.115.27 (talk • contribs)

Hogettes
That's OK, I just missed the Hall of Fame reference. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 10:56, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank for calling, you have reached the original author of Wikipedia's History of American football...
If you check the page history, you will find I started the article and that a good proportion of it is still my ideas and references, if no longer my exact words.

I liked my referencing system and IMO the one you use sucks, but that is just my opinion. But please don't tell me which referencing system to use.

I wasn't the original contributor of the stuff about Japan and Europe. I did think it was interesting material, the main points of which I checked through Google. I didn't think anyone would challenge it, let alone delete it, so I didn't reference it. I did notice when you deleted it as "trivia", but I only just got around to doing anything about it. It was also quite striking that the article did not have one single mention or link to IFAF or the World Cup. I also thought it a good idea to add Mexico, since it was the first country other than the US and Canada to play gridiron.

As for the "your stuff needs references" line....please. There is a lot of other info in that article (and in all articles) which is referenceable, but isn't. WP:CITE is many things, but it is not a license to delete stuff that you've never heard of/aren't interested in and/or think is trivial. (I mean FFS, sport is innately trivial).

By the way, I've never played the game, seen it live or associated with known gridiron players. I live in a country where it doesn't get much exposure and had rarely even paid attention to it on TV until recently. So, I have no vested interest in this subject. I just think the international amateur scene is interesting and so do plenty of people other than you. Please don't delete it again. Cheers, Grant  |  Talk  06:50, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Addition to Plymouth Colony
Hey! Thanks for your additions to the article Plymouth Colony. Its a really useful bit of information, but it seems to lack any references. Do you have a reference for the information you added? It would be really helpful if you could provide that. See WP:CITE and WP:V for more information on citing references. If you need help with that, let me know. We want to maintain the article at featured article standards, which it has earned. --Jayron32| talk | contribs 02:00, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I was merely summarizing the unreferenced information in Plymouth Company and Plymouth Council for New England. -- Beland 12:52, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

FL Main page proposal
You either nominated a WP:FLC or closed such a nomination this year. As such, you are the type of editor whose opinion I am soliciting. We now have over 400 featured lists and seem to be promoting in excess of 30 per month of late (41 in August and 42 in September). When Today's featured article (TFA) started (2004-02-22), they only had about 200 featured articles and were barely promoting 20 new ones per month. I think the quality of featured lists is at least as good as the quality of featured articles was when they started appearing on the main page. Thus, I am ready to open debate on a proposal to institute a List of the Day on the main page with nominations starting November 1 2007, voting starting December 1 2007 and main page appearances starting January 1 2008. For brevity, the proposal page does not discuss the details of eventual main page content, but since the work has already been done, you should consider this proposal assuming the eventual main page will resemble either an excerpted list format or an abbreviated text format. The proposal page does not debate whether starting with weekly list main page entries would be better than daily entries. However, I suspect persons in favor of weekly lists are really voicing opinions against lists on the main page since neither TFA nor Picture of the day started as weekly endeavors, to the best of my knowledge. Right now debate seems to be among support for the current selective democratic/consensus based proposal, a selective dictatorial approach like that used at WP:TFA or a non-selective first in line/calendar approach like that used at WP:POTD. See the List of the Day proposal and comment at WP:LOTDP and its talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:47, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Labour India
Sir, I have furnished sufficient references and info to support Labour India article. I also re-edited the article. Labour India is a well known brand name in Kerala’s educational functionaries. We neither put this matter for promotional purpose nor blatant advertisements. I therefore requesting you to re-consider the matter and delete speedy deletion templates from the page. Thank you, --Avinesh Jose 08:57, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for taking the time to write a more in-depth assessment of the Mobile, Alabama article! I found it very helpful. Altairisfar 20:19, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem! --Jayron32| talk | contribs 02:21, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey, I thought of that when I changed it, the article already has enough crap that gets added to other sections on a weekly basis, especially that "Notable residents" section(before I merged it) and the "Sports" section. Just finished doing my worst on the "Transportation" section and have the lead in my sandbox.  Believe it or not, I had already added or updated over 30 references to the article, it so full of inaccuracies and opinions that it has been exceedingly difficult to rewrite it and have it make sense after removing most of the BS.  I've been looking at it for so long that it's flaws were no longer apparent to me, so THANKS AGAIN!  I really appreciate you taking time to help.  Altairisfar 03:29, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, and BTW, I'm stealing your talk page header with a few modifications, I hope you don't mind. Altairisfar 03:45, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Do it. I stole it from someone too, so long ago I can't remember who... --Jayron32| talk | contribs  04:45, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

