User talk:Xcentaur/Archive 6

Semi Hit again
Hi xC, I'm just here to inform you about the newest update of Box Office India. according to this the film is finnaly a semi-hit.

In this table Box Office Earnings 18/05/07-24/05/07 (Collections in Ind Rs) you can see that the site updated its status. It was above average yesterday and today they put semi-hit.

BTW, ibosnetwork makes its updates not so often as BOI. We were always using BOI. Moreover, the stasuses and grosses by both of the sites are always different. BOI is considered more reliable as it is the official. Yes it is. Why shouldn't be an official site for the Indian Box Office? I think it's great. I gotta go now, Best regards, --Shshshsh 09:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Lets get this much clear my friend, none of these are official in the true sense of the word. Whether you think its great or not does not change the fact that these are unofficiall tallies. In other words, we should be skeptical of all numbers and continue looking for double-checks or confirmations for the same.
 * Secondly - change it to semi-hit. Alright? Are you happy now? Those two words 'above average' and/or 'semi hit' do not merit so much discussion. So you want to put in semi-hit, put it in and put in the reference as well.
 * I am tired of going over the same discussions over and over again. I removed your changes as they used wrong grammar at the time. Personally I favour 'above average' over 'semi hit' because 'semi hit' just seems like a gimmick to me. Unfortunately, I don't care enough about trivialities to waste so much time over two words. I've finished wasting enough time over ridiculous nonsense on these two pages, and I do not intend to do so further. Do as you like, I wish you best of luck.
 * Regards, xC | ☎  11:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * OK dear, thanks for the pleasant talking manner. In fact, I don't care for this now. I'm just SHOCKED. Where is the whole work of you, Shez and very much of users on the page of Mukerji? Total blank. Haphar did so drastic edits without any further discussion. We have talked and discussed so much on every little detail. He should have looked over them, and then discuss and then make his edits (if there are sufficient explanations). I'll look over your discussions in the talk page, and then comment. This edit war was out of any logical proportion. Thanks, Best Regards, --Shshshsh 19:29, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Endal
Hi there

I have resisted the urge to edit the page my self and very some kind souls have taken on themselves to bring the Endal article in to line with all the WP rules. I am amazed at the depth and trouble everyone goes... to truly humbling

I am still making notes etc on dog related issues and doing my own off line research and when appropriate ammending (yes me ammending pages...who would have ever though that?) pages.

have a great week Endal and Allen 16:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey no!
Your welcome. But this Haphar guy seems pretty upset. I don't even think he cares about the article, he just wants to be nosy and see what we've been doing for the past. He came before to attack the article a year ago. Where he just didn't want the mention of every film and removed Chalte Chalte from Rani's career, saying it wasn't a hit. Then, he never showed interest in the page and left. Now he's back. I just hope he has a point. So far, I seem to think he was bored and just wanted to see where Rani's page had gotten. I just don't understand his purpose. Well, now we're in an edit war. - User:shez_15

Guess Who?
I'm not sure if I ever told you, but as one of the people who wanted me to get an account (IP 24...), I will tell you who I registered as: AnonGuy. --əˈnongahy ♫Look What I've Done!♫ 20:23, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * The extremely sensible editor with the anonymous IP starting 24.-.-.-, whose page was filled with urgings by us lot for him to get his own account. He did. Ref (chew) (do) 17:46, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi xC
First of all, thanks for the message.

Secondly, I have certain family problems to deal with - It is important, more than every other thing. I understand you and I wish you all the best. Hold on!:)

I've recently posted a message to Haphar. To be very honest, I'm also busy in recent days, real life commitments don't allow me to show presence here for the next few days. But I'll come to discuss on the talk page, when I have the time for it.

Very drastic edits. I appreciate the guy but we have to work together. I just hope that an edit war would not return once the page is unprotected. I hope every user takes care of talking and discussing bfore editing. As you said once: Edit wars are for people who don't have the decency to use talk pages.

Haphar has not discussed yet the reason for every single detail, except saying: It's a fangush in general and giving pair of examples, when actually he has removed more than 10 KB long of content.

Yes, we had our differences, but it always was for improvement and I really believe so. I'm happy with every discussion we had, even if some of them weren't always nice.

OK, I guess I gotta go now. I hope I could be here from time to time. Thank you very much. Best regards, --Shshshsh 15:07, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Please do drop by on the article talk page whenever possible. Best regards, xC |  ☎  13:44, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Coaching
X, so sorry I haven't followed up on our coaching in a while - my internet connection's been very slow, making anything other than clearing backlogs a chore. With regards to some of the questions you've asked me on the page - I'm not highly experienced in the intricacies of deletion policy, so I've roped in the help of, who's much better at this sort of thing. He's answered some of your questions on the page. Perhaps I'll ask him to co-coach? :) Anyway, I'll have some more stuff for you there tomorrow. Take care, Riana ⁂  14:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Good luck
Wish you all the best. But when you do come back, please help us in dealing with Haphar. We'll really need you once the page is unprotected. I'll see what I can do. - shez_15

Mark Hulbert
A "" template has been added to the article Mark Hulbert, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but yours may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. The Sunshine Man 14:22, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello
Hello. I saw the edits that User:Haphar made on the Mukerji page. I agree with some of the edits such as the removal of the fashion details, preparation for role etc but not all of them such as the huge amount of info removed from the career section. I will be writing on the discussion page tomorrow or later in the week because for now I want to do some clean-up on the Bollywood pages. Also, I thought I would let you know that I'll be on and off wikipedia for some time because Im going through surgury next month. I think you have personal problems of your own as said to Shahid. Good luck with that, and hope to talk to you soon. Best regards. -- Pa7 18:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Sadiq Abad
NO. YOU ARE WRONG. THE TRUE PRONUNCIATION OF SADIQABAD IS SADIQ ABAD. SO YOU ARE QUITE WRONG AND IT WILL NOT BE A CORRECT DECISION.

Sadiq Abad
No you are wrong. The right pronunciation of Sadiqabad is Sadiq Abad so in my opinion, your this page "Sadiqabad" must be merged with "Sadiq Abad" page. Word "Sadiq" means true and "Abad" means the population so the whole word "Sadiq Abad" means the "population of true peoples". "Abad" also means the place so you can understand the meanings of Sadiq Abad clearly now.

Shahrukh Khan career section
Hiya. I have done the splitting of the Shah Rukh Khan career section. Let me know if you are fine with it or if more changes could be made. Thanks. Shakirfan 23:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Khanewal
You asked me about the pictures of Khanewal. In this regard, I will like to tell you that at present, I have not any pictures of Khanewal however, I would like to inform you that I would arrange these pictures in near future.

Image copyright problem with Image:BAHAWALPURFLAG1845-1945.gif
In this regard, I would like to inform you that This is a picture of the flag of Ex-State of Bahawal Pur which in my opinion, should not need a copyright/license.

Ab_18
Thanks for removing the tag. AB.

Sadiqabad
I don't think that user:Mb2 pk knows how to use the system properly, I left a message on his talk page about images in Khanewal. I never got a response, then by chance I stumbled upon the reply on your talk page, well I am asuming that this is the reply. So I think its just a matter of learning the system, I don't think he means to be rude. --AdamJWC 09:03, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back
Hi! have you solved your problems? I hope everything is OK now.:)

I'm very busy. I drop from time to time, but I still don't have enough time to be here. I discussed on Mukerji's talk page about the removals. Haphar agreed. I displayed the accepted details on the page. Have a look please, and tell me whether you're OK with it.

I have recently posted my opinions on some of your suggestions (the link you sent me).

Best Regards, --Shshshsh 18:12, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I have added my input regarding the Mukerji article on the discussion page, please have a look and add your opinions. Best regards. -- Pa7 17:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Rani Mukerji
Please go on the discussion page and see what I've written. Give your suggestions. Thanks. - shez_15
 * Will have a look, thanks xC | ☎  07:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Please control this Haphar guy, see his contributions and what negativity this 'mr know all' spreads. see the rani talk page - the comments made today - 18th june 2007
 * Sadly, I don't support user's who make personal attacks against other users. While I have my differences with him, I think discussing his behaviour on the article talk page is counter-productive. Regards, xC | ☎  07:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks for the message dear! I don't see you here. I see you're busy now. Yes this user is a bit agressive. I don't really know, but I feel something regarding him and I won't say that now. Just waiting for news. Thanks for the guidance. Best regards, --Shshshsh 11:00, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Regarding film credits. You will never find some Hollywood film crediting the actors in alphabetical order. Film credits can't be used, since we don't have a comprehensive source for every one. Apart from it, filmmakers use seniority/order of appearance to listactors. We are not filmmakers. We have to credit the main stars before. Zora, Plumcouch, Pa7, Haphar decided that. It was on the page of Veer-Zaara, when Shez was reverting the page, putting Mukerji before Zinta, whilst she is just the supporting. Zora and Plumcouch had had big wars with Shez, when they decided to use IMDB for every film. It was nice, since IMDB was making fair crediting, and now it changes its credits every day, Really! It uses neither film credits nor lead-support. Just see B&B page or Yuva page. Users there change credits every day. I got that we can't use it anymore. The only fact is that film credits are not suitable. IMDB either. We have to find another reliable site now, which has entries for all the Bollywood films. We need some source which will be used as a crediting template. Best regards, --Shshshsh 11:16, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Re
Well thanks, though It was not something that was personal for me as I do not know what the guy is referring to. He could have gone on but it was not quite relevant on the talk page. On Ms Mukherji a certain user is now endagering the progress by insisting on putting everything back, including what was discussed to be not relevant. There was a discussion and yet he put everything back on. Rather then get the page blocked if you could reason with him to look at adding only relevant info it would help. he has an all or nothing approach that needs to change Haphar 14:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Cast credit
Thanks for expessing your opinion. All of your suggestions are good, but some of them are not matching, in my opinion.

I will use Veer-Zaara as an example.


 * Alphabetical order - It would cause a big speculation if we used that. Someone says first name is the way to credit alphabetically. Someone says surname.


 * Screen time - I don't have any problem. In Veer-Zaara for example Shahrukh Khan has the highest length of time (Approx: 2:30). Then Zinta (2:00) and then Mukerji (45-1:00). But is it suitable for all the films here? Do we know that information for every film? And if we don't, is there some proof for our claims regarding this? Why should you believe in my information given above?
 * Importance of role - The fact in every film is that the leading actors are the most important/notable. In Veer-Zaara it is clear. Shahrukh Khan (Veer) and Preity Zinta (Zaara) are the most important in Veer-Zaara. Then the supporting. There are supporting roles from first grade and second grade. Rani Mukerji is a supporting from first grade. Kirron Kher from second. That's how Preity Zinta and Kirron Kher are in KANK. Supporting of first and supporting of second, respectively. However, Shez_15 thinks Rani Mukerji's role in this film is more important, just as he claims that her role in every other film is more important than the role of every female costar she worked with.
 * Seniority (ie. years in the industry) - Seniority is the way of filmmakers to make their actors happy. We are not filmmakers. Here is an encyclopedia, not a film. Filmmakers have their reasons, and we are not obligated to these reasons. In Veer-Zaara Kirron Kher is senior to both Mukerji and Zinta (but she is supporting of second grade, that's why she is not credited before them). There is a limit. Mukerji is senior to Zinta in two years (and just to note: before Zinta's debut Mukerji had had only one film, which was neither successful nor acclaimed). They are actresses of the same generation. However, Madhuri Dixit is senior to Aishwarya Rai in more than ten years (!). So I think when it comes to such a big period, that's still arguable.
 * Independent sites eg. IMDB, Yahoo, etc - That was my favorite way. When we go as per something, it makes our work way easier, without arguments, personal opinions etc. The usage of a crediting template would relieve any difficulty. IMDB is no longer good. I haven't seen yet Yahoo. There are certain available sites we can use as a source. Initially, IMDB listed Zinta before Mukerji. Now it doesn't. There are free users who can change everything from one day to another. That's how Yuva was changed (Mukerji after Kareena), Bunty Aur Babli (Abhishek after Mukerji) and more and more.

