User talk:Scartol/Archives/2008/February

Thanks!
Thank you for offering to watch over pages while I attempt to write something publishable, which can then be quoted on Wikipedia! :) Awadewit | talk  05:13, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! :)
I just saw the good news about Old Man Goriot — yeay! Congratulations on a wonderfully vivid article, Willow (talk) 12:43, 2 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Let me add my congratulations - sorry I didn't get to add my effusive praise at the FAC. However, I have a sneaking suspicion that I will have another opportunity. :) Awadewit | talk  16:37, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Street Children
Greetings, I recently embarked on a complete re-write of the Wikipedia article on street children: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_children

Before I did this I made a few contributions on the article's talk page (the three at the bottom of the page): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Street_children

However, I had a growing feeling that I had so many quibbles with the article that I should attempt a completely new version rather than trying to fix what was there. The new article is about 90% finished but I suspect there is a lot wrong with it. And while I worry away at what remains to be written I would appreciate any criticism that can help me to make this a better and more Wikipedian article.

My version of the article may be found on my user talk page.

Thanks. Almudo (talk) 20:27, 4 February 2008 (UTC)Almudo

Jena Six peer review
I noticed that you put your name down on the peer review volunteers page as willing to work with articles on "sociology, economics, political activity, [and] international organizations." I'm not quite sure as to whether this would fall under those categories, but would you mind checking out the Jena Six article and its accompanying peer review? We've been chipping away at it, and some independent feedback would be quite useful. Thanks, Kakofonous (talk) 04:44, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:LCH Intro
A tag has been placed on Template:LCH Intro requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:23, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Labor/Organizers
A tag has been placed on Template:Labor/Organizers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:30, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Labor/Organizers2
A tag has been placed on Template:Labor/Organizers2 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:30, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Boydell Shakespeare Gallery
Since you've already read Boydell Shakespeare Gallery, I was wondering if you might offer an opinion regarding the first section on "Shakespeare in the 18th century". Another peer reviewer has suggested that it should be cut down. I am obviously too close to the article to make these decisions any more and would appreciate some feedback from others. I am reticent to make any sweeping changes at this late stage (the article is almost ready for FAC), but if it would improve the article, obviously I would do so. Thanks. The discussion is here. Awadewit | talk  03:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Requesting a peer review of ANAK Society
Hi, Eric. I noticed you are listed as a peer review volunteer for social science and society articles. I'm hoping to get some feedback on an article in that category, ANAK Society. The ANAK Society is a secret society at the Georgia Institute of Technology and I'm hoping to get it to FA quality. Would you be interested in reviewing this article? Thanks for your time. MaxVeers (talk) 06:06, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Copyedit request
Hello. An article I have nominated at WP:FAC, Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow, currently has a lone oppose standing over copyediting concerns at the article's nomination, and I would greatly appreciate it if you would be willing to copyedit the aforementioned article. If other concerns are more pertinent at the moment, I fully understand. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 07:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. I appreciate the response. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 20:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for the barnstar. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 03:06, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi
This is odehe and i like harriet tubman because without her our generations would not be free. send me back.

[Why do u like harriet tubman] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.107.2.54 (talk) 04:45, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Userbox and User Page Design
I love your feminism userbox. It's up on my page. I wish there was a category for "Wikipedians interested in feminism". --Grrrlriot (talk) 19:08, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * This discussion is now moved to User talk:Grrrlriot. --Grrrlriot (talk) 01:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Would you be interested in designing my userpage? --Grrrlriot (talk) 22:47, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It's almost been a week, since you said you would design my userpage. I'm just making sure that you are still wanting to do it. I assume you've been busy, I'm not trying to rush you or anything, in fact, I'm a pretty patient person. I'm just making sure that you are still up for doing it. --Grrrlriot (talk) 16:42, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Adoption
13:04, 12 February 2008

Hello! I would like to be adopted by you. I read you are busy but I liked your page very much and wanted to contact you anyways. I am new at Wikipedia but I aim to be a strong contributor. I am interested in creating a Wiki Project regarding water resources management and irrigation in Latin America including the impacts of Climate Change and innovative adaptation innitiatives. The objetive of this porject is making information that is normally buried on academic and government web sites available to the general public. I would love to have some assistance with editing (I am a native Spanish speaker) as well as learning more the specfics of Wikipedia writting and wiki life. Please check irrigation in Peru and let me know. Thank you very much!