As requested...
Elvis Presley. There are "see also"s specific to certain topics, which are included as references. There are references that cite several different links. Some of the notes look like they could be included in the article. They cite wikiquote, which I don't think is appropriate. Very confusing.  Lara  ❤  Love  03:46, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

A little late, but better late than never
This is random, but I came across the History of American football article just now and it made me remember. I think I forgot to send my congrats after the FAC. So here it is: Congrats! Okiefromokla•talk 03:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Muchas gracias! --Jayron32| talk | contribs 04:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

David K. Wong
Hi, noticed your addition of tags to this article, thought I'd point out, as I did to BeanJosh that this appears to be recreated material from a speedily deleted page David Wong (since there's a message concerning that on the creators talk page from BeanoJosh). If so then it would fall under the 'recreation of deleted material' criteria for speedy deletion would it not? Number36 06:07, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks, I don't think it went through AFD, seems like it was deleted for lack of asserting notability with a speedy deletion, but was unsure if the recreation of deleted material criteria applied if it had been previously speedy deleted, your explanation on that point makes sense thanks. Also since I didn't see the original page I was unsure whether the page was recreated exactly the same or if it had been improved, so I thought it would be better to draw it to the attention of someone who had.Number36 06:18, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi again, just to be sure; I have added the same tag you did to the David K. Wong page, to the Adam Goldwyn page, since in this case it appears that it like the David Wong page was recreated after a speedy deletion (it appears so from the message on the creators talk page about it), is this correct?Number36 06:54, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi again, just noticed that an anonymous user has removed the tag you placed on the David K. Wong article, I would revert since there hasn't been any other changes to the article, but in the tag itself it says 'You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to its deletion for any reason.' and 'If this template is removed, it should not be replaced.', so what happens now?Number36 00:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 15

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —O bot  (t • c) 23:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Workshop
Hey Jayron. As you'd commented previously, I thought you might have a comment on this list. It's the various ways a nominator might list something on PR. Cheers, Marskell 20:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Redirect of Kate osborne
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Kate osborne, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Kate osborne is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Kate osborne, 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. CSDWarnBot 09:02, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Labcorp
I tagged Labcorp for speedy deletion as spam, and you replaced that with a copyright warning. It is such a blatant advertisement that it was presumably put in by Labcorp themselves, who will no doubt give permission to copy their website: wouldn't it be quicker to get rid of it as spam? Regards, JohnCD 19:26, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Nelsen Middle School
Why are you nominating this new article for deletion? As far as I am aware, a public school is not neccesary to delete --Bachcell 05:37, 27 October 2007 (UTC).

Wanted: Opinion
Does look like a notable, legit site to you?  Lara  ❤  Love  04:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

). Place comments that start a new topic at the bottom of the page and give them ==A descriptive header== . If you're new to Wikipedia, please see Welcome to Wikipedia and frequently asked questions. <div style="border: 1px solid #C0C090; background-color: #F8EABA; margin-left: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-right: 3px;"> Talk page guidelines'''
 * style="background-color: #FFFFFF;" |

