User talk:AKAF/Archive2006

pedelec

improvement to pedelec may warrant your re-evaluation of the situation for deletion. Thank you! --CyclePat 17:47, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did tag the article, but I was just passing through. I'm not really knowledgable about it or qualified to make decisions about it. It does sound like several people in the AFD did want to merge/redirect it, so just based on that, it probably wouldn't be controversial to merge it. --Interiot 06:45, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hypersonic

The idea of the "expert" tag is to try and flag the attention of someone who can make sense out of a technical article. And in this case it worked, you did a great job in rewriting it! Ifnord 15:22, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ron Horsley

It's just petty vandalism. Should be ok, unless someone complains about it, in which case we would need to delete the revision. Johnleemk | Talk 06:39, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Shock wave

Thanks for finishing my reversion, I'm annoyed with myself that I missed it. --Xyra e l ^T 15:44, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I edited it because it seemed like a vandalisation, then I discovered it was a stupid revert war :-(. I was just planning on ignoring him, in the hopes that he would get a sense of proportion; but you helped quite a lot.WolfKeeper 14:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:POINT

this seems like an attempt to make a WP:POINT. Are you seriously claiming that Eton, Exeter, or Columbine would be not notable? JoshuaZ 15:52, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to add a note or rephrase to make that clear. The current wording sounds much closer to my interpretation than what you meant. JoshuaZ 16:09, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]