--anunuezsanchez

Hello! Thank you so much for getting back to me so soon. I appreciate your comments and agree thant a Wiki Project is maybe a little premature since I have only written a country note. But I am aimed to produce a lot in the next few months and make that information available to the global wiki community, so my objective is to make a Wiki Project eventually (I would love to have your help and advice for that). Please visit the piece I made on Irrigation in Peru and let me know what you think.

I am from Spain but I am currently based in the States. I am a sustainable development professional very interested in adaptation to climate change. I believe action is needed today and that action need to be based on information. Hence the idea of sharing knowledge with the on line community. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anunezsanchez (talk • contribs) 19:00, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Thank you so much! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anunezsanchez (talk • contribs) 20:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:MoSElement/aacheck
A tag has been placed on Template:MoSElement/aacheck requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:MoSElement/becheck
A tag has been placed on Template:MoSElement/becheck requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:MoSElement/check
A tag has been placed on Template:MoSElement/check requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:MoSElement/dfcheck
A tag has been placed on Template:MoSElement/dfcheck requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:MoSElement/dspcheck
A tag has been placed on Template:MoSElement/dspcheck requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:MoSElement/sncheck
A tag has been placed on Template:MoSElement/sncheck requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Peer Review request
Oh great, another one...this is probably out of your normal zone of interest, but I'm looking for peer review contributions on Max Mosley. He's (one of) the sons of Oswald Mosley (pre-WWII British fascist leader), and was involved in Mosley's post-war party for a while. He's notable in his own right for his involvement with automobile sport. I find it helpful to get views from those who don't have an interest in or knowledge of motor racing, so if you have the time it would be great to see your comments at WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Max Mosley. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 17:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries, thanks for letting me know.4u1e (talk) 17:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Page move
I've moved your lesson to your userspace for safekeeping. See User:Scartol/Scartol, on template use and design. The Transhumanist (talk) 20:14, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Shimon Peres
Hi. Ive nominated this article for a peer review and saw you were interested in the topics it covers. If you are able to, any help would be appreciated. Thanks. Flymeoutofhere (talk) 14:07, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:X9/citycheck
A tag has been placed on Template:X9/citycheck requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:X9/countrycheck
A tag has been placed on Template:X9/countrycheck requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:X9/doc
A tag has been placed on Template:X9/doc requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<tt>&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude></tt>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey!
Just thought you might be interested in this: WikiProject Gender Studies/Feminism Task Force --Grrrlriot (talk) 23:39, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I know you are super busy, but could you make some userboxes and templates for use on the Feminism Task Force? If not, Could you suggest someone that can? --Grrrlriot (talk) 18:28, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Oldlabour
A tag has been placed on Template:Oldlabour requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<tt>&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude></tt>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:15, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Edit to Chinua Achebe
Hi Scartol, hope I'm leaving this message in the right place. A quick defense of my edit:

1) Not that my personal opinion matters that much, but I don't think 'But then' is overly conversational in tone. I say that as a university TA in Humanities and religion, so I feel like my opinions on writing style have some merit beyond my own endorsement of them... Regardless, it's obviously pointless to argue about it, so let's move on to the main point.

2) I think there needs to be some sort of transition between these two sentences: "Despite his scholarly achievements and the global importance of his work, Achebe has never received a Nobel Prize, which some observers view as unjust." "The Nobel Committee has been often criticised for overlooking important writers, such as Jorge Luis Borges, W. H. Auden, Vladimir Nabokov and Leo Tolstoy." The point of the first sentence is that Achebe has never won the Nobel Prize. As a counterpoint to this, the article points out that there have been several other prominent authors that have been overlooked, (so it's not that unusual for this to happen, possibly not particularly unjust, i.e. in that he's in good company).

I tend to see the second sentence as a sort of 'on the other hand' statement, which I would signal to with a phrase like 'on the other hand' (but that's definitely too conversational), 'at the same time' (needlessly verbose, I think) or 'but then' (clear and simple, in my opinion).

Even as I'm writing this, I realize it's possible to read the second sentence as more of a parenthetical statement than a counterpoint. Either way, I feel like that should be signalled somehow. Cheers... Genesiswinter (talk) 02:55, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello again. What about "that said?" "That said, the Nobel Committee has been often criticised for overlooking important writers, such as Jorge Luis Borges, W. H. Auden, Vladimir Nabokov and Leo Tolstoy." I don't know, the way you have it phrased now seems pretty good to me. It's slightly awkward no matter what you do.


 * Maybe one thing I'm not clear on is why precisely people think it's unjust. Is there an implicit accusation of racism or Eurocentrism? (I assumed this was the case on my first read-through). Or is it a more basic -- 'Achebe is a great writer, and it's unjust that he has failed to win the prize'? What I'm driving it is, is the injustice affecting Achebe like that of Nabokov, Tolstoy, etc. or are those asserting its injustice assuming there is more sinister motivation (Achebe's criticism of Conrad, racism/Eurocentrism, etc.)? And while I'm thinking of it, has he ever been nominated?


 * It's possible that if the article articulates the accusations of injustice a little more concretely these phrasing difficulties might disappear. Cheers, Genesiswinter (talk) 23:16, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Feminist-stub
Hi - I see you have recently created one or more new stub types. As it states at Stub, at the top of most stub categories, and in many other places on Wikipedia, it is recommended that new stub types are proposed prior to creation at WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, in order to check whether the new stub type is already covered by existing stub types, whether it is named according to stub naming guidelines, whether it is otherwise correctly formatted, whether it reaches the standard threshold for creation of a new stub type, and whether it crosses existing stub type hierarchies. In this case, it is unclear how the use of this stub type would vary from that of the long-standing fem-activist-stub. Your new stub type is currently listed at WP:WSS/D - please feel free to make any comments there as to any rationale for this stub type. And please, in future, consider proposing new stub types first! Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  00:20, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! I am very honored with the DYK. What is normally the process/life spam of an article inside Wikipedia? Does it start with a DYK? Does it start with a Good Article and then it is peer reviewed for a featured article? How could I promote and improve articles in the wiki world? You encouragement is much appreciate Scartol, Thanks! --&#91;&#91;user:anunezsanchez&#124;anunezsanchez&#93;&#93; (&#91;&#91;user talk:anunezsanchez&#124;Talk&#93;&#93;) (talk) 22:20, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

East Timor
Hello there. Wow – you have really done some work, and from my initial skim through the article, I must say I am quite impressed with the quality of research, and the matter of fact style. Without reading the whole thing in detail, it looks like you have not gone on a moralistic and simplistic point-making exercise which much of the writing on East Timor (and for that matter Western New Guinea) tends to do. The classic is to say that Indonesia army killed 200,000 East Timorese, and of course there are the Chomsky/Pilger/Amnesty Reports (bless them) that can be referenced to say that, but sometimes they are not the best sources for info.

A week ago I started out trying to improve bits and pieces in the East Timor coverage, but has now become a mission to do some major work, with new articles, and some more research – your new work does much of this already, and made less work for me. I would like to use a lot of it in other related articles but will wait for you to post. (and once I’ve had a closer look at your sources, you might want to give me advice on getting good sources). I also like your section headings – clear

One initial suggestion would be to consider where this info might go, and if it all needs to go into the Occupation article? I certainly think everything you have should at least be touched on, but I envisaged the Occupation article (a stub which I created a few days ago) would be an overview with more detailed child articles (such as the “1974-75 politics and civil war”, Invasion, Santa Cruz massacre, Referendum period, etc) branching out from underneath it. Take the Santa Cruz massacre section, for example - my suggestion would be to trim much of the detail from your proposed article (keep the vital “hook” points), and shift it to the Santa Cruz article. Ie, for the Occupation article, consider the overall significance of the massacre – from my understanding, it wasn’t (tragically) an isolated case, but its notability for the Occupation was that it uniquely got such a dramatic profile (there was actual footage), and had such an impact international for the independence cause.

Also, take a look at the new template that is a link to different articles. I’ve also re-worked Indonesia’s and Malaysia’s – have a look for clues – I recommend Indonesia’s as superior as it’s not overladen with EVERY article written on its history, just the main periods.

As for me, my link to East Timor is Indonesia – I’m the most active in what remains of the Indonesia project. I got Indonesia to FA, and developed Indonesian National Revolution to GA but got distracted (bored?) and haven’t been back to developed the next level of quality.

I really want to develop the East Timor stuff – but I don’t want to double up on all the quality work you’ve done. What are your thoughts on divvying up some of your info into the “child” articles I mentioned?

