Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:36, 22 June 2006

Welcome!

Hello Badgerpatrol/archive1, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Deckiller 03:56, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Bengal famine of 1943

• What are you doing on Bengal famine of 1943? That reader beware is not allowed - if you want to propose a change, please do it on the talk page. Izehar (talk) 15:29, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

• Are you going to tell me? Izehar (talk) 18:42, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

• Hello, I was objecting to your edits, because they seemed to discredit the article. That reader beware which you added made it look like a hoax. I have no objection to a neutral informative disclaimer; something like:

Caution: this article was published in "The Revisionist", a journal which primarily publishes material relating to the Holocaust from a Historical revisionist point of view.

If you don't like that, they you can delete the link outright if you want. No one will object (I don't think). It is Misplaced Pages policy not to include biased information (see WP:NPOV). Izehar (talk) 23:21, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

• Don't bother, I have deleted the link. Izehar (talk) 23:24, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

• Look, I didn't delete the link after all, when I tried to, my browser failed. As you're going to be a regular contributer, do what you see appropriate. I was merely on RC patrol whan I saw your edits. Take our standard welcome notice - I see you haven't got one yet. Welcome to Misplaced Pages Izehar (talk) 10:33, 9 December 2005 (UTC) Feel free to ask me any questions you may have on my talk page. By the way, you should sign your name to your posts and comments with ~~~~. Izehar (talk) 10:33, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

We hope you enjoy your time here on Misplaced Pages and that you choose to become a Wikipedian by creating an account. Feel free to ask me any questions you may have on my talk page. By the way, you should sign your name to your posts and comments with ~~~~. Extraordinary Machine 18:53, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured article removal candidates/KaDee Strickland

Extraordinary Machine 18:53, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

• I'm not the one who decides which votes count and which votes don't, but I'd encourage you to create an account nonetheless for the reasons above, and also because you seem to be a very good editor, as you are commenting on the article's content and not its editors. I still think in hindsight that while the article was a little too detailed at the time it appeared on the Main Page (though I think it is much better now), I don't think there were any POV problems, or at least nowhere near as serious as they are being made out to be. That's just my personal opinion, though. It's a pity, as I want to be seen as a good editor who writes great articles about a variety of subjects, and not the editor who unintentionally and in good faith managed to spawn one of the most controversial featured articles in recent memory. Anyway, I hope that you create an account, as we need more editors like you. Please, just consider it. Extraordinary Machine 23:22, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Accusation

• What the hell do you think you're playing at? REMOVE that statement from the page immediately! Lion King 20:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I demand that you retract this accusation forthwith. Lion King 21:32, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

It is not an accusation, it is a suspicion, given voice. I am not retracting it because it still remains my suspicion. However, I certainly apologise for any offence caused, assuming I am incorrect. Cheers, Badgerpatrol 22:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

You most certainly are incorrect, if you'd bothered to check the history, the IP that left this comment, is in LEEDS. Leave any messages on MY PAGE, I HAVE BETTER THINGS TO DO THAN PISS ABOUT WITH MISCHIEF MAKERS LIKE YOU. Lion King 00:04, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

See my comments here. I did check the history, and I have now done so again. I am not able to view users' IP addresses since I do not have developers' privileges- I assume that you do, or is there some other method of viewing and geolocating IP's, or something that I have otherwise missed? I would be grateful if you could point out how it is done or where I made the mistake, as it is a potentially useful tool. The only unsigned and unencrypted IP I could find belongs to a user in Gravesend, according to my software, and is in any case not the user in question. Since you have advanced privileges, I assume that you can tell that I am of course not a sockpuppet for any other user, so I would be grateful if you could ascertain this and then remove the accusation (unless you feel you can state, as I have, an objective basis for your suspicions). Apologies for not laying out an evidentiary argument sooner, this was because I have only a general suspicion that you are employing a sockpuppet (rather than hard evidence) and did not wish to kick up a fuss over what I felt (and still feel) to be a relatively minor issue (even a brief investigation is enough to satisfy that you are not generating sockpuppets on a regular basis). As I state, the evidence is circumstantial, but I feel quite compelling. However, if I have unfairly maligned you I can only apologise. I would prefer to continue the discussion here, by the way, rather than moving from page to page- if you are subsequently vindicated in the future however and (in that case understandably) wish to copy and paste this discussion in-full and unedited onto your own discussion page then please do so, provided that you act in good faith. Thanks for your comments (although there is no need to swear!) and thanks in advance for your help over the IP address locator issue. Cheers, Badgerpatrol 01:42, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I apologise for sweaing at you, I was very angry. All the rubbish from the "Charlton" Fan, comes from a user in Leeds, it was located for me by a friend who is the top IT man at one of the biggest corporations in the world. I can assure you I am NOT this Redageeze. Best Wishes Lion King 02:30, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

You know a lot of important people! OK, I accept your word in good faith (although it's maybe slightly troubling that you are finding out other wikipedians' locations and violating anonymity, but that's not the issue here I guess!). Thanks for the apology, I also apologise for any offence caused- none was intended, all just a storm-in-a-teacup. I still intend to edit the MFC page btw as discussed previously, hopefully we can come to some kind of consensus...! Believe me, I have nothing against you personally or against your club. (PS- Who are 'The Haddocks'? West Ham?) Cheers and apologies again, Badgerpatrol 03:34, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

The Haddocks are the "addicks," this all started when a local fishmonger in Charlton used to nail a haddock to a pole, take it to games and hold it up in the air when they scored! which was'nt very often against us! West Ham are politely known as "that shower from over the other side". I have no objection to you editing the Millwall page, all I ask is that you make a clear distinction between Millwall supporters as opposed to Millwall hooligans. Best wishes Lion King 03:56, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

No problem, it goes without saying that I will do my best. I won't be getting around to it for at least another few days at any rate. Cheers, Badgerpatrol 04:13, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Millwall

Thanks for letting me know. I'll try to remedy it. SteveO 13:16, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

ok, no problem! Cheers, Badgerpatrol 14:33, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

LSE's quality of research was rated second overall, and first in the social sciences

I refer you to the following source, and specifically this paragraph: "In the most recent national research assessment in the UK (2001), LSE came second after Cambridge for the quality of its research - and top if only the social sciences are taken into account. In the THES's 2004 world ratings, LSE was top of the UK institutions and second in the world, behind Harvard." General Information About LSE

Hope that clears up the confusion!

-Sam Badgerpatrol 17:11, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

My userpage

Thanks for the revert! And you are absolutely right, I misspelled Tolkein, which I have a habit of doing. But since I rarely read my own userpage, I guess I missed this a long time ago. Thanks again, and for the quick responses!--naryathegreat | (talk) 04:11, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Douglas Adams

Hey! I saw your edit on Douglas Adams, and thought I might be able to help with the wording. Why was the previous wording misleading? Was the M.A. an honorary degree? EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 02:45, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. Looking into it further, I think this link fully supports the idea that he earned his BA and then had no further contact with the college academically. Thanks for your edit, and keep up the good work! EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 03:17, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't think it matters enough to worry about too much. However, the point I was trying to make by that link is that it only mentions his B.A.. If he went back and earned an M.A. (at any of the colleges in the system), you'd imagine it would mention that in the description of the prize in his honor. Either way, thanks again for all your help. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 03:33, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Misunderstanding because of missing signature

Um, if you don't mind me asking, why have you moved your discussion to my talk page? Whilst I sympathise with many of your sentiments and ideas, I don't think as a third-party it is right for me to be hosting a conversation you began with another individual. I am supportive of your response to what was obviously a silly comment (although my advice is not to rise to them in future, there is no reasoning with these people), but I don't think I should be interfering between you and him/her (I presume him). I'd be grateful if you could move his comment and your response either to your own talk page, his talk page, or back to the Dresden bombing page. Cheers, Badgerpatrol 03:45, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Oops, sorry, thought it was your comment as yours was the only signature. When there is an unsigned comment you can mark it with {{unsigned|username}} to avoid misunderstandings like this in the future. Get-back-world-respect 03:49, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

OK, no problem

My comment was actually a response to his- I thought that was fairly clear, although I shall take your advice in future to avoid getting an earful when I view my talk page!! Cheers and no harm done, Badgerpatrol 03:53, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, sorry, I was a bit dumb not to see this myself. Only recently learned how to use this unsigned template myself. Thank you for teaching me a new expression, get an earful, really like this one 8^p In German we say "talk someone a meatball to someone's ear". I have a language learning project running, just in case you are interested. Get-back-world-respect 03:58, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Education in the United States

That's funny, just as you added that citation needed tag, I added it.--naryathegreat | (talk) 00:52, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

BTW, would you like to vote in the Education in the United States FAC?--naryathegreat | (talk) 04:26, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Doctorate page

Hi Badger, good comments you put on the doctorate talk page! Are you going to integrate some of that into the article?--PaulWicks 19:41, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Your Comment

I'll agree with you in your assessment that you don't understand what's going on. I wish you a nice day. Karmafist 21:28, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

No, but my inability to properly elucidate an objective analysis of an equally objective vote of opposition from one of my former best wiki-friends set me off, and your comment, inadvertent or not, I saw as instigation. Karmafist 04:45, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

History of the Luftwaffe during the war POV

Hi - I noted your POV there, and have tried to improve the article a bit. If you could point out further POV issues there, please let me know. I am not finished with the article yet, but my lunchbreak is over now. Andreas 13:22, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

The Beatles

Hi! I've seen you around on The Beatles' articles... Would you consider becoming a member of WikiProject The Beatles, a WikiProject which aims to expand and improve coverage of The Beatles on Misplaced Pages? Please feel free to join us.

Abbey Road... You're not in this picture... yet! Todo list: To-do list for User:Badgerpatrol/archive1: A list of articles needing cleanup associated with this project is available. See also the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects. Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Articles on each Beatle tour (Category:The Beatles concert tours). See: Missing articles. Expand : The Lost Lennon Tapes, notable radio series which has spawned many bootlegs. Apple Records See also: Adopt an article Stubs : See: Category:The Beatles song stubs Update : Pics/Graphics wanted: Kenwood. Verify : Beatle wives Other : Project: Add {{WikiProject The Beatles}} to the talk pages of all Beatles-related articles. Send a newsletter to members, canvas for new members and coordinate tasks. Enter articles assessed as stubs onto this list, also list articles needing cleanup and other work here. If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list and add your achievement to the project log.

(I saw your comment at Talk:The Decca audition, and what to do about the Beatles history and forked article is something that's up for discussion at the project). --kingboyk 12:31, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Chai Patel

I've expanded the article a little, so that instead of saying charges were dropped, it has details of the charges themselves. I've also added some background info about the Dr. --Oscarthecat 09:33, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Ian Smith

Hi, just to let you know that after you removed POV from this article, I reverted back past the earlier edits as well. That anon editor, as well as adding POV, has been breaking up a number of articles into long series of single-sentence paragraphs, rendering them hard to read, as well as making it difficult to see what other changes crept in at the same time. --BillC 18:03, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Lawyering

FYI, it is a real word; it's listed in Black's Law Dictionary, 7th ed. But I won't revert your edit because I agree that it's unnecessary jargon in the context of the law school article. --Coolcaesar 01:54, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I know- you may notice that I didn't alter the second use of the word in a succeeding sentence. The reason for the change was stylistic (to avoid the same term being used twice in a paragraph; I usually feel repetition is a bit jarring, although I realise it's just a matter of taste). Revert away however if you wish, this is a wiki! All the best, Badgerpatrol 10:35, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Verification tag on Wes Clark article

Hi Badgerpatrol, I've responded to your comments about the last paragraph in the Balkans section via the Talk area for that article.

Soggy Biscuit

I've pulled my opinion since you've committed to rewriting the article and sourcing it. Kudos for finding some real sourcing.--Isotope23 14:02, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I changed my opinion on the article too and found some further mentions, but it's up to you to put the references in since you said you'd do it. Esquizombi 14:51, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Also I wonder if a Wikiproject on paraphilias, sex acts, etc. might help. There are a lot of articles on such topics on WP that all suffer from problems similar to (or worse than) this article. In the state that they are I'd usually be inclined to recommend delete on them on AFD (I think you'd agree that some or many of them are made up, or are real but contain a lot that is made up), but some of them probably merit keeping in some manner if they were improved. Esquizombi 15:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

What exactly does The Poisoned Bowl: Sex and the Public School say about the SB? Is it actually a reference for the claims that it is "not necessarily associated with homosexuality" and "in keeping with the spirit of adolescent sexual exploration"? Esquizombi 14:07, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

If the book doesn't mention the SB, then saying it is "in keeping with the spirit of adolescent sexual exploration" seems like original research. Perhaps you could merely mention some of the things that book mentions and let the readers make the association if they choose to do so. Oh, also it looks like deletes and keeps are about even so probably it will be kept by reason of no consensus at least. Esquizombi 14:31, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

When I mentioned "public schools" I didn't have in mind public/private schools but merely that I was around other boys so if the term was in currency I would potentially have learned of it. If the use in the UK is limited more to public schools in the sense of fee-based independent schools then that should perhaps be specified. Redundancy like that (i.e. having something that already appears in the public school article) isn't a bad sort of redundancy, especially since the SB article is short. Esquizombi 17:09, 7 April 2006 (UTC) Also, regarding the hidden tags in the article, it might not be bad to have such things mentioned on the talk page also since people unfamiliar with such tags or WP newbies might not go further than reading what appears on the article and talk pages. Unless there's something wrong with posing open questions on talk pages? I'm not sure what the policy is about hidden tags, never having used them myself. Esquizombi 17:15, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

University of Durham

Hi Badger! As far as I know, the history of UDSC/Queen's Campus is...

• 1992: Formed jointly by University of Durham, University of Teesside and the Teesside Development Corporation. Offers joint qualifications.
• 1994: Approved as a residential and teaching college of the University of Durham.
• 1996: Students begin studying for Durham degrees.
• 2001: John Snow and George Stephenson colleges founded.
• 2002: The Queen gives permission to rename UDSC 'Queen's Campus' on occasion of her Golden Jubilee.

The demographics and entrance requirements have always been markedly different between the old University and UDSC. This has been a source of friction between students since members of UDSC have been entitled to an identical Durham degree and to append 'Dunelm' to their title since 1996. Until recently these were conferred at Stockton Parish Church, but are now awarded in Durham Cathedral with the rest of the university. The one exception is the medical school at Stockton which awards University of Newcastle (upon Tyne) degrees since the clinical part of the course is taught there. I've also heard rumours that some departments are currently considering relocating from Durham City to Stockton (Durham is very crowded with little room for expansion).

Hope this helps! - Yellowspacehopper 19:56, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

England and Wales

Do you want me simply to copy the relevant elements from the English law page by way of verification? David91 03:20, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Maggie Gyllenhaal

Thanks for removing that "swede" reference, it had been bugging me. I mean, there's not even much good evidence that she and Dunst are still good friends. I think americans can be a bit zealous when it comes to nationality. Bless... Amo 15:29, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Rosalind Franklin

You have contributed to the Rosalind Franklin article. It has recently had a rewrite and been had a request for peer review. Your comments would be appreciated. Alun 14:09, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Moira Stewart

Hi. I know about talk pages and the circumstances when it may be appropriate to remove comments from them, and I certainly don't find it offensive if people are aggrieved that I've done this. The point is that whatever the truth about Moira Stewart, the message on the talk page is irrelevant and a piece of possibly somewhat defamatory speculation. If that comment had been added to the article it would have been removed as uncited rumour. I know the talk page is not an encyclopaedia article and not subject to the same rigorous scholarly standards that are invariably applied on Misplaced Pages (forgive me for being a bit facetious here), but it's still visible to the reader, who can think to themselves, "Moira Stewart's a lesbian, and I know because I read it somewhere on Misplaced Pages", despite the person who added that statement offering no evidence, and you restoring it to the talk page because, in your words: "I have also heard that rumour- I believe it's quite a widely disseminated urban legend." As it is, that talk page is essentially a platform being offered by Misplaced Pages for some childish person to call someone a lesbian, and cast aspersions about her sexuality in a disparaging way. There's absolutely nothing wrong with being a lesbian of course, but I think Moira Stewart has a right not to have her sexual preferences speculated about in a public forum by some giggling adolescent who finds it amusing to call someone a lesbian, effectively as a piece of abuse. The talk page serves no purpose and doesn't help us to write an accurate and comprehensive encyclopaedia. Just delete it mate. 86.136.6.123 15:28, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

That's Our Haug!

Hello, Badgerpatrol. As refreshing as it is to see some new ideas about naming articles on Misplaced Pages, I hardly think "Haugie" would sound appropriate, as in "That's Our Haugie!". As some sandwiches are pronounced roughly the same (i.e. the "Hoagie" sandwich), the title would be misleading, or I dare say, even deceitful. On the other hand, however, I can definitely see the underlying quality in "Hangin' with Mr. Haug", though I might further suggest giving the show a more traditional feel by adding a second title, I think. something to the tune of "Hangin' with Mr. Haug, or, Mr. Haug and the College of Cardinals". Just let me know! Kuzaar 14:39, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

"Hangin' with the Haugmeister." I love it. To be completely honest, here, if we don't get sued, I think that we've got a big hit on our hands. Now all we have to do is pitch it as our own idea and we might be the next "Charles in Charge" or "Who's the Boss"! Kuzaar 19:25, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

(So this is how terrible sitcoms witness their inception.)

Deletionism &c.

Hello again, Badgerpatrol. I noticed a couple of your votes on AFD earlier this evening and glanced at your edit history, and noticed your question on Brian G. Crawford's user talk page. Since it didn't seem he responded, I might as well answer some of his questions by proxy. I consider myself to be philosophically more toward the deletionist side of the spectrum. For me, at least, it's a kind of neatness that I find unique to wikipedia that I find myself striving for. I see hundreds of little articles and bits and pieces of detritus floating around in the wikipedia and I think to myself (alternately), "That doesn't belong here." or "That's worth keeping, but there has to be a better home for it."

In the past couple days I've been very active myself at the AFD project page, and I think of the deletionist movement as a kind of tribulatory process for potential articles, one that has the ability to refine the raw ore of information and get it down to its most valuable and encyclopedic precious metal. Sort of a literary crucible, if you will. The AFD people are, in their way, like the janitorial staff or maids of Misplaced Pages, cleaning up the constant accumulation of trash and other assorted things, and sending appropriate & valuable things to where they belong. If you have any further questions regarding that kind of a philosophy, I'd be glad to answer any questions that you have. Kuzaar 03:43, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

(P.S. Ordinarily I wouldn't have looked at your edits but your name stuck out to me from the humorous comments on the That's Our Haug!!! article.)

Additionally, while I'm still thinking of it, I today found a supreme quote to sum up my philosophy (It was stolen from Calton, by the way.) It's clean-up duty, mopping up after the dishonest, incompetent, and fanatical. Can't imagine why you'd have a problem with that.. Cheers, Kuzaar 03:52, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Graduate school

Just to clear up your puzzlement; the edit that I reverted didn't correct the errrors that you found and cleaned up, but it did include the sentence: "The minimum duration of a Ph.D. programme is two years, but such a deadline is quite unrealistic, therefore usually requiring an average of three to four years for completion" (making it look as though the deadline required four years rather than the doctorate). Your clean-up is excellent, though. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:46, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

User:172.150.22.239 and RfAs

Hi Badgerpatrol. I think I can explain why User:172.150.22.239 reverted Ardenn's votes: Ardenn has a serious stick up his butt with admins (just look at his Mediation request against me). He opposed 9 RfAs in the span of 7 minutes, clearing without considering each individual. I personally agree with the anon that Ardenn was disrupting the RfAs to make a WP:POINT (see the anon's edit summaries). ~MDD4696 04:05, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Strong oppose

You were very vocal in your opposition and I felt I had to defend myself:

1. Strong Oppose, per the diffs (, , )and explanation in my comment below and ESPECIALLY this diff from less than a month ago. That is not the kind of behaviour that I associate with an admin. He may be a decent contributor to the project, but he is definitely NOT responsible enough to be entrusted with admin powers. Badgerpatrol 04:30, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm very sad that you feel this way. The edits from Yoghurt (and Gasoline, where I was much better) were from nearly a year ago and were well inside of my first 1,500 edits. I've pointed below that it was me acting at my worse, plus I've learned a lot since then, and I certainly no longer engage in flame wars. The comment on Terry Goodkind's page was retracted immediately and with an apology to Alianus. Bastique 05:23, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind honesty. I will point out that I've been an admin at Commons for about 5 months, with absolutely no controversy. While things do tend to be more quiet there, they're not completely without heated debate--usually among admins. Like I said in one response, I learned from the early examples; and I don't involve myself other than to make the occasional non-recriminating remark (see Village Pump for examples). Also, I have very little interest in involving myself with user blocks or interaction. Most of what have to constantly ask other admins to do involves page deletions, image deletions, deletions history—only the occasional unblocking. More research and restoration than anything else. ℬastique▼♥♑ 13:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Cricket

Hello Badgerpatrol. Perhaps I am being to give too detailed an explanation of the notability of cricket in the US, but, I'm guessing that as there are only about 10 cricket pitches, the rest of the expats from cricketing countries will be playing on concrete somewhere. I'm also guessing that most pitches in cricketing countries are concrete anyway - street cricket, and the fact that there are probably more public parks, cricket nets and primary schools (which tend to have concrete) than high schools and cricket clubs (which have tend to have one grass pitch in addition to 4 or 5 synthetic astroturf pitches). Regards, ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 00:45, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Do you ever participate in the Cricket quiz at WP:CRIC?? :) .Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 07:02, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Contested prods

thanks. i mustve misunderstood it - i thought if you removed the message the article needed to go to afd. if it doesnt then i dont mind (it saves work if i remove a prod template :) BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 05:09, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Rachel Marsden talk page

an even larger portion was blanked. the section "== Isotelus & Ceraurus - Sockpuppetry Confirmed ==" was removed. I don't know if it belongs in the talk page though since it is not about RM, but it hints at who is doing the other blanking. Geedubber 21:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

There are serious vandal problems here again ()- I believe the same user or group of users is attacking the page. It might need reprotecting. Thanks, Badgerpatrol 17:32, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Reprotected. If you find that someone's disruptively edit-warring you can report it at WP:ANI, and if they make excessive reverts you can also post at WP:AN3. Stifle (talk) 22:48, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you! Thank you for your comments and suggestions in my recent Request for Adminstration. Please bear in mind that I am taking all comments and suggestions to heart. It's wonderful that we all have opinions here. If you feel I've done something wrong, in my opposition to User:Buchanan-Hermit, well, you are entitled to your opinion. If you're trying to press a point, you made it during your opposition to me--no need to continue. Thanks! Bastique▼ voir 23:10, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank-you

The count is in, and now I join the crew who wield the mops and pails. Thanks for your support! I pledge to serve both you and Jimbo Wales. If you have anything you need, then please don't think to hesitate. For I am the very model of a grateful admin designate! ♫Bucketsofg✐♪

Talk:Main Page

Hi there. Thanks for being calm in your note about Talk:Main Page, since, yes, they were great swathes of text. The banned user is User:Amorrow who openly edits from various 71.*.*.* IP addresses. He has stalked Misplaced Pages participants both on the Internet and in real life, and he is as banned as banned can be. His contributions are not welcome, whatever they are. (In fact, some people hold to this so strongly that they revert all his edits, even spelling fixes!) I'm not sure if there's a central link I can give you that summarizes all the reasons why he is unwelcome, but stalking and death threats are a major part of it. I am disappointed that his comments on Talk:Main Page lasted as long as they did and drew other people to respond. The people who responded to his comments are not under ban, and perhaps ideally their comments should stay, but they don't really make much sense without the bulk of the thread. There's no problem with the topics under discussion - if anyone else wants to reopen them in good faith, that's fine. But it's been agreed by "the community" as well as Jimbo that his contributions are to be reverted on sight: Thanks again for checking with me and for being patient about it. Best, FreplySpang 16:51, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup!

Thank you, Badgerpatrol/archive1! Thank you for voting for my recent RfA, which passed (to my extreme surprise and shock) with a total tally of 66/15/2. For that, I would like to thank you and offer a helping hand in any admin-related tasks that may be required -- it's as simple as leaving a message on my talkpage. Thanks again! -→Buchanan-Hermit™/!? 22:20, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

FIFA world cup

Then change it to the nextworld cup, Jean-Paul 07:21, 8 June 2006 (UTC) Talk to me P.S. click on the link above and leave a message on MY TALK PAGE

Sport on ITN

Hi David- I noticed that you returned the ice hockey and basketball items to ITN- I support this, although I have to point out that if you choose to include national-level champions in North America then the same should apply elsewhere in the world for national-level championships where the result is of general interest and where the situation is otherwise in conformity with the ITN guidelines. I hope you will enforce this. Badgerpatrol 13:12, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely. If the ITN criteria are met, the geographic location should have no bearing. —David Levy 17:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC)