User talk:Kosebamse/Archive7

Away
I will be away for a while (private matters, nothing to do with Wikipedia). Happy editing, everybody. Kosebamse 14:32, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

List of people with epilepsy
You commented during a Peer Review of this article. It is now a Featured List Candidate and I'd appreciate your views (if you are back in time). Cheers, Colin°Talk 16:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Back, sort of
Looks like I'm returning to editing. I'll be here rather sporadically, so please don't expect me to answer comments or follow requests immediately. But it's nice to be back. Kosebamse 12:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
How kind you are. I saw when you gave up your adminship (very quietly, but somebody posted a note about it on ANI) and I've thought about doing the same ever since. Adminning certainly detracts from actual contribution, and I'm pretty ineffectual with the technical stuff anyway. Better let people who're good at it do it. I feel a childish pride when I succeed in doing a history merge or a range block (how brilliant, how brave, what feats!) but that's just self-indulgence. A teenager with more of a flair for it--that would be most teenagers-- will do it faster, better, more safely. And one keeps getting embroiled, indeed. But adminship isn't the point in this case. I've worked so much with Giano that I really can't contemplate working, not just without him, but in the constant awareness that he was wantonly driven off, trolled out. :-( Oh, well, perhaps we'll both come slinking back as reincarnations some day when the addiction bites! Though indeed without any of the enthusiasm of true newbies. :-( It's pretty sad when the addiction is the only hook. But if it happens I'll certainly give careful thought to what you say abut the watchlist, I think I see your point. Thank you very much for your letter. Bishonen | talk 01:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC).

Coordinates
Hello. Maybe I've just had to explain in the edit summary, sorry. I will explain here. I think such accuracy is harmless and only good in these cases. Surely better than the opposite case (seen on WP many times) when coordinates are bloody innacurate. Regards. - Darwinek 22:43, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I need you to upload file picture here
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.182.192 (talk • contribs) 17:32, 20 January 2007
 * Comment, I looked at the link yet I see nothing. Is an empty page. Mathmo Talk 07:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I have answered that user on his page; seems that he doesn't understand why his request won't help. There's nothing we can do here. Kosebamse 08:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Issue de table
Well, the feast is over for this time, and off we go into a period of intellectual fast. But mayhaps will we meet again some day to make more medieval merry! My regards to you for your comments at the nomination.

sincerely, Peter Isotalo 07:55, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Time Cube creation principle
Kosebamse, I need to inform you that a Time-Cube-related discussion has been occurring on the page User talk:Sloth monkey. That discussion, with its [linkspam removed], may be of interest to you.

My fault entirely
My fault entirely, and thank you for the note. --Duk 21:07, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

"Occupied territory"
Actually, I've been debating whether to use "occupied territory" in the lead of Jerusalem. Although I've flip-flopped already, I'm probably going flip-flop back toward not using the term. There was a discussion at Image talk:Is-wb-gs-gh v3.png over how the map of Israel should refer to the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Golan Heights. Eventually, it was decided that they should avoid "occupied territories" altogether and just say Israel with the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Golan Heights. So, perhaps we should just leave West Bank on its own and let interested readers click on the link for a description of the complex situation. --  tariq abjotu  13:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Have all of your objections to the FAC been alleviated? --  tariq abjotu  14:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry; I didn't realize you retracted your objection. --  tariq abjotu  14:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem, I will read the article thoroughly again and probably say "support" then. Kosebamse 14:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Jerusalem FAC
The featured article candidate discussion of Jerusalem (archived here) has been restarted. Please check if the current version of the article has addressed your concerns, if any, and voice your opinion on the FAC at the current nomination. nadav 19:03, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks for the hint. Kosebamse 05:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Copyright violation in Bronchoscopy
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Bronchoscopy, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Bronchoscopy is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Bronchoscopy, 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. --Android Mouse Bot 2 22:24, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Deletion
I sent you a copy of the deleted version via e-mail, so you should check it. Sorry for not mentioning it here. --Maxim 19:43, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh crap, I've missed your message in another section completely, so I apologize for that. I'll look over the article and restore everything that's not a copyvio. Extremely sorry for the unfortunate delay. Also, I value deletion concerns a lot. I make mistakes, and I am more than glad to redeem them. Maxim 20:03, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar
Hi, Kosebamse. You deserve a barnstar. Axl 09:58, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

MCOTW
JFW | T@lk  12:21, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Bjørnøya
You're welcome, and Merry Christmas. I came across the article because it is listed as GA on WikiProject_Norway, although it has in fact been demoted. What do you think about a renomination? Jfire (talk) 21:50, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not/Unencyclopedic
Good morning. I noted you saying, FOUR YEARS AGO, that the project does not have an agreed definition of what an encyclopedia should be. Well, that's a problem that can only grow unaddressed as our focus inevitably moves from creating good content towards maintaining good content. The matter is somewhat a concern a mine as I've been watching and feebly participating in a dispute over the fact that there's a lot of pressure to make our fiction coverage more professional and better sourced. This involves the destruction of tens of thousands of articles and the compromisation of the field that's our primary advantage over traditional encyclopedias, so that's what people have set out to do.

Editorializing aside, what bothers me is the fact that there's no clear agreement on a goal, which is a sure factor in proliferating decision-making by force. So have you, in the last four years, seen any agreement on what an encyclopedia should be, or attempts at coming to such an agreement? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kizor (talk • contribs) 10:48, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/IRC/Proposed decision
Just to confirm this. Kosebamse (talk) 11:26, 30 January 2008 (UTC)