No doubt I will have more to say soon. Regards --Merbabu (talk) 01:51, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * he he - you must have got a surprise when I actually created the article (yesterday?). I certainly was surprised to see your efforts - pure coincidence, I didn't see you doing it. have we crossed wiki paths before? If you have time, you may want to pass your eyes over Indonesian National Revolution which I feel I should improve futher - just a copy edit and advice would be a good start. Also, I had a good go at improving Suharto and History of Indonesia recently but they are both huge topics and there is still a long way to go. --Merbabu (talk) 02:22, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, so this is the super sekrit project that nobody could know about? Wowza.  I'll definitely review this.  I studied oodles of geopolitics so this should be fun.  Thanks for the heads up for time to plan.  I've been so busy reviewing lately (sorry I missed Old Man Goriot, you are too speedy for me)!  p.s. we should see about rousing Hobbesy to finish getting J.D. Salinger across the line sometime soon.  Cheers! --JayHenry (talk) 02:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Scartol - I've now had a fairly detailed look at this article and I have to say I have more issues with it than I initially thought, but I'm still impressed with your research and especially your written style. With a few exceptions, my "issues" is not that I disagree with what you have written, it's more what could be added - but i can contribute to this. I have been makring things in some good sources and will start to add things that will make it a better article. Related to this is my early suggestion that some sections be trimmed back to their core items (invasion, santa cruz, for example) - but I'll leave this for now and is, of course, on the condition that this info is first transferred and settled nicely into to the related detailed articles.

Our time frames for all this might be a little different - I can't promise that I'd be able to move as quickly as you might like (ie, you FA ambitions) but I will do my best and put off other wiki dreams. I won't have the time or energy til the weekend. More discussion/suggestions/questions will come from me then too. My style (for better or worse) is to make small changes over a many edits, rather than a mind-boggling re-write in one edit, so there's always the "undo" functionality on specific points.

kind regards --Merbabu (talk) 02:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Userbox
You're right. Hadn't noticed that myself earlier. Please feel free to make any you see fit to make. John Carter (talk) 14:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Scartol
I was just wondering how do you request an article. I found what I thought was the article request page at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/2007-02-21 but I couldn't work out how to use it. On the edit link it just has a load of code with bad instructions. For example it says go to the subject/headline box, but there isn't one so it doesn't make sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nibinaear (talk • contribs) 21:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Peer review for Jack Warner
Hi Scartol, Thanks, again, for all of your assistance on Jimmy McAleer! The FAC languished for more than a month, but I'm happy to report that the article was finally promoted. Earlier today, I requested a peer review for a piece on movie mogul Jack Warner. The article includes a good deal of information, and it's reasonably engaging, but I know it can be improved. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated, as always! Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 15:37, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for getting back to me. I'll get in touch with you in a week if I need additional feedback. Best, -- twelsht (talk) 04:18, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

East Timor image
Normal MOS is to put info boxes first in articles. Any controversy around the statue should be discussed in a separate section, giving balance to both Indonesia's reasoning for building it and the expressed opinions of all the people. It shouldn't make generalisations like but was seen by most as it implies that "others hold the other views, but the writer has chose to ignore them" thats where the NPOV applies. Gnangarra 01:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

ET occupation -- observation
The presentation of the Australian response to the invasion ignores the political position Australia was in in 1975 with the sacking of the Whitlam government in November and the elections on 13th December(6 days after the invasion), if anything it shows that Indonesia was given a unique opportunity to take action when the nearest country considered capable of doing anything wasnt in a position to do anything, nor were any other countries able to as there wasnt a Government to authorise the use of Australian facilities because of the conditions imposed on Fraser until after the election. Then add to that the political legacies on Australia and the US from the Vietnam war which ended only 6 months before, neither country could take any military action. Its just an observation on my part as I dont have sources(though I'll see what I can find) to attribute the domestic situation in Australia and its effect directly on the Invasion. Gnangarra 15:38, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Ping! -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 17:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Scartol/sandbox
Another editor has added the  template to the article User talk:Scartol/sandbox, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the  template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 21:02, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Interview of sorts
To make your life even more exciting (!), I was wondering if I could "interview" you over email for my Wikimania paper. I'm writing on "online collaborative writing" and I'm trying to collect as many perspectives as possible. It would seem like now is the perfect time to ask you questions about this topic. :) I would really appreciate it! Awadewit | talk  01:53, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

East Timor article
Let's hope we get some more members soon. I'm about beat for the day, but will look over the material tomorrow and try to come up with something then. John Carter (talk) 02:40, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia demographics
Dear Scartol,

I hope you are doing well. I was wondering if there is any tool available to check the demografics of the people that read the article. I am thinking where are they from (where is the computer where they are having acesss to Irrigation in Peru in Wikipedia), how long do they stay reading...and also if there is a way to survey them about how useful they found the article to be. Any ideas? Would Google analytics work? Thank you! anunezsanchez(talk) —Preceding comment was added at 14:20, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank for the advice. I'll keep you posted with whatever the developers say. anunezsanchez(talk)

Your design on Grrrlriot's userpage
Mind if I nick it? WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN  aka john lennon  19:23, 28 February 2008 (UTC)