| Revision as of 19:25, 9 January 2008 editSm8900 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers64,036 edits →new request← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:06, 9 January 2008 edit undoජපස (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers60,484 edits →RfA thanks: helpNext edit → | ||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
| :] (]) 16:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC) | :] (]) 16:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC) | ||
| ==Help== | |||
| ] has a number of pseudoscience promoters trying to argue that general consensus is not seen for the fact that this idea is pseudoscientific. ] (]) 20:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:06, 9 January 2008
 Archives | |||
|
|||
Activity survey for members of WikiProject Companies
- placed on talk pages of all participants
I wanted to get a notion of the level of activity of people who are members of WikiProject Companies with respect to monitoring the WikiProject Talk page and participating in discussions of interest and/or responding to requests for input.
Could you please visit Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Companies/Member information#2008 Quarter 1 (Jan-Mar): Talk page monitoring survey and adding yourself to one or more of the several groupings listed?
Thanks for your assistance.
--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 03:55, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Images for deletion
I replied, thanks for the tip-off as to your submission. Asenine 11:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
new request
hi. i just submitted a request for Israeli-Palestinian conflict. i would suggest you look into this matter yourself, or else assign someone experienced. There is current a request pending at ArbCom, to look at the entire group of articles on this topic. many user conducts are likely to be reviewed, yet is possible that few specific articles disputes will be resolved. so I would feel that this is a good time to try to start some positive form of dispute reoslution as well.
i remember your last comment to me, regarding your reasons for feeling you might not be seen as neutral in this case. however, i would suggest that you take this case. i don;'t think anyone will think less of your ability to be fair, based on just a few past positive interactions with one or two involved editors. thanks. --Steve, Sm8900 (talk) 15:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
RfA thanks
|
Thank you for voting in my RfA, which which passed nem. con. with 45 support, 0 oppose, and 0 neutral. Thank you for your support and all the kind words that were expressed. I will try to live up to the trust placed in me by the community. I now have my homework to do and then pass the Marigolds. |
Help
Consciousness causes collapse has a number of pseudoscience promoters trying to argue that general consensus is not seen for the fact that this idea is pseudoscientific. ScienceApologist (talk) 20:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC)