User talk:Narson/Archive 3

Dot-com bubble
Huh? What's improper about closing this RM? There is no support for it and it is clearly a frivolous proposal that doesn't stand a snowball's chance of succeeding. There is clearly no need to waste anyone's time keeping this one open. 199.125.109.102 (talk) 05:11, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Are you just running around undoing everything I have done???? Really now, only an admin can be so bold as that. I don't see any admins complaining about any of my edits. Do you? 199.125.109.102 (talk) 06:40, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You closed debates a day after they started, that is not how it is normally done. As for needing to be an admin, no. You made inappropiate closures based on your misunderstanding of the protocol, I reverted that mistake. Please WP:AGF, I am a regular watcher of RM, it is an interesting place to get involved on the behind the scenes stuff and you notice when stuff you went 'Interesting' isn't there the day after it appears. After seeing that I did indeed check your contributions and saw the other one closed a day after its relisting. Generally it is best to leave the RM closures to the RM admin, otherwise it descends into verbal fist fights over the 'You arn't an admin, how can you make that call!' and the joys of edit wars. Narson (talk) 10:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * And just to prove everyone makes mistakes, I boo-boo'd on the Market Economy one. That was in the backlog not in the 3rd April section. Should have stayed closed, I apologise. Narson (talk) 11:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. It just seemed suspicious that you would be following me around and undoing all my hard work. And by the way it is ok to speedy close frivolous RMs. I see that you are discussing this with an admin. 199.125.109.102 (talk) 15:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

More request closed too soon

 * See User talk:Anthony Appleyard. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 12:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Administrators
Where can I contact Administrators? Some ultra-patriotic vandals keep vandalising the Battle of Harlem Heights and the Battle of White Plains to American victories, with the same reference present! Those people who are editing it should be banned from editing, and both pages locked. (Trip Johnson (talk) 10:56, 9 April 2008 (UTC))

Re: your comment (and undo) at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2008/November
Hello. I was replying to your comment on Bangalore/Bengaluru when there was an edit conflict with your undo of your own comment/edit. I was wondering if there's any problem. Just a little curious, on the concerned side. a JC freak  y A k  20:40, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. I know it's kinda confusing - we really can't look for an objective measure, here, and that seems to be the problem. Anyways, feel free to continue the discussion as you see fit. :) a JC freak   y A k  18:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Sovereignty
Oops, I assumed it was related to the joke going around in 2003 of the French being "cheese eating surrender monkeys". It looked like a surrender flag. Justin talk 12:25, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

News! Tag & Assess 2008 is coming ...
Milhist's new drive – Tag & Assess 2008 – goes live on April 25 and you are cordially invited to participate. This time, the task is housekeeping. As ever, there are awards galore, plus there's a bit of friendly competition built-in, with a race for bronze, silver and gold wikis! You can sign up, in advance, here. I look forward to seeing you on the drive page! All the best, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 13:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)




 * }
 * }
 * }

Falklands War taskforce
Hi there, I was considering setting up a Falklands War taskforce on wikipedia, hopefully a few interested people could make some head-way into improving articles, establishing uniformed lay-outs etc. Anyway, if it sounds like something you'd like to be a part of, please let me know. Thanks, --Tefalstar (talk) 21:20, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * It was quietly closed. There was some comment as how my version reflected my sources, whereas Alex's clearly didn't.  I don't think the guy mediating spent much time on it.  Alex tried to revive it in January but I haven't heard anything since.  Possibly a co-incidence but as soon as I asked for an arbcom, Alex stopping agitating.  I think he knew he was on to a loser.  Justin talk 13:43, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Well a combination of repeatedly using the same username on multiple dating sites, combined with IP editing, means I have a pretty good idea of who it was. He was too good at wikilawyering to be a noob.  Justin talk 14:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


 * LOL. It wasn't difficult I only typed his username into Google and it picked up his profile on a net dating site.  IP traced to the same campus.  QED.  All this was confirmed when I found he'd initially edited biographies of his relatives.  Justin talk 15:12, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


