User talk:Nathan/Archive 1

Just wanted to show you the Worldnetdaily reference:

Beginning today, reporter Matt Sanchez, currently embedded with the U.S. military in Iraq, will provide WND readers with a glimpse into the Iraq war most Americans have never heard from a press increasingly hostile to the war effort.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57237

Matt Sanchez 07:56, 20 September 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Hello Avruch, I've reverted your edit to User:Agüeybaná because you placed it on the user's userpage, not on the talk page. Feel free to place it on the talk page, thanks! ^Ariel♥Gold 22:54, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In my RfC, you said "which appears to have been copied from someone else, discussion included?" when talking about my userpage. Could you explain this? I don't understand that. --Agüeybaná 23:11, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scanning it quickly it didn't look like you'd written on it yourself, and I wasn't sure if when you'd copied the formatting you'd accidentally taken the text. In any event, its all in the correct place now. Avruch 23:13, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All content on my page is original. --Agüeybaná 23:15, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duly noted. Avruch 23:17, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I really like the proposals you made on the discussion page. I am intentionally avoiding editing the article since I contributed a great deal to the article in the past. But I do think that all the warring parties need to come to some kind of agreement. Sometimes it takes a neutral party to cut through the muck. Keep up the good work.

If you can, I think that maybe you or another neutral party should revise the article.Piercetp 04:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Avruch, sorry about cutting out some of the "Faculty" text from the WNU main article. I quickly read the history and thought it was the vandals comments. You are doing a good job on the article along with Rkowalke. I now seldom edit the main article, since last year I was accused of having a conflict of interest because I'm an alumnus of the school. Thanks.Taylor W. 15:01, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've decided to take your mediaion case at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-09-26 Warren National University alongside Concrete Complex if you have no objections. Discussion can begin right away--Phoenix 15 20:03, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi – happy to help. You did all the hard stuff perfectly. All you need to do after that is list the AFD on the current day's list. If you don't do that, nobody will know about the AFD except those who happen to stumble onto it by visiting the article. That's not likely if the article is obscure enough for AFD, so we log them by UTC calendar day.

On the main WP:AFD page under 'Current discussions', you'll see a link that says 'add a new entry'. Click it, then add a transcluded link to your AFD to the top of the list – in English, that means put the link to the AFD in braces {{ }} instead of brackets [[ ]]). Preview to make sure you've done it correctly, then save. I already did it for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/VANK, so you can look in my contributions list to see exactly what I did.

You can make sure an AFD is logged by clicking 'what links here', either on the AFD or on the article. If it's listed for discussion, it will have a link to the log page for the day it was listed. Both VANK and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/VANK now link to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 October 4, so I guess I did everything right. :-)

There's a step-by-step how-to list at Wp:afd#How_to_list_pages_for_deletion, which I used until I learned the process by heart. If you have more questions or need help, just shout! - KrakatoaKatie 19:03, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thank you! Avruch 19:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right away I saw that you hadn't copied the end of a /noinclude tag on your StatusTemplate page, so I did that for you. Now you need to transclude {{User:Avruch/Status}} onto your user page or wherever you want it to go. That will take care of the templates; now the problem is the script. Status switcher was a tough nut to crack for me, and I don't know why a tiny little line can cause so much trouble. I had the same problem you're having – I couldn't get it to work no matter what I did, and I still don't know what I did wrong.

I'm a little embarrassed to say that I finally copied Misza's monobook.js file into my own, because he uses the same tools I do – popups, Twinkle, status switcher, and watchlist sorter. I've done a little tweaking to his Twinkle settings, but my version is still really close to his version.

If you like, you can copy my monobook.js page into yours, or I'll copy the non-admin parts into your monobook.js page for you. Twinkle is just terrific, and I don't remember what I did without it. I use popups mainly for previewing wikilinks – it allows me to mouse over a wikilink and see a little popup window with the lead section of the article inside. You can also use it to revert changes, fix dab links, and some other neat stuff. Watchlist sorter... well, it lets you sort and manipulate your watchlist, and it's pretty cool.

There are some great script writers here and they've made my life much easier. The Wikipedia-haters haven't used scripts, 'cause if they had they'd be much happier here. Let me know if you decide to do any of the above. :-) - KrakatoaKatie 00:15, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dearest Supporter,

Weekly Delivery

Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 13:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:16, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for voting in my Rfa, which I withdrew from yesterday. Though I did not get promoted, I see this Rfa as being a success nonetheless. What I got out of this Rfa will help me to be a better, all around editor. Because of this Rfa I have decided to become better in other areas of editing. I'm not going to just be a vandalfighter. Though vandalfighting is good, being active in all areas of editing is even better. Have a nice day.--SJP 22:50, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I never thanked you for participating in my RfA a couple of weeks ago. Thank you for your support, though unfortunately the request was closed as "no consensus". I plan to run again at a later time, and I hope you will support me again then.

Thanks again! —Remember the dot ^(talk) 06:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you voted in my RFA...

...thank you for your participation. I withdrew with 83 supports, 42 opposes, and 8 neutrals. Your kind words and constructive criticism are very much appreciated. I look forward to using the knowledge I have accrued through the process to better the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers and Wikidudeman for their co-nominations.

Thank you again and, best regards. VanTucky ^Talk

This RFA thanks was inspired by Lara❤Love's

• No, if I knew a way to make them links I would. Is it possible? Thanks, VanTucky ^Talk 23:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:51, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had speedied this as spam one second before you AfD-ed it. It has both tags on now - it seems to me clear enough for a speedy, but if you meant your AfD to replace my speedy, by all means go back and take the db-spam tag off. JohnCD (talk) 21:50, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i've added more to the article, but this is all i know. i'll do some research to find out more if i need to, but i'd appreciate it if it wasn't deleted. EllieNeo (talk) 23:40, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just FYI, I added a {{hangon}} tag to this article and placed an entry on its talk page. Cheers. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 23:54, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And I don't know who you are, but I'm not exactly a novice at Wikipedia. I've had an account for over two years, and was editing before that. I would not add a page about a chain if it was not notable enough to add. And there are FAR less notable chains with pages on here. You're going to lose this argument.Jgera5 (talk) 00:04, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Avruch, I notice that you have been putting speedy deletion tags on articles within a minute or two of their creation. Could you please take note of the guidance at WP:NPP#Patrolling new pages:

"Special:Newpages logs new pages as they are created. It is advisable to patrol new pages from the bottom of the first page of the log. This should give the creating editor enough time to improve a new page before a patroller attends to it, particularly if the patroller tags the page for speedy deletion. Tagging anything other than attack pages or complete nonsense a minute after creation is not constructive and only serves to annoy the page author."

And also try to use a bit of common sense when tagging. The point of WP:CSD#A7 is to prevent people creating spurious articles about themselves, their friends, their companies, their bands etc, not to stop articles being created about 16th century merchants. Phil Bridger (talk) 00:55, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Replied on your talk page, but for the record, there were a lot of merchants in the 16th century, and I doubt all of them were notable. In any case, it was supposedly a transfer from the German wikipedia and yet it had no information other than a single line. Avruch^Talk 02:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, when you tagged it one minute after creation it only had one line, but ten minutes later it had several sources to establish notability. That's the whole point of the advice which I quoted above. Shalom! Phil Bridger (talk) 10:14, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Plasda - No problem. Everyone makes mistakes in RC patrol. ;-) Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 06:23, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments indicate that you wished to withdraw your AfD nom of Vocelli Pizza. In a minute or two, I'll non-admin close it. Usually, the nom actually strikes their nomination, so if, for some reason, you did not actually want your nom to be closed, please feel free to revert me. Thanks! ZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 15:03, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. I non-admin closed a withdrawn nom last year, and the nom changed his mind, so I always check now. No worries. Best, ZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 21:20, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Avruch. Please be more careful when nominating articles for speedy deletion in accordance with the criteria. You recently nominated an article I had just created (Blues Fell This Morning) for speedy deletion, it clearly does not meet the CSD criteria under #A7. It has a reference and, is written in a neutral and encyclopedic tone. All I ask is that you be more careful when new page patrolling in the future. Regards :) —Qst 20:06, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You tagged this page for deletion as G6 - non controversial housekeeping - but you did not say what the housekeeping task that needed the page to be deleted was. I've removed the tag pending clarification. Mr.Z-man 20:18, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did not, in fact, create this article. I don't remember it at all, but the page history shows my edit as the oldest, with the annotation "Trying for something a bit less like a recruiting brochure." In other words, editing an existing article in order to move toward Neutral Point of View. I think that the absence of previous history is because of major software changes in the history of Wikipedia. Since I am not the page creator, and given the recorded history of my involvement with it, I don't know why you thought I would remove the "Afd" tag. Vicki Rosenzweig (talk) 19:31, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to check your votes in the recent ArbCom elections, as an I.P. has been striking them out. I count far more than the required number of edits, but I figured I'd try not to be bold for once. --Action Jackson IV (talk) 11:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Avruch,

Thank you for applying for NPWatcher! You've been approved to use it. Before you run the program, please check the changelog on the application page to see if there is a newer release (or just add the main page (here) to your watchlist). Report any bugs or feature suggestion here. If you need help, feel free to contact me or join NPWatcher.

Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 14:48, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just was looking through the edit history and noticed that you were the one responsible for creating the archive on Talk:Glossary of Christian, Jewish, and Messianic terms. Thanks! Egfrank (talk) 19:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the AfD has been closed ("no consensus") but your continued input re: sourcing issues and improvements would be most appreciated. Again thanks, Egfrank (talk) 19:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Although I certainly agree that Hilbert Spaces and its Applications has multiple issues, I'm wondering what is there that you thought might be original research? It looks like just the standard textbook stuff to me. Michael Hardy (talk) 02:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand completely that the Absolute Anarchy article had not much meaning to it. I tried to mention it to one of the Wikipedian staff (User:Secretlondon) to see if he knew anything about this topic. Unfortunatly, I had made a mistake of showing it up on a public page without having any immediate information about the topic. I only wanted to ensure that there was a such thing as Absolute Anarchy and to have a page about it for others to study. I only wanted to have the credit for having the idea and for someone else to have credit by adding to it. If you can consider my idea, then I would be honored if you would create it for me. But, it's your decision. Thank you. Maltese Dragon (talk) 00:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which was successful with a vote of 33/7/4.

Special thanks go to Epbr123 for nominating me and Pedro for the offer of help.

I am honoured by the trust placed in me by the community. I hope to repay this by the wise use of the tools, which I intend to use gradually. Mop & bucket is on the Christmas list - honest. Keith D (talk) 00:33, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if this is the same instance as referenced above, but your vote has been struck here: [[1]] by an IP. Any idea why? Epthorn (talk) 18:13, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Later I wondered if mainspace was the problem- I agree that it's a little strange to just count that. The IP was especially fishy, though... dumb bots. Epthorn (talk) 23:51, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. FWIW I think the article's horrible and would be delighted to see it go - but just wiping such articles tends to bring back the information elsewhere. But not opposed in principle. Nmg20 (talk) 23:56, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the grammar nazi userbox.[2] I'd never gotten an actual complaint about it until now, so I never bothered to remove it. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:29, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! That was getting rediculously messy. -Verdatum (talk) 20:11, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Agreed. No problem. Avruch^Talk 20:16, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks That's something I've been thinking about and will probably get around to later. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 22:54, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]