User talk:OlEnglish/Archive 4

Lake Dolores
Hi OlEnglish,

Yes, just added a bunch of text in the last 24 hours. We decided to turn the Lake Dolores Wikipedia page into a documentary film -- so much of the new information is from our recent interviews. The citing process will begin in relative short order. (I have a few questions, such as: How do we handle a third-party citation of an interviewee before the film is released? along with a few others) Your help and advice would be greatly appreciated.

I look forward to communicating with you at your convenience.

Thank You -- LogicallyCreative (talk) 01:55, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi there, I'd love to help you but a better option would be for you to post your specific questions at the New contributors' help page or the Help desk (or more specific ones such as the Reliable sources/Noticeboard) as then you would get a wider exposure of users seeing your question that would probably be able to help you better than I could. Honestly I'm just a WikiGnome goin' around patrolling random articles for potential problems and don't have that much experience when it comes to creating articles. ;) -- &oelig; &trade; 02:06, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Tags related to Dr Prabhat Das Foundation
Dear OIEnglish,

I am new to Wikipedia. I have done minor editing of above mentioned topic (Dr Prabhat Das Foundation).

I personally know this foundation & I might have some bias for this organization, but I believe that all the information presented in this article is correct.

I think that the main deficiency is the small number of references. I have checked with the volunteers of this organizations & they informed me that they have many news papers / magazines references but only in Hindi language. Can these Hindi-references be used?

Thanks Bihari11 (talk) 17:44, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Sure, should be OK, WP:NONENG has more information on non-English sources, as well as Cite. -- &oelig; &trade; 19:03, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Removed speedy deletion tag: Still life with rice
Hi OlEnglish! Firstly, thanks for helping out in CSD areas. I just wanted to inform you that I removed the speedy deletion tag you placed on Still life with rice- because: A7 does not apply to books, software, buildings etc. If you have any questions or other message, please contact me. Thanks Kingpin13 (talk) 05:54, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Whewpsie-do, finger slipped. ;P -- &oelig; &trade; 05:55, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Christanity in Korea
Dear OIEnglish, I mentioned on the talk page of this site to be careful as last week a family were jailed for possessing a Bible in North Korea. The rebuffing remarks were really over-the-top. Not assuming good faith, comes to mind. I was anxious to leave a note to others writing on the site to be aware that what is said may endanger others. Surely that is relevant. Saying things like no one here is going to say anything...in this way is creating a you and us situation, and almost suggests a closed book. Electronically generated attacks are not unknown from that general area.

MacOfJesus (talk) 08:55, 6 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I understand your concern, but WP:NOTFORUM really does apply in this situation. Discussion really should focus on just the article. -- &oelig; &trade; 16:19, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Dear OIEnglish,

How does one address this situation to advise caution for users on what info they give out and discuss? I felt I had to check the title of the site as at one stage I thought it was "Korea" and not "Christanity in Korea". I was not giving a news item but advising caution. Are'nt we all to assume good will. I for one did experience living in a Christian hostile environment and am aware of "throw-away" comments in the "free-world" have devistating effects in others often erroniously. How ad rem is that to the site? I believe it is very ad rem to the site!

MacOfJesus (talk) 21:33, 6 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi there.


 * Firstly, I sympathise with your problems.


 * Secondly, I don't think that the responses were inappropriate. Wikipedia is simply not the place for these types of discussion. If you were citing a news story in a reliable source, then yes, it might be a suggestion regarding the article - but a discussion of something without any evidence is not appropriate. There are plenty of forums to raise and discuss such issues, but Wikipedia is not one of them.


 * That is what the users meant by WP:NOTFORUM; I think that there is just a simple misunderstanding here. The 'discussion page' is for discussing the article - and that is all. It is not for discussing wider matters. talk pages exist for the purpose of discussing how to improve articles; they are not mere general discussion pages about the subject of the article.


 * We do indeed assume good faith - and in doing so, I see that your comments were well-intended. I do not think that they were ad. rem, because they were not a comment about the article. If, for example, you had given a link to a news article about this, and suggested that it might be useful information to expand the article, that would be fine. But personal views and unsubstantiated facts are not appropriate.


 * AGF works both ways. In viewing the responses to your comments from the other users, and assuming good faith, I can only conclude that they were trying to point out the same thing - that article discussion pages are not the appropriate place to discuss such things.


 * I hope that this explanation helps a little; I suggest that the best thing to do is to simply forget about the incident, and move along - drop the stick, as we say.


 * Furthermore, I hope that you will understand that I am just trying to help explain and clarify the policies that we - all of us - have decided upon. Despite my suggestions, I assure you that I have the deepest sympathy for your plight, and I wish you all the best.  Chzz  ►  01:49, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

De-orphaning script
Remember that de-orphaning script? It's finally out. Check out User:Manishearth/OrphanTabs for details. Manish EarthTalk • Stalk 08:02, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Again, I keep having the same problem, I'm using Firefox 3.5.2 with all the default values and the pop-up blocker turned off, and every time I click on the de-orphan tab it just pops up a new tab with the search results and stops there. It does no automatic de-orphaning. When I try it in Internet Explorer it goes a bit further but still stops at a dialog box displaying a bunch of script code. So ya I would say its still a bit buggy and needs further testing in different environments. -- &oelig; &trade; 16:02, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Tags related to "Dr Prabhat Das Foundation"
Dear sir I am a volunteer of Dr Prabaht Das Foundation, and am glad to see this aricle in wikipedia. I was informed that the "tags" were added by you during editing. As this aricle is now much improved this is high time to delete these tags. I request you to revisit this aricle again & if satisfied with the quality of article remove these improvement tags. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.68.20.27 (talk) 22:05, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I am no longer involved in the maintenance or monitoring of that article and am not opposed to you or anyone else removing those tags. I just trust you're sure that the noted issues have indeed been resolved. -- &oelig; &trade; 23:38, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Find-A-Grave: Thanks
Thanks for finding the Clarence Lionel Adcock article in Find-A-Grave famous people/A. To preserve a record of such findings, I like having a redirect from the name that the Find-A-Grave list has to the name that Wikipedia has - I've created one for Clarence Adcock, but I think it's easiest to do that when deleting the entry. --Alvestrand (talk) 12:24, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh no problem, I usually create a redirect myself, must have slipped my mind that time. Btw, I added you to the list, hope you don't mind. ;) -- &oelig; &trade; 18:12, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


