User talk:Jlittlet

Revenge play
Great work at Revenge play! Nice to have someone here who knows detectably more about this than I do.

Given the level of detail in your list of plays, I'm guessing that you didn't just write all of this off the top of your head, but I notice you don't cite any sources. I see this is a relatively new account; I don't know if you've even glanced Cite sources or Verifiability, but citing sources is important, for all sorts of reasons.

If I can be any help, just drop me a note on my talk page; always very glad to see people here who know their way around literature, we are a bit heavy with tech geeks and political warriors. -- Jmabel | Talk 09:15, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Aside
I just wanted to compliment you on your wonderful work on the aside article. As a side note, it would be wonderful if you could cite your sources in future work. Good job!  Wh e  re  (talk) 03:23, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Adventurer
Nice paragraph, thanks. GRuban 13:49, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Continuator
While it's great that you've added some references, I think you need to be more specific about some of the specific claims you made in the text you added (for example, that Virgil "intended to legitimate [sic] and elevate the Roman Empire") by providing specific citations from those works. Thanks. | Klaw ¡digame! 00:05, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * That's a good start. I formatted the endnotes per Footnotes, so you may want to check that out for future reference. | Klaw ¡digame! 04:54, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

You've got a barnstar

 * You're doing a fine job--just remember to sign with four of these: ~ . Best of luck, AdamBiswanger1 16:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Edit summaries
I have noted that you often edit without an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. An edit summary is even more important if you delete any text; otherwise, people may think you're being sneaky. Also, mentioning one change but not another one can be misleading to someone who finds the other one more important; add "and misc." to cover the other change(s). Thanks! — Prodigenous Zee - 23:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Course evaluation pipes
Hi Jlittlet,

Why all these pipes for Course evaluation? It's not a proper noun, so it shouldn't be capitalized. Changing the name in a See also list, e.g., seems counterproductive as well. Rfrisbietalk 21:18, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * You wrote...
 * Hello, I am not sure I am doing this right; please bear with me. I am not sure what a "pipe" is, but if it's the link divided by |, then my reasoning was this: I was merging "Course evaluations" with "Course evaluation," and when I corrected the links to "Course evaluations," I used the | to preserve the appearance of the page. I apologize if this is not the correct way; I am new to merging. Jlittlet 21:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, piped links are those verticle lines that let you change how a link is displayed!

Sorry for assuming you made the original caps changes and the renaming pipes. In most cases, links are best displayed in their "unpiped" form. Go ahead and reply here, if you want, to keep the conversation in one place. Rfrisbietalk 21:43, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks for the tip. I will fix those links and try to avoid piped links in the future...although I am somewhat addicted to them, sadly. Jlittlet 22:19, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I use them a lot too. The piped links page (piped above

) has some good tips. Rfrisbietalk 22:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Fascism and ideology
In your recent edit at Fascism and ideology, you claimed to have "fixed" a link but you merely removed it. I've restored. - Jmabel | Talk 03:10, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piped_link: "Do not use piped links to create "easter egg links", that require the reader to follow them before understanding what's going on." I wrote that I "fixed" the link because I removed such an "easter egg" link. I should note also that you didn't "restore" the link, but rather updated it to reflect the merger of "Fascism (epithet)" and "Fascist (epithet)". Jlittlet 03:23, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * So do you think I should have restored the link that simply redirects to the same place? That seems odd.
 * I don't think it is too Easter Eggy, but if you really think so, then there would be two ways to fix it: ' fascism is often used as a term of abuse ' or ' fascism is often used as a term of abuse (see fascist (epithet)) '. I would not object to either of those edits, though I find them a bit heavyhanded. - Jmabel | Talk 03:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Department of Botany
Your recent edit to Department of Botany (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 20:16, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Merges
Hello Jlittlet. I noticed you complete lots of unopposed merges, after one of them made it to my watchlist (Animal language). Is there some way without too much effort for you how you could put *what* the merge is with in your edit summaries? It took me a bit of hunting in your contributions to find that it was with Animal language acquisition. Eminently sensible, but only ALA was tagged merge not AL so it took some digging. Thanks. Martinp 18:20, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Merge: Human rights in Indonesia
Similar to the comment above, there does not appear to be any info on what articles were merged. Could you please list which article the new text came from (and thus was presumably removed). thanks --Merbabu 02:34, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for catching the additional vandalism on Brown v. Board of Education -- I missed it when I reverted, guess I didn't revert back far enough. -- ArglebargleIV 14:54, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Refectory
I've restored the page. One of the core ideas of WP:PROD is that it only takes a single objection to defeat a PROD at any point, before or even after the deletion. You've objected, and I've restored the page. - TexasAndroid 12:31, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

DYK
Hi, the following is copied from my user page, as looking in the history you did a lot of work on the historic Fortune Theatre. I recently split the modern and historic theatres. It appears to have attracted some attention.


 * Nice article! I've been tweaking the refs and was wondering if you could specify which volume was used from Bentley? I strongly suspect it's vol. 6 (Theaters), but I'd like confirmation. Page numbers would rock my socks, but I won't be pushing it ;-) Circeus 01:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I only split the article; previously the modern and historic playhouses were confounded on the one page. I was trying to create a nav-box for London theatres, and most were in an appalling state, and I tried to correct some glaring anomalies as I went along. This was one of them, so the article is not my progeny. Like yourself, I have tweaked, and am aware that more tweaking is required. One is chasing down the refs, and putting more in-line from multiple sources. The e-theatre group (link on Fortune Playhouse talk page) specialise in the area; although I did some work on The Theatre, The Curtain and The Red Lion (playhouse); I can't claim to be an expert. (I would bet that User talk:Jlittlet would be a good place to start (from Fortune Theatre history). HTH. Kbthompson 01:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Fortune Playhouse
Actually, adding them to the bottom reference is probably sufficient. Circeus 17:09, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Re:Random query ... Wimpole Street (near the Park = Regent's Park). I used to work in Wimpole Street, and it's behind Oxford Street, to the w. of Oxford Circus. The bottom of Tottenham Court Road (half mile to the east) was St Giles, a notorious rookery (slum) (and also the location of a brewery, which burst and drowned many of the inhabitants!), not the place for 'nice young gal', even one of independent spirit. She writes to To H.S. Boyd - Monday, September 19, 1843, about the "dog-banditti" - He dashed up the stairs into my room and into my arms, where I hugged him and kissed him, black as he was--black as if imbued in a distillation of St. Giles's.  - but says they hunted the bandits into the City ... That's all I can find, except the ransom paid was 6.5 guineas ... some information seems to be conflated with the tale Flush wagged by Virginia Woolf, not one of her best, but a best seller.
 * Now that's all the time I want to spend in a fluffie-wuffie 18th century, for now. My normal haunt is doan-east, where the murders is dun. HTH Kbthompson 18:20, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Robert Lockyer
Thanks for the article. --Philip Baird Shearer 08:36, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

A

shakespeare project
Hi! Just noticed your work on Macbeth and wanted to invite you to the new WikiProject Shakespeare. Wrad 21:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Will do. Wrad 00:18, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The San Francisco Improv Co-Operative
I noticed that you merged The San Francisco Improv Festival into The San Francisco Improv Alliance. There is another merge proposal, with minimal discussion (you are the sole contributor) re The San Francisco Improv Co-Operative. I am cleaning the June backlog, but I thought that you would be a better person to make the merge (or remove the tag if thats what you decide). Grumpyyoungman01 08:10, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Shakespeare project collaboration
The Shakespeare Project has begun a collaboration to bring its main article, William Shakespeare, to FA status. If you wish to contribute, please review the to-do list on its talk page. Let's make this article an FA! Wrad 15:27, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Wrad/Literary Criticism of Hamlet
The above page is one of my works in progress, and still needs a lot of work. I've just noticed you seem to have access to good sources and wanted to invite you to add to it if you like. It is obviously a big project, and I could use some help to make it more presentable. Wrad 23:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Go ahead and add now. We just need enough to fill in major points and put it on mainspace. I like how you say it: "when it goes live." Like a TV show. Wrad 03:56, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Everything on the page has a source, even if it doesn't look that way. The entire history section, for example, comes from the same book.  I'd love to have you add to it, with only one request.  Maybe just add the information and the citations you have separate from the rest of the prose, then we can mix it in later, without me losing track of what came from where. Wrad 20:16, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Sounds great. Things will probably change once we get more facts worked into the history section.  I just want to be able to tell what comes from where, since that one source of mine produced so much information that could get split up and lost (or at least the source could get lost) between edits. Feel free to put any other ideas and comments on the talk page of our work in progress. Wrad 21:17, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Also... Just looked at you sandbox and saw your intro. I love it!  Feel free to replace my lousy version with that one. Wrad 21:20, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Looks great! Thanks for the help. Wrad 16:36, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Shakespeare Collaboration
The Shakespeare Wikiproject is starting another collaboration to bring Romeo and Juliet to GA status. Our last collaboration on William Shakespeare is still in progress, but in the copyedit stage. If you have strong copyedit skills, you may wish to continue the work on that article. Members with skills in other areas are now moving on. Improving Romeo and Juliet article will set a standard for all other Shakespeare plays, so we look forward to seeing everyone there. Thanks for all your help with the project. Wrad 20:42, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Stylistics
I have replaced the link to the word 'linguists', which you removed from this article and provided a link to to the article 'linguist'. I feel that as this is the first use of this important term it is not, as you say, 'redundant'. Any thoughts welcome, BL

Albacon
Hi, thank you for your little fixes to this article. Bearian 22:29, 28 July 2007 (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 11:27, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Hamlet Criticism
Hey, I'm about to put this page online, and I was wondering if you could fix the refs for the stuff you added. Thanks. Wrad 23:52, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help, the article is now up and running as Hamlet literary criticism and has been nominated as a Did you know? on the main page within the next few days. Incidentally, I've noticed your work on Cymbeline (one of my favorite plays), and was wondering if you had refs for all the stuff you're adding. I've got it on my watchlist and loved your edits. I just found myself cringing every time I didn't see a ref for it. I plan to work on that article later on and would hate to have to add all the refs myself. Don't mean to offend, just looking out for the wiki. :) Wrad 00:40, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, is Macbeth one of your favorites/future plans? Oh, I looked at your userpage, and heartily agree about finding a way to discuss play dates better. Take a look at some of the efforts at List of Shakespeare's works. Wrad 01:08, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Los Angeles, Calfornia
I noticed you filled in the sourcing gaps on the history section of the Los Angeles article. Nice, but your additions are in a nonstandard format. I'd recommend using Template:Cite web or Template:Cite book templates for clarification. It's also less work for the day the article approaches FA status. Thanks.--Loodog 02:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

New GA collaboration
The project is trying to decide on a new collaboration on the project talk page. I'd be interested in what you think it should be, since you would be a big help as part of it... Take a look. Wrad 00:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Shakespeare in performance
Here is the article you were asking about. It's actually up for GA status, so it may need some help getting through. Wrad 04:14, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Hamlet
The Shakespeare Project's new collaboration is now to bring Hamlet to GA status. Wrad 00:36, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Question at merbabus talk page
I am sure he can answer for himself - however in the indonesian project and australian project the word bibliography has been not used/avoided/discarded in the main by either - external links, further reading (ie clearly not used to create the article) and references where in line cites show up. cheers SatuSuro 03:11, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Mind you I bet some projects do things dffferently cheers :) SatuSuro 03:25, 14 September 2007 (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 22:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Please do not delete cleanup tags from articles.
Please do not disguise removal of cleanup/dispute templates with edit summaries that do not mention such deletions but only mention non-controversial changes. —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93; ‹(-¿-)› 04:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi: I have removed my attempt at fact-checking the article, and I apologize for not having been more complete. I should note, however, that my summary on removing the no-wiki comment ("remove no-wiki comment") was arguably more precise than yours on placing it there ("just some general improvements"). I should note also that you added a citation tag to a sentence that you added in January. Having noted these things, I leave the article to more capable editors. Jlittlet 05:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * If the biblio. stuff you added and then removed was actually relevant, then by all means please add it back, and use it to cite facts in the article. My objection was to removal of the refs cleanup tag, since the article (with or without the biblio section) was not citing any sources for anything.  And, I don't exempt myself from any fault for that, which is why I fact-tagged my own addition.  I was sloppy or tired or something that day and forgot to cite my source, so I'm shaming myself for it. :-)  Anyway, sorry if I ticked you off; that wasn't the intent. Nor was it to besmirch your three books, but rather to say "use &lt;ref&gt; and Cite book so we have actual ref. citations." :-) PS: On further thought, I think this may simply be a procedural confusion. I think you were adding sources that do confirm something(s) in the stub article there, but didn't actually cite them as references, and I interpreted them as "by the way" additions of "see also" material, when you meant them as ref. citations. If that sounds plausible, let me know. PS: I'm temporarily watchlisting this page so you only need to reply here. —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93;  ‹(-¿-)› 07:50, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

William Farren
Hello. I see that you added lots of interesting information to the William Farren article, but you did not add any citations to the information that you used to find this research. Would you please add some citations? See WP:CITE for information on how to use citations in Wikipedia. Thanks! -- Ssilvers 18:44, 8 October 2007 (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 02:43, 17 October 2007 (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 17:10, 12 November 2007 (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) 05:43, 19 December 2007 (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) 04:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

399 to go
We are almost done, Category:Articles lacking sources from June 2006 is down to less the 400 articles to find references for. I would like to thank you for listing yourself as a volunteer at Unreferenced articles and would like to take this opportunity to invite you to visit the project again and work on getting the last few articles referenced. We started with 5,572 and we are in the home stretch, please come and try to do a couple a day and we can finish it up in no time. Jeepday (talk) 02:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Westside (Los Angeles County)
We need Sources for the above article. Can you help. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 18:53, 22 February 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) 23:57, 18 March 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) 15:41, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

New Focus at Unreferenced articles
The huge set of unreferenced articles from June of 2006 is finally completed. Thank you for your contributions. The new focus at Unreferenced articles is Category:Articles lacking sources from July 2006 which as of May 28 is only 1,322 articles and should go much quicker. Thank you to everyone who has contributed and listed themselves as a volunteer. Jeepday (talk) 12:00, 28 May 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) 17:16, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Romeo and Juliet collaboration
Greetings! The current Shakespeare Project Collaboration is Romeo and Juliet. This project is currently going a thorough peer review and copyedit before moving on to FAC. The link to the peer review is Peer review/Romeo and Juliet/archive1. Have a look! « Diligent Terrier   Bot    (talk)   20:47, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Ha!
Re this edit of yours from October 2006: how wrong you were. And it only took me two years to get around to doing it. — Hex    (❝  ?!  ❞)   01:19, 27 August 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) 03:53, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Shakespeare notice
There is currently a discussion going on regarding the project's policy on how information on characters should be represented in articles on Shakespeare's plays. Please take part by clicking Talk:Romeo and Juliet. Further context, if needed, can be found by scanning the two previous talk sections on the page as well. Sent by §hepBot  ( Disable )  at 04:19, 11 November 2008 (UTC) per request of Wrad (talk)

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) 21:11, 14 December 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) 12:37, 14 February 2009 (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) 12:40, 1 April 2009 (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) 23:59, 13 August 2009 (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) 02:45, 16 January 2010 (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) 21:23, 15 March 2010 (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, 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) 05:08, 6 June 2010 (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, 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) 05:12, 9 July 2010 (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, 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) 17:00, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Love's Labour's Lost
Since it appears you do not use your Wikipedia account much anymore, this may very likely be a lost cause, but I wanted to let you know that after several years and many edits, a few other Wikipedia editors and myself have finally fixed the horrendous, factually lacking, and libelous contributions you made to this article. Next time you want to slander a piece of work without any regard to fact or decency, please keep it to yourself. Sincerely, a moderate Kenneth Branagh fan whose only request is that you maintain just a little neutrality when contributing to Wikipedia. Jg2904 (talk) 09:43, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Ditto for Rajputana.Xufanc (talk) 07:38, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Microcynicon: Six Snarling Satires for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Microcynicon: Six Snarling Satires is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Microcynicon: Six Snarling Satires until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.  Invading Invader  (userpage, talk) 23:04, 1 November 2022 (UTC)