| Revision as of 02:27, 26 June 2009 editMediationBot1 (talk | contribs)3,850 edits A request for mediation which you are a party to has been rejected← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:18, 22 August 2009 edit undoNoroton (talk | contribs)37,252 edits →Please take a look at this: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
| |} | |} | ||
| <small><center>This message delivered by ], an automated bot account ] by the ] to perform case management.<br>If you have questions about this bot, please ].</small></center> | <small><center>This message delivered by ], an automated bot account ] by the ] to perform case management.<br>If you have questions about this bot, please ].</small></center> | ||
| == Please take a look at this == | |||
| Responding to several comments over at the NOT talk page, based on the idea of "unencyclopedic" content, I put up a new section, ] on that talk page. I just noticed that your comment on that page makes the same point (mine is a bit more detailed, maybe too detailed). Much of the "unencyclopedic" argument is a pet peeve of mine. That was a brilliant point you made, by the way. Thanks, ] (]) 19:18, 22 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 19:18, 22 August 2009
Sections of this page older than 31 days are automatically archived.
AfD nomination of Global Virtual Aviation Community
An article that you have been involved in editing, Global Virtual Aviation Community, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Global Virtual Aviation Community. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?
Collectonian and Lord S are AfD'ing an article from DBZ again
They didn't even notify the talk page where consensus was just reached, this really is reprehensible. http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tien_Shinhan#Tien_Shinhan
New straw poll
You are a user who responded to RFC: Use of logos on sports team pages. As someone interested in the discussion a new straw poll has been laid out to see where we currently stand with regards to building a consensus. For the sake of clarity, please indicate your support or opposition (or neutrality) to each section, but leave discussion to the end of each section. — BQZip01 — 23:19, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Final version
As a contributor to the discussion regarding sports team logos, I am soliciting feedback as to the latest version of that guideline. Your support/opposition/feedback would be appreciated. — BQZip01 — 21:23, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Formal Mediation for Sports Logos
As a contributor to Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/RFC_on_use_of_sports_team_logos, you have been included in a request for formal mediation regarding the subject at Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation/Use of Sports Logos. With your input and agreement to work through mediation, it is hoped we can achieve a lasting solution. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:39, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Request for mediation not accepted
|
A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation/Use of Sports Logos.
|
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
Please take a look at this
Responding to several comments over at the NOT talk page, based on the idea of "unencyclopedic" content, I put up a new section, Misplaced Pages talk:What Misplaced Pages is not#The reason why the "unencyclopedic" argument just doesn't fly on that talk page. I just noticed that your comment on that page makes the same point (mine is a bit more detailed, maybe too detailed). Much of the "unencyclopedic" argument is a pet peeve of mine. That was a brilliant point you made, by the way. Thanks, Noroton (talk) 19:18, 22 August 2009 (UTC)