Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:25, 30 April 2006

Red Hills Region

Thanks for the update on Red Hills Region -- Noles1984 22:25, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Commons

Hi, I know you're on break, but if you see this, I've left you a message at your talk page on Commons. Thanks! Angr (talk • contribs) 08:11, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Bruce Wars in Ireland

I've being doing some long-overdue edits to Edward Bruce, particularly under the headings "The Invasion of Ireland" and "Arrival and the Campaign of 1315". I began it because the original article was hopelessly wrong in many places, but am now wondering if what I am writing would be better suited as an article in its own right on the Irish Bruce wars? Fergananim 19:16, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

What?

What are you talking about? What e-mail are you talking about? And whether or not you appreciate my edits is immaterial..... Thank you for your time and have a great afternoon...

CabotTheWarrior 19:50, 14 April 2006 (UTC)CabotTheWarrior

What???

You didn't answer my question at all.....what are you talking about? What e-mail are you talking about? You're not making sense...please take the time to think out what you say before you say it so your fellow editors can understand what you are saying...

CabotTheWarrior 20:15, 14 April 2006 (UTC)CabotTheWarrior

Australia in AFC

Please see User talk:SteveGOLD#Image:World Map FIFA2.png. Thanks. --SteveGOLD 04:36, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Karmacoda

You really shouldn't close an AFD you are apart of. Please leave that to somebody else. -Rob 21:00, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I won't revert you, as the ultimate outcome was keep anyway. And you're right, it should not have been nominated. -Rob 21:34, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi! Trying to get this off of Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2006_April_14#Karmacoda and can't figure out how. Originally the user wanted to argue as copyright violation, but that didn't fly--the original author has approved the text. Then he claimed non-notable. It certainly does meet notability standards.

I see how active you are and your help would be appreciated getting this rushed so I can notify the complaintant via email.

Thank you. ℬastique▼♥♑ 20:41, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello! I don't quite understand what you mean. The AfD process has been undertaken and the result was keep. This result is logged on the AfD page for future reference. When I close debates in this manner, I remove the link to the debate from the main article page, with a note in the edit history regarding the successful keep vote. I then add a link to the debate to the article's Talk page, for reference. I have done this for you. Once articles appear on an AfD page the link stays on. The debates can be closed early if there has been a mistake in the nomination. The closing admin makes a note of this in their stated reasons for closure. I hope that this has been of some help. Please let me know if you need further clarification. Regards,  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  21:42, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

IRmep

When IRmep spoke on capital hill Adam Shapiro was on their panel, that would be affialiation. .- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 00:26, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

If he was speaking on their behalf on capital Hill then how is it not affiliation?- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 00:29, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Anyways you have violated the 3RR probably without knowing, maybe you should self-Revert.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 00:32, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

If Shapiro and IRmep had never come into contact before they would still be affiliated by virtue of the fact that Shapiro spoke on their behalf in front of congress. Here is a definition of "Affiliation- To become closely connected or associated.". Imagine if it wasn't Shapiro talking for IRmep but a Lawyer doing it for free, would you deny they were affiliated then?- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 00:38, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Anyways check the edit history of the article, you made a clear violation of 3RR please either revert yourself or change what you wrote to something more compromising.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 00:40, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Your reverted me two times, you reverted two other times as well though.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 00:41, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Fine I will change it to "Adam Shapiro (who started the pro-palestinian ISM) was on the panel of IRmep when the organization spoke on Capital Hill and shares his same views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict." will you be fine with that?- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 00:44, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that the only place we can get info about them is from their own website or from equally bias and partisan blogs from the opposite side like Little green footballs.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 00:53, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Cornuke

None of his lesser degrees were from accredited institutions either. How do you think we should state this?JoshuaZ 15:57, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Bias?

I am rather insulted by your accusation on the IRmep talk page. I feel it is unjustified and consider myself one of the more polite and level-headed editors that you will find on this subject. Although admitedly the IRmep article hasn't brought out my best qualities. The fact that I could find editors of radically different POVs to support me and give evidence of compromise helps to convince me that I am justified in this belief.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 00:45, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I never said that you have a POV on the IPC. I don't even really think that. Honestly the only thing that I thought was that you were being too accomdating of whoever launched the complaint. For example, any court in America would agree that it would be okay to say that Shapiro was affiliated with IRmep when he agreed to be on their Capital Hill Forum panel.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 01:27, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

SYITS

I just wanted to drop a quick note to say that I appreciate your input on the Cornuke article, it's been dramatically improved since you've gotten involved. I also appreciate your verification of my identify, at least that I'm not this gastrich guy ;) I'll add to my user page as I get some time. Thanks! --SYITS 15:38, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Fort Lauderdale, Florida

I'll keep my eye on that. I was hoping I had found a nice compromise with that user by moving the Calvalry reference from the intro into a seperate religion section. I imagine it is arguable that the church is sufficiently notable for inclusion (especially in the context of a broader religion section) and, frankly, I dont have the energy right now to get into a back and forth about notability with the editor who added the church. But I will definitely watch out for any more illogical edits. Thanks for all your good contributions. Captaintruth 01:07, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Care to explain this?

Re: "OTRS Ticket number 2006042810016001." I have no idea what it means. - WarriorScribe 01:51, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Ref "Go to OTRS and stop reverting carefully considered changes. I am reverting it and will escalate this to an RFC if you continue."

Two things. First: What did I revert? I don't recall anything. Back off. I haven't reverted any "carefully considered changes." Feel free to engage in threats while trying to white-wash. I can certainly put you in front of an RfC, as well. Fair enough? Second: I can't see where this ticket number can be applied so that I can see if it addresses what I asked. You'll have to do better. All I'm asking for is a reasonable citation or reference that shows that these things are "improper" or not allowed. Unless you're an admin, and given your rather imperious attitude, so far, I'm not really interested in your "say-so." - WarriorScribe 14:25, 30 April 2006 (UTC)