I personally feel like Zora, Plumcouch and Pa7. Why should the supporting actress be listed before the leading? Take these sources (just as an example) for Veer-Zaara.    

Every souce lists Zinta before Mukerji. That's why I disagree. Best regards, --Shshshsh 18:43, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

IF MY POSTS ARE NOT WIKI FRIENDLY
Xtc, If my posts on Haphar do not meet the benchmark, then asking others (by haphar)to delete posts posted by me concerning him is also hardly reasonable. 'Personal Attacks' you say, Please look at the edit history of Haphar and you would find personal attacks in abundance, especially on the Rani page. Haphar is an old friend and this is just a friendly knuckle from a person with whom he had spent some memorable (although) brief moments. I like him but not the fact that he is so venomous with people who do not seem to think parralel to his thought process.And please do not refer to me as an 'IP nut'. 124.125.68.33 03:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I have a few disagreements with him as well, it is simply that I do not agree with the way you vented your frustrations on an article talk page. You are welcome to take your problems with him to his talk page and chat with him there. There is absolutely no reason for you to discuss an editor's behaviour on an article talk page. Regards, xC | ☎  06:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

quote...
i doubt that you are at all interested, but there is a very similar quote in the show Boy Meets World to the one on your page. i have no doubt that it came from it in fact, but here it is: "You do your thing and I do mine. You are you and I am I. And, if, in the end, we end up together, it's beautiful." Just a simplified virsion, i suppose. Cheerio! ~User: Sophiakorichi

i think i came across your page because you edited a page on my watchlist. when im bored, i sometimes see what the userpage of someone (who has edited an article i watch) is like. thats all. i started reading the quote and was instantly reminded of Boy Meets World. Good show, in my poinion. Do you mind at all? ~Sophiakorichi

I'm not sure why you would mind, but, I'm sure that someone some where would mind. And, if you enjoy working on PotC articles or anything to do with fantasy, I daresay we will! ~Sophiakorichi

Binangonan, Rizal edit
Sir, what exactly do you mean by 'cleanup of list is required'? Also, I'm from Binangonan and the wiki entry for Southwell School points to a school in New Zealand. I don't think they(Southwell School, Binangonan) have a wiki entry yet. I'm just a newbie with wikipedia and I try to improve this page on my spare time. Thanks for any help. Richardarcilla 07:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Film credits
Hello. Thanks for enquiring about the surgery, but its not until the first week of July. I do not think alphabetically sorting the credits is the solution because it just seems bad to have the actors placed in a certain order when (in my opinion) the star billing should go leading actors and then supporting actors. IMDB keeps changing the credit status, so yes it has become un-reliable. I was thinking of just sticking to film-makers credits but then there is the huge task of cross-checking the films and that will take ages. However, if putting the credits alphabetically, will stop the disputes then Im all for it. Best regards. -- Pa7 18:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Film Credits Part Two
I'm all for alphabetical order too. Only that it looks unorganized since the actors in very small roles will be put at the top. I don't know. My suggestion is to keep with IMDB since it's the largest movie database. And it's already being used. So it's feasible. But for popular movies or movies where people object to IMDB's casting or where people keep changing the cast list everyday, for those movies, we should try to find the cast billing as in the movie and put the internet source on each talk page of every movie, so there is proof of the order. I think this is the best solution. I've already done this for Har Dil Jo Pyar Karega and Veer-Zaara. See the talk pages. So just check it out and tell me if you agree. I think the most problems regarding cast order is with the most recent movies and new movies are easy to find on the net after a week of its release. The articles with the film's actual casting can be A-level articles. I think we can use IMDB casting initially and when the movie releases, we can use the official billing. That's if the IMDB list seems to be unfair. I can find you casting for at least 100 movies if you want me to. But I don't want people to change it to IMDB again once it's found. I don't want someone to walk over my work. So, if every editor can vote, then I can start looking for the official billing on the internet. That's my suggestion. It makes sense. Best Regards, - shez_15


 * I think someone just changed most of Rani Mukerji's film castings on IMDB, putting her inferior to Preity Zinta on most of them. And I think it's an editor on wikipedia since we were discussing about all the same movie's castings. Her billing changed on KANK, Veer-Zaara, Chori Chori Chupke Chupke, HDJPK, Yuva and Raja Ki Aayegi Baraat. I know who the user is. But I don't want to name him. So I guess IMDB is unreliable when people keep changing the cast everyday on the purpose to attack an actor. It's unfair. So, let's just stick with official movie cast list since there are no biases attached there but only that of the film maker and since the movie belongs to the film maker, we should give him/her the respect of his choice of cast listing. - shez_15


 * I disagree with alphabetical order.
 * Let me interrupt and say: film credits are not suitable. It was discussed earlier. It's closed. We were using IMDB, but it's not suitable either, as you see film credits changed in most of the pages. Let's move on. And where does the double-standart come from? When Zinta was listed after Mukerji and I tried to convince you that IMDB is un-reliable you said to xC here My suggestion is to keep with IMDB since it's the largest movie database. And now you see Mukerji after Zinta, you say it's bad. WOW, what a transformation. But I'm not like you. I'm not interested in IMDb anymore. Sorry to express my opinions here on your talk xC. Best regards, --Shshshsh 00:06, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Both of you have some valid points guys. I really don't know, to be honest. I'm looking around for a reliable site or some other solution acceptable to all parties. It might take a while... Happy editing! xC | ☎  14:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you...:-)--Shshshsh 17:34, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi! I just went through my own archives. I saw Plumcouch's message to me where she suggests to use indiaFM.com as a source for Bollywood films. What do you think about using it as a crediting template? And BTW, What do you think about my new signature? Not as good as yours, but still nice:) Best regards, -- Shahid •  Talk 2 me  19:37, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Dunno about IndiaFM.com, I'm looking through the site right now. My nets running slow, so I might take a while to get back to you. Nice sig, I like it :) xC | ☎  17:39, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Coaching
Ask and you shall receive, my friend :) There's plenty up there to keep you happy for a while, I think! Cheers, Riana (talk)  08:25, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll have a look tomorrow, but I had a quick glance, they seem sane enough ;) Riana (talk)  17:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words
Thanks for the kind words about my edits to Thomas R. Bard. He's actually an ancestor of mine. Anyway, I do have an account user:notecardforfree, yet for whatever reason, I was not logged on when I edited the page. 71.141.241.173 22:04, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * (replied on notecardforfree's talk) xC | ☎  06:30, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Last of the Time Lords
First of all thank you for mediating the dispute over the above item (I am 83.105.96.154 - I took your advice and opened an account). I accept that my suggested edits do not comply with Wikipedia protocols and that discussion is now at an end as far as I am concerned. However I feel I must point out that despite what Rambutan says I have NEVER posted any profanities on Wikipedia or any other website for that matter. If you wish you can check the History yourself. Unfortunately this is not the first time Rambutan has posted untrue statements about me on Wikipedia. I am prepared to let bygones be bygones - however I am not prepared to let that statement stand. I would remove it myself but that will start an edit war, I would ask Rambutan to remove it but his Talk page is locked to new users like myself. Please would you pass my comment on to him and edit your earlier rebuke.

As for signing messages - sorry about that I have forgotten a few times (I didn't even know you were meant to until Rambutan informed me) however the edit I was objecting to on the Last of the Time Lords Talk page was that Rambutan actually edited my signature off a message. That was petty and uncalled for.

Sorry to drag you into this. Kelpin 12:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Note to self - I came across the whole thing on RCp. I don't know what the hell happened, to be honest. Kelpin ended up blocked. And since I don't know a tin can worth of what else happened, I refuse to get involved. xC | ☎  18:30, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Dear Xcentaur
 Thank you so much, my dear Xcentaur! :) Dear Centaur, first, let me apologize for taking a full day to get back to you - time is a fleeting commodity for me this week! ;) But there was no way I'd leave your incredibly charming message unreplied. Especially coming from you, a name I'm familiar with (having Riana's page watchlisted can do wonders! ;) and which I immediately recognize with a smile. Trust me, several times I've thought about dropping by your talk page to say hi, because I've noticed you're an excellente ditor, and a kind person, but for one reason or another I chose to wait a little more. Which made the surprise of you visiting me even nicer! :) You flatter me with your most kind gesture of inspiring that addition to your talk page. Needless to say, you're more than welcome to do so, tho I can hardly claim the credit for it - Thomas Harris should be thanked, not me! Seriously, thank you. It's always a great compliment to help a little, even indirectly. Your userpage could use a few enhancements, btw - want me to mess up with it a bit? ;) I also hope we get to talk more soon, either of wiki-stuff, or simply if you feel like visiting me; and needless to say that, if I can help you in any way, you know just where to find me! ;) Love,  P h a e d r i e l  - 07:23, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello
''You said once that(forgot it) we can't write that TRRP was critically panned, since it was made for commercial purposes. Black was the opposite. It was not a film for Box-Office.''

That's what I said to Shez. I wasn't stating an opinion by that. My opinion is the opposite, as yours. And BTW, I don't have the time and the energy to fight. -- Shahid •  Talk 2 me  13:18, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for clarifying.
 * The only reason I even bothered to say anything is that I found the idea preposterous, that individual editors will now decide to what end the movies are made. I honestly don't care much about any of the bollywood pages anymore, for the simple reason that hours and hours of time is spent on the talk pages and not much real results for all that yakking.
 * Believe me when I say I don't have the time to fight either. In case I came off as hostile, please forgive me. In trying to type fast and attend to a lot of things simueltanously, I may have sounded abrupt. Not my intention, I apologize.
 * Happy editing, xC | ☎  13:30, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * It's OK dear! It was just a misunderstanding. You're one of the most fair-minded editors here and I respect you a lot.
 * Yeah, the Bollywood pages are so restrained. I just thought to leave the Rani Mukerji page and go away. There is no progress. All the stuff which was removed by Haphar comes back. I'm afraid that this will turn to be another edit war. I want to evolve as an editor and work more, rather than being involved in endless discussions with zero results. That's so tiring to wander around hackneyed arguments of cast credits, trivial stuff, removal and return of wrong and unnecessary "information", when all these things, each and every one, have to be obvious. Anyway, just keep the great work. I wish you all the best! Thanks and best regards, -- Shahid •  Talk 2 me  15:20, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Collector to base bias.PNG
Hey there,

I see you added a comment there. Just wanted to clarify, I did make that image myself. I don't do much related to images, you seem to be more knowledgeable - should I add in a line about the uploader (me) being the creator of the image, or is the tag included for licensing enough for that?

Thanks in advance, xC | ☎  13:15, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Ideally, you should include a note about it being self-created in the image summary, so that it's watertight. ShakespeareFan00 13:18, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Whoa, fast reply!
 * Thanks for telling me. I'll definitely keep that in mind. Happy editing, xC | ☎  13:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

John Kim
The notability tag is required. Neither of the external links establishes John Kim to be a significant figure, they are merely about projects he (and many others mentioned in them) have been involved in. Just because an article is of stub class doesn't mean it can avoid the notability guidelines 138.130.68.218 07:22, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Perhaps. Lets leave in the notability tag if you feel so strongly about it. I was going to nominate the page for deletion anyhow because its wholly unsourced. Happy editing, xC | ☎  07:25, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Kudzu
I've responded at User talk:72.24.189.30 about the recent edits to Kudzu. Kingdon 13:37, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, as per Google this page 20 m is 65.62 feet, rounded off to 66 feet. I'm afraid you're wrong in this matter. Please re-revert all what you changed.
 * Well, maybe, but that doesn't explain all the other changes (like adding sources, changing pest (animal) to weed, and others) which were reverted by 72.24.189.30. Anyway, I've added the issue to Talk:Kudzu. Kingdon 15:17, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I never referred to any other issue. I am only referring to the numerical changes which you have (in my opinion) wrongly blasted. Without explaining the idea of significant digits to the said IP you threw out all zir edits, saying they are wrong, when clearly they were numerically equivalent. That is all I am concerned with on that page, that a well-meaning IP trying to help had zir changes reverted without even a small note explaining why. Anyhow, happy editing xC | ☎  15:31, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

The school AfD
Schools are tricky, very tricky. I nominated a school for deletion at a time when everyone was on the 'schools are inherently notable' bandwagon; I've also taken part in AfDs when people are on the 'if the school's not Stuyvesant, it shouldn't exist' bandwagon :) This one seems to be a bit divided, so I won't close it early, who knows. Schools are a bit of a gray area still, unfortunately. And yes, I came home last night and was really tired, but I am looking at your answers right now! Cheers, Riana (talk)  02:55, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Revert on your userpage
Haha, no problem. I like your signature by the way.  Bsroiaadn Talk 07:12, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, and same here. Peace.  Bsroiaadn Talk 07:17, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Re edits to Khan Kluay
Hi, In your reversions by an IP vandal to the above article, I think you might have reverted to an incorrect version (The country Thailand was in the original article before it was removed by the vandal). I attempted to revert it back to one of your original versions but you have reverted my edits back. Pls check the history to confirm this. I'm not going to revert the article any further as I do not want you to perceive my further reversion as vandalism and enter into an edit war with me when we are both on the same side! --Nuttycoconut 07:50, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid it was an error on your part, friend. In this edit you removed Thailand from the infobox, which is why I had to restore it with this edit. Thats why I had to revert further back. Hope you don't mind that, my apologies if it seemed like a revert match :P Happy editing, xC | ☎  08:37, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, My bad! --Nuttycoconut 14:59, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. Take care, xC | ☎  17:18, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

re: roman at International Phonetic Alphabet
Hi, you changed "roman" to "Roman" at the International Phonetic Alphabet article using AWB. The term "roman", when used to describe typefaces, is meant to be in lowercase. It's like italic type vs. Italic languages. I hope this helps.. :) --Kjoonlee 17:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, I thought it was supposed to be uppercase :P Thanks for the links, I see the difference now. My bad. xC | ☎  20:43, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Translation
Hey there! I believe WP:ECHO does something similar, but it's a wonderful idea and should really be publicised more. You could try and rally the folks at WP:TRANSL for assistance :) ~ Riana ⁂ 12:15, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Merger of mission articles
A while back, on WP:PM, this discussion occurred: "Merge Anglo-Saxon mission into Hiberno-Scottish mission; there is already a request for Schottenklöster into the same. — SomeHuman 2006-08-12 00:14 (UTC) Update - Schottenklöster has been merged. Merge tags put up on other two. xCentaur | ☎ 20:15, 22 February 2007 (UTC) " The tags have been removed (not by me) and I have voted opposed to the proposed merger. Is there a consensus or not? What should we do? How do I copy User:SomeHuman on this discussion? Bearian 15:45, 6 July 2007 (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 21:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for teaching of newcomer and strong control of necessary sources.Ttturbo 19:08, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You're welcome :) xC | ☎  07:20, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah...
That user is... um... He had a totally bizarre signature and used it on my page a few weeks ago, and got told off by at least 4 people, and got very offended. I'd rather not approach him again :/ I pointed out WP:SIG and all that to him. If you want to have a go at explaining, be my guest ;) By the way, have you added me to your Gtalk? :) Take care! ~ Riana ⁂ 07:38, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Revert?
Hello. On RC Patrol, I notified a vandal that I'd reported him on the AIV page. Why did you revert my edits? (It is the first time any of my edits have ever been reverted I feel inclined to add).  Lra drama 09:59, 9 July 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks for the explanation. Happy editing.  Lra drama 10:00, 9 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the compliment. You're also doing a fine job. The template in question has now been deleted, so I won't use it again. With regards,  Lra drama 10:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)