Misplaced Pages

User talk:RMHED/Archive 3: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User talk:RMHED Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 07:17, 8 September 2008 editRisker (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators28,290 edits →Now on AfD: new section← Previous edit Revision as of 13:14, 8 September 2008 edit undoA.C. Norman (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers812 edits →Cambridge special access scheme: new sectionNext edit →
Line 95: Line 95:


]. Please feel free to comment. ] (]) 07:17, 8 September 2008 (UTC) ]. Please feel free to comment. ] (]) 07:17, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

== ] ==


Could you give reasons why you think that ] should not be deleted? You have not done so in the edit summary, the article's talk page, or my talk page, after removing my PROD from the article. ] (]) 13:14, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:14, 8 September 2008

  • RfA tracker
This is a readout of the current RfAs.
Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)
  • Old PROD
This is a list of deletable PRODs.
Category:Expired proposed deletions
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which did not succeed with 41 support, 21 oppose, and 1 neutral. I appreciate both the supports and the opposes. Thanks again and cheers! TN‑X-Man 18:37, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which succeeded with 71 support, 14 oppose, and 5 neutral. Thanks for your participation. I hope I serve you well!

--Smashville 23:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Now on AfD

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Laurence Baxter. Please feel free to comment. Risker (talk) 07:17, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Cambridge special access scheme

Could you give reasons why you think that Cambridge special access scheme should not be deleted? You have not done so in the edit summary, the article's talk page, or my talk page, after removing my PROD from the article. A.C. Norman (talk) 13:14, 8 September 2008 (UTC)