User talk:The Interior/Archive 3

Thank you
Thank you for copy editing of the Autonomous Albanian Republic of Korçë article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 01:12, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: article
Yea, no prob! I hope I wasn't too harsh. I'm glad you've found some more sources. I can't wait to see how you improve the article. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 05:38, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Salmon
Hi, nice pictures and videos of salmon spawning. It's always nice to see such things still occurring despite massive river damming. I guess your photos/videos are of tributaries of the undammned Fraser. It always depresses me to see no such thing on tributaries of the Columbia above Chief Joseph Dam. On the other hand, your photos reminded me of the Wallowa Mountain streams of Oregon. Pfly (talk) 11:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Thx
Well, at least it's not just "because Skookum1 says so"....you'll probably be challenged that your comments are original research though, and where are your "reliable sources". "What your geography teachers said is not citable - find us print citations which explicitly say that or withdraw it..." yadayadayada.....I'll be "off-air" over the next while, between moving (from P-town to Rainburg) and should be working full-time in the film biz from now on in for quite a while, will only just be able to squeeze in so much computer time, gonna focus on my political commentaries elsewhere and history/geography books underway....wasting wiki-energy on items like this one, or the dash/hyphen thing (now focussed on the RM at Poland-Lithuania but also in MOSTALK and originating at Alberni-Clayoquot Regional District....and other gigantic crowbar work removing princess-pea molehills....kept me from improving a lot of geography articles, and getting off long-abeyed history article projects. "Because Skookum1 says so" is "because Skookum1 is usually right", "and "Skookum1 knows his shit".  There's a big difference between informed knowledge and "original research" huh?  My time will be better spent writing about BC history and geography without wiki-"guidelines" and people misusing them in my way....Skookum1 (talk) 17:58, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

*Blush*
Well thank you very much for the sparkly bit. My heart broke a bit not being able to make the meet - I'll start working on securing a spot for the 15 year anniversary now! --Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 00:41, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

