User talk:Lar/Archive 53

FP/PR poll
I'm surprised you are supporting this poll. I guess the rationale is that its a baby step, but a crucial first step along a path to better things. My impression, though, is somewhat different: to me it looks like its a step down the wrong path, one that that only looks like the right path but instead leads to something entirely different and not at all useful. I've described my reasoning a little more in depth here. Avruch  T 21:23, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Best of a bad job... something to get the thing turned on technically... nothing else passed... All shoddy reasons and I have a lot of sympathy to Doc's oppose. But still... I despair of any forward movement. ++Lar: t/c 14:56, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

User talk:PeterBiddlecombe
I've been in email communication with this user; he's caught by your rangeblock on 88.108.128.0/17. I would like to grant him IP block exemption but his edit history is a bit thin for me to do so without knowing what abuse led to the block in the first place. Could you take a look? Thanks. Mango juice talk 11:41, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Let me check and I'll reply here as to whether I see any CU related issues (as I have above)... at which point I will leave it to your discretion if there are none. ++Lar: t/c 14:46, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Checked. IPBE is not contraindicated from CU results. To your discretion, then, Mangojuice. Best wishes. ++Lar: t/c 14:56, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Assuming you're also willing to help with BLPs
I was making a list on Sarcasticidealist's page, but he quit soon after. I'm going to put the list here. If you don't want to handle it, I'll stop.

BLP list

 * list moved to User:Lar/Liberal Semi

Please review these and see if you can do anything. Much appreciated,  Enigma msg  03:54, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I will try. I invite my TPWs to look as well. Semi-ing is easy enough, if I find two vandalisms that lasted longer than 5 min, or one that lasted longer than an hour, that's justified as far as I am concerned. The other stuff, editing for content, or nominating for deletion, I may not have as much time for. But make sure you have the latest status... Chris Brown and Jay Cutler both were already semi. I raised Chris to a year. ++Lar: t/c 04:43, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I've watchlisted the names on the list. Avruch  T 13:18, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! ++Lar: t/c 14:46, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I will cross off the ones that were done. I can start to remove entries if the list gets too long.  Enigma msg  06:01, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Crossing off is fine for now... if this grows a lot maybe I'll start a subpage in my userspace we can use for this... dunno. Keep em coming. And thanks, TPWs for digging in. ++Lar: t/c 14:46, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I can help with this, too, if it's needed. Just let me know. لenna  vecia  05:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool. Just be a TPW and if I miss an easy one because I'm off doing whatever, laugh at me in glee as you take care of it. Or... if you're ambitious, do the spade work on one of the ones I say, in my extremely lazy way, is too hard for me to find the vandals since I hate trolling history... d see if the diffs are there, and then, if they are, taunt me about it. You can taunt, can't you? ++Lar: t/c 05:49, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

sub-section
Thanks for semi-protecting Derrick Rose! Could you semi-protect a couple more NBA bios? Zagalejo^^^ 08:02, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * ''list moved to User:Lar/Liberal Semi

Question
Chris_johnson_(baseball). IMO, stuff like that should be deleted. It's not worth trying to salvage it. However, I know if I tag it, someone will probably insist on keeping it. What do you suggest?  Enigma msg  22:58, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It's spelt wrong so if it is kept it should be moved. See if there is an actual article... if he plays for the Astros he's notable. If there is, make it a redirect to there, if not, move it. Unless this is a hoax, though, there should be some article at the location. ++Lar: t/c 23:02, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Someone moved it but there is no living people category, etc. He does not play third base for the Astros. He's a career minor leaguer and not notable. Obviously if he was in the majors there would be an article.  Enigma msg  23:39, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The reason I bring it up is because I noticed the awful system at work. It was just created, but I know what will happen. It will become yet another unsourced/unwatched BLP that is of almost no value. Someone will eventually come along and write something like (something stupid) and if that person uses a plausible edit summary, there's a better than 15% chance it won't get removed for weeks. This article is representative of the massive underlying endemic problem of Wikipedia. Not even the most rabid inclusionist would go out and create articles on every current and former minor leaguer. That's over half a million articles. However, said rabid inclusionist will work hard to prevent anyone from deleting the almost notable BLPs that get created. There are thousands of these articles that I can't do anything about except add a "notability" tag, which accomplishes exactly nothing. If I slap a CSD tag on it, it'll be removed within a day. If I PROD it, it'll get removed in four days or so. Par for the course. If I send it to AfD, it probably gets kept and I end up looking like a rabid deletionist.