 * That'll probably be the same people supporting bringing a certain editor back after a record level of blocks. I can defend my conduct.  I don't mind giving this a go, give me a few days to sort a few things out and I'll start to put things together.  I've a lot on my plate at the moment so it may be slow.  Justin talk 11:24, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Mozza
Seems like a sensible addition. I've tweaked a little bit. As I've observed elsewhere, the section devoted to this issue is really too long. However, I think it makes more sense to wait and see how it all pans out before trying to trim it. I'm starting to wonder if he'll get away with it now; by delaying the vote so the issue's not so hot, and by emphasising that he intends to step down anyway next year, he may just persuade enough people that they don't want to make an enemy of him in the meantime. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 09:22, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't get me wrong, quite apart from recent events in F1, it's pretty clear reading between the lines of Max's earlier career that he's a fairly nasty piece of work. And that comment about BMW and Mercedes took some nerve to make and was probably an error tactically. In a way I think Jackie Stewart was right to observe that the FIA needs someone from outside motorsport to head things, because everyone of stature in motorsport is already entrenched. However, on those occasions I can think of when motorsport organisations have tried it (CART, March in its latter days) it's gone badly wrong. 4u1e (talk) 06:56, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)
The April 2008 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) 01:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello
You previously expressed an interest in an AN/I discussion involving Vintagekits, here. The discussion has now moved back to the main WP:AN/I board, where community input is being sought. Yours, --Major Bonkers (talk) 09:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for yours. In my own way, I think that you're right and I rather share your sentiments. I've taken an interest in this situation, having been crossing paths with him for the last two years. Since the end of 'the Troubles' arbitration, last October, he had largely kept himself out of trouble; there is a history of disruption, which no-one else seems to have had the gumption to point out, and the 'indefinite ban' lasted two days. As I say, I'm not against him returning, but I do think that some sort of policy should be maintained, and it's unfortunate that it falls to me, as one of his 'opponents', to point this out.


 * God Schama's boring - he takes a fascinating subject, like the French Revolution, and gets bogged down in such huge over-detail that you can't see the wood for the trees.


 * I had had a go at editing the Falklands War article; it attracts a large number of followers: some of my bits are still there:


 * Criticism was leveled at Ted Rowlands, a former junior foreign minister in the preceding government, who disclosed in Parliament in April 1982 that the British had broken the Argentine diplomatic codes. Because the same code machines were used by the Argentine military, this disclosure immediately served to deny British access to valuable intelligence. This, and other responses to parliamentary questions, and leaks of information to the BBC has been alleged by historian Hugh Bicheno to be a deliberate attempt to undermine the Thatcher government on the part of a variety of individuals who had a vested interest in its fall.[80]


 * and:


 * Ultimately, the successful conclusion of the war gave a noticeable fillip to British patriotic feeling, with the mobilisation of national identity encapsulated in the so-called "Falklands Factor." Since the failure of the 1956 Suez campaign, the end of Empire and the economic decline of the 1970s which culminated in the Winter of Discontent, Britain had been beset by uncertainty and anxiety about its international role, status and capability. With the war successfully concluded, Thatcher was returned to power with an increased Parliamentary majority and felt empowered to press ahead with the painful economic readjustments of Thatcherism. A second major effect was a reaffirmation of the special relationship between the US and UK. Both Reagan and Weinberger (his Secretary of Defence) received honorary knighthoods for their help in the campaign, but the more obvious result was the common alignment of Britain and the USA in a more confrontational foreign policy against the Soviet bloc, sometimes known as the Second Cold War.


 * but my 'spangle', a cited reference that an American naval analysis had considered the retaking of the Falklands to be 'a military impossibility', lasted about six hours! I gave up after that.


 * Best wishes, --Major Bonkers (talk) 10:09, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Major Bonkers
Ah, no problem. It was a relevant and properly sourced contribution, I couldn't see why it was removed. BTW you do realise Ryan is already all loved up? Justin talk 21:57, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm too cantankerous to be a patriarch, I was going to have a stab at a project page but work is kinda getting in the way at the moment. A few volunteers and we should get some momentum going.  Justin talk 22:33, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

RE: JCRB/MEGV
Thanks for informing me. Please keep me updated of any further issues with these users. --Gibmetal 77 talk 21:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)
The May 2008 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) 01:34, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Alex Returns?
I'm guessing so, the style is all his, you start to recognise that sort of thing after a while. I said we hadn't heard the last of him. I'm pretty sure that he has a regular username, the nom de plume is purely to kick up a fuss about the Argentine POV. Note he has gone to the edge of 3RR but hasn't gone over the boundary, he clearly knows how to play the game (though winding up admins isn't the smartest of moves). I'm guessing we'll hear from him as soon as the 24hr time period is over. Care to give me odds? Justin talk 22:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * If your Scottish poonds are useless you can give them all to me. ;-) Justin talk 00:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

UNINDENT

Cheers, I knocked a couple up in my lunch hour. Justin talk 19:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know, mind in the gutter. You're not a student yet mate. Justin talk 21:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

BTW just a thought for you. I doubted that Alex would use the same name, because around the time he gave up, we'd all started to ignore him (editors, arbitrators etc). Did you see the question on the arbitrators page?

fr:user:Narson
Account has been usurped.

On a side note, please keep in mind that until 14330 is corrected and go "live", it is not advised to merge if any account to usurp is left.

DarkoNeko x 09:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Bearer of bad news
Seems to be the season for it, i woke up to find someone had created the category British occupations and put the Falklands War, BAOR and other articles into it. Looking at the guys talk page he seems to have a history of disruption. I've removed the category from many pages and recommended it for speedy deletion. Can you guys keep an eye on those pages for more disruption? Justin talk 09:55, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Cheers mate, that process is very confusing. Justin talk 16:18, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Having taken a peak at his contribution history, that is precisely what I was expecting him to do. Justin talk 19:34, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Its already on my watch list and thats what I've been doing. I did wonder if leaving it for a few days and allowing the purpose of it to become clear might help?  Justin talk 16:38, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Falklands War
The names are in there in accordance with WP:NPOV and the reason for the reverts was to put off the POV IP warriors. That guy is continuing with POV edits. Aside from anything makes it difficult for me to be accused of a pro-British bias. ;) Justin talk 11:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Bearer of Good News!
Thought you might like to know that Ryan has got HMS Cardiff (D108) to the point where it is going to be the feature article on Wikipedia's main page for June 20. Justin talk 21:19, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

DRV of Category:British occupations
As a participant in the discussion, you may be interested in the Deletion Review that has been listed regarding my closure of the discussion as "no consensus". Regards, BencherliteTalk 23:06, 24 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for keeping me in the picture, great minds obviously think alike; I was doing the same thing on Bizone and Allied Occupation Zones in Germany as they were over categorised. Previously they guy has just edit warred when I've pointed this out.  Justin talk 09:11, 25 June 2008 (UTC)


 * For info I also added the category Soviet Occupations to Anglo-Soviet invasion of Iran, though even I would admit it seems like over categorisation and both that and British Occupations could be removed. Justin talk 09:17, 25 June 2008 (UTC)


 * You're not the only one, I have tried to think of some but I basically can't. Slightly distracted with the Generalmesse sockpuppet hunt.  I could do with your thoughts on something else, something doesn't seem right to me about the editor who sparked the whole VK ban/block business.  Could you drop me a line via email this user?  Justin talk 13:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Suez? Justin talk 20:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Faeroe Islands in WW2? I've just added it to the category as it seems to fit. Pfainuk talk 21:07, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Possibly but given that it was happily accepted by the people, doesn't really fit. I'm going to add Suez Crisis, I didn't add Operation Musketeer (1956) as its a stub.  Difficult to come up with things that aren't tendentious.  Justin talk 21:20, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Crazy IP
Note sure what this guys problem is, savvy enough to be was using an open proxy to change his IP address. Knows how to game the system as well. My guess is someone banned for doing the same on other articles. BTW I usually stop at 2 reverts but with the guy reverting another editor and my 2 he violated WP:3RR. But as he was dynamically changing the IP address they couldn't block him so he came back for a 5th - that kind of makes a mockery of the whole block thing. I'll leave it a couple of days and revert the articles he changed - though on past performance he's watching my contribution history and will change them back. Ho hum. Justin talk 23:10, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I spotted this one a couple of months ago, he tried to stir up shit between me and DagosNavy on the Top Malo article. Vandalism I can handle, did I tell you about the death threats I got when I had my email address in the open for a couple of hours?  Justin talk 22:11, 28 June 2008 (UTC)


 * BTW am I just mad, or does he have so many sock puppets he doesn't care about outing them. They're easy to spot.  Justin talk 22:16, 28 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I was in fire support, my expertise was Milan and the 81 mm mortar. I also rated marksman and I'm still pretty good with a rifle.  Not skills easily transferred to civvy street so I went back to school.  The death threats I just laughed off, some Argie punk kid demanding a duel of all things - can you imagine that, I told him to come to Glasgow and I'd meet him at the airport. ;-)  Justin talk 22:22, 28 June 2008 (UTC)


 * You'll probably think this is sacrilege, I've shot the Baker and it was fun but I do have a soft spot for the Springfield Model 1863. Justin talk 22:36, 28 June 2008 (UTC)