film project userspace draft.
Thanks for fixing the spelling and all that on my userpage draft. I know there would be a few left. My mind did wrestle on how to spell exceptions at the time so thanks for clearing that out. Jhenderson 7 7 7  01:41, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Location maps - we need something better and less UNDUE than the RD-based ones
Just noticed the change on your "works in progress" where you took out a location maps project....for a long while now I've wanted another map to be available than either the regional-district-based one, or the one I had someone make up with no RD boundaries, just all grey, that is more suitable and typical for how BC community locations are shown.....in general use that's by road/highway network....the RD boundaries mean even less to a British Columbian than they are useful in any way as a guide for someone from somewhere else; a terrain-map with major highways is what's needed, but it has to be orthometric or whatever to make the push-pin gag work.....Skookum1 (talk) 03:33, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that was an ambitious plan to get good at maps that I have yet to realize. I'll re-engage myself on map files, but in the meantime you should talk to some of the folks over at Graphic Lab/Map workshop.  They don't work fast, but they are a knowledgeable bunch.  PALM TREEZ! just trying to make you twitch  The Interior (Talk) 03:42, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Especially without mention of the Arbutus, which does grow a bit on Point Grey, as I recall around Trail Six and probably farther south there too, toward Iona Island. As for the maps, maybe I should take that over there, I've been rather preoccupied....I have this thing about RDs not being suitable/due weight references for place and location and description; but rather regions, ranges etc and as mentioned the highway network....the old highways maps, with the shaded relief and major lakes/rivers etc on them were much more useful, and relevant to any reader, from BC or otherwise; copyrighted of course but we be good to have a scan of at least a part of one of them as a model....BC Basemap can generated images but they're Crown Copyright, albeit under open license; don't like their graphics anyway, the LRDWC version had much better density of countour lines, for example.....I don't like the orthometric maps to start with, but they're necessary for the pin-point thing unless some kind of algorithm is applied for more "normal-looking" projections.....as with the Ontario maps, or some of them, a local-area cutaway or 2nd map is very much required, and especially when clusters of towns like the East Kootenay or "the Hazeltons" or "Greater Lillooet" are involved, a more local region map is also called for, not needing the pinpoint projection of course; just taking notes which I'll post over there later as I have to go out suddenly.....had a though too lately taht location boxes for many places in BC shouldn't only be for towns, but as with Penticton's the names of teh mountains and valleys overlooking/focussing on the place.  Lillooet's similar that way; distant towns are less relevant except in a more automotive-oriented context....it's not Iowa let's put it that way.Skookum1 (talk) 04:23, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Dunn Peak
The DYK project (nominate) 18:02, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Clearwater copyvio
I see a lot of this kind of thing- copy-pasting from tourism materials and CoC materials, often seemingly by the CoC/local tourism board, e.g. User:Tourism Ucluelet was around for a while (that name may have had a space in it, can't remember). I've said elsewhere, and re the Wikimedia Canada thing, that there should be an outreach to groups that do this, explaining what Wikipedia can tolerate and what it cannot, and also encouraging them to use WikiTravel - where copyvio is still not allowed, but more spam-like materials and peacock language is OK....WikiTravel is greatly underutilized IMO; if I weren't having to battle dunderheads about whether or not Squamish-Lillooet Regional District should have a hyphen or a supposedly MOS-mandated dash in it, I'd have more time for useful work.....but anyways all small (and large) BC town articles have brochure-type problems; and there's probably more copyvio out there on los of them too....Skookum1 (talk) 19:48, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's especially aggravating when it replacing neutral and generally well-written stuff. This definitely is an issue with many BC articles.  I guess we could write to the various Tourism agencies and apprise them, I assume most of this stuff is being done by paid employees.  That would be a good function for a Wikimedia chapter, would look better on a letterhead than an email - "User:JoeBlow wants you to stop".  There was some talk of getting the Chapter up and running at the meetup, I forget who exactly had actually incorporated something - Franamax knows more. Gotta go, looks like they're at it again! The Interior (Talk) 20:00, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * also a general directive/information to TourismBC....britishcolumbia.com, which is a private site, often has better information and is also more amenable to corrections, and unlike whine-lady doesn't try to wiki-lawyer things to have their particular version of things change; they just willingly change their version if there's a problem.....different matter with tourism boards, for sure....they're used to controlling information in the local press, same as the BC Liberals are used to controlling the mainstream media, the way some of their operatives have been trying to censor the Christy Clark article....and others. For a while I've advocated an outreach to curators of museums and to college history/geography departments about how to use Wikipedia properly, and 'what it can do for you'.  Talking to Chamber of Commerce or Tourism board types is a whole different ballgame...and as you note "User:Fuckface wants you to stop" isn't t he way to deal with them....Skookum1 (talk) 20:08, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Interior Ranges template
I don't have time to revise this right now, but there's organizational issues to it that should get addressed; subsections should be by grouping; with the Monashees and Selkirks etc as subranges of the Columbia Mtns, the Marble Range is a sub-range of the Fraser Plateau, the term "Interior Mountains" (used by S. Holland) is for all of those between the Rockies and the Coast Mountains north of the Fraser Plateau (Cassiars, Ominecas, Hazeltons, Skeenas - and the Stikine Plateau and its subplateaus are part of that grouping). Subranges currently redlinked e.g. on Selkirk Mountains should be in it - but if they were all added it's incredibly unwieldy, unless each section within the template could be collapsed. The Fraser Plateau has numerous mountain ranges within it - the Clear as well as the Marble, also the Camelsfoot, Fawnie, Quanchus and more. "Landforms of the Interior of British Columbia" might be a better angle to do this by, since there's subareas of the Fraser Plateau like Nechako Plain and Fraser Basin; the Highlands are generally considered part of the Fraser or Thompson Plateaus, though many people refer to the Okanagan Highland especially as part of the Monashees, I think.....and the Cascades are really an inland range, despite fronting partly on the Coast.....gotta go, long day coming....Skookum1 (talk) 19:09, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I was going to run this by you. There were many organisational issues I had to consider, especially for groupings.  The name of the template in certainly up for discussion - your landforms suggestion could work, or "Intermontane" also.  I see that the "Interior Range" could be defined as just ranges north of P.G.  I have avoided redlinks up til this point, there are just to many for what is already a bulky template.  As for collapsible within collapsible, I tried; the three tier thing is at far as the coding will allow.  I guess another option is to have drop-downs for each major range, instead of the North/Central division I have now.  I'm going to copy this over to the template discussion page, we should continue over there.  Have a good one,  The Interior (Talk) 19:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

CC and BC re BLP/POV
The problem with "more neutral wording":
 * ''Although Clark was not directly connected to the BC Rail scandal investigation,

Is that she was directly connected to the BC Rail investigation.....her house was one of ten warrants issued, four were on the legislature, one was on Bruce's house, one was on hers. AND SFAIK she was the name on the warrant, which is why the documents found, which should have not been there and were allegedly in the possession of her then-husband Mark Marrissen were only confiscated, and Mark wasn't charged (because his name was not on the warrant so it was found "incidentally"). One controversial aspect of this warrant, also, is that they were given advance warning of the search on orders from Solicitor-General Coleman, which others so warranted were not given the same "courtesy". There is an oft-repeated pretense to do with BC Rail that no elected officials were under investigation; usually it's the fact that Gary Collins was placed under surveillance and wiretaps, but the reality is that the Clark household was searched, and SFAIK by warrant naming her, not her husband (which raises the question why did he have confidential documents on him at all and how did he come by them?). This same SPA tried to rewrite her article previously to make it sound like she was not the target of the warrant and as if she were not home at the time....and how was it two ministerial offices were raided and only, allegedly, the files of the aides who were charged were looked at, and the ministers excluded from investigation entirely - by a Special Prosecutor appointed for just that purpose (the previous one had been ready to search everything and everyone)....both Dave Basi and Bobby Virk worked closely with the Deputy Premier.....one thing is for certain, she will not be exempt from investigation by a public inquiry - the same public inquiry she is loudly saying is not necessary and would be a waste of public money (which is pretty funny given that they gave away a $2 billion asset and we're actually winding up paying CN for taking it from us...). NPOV does not mean covering things up to make one side or the other happy....Skookum1 (talk) 18:43, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * For sure there is more to this story than the public has access to, but I'm just trying to make the sentence reflect the source given. Perhaps change to: "Although Clark was not charged in the BC Rail scandal..." ?  I didn't know about warrants to her house.  I just want to get this sentence clear of BLP issues, i.e. that the source corroborates what is said in the sentence.  The Interior  (Talk) 19:05, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Only four of the warrants are online, those dealing with the ledge raids themselves, the others remain sealed; I've just asked one of the journalists covering this case for clarification as to who was named in that particular warrant, as it was in the mainstream press, even, at the time....Skookum1 (talk) 19:17, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Speaking of what's in the cites vs what sijohnhackett wants to be seen only see this edit to Kevin Falcon, where I've restored what the linked item says vs. what he tried to clean it of....Skookum1 (talk) 19:18, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Here's more of the same as reversed by an IP user who's begun following this (someone who knows the wiki-rules, maybe a regular logged out to avoid name-calling like what I've been subjected to). Sirjohnhackett's out of control, and will always be as he has no intention of behaving like a Wikipedian in any way, though invoking wiki-rules as he sees fit to justify himself, but without really understanding any of them and not respecting ones that get in his way.  That particular edit is definitely a POV issue for that noticeboard, though theoretically someone from BLP should intervene....this is well beyond 3RR on the Clark article....more like 8RR....or 11RR or so....might as well call it nRR as it's not going to stop....Skookum1 (talk) 19:30, 31 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Have a read.... Getting to be time to update teh BC Leg Raids article, and teh can of worms on Christy Clark just got a lot deeper....this is worth a read, too....  What was I saying about the Sun and Province not being reliable sources? (somewhere, on one of teh biography talkpages, this morning, and repeatedly in the past) and about political blogs being the only source of good, complete information and not just "someone's opinion"?Skookum1 (talk) 20:06, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM January 2011 Newsletter
The January 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Galbraith Stores
Thanks for your comments, the article Galbraith supermarkets has been revised and updated. Regards Westriding (talk) 10:26, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Re: Mikołaj Cebulka
Sure, added a cat and some description. Also, added another article to my create list :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 06:13, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Ballikinrain
Thank you for your help. Shipsview (talk) 11:34, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Pacific Salmon Commission
Orlady (talk) 18:03, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

EditorReviewArchiver: Automatic processing of your editor review
This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 20 February 2011 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7 days. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding  to the review page will prevent further automated actions. AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:20, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Your Edits!!
Most of those links under External Links heading were placed there by Wiki editors.

It is incredibly frustrating and annoying to be going back and forth with various editors with differing opinions as to what is correct for Wiki.

Why should I think that your decisions are right and previous editors wrong?????

You seem to have an incredibly narrow view of what is allowed.

Additionally, as I view other pages, I see that what is allowed there is equal to what has been posted here prior to your disapproval. I really wish you would leave this page alone and go edit someone else! Nell 21:14, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Your Horrible Editing!
The links you removed contained valuable resources unavailable at the one remaining link you allowed!

Will you kindly stop!!! Nell 21:28, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Your latest edit...
the link you removed was placed there, originally, by another editor. it contains works that are not referenced in the wiki bio. why do you insist on editing this page when your presence is upsetting to me, and you can edit so many others. i ask that you leave my work alone and stop policing this page. Nell 23:25, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Nell, you are displaying some pretty blatant ownership issues. You really do not have any right to tell someone they cannot edit an article. It is not your work, it belongs to the Wikipedia community. --Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 00:03, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

You are a bully.

The world catalog provides important references. Another editor TOLD ME that listing profiles under external links is acceptable.

Please stop your harassment!!! Nell 18:37, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Re:Black Society for Salvation
Thank you for your copy edit. I am aware that I need to improve some grammar issues of my writing, although there is certain improvement already (thanks for noticing it).

You did a good job with the copy editing of the Black Society for Salvation article. There is only one thing that I changed. It is the declaration of the society which was issued in Skopje. That declaration attempted to explain to Great Powers that although Albanians were fighting against Balkan Allies within the army of the Ottoman Empire, they were doing that not to protect the Ottoman Empire, but their Albanian vilayet, promised a month before the First Balkan War.

You are right that I suddenly, out of nowhere, mentioned Ismail Qemali. Now I added a wikilink to the article about him and the explanation connected with this article. The purpose of mentioning him and his conclusion was to inform the readers that he (wisely) concluded that despite all efforts placed by the Albanian nationalistic societies like the Black Society for Salvation, they could not have success without the support of some Great Power. Since all other Great Powers supported either Balkan Allies or Ottoman Empire, he wisely concluded that he will get support of Austria-Hungary. And he did. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 07:59, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

National Screen Institute
I saw a need for this article and so I wrote it. But the article could benefit from expansion and further sourcing. As you are listed at the WikiProject Film/Canadian cinema task force, perhaps you might care to help out? Expanding on the school's programs? Listing the awards its presented (and recipients)? How other media in Canada recognize the intitute and its efforts? Thanks,  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:24, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Quite busy, but I'll see what I can do. The Interior  (Talk) 07:41, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Qemali
I was thinking to write you a message and to congratulate for very good proposal of Alt hook which showed that you really got into the matter. I don't think that Qemali was member of this society from several reasons:
 * 1) he was on very higher level in Ottoman hierarchy and in hierarchy of Albanian nationalists. This society was in charge for low operational level of armed fights.
 * 2) Ismail Qemali was not present in Albania during the period of revolts in 1911-1912. He was either in Istanbul or in Europe gathering weapons and money and attempting to win over European public opinion to the cause of the uprising, maintained communication trough the British Consulate in Skopje.
 * 3) my personal opinion is that Qemali was not the member of the society, otherwise he would establish the committee in his hometown, Vlorë, not only in Korçë, Elbasan, Debar and Ohrid, and he would have much more sucess in organizing the uprising in southern Albania and maintaining the control over local committees.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:19, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Question
Hi The Interior, I just read your comment below the medal, and decided to ask you, if let's say I am to remind :-) you that I wrote more than 50 DYK articles, and has never been given a medal for DYK I wrote, would you give a medal to me too? :-) Cheers.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:48, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK medal
Thank you for the medal – in fact, I already had it but had forgotten to put it on my user page... fixed now! Regards, and sorry for your wasted typing! BencherliteTalk 20:00, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I noticed you ticked yourself for 50 but couldn't find the award. Great work!  The Interior  (Talk) 20:03, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Another thank you from me as well! :) KimChee (talk) 01:47, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM February 2011 Newsletter
The February 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:20, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Admin request page
Hi

I have added a subpage for admin requests on the "Resources for Guides" tab

Hope thats enough! Put anything you like and we can change the standardisation once we know what we need on there - You're our guinea pig :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 05:03, 1 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I have just asked about a trick that might get us around that one, I doubt if they would want, or need as yet, to keep that close an eye on it, but just in case lets see what they say to my "Mr Blackadder, Sir, I have a cunning plan...." Chaosdruid (talk) 05:54, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Har! If you are our Baldrick, I promise not to smack you about like Blackadder does. The Interior  (Talk) 06:03, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Richard Brautigan
Thanks. Yes - please help - I couldn't format the references so that the two books, by Chénetier and Malley fitted with the existing list.

No citation was intended. If you could format these properly I would be grateful. --Gerry Bell (talk) 05:26, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * That's timing! Just responded on your page as you were writing this! The Interior  (Talk) 05:28, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Shapeshifting (album)
Thank you for your article Victuallers (talk) 10:03, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You're very welcome. The Interior  (Talk) 10:06, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Reply
See User talk:Awikipro. That spammer offered his "services" across about 150 pages, and all were removed. Where removal left a blank page, the page was simply deleted. Courcelles 22:08, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

response from Michael
Got your message. Reasonable request. You'll find my answer on my own talk page at "User:Hermitstudy". Thanks. --Michael Paul Heart (talk) 07:34, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Your quick.
Was just removing this myself, That BLP is a bit of a mess overall. Tentontunic (talk) 12:27, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Help
I appreciate your commentary on my talk page... While I have an admin attention would you mind looking @Shmuley Boteach page - Through the years a single user account has repeatedly whitewashed the page and I'd like to put a lock on it or at least ban the people who simply vandalise consensus edits and dont know how to ? HELP ? Jonathangluck (talk) 23:18, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Possible to put a lock on the page ? Will you watch it because someone has done exactly this for years ? Can you sockpuppet user this person bc I believe is all same person ? Jonathangluck (talk) 23:57, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Buttrock
Hello The Interior. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Buttrock, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Differenet enough to need a new AfD, especially as four years have gone by. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 11:02, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Shmuley Boteach
Once again the same thing is happening, and its from a previous user who has done so before... and is people connected. Can you implement a lock on the page or @least ban that user and IP ? Jonathangluck (talk) 16:37, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Can we implement a longer lock and also see if its the same person today as previously ? he can keep switching computers and doing this ? Jonathangluck (talk) 03:35, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

non-peer reviewed article (Tahash)
This was the first version of the article I read, back in October. I thought it was interesting enough to include in the "See also" section as Original Research and Synthesis of this man's Point of View. Back then, in October, I had read and listened to most of it, and had looked at the links in the footnotes and references and was checking them out, and had left off for about a week. When I came back to it to pick up where I had left off, most of the article was gone, and I couldn't figure out why. That's how I first became involved.

I simply thought this version might be included as one man's opinion (apparently an informed opinion, but his own opinion). Several people have disagreed with what was in the article, but none of them (including myself) represented themselves as an expert in Semitic Studies and Linguistics, so for this accidental reason alone it is therefore "not peer-reviewed". As a researcher I couldn't fault the information obtained from the sources cited and the sounds provided by the audio links, even if the conclusions appeared somewhat novel. I had thought "if the controversial (not-necessarily-reliable-source) Zoo-Rabbi Natan Slifkin and others like him are still included in the wide spectrum of views in this article, this curious version by Adelman with its footnotes and audio-links probably qualifies too as another Point of View." So I included what I thought might be a disclaimer annotation removing it from consideration as a representative Wikipedia article. Slifkin himself has been peer-reviewed and judged not-so-reliable by people who disagree with his theories (but not his zoological expertise). Your revert was unexpected for that reason. Even if I can't persuade you to reconsider, I hope you understand my good faith reasons for making the link to that particular version. --Michael Paul Heart (talk) 14:08, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Different matter: I'm not a "texter". What does "AGF" mean (in your response on my talk page)? Couldn't find out from other guys who do texting and use the internet a lot. They had no idea. --Michael Paul Heart (talk) 14:16, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Question
Hi! Thanks for the welcoming. Perhaps you could teach me how to personalize my signature? --Shovan Luessi (talk) 08:56, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Your edit on James Downey page
If this page is about the Irishman, James Downey, graduate of Harvard, a head writer on SNL, which I believe it to be, then he is ABSOLUTELY, W/O QUESTION NOT RELATED TO ROBERT DOWNEY, JR. AND ROBERT DOWNEY, SR. He also is not the James Downey in the three films I removed. Nell 21:56, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

It is a common mistake - also made on IMBD and probably elsewhere, has been made for years. I know the Robert Downey family. Nell 22:01, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Your edits to james downey page
the reliable evidence is my word. you could have dug deeper. those who know James Downey and Jim Downey know the truth of this. you are perpetuating untruths. Nell 07:46, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 04:49, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

re: Adams River
Yea, I would always go for too many refs than too few. Definitely get one for everything course related. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 01:32, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, that source looks reliable, but the content doesn't appear helpful. It's about a proposal, which for all I know happens all of the time. You'd be better finding whether it actually became a heritage river. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 03:49, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * There's only 3 pages! Where is page 10? :P ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 05:19, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Whoops! This ones a bit more meaty.  The Interior  (Talk) 05:28, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Much better! ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 05:35, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Nice, keep it up. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 15:11, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Talk page conduct
What kind of talk page conduct is this?  Schwede 66  01:44, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I see. I wasn't sure what to make of it. No worries then.  Schwede 66  05:40, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Angry remarks on my talk
Hi Interior, and thanks for this edit. I even prepared a short answer explaining current geographical situation in Central Europe, BZurkO's information is slightly out of date :) Thanks again. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 09:12, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. It's funny how the Czechoslovak name persists in North America, I hear people using it quite often.  The Interior  (Talk) 09:39, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Autonomous Albanian Republic of Korçë
Thank you. I am really happy. This is the first GA that I significantly contributed. Thank you very much for your copy editing of THE article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 01:18, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I could use your opinion on something
Over at Talk:List of video games notable for negative reception I've been having a discussion with a couple of Anonymous users (both IPs geolocate to the same town, so it'd probably be safe to say they are the same person) regarding an addition to the list I believe is in bad faith. My belief in the bad faith of the addition is based in the fact that the editor was showing screenshots of the edits in a thread devoted to vandalizing Wikipedia, then said he would "encite major drama" on my talk page for not helping him vandalize the page. I could use your opinion on how to proceed with this. ScottSteiner (talk) 05:20, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

re: Angry World
Thanks! J04n(talk page) 19:03, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, I really enjoyed the album. The Interior  (Talk) 19:09, 25 March 2011 (UTC)