 * NP, didn't know it existed, doesn't worry me a bit! --Alvestrand (talk) 20:06, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

The Bug Squashers' Award for Excellence

 * Nice! :) -- &oelig; &trade; 16:13, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

RCAT
About RCAT, I've left a message on the talk:RCAT page. You asked about a discussion. User F203 (talk) 21:30, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Scott Janke

new stuff & stuff
hey. so can u show me- is there like a log where I popped up as a new user? can u show me how that wrks/whewre it is? thanksys! BoogityBang (talk) 20:53, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


 * There is a continually updated log of new user accounts at Special:Logs under "User creation log".
 * I noticed your username when it 'popped up' as you edited one of the articles on my watchlist. :) -- &oelig; &trade; 22:11, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your participation in my recent RfA. I will do my very best not to betray the confidence you have shown me. If you ever have any questions or suggestions about my conduct as an administrator or as an editor please don't hesitate to contact me. Once again, thanks. ·Maunus· ƛ · 13:22, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!
Dear OlEnglish!

Thank you for your information on my page.

I understand.

I read the page on Conflict of Interest, and I understand that as well.

I can state that every information posted on my page is strictly objective, or neutral. FACTS: dates, directions, awards, theatre reviews.

Please let me know how to proceed.

Thank you so much!

DvornicsekDvornicsek (talk) 01:32, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * You must understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and is not to be used for promotion. Your edits to László Marton (which are also your ONLY edits under this account, meaning you're what we call a single-purpose account) consist mainly of copy-pasted reviews and clearly is promotional in nature. You already stated that the subject of the article is your husband so I have trouble believing you could truly remain neutral as well. Are you prepared to write critically about your husband? -- &oelig; &trade; 01:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, again
If you take a look at the page, it really is neutral. A list of directions, awards received and theatre reviews written by theatre critics. But I totally undersatnd your concerns, this is why I'm asking: what would the next step be for me to proceed with this work. Sorry for asking so much! I'm just having a hard time putting this together. Dvornicsek Dvornicsek (talk) 02:17, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Just leave it be for now, someone else will come along and edit it, add to it, fix up whatever needs fixing, remove whatever needs to be removed. Eventually it will become a good article. This is a collaborative editing environment and no one here owns any articles. My recommendation to you, since you created an account, is go read and edit other articles, get to know our policies and guidelines, help us build this encyclopedia into something wonderful that the world can enjoy. -- &oelig; &trade; 02:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

if?
If I remove the large amount of theatre reviews, and stick to just a few important ones, would that help? Maybe a posted way too many reviews. Dvornicsek Dvornicsek (talk) 02:20, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes that would probably help. Try comparing it to other articles on the subject, look for some featured articles on theatre directors and see how they're written. -- &oelig; &trade; 02:30, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Proposals
I have placed some studies for John Carter, and proposals to change and add to main pages. Is he on holidays or away?

Sorry, it is full day-light here, and you must be all in bed, there!

MacOfJesus (talk) 11:20, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank You, we have made contact. MacOfJesus (talk) 18:48, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

MISS & MGM
Hi OlEnglish

WP:MISS says "Wait about a month before listing someone who has simply ceased editing". MGM has been out of action for nearly two months, without so much as a peep, vandalism revert, page protect, or otherwise. I saw no suggestion in any of his recent edits that he was taking a wikibreak or any other reason to expect him to stop editing. Why the revert?

Bongo  matic  02:23, 21 August 2009 (UTC) Should you wish to reply, please do so here. I will watch this page for a few days, so no talkback or other comment on my talk page is required.


 * I changed that to 3 months now. I've seen many Wikipedians who go on long breaks up to a month or more and then return to editing as if they've never left. It's better to be safe and tighten up the criteria for listing to increase accuracy, lest we get irate editors complaining about assumptions that they're missing when in fact they've just decided to take a vacation, or who knows what. Give MGM a bit more time, he may return, if only to place a notice on his page. If there's still no edits after about 3 months go ahead and add him to the list. -- &oelig; &trade; 03:35, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I undid both your changes per WP:BRD. The one-month guideline or wording to almost identical effect has been in effect for many years. Bongo  matic  03:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, let's move this discussion to the talk page there, get some more opinions and see if we can reach some consensus. -- &oelig; &trade; 03:40, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * As stated there, I have no view against your proposed listing criterion change. However, I don't think MGM would be bothered by the listing given the longstanding nature of the current (soon to be previous?) instructions. Hope my revert or comments don't come across as brusque or tendentious. Bongo  matic  03:52, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh no that's quite alright, I was half-expecting a challenge to my bold change. But hey that's how we do things 'round here right? :) -- &oelig; &trade; 04:13, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

User:Rgowran
has just made this edit again on Jack Van Impe in the last few minutes. I just reverted it and two others, including yourself, reverted his previous edits. I just issued a warning regarding a potential violation of the three-revert rule. Monitor the user's edits very carefully. Thanks, Willking1979 (talk) 02:17, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi!
Congratulations for being the first Wikipedian to make it out of my Page of Doom! Any suggestions for making it harder? (I know, it gets a bit boring because the link is always in the same place.) Professor M. Fiendish 02:39, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I did change the position of the link. Now every time someone gets out of the Page of Doom I will change it! But it's still rather too easy. Professor M. Fiendish 02:39, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Here's a hint: make it all caps so the O's are less distinguishable from 0's, example:
 * PAGE OF DOOM
 * PAGE OF DOOM
 * PAGE OF D00M
 * PAGE OF DOOM
 * PAGE OF DOOM
 * PAGE OF DOOM


 * That would make it tougher to spot, (depending on what font they use anyway) :) -- &oelig; &trade; 04:38, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks! That's what I did. I also made the page longer and changed the position of the link yet again. The old one with lowercase o's has gone up for db-author. Professor M. Fiendish 05:03, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Maybe the link should display things like "is this the way out?" "do you feel lucky?" "EXIT" "quick! they are coming to get you!". That would make them more frustrated. Professor M. Fiendish 05:03, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * It worked! Cureden is now second place. Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 11:52, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Trouted
Whack! You have been trouted for: Nothing. Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 07:49, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Ha! Joke! Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 07:49, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphan tag
Hi there, and thanks for your message on my talk page. Yes, I've been adding Orphan to articles with 2 or fewer incoming links - I tend to think we should aim for a highly interlinked Wikipedia, and any article that can't be linked to 3 others somehow might not be worth keeping as a separate article. I realise this creates a huge backlog, but that doesn't bother me as it's not exactly a pressing issue.

However, I understand now that the members of WikiProject Orphanage think differently. Perhaps the ideal solution here might be to have two templates, one for 'no incoming links' and one for 'few incoming links', similar to Unreferenced and Refimprove... For the time being though, I have no wish to get into edit wars over templates, so I'll simply defer to your consensus and not add Orphan to any articles with any incoming links at all. I hope that helps. Robofish (talk) 00:03, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Obviously our views and priorities differ, but thank you :). That's an interesting idea about the two separate templates, but would likely be viewed as unnecessary and redundant. -- &oelig; &trade; 00:21, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I suppose my next question is: should I be removing the Orphan template where an article has at least one incoming link? Robofish (talk) 00:09, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * No not if you don't want to.. if you can't find any other incoming links you could always use the  parameter to tag it as an 'attempted de-orphan'. Or if you feel confident that the article probably could not get any other incoming links and the one link it has is the best it can get for now then you can remove the tag, and hopefully sometime in the future another link will eventually be created for that article. --  &oelig; &trade; 00:21, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Concerned?
Thank you for your note. Origin of concerned? It is that I love Vancouver, and am concerned about most local matters. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 14:45, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Test
I didn't bother to look how many edits you had before reverting. I have to revert juvenile garbage from that page on a semi-regular basis, but I find that "revert test" is more WP:CIVIL than "revert juvenile garbage" as an edit summary. I'm well aware of the infinite potential for innuendo presented by a park called "Big Bone Lick" located in a city called "Big Bone" on a road called "Beaver Road" near the community of "Beaver Lick". Still, at the risk of sounding like a prude, I'd prefer to keep the article encyclopedic for the folks who might actually be interested in the history or archeology of the park, rather than turning it into a Wikipedia novelty. Acdixon (talk • contribs • count) 13:58, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Hehe well I'm glad there's still some diligent editors out there. Myself I try not to be so serious all the time. -- &oelig; &trade; 16:42, 27 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) 00:34, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Way off on most of these. :) -- &oelig; &trade; 18:03, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Cold Y Generation
An editor has nominated Cold Y Generation, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. --Law Lord (talk) 02:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Your message about photo tagged for speedy deletion
Thanks for your message. I have asked the following question on the copyright question page:

With reference to this image: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Michael_Howard_at_Farnborough_Console.jpg This is a scan (by myself) of a private photograph of the subject (Michael Howard) which he gave to me before his death. I have no information about who the photographer was and I don't think there are any reasonable steps I can take to identify them. What would be the copyright status of such an image?

Hopefully I'll get some advice on what to do in this situation.

Best

Jezwells (talk) 11:17, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I did not leave you that message, another editor did. But it seems you already got an answer to your question here. -- &oelig; &trade; 16:21, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Nickelodeon/Invader Zim
Responded to your question. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

More Lies About Jerzy
The play is based on the real life person Jerzy Kosinski, but in the play, the character is named Jerzy Lesnewski. I will provide references on the page. Also, my synopsis was more accurate than the one you have replaced it with. Undoing your correction, with, I hope, your go-ahead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellendipaglia (talk • contribs) 06:16, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * My apologies. Could you please provide edit summaries with your edits? This will help others understand your changes and avoid these kinds of situations in the future. Thanks. -- &oelig; &trade; 16:22, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Template question
OE, I'm really, really weak on the technical side of things. Could you explain in simple terms what these edits change? It indirectly relates to another discussion I've been having with TonyTheTiger. Thanks. Un sch  ool  14:32, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh nothing, I was just trying to solve this guy's problem. Basically I wanted to see if adding a few parameters to the tlrow template would prevent it from categorizing the Template messages/Cleanup page. It didn't seem to work and I'm not sure why. -- &oelig; &trade; 16:33, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, I actually want to create a list of pages that have been tagged as having excessively long leads, and I can't figure out how to do it. Oh, such a "special page" exists, and I've gotten to it (titled, Pages that link to "Template:Intro-toolong".  But I have to get there indirectly, by hitting "What links here" on the too long lead template.  I just want a link that takes me direct to this list, so that I can check it regularly and easily.  For now, I've just copied the page and placed it here, but of course, it's oogly.  Any better ideas? (And do you even understand what I'm talking about?  This looks like it would confuse me if I didn't know what I was dealing with.)  Un  sch  ool  18:19, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes I understand what you mean. Hmm, well it seems intro-toolong automatically places articles into Category:Wikipedia introduction cleanup, but that category also includes other "intro-" templates. This link takes you directly to the page you want: Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Intro-toolong. -- &oelig; &trade; 19:34, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Un  sch  ool  20:16, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

ISS (disambigution)
My apologies for editing this article again, but I'm afraid I never got the reason for it being reverted. I won't edit it again, but would it be ok if you could give me a heads up as to why it was reverted. Sorry about the mishap. Krazycev13 (talk) 17:07, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Sure, no problem, you just need to click on the history button to check the article's revision history, and you can read my edit summary there. What I said was that there's no indication in the band's article or its references that the band is referred to by the initials "ISS". -- &oelig; &trade; 17:15, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh ok. My bad. Krazycev13 (talk) 18:27, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Feedback
Thank you for editing my test page User:Btilm/kent plantation house. Will you please look at it again? What needs to be improved? Please give me your feedback. Thanks.  Btilm  03:18, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I would take out the "Additional information" section. That kind of information is brochure-like and not usually included in articles (See WP:NOTDIRECTORY #3 and #4). You may also want to submit a request for an automated peer review at Peer review/Automated. -- &oelig; &trade; 03:26, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * And, in doing so, remove the primary source, http://www.kenthouse.org/welcome.htm - which could appear legitimately as an external link.  Chzz  ►  00:04, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Merging
Hi Ol' English,

Thanks for letting me know about the GFDL merging requirements. I've never come across them before, although I've been active on Wikipedia for several years. When did they come into effect?

Neelix (talk) 03:04, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm guessing at least as long as WP:GFDL has been in effect, I wasn't aware of this attribution requirement either until I read Help:Merging. Don't know if it's an absolutely required policy or just a suggestion but either way it makes sense to include the article name in the edit summary because it really helps when trying to track down an article's full edit history. You can search the WT:C archives for more info. Also there's this discussion here: Template_talk:R_from_merge. -- &oelig; &trade; 03:18, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

350 (organisation)
Hi OlEnglish. When, in the above-captioned article, I made the quotation from Hansen a pull-quote, it created extra space in the article obviating the need for some line breaks (i.e.,   ), that you correctly determined were no longer necessary. However, when you removed them, you also removed some other HTML coding that should have stayed behind. I restored that coding but made sure to leave out the extra line breaks. Thanks for pointing out that they were no longer necessary! — SpikeToronto (talk) 04:48, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, okay.. But the is not needed though... It shows up automatically whenever there are three or more section headings. --  &oelig; &trade; 04:52, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Of course, you’re right. But, by inserting it as I did, doesn’t that mean precisely locating it? I recall having some difficulty with the positioning of a table of contents in a wikiarticle until I forced its location with the insertion of exactly where I wanted it to be. With this particular article, I inserted it originally because, previously, when the article was smaller, someone had put in a  . I realize that simply removing the , with the presence of three or more section headings, it would have begun to appear. But, because of my previous experience, I just automatically put the  in exactly where I wanted it to appear. Thanks for reminding me, though. I’m always learnin’ somethin’! — SpikeToronto (talk) 05:06, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes you're right it does allow you to precisely locate it, I didn't know that was your intention. Btw, in case you don't already know, you also have to option of using TOCleft and TOCright to float the TOC and have text wrapping around it, like the decorative "W" on my userpage. Regards, &oelig; &trade; 05:13, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


 * No, I didn’t know that! Hmmm … maybe I could make use of that on my Talk page … By the way, I answered your Anon-IP comment on my Talk page. Now, about that fish at the top of your screen: Every time I catch it out of the corner of my eye, for just a split second, I think you’ve a certain component of the male anatomy attached to your Talk page! — SpikeToronto (talk) 05:24, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


 * LOL! I also have a kitty cat atop User:OlEnglish/Todo list, a penguin at User:OlEnglish/Guestbook, and a mushroom at User:OlEnglish! =)  &oelig; &trade; 05:29, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, I won’t be misconstruing any of those! By the way, how do you get your Wikignome and rollback icons to separate at the top of your user page? My email and rollback icons, on both my user page and talk page, superimpose on top of each other! Thanks! — SpikeToronto (talk) 05:36, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


 * It has to do with the internal coding of the individual templates, but can also depend on your browser or skin, I use Firefox with the default Monobook skin. I'm pretty sure I can fix it for you but I must go to bed now, I can take a look at it tomorrow but if you want immediate help I highly recommend you ask User:Jack Merridew, he's very good with template coding. g'nite! -- &oelig; &trade; 05:49, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

User talk:142.179.92.183
142.179.92.183 Has been Registered 2 Months ago as Gerdel.Everthing has been moved to Gerdel's User Talk. Gerdel (talk) 01:47, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Jubilee Clip
Hi,

I have been trying over the last few days to get a decent objective definition of a Jubilee Clip which I felt was lacking. I have no axe to grind other than to try and improve the quality of Wikipedia generally - my only connection is as an end user of jubilee clips and the fact that I happen to live in the UK.

Anyway, as part of my research, I traced the company who registered the first patent for them anywhere in the world (which happens to be a UK company) and they have been very helpful in providing factual information about the early history which I have tried to reproduce faithfully in the entry. They also provided me with a picture of the inventor (not yet uploaded) and a picture of some Jubilee Clips which, in good faith, I did upload. I filtered out marketing information which I felt was not sufficiently objective.

Much to my surprise, I see you have marked the image as a CSD and for the life of me I can't see why. So far as I can see, the picture shows precisely the object that the entry is seeking to describe. Please could you explain?

Many thanks in advance,

Sebh007 (talk) 23:19, 3 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually, I'm not sure how you came to be here but that wasn't me, that was another user named User:Midnight Comet that tagged your image, and the reason was because, according to the CSD tag, it does not have information on its copyright status. I forwarded your message over to his talk page for you. -- &oelig; &trade; 23:34, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Kind words
Thanks for them. Eubulides (talk) 05:33, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Beware
The walking man will continue to strike. From any IP. Beware. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.229.210.4 (talk) 04:55, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

You help is appreciated
I [(MetroChristian) username] am writing an article/biography about an individual whom has helped thousands of people. His name and the article name is Bernard Wilks. I have received notices of COI, article written like a resume, and other flags. While this is my first article I am not totally sure what I would need to do to have this article acceptable to Wiki's standards... the subject of the article does not even know that it exists. I am simply writing it to inform those in the area and around the world of the help that this person is providing and how he is imparting the world for positive change.

Please provide in simple details what I need to do to have any flags removed and have this article/ biography accepted.

Thank You for your help.

metrochristian —Preceding unsigned comment added by Metrochristian (talk • contribs) 04:36, 7 September 2009 (UTC)


 * It would be a good idea to become familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines before starting any new article don't you think? Please read the links that were provided in the welcome message on your talk page. See Mother Teresa for an example of what an acceptable article looks like. In my opinion, your best bet would be to put in a request at WP:Requested articles for someone to write the article for you, as judging by your username, I have a hard time believing you can write neutrally about this person, particularly since this is your very first edits on Wikipedia. I understand you're just trying to inform but Wikipedia has strict policies of WP:Neutrality, WP:Verifiability, and WP:Biographies of living persons that you must adhere to, else the article will remain either tagged with notices such as those or will probably be deleted. Regards, &oelig; &trade; 04:48, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your help I will be adding references etc. and will invite others to contribute. I am also re- reading WP policies. Would you suggest that I remove the content and then resubmit with verifiable references and links and then invite others to rewrite the article. I was just adding and rewriting the facts into a concise bio as as I went along and planned to have it finished next week the bio will be balance and neutrally written in the format of Mother Teresa's bio [that has always been my intention, despite what you believe you can derive from my username (no disrespect intended)], I just haven't gotten that far into the body as of yet. Would that be too late? Thanks for your help I sincerely appreciated and I will follow your advice. Metrochristian (talk) 09:10, 12 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Sure, as long as it's written neutrally and reliably sourced everything should be OK. You may also want to post a request for feedback from other editors. Sorry if I reacted a bit strongly, it's just that too often I see people using Wikipedia for promotion without any regard to its policies. -- &oelig; &trade; 16:42, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for giving me a kitten. If you ever want to know how she's doing, please go here. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a message on my talk page. @ 01:22, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for getting that prod on Computer repair technician
I've been wrestling with this issue for several years. User:Collectonian is entirely correct that without sourcing, the repair I myself made on this article two years ago amounts to original research. When one performs a search for this sort of information online, one invariably finds folks who want to make money: 1) fixing your computer, 2) selling you a computer, 3) selling you training or 4) finding you a job. I do see hundreds of job descriptions in listings, but using them doesn't answer synthesis issues. Google books doesn't help much more. Ideas? BusterD (talk) 11:41, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, the US Dept. of Labor inline cite has good info. Is there something the UK uses as a similar reference? It's entirely possible I'll have to use offline sources to get this done. BusterD (talk) 11:49, 9 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Hmm, what about something from the A+ Certification or MCSE tests? -- &oelig; &trade; 03:51, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Or better yet, try searching Google Books for "computer service technician" or just "computer technician". -- &oelig; &trade; 04:40, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Check these out:
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=lCYDAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PP1&pg=PA86#v=onepage&q=&f=false
 * Upgrading and Repairing PCs books from Scott Mueller
 * The Peter Norton Programmer's Guide to the IBM-PC (the pink shirt book ;)

A bundle of related broken R to section
I though you might be interested in User talk:Lightsup55. Those 43 represent over half of one percent of all redirects tagged with R to section. I wonder what percentage of section targeting redirects are so tagged. -- ToET 23:15, 11 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Sigh. I've had to correct this editor on the proper use of redirect templates once before. Creating all those redirects was totally unwarranted. -- &oelig; &trade; 23:26, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Franciszek Chałupka
Perhaps you could raise it at WP:PWNB? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:59, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * meh, it got userfied, thanks tho. -- &oelig; &trade; 18:01, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

A friendly source of trouble
Earlier, you wrote of R to section, saying:
 * ... you also need to take into account the title of the template, which is "Redirect TO section" so it would be defeating the purpose of the template if it's not redirecting straight to the section.

and I agree with you, but as we discussed before, R to list entry's description doesn't match its name.

I just notice that WP:Friendly describes as the two templates as being quite similar:


 * R to list entry: redirect to a "list of minor entities"-type article which is a collection of brief descriptions for subjects not notable enough to have separate articles
 * R to section: sames as R to list entry, but when list is more section like in organization, such as list of fictional characters in a fictional universe.

What do you think of that? -- ToET 15:04, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes there's much that I'd like to revise in WP:Friendly, including its placement of maintenance tags above hatnotes instead of beneath them, as per WP:HNP. I've raised this at the talkpage but nothing was done about it. -- &oelig; &trade; 19:06, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Editor Review
Thanks for posting an editor review for me. I will take your advice and read more essays. Thanks again! WVRMAD • Talk  • Guestbook  16:06, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

R_from_insufficiently_notable_topic_to_rate_mention_in_target_article
Hey OE, would you handle redirects like this any differently than this? Other than in dog-before-cart cases like where an editor has created a section redirect prior to writing a planned section, there is no reason to have a section redirect to a section that doesn't (and likely never will) exit, is there? Also, is there any appropriate template the the resulting redirect? These sorts of redirects to related but silent-on-the-topic articles are a common result of RfD (without the section redirect, of course). -- ToET 09:46, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


 * A R from merge tag is required in this situation to comply with GFDL licensing requirements. Even if the content wasn't merged, or was deleted at some later date, I still consider it important to tag these with R from merge because the edit history still remains in the redirect. -- &oelig; &trade; 17:05, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

?
Dear OIEnglish,

Are you serious in asking me to comment on the page you left on my talk page (MacOfJesus (talk) 17:52, 15 September 2009 (UTC))? If you have been following the history of the development of the page Saint Athanasius, then you will see that Constantius II ordered the killing of Saint Athanasius.

MacOfJesus (talk) 17:52, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know anything about the subject, whether he was a saint or not doesn't matter to me, I only care about improving the encyclopedia, and any message I send you or anybody else would only have that goal in mind. In this case, I was only trying to help out by putting in touch someone knowledgeable on the subject to a discussion where I felt you would make a difference.. and the discussion, if you bothered to click on the link and read it, is about changing the title of the page, so if you feel as strongly as you do about that then go to the discussion page and voice your opinion on the subject so we can have a better Wikipedia. -- &oelig; &trade; 18:01, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

All I could say is what I'v said to you, that I think after following the history of Saint Athanasius that I suspect the name and title is meant ironically. I did view the pages in question and the main page. My reluctance is still with me. I did talk with an expert on the early Fathers of The Church to request his advice on Saint Athanasius who dismissed my request for I was challanging Timothy Barnes' work! Even if I were to leave a comment on the talk page, would it be of any value? Or would it give rise to a tit-for-tat situation? MacOfJesus (talk) 18:14, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Of course it would have value, your view on it, coming from an expert, can make a difference. All you have to do is state whether you're in support or opposed to the move. But of course if you don't want to that's fine, you don't have to. I just thought you might be interested, but I guess I was wrong. Sorry. -- &oelig; &trade; 19:29, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I did do that on the page in question and indicated my vote, however, I don't know what weight my words will have.

MacOfJesus (talk) 20:49, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Everyones words have weight. This is how the consensus process works. Plus, you should feel free to voice your opinion on any topic whatsoever. What matters is not whether your comments will be acknowledged, but that you're contributing to an important aspect of Wikipedia's processes.. at least that's what I'm here for.. that's my only agenda.. others may only be here to push their own viewpoints or only discuss one specific subject that they have a vested interest in, but I just want to help out anywhere I can, in whatever way I can to make Wikipedia a more accurate and functional site. I hope you understand. -- &oelig; &trade; 21:11, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

After looking at the main page of the person in question again, I changed my stand. He was exiled by the Emporer and said he was willing to die for his beliefs, an important point for Canonization even today. There is confusion over identity. And the Church imposed silence over two seperate groups opposed in opinion. I would need to study further. I declined a vote until I know more. (Sitting on the fence, a dangerous course).

MacOfJesus (talk) 01:32, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Akon
Hey wat up just changin some things on the akon page l8trz. Hey do you also edit other artists. Hey nice to meet you too.--Arcangel Viveros 18:14, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi there, I edit a wide assortment of topics, I usually do maintenance-related tasks here at Wikipedia. Nice to meet you as well. btw, use four tildes to sign your name, like this:   &oelig; &trade; 18:21, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Cool, so you're interested in christianity if you want to we can talk about it--Arcangel Viveros 19:01, 16 September 2009 (UTC)Arcangel Viveros 19:00, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Akon
if u want we can talk about religionArcangel Viveros 19:07, 16 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arcangel11 (talk • contribs)

Disambiguagation
Dear OIEnglish,

The Main page: Patriarchate, should have a note relationg to the word "see", "See", as it refers to the same thing, in context i.e.: An area of government by a bishop, etc. Could a link be made as often in main pages the two words are used?

Also, with: holy see, etc. there should be a note of disambiguation at the beginning of all these main pages! In some of the main pages (of the saints etc.) the words are interchangably used throughout, which may cause confusion to the unwary!

MacOfJesus (talk) 14:49, 17 September 2009 (UTC)


 * First off, what Wikipedians normally refer to as the "main page" is the Main Page of the encyclopedia. And when making a distinction between an article and its talk page we usually use those same terms: "article" and "talk page". So it will be less confusing for people reading your posts if you referred to 'Patriarchate' and 'Holy see' using the term "article" rather than "main page".


 * Regarding Patriarchate, there is already links to the word "See" in the see also section, I'm not sure it will be any more helpful to add a hatnote in addition to those. However I did add a See also Patriarchate hatnote to the Holy see article, I'm assuming this is what you meant? -- &oelig; &trade; 02:33, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, will take all that on board! The bit about Patriarchate and See, I was thinking of the reader / student / or interested party reading the article page. As a student I was often balked by these difficulties, and ended up either giving up or going on to something else! That is why I prefer terse entries in the article page. Thanks.

It is basically the same as what you are telling me about article page and talk page. It does help if we all stick to the same terminology. In the article page, sometimes they are "all over the place". Thanks again.

MacOfJesus (talk) 10:59, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi
Dunno if we've met before, but I was wondering if you'd like to consider running for adminship. Thoughts? – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 01:13, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I think I can handle that.. although I'm unsure about my chances.. in the current climate of RfA I dunno how well a pure wikignome would do.. I mean I don't have any GA's or FA's or any of that, I've written a few stubs.. but mostly I'm just interested in maintenance.. so maybe adminship would be a good thing for me considering that's what it usually entails.. what do you think? -- &oelig; &trade; 02:41, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Contrary to common belief, RfA is actually pretty tolerant of wikignomes. There are a handful of people who look for GAs and FAs in RfA candidates, but overall I think it wouldn't be a huge issue. I think you'd have an excellent shot at passing, personally, but it's your call. Cheers, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 05:06, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Sure why not, if you want to nominate me that is. -- &oelig; &trade; 05:13, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool. Nom written up at Requests for adminship/OlEnglish. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 17:07, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Dear OIEnglish,

I support, vote for you. I don't know if I have a vote, or when. I viewed the page.MacOfJesus (talk) 17:17, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you. :) Please wait until it's transcluded onto the Requests for adminship page, and then edit Requests for adminship/OlEnglish and voice your support there and then. The easiest way would be: once you see others start to !vote, just follow their example of how it's done. Also, it's not really considered a vote but rather a poll, and comments can be given more weight than numbers of 'supports'. Please read WP:NOTAVOTE for further detail. -- &oelig; &trade; 17:27, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Good Luck! MacOfJesus (talk) 17:29, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Your requested page is being worked on
This is mostly a copy and paste from 100_metres

Please look on the Talk page, might make this into a redirect since its the same information as on 100_metres

Talk:List_of_fastest_runners

So what i am wondering is... Do you think this just needs a redirect, since your the one who wanted to page ?

Thanks, Darkskynet

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requested_lists List_of_fastest_runners Darkskynet (talk) 12:26, 19 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Responded on Talk:List_of_fastest_runners. -- &oelig; &trade; 21:53, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Congrats on the adminship nomination
Hey, I originally found out about you when you added a comment on my talk page about my screw up to that one disambiguation page. Although you likely don't remember, I sincerely thought you were an admin at the time. You were polite, you had a boatload of contributions, and you helped me understand my fault. When I found out that you were not an admin, it shocked me. At the time, I had no idea how to nominate you for adminship, but not that you are nominated, I support you all of the way, and have noted that on your nomination page. Good luck, and best regards. Be sure to give me a heads up it you do become an admin.  Krazycev   13  20:47, 19 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I appreciate that. :) -- &oelig; &trade; 21:51, 19 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey, just decided to check back on your page. I see you're now a sysop! Woohoo! Congratulations! Krazycev   13  20:25, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

re Puck (sports)
Thanks, and yeah, that was my conclusion too. It's a pity we can't "watch" user contributions the same way we can watch pages. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 14:05, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
Dear OlEnglish Please accept my most humble apologies for my tardiness in replying. Thank you so much for all your kind words. Most honoured to have the Ribbentrop article which I contributed to substantially (through that was not my intention at first-I was annoyed at the errors and omissions when I found the article in 2005, and set about correcting them) be honoured for good article status, through not to complain, but there are some things I would like to improved like adding a bit about declaring war on the US (maybe that will get up to feature article status). The one thing that really bothers me right now, and this is my own failing that I some stress needed to be laid that Neurath and the rest of the professional diplomats of the German Foreign Office were only moderates within a German context. Neurath was a more likeable and genial character then his abrasive and obnoxious rival, which I think disguises the fact that most of what Neurath believed in was actually fairly extreme-the only differences between Neurath and Ribbentrop as relates to idea of seizing Eastern Europe to provide Germany with lebensraum was timing, not the goal itself. But that perhaps is more a matter for the Neurath page. I shall follow the process with interest. Thanks for the tip with referencing; sorry about my ineptitude in that matter as sometimes I get confused, but I will take your advice to heart. Thank you much for your advice and all your kindness; you have really made my day!--A.S. Brown (talk) 19:43, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Your welcome :) And by all means feel free to expand it further! -- &oelig; &trade; 19:50, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Re Roderick C. Meredith, Titles and Responsibilities
Re Roderick C. Meredith, Titles and Responsibilities, why edit relevant. Read ref. www.servantsnews.com/docs/merlet02.htm carefully. Without the expanded information, the letter may be assumed by casual readers to be an authentic original, or an authentic copy of such, which it is not. Further, the allegation that Meredith asked to be appointed as Armstrong's successor is unsubstantiated, not even mentioned in the partly-illegible copy of the letter itself. The allegation therefore appears a gratuitous and unsubstantiated rumor. Also, the allegation of "rebellion" on Meredith's part appears likewise gratuitous and unsubstantiated (his motives and level of conversion may have been at issue in the letter, but not his loyalty to Armstrong). An authentic original of the supposed letter, or at least a copy thereof, with actual reference to Meredith asking Armstrong to be appointed as successor and being sent away for "rebellon", would be another matter entirely. However, such does not seem to exist.


 * Reposted at Talk:Roderick C. Meredith and replied there. -- &oelig; &trade; 20:04, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Adminship
Hey i supported you for admin hope you're elected. Arcangel Viveros 20:03, 21 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much. I appreciate that. -- &oelig; &trade; 20:04, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Hopefully I did Something Good How Come It Doesn't Show me when u message back. Arcangel Viveros 20:08, 21 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Show you what? that you have new messages? Because I answered on *my* talk page. If I were to answer on *your* talk page you would get a notice. I'll leave you a message on your talk page right now to demonstrate. -- &oelig; &trade; 20:17, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Oooo I get I'm new to this so I Might ask for some help Thanks though so how you feel about going to become an admin. Arcangel Viveros 13:26, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

I voted, too, no: 24 on the list. Should I encourage others to express their views? Allowed or no. I'm getting a few comments about my spelling etc. I want to say I'm not a witch! I hope you win the Adm.

MacOfJesus (talk) 18:42, 22 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the support but that will not be necessary :). If you read Canvassing you'll see that it's discouraged. -- &oelig; &trade; 19:03, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

All I said was: "(We are voting for OIEnglish for Adm.)" nothing else! Hardly canvassing!

How petty some can be; some objecting to my spelling which made me go back and look at everything I wrote! The only thing I could find was: "colour" etc., because of the-neck-of-the-woods I come from.

MacOfJesus (talk) 10:30, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Help!!!!!
Hey how do you make one of the artist info box things? Arcangel Viveros 15:44, 23 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm assuming you mean 'musical' artist? Template:Infobox musical artist has documentation you can follow, you should also read Help:Infobox and Manual of Style (infoboxes), then if you still require further help I would advise you to post a query on the New contributors' help page. -- &oelig; &trade; 22:20, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Alright Thanx. ♦♣♠Arcangel11♠♣♦ 13:27, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Request for Comment: Saint Augustine
I'v requested comments on the conversion notes on the article page of Saint Augustine. This should be changed as its wrong, the way it is stated. I'v left a note for John Carter.

MacOfJesus (talk) 18:39, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

We could use a wikignome
We could use a wikignome over at WikiProject AP Biology 2009. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 02:39, 25 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Ooooo I love that picture on that page! .. Anything in particular you'd like me to do? -- &oelig; &trade; 03:50, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Nothing in particular. Perhaps include the project on your watchlist? Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 03:15, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Sure, will do. -- &oelig; &trade; 03:17, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Your recent prods
Those articles are being regularly recreated by an anon/SPA with no references. This been going on for years. See Talk:Circles in Polish mythology (2005) or Portal_talk:Poland/Poland-related_Wikipedia_notice_board/Archive_7 (2006). I thought there was a proper AfD at some point but I cannot find it. Redirecting to the list they originate at is not the best idea, most of that stuff needs to be deleted and red links removed. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:13, 25 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Ahh I see, I was unaware.. thanks for the explanation. Ok then I will de-link the list so as not to mislead others into thinking these articles need to be created. Or do we want them to be created but jsut waiting for it to be done properly with proper references and all? -- &oelig; &trade; 17:16, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Your Request for Adminship
Dear ,

I have closed your recent RfA as successful per the consensus of the community. Congratulations, you are now a sysop! Please make sure you're aware of the Administrators' how-to guide and are aware of the items on the Administrators' reading list. Finally, please don't hesitate in contacting me if you need anything. Best of luck in your new position! — Anonymous Dissident  Talk 03:58, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yay, congrats! – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 04:01, 26 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Woohoo! Thanks! :D -- &oelig; &trade; 04:15, 26 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Nice work. - Dank (push to talk) 04:42, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Though I opposed, I just wanted to say congrats and hope that you don't have any defective handles on your mop :) ArcAngel (talk) 05:02, 26 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Congrats!-- Giants 27 ( c  |  s ) 15:24, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations
Congratulations on the Adm., boss. Do remember, though, when you mop-up a bucket to place the bits in! Once again; Good Luck!

MacOfJesus (talk) 12:17, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Haha, thanks again. :) -- &oelig; &trade; 03:09, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thank-you so much for the barnstar. I know some of the more established editors like to disdain barnstars ( or pretend to) but I still think they are a great way to support the project. Thanks again. SPhilbrick T  13:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I completely agree. It feels good to know that what you're doing is noticed and matters to someone, and it encourages you to continue, because when someone takes the time to recognize your efforts and say thanks with a barnstar, it makes you feel that it was all worthwhile. And that's basically all it is to me, just a way of saying "Thanks".. I think the reason why some disdain barnstars is because they're looking at it the wrong way, they think it's some kind of medal to be earned and collected to show off as trophies, instead of just a simple gesture of appreciation. -- &oelig; &trade; 02:46, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to the Help Project
.. Your tasks for this week are .... ( only kidding ;) )I am assuming from you signing up comment that you have been editting the help pages before? I hope so and that you have been drawn into the net by the project banners!  I had the impression there were a lot of independent editors sorting out the help system - but not enough that they'd be passing the same article at the same time and strike up a discussiopn ( as is often the life of the gnome ) I hope the Help Project develops into a place where these editors can meet up, and when a centralised discussion is needed ( you know the help pages!) there is a place to hold it. I think I'll be tagging the project banner on help pages for a while yet as a main focus, but there are some ideas starting to trickle. Power to your pixel! L&there4;V 19:32, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey there, ya I've cleaned up many a page in the Help namespace.. for some reason these seem to be not as well maintained as the guidance pages in project namespace.. many are needing updating, expansion etc. And yes it was the project banner that led me to the page :) I dunno why I didn't join up earlier.. but I mostly joined up to do points number #3, #4, and #5 in the "Open tasks" section.. I enjoying helping out other editors, and I find myself frequently pruning help talk pages of irrelevant posts and directing editors to the proper pages.


 * PS. btw that redirect you created: "Help Project".. it's not really such a good idea to create these cross-namespace redirects, and it's not really necessary.. there's already WP:HELPWP. Do you really want to keep it? Unless you really think it's needed, I'm inclined to delete it.. -- &oelig; &trade; 03:08, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * On behalf of those whom you have made wikipedia a little easier to learn - thankyou :) Tis good the banner works - the more the merrier :) see you around L&there4;V 12:56, 30 September 2009 (UTC) (ps - the redirect isn't necessary)

Olenglish
wat u doin right now? Arcangel11 (Talk) 16:42, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

 * Nice!! I've always wanted one of these ;) -- &oelig; &trade; 03:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC)