User talk:BL Lacertae

This user may have left Wikipedia. BL Lacertae has not edited Wikipedia for a considerable amount of time. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Talk page stuff from 2005 can now be found here!

Western Sahara stubs, category

===>Thanks and sorry Thanks for fixing the mistakes that I made on that Project page, and sorry if I jumped the gun about making the stub category. Please let me know if I can fix this. Justin (koavf) 01:15, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Donabate Portrane Community Centre

Could you explain why in this edit you added the tag {{US-struct-stub}} to indicate this is an American building. I suspect, that it's in Donabate, Ireland based on the name. Also, if doing such an edit, I would suggest mentioning something in the edit summary, as it's not immediately noticed. I've never heard of this place, so I could be wrong. If you do know the locaiton of the place, please add that to the article. Thanks. --Rob 05:45, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Quillian Games stub tag

Thank you for changing it to the book tag. I was just in the process of looking up how to do so.

Link9er 15:49, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maoririder

Hello. Could you drop me a link about how Maoririder got banned? I've read the AC case but it looks like they decided only to assign him a mentor. Conscious 16:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I think I'll go and warn Aecis about this (he's going to speedy all Jingofetts's contributions, and soon he'll be able to do it). Thanks. Conscious 07:19, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

O.H.M.S.

Hi! I noticed you added a British Government Stub to the O.H.M.S. page that I created. I'm not sure that this is entirely appropriate, as the endorsement is used by many other countries (eg Australia, Canada etc). jmd 23:49, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

I don't have a fancy layout like other new admins, but I just want to thank you for your support at my RfA. It passed 48/3/1, so I have officially been promoted. I hope I won't let you down. If I'm not doing something properly, please tell me. Aecis ^{Mr. Mojo} ^risin' 21:03, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD- Theron Pummer

I'm a bit of a new user, and since you've got a bit more experience, I'm going to generally defer to you on this AfD thing. I have a particular interest in the kind of philosophy that the subject of this article wrote about, encountered his journal publication in an academic context, and reflected that since the publication was considered important enough to consider at an undergraduate symposium, he might be included in WP. I added this article on the subject with the hopes that someone more familiar with the ideas of the subject would be able to expand the article.

Anyway, I'm not sure if, all that said, the article STILL isn't worthy under deletion policies. I realize that undergraduate research/thought, even when it's pretty worthy, is still difficult to consider "notable" in all but exceptional circumstances. Let me know what you think. KrazyCaley 02:50, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Metropolian Katowice

Mam pytanie: czy znasz może język polski? --LUCPOL 22:24, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

huh? i dont speak polish if thats what youre asking! BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 22:28, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

heh? i dont speak polish :( --LUCPOL 00:18, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Physicalism/Larry's text

Out of plain curiosity; you nominated this page for deletion, but you stated yourself that a {{move to Wikisource}} is probably the best option. Why didn't you do that instead?Soothing R 10:51, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then, no harm done..but let's keep this MFD running though. It looks like other people think that a deletion is appropiate.

Soothing R 09:32, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

stub types for deletion

I replied to your comment.--Urthogie 16:55, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Replied with a compromise.--Urthogie 17:40, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

geo-stub

Hi, I had removed the israel-geo-stub from various Israel geography articles since some users have decided that it is POV. The new icon for this stub does not include the 'disputed territories' of the Gaza Strip or West Bank / Judea and Samaria, and is somewhat misleading for locations that are/were in these areas. I would prefer if the isr-geo-stub were a full map of Israel, or a simple flag since these are/were Israeli locations (if someone wants to argue that these aren't/weren'tIsraeli territories), but this issue has not been deicded yet. Please see: Template talk:Israel-geo-stub. What do you think? --Shuki 08:43, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

UK Location Stubs

In a few places now (Withypool, Two Moors Way, Sampford Peverell) you've either changed a UK-geo-stub to Devon-geo-stub, or removed the UK-geo-stub when both were present. My thinking is that having both stubs is more useful—people might not see that a stub needs improvement if it's just pigeonholed under Devon, whereas they might be looking (more broadly) for UK stubs to fix, for example. I reverted the change to Two Moors Way, but after noticing that this is a consistent change, I wanted to ask you the reasons for you edits. Is there a protocol or style thing about multiple stub categories that I don't understand? Thanks, Ryan McDaniel 16:51, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saw your reply, thanks for the clarification. Guess I didn't understand that it automatically cross-linked the stubs. I'm gonna go fix whatever I broke now :-) Ryan McDaniel 00:19, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cat:SF films

fixed - you must be using a "non-compliant browser" (you use Safari, IIRC) - it glitched the Hangul characters. Grutness...wha? 22:35, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Gight

Sorry, I didn't know that was such a hot button issue. Thanks for clearing it up, though. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 22:37, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT stub

Hi there! just a heads-up - noticed that you put an lgbt-stub on Gay Press Organization, but it didn't work because it's got to be LGBT-stub, not lgbt-stub. fixed it, so don't worry, just thought i'd let you know so you don't have to go back and change any others. i don't know if it's possible to put in a redirect, cos i'm pretty new, but let me know and i'll do one! cheers -- ConDem 01:47, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Did my first bit of stub-sorting today, was actually quite fun! So thanks for the idea. ConDem 18:41, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the advice! will do in future. -- ConDem 23:09, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Frome Valley Walkway

Thanks for your changes to Frome Valley Walkway. It is my first new article and I wasn't sure I'd got the headings right. Duncshine 09:25, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Thanks for your response. I did think about the links to local pubs, but decided to include them based on the guidelines that:-

1) The links add meaningful content that is not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. (Icons regarding facilities offered, types of drink offered, photographs etc). I'm not sure Wikipedia wants an individual page for every pub in the UK/World, but nonetheless it does add to the information on a given locale or, in this case, River.

2) The site is an open directory. Users can update the information any of the pages.

3) The site is non-commercial. It's my site, started as a hobby way back. The idea is to add information about pubs for everyone (especially travellers and tourists) to use. Pubs are my special interest subject (what does that say about me?). Needless to say there are no fees etc involved.

4) The site is NPOV. Although I encourage users to add whatever information they can, I have a strict editing policy so that 'the best pub in Glasgow' or whatever, gets removed. The idea is to state facts rather than opinions.

5) If I'm honest, I don't have time to add all the information on my site to Wiki, but I do feel the info adds to an understanding of a given locale. Also, when my site is updated, as it frequently is, any links on wiki automatically go to the latest information. By the way, there are plenty of pages within my site that would add NO value to wiki, so clearly there's no reason to link to those (where the information is patchy or out of date).

All that said, I am clearly biased! The world of pubs is clearly where I can add most to wiki, but if experienced users like yourself feel this goes against what wiki is about, you just need to let me know. In that instance I'll try and add info where I can, but avoid the links.

Would very much welcome your guidance on this.

Thanks

Duncshine 10:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi once more. Thanks for a very thorough response. I think with any future entries, I'll make my judgement as to whether any link really does add something to the article. Then, if an editor disagrees with me, we can discuss it. That's what I love about WP, it's truly democratic!

Can I ask a stub question? I've just added a stub on Winterbourne Viaduct, an architecturally significant viaduct/bridge near Bristol. Now, I've put that its a Gloucestershire location stub; but I was wondering what the guidelines are for other stub categories. I'd like people who are knowledgable about viaducts, railway crossings, architecture etc. to be able to expand this, but I'm not sure how many and which stubs I should add? Sorry to be a pain, but once I get the hang of it, I won't bother you so much! Duncshine 09:10, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again BL Lacertae. Just to let you know I have arrived at the definitive stub settings for Winterbourne Viaduct. I've gone for UK-struct, bridge-struct, and UK-rail stubs and removed the Gloucestershire-geo stub. No need to reply to me if this seems OK, but do please set me straight if you think I've used the wrong stubs. Thanks again for your patience, and for making me want to get more involved in adding and updating Wiki articles. Duncshine 13:17, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Libya stubs

Coincidence. I've never been to WP:WSS. But I will gladly join. Send my kisses to the lizard. the.crazy.russian (T) (C) (E) 00:46, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

22/7

Stong Keep. It is absurd to say a proof on its own is not an encyclopedia article. What about all of the other pages devoted mainly to mathematical proofs? Will you nominate ALL of them for deletion? What about ALL OF THE ARTICLES IN list of topics related to pi?? Should the ALL get merged into pi? That is absurd! Wikipedia is NOT supposed to be only for beginners. "Night Gyr", may I inquire about your experience with Wikipedia's mathematics articles? "Kiss the Lizard" very clumsily misses the point of this article. 22/7 is of course one of the earliest convergents in the continued fraction expansion of π. By contrast, those decimal expansions (e.g. 3.14159) are rather arbitrary. "kiss the lizard", what is the nature and degree of your experience with Wikipedia mathematics articles? Michael Hardy 01:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please dont rant on my talk page. you already made your point on thw afd page and thats all you need to do. and might i point out that if you cant even work out which part of a wikipedia signature is the username then perhaps it is you who dont have the wiki experience, not me. i havent edited any mathematics articles here, but that doesnt mean i cant tell the difference between an encyclopedic article and a nonencyclopedic one - or that i am ignorant of mathematics.

Your vote on this article does make it appear that you cannot tell the difference, in this case at least.

But why speak of "ranting"? Michael Hardy 23:38, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

for all you know i may have a phd on the newton-raphson method and its use with continuously differentiable functions.

What I said was that your comments make it clear that you do not understand the article. I stand by that. Michael Hardy 23:38, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

in any case it would be far more useful if you tried defending the article - rather than attacking those who do not see it as worth a place in wikipedia.

I did not attack anyone. I have been defending the article. Successfully, it seems (with four or five votes for either "delete", "merge", or "transfer", and about 35 for "keep"). Michael Hardy 23:38, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

to rant: "to speak or declaim in a violent, loud, or vehement manner". yup - ranting. my vote simply makes it clear that this article is not encyclopedic. it might be useful in one of wikipedias sister projects but it doesnt belong here in that form. and did you or did you not claim that my comments were "very clumsy"? did you or did you not attack my knowledge of the subject area based on my lack of edits to other wikipedia mathematics articles? both ad hominem, personal attacks. BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard

I did not claim you lacked knowledge of the subject based on a lack of edits. What makes you think I did? I merely asked what experience you had.

My "very clumsy" remark was about those particular comments of yours.

Although I have never said before that you are not knowledgeable in mathematics (I don't know what makes you think I said that) I will now say something on that: I think if you knew much about the subject, you would not be saying that "if there was a similar mathematical proof presented that any x was greater than any y it would not be encyclopedic either" --- as if such a thing would necessarily be comparable.

I haven't launched any ad hominem attacks. An ad hominem attack looks like this: "Ronald Reagan is a Republican, therefore his argument makes no sense." I never said that any particular fact about you implies your arguments make no sense.

And why would you consider it a personal attack if I say only that a particular thing you wrote was clumsy? That's about one thing that you wrote, not about you as a person. Michael Hardy 23:58, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I merely asked what experience you had. And the point of that question, if not to suggest to readers that i did not know about the subject, was what, precisely? Couple that with the suggestion that my comment was clumsy, and there is the clear intention of showing that my knowledge of the subject is inferior to yours. is that in any way a defence of the article on its merits? no. it is an attack on my ability to judge the worth of the article. BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 00:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I asked the question was a suspicion that you were not familiar with Wikipedia's customs and conventions followed in mathematics articles. Michael Hardy 00:51, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Elaea

I will be adding Elaea, but you edited my geostub in its tender youth. The Elaea you mention is indeed in Turkey, the one mentioned here is in ancient Aethiopia which most likely corresponds to Eritrea or Sudan, or Somalia, or such. See [1] for 6 Elaeas (or Elaeae?), there are no doubt others preserved in other writings. See also [2] for Strabo's account of the matter. Carlossuarez46 02:48, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Most unfortunate about the unusable Yemen geo stub, but all the authorities place it on the African side (is there an African geo stub?) Carlossuarez46 03:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:R with possibilities

Hi BL, thank you for your vote, but since the template was proposed for renaming only as opposed to deletion, did you actually mean to write that you like the template's name and would like to keep the name as opposed to anything else? Thanks again. Shawnc 02:11, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ops thanks. added extra comment to my vote. BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 03:09, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

geo-stub and craters

No problem, and thanks for letting me know. As far as I remember, it was only one article, but the important thing is that it won't happen again. See you around wikipedia. --Xyrael 10:15, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Geo stubs

Yes I changed stubs in the articles about Kosovo cities. In fact I changed 3 different stubs into one: "Serbia-geo-stub", non-existing "Kosovo-geo-stub" (but it was in the articles) and "Euro-stub", into one singe "Geo-stub". I think that "Geo stub" is the best solution here until the final status of Kosovo is not defined to prevent further disputes about this. You said that "Geo-stub is only used now as a temporary holding template until things are sorted further", so in the case of Kosovo we can use it as a temporary holding template until the final status of Kosovo is known. However, it is only my suggestion since I will not change anything about these stubs in the future. If you want to change "Geo stubs" into something else, please do it, I will not object. PANONIAN (talk) 13:37, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See why I changed that into "Geo-stub":

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gora_%28region%29&diff=47648587&oldid=33148701

And he will also change the "Serbia-Montenegro-stub" which you posted into non-existing "Kosovo-stub", thus, the articles then will not have stubs at all. PANONIAN (talk) 13:49, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Renamed categories

The categories which you tagged for renaming have been renamed in accordance to your suggestions and the old categories can be deleted. Don't know how to do this, but maybe you do? --KYN 19:06, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apologizes to have messed things up. Didn't realize that category naming was serious business. --KYN 19:40, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

EX-Yugoslavian Edit War in Wikipedia

If you want to sort the geo stub about Yugoslavian after the war you must at first read this: Talk:Federal Republic of Yugoslavia--Hipi Zhdripi 19:31, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ok ive read it. now ill go back to sorting them according to the finalised discussions on kosovo at WP:WSS. kosovo in general gets serbia-stub and places in kosovo get SerbiaMontenegro-geo-stub. BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 02:33, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lebanon-geo-stub

Thanks for dealing with the Lebanon geo-stubs! :) Grutness...wha? 07:56, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not me - I only tidied up the last few and took it off your splitting list! BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 13:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Auckland meetup

Just to let you know that a meetup is planned in Auckland for the 25th of June (see Wikipedia:Meetup/Auckland for more details), and that you are cordially invited. GeorgeStepanek\^talk 00:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cave, Italy

Hey, thank you to collaborate to an Italian commune geo stub. However, I ask you to check other communes entries which has been just expanded to see what would be the standard form of the article (examples: Acquapendente, Molfetta). This is why often you'll see History - Main sights - Transportation sections without any text below... they're an invitation! Further, if you've time, you could add the infobox to articles without or even the footer for the province communes. Data can be copied exactly from the corresponding article from it.wikipedia.org, ismply formatting them for the English version. Ciao!!!

huh? all i did was properly format a stub while i was fixing a better template. BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 01:09, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for destroying the Historical London travel guide before my friends added content, I guess the era of (1) discussing before acting and (2) not worrying about stubs before they get content are over. Both of these used to be Wikipedia policy, but I haven't been paying close attention in recent years to how Wikipedia has changed. Greg 06:15, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

it didnt seem like a very encyclopedic thing (or likely to become one). the article already had a merge notice on it and there was no dicussion saying it shouldnt be merged. as it was there was so little there anyway that anyone reading the article would have thought "is that it?" it made far more sense for it to be part of the history of london article as the merger notice proposed. so there was an opportunity for discussing before acting but noone seemed keen to save it, and even a stub has to have some content - this had none. BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 12:10, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied to your message about this article on talk page - and left a note at Talk:History of London, too. I agree - as it stands, this article should be a redirect, although it's possible that something more substantial may end up there in the future. Grutness...wha? 12:54, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent user name

Really brought a smile to my face. Thanks. Runcorn 18:23, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

State Road 60 (Florida)

Thanks for fixing my stub.User:Mikereichold | User_talk:Mikereichold 13:51, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Contested prods

Just a note- as far as I know, it isn't necessary to list a page on AfD in order to contest a prod- I believe usually the onus is on the user who added the PROD tag to do so. I do agree that the wording on Proposed deletion is a bit ambiguous. Of course, you can list on AfD in order to gain additional community support for your position, and this may be your intention? Badgerpatrol 01:31, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to add to the comment above: perhaps you are confused as to the nature of the prod template. Prod is essentially a "weak delete" which works only if no objections are raised. To override a prod you have only to remove it. Moving a prod to AFD is both unneccessary and wasteful. Thank you for your time. Fake User 06:21, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks to both of you but im only doing what it says at WP:PROD:

Remove the {{dated prod}} tag from the article, and optionally  
try to address the concerns of the tagging editor;  
OR
2.	Alternatively, nominate the article for an Articles 
for deletion debate.

so according to that if i remove the prod tag and dont try to address the concerns of the editor i have to nominate the article for an afd debate. BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 08:42, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify that, and without meaning to arouse any confusion- you are well within your rights to move a PRODD'ed page (that you want to keep) to AfD if you see fit to do so, although this happens very, very rarely, and some voters may question whether it's worthwhile. It's a bit harsh to state that such an approach is unecessary and wasteful- you may feel for example that the most honourable and sensible way to settle an intractable dispute is to list the page and let the community decide, or you may want additional feedback as to article quality from third parties to crystallise a position that you are unsure about. There's no reason to avoid AfD if you feel there is a genuine reason for doing it, although obviously it might be considered a bit odd to nominate an article for deletion that you actually want to retain- and of course there is always the possibility that the article may actually be deleted against your wishes! It's always best to contact the editor who left the PROD tag first and try and discuss it sensibly, which may turn up a solution. Badgerpatrol 08:47, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It might be a good idea to leave a message at WP:PROD talk and get some clarification. You certainly haven't done anything wrong btw- in fact it's admirable in my view that you stuck to policy even though it meant nominating articles you want to keep for AfD.Badgerpatrol 08:53, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ill do that - and thanks :) BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 08:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heytesbury street

Hi, This certainly was a candidate for deletion in its original form. I've now added material and wonder if you could see what you think of it now? Dlyons493 Talk 20:22, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Protected Areas stub vote

Hi! You voted a few days ago on a protected areas stub proposal. There has been some follow up discussion on the proposal that may interest you. I hope that we can determine a solution that works for everyone. Thanks! ClarkBHM 13:21, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You!

Was looking at my watch-list and saw

(diff) (hist) . . m User:Gingerjoos; 12:19 . . BL Lacertae (Talk | contribs) (fix of category so that your user page isnt listed as a stub!)

Thanks a lot! Being a newbie means not being aware of stupid things like this. Glad that you took time out to look into this. :-) anirudh 07:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ockbrook and Borrowash

Hello BL,

When I created the article, I at first used the Derbyshire Location stub but then changed it. The reason is that each of the villages (Ockbrook and Borrowash) is a location and deserves its own article. As a pair, they are not a location but a civil parish and (a somewhat mismatched) administrative area.

This being so, the Derbyshire Locations stub doesn't seem quite right.

What do you think?

If theyre both in derbyshire then they should get the derbyshire-geo-stub - thats the way geo-stubs work. the england-geo-stub is for places that are in several counties like Ancestral Thames and the UK-geo-stub is for ones dealing with the whole UK. BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 23:50, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Arbus_Driver"

Hmm. I was thinking more along the lines of there being a need for a derbyshire-admin-stub, or similar. But that's probably a bad idea. In fact, come to think about it, the article may not be a stub at all as there's probably little else to say about it... But let's leave it as you've set it for now. A R Driver 01:40, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

right - sorry i misunderstood you. no there are no local government stubs by region - there are already so many different stub types that WP:WSS tries to discourage unneccessary splits and since local government regions are, well, regions, geo-stub makes some sort of sense for them. BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 22:41, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Arbus_Driver"

We seem to have reached agreement to do nothing further here (although I think we both realise the situation isn't perfect - it's a slightly odd ball case). So, to ensure that any future editor gets a heads up, I'm going to copy this conversation to Talk:Ockbrook_and_Borrowash. A R Driver 17:02, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CrazyRussian's RfA

File:Motherussia.jpg

Hello BL Lacertae, and thank you for your support at my request for adminship, which ended with an awe-inspiring 86/1/2 result. I plan to do much with my shiny new tools - but I'll start slow and learn the ropes at first. Please deluge me with assignments and requests - I enjoy helping out. For Mother Russia!! - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 05:28, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Depression Category

Hello,

I placed the Depression Category on the renaming list. I'm relatively new to the techniques of Wiki. How do I go about moving it to the full debate page?

Still learning,

Michael David 19:54, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Freemasonry Stub

Oh, shoot, I forgot that that had to be done! Thanks for the heads-up. Oz Lawyer 00:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Ireland stub fix

I forgot that we have stubs for everything, everyone, and their mother, including "Ireland-related stubs."

-)

And thanks for the Medindie stub fix

Alan Baskin 04:47, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Southcarolina-history-stub

I was wrong. Jonathan Johnson 02:41, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

R.E. stubs for zoos

Thanks! I hate having to put just {{stub}} on things, but often times it is a choice of me digging for 15 minutes for the correct category, or putting the {{stub}} tag. But I try to do my best to add comments next to the {{stub}} tag to try and help out the next person. Agian thanks for telling me, I will remember that. —— Eagle (ask me for help) 01:36, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I suspect you see the comment after you find the tag... Oh well... —— Eagle (ask me for help)

Freeway/motorway/whatever category

Removed cfdnotice, cfd has completed. --Kbdank71 16:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC) --SPUI (T - C) 19:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

canada

ok thanks mate I wasn't sure. Thanks for the tip. I have found there are millions of uncovered places in Canada so I will be expanding and will categorize correctly! James Janderson 19:54, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for holding the fort for me while I was away and keeping an eye on my talk page. I'm back in a limited way now. Grutness...wha? 01:47, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation

BL Lacertae, would you please be interested in mediating a dispute that involes deletion of pertinent information from the Wikipedia articles? If you would consider being a mediator, I will fill you on the details. Please respond on this your page. Thank you, Barefact

I think she's on a bit of a wikibreak - I haven't seen any edits from BL for a month or so. Grutness...wha? 23:01, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leeds-Bradford

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Leeds-Bradford, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. L.J.Skinner^{WOT?|I did} 20:44, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AUK

This is an invitation to WikiProject Auckland, a WikiProject which aims to develop and expand Wikipedia's articles on Auckland. Please feel free to join us.

Taifar ious1 09:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A reply to your concerns

Someone else recently raised certain concerns similar to those you raised with me early in 2006. After having some time to collect my thoughts, I wrote a fairly terse reply here. It was clear that you don't understand mathematics, and this answer should be comprehensible to lay persons like you. Michael Hardy (talk) 20:08, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello BL Lacertae! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 273 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Ayub Ogada - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Anne Audain - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 01:27, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jan McLean

The article Jan McLean has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable advertising.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Claret Ash 00:04, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Fazenda Tagy

The article Fazenda Tagy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is actually a farm, not a geographical location. The way I see it, farms are private places and therefore this article should assert the subject's notability, which it doesn't.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Victão Lopes ^Fala! 18:59, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Frontier of Dreams

The article Frontier of Dreams has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails to establish notability (WP:GNG)

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 80.221.159.67 (talk) 17:04, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]