 * I'm not a rabid deletionist. I just think that if someone creates a BLP, they better make an effort. Write it in coherent English with correct capitalization. Find some kind of source that asserts some kind of notability. Why do we have to fix the garbage that gets added?


 * It could be argued that the people who prevent these borderline BLPs from being deleted are culpable when the inevitable defamation happens and sticks.  Enigma msg  00:26, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I know this is a talkpage, and I'm probably being unnecessarily strict, but just to be on the safe side let's not have a link to a BLP and a statement about the subject that could be misinterpreted. I really appreciate your efforts on BLPs, keep up the good work. Avruch  T 00:46, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree. And I endorse the change that fixed that, thanks. Probably not something that needs to be oversighted or whatever but it's good to at least not have it in the current text. ++Lar: t/c 22:23, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree about it being necessary to remove, but it's your talk page and I probably could have gotten my point across in a better way and I of course would rather we be too sensitive than not sensitive enough. I just wish someone would respond, even if just to agree or disagree.  Enigma msg  03:29, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, were you waiting on a specific answer from me? Apologies if so. If you are pretty sure they're a minor league player, then delete the article... Or tag it for speedy and it'll get deleted. Hopefully. I agree with you about the more philosophical stuff you were saying, if that's any help. ++Lar: t/c 03:36, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I was wondering if anyone had any reaction to it. It was fairly thought out. As for the article, my small essay above reflects what I'm going to do. Nothing. I'm not tagging it because odds are good that an inclusionist will remove the tag. I'm not taking it to AfD because it isn't worth the effort. It's an almost notable bio that has no value aside from being yet another vulnerable BLP. Those are my comments and they represent my frustration with the underlying issue, which apparently the "community" will not help solve because the mythical "consensus" on the issue will never be achieved. Such is Wikipedia...  Enigma msg  04:08, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with all that. And I find it quite depressing. Tag it for CSD. ++Lar: t/c 04:26, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVII (March 2009)
The March 2009 issue of the Military history 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) 03:05, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

"Punto Switcher" recover text
Dear Larry, please help me recover text of deleted article "Punto Switcher" deleted at 18:52, 30 August 2007 MastCell (talk | contribs) My e-mail is sergmos + gmail.com Sergey Moskalev (talk) 11:54, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The article has been undeleted and placed at User:Sergey Moskalev/Punto Switcher. If you plan to develop it further, address the notability first before moving it back (sounds like interesting software, perhaps it could be mentioned in a general article on automatic language switching?). If you just wanted the text, please advise when you are done and I'll redelete it. There did not appear to be a talk page that went with it that could be undeleted. ++Lar: t/c 12:21, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you Larry! I will elaborate article and establish the notability first. Problem is that main references mostly in Russian, but I will try. Now Punto Switcher included in Yandex.Pack - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yandex#History So I'm copied text and you may redelete it. Thank you again! Sergey Moskalev (talk) 15:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

The current Buttermik/ItsLassie/whoever stuff on AN/I
I quite agree, all that nonsense (particularly from ItsLassieTime) needs investigation and action and I'm not trying to shove it under the carpet. I'd like to take in stages, though - let's deal with the initial allegation (which I believe to be in bad faith, but let's get some consensus) then the subsequent attempts by sock- or meatpuppets at blowing smoke over the area. That way there's no way someone can winkle their way past a block or ban by claiming abuse of process. Tonywalton Talk 22:20, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, after your last posting to the thread, I see where you're going, and I agree as well. One step at a time. I'll do my best to work with you to keep things on track. ++Lar: t/c 22:22, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Tonywalton Talk 22:29, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

One of your rangeblocks...
See User talk:Danjit. I have no idea if this was the guy you were after, but you may want to crosscheck his account against whoever you are trying to stop. This is an OLD account with like one edit 6 months ago... I'll let you respond and grant IPBE if needed... --Jayron32. talk . contribs 03:54, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Tiptoety pinged me about it at about the same time. Checking now. thx for the heads up. ... no CU related reason not to grant. I believe T is granting it as we speak. ++Lar: t/c 03:59, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * And he did... This is now ... --Jayron32. talk . contribs 04:00, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey there :)
(responding here to your comment at Ceoil's talkpage) Yes, things are great. There's a lot less overlap between Aramgar's and my areas of interest these days. He's very much the historian, while I focus more on art-related articles and general copyediting. And, generally, we stay out of each other's discussions, for the most part. So, the unpleasantness is, I think, well behind us. Still, your your support at that time was absolutely invaluable, and I will never forget it.

I was very sorry to see the way Josette was treated by LassieTime/Buttermilk. She (Josette, that is) handled an unpleasant situation with civility and dignity. I hope she wasn't too rattled by the whole thing. Best wishes, Kafka Liz (talk) 17:07, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It is really good to hear things are working out well for you and your editing! I was glad to help. I don't think Jo was too rattled... mostly just annoyed. She's polite but firm. :)... this situation is one that we've both been more closely involved than any other situation, (mostly we tend to not edit in the same areas) so it's given us some pause... Happy editing! ++Lar: t/c 18:57, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Please help
You posted out of the blue on my page previously, criticizes me for complaining about personal attacks to the person who was attacking me, User:Giano II. If you consider me of benefit of Wikipedia, and I ask you to look at my edit records, then please help me prevent continuous personal attacks from User:Giano II. The most recent is this:. I merely voted, as the editor in charge had complained that no one was voting. If you do not help, I will warn User:Giano II myself. I do not believe that an editor like me, who does not personally attack or name call, should have to suffer unpleasantness intended to drive me away while you protect User:Giano II. Note, even User:Ottava Rima, whom you recently voted for, has stood up eloquently for me. Regards, &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 18:38, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I voted neutral on OR, actually. I will take a look at what you've brought to my attention, (but it may not be instantly) and try to comment in what I think would be a helpful way, if commenting at all would be helpful. I will say this, absent any context behind it, the comment by Giano that you gave a diff for certainly seems less than 100% helpful. ++Lar: t/c 18:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I apologize for making the remark to Giano. If I had thought there was the slightest chance that you would defend me, I would not have answered Giano. I have been attacked repeatedly by him, and only been defended by kind editors who were, nonetheless, afraid that he was going to attack them next. This is the first time, out of probably 10 to 15 personal attacks recently, where anyone stood up to him. Usually, I was just further harassed by his clique of friends. The one time I defended myself I  had my talk page bombarded because I dared to  post a warning. So, thank you for at least saying something to him. Regards, &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 21:03, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * So now he is continuing to abuse me. He obviously does not take you seriously.  Are you going to allow that to continue? Regards, &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 21:07, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Allow it? I don't think I'd frame it that way, and I won't be chivvied. Your best course of action is to ignore his comments and then contribute to the FAC or not, as you like. ++Lar: t/c 21:19, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know what "chivvied" means, but the implication is that I should stay away from FAR. I was responding to the FAR editor's complainant that FAR was constipated because no one was voting, but I will do as you suggest and stay away. Not rewarding to to the gut work anyway and I should know better than to respond to pleas!  Regards, &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 21:50, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * No, the implication is not that you should stay away from FAR. If you think you have useful contributions, please contribute. My suggestion regarding Giano is to ignore him if you do not agree with his viewpoint, and just go on about your business. But if you wish not to contribute that too is your choice. ++Lar: t/c 22:40, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is my choice. I was only participating there to be helpful. Frankly, I am not tough enough for this environment. I am not the kind of person you seem to think I am. I find the ugliness at Wikipedia is taking an increasing toll on me and my personality. I do not know you and do not appreciate the strong animosity I receive from you.  The RFC that you were so glad to  support against me, despite having had very few contacts with me, and despite the fact it had no substance,  has removed any good will I have.  I think Wikipedia is not a favorable place for me. I have had very few "breaks" here, having been stalked by a group of sock puppets for most of my first year, and mostly blamed for that until it was uncovered. Since you have made it clear that you will not help me, I ask you to please never intrude on my talk page again, as you did when I merely warned Giano about personal attacks.   I likewise will stay away from yours. {By the way, you comments on Ottava Rima's RFA are not understood by other editors, and you have been asked to clarify.) &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 00:15, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * A curious situation. These two users seem unable to work together, though many others are able to work with both.  I hope that feelings mend shortly.  --Rocksanddirt (talk) 00:30, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Mattisse, I bear you no ill will, animosity, or hostility. Believe it or do not believe it, as you like. That said, in my view you need to work on how you accept feedback. Pointing out that there are things a user needs to consider is not hostility. That's a key lesson you should have taken away from that RfC. Next, you are welcome to post here (within the common guidelines we all accept) or not, as you like. You should realise that if I feel the need to post at your page, I will. As for the situation at the FAR, (which I remind you, you asked me, here on my page, to comment on...) I commented, but I'm not omnipotent. So if my comment did not achieve the desired effect, that's unfortunate. Finally, thanks for making me aware that my remarks at ORs RfA may not have been perfectly understood. ++Lar: t/c 01:11, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Commons admin
I really appreciated your frankness during my Commons adminship request and vote. I was wondering how people felt on that topic. I'm not a fan of drama or long debates, as you've probably figured out from my contributions here on the English Wikipedia. I've already spend several hours this evening reading Commons' practices to make sure that I understand everything. I have known almost everything that I've read. I'll be excellent at dealing with speedy deletions, which is an area that I occasionally help with here on the English Wikipedia. I've enjoyed working on the flickr image reviews, so the tools should be helpful when I find copyright violations.  Royal broil  02:35, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Congratulations on passing. Don't hesitate to ask for help if you need it... Commons admins by and large are very helpful and friendly. ++Lar: t/c 03:38, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Cla68
Had you yourself unblocked as you mentioned in the AN/I thread I would have asked for you to turn in your bit. You're a good guy, but you completely lose your perspective whenever WR enters the picture. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 05:02, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Consensus ain't there, and it never was, they were fooling themselves. And it had nothing to do with WR, really... the people who lose perspective w.r.t. WR are those who blocked... the JoshuaZ's of the world, not me. But I'm recallable, and I'd call this close enough to an admin action that it fits the criteria I set up. See User:Lar/Accountability if you're so inclined. How's your mainspace edit count? ++Lar: t/c 05:10, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * PS, for the record: I posted the unblock granted, hit save, and went to the unblock form next. YM had beat me to it, but if he hadn't, I would have pressed the button. So it's same-same really whether he did it first, I intended to. Saying I didn't actually do it is not going to be something I'd use as defense. ++Lar: t/c 05:12, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Whatever. Blow it off if you want, but it's meant as sincere advice from someone who likes and respects you and is bothered to see certain things. People around here whom I don't respect (and I could name a few), I just stay away from. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 05:23, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm absolutely not blowing it off. I don't think I've ever suggested my own recall to someone, ever. So that's a metric of how seriously I'm taking your input. If you say you would have called for my bit if I had pushed the button, I'm telling you, consider that I did push it, because I would have. Then decide if you really mean it. The mechanism is there, and I've put a lot of work into making it air tight, there is no way for me to wriggle out. All that said, you know that I think highly of you as well... so yes, I am taking what you say seriously. I may not agree with you, but I'll certainly think more on it. ++Lar: t/c 05:31, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Douglas J. Feith
On this article's talkpage, there is a discussion about some material I removed from the article. A couple of editors are arguing that it should all be returned without improvement, I wonder if you or some of your TPW's would like to weigh in? Avruch  T 15:16, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I will try to make some time but it may not be right away... TPWs??? ++Lar: t/c 17:23, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * You didn't know that you have TPW's? That's a TPW foul. :P MastCell Talk 18:22, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course I know I have TPWs. "TPWs???" is short for "hey TPWs, can one of you take care of this please because I'm busy." Now, I'm still busy... did you fix it yet, MastCell? If not, quit jabbering. My TPWs are cheerful, helpful, and kind. Not to mention efficient. If you want to hang here, you gotta up your game. :) ++Lar: t/c 21:21, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey Lar (a BLP for you to look at)
Was going to log in and post it on the Semi-Project page, but unfortunately, you've locked me out (and no, I'm not going to log in and break my sabbatical to do so.. a matter of principle).. but will you look at this article please? Scott Brown. A friend of mine came to me with some concerns about this.

Specifically, this edit. and this edit. I have found sources for one of the controversies, so I've re-added it. It's that 2nd part I'm worried about.. there is NO record of it being made, and it looks to be made out of whole cloth. It's being seized by various partisan groups as a rallying cry. . Could we semi-protect the article (yes, I know, it'd lock me out too, but this is bloody ridiculous, and I've done my part.

Anyway, if you have any questions, email me or hit me up on WR. Grazie. SirFozzie.. 71.184.225.103 (talk) 17:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * This seems complex, I'm not seeing the qualifying vandalisms. (see the lead of the User:Lar/Liberal Semi page with the criteria. The second diff you gave confused me, actually, that was you, right? Not to be a hardass but I just want to focus on brainless semi's... qualifying vandalism? protect. Done. Brainless.


 * I leave the harder cases to others. Because there are SO MANY BLPs out there that get vandalism that even brainless ones will keep me (and my TPWs) busy if enough people start bringing them to me. But if one of my TPW's want to tackle it, please do. ++Lar: t/c 06:03, 10 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Indeed. I only begun to scratch the surface with the ones I added. Right now I'm focusing on NBA BLPs, but if I look at my watchlist, I have probably 100 more that would qualify. I would have to actually do the work, though.  Enigma msg  18:09, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

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

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, [[Sam Korn ]] (smoddy) 22:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

WP BIO
Is there any objection to making it a conditional to the "living" paramater? That way it triggers with the same consistency as the BLP message, but avoids needless noindexing. It's an extremely safe bet. -- Ned Scott 04:27, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Im fine with that. As soon as the "living" parameter is 100% applied to every bio that's living. It doesn't have to be 100% accurate, I'm fine with the "living" parameter being misapplied to nonliving, but if there is ONE ... not "a few" but ONE, BLP that doesn't have the "living" applied (even during momentary vandalisms), then no. Better safe than sorry. ++Lar: t/c 15:42, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Happy Easter!
On behalf of the Kindness campaign, I just wanted to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Happy Easter! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 08:00, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Get that pesky rabbit off my lawn! :) No seriously, thanks! Hope the easter bunny (or whatever secular spring/fertility symbol you use instead) was good to you. ++Lar: t/c 15:44, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

You need links
No, not the golf course kind. Just a suggestion, but since your special BLP page has taken off in popularity, it would be helpful if you could put a link to it at the top of the page. :-) Hope you had a good holiday weekend.  Risker (talk) 19:25, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not that popular yet... spread the word! ...and feel free to pitch in! I've put some links in, see what you think. ++Lar: t/c 02:19, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Nicely done, especially the bright blue banner in the editnotice. If I can remember tonight, I'll add a BLP to the page for the review of others since I'm too involved as an editor to be objective. Risker (talk) 18:13, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Nietzsche 2
You blocked this user as a sockpuppet of Werdnawerda. You didn't say whether this is based on Checkuser evidence or not, and the user is requesting unblocking, saying that he isn't a sockpuppet. Was this based on a conclusive checkuser finding? Mango juice talk 17:55, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I already commented there, fairly definitively I thought. I'm satisfied that, barring conclusive evidence to the contrary, this is a sock. I decline to answer exactly why, except to say that I ran checks. I suggest a decline, the user's latest response doesn't address the issue. ++Lar: t/c 18:24, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikiproject Bridges Member
On your user page, could you change the Wikiproject Bridges banner to WikiProject Bridges Member as WikiProject Bridges now points to the project banner. It was already being used on over 100 articles but just 6 user pages, so it was easier to change the user page links, but yours is protected. -- WOSlinker (talk) 19:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Done, sorry for the delay. ++Lar: t/c 18:54, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

The BLP Barnstar
Thank you very much, this means a lot to me. ++Lar: t/c 16:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * In the blp vein, what do you think of this idea for reorganizing the BLP noticeboard? <strong style="color:#0033CC">Nathan <strong style="color:#0033CC"> T (formerly Avruch) 22:31, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Seems reasonable at a quick glance... I may not be the right person to evaluate process changes. Hey TPWs... give it a look! ++Lar: t/c 00:16, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

questions about User:Lar/Liberal Semi
refactored to User_talk:Lar/Liberal Semi ++Lar: t/c 18:47, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Administrator review
I thought you might be interested in reviewing the above process page as you supported its creation back in 2006 at [[Wikipedia talk:Administrators open to recall/Archive 1]]. –<b style="font-family:verdana; color:black;">xeno</b> <sup style="color:black; font-family:verdana;">talk 03:57, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Commented. ++Lar: t/c 11:31, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Admin Coaching
I saw that you were listed in the Coaches for reconfirmation section of the admin coaching status page. Could you please update your status, and if you are still interested, drop me a note on my talk page? Thanks,  Genius  101 Guestbook  14:22, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Updated. ++Lar: t/c 19:15, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

AFD Re-opened
As you are an editor who had been involved in the Afd discussion of Jennifer Fitzgerald, I'm here to let you know that I re-opened the discussion on the article to gain a stronger consensus. After some discussion with a few other editors I agree that I may have closed the article too hastily and that further discussion is necessary before a final decision is made. Best wishes, Icestorm815  •  Talk  19:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know, I appreciate it. ++Lar: t/c 19:29, 29 April 2009 (UTC)