Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:27, 3 February 2008

Guettarda is currently disgusted and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Template:Catneeded

This article needs more cats, preferably if the pictures are free, FREE I tell's ya. Hisss. This would enhance navigation by listing it with other articles in the Category:cats. Please help Misplaced Pages by adding more cats to articles.

Archives: Archive 1 (August 29, 2004-March 3, 2005) - Archive 2 (March 11, 2005-March 28, 2005) - Archive 3 (March 28, 2005-April 17, 2005) - Archive 4 (March 20, 2005-June 6, 2005) - Archive 5 (June 6, 2005-July 4, 2005) - Archive 6 (July 4, 2005-July 26, 2005) - Archive 7 (July 30, 2005-September 26, 2005) - Archive 8 (September 27, 2005-October 13, 2005) - Archive 9 (October 14, 2005-November 18, 2005) - Archive 10 (November 18, 2005-February 12, 2006) - Archive 11 (February 12, 2006-February 17, 2006) - Archive 12 (February 18, 2006-February 26, 2006) - Archive 13 (February 26, 2006-May 13, 2006) - Archive 14 (May 13, 2006-July 31, 2006 ) - Archive 15 (July 31, 2006-September 20, 2006) - Archive 16 (September 20, 2006-October 30, 2006)- Archive 17 (October 30, 2006-January 13, 2007) - Archive 18 (January 13, 2007 - May 21, 2010) - Archive 19 (May 2010 - May 2012) - Archive 20 (December 2009 - present) Current

Edit

Oh for God's sake

- don't disrupt to make a point. It's not big, it's not clever. Neil ム 20:44, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I find the image offensive. Normally I don't impose my views on others, but given your need to protect the project from offensive content like "Katrina Relief" I figured that you wouldn't want to be a hypocrite. Obviously I was wrong - you only want to keep what offends you off the project. Guettarda 02:33, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Neo-nazis and their apologists piss me off. If you want to sanitise Hitler through cutesy captions, use your own web site. Don't use Misplaced Pages to promote your pro-Nazi humour. Guettarda 06:14, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

For clarity, did you just call me a Neo-Nazi, or a Nazi apologist? Neil ム 06:52, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't know what you are. But you are acting as a Nazi apologist by sanitising Hitler's image. Guettarda 06:54, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Also, where did I say a link to Katrina relief was offensive? Neil ム 06:56, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

There's no way you could have forgotten your harassment of deeceevoice that quickly. What utter garbage. Guettarda 07:02, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

The offensive part was where Deeceevoice labelled Misplaced Pages editors as racists. Get your facts straight. I didn't - at any point - state or imply the links to Katrina relief, or Sudan relief, or any of the other links, were "offensive". Neil ム 08:34, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

As someone uninvolved, can I say that all this is unpleasant to watch, and doesn't look to be doing either of you any good or making you happier. How about quietly forgetting the whole thing? William M. Connolley 08:41, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Agree that this emphasises that it's appropriate to allow users fairly wide latitude in what they put on their user page, and the importance of avoiding substantially editing another's user page without their permission, as set out in Misplaced Pages:User page#Ownership and editing of pages in the user space. By the way, an implication about the links to Katrina relief, or Sudan relief etc. might have been understood from the summary (Removing soapboxing and offensive content, external links, etc). Perhaps just unfortunate phrasing. .. dave souza, talk 10:39, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Axe

Refactored. BTW, I like all the cat pics. I lost two cats this year, one in the spring, one a few weeks ago, both just vanished into thin air. I think I will come here to meditate on occasion. - Crockspot 19:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Edit warring on dominionism template

Please see Template_talk:Dominionism#Warning_about_edit_warring. — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

You serious? One editor keeps reverting to a version which, by his own rationale, violates NPOV. Guettarda 20:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Regardless whether it's one editor or 500, consensus means "you make an edit and it sticks". In this case, it was clear that the edit was not sticking, but it kept being reverted anyway. That's edit warring. — Carl (CBM · talk) 20:58, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Nope. That's unanimity. Misplaced Pages isn't governed by unanimity. Guettarda 02:18, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

You should read WP:PRACTICAL inside WP:CONSENSUS. Moreover, the issue of consensus is not so important. Even if your edits represent consensus, except in cases of obvious vandalism there is no exception to the 3RR or edit warring policy to restore consensus versions of articles. — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Carl, you really need to figure out the difference between "policy", "guideline" and "crap I just made up". There's an obvious exception to the 3RR - the fact that if one editor is reverting against consensus, s/he runs out of reverts long before everyone else. WP:EW is a guideline. Your 0RR isn't even that.

To say that "this issue of consensus isn't important" is ridiculous. We are here to write an encyclopaedia, not to create a new bureaucracy. Articles don't exist to allow everyone to get their say. We revert vandalism all the time, we also revert stuff like John's insertions all the time. There's nothing at all that says that we need to tolerate tendentious editors. Articles aren't free speech zones. Your attempts to preserve them as that run counter to everything Misplaced Pages stands for. Guettarda 13:33, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree we do not need to tolerate tenditious editors. But there are ways to handle them without edit warring, such as an RFC or mediation. Did you see this comment on WP:AN? It is very common for both sides of an edit war to sincerely believe they are improving the encyclopedia. — Carl (CBM · talk) 14:03, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

The last comment is both stating the obvious and begging the question, "why the Draconian measures?" You have yet to provide justification for 0RR, or 1RR or any change in policy.

I'm not sure what your experience with mediation has been, but in my experience it has proven to be a feel-good remedy that is functionally useless. Ditto for RfC as a means of changing behaviour -- RfC's generally result in either blocks or bans being recommended, or in simply escalating the issue to an RfAr. In other cases RfC's are simply fractious bickering the accomplishes nothing.

In addition, I think you missed Guettarda's point re tendentious editors, especially given that your 0RR ploy treats all editors as tendentious little pricks. BTW, have you seen ? •Jim62sch• 16:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Carl, this isn't about edit warring. This is about abuse of tools and about the fact that Misplaced Pages is a project to write an encyclopaedia, not an experiment in bureaucracy. You should not be using your admin privileges to encourage tendentious editors. Troublemakers waste everyone's time. What you are doing is compounding the problem - you are disrupting Misplaced Pages by (a) blocking a productive editor while supporting a troublemaker, (b) arguing that your obvious misuse of tools was somehow correct, and (c) raising all sorts of utterly irrelevant nonsense. Why not apologise to ON like a big boy, and try working on improving articles. You appear not to understand the policy side of Misplaced Pages, so why not focus on something that's productive? As for what Bluemoonlet said - I find it impossible to square what s/he had to say with what actually occurred on the page. The diff s/he pointed to was my fourth attempt thirty-eight hours to explain the same point in ever greater detail. I said the same thing 38 hours before. John repeatedly pretended not to understand what I was saying, while throwing up incoherent arguments. But this isn't about whether Bluemoonlet accurately represented the situation or not. This is about your misbehaviour, disruption, and abuse of tools. Guettarda 17:43, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:EricWilliams.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:EricWilliams.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 13:41, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Template:Dominionism

As you participated in the prior TfD, I thought you would be interested that it has been proposed for deletion once again. You can find the discussion here. SkierRMH 02:44, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

RE:Michael Williams

I don't have any reliable source; I'm just taking the information from here I€₣ 19:07, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Page Protection

Thanks for your note about page protection. Davy p 18:49, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

3meandEr

You commented on WP:AN last week concerning a proposed 0RR/1RR regime on the article Northern Cyprus, which is being disrupted by a SPA, User:3meandEr. I've posted a request for a block or community ban on this user at WP:AN/I#User:3meandEr and Northern Cyprus - your comments would be appreciated. -- ChrisO 11:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Caribbean palms and table of content

I admit I jumped a bit to conclusion (how much is unclear, the list is shorter than it looks, so the nonexistent articles, even if they don't represent as big a number, still are a sizeable fraction of the list...) there, though I did so accurately, apparently. Anyway, what would you say if I made a custom Table of content (something multicolumns like {{List of townships in Illinois by county}})? Circeus 23:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

LOTD proposal

You have nominated a recent WP:FLC. There have been two recent proposals to begin a List of the Day feature on the main page, which have both received majorities but have not been approved as overwhelming support sufficient for the main page. WP:LOTDP is a new proposal to try to get the ball rolling based on the original proposal. Voice your thoughts on its talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

List of palms of the Caribbean request

I'm a bit slow responding as I'm doing very little in WP right now. The article looks nice, but I've no experience with judging Featured articles/lists/etc. -- Donald Albury 23:35, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Eaglegordon

Just thought you might want to know, User:Eaglegordon is also making a pain of himself on Evolution as theory and fact and has created a fake 'talkarchive' page at Talk:Evolution as theory and fact/Archive 2‎ (using what was a redlink on the talkpage). I've templated it for speedy deletion ('vandalism' seemed the most apt description for creating a talkarchive page that doesn't contain archived material). Hrafn_Stalk 04:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Coccothrinax argentata

After reading you message i went and searched google for the tree listed as vulnerable. Anfortunealty, i couldnot find any references mentioning ANY conservation status. Because the tree was not listed with both the IUCN and with palmguid.org(), i'm inclined to assume it as a least concern and i've changed the statusn on the article to reflect this. -thanks for spotting itryan shell 17:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Featured List of the Day Experiment

There have been a series of proposals to initiate a Featured List of the Day on the main page. Numerous proposals have been put forth. After the third one failed, I audited all WP:FL's in order to begin an experiment in my own user space that will hopefully get it going. Today, it commences at WP:LOTD. Afterwards I created my experimental page, a new proposal was set forth to do a featured list that is strikingly similar to my own which is to do a user page experimental featured list, but no format has been confirmed and mechanism set in place. I continue to be willing to do the experiment myself and with this posting it commences. Please submit any list that you would like to have considered for list of the day in the month of January 2008 by the end of this month to WP:LOTD and its subpages. You may submit multiple lists for consideration.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 17:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Online Etymology Dictionary

I was just curious - on what basis do you consider this a reliable source? Guettarda (talk) 02:44, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• On the basis that it is correct! Can't ask for more than that. AlphaEta 02:50, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• No, just being "correct" isn't good enough (basis for inclusion is verifiability, not truth...). Guettarda (talk) 02:52, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

*Fine, if you can disprove the content of the reference, you may remove it. But you won't be able to, and you appear to be trolling. Feel free place the full reference to Haeckel's 2 volume Generelle Morphologie der Organismen if you'd like, but even that doesn't include an etymological description. AlphaEta 03:12, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• Sorry, I overreacted at what I thought was an attempt to troll my user page. Check to refs I've added to ecology and let me know what you think. Kindest regards, AlphaEta 04:35, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• Ah, I see. So an appropriate citation must indicate that Haeckel coined the term, because citing Generelle Morphologie der Organismen alone doesn't necessarily prove that it was the first use of the word oekologie. The question then becomes, after all of this, do you think the sentence actually requires a citation? Thanks for your help, AlphaEta 03:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, babe

Belated, but sincere. ;) Peace. deeceevoice (talk) 08:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

LOTD experiment

My userpage List of the Day experiment is getting under way at WP:LOTD. One of your lists has been nominated. I invite you to come by and represent it. If you would like to represent your list article please reformat your username in the table so it is normal sized. Among the things you may want to do to represent your list are:

1. Change the image selection
2. Add talk page projects to the list and then add them on the summary table
3. Write a summary of the article in less than 500 characters. I will begin doing this later today for those who don't do it themselves.
4. Participate in the feed back process when it starts on December 1.
5. Participate in the voting when it starts on December 11.

You are free to remain uninvolved. Your list was chosen for being among the first s ever created.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 19:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Re:Congratulations!

Mi old Amigo, Thank you. It was a total unexpected surprise to be honored by the country that I love so much. Tony the Marine 18:11, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Anon editor

Quick FYI - this anon editor is not Larry Fafarman (sp?), but pretty clearly is User:Jinxmchue. MastCell 21:24, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. In that case I have an edit to undo. Guettarda 21:25, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Spiritual Baptist

I know the group is syncretic, but it is listed on the List of Baptist sub-denominations, and it struck me as reasonable that any church which is called "Baptist" on that page would qualify for inclusion in the Baptist work group. If you think that this group does not in fact belong on that List, personally, I wouldn't argue the point. So, if you want to remove it from the list, I don't think I'd even notice if the category and banner were removed as well. I can't swear that no-one will ever seek to restore them in the future, though, but I don't think I will. John Carter 21:35, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

The article mentions that the group is based on Baptist origins, but I really can't address whehter that's enough. It might be safer to remove the "baptist-work-group=yes" part from the banner and change the category to Category:New religious movements? That's not necessarily the best choice itself, but it's the best one I can think of. John Carter 21:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I've contacted the other members of the group, and hope we see some response at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Christianity/Anabaptist work group#Spiritual Baptist soon. John Carter 22:15, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

• I think that Jinx believed in good faith that his block had expired. He logged out to check that, but I suspect that his dynamic address had changed on him. I was in the process of explaining this to him when you blocked him. Or perhaps his block truly had expired, and there is a timestamp confusion? I don't know. But I am sure he thought the block had expired. - Crockspot 05:43, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Your comment to my talkpage re FM @ ANI

Hi. I have clarified my meaning in response to your post at ANI - FM reviewed the unblock request, when he had a past history. Not a controversial decision, but perhaps one left to an uninvolved third party. Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

's cool! ;~) LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Resolution image

Mi hermano, don't let that other user get you involved in a "cat" verses "mouse" game. You know how it is, there are people in here who will not accept when they are wrong. The situation has been resolved to my favor anyway. Thank you for coming to my defense, your amigo Tony the Marine (talk) 23:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Typo redirect Mapepire Balsain

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Mapepire Balsain, by another Misplaced Pages user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Mapepire Balsain is a redirect page resulting from an implausible typo (CSD R3).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Mapepire Balsain, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 18:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Mapepire Balsain

Well it's not the first thing I deleted that was contested and I did read the discussion. Also after I delted it I checked and noticed that if you entered Mapepire Balsain in the search box you still ended up redirected to Bothrops atrox. The capital is not needed but if you want, then just recreate it. It's not something I'm really concerned about and I wouldn't delete it a second time. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 03:05, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

When I said I wouldn't delete it a second time all I ment was that I wouldn't war over it. Anyway it's back now but I'm still a you know what. Made me laugh. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 05:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

This whole thing slipped my mind. I've left a reply at User talk:Jwinius#Mapepire Balsain. I have come to realise that you were correct in saying the redirect should stay and I believe that he had not noticed the last line at Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style#Animals, plants, and other organisms. Hope you are back soon. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 01:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:LOTD

You are the nominator of a WP:FL that was promoted in the last month. I am inviting you to participate in nominations and voting in a List of the Day experiment I am conducting at WP:LOTD.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 00:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

heeeeeeeeeeeeeeey

I am disgusted too. But if you are around, we could all benefit from your input at Race and Intelligence, in all the sections starting here and down. This may actually be an opportune moment because several editors are makeing radical proposals for a new approach to the subject. I actually feel a glimmer of hope that significant positive change is now possible, after years of an article that has just been a black hole for meaningful thought. Please consider it. FYI I think there has recently been some good constructive work done on the Race article and at some point perhaps you could go over it and identify some strategic spots where improvement is still necessary. Slrubenstein | Talk 06:15, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Au contraire! In some sort of admittedly sick and twisted way, my idea of love has something to do with shared suffering, stress, and frustration! Anyway, I'll get back to you soon about the vote - thanks for calling it to my attention (I have been sort of off-wiki for a few weeks and have missed A LOT). About the link - I like anything that exposes Watson's racism and reminds people that just because you have scientific expertise in one field doesn't mean you can't be a total moron in another. I don't think i agree with the columnist's definition of heritability, though, which I understand to be the proportion of variation within a population that owes to genetic factors. As for twin studies - I agree that they are often misused. But I think that there have been more rigorous and sophisticated twin studies recently, and among real scientists - not social psychologists like Rushton but real population geneticists - there is a more sophisticsted debate about the meaning of twin studies as well as proper research design. Here is why I keep calling attention to them at the race and inteligence page: if we obey NOR and stick to the claims made by the reearchers themselves, any articlke based on twin studies would make it clear that heritability calculations only apply within a population. in other words, as soon as the choice is made to base an article on twin studies, differences among races disappears. It simply cannot be introduced (not without violating NOR). Also (as the columnist sort of implies), all good twin studies acknowledge that however high the heritability of a factor, environment, including the social environment, also plays a role. Rushton and Watson may see genes and environment (nature vs. nurture) as competing. But - again, if we obey NOR - any serious account of current research with twins will have to explain that these scientists do not see genes and environment as competing - it is not either/or, it is this and that. Slrubenstein | Talk 21:01, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

We need sourced content that can be verified from reliable sources.

Could you show which source inserted into an article was not reliable? I don't even remember inserting a source. I have recommended some on a talk page. Anyway, if you could be specific...otherwise, looks like a boilerplate caution that might have been mis-applied to my talk page. Thanks. Ra2007 (talk) 21:31, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Very Cheeky

This is the AfD, the decision was merge the stuff back. After 5 weeks of bickering, not one word has been replaced. Thus the article as you concede has been deleted by the back door. Lobojo (talk) 04:13, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

You have completely misrepresented the AfD, I count about 16 keeps 15 deletes and 6 merges. And the recommendation was to merge, which is valid, though it was against consensus. Merge means merge, not delete, though it would suit you if it did since you wanted to delete. Which is the effective current situation. The article has been blanked, but none of the material merged back. Lobojo (talk) 04:27, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Derrr!! Well that is 22-15 against what you want to do too! All I want to do by the way is follow the instructions set out by the closer. What you want to do is win the AFD, even though you lost it. Lobojo (talk) 04:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

The Phrase

This is to inform you that, at Talk:Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution, new section The Phrase, you are mentioned, because of your recent edit on the main article. I hope you will appreciate the consideration and fair play.
Miguel de Servet (talk) 10:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: {{Country data Tobago}}

I protected every single country data template a while back upon request, and don't really know anything about them. You might be better served by posting a message to the appropriate WikiProject's talk page. Cheers, east.718 at 09:37, December 19, 2007

Quit yelling

Thank you. Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 21:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Recent edits on CAM

Seasons Greetings to you also. Your last flurry of edits seem POV pushing. The characterizations in the lead don't seem encyclopedic and NPOV. Anthon01 (talk) 14:50, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

How not? Guettarda (talk) 14:56, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

You wrote

"A set of practices that cannot be tested, refuse to be tested, or consistently fail tests" is vague, not a scholarly definition but the opinion of one person(s) in an editorial. The opinion is not backed by any data. I think the repetition of three different definitions in one sentence is poor form and even if they were true definitions, don't all belong in a lead. I think that sentence poorly reflects on wikipedia. Anthon01 (talk) 16:57, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

NPOV requires us to present all relevant opinions. CAM is extremely controversial. We can't pretend that it isn't. Dawkins' position is "professor of public understanding of science" and he is an extremely notable commentator on pseudoscience. Angell is another highly notable commentator.

These are three important definitions. Eisenberg's definition is important, because it highlights the imprecise definitions of CAM. If you want a definition you can use in a survey like his, that's about the most precise a definition you can get. Eisenberg's study has been cited over 1000 times.

Dawkins' opinion is highly notable. It does a good job of capturing the main criticism of CAM - that it consists of a mixture of untested and failed therapies. We need to include this in our definition of CAM, whether it comes from Dawkins or someone else.

Angell and Kassirer make another crucial point - that many advocates of CAM deny the need for scientific testing, often going so far as to challenge the validity of scientific testing. Instead, CAM proponents rely on anecdotes and weird ideas like "water memory". These are notable quotes which introduce these issues. Obviously they should also be dealt with in more depth in the article. Guettarda (talk) 17:56, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Many of these are not definitions but characterizations. Angell has no data to back her assertions, but that ok, because she gets a pass. The fact the her statements are unscientific don't matter. Of course in your haste in getting your POV in the lead you have violated your own position on what a lead should be. BTW, the reputable Physica A published an article on water memory, "icy claim that water has memory", and nature has also recently published a letter called "The memory of water". The issue is unresolved. It is a topic under study. Anthon01 (talk) 01:32, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

	<font=3> Wishing you a "Feliz Navidad and a Happy new Year" Tony the Marine (talk)

I thank you for your wishes. I also wish you Merry Christmas! --Bhadani (talk) 04:21, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for formatting my message - you are pretty fast :) --Bhadani (talk) 04:25, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

:) --Bhadani (talk) 04:31, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy Christmas! Cheers, — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 08:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you, and Merry Christmas to you and your loved ones. Jayjg 04:46, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

And from me as well ... what a pleasant surprise as I sit here on Christmas eve editing Misplaced Pages and waiting on Santa! Happy Christmas! Cheers!--Random Replicator (talk) 05:27, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

And from me! May your stockings be filled with all the good things of the season. Raymond Arritt (talk) 05:41, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

And me ... Merry Christmas --Melburnian (talk) 06:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Me too! Merry christmas Jimfbleak (talk) 06:34, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

...and me. Merry Christmas, and best in the New Year. bikeable (talk) 06:53, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you and wish you the same too. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:59, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you from me also for the cheerful greeting! All of the same back to you and yours! My high school senior daughter still wants to believe in Santa. Me, too. *Sigh* -- Cecropia (talk) 07:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

What a surprise to see the organge banner only to find a friendly hi instead of a chore, or worse a complaint. That's a nice Christmas present right there. Thanks :) David D. (Talk) 07:19, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Umm thanks

Merry christmas to you also. I've also just uploaded a cat picture, strangely enough and it's not even my own, but I'll share it with you all the same. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pengo (talk • contribs) 07:00, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Greetings

Thanks, same to you! :) —Nightstallion 08:05, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Guettarda, thank you for the sweet greetings : ) and a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and your family! Best, Miri... --MPerel 08:25, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

And a Happy New Year to you! --Michael Johnson (talk) 09:54, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Same again! Good to hear from you, as our paths don't seem to have crossed much recently. Maybe next year! -- Hoary (talk) 10:10, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas, and thanks for the greetings. :) --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 10:11, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the greetings. Merry Christmas and happy holiday season to you too and all the best in the New Year - Darwinek (talk) 10:40, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for the Christmassy bauble, much appreciated, and a merry solstice to you and yours! Have a couple of cats..... dave souza, talk 20:45, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

You are Misplaced Pages´s own Santa, aren´t you? Amyway, it was nice to get one present this morning, thank you! I am spending the holiday with a friend´s family in Pamplona. They do not celebrate Christmas except by eating massive meals and the food is fantastic so I am not complaining. Don´t forget, tomorrow is the first day of Kwanzaa. Wishing you a very happy holiday and prosperous new year, Slrubenstein | Talk 11:22, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

Merry Christmas or Happy holidays (or Happy <insert holiday here>). Hope you are having a good one. Mine is great so far. Take care, and Happy New Year when it comes. Orane (talk) 17:40, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Glædelig Jul og en rigtig godt Nytår! - MPF (talk) 21:06, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, and the same to you. Ral315 (talk) 21:39, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas to you too. :) bibliomaniac15 22:36, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas Guettarda! I hope you are enjoying the holidays and reflecting on all the wonderful possibilities to strive for :) Take care. -- User:RyanFreisling @ —Preceding comment was added at 00:55, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!--MONGO (talk) 05:04, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Nice to here from you again. The weather here is sunny and hot, after weeks of dreary rain. Wishing you and your family all the best, now and in the new year. Great to see you still editing in the constructive manner of always. Thanks, SqueakBox 20:15, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

A belated merry christmas and a happy New Year. JoshuaZ (talk) 23:04, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your Christmas greetings! I am sorry to have missed Christmas to send you my best - but I have been so busy I only got around to writing to many of my own family yesterday (Boxing Day here - but still Christmas where they live! ;^). I wish you and yours all the very, very best for the New Year - and let us hope it is a happier and more peaceful one for the world as well. Finally - my deepest thanks for all your many wonderful contributions to the Misplaced Pages over this past year and for your efforts to make it a friendlier place to work with others. You efforts are truly appreciated. Your No. 1 Cooktown fan, John Hill (talk) 02:13, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Likewise from me. Thanks for the season's greetings. Hope your holidays are going well. Happy New Year! :-) --Rkitko 05:13, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Article names

Sorry to interrupt all of the Holiday cheer. Hopefully you will have the time to answer this query of mine. I'm prompted to write to you after reading your edit at the Duchy of Auschwitz (Oswiecim). You mentioned that Vienna had a common name in English, and Warsaw had a common name in English. What's your opinion of Cracow vs Kraków, insofar as a common name in English goes? Thanks and Best Wishes for 2008. Dr. Dan (talk) 04:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Couldn't say offhand - Krakow seems more familiar to me than Cracow (Firefox's spellcheck recognises the former but not the latter), but I'd rather comment from a position of knowledge than one of ignorance. Ditto for Krakow versus Kraków. Guettarda (talk) 05:02, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

May the Joy and Peace of Christmas be with you now and throughout the new year. --Ricardo (talk) 15:43, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas to you!

Sorry for the late notice, but hope you had a Merry Christmas. Happy New Year! Thanks for thinking of me. That means a lot to me. Hope 2008 will be a doozy. Regards GetAgrippa (talk) 16:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Me too. Thank you. I hope you had a Merry Christmas and I wish you all the best in the new year. Biruitorul (talk) 18:44, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

thanks!

thanks for your friendly greetings. & happy holidays! Lquilter (talk) 18:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

How about talking on CAM

How about it? All we are doing is reverting over and over. Anthon01 (talk) 16:36, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

That would be nice. I take it you have contacted all the other people who are reverting without even touching the talk page? I take it that you have decided to talk instead of reverting? No? I see. Guettarda (talk) 16:50, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Why should I contact everyone else when you are the main editor? If we can agree it would make it easier for everyone else to fall into place. Anthon01 (talk) 17:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Daniel Dumile

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Daniel Dumile, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Misplaced Pages:What Misplaced Pages is not and Misplaced Pages:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Misplaced Pages or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 21:15, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy New Year

≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:38, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Xmas!

Thanks for the season's greetings! I don't think I've talked to you before - it's always good to meet someone new. Happy New Year back at you! :) Cheers, Spawn Man (talk) 03:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy New Year

I second that emotion/notion. Thanks for dropping by. Bless, deeceevoice (talk) 05:49, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Disgusted? Me too.

Wanna start a club? Samsara (talk • contribs) 14:25, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

3rr, bad faith, etc.

How many times do you get to revert in a day? , , and ? In any event, the sentence "On August 25, 1956, he married Anne Lewis, whom he met while working as an instructor at an Arthur Murray Dance Studio in Tampa." never had and still does not have a reference as far as I can tell. What do you think is bad faith? TableManners 04:54, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

ANI notice

FYI- This user has started a thread at ANI about this. See WP:ANI#Admin Guettarda violating 3RR, suggesting bad faith. - Rjd0060 (talk) 05:21, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

3RR

A 3RR report was filed about you here. I've declined a 3RR block since it's borderline ("only" three reverts) but any admin should know better than to let it go that far in the first place. I suggest either taking some time away from the article or going through dispute resolution channels, if the talk page discussion isn't working for you.

And remember: there are no emergencies on Misplaced Pages! Kafziel 06:02, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the warning. If I thought it was a serious dispute I would have waited to let someone else revert the guy, but since it was nothing but bad faith disruption, I saw no problem in reverting it. Guettarda (talk)

Merry Much Belated Christmas

Sorry I didn't respond until now, but Merry Christmas and Happy Festivus. And sorry you have to deal with such trollish behavior on the part of the "editor" who reported you to the 3rr board. Obviously some people think its more prudent to pick fights and try to trip up good admins than it is to actually work toward building an encyclopedia. C'est la vie. Cheers! Baegis (talk) 13:32, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Same here, belated Christmas greetings. :)--§hanel 08:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Merry Eastern Orthodox Christmas. Dragons flight (talk) 08:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC) for the record, I'm not Orthodox, but it seems like a good thing to say today.

rollback

"But membership of the class must be community controlled, not admin controlled"

Well said! I'm not happy with this proposal at all. futurebird (talk) 22:42, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Introduction to Evolution

Your commentary on the Introduction to Evolution featured article attempt is actively being discussed on Talk:Introduction to evolution. It would be most appreciated if you would be kind enough to contribute to the dialog there. It may be that your concerns have been addressed. If not, then further guidance would be appreciated. The page should be well organized; if you go to the bottom and scroll up you should be able to locate your specific concern which I took the liberty of copying/pasting to this page. Many thanks for following up on the discussion.--Random Replicator (talk) 23:34, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Why thank you

Thanks for the Christmas wishes. It's a bit late to wish you the same, but have a great Papaya festival! >Radiant< 23:41, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your Christmas greeting. Sorry to respond so late. Hope you are having an excellent 2008 so far!! Alun (talk) 20:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for Mega Society (second nomination)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Mega Society (second nomination). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

Looks more like an editing dispute than a deletion dispute to me, but since they don't appear to have brought it up with you, I'm letting you know. :-) Stormie (talk) 08:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:LOTD

Congratulations!!!! List of snakes of Trinidad and Tobago has been selected to be a February WP:LOTD. If you have any particular date preferences please contact me by January 24th.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 16:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

you might want to consider

--Filll (talk) 16:55, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

My Rfa

I wish to thank you for being supportive of my effort to regain my adminship. Though it was not successful, your support was still very much appreciated. Let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Thank you!--MONGO 06:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Homeopathy

The journal is Homeopathy, Volume 91, Issue 3, July 2002, Pages 156-161, as the link says. I realise that it is not an unbiased source and I was mistaken to present it as such, but for the purposes of which I was using it (# of plants used in homeopathy), it doesn't really matter. If anything they would have overestimated the number, but the number they gave still amounts to a very small percentage of all plants. DJLayton4 (talk) 21:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Revolution

Yeah, someone had to do it.... ;-) -- Kim van der Linde 15:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Per AN/I

Per AN/I please undelete User:SqueakBox. ⇒SWATJester 04:27, 3 February 2008 (UTC)