Please respect Etiquette, assume good faith and be nice.
 * }

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for November 2007
The November 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the December 2007 issue. Dr. Cash 01:14, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Kem lambaian danau
I would like clarification of your speedy delete tagging of Kem lambaian danau. Clearly it does not belong on the English Wikipedia, but you tagged it as a foreign language article which exists on another Wikimedia project. Which one? I couldn't find it in the Malay or Indonesian Wikipedias. --Metropolitan90 07:02, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * To avoid any misunderstanding, I'm an administrator who was reviewing speedy deletion candidates to see if they qualified to be speedied. I had no involvement with writing the article, don't know what it was about, and don't even read whatever language it was written in. --Metropolitan90 06:03, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * In regard to your questions, the article was apparently speedily deleted on other grounds, namely, being a copyright violation. The text was apparently copied from a blog, so there is no great loss in its having been deleted. If you see an article on the English Wikipedia written in a foreign language, but which is not a duplicate of an article on another Wikimedia project, you can tag it as notenglish. If you know what language it's in, you can add that to the template:, for example. The template includes instructions on adding the foreign-language article's entry to Wikipedia:Pages needing translation. In addition, you can submit the article to WP:PROD assuming it qualifies for that, or otherwise to WP:AFD. While many editors believe that foreign-language articles are supposed to be allowed two weeks to be translated into English, I can't find a current policy or guideline stating that, and so as far as I can tell foreign language articles are subject to the ordinary deletion criteria of WP:PROD and WP:AFD. Just being in a foreign language, though, is not itself a speedy deletion criterion. --Metropolitan90 06:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Deletion of Article Julie Hrdlicka
This article was deleted due to Hrdlicka Notability and/or lack of reliable sources. I am wondering what is considered a reliable source since I noted that she was running for a political office and used the political parties website as a reference to prove she was running in the upcoming election. I have noticed on other candidates articles that this is not used and they have less proof then Hrdlicka, so I am baffled as to why her article was removed. Is a political parties website not considered a source written by a reliable third party. Please help me understand what is required as a reliable source? Thanks Lemonyjim 20:36, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

List of BNSF locomotives
I like the idea for a list of BNSF Locomotives, as well as those for other railroads. I've already swiped the text for the two BNSF's that are currently facing the threat of deletion. DanTD 15:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Go with it. As they say, be bold.  --Jayron32| talk | contribs  06:22, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

History of American Football
I am definitely of the opinion that pages with extremely long reference/notes sections should be "cleaned up" as it were with the use of either a scroll bar or a show/hide. I think it makes the page more aesthetically pleasing and easier to navigate. What are your qualms with using one of these mechanisms?

Tkasmai 19:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Reply You bring light to a good point about transparency and the user being able to see the research being done. I agree.

Tkasmai 16:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Hi Jayron - Many thanks for the support at my RfA. Even though the oppose discussion was an irrelevant tangent, I'm not convinced it is terribly helpful to strike out some of it. Do you mind if I undo that? Geometry guy 19:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Your contributions during the thread were very helpful, and it is easier to follow the discussion with them unstruck. Geometry guy 11:55, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you
<div style="padding: 5px; background: #FFDCF8; border-style: solid; border-width: 10px; border-color: #000000; font-family: Tahoma, sans-serif; font-size: 100%; "> <div style="margin-top: 3px; padding-top: 9px; padding-bottom: 9px; padding-left: 9px; padding-right: 9px; width: 200px; float: center;"> Click there to open your card! → → → Dearest Jayron, Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 137 supports, 22 opposes, and 5 neutrals. Your kind words of support and willingness to come to my defense are very much appreciated and I look forward to proving you right. I would like to give special thanks to The_undertow  and  Phoenix-wiki  for their co-nominations. Thank you again and best regards.  Lara  ❤  Love  19:43, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Credits: This RFA thanks was inspired by  The Random Editor 's RFA thanks which was inspired by Phaedriel 's RFA thanks.

Gilbert Perreault
I think what you were missing with my objection is that I was on my way to having consensus on how to go forward with the article based on the 5 comments at WP:GAR. However, the conversation was in a sense rebooted and recommended to WP:RFC where he was given a chance to get all his hockey buddies to say any half way reasonable thing to stop me from reverting his changes properly. Now we are locked in another debate that has no consensus for reasons I have explained. I can't just say, I now have 5 guys at GAR who know what they are talking about because at RFC 5 guys who may have reviewed 50 WP:GAs each are offset by 5 guys who like to work with User:RGTraynor regardless of whether they know what a GA is.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 20:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * And you still have those comments. They didn't get unhappened. --Jayron32| talk | contribs  00:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting something like WP:MC? (Could you reply to my talk page).--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 13:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
 * There seems to be a major disconnect. I did not submit it to WP:GAR to get a keep verdict only.  I submitted it for endorsed actions to take to keep it at WP:GA.  The GAR was aborted and although the actions I had hoped for were endorsed there, I was told to go to WP:RFC.  At RFC a bunch of hockey guys who talk like they don't know much about good articles started chiming in.  There the debate ended up heading toward no consensus.  I can't go and make the proper changes because the GAR consensus was aborted and the recommended process resulted in no consensus.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 22:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

(undent) hello, hope I'm not being too forward..I'm watching jayron's talk because I left (and soon after deleted) a message on it recently, and my settings are to watch whatever I edit...if I had been in your shoes, I woulda very politely asked those folks who supported my position in GAR if they would consider commenting on the RfC. I don't think that's canvassing, do you? I mean, they were involved in the original round of discussion. --Ling.Nut 00:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

my rfa
<div style="padding: 5px; background: #8AA5DB; border-style: solid; border-width: 2px; border-color: #FF4F00; font-family: Tahoma, sans-serif; font-size: 100%; "> <div style="margin-top: 3px; padding-top: 9px; padding-bottom: 9px; padding-left: 9px; padding-right: 9px; width: 400px; float: center;"> <font color="#002FA7">If you voted in my RFA... <font color="#002FA7">...thank you for your participation. I withdrew with 83 supports, 42 opposes, and 8 neutrals. Your kind words and constructive criticism are very much appreciated. I look forward to using the knowledge I have accrued through the process to better the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers and Wikidudeman for their co-nominations. <font color="#002FA7">Thank you again and, best regards. Van Tucky  Talk <font color="#002FA7"> This RFA thanks was inspired by <font color="BA55D3">Lara <font color="00CED1">❤ <font color="FF1493">Love's 

Harriet Tubman peer review
Hello! I noticed you're signed up as a potential peer reviewer. I've spent some time improving Harriet Tubman and I'm trying to get it ready for FAC. Would you care to do a peer review? Thanks in advance. – Scartol  ·  Talk  02:27, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Featured List of the Day Experiment
There have been a series of proposals to initiate a Featured List of the Day on the main page. Numerous proposals have been put forth. After the third one failed, I audited all WP:FL's in order to begin an experiment in my own user space that will hopefully get it going. Today, it commences at WP:LOTD. Afterwards I created my experimental page, a new proposal was set forth to do a featured list that is strikingly similar to my own which is to do a user page experimental featured list, but no format has been confirmed and mechanism set in place. I continue to be willing to do the experiment myself and with this posting it commences. Please submit any list that you would like to have considered for list of the day in the month of January 2008 by the end of this month to WP:LOTD and its subpages. You may submit multiple lists for consideration.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 17:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Many thanks for all your contributions to my RfA. I'm looking forward to working with you in the future to make GAR an even better process! Geometry guy 20:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 16

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —<font color="#2E82F4">O <font color="#2E82F4">bot  (t • c) 23:39, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Re:
actually i was a bit busy and still i am busy....so its hard to come frequently.

thanks for remembering me.

Rohan (talk) 06:33, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

He just wrote this statement on his userpage. And yes, there are no balls on there. That is an organization, though. -<font color="#006400">Go od  sh oped 04:46, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * There may be many very good reasons to block this person post-haste. I just don't see it in the user name.  --Jayron32| talk | contribs  04:56, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Frederick Peterson
Everything looks good. I'll defer further edits to you. Kindest regards, AlphaEta  18:10, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey. I nuked the Day of Black Sun, part 2, because there was no way to verify the content legally, but in case you chance across it later you should now that it's not an episode from a web broadcast, but from pretty much the biggest thing currently in cartoons and amongst college nerds. The site quoted was where it had been leaked to. Cheers, Kizor (talk) 02:20, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Notice of request for deletion of editor :)
, the editor you are, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that you satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space. Your opinions on yourself are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at User:R/EFD and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit during the discussion but should not remove the editors for deletion template from the top of your userpage; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you, and have a good sense of humor :). -<font color="#006400">Go od  sh oped 05:00, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

LOL!
Never seen it put that way before! :) Jmlk  1  7  07:30, 25 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Fine, don't ever get on yahoo and talk to me anymore, ass. But this is too hilarious. I miss your funny as hellzness. I'm off to sleep.  Lara  ❤  Love  08:28, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Videoman
What's wrong wit Videoman? huh? --The Dark Lord of Wiki (talk) 14:37, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Barbara Gordon
Hello,

I've put the article through a number of revisions to address the issues brought up by the peer review and I've asked this article not be delisted- or at the very least, be renominated/reviewed. If there is any further criticism/commentary you can add to the WP:GAR, please do so. Thankyou for your time and consideration. Bookkeeperoftheoccult (talk) 01:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Mentoring Barnstar

 * Thanks! It was my pleasure!--Jayron32| talk | contribs  18:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

November Rain
I just wanted to say that I'm very sad that you have apparently abandoned Yahoo! Messenger. It saddens me that we never chat anymore. :(  Lara  ❤  Love  06:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Spiffier triple crown, new awards available
Hi, I've been sprucing up the triple crown awards. Here's the new version of the standard triple crown you've already earned. Feel free to replace your old one with this if you like the new version better. I've also introduced two new triple crown awards for editors who've done a lot of triple crown work: the Napoleonic and Alexander the Great edition awards. If you're active in a WikiProject, check out the new offer for custom WikiProject triple crowns. I'll make those upon request if five or more editors qualify. See User:Durova/Triple crown winner's circle for more information. Thanks for your hard work, and cheers! Durova Charge! 21:41, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Gold Greatest Hits.jpg
Thanks so much for helping me to resolve the problem. I'll keep that in mind next time. -- Cuyler 91093  contributions  06:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem! --Jayron32| talk | contribs 06:49, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Secret Page
I guess it wasn't supposed to be that hard. Barnstar for you! You can add the barnstar template to your user page if you want. Or, if you prefer, you can also add the icon template. See the page for details. Great job in finding it, btw! -- Cuyler 91093  contributions  07:05, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, it was good for 30 seconds of fun! Anyhoo, have a nice day! --Jayron32| talk | contribs  17:48, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I definitely will have a nice day. Regarding the image, I understand now why it can't be on the page. I'll leave it be, and thanks for the help (again)! -- Cuyler 91093  contributions  22:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * What's a good name to disguise my secret page? Any suggestions? -- Cuyler 91093  contributions  05:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll respond here to keep it, an um, secret. I would try a page named "barnstars" because its hidden under a barnstar.  It would confuse people... --Jayron32| talk | contribs  05:07, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


 * You're very smart. I'll try it. Thanks for the help! Nice to find a Wikipedia contributor that's friendly, outgoing and intelligent. -- Cuyler 91093  contributions  05:14, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Really? Where?  --Jayron32| talk | contribs  05:29, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Haha... Humble, too, so I see. -- Cuyler 91093  contributions  10:04, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Also, how did you figure out where my secret page was? What's your secret? -- Cuyler 91093  contributions  10:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I have no secrets... At least, none that you know about :) --Jayron32| talk | contribs 19:10, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Awesome stuff!
Just something to say thanks for helping out with the Elvis Assessment Drive and assessing loads of articles - you really did help and it couldn't have been done without you. Keep up the excellent work! :) Regards from Spawn Man (talk) 06:51, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * How does this always happen to me? A music barnstar for 5 assessments? *Shakes head*  Lara  ❤  Love  15:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Not my fault!!!! I tried, but y'all beat me to it!!!! --Jayron32| talk | contribs 04:03, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I know. But the same thing happened during the Summer backlog elimination drive for GA. Awards handed out by someone who had not done any of the planning for the drive. They were given out too early and some editors received them that shouldn't have, in that case it included the user handing them out. I just don't get it.  Lara  ❤  Love  04:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Help again, please!
The Betacommandbot is tagging my images again. Could you help me a little bit in making the images okay? Thanks. -- Cuyler 91093  contributions  20:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! I'll put it in a template, and I'll be sure to do this. Thank you so much! -- Cuyler 91093  contributions  04:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for December 2007
The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the January 2008 issue. Dr. Cash 01:03, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Content review/workshop
Hi Jayron - I don't know if you're still following the goings-on on the above page, but having taken the PR topic as far as we can for now, we're currently deciding on the next topic for discussion. Your input, if you still have the time and inclination to get involved, would be most welcome ;) <font color="RoyalBlue">EyeSerene <font color="OliveDrab">TALK 10:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi
Greetings, can you tell me where you got those cute smily faces......????? Thank you and God Bless...Have a wonderful day....

Rianon Burnet 17:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes thank you, It did make me feel better!!!! I passed it on.........

Rianon Burnet 13:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Request for help
I just requested a peer review for Youngstown Ohio Works, an article on an early 20th-century baseball club. I saw your name on the list of volunteer reviewers and wondered if you could take a peek at this article. I've been told that it's close to GA standards but would benefit from the feedback of an experienced editor. I'd appreciate any help you could provide! Sincerely, -- twelsht (talk) 00:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Jayron 32, Thank you so much for the kind comments and recommendations! This article has certainly benefited from the review process. It's grown by perhaps 400 words since its nomination several days ago. By the way, I acted on your suggestion to tone down some of the language, which was an issue in the "Legacy" section. I think I've removed most of the peacock words. If you wouldn't mind giving it a second look, I'd very much appreciate it. Thank you, again, for your feedback! Sincerely, -- twelsht (talk) 14:49, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Jayron32, I just wanted to let you know that another participant in the Youngstown Wiki Project nominated the article for FA status. Again, I appreciate your feedback and support! Sincerely, -- twelsht (talk) 20:28, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

RE: NC Maps
I will work on that. I've been having the same problem and am thinking about actually splitting the maps to have one in the article and make a more simple overview map for the infobox. Do you still find legibility an issue when you open the map up for the full view? I find even that a bit small, but that's as big as my map making software will export the file.

What is your opinion on having the overview with a full map in the article? I will give that a try with NC 7 sometime today and let me know what you think. I appreciate any advice or recommendations! Exw81 {talk|contribs } 13:48, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Peterborough (UK Parliament constituency)
Thanks for your support. I'm not quite sure about the procedure for closing the reassessment and listing the article. It might be better for you to do this rather than me, so there is no conflict of interest. Alternatively, I could just re-nominate, if you will review and pass it. Please let me know what you think anyway. Chrisieboy (talk) 13:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject College football December 2007 Newsletter
The December 2007 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Rick DeBruhl
I notice that you began the AfD process for Rick DeBruhl, and transcluded the nomination page onto the daily AfD log, but I don't see the actual nomination page. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:48, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, I fixed it for you. You can offer your opinion there if you want. Ten Pound Hammer  • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 04:50, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, seems Metropolitan90 and I were both a little impatient, heh. Ten Pound Hammer  • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 04:50, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I sent them both at the same time. It looks like one arived a split second before the other.  I fixed it all.  --Jayron32| talk | contribs  04:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Good article review
Since you were active in the Good Article review of Latin, you might be interested in reviewing Latin mnemonics. Jonathan de Boyne Pollard (talk) 12:17, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Denied prod for Brian Stann
Hello, I denied the prod for this article after careful review. I found WEC 26, WEC 28, and WEC 30 in Special:Whatlinkshere/Brian Stann, and saw that those articles list him as having won his class. This satisfies me as an assertion of notability, so prod would not be an appropriate avenue for deletion of this article. Feel free to list it at WP:AFD, where it could receive a more thorough review. Thanks, JERRY talk contribs 15:16, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. I won't contest this.  That is clear notability.  No more issues from me.  --Jayron32| talk | contribs  17:27, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Buddy
Even though you live in NC, I think it's admin time. the_undertow talk  09:41, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I can totally wait. If I'm not banned by next year, I will be happy to co-nom, if you will allow it. the_undertow talk  22:46, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Portland Trail Blazers
Hi there. I recently requested a peer review on the article Portland Trail Blazers, and I found that you had listed yourself on the peer review volunteers. Could you possibly review the article if you have the time? Thanks. T he  C hronic  23:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Will do! --Jayron32| talk | contribs 23:37, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, again, for your support
This message is to thank you for supporting the FA nomination of Youngstown Ohio Works. Earlier today, I learned that the article had been promoted. Please know that your feedback and support were appreciated. Sincerely, -- twelsht (talk) 03:11, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

The Rape of Nanking (book) GA status
What is a good article? states that one of the attributes of good article is: "It is stable; that is, it does not change significantly from day to day and is not the subject of an ongoing edit war." Content dispute=instability (as well as lack of NPOV). The very fact that this discussion is occurring is indicative of the instability of the article. How exactly is this fact irrelevant? --Saintjust (talk) 07:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Content dispute is the very reason why the article lacks stability, a necessary attribute of good articles. There is no point in requesting for GA delisting if the content dispute was already resolved. RfC is an independent issue. --Saintjust (talk) 07:12, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * No, delisting will not endorse my version. For what disqualifies an article from GA status is the very existence of a content dispute/edit warring. It's not about a specific version of the article being biased or what not. It's about the unstable status of the article, flipping back and forth between different versions. For the purpose of GA disqualification, only the recognition of the content dispute suffices. There is no need to endorse one version over the other. An article being unstable and the content of a version of an article being N/POV are two different things. --Saintjust (talk) 17:12, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * It doesn't apply to the NPOV dispute. Even if the article doesn't change day by day, that the neutrality of the content is being disputed still remains. And you don't have to recognize one version being more neutral than the other in order to recognize the existence of a NPOV dispute. --Saintjust (talk) 03:21, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 * The content dispute is over the NPOV of the article, and the instability/edit warring is a result of it.


 * The point is that delisting does not endorse either of the parties in the content dispute. Recognizing the existence of a NPOV dispute and recognizing one of the parties' pov being right are two different things.


 * My argument in the content dispute and my argument in the GA status discussion are separate. It's incorrect to assume that I filed the delisting to advance my point in the content dispute because it just doesn't work that way for a fact. --Saintjust (talk) 03:44, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Peer review request
I recently requested a peer review for Jimmy McAleer, a B-class sports biography that appears to be close to GA standards. The article concerns a 19th- and early 20th-century baseball figure who was instrumental in the establishment of the American League. Any recommendations to improve this article would be greatly appreciated! Sincerely, -- twelsht (talk) 07:09, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm on it. --Jayron32| talk | contribs 16:41, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks! -- twelsht (talk) 17:51, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Regarding Jimmy McAleer, I came across a passage in a 1931 newspaper article that supposedly outlines McAleer's account of his rift with Ban Johnson. I say "supposedly" because the reporter wrote that McAleer provided this information to him with the understanding that it would not appear in print while McAleer was alive. Hence, when the article was published, McAleer was safely dead: a situation that raises questions about authenticity. The information was published, so I don't think there's a danger of OR. But it does need to be properly presented. Any thoughts would be much appreciated. Thanks, -- twelsht (talk) 15:05, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I forgot to mention that the material is included in the last graph of "Managerial career." Thanks, again, -- twelsht (talk) 15:12, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I inserted the infobox, and it looks great!! In line with another reviewer's suggestion, I filled out the "Playing career" section and created a couple of new sections. I don't see a need to draw more attention to McAleer's initiation of the custom in which the U.S. President throws out the first ball of the season. That really isn't the highlight of his career. The fact that he's remembered primarily for this innovation suggests how far his reputation has fallen. If you have time to give the article another quick glance, I'd appreciate it. Either way, thanks for all of your feedback--especially during a hectic time of the year! Below is a small token of my appreciation. Best, -- twelsht (talk) 03:18, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Volume 1, Issue 17

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Want to change your method of delivery? – It's all here. —<font color="#2E82F4">O <font color="#2E82F4">bot  (t • c) 04:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

What do you know...
...you are funny! &mdash;Bo L  @  06:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hell's yeah! --Jayron32| talk | contribs 06:44, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I apologize if I didn't think you were failing WP:HUMOR. &mdash;Bo L  @  06:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll keep agreeing with you, even if you are so terse, I can't follow your side of the conversation. So Hell's Yeah again!!! --Jayron32| talk | contribs  06:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Yo
Are you online right now?  Lara  ❤  Love  04:18, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Check out Knitta. Look GA quality?  Lara  ❤  Love  04:26, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * That was hella-fast. But thanks. :)  Lara  ❤  Love  04:29, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes and yes. I nominated it last night. Looks like it will be going up.  Lara  ❤  Love  04:32, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

New England Patriots
Hi Jayron22,

I removed the thins you added back to the 1963 Boston Patriots season, it was getting in the way while I was adding the records. But now you put it back, it doesn't get in the way! Thanks Ohmpandya (talk) 19:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Notability for "MOVEit" and "Standard Networks"
Hi - I noticed you flagged various entries for MOVEit software and the Standard Networks corporation for deletion in November for non-notability. I'd like to offer some references as proof of notability.
 * http://www.isp-planet.com/equipment/2002/moveit_dmz.html
 * http://wistechnology.com/article.php?id=700
 * http://www.tech-centric.net/it-jobs/Secure-FTP-Software-Administrator_462445
 * http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-89971336.html
 * (long url)
 * http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2005/nov/1205925.htm
 * https://scac.setoff.org/doc/en/MOVEitDMZ_GeneralInformation_FederalRegs_PrivacySecurityAuditing.htm
 * http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Free+MOVEit+Secure+File+Transfer+Clients-a0141006557
 * http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-2845587_ITM
 * http://www.thefreelibrary.com/MOVEit+DMZ+Exceeds+FFIEC+Two-Factor+Authentication+Guidelines-a0154170468

I'd also ask that you consider "MOVEit Freely" separately - that was the first MOVEit/Standard Networks article that appeared in Wikipedia (several years ago I think) and its widespread use (100,000's of end users compared to 500 or so large companies for MOVEit DMZ, etc.) may justify its inclusion in the encyclopedia. Some typical references to this utility include:
 * http://www.securityfocus.com/tools/2525
 * http://www.autohotkey.com/forum/topic15015.html
 * http://moveit-freely.standard-networks.qarchive.org/

Jonathan.lampe@standardnetworks.com (talk) 00:06, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Follow up on Snooth
Just a comment because the discussion was closed, my problem with the business week mention is that its trivial coverage. Trivial doesn't refer to the publication itself, but the nature of the coverage. A single sentence in which its mentioned isn't significant coverage. Regardless of who publishes it, people are extremely unlikely to remember a website that got a 1 line name-drop in some article, and WRAL is just a reprint of the venture beat blog. Hence why I cited that discussion at the reliable sources noticeboard. --Crossmr (talk) 02:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Jimmy McAleer
Hi, Jayron32,

This is just a quick note to let you know that I nominated Jimmy McAleer for the FAC. Thanks, again, for all of your feedback! Best, -- twelsht (talk) 16:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments! I think the opposed reviewer's concerns have more to do with prose than POV issues. I can't think of a statement included in the article that isn't supported (directly or indirectly) by a citation. In the interest of addressing the reviewer's concerns about "colorful" prose (and this seems to be the issue), I pared down some of the language. I also introduced a small section on the subject's personal life. I'm unlikely to find out more about this gentleman without interviewing his relatives, which would be a clear violation of Wikipedia's ban on original research. Best, -- twelsht (talk) 22:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

747
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Boeing_747

Thanks for your comments. I'm trying to improve the article not argue with you. After discussion with SandyGeorgia, it was suggested that I contact you and see if your concerns for FA have been addressed. If so, please change your "oppose" conclusion.

Since your comments, Fnlayson and I have gone over the article with a fine tooth comb and made improvements. A LOCE editor did the same thing. I hope you aren't saying that the LOCE review was incompetant. Archtransit (talk) 22:06, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Jayron 32, my friend
I apologise for calling you an imbecile during the deletion debate for the Lord of Darkness article. I have a tendency to lash out at people you see and I'm trying to improve my behaviour because I must admit it leaves a lot to be desired at the moment. But I can be nice, I can be really nice when I try. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. --Illustrious One (talk) 16:56, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

1963 pats
Hey Jayron, Thanks for the compliments and the suggestions. I made the edits. (Except the color thing). How does it look? Please give me feedback, if in anyway I could make the article better. Thanks!--Ohmpandya (talk) 19:31, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Peer Review of Carbon
Hello, I saw your name on Peer review/volunteers saying you can be contacted about Peer Reviews about Chemistry. I am contacting you because I have just put Carbon for peer review. Any comments would be appreciated. Zginder(talk) (Contrib) 21:40, 30 December 2007 (UTC)