Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:08, 22 April 2006

Archives
Archive I
Archive II
Archive III

A KISS Rfa Thanks

Thank you, I've been promoted. pschemp | talk 01:08, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

The Charlotte Mason Page

First, thanks for helping us out. I really appreciate it! About the potential copyrighted information. You may want to try to talk to Simply CM about it. I don't know who that user is beyond his/her handle. This individual may be associated with the college that used to bear Charlotte's name. (I did try to contact the college to ask them if I could use a picture on their website for the article). SimplyCM did a lot of revisions and expanded my initial ground work.

CCRF

I appreciate the level of work that has been put into this article, but I am not convinced it's ready for the "prime time" as a featured article. It still needs a major copy edit. Instead of whining and complaining and sitting back and waiting for others, I pitched in and tackled part of it (the "history" section). However, it's a big chore and still needs more time. In doing my copy-edit, I came to see that the "history" section needs more than a copy-edit (as do a couple other sections). Earlier, I nominated the article for one of the collaboration projects, which this article could benefit from prior to being posted as a feature article. I don't think I outright oppose it being a feature article, but I am also not ready to endorse it as such. Fluit 18:00, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Please read this again carefully. I am clearly referring to me not whining and complaining and stepping up to the plate instead, which I did. It's easy to sit back and point out what's wrong, it's harder to do something about it, but I chose the latter. I also freely admitted the work wasn't done, it just needs more time. Fluit 18:14, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

• Hey, don't sweat it over the not-swearing thing. I'll accept the exhaustion. I've learned that it's a bad idea to do much more than sleep or watch TV in the wee hours of the nite. Fluit 23:56, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Charter

I don't know. I hope soon. --a.n.o.n.y.m 04:38, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Same-sex marriage in Canada

I have nominated it for peer review. Ardenn 07:04, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Meech

Hey, do you think we should merge that Bourassa speech into the main Meech article? It looks as though most of the info in the Bourassa speech article is doubled from the Meech one.Habsfan|t 15:06, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that'd probably be the best course...I'll add one now...Habsfan|t 05:35, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

List of shock sites

Someone has put this up for deletion yet again. Care to cast your vote? Skinmeister 10:40, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome

Thank you, CanadianCaesar/fourth, for the warm welcome and all the good information on my talk page. --Mazzard 15:03, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I followed your signature here. Should that be Eh tu Brute? or Et tu Bruteh? DJ Clayworth 18:13, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Patricia Cornwell

You might find this amusing. Or something. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:26, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Happy anniversary

Wow, exactly 14 years to the day! I must say, coverage of the Charter is looking better all the time. I'm especially hopeful given the growing number of new contributors popping up here and there. When considering how much things have changed since April of last year I look forward to seeing where we are next April 17th. Cheers! --PullUpYourSocks 19:38, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Motionless Page

Hey, please don't delete the new Motionless page. Of course I am the only one to have edited it... it was created half an hour ago. Furthermore, as I am not a member of the band I can't exactly see how this qualifies 'band vanity'. The article is honest and point of view neutral; any parts you feel are not feel free to delete. I simply seek to inform the wikipedia community, and the music scene at large about an rising band with a growing following in the United States, Netherlands and, yes, Canada (one of the members attends a Canadian University). It is certainly making ripples in the post-rock community, and the value of having an article devoted to it lies therein. You wouldn't delete an article on the Velvet Underground or Beatles, so please respect this band's right to identification as well as my right to post a perfectly good article. -Regniweol

It's going to need a bit more content and an explanation of why the band is important before it gets an article, typically. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 22:08, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Band Vanity

I'm putting up a biography about a band, I'm not asking anyone to join a mailergroup or listen to our music. I don't understand why putting up a respectable biography of a band is considered vanity. Please let me know what I am doing wrong, thanks.

Sorry

I was unaware of the vandalism rules. Although seemingly obsurd, I'm not one to break rules and I am sorry for wasting your precious time. Misplaced Pages is a very valuable source.

Turtles

You look like someone I was probably friends or soul mates with in a previous life, so I'm going to be straight with you. From here on in, you're fighting a robot. --65.145.31.234 00:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about the above. Jayjg 15:40, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Spider pit sequence

Dear CanadianCaesar I am sorry if i keep annoying by moving one of my favorite pages. But this article is not a hoax if you think i am not telling the truth just go to google.com and type in spider pit sequence. If their is anything i can do for you just contact me at JJthecool9. P.S i am not 9 years old i am 13 i just picked this password becasue this was my first password i used when i was little. And please do not delete this article.

Innocent Blocking

Dear CanadianCaeser, I have recently been blocked by you because I apparently vandalized pages and was warned. I have not recently vandalized or been warned. Please revert my block. Thank You. FireSpike 21:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

The page i created was not intended to be vandalous, it was an attempt to demonstrate that some information on wikipedia is not intirely accurate because anyone can edit it to a friend who relies very heavily on this site as a source of information. even to the point that if there is reliable evidence against wikipedia, he will argue all day and all night. regardless, i am sorry for vandalising, i don't know if you saw that i had removed the profanity after i saw it had been marked, but i did(or at least i think i did, i'm still getting the hang of wikipedia) linked2zelda

FAC

I've had another look at the history section, as you'll have no doubt noticed. What is it that you're asking for, exactly? I think the only problem with the language is that it sometimes feels like you can see the joins where different people have been at it - there's just the odd lingering patch where the flow is interrupted. I guess this problem is largely unavoidable given the way our articles are written, but I'm not sure if my edits are entirely helpful here. I'd love to see it featured, anyway. This FAC just drags on, no? Flowerparty☀ 07:52, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok, well I think it looks pretty good now. And it's certainly not worth getting stressed over this when there's good essay-stress to be had! By the way have you ever come across this tool? - throws out some frightening statistics. Flowerparty☀ 08:15, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

User:JJthecool9

Thanks for letting me kneo. He's an odd case; some of his edits are sensible and useful, but he doesn't seem able to resist being silly as well. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 20:28, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

thanks for removing the fair use image

i had no idea it was fair use and wasn't using it to make a statement or anything, nor was i angry, and your removal has really helped the encyclopedia.

keep up the good work!

... aa:talk 21:46, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms FAC

I'm afraid I'm just the messenger; User:Raul654 is the one who makes the call. Having looked at the FAC discussion while I was going through and tagging the failed articles, I'd agree that asking him to clarify his thoughts on this one is within reason. Cheers! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:08, 22 April 2006 (UTC)