 * You might be right but there is an industrial quality about the 1863 that is almost modern, my all time favourite has to be the Lee Enfield No.4 from my cadet days, and SLR kicks SA-80 butt any day. Justin talk 23:15, 28 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "Rebellious Scots to crush". Eh, if any of you English Poooofs care to try..... Justin talk 23:30, 28 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Nae bugger can be as confused nationality wise as someone with a father from an Ulster Scots family relocated to Glasgae, who married a Spanish Catholic and was brought up in Glasgow. Still taught me to be a stubborn sod who calls it like I see it.  Justin talk 23:45, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Tierra del Fuego
Thought you might be interested in this CFD on categories related to Tierra del Fuego Province in Argentina. Cheers, Pfainuk talk 10:02, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Lapsed Pacifist
Yes, he seems to be deliberately flouting WP:NPOV. Jayjg (talk) 22:11, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It's getting even worse; he's now changing the term "Israeli settlements" to "Israeli colonies" in multiple articles, including Green Line (Israel) and Oslo Accords. Jayjg (talk) 01:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

He's still at it: in fact, he's edit-warring over the term:. And yes, there are ArbCom restrictions regarding this. Jayjg (talk) 00:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what to do next; every time he edits an I-P related article he inserts this kind of POV. Jayjg (talk) 01:49, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)
The June 2008 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) 19:44, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Peter Tracy
Have you seen this article, pretty obvious hoax, there is a nomination to delete at Articles for deletion/Peter Tracy Justin talk 10:50, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Wilco, understood red leader. Justin talk 11:38, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

hello
just a quick message to say pleased to meet you, I didn't think the mosley talk page was the place to do it! I see that your intrested in a lot of subjects that i am, formula one and various wars! Tommy turrell (talk) 15:37, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Mosley
Thanks for the update. 4u1e (talk) 08:56, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, if you're looking for work... :) There's general statement about Mosley being criticised by lots of  folks, which it would be great if you could ref. You might get lucky and find one ref that lists them all out (the most important ones to my mind are JYS, Damon Hill (if he did) the motor companies and the various automobile clubs). If not, I'd suggest chucking all the separate refs needed into one citation, or you'll end up with something like this.      4u1e (talk) 07:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * No so much OR (although that ref's not ideal, as it's a primary source) as synthesis. It seems odd to me that the legal position on Mosley's actions is not usually addressed, despite the iffy legal position of prostitution in this country - although he has claimed on several occasions that no lawbreaking took place, by my reading somebody (not Mosley) likely broke the law by profiting from prostitution or by organising prostitution. Anyway, I'm happy to leave it out until someone raises it at review. 4u1e (talk) 12:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Pff, well, as I said on the review page, it's not a very efficient way of going about things. Still, I feel I've probably grumped about it enough, so I'll just let it go through GA again. Provided someone else reviews it (i.e. not Sceptre) we may get some useful feedback - more eyes is usually better. By way of forewarning, I'm going to trim the last para again: I really can't see that we need much (i.e. any!) detail on 'Woman E' for example. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 17:07, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Rather than the continued reviews, or GA status, what actually bugs me is that Sceptre hit and ran: he's added nothing of substance to the reviews, and although everyone seems to agree that he didn't follow the correct procedure, shows no recognition that he may have done something wrong. Shrug. Back to the coalface. And yeah, we're going to reporting current events for a while, but then I don't imagine the article will get to the top of the GA queue anytime soon! 4u1e (talk) 17:24, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I think he thinks that he was contributing to the encyclopedia. He was right that there was a problem to be fixed, but that was a silly way to try and do it.
 * Oh course, when I were a lad, our dad used to kill us every morning, which taught us respect, tha' knows. 4u1e (talk) 17:33, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * That's (I hope) my chosen course, too. I'll keep niggling away at the article anyway - as ever, any thoughts welcome. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 23:19, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, well, he's interesting, but it seems he's always been an arrogant and unpleasant guy. I'm using a wide variety of sources and that comes through from all of them, albeit sometimes between the lines. 4u1e (talk) 09:36, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ta for that. It's all very well people saying this incident isn't that notable, but I can't move at present for people who know nothing about motorsport making Max Mosley jokes, which has never been the case previously. 4u1e (talk) 17:15, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Fuse/Fuze
Fuse is generally used in an electric circuit or to melt two parts together.

Fuze is for ordnance, a device to arm and detonate a shell, bomb, rocket, missile at a safe distance from the operator. Justin talk 15:25, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Rock Band
[copied from User talk:Oren0‎]

Can I be cheeky enough to enquire as to why you reverted your comments? They seemed quite apt and civil. I'd looked for the RfD myself, but after I went through a few months worth, I got bored around march. Narson (talk) 22:31, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * This is the RfD discussion to which Oren0 linked. (Note the outcome for Rock Band.)  —David Levy 00:15, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Gib
OK I'll back right off, largely because you asked me and I respect your opinion. Justin talk 16:16, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * What can I say, I respected the effort you and Pfain put in with MEGV/JCRB, its only because of people who value truth that the whole project hasn't turned to dust. Don't let the bastards grind you down.  Justin talk
 * I really hate to do this but could I ask you to comment on Talk:Gibraltar as to why you asked me to back off on there. Red Hat is now using that to attack me and paint me as causing disruption, I know its to get a rise but its not helping any attempt at mediation.  Justin talk 07:53, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Eighth Army Nationalities
Yes I think it would be worth it, but I didn't add the info so I have no source to hand on it. In fact, wouldn't it go for most of the British Army? I'm not sure why the contributor picked out the 8th. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 16:35, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * ps thankyou for defusing things.  The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 20:00, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

War of 1812
Hey there, I apologize for my earlier edit on this page. It was made in haste. I have gone back and put a bit more thought into improving the article. Please don't revert without discussing it on the War of 1812:talk page or on my user:talk page. (I have updated my comment with a signature) I look forward to working together to improve the accuracy of this article. Digiterata (talk) 22:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Mediation Cabal
I have listed the dispute over the Gibraltar article here for mediation. You are invited to participate. Justin talk 20:47, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)
The July 2008 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) 02:18, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you do not want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions. Happy editing! Malinaccier (talk) 16:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback can only be used to revert vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback may be removed at any time.

Back Again
Ho hum, our "NPOV" tag warrior returns and Generalmesse creates more sock puppets to re-establish Italian honour in WWII. What joy. Justin talk 12:11, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Elections in Gibraltar
Hello, I have opened an RM at Talk:Gibraltarian general election, 2007 to move the three articles on elections in Gibraltar. I thought you might be interested as you were involved in the previous RM on referendums. Thanks, Pfainuk talk 16:59, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Iconic photographs of the Falklands War
I've just started a new article in my user space here. I'd welcome your comments on the images chosen and suggestions for any others. You are of course welcome to contribute if you would like to help. Justin talk 12:28, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * LOL I was just dropping by to say thanks for your contribution and spotted the comments below. You've had it now, its on my watch list :-) Justin talk 18:18, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the edit. Justin talk 00:10, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

War of 1812 Pop Culture Reference
I have re-submitted the external link to http://ru.youtube.com/watch?v=o7jlFZhprU4&feature=related on the War of 1812 page and placed a notice on the discussion page for same. If you choose to revert my good faith edit again, please explain yourself on the discussion page first. Thanks. Digiterata (talk) 17:20, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

The Conqueror picture
Well the Jolly Roger point yes, however the other picture shows much more than that, and the flag is but one detail in the article indeed. So I'd rather have the present picture, the fair use of which is well justified in the submarine's article. Many thanks for editing the other article (or what little's left there after the recent unfriendly removal of most of the sourced facts from it by a certain editor). Best, Apcbg (talk) 23:25, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No that's someone else, and the former deputy foreign minister is yet another person; the name is not among the most popular but not rare either. As for possible sources, some relevant ones were given say in this earlier version of the article. Apcbg (talk) 00:49, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for your edits, what you wrote is correct. The political involvement, well that took place in the years of radical change in the early nineties.  Best, Apcbg (talk) 05:33, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Mosley
Puts face in hands.

I really, really wouldn't mind if anyone had any comments to make on the quality of the article. Good grief. 4u1e (talk) 07:37, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I think we're still waiting for someone to both review the article (which Resolute did, or at least I've got no reason to doubt he did) and document their review in a manner deemed suitable. In other words, had Resolute written "GA Criterion 1 - Pass, Criterion 2 - Pass etc" then we'd have been OK. I think he's in a huff now, not surprisingly, so I don't imagine he'll want to come back and do the boring bit. I've archived all of the discussions on the talk page, on the basis that the bad tempers in evidence there may be putting people off wanting to get involved in reviewing the article. And who can blame them. 4u1e (talk) 17:32, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Back at GA now, with yet another reviewer who found no issues. I guess I can start thinking about FA now. Still some work to do in re-writing the last third or so, I feel... 4u1e (talk) 21:18, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Page moves
I noticed your supports for the move requests I made on Doug Stone and Tracy Byrd. You might be interested in this one too, since it's the same kind of thing. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 19:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC)