User talk:Dendlai

Welcome!

Hello, Dendlai, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! TerriersFan (talk) 05:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the revert

Thanks for the revert on the Food chemistry article. Much appreciated. Chris (talk) 13:50, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss the changes

I'd like to clarify. I heard UNRWA spokesmen confirming on radio interview that on footage we see Hanan Al-Masri, reporter for Al-Arabia Gaza Media Office. You could also clearly see on Youtube that it is the case, since there are other related clips by Hanan Al-Masri. Don't you just love Internet technology? I'm not an Arabic speaker. Maybe you could confirm that she tells about Grad launching near her office? She looks somehow surprised. There are a lot of other footages which show rocket launching from center of Gaza city, I hope you don't dispute this. It was mentioned here that high density of population and human shield claims are relevant. I'm going to restore your undo, unless I'm notified this is out of consensus. Thank you.

Hope you could joins discussion on Talk/Background 05:10, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Wrong tagging for speedy deletion

Hi Dendlai. Thank you for your work on patrolling pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I just wanted you to inform that I declined to delete Orchestra Luna, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion under criterion A7 because of the following concern: Having a notable member (like Rick Berlin in this case) implies notability. See WP:BAND criterion #6. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion and especially what is considered Non-criteria. In future you should rather tag such pages for proposed deletion or file them at articles for deletion. Regards So Why 10:40, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss the changes

The talkpage is a good thing. Brunte (talk) 14:31, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dont revert my motivated edit without discussion. Tell whats in my edit breake the WP:NPOV Brunte (talk) 14:43, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

... Brunte (talk) 14:56, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, yes random user. "Wayt! xtrnl lynk, liek previus epsod I can haz? ooo! I iz hapy Kattigory artikul! Stubz it 2!Infofobx! Artikul can haz it!" Brunte (talk) 17:01, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prop 8

Good compromise, leaving out Same-Sex Marriage as a "see also" but keeping Homophobia. I accepted that with just a few seconds thinking, seing how that was just right. So... Good diplomacy and compromising there. Just wanted to tell you :) Dendlai (talk) 17:04, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I actually posted to the talk page as well. I understand why people might link to homophobia, but I could also understand why not to include it since it might wrongly imply that people for Prop 8 are homophobs, not saying that some couldn't or wouldn't be. Anyways, will wait to see what others think. Cheers! --Tom 17:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

established editor

You took me to task over the term "established editor" here. All I meant to say was "an editor who is not an SPA". What phrase would you like me to use? Of course some editors are more equal than others, you would presumably consider yourself superior to the kid who writes "Ridley Tankersley is a great person who goes to DSMS." — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 04:46, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On the same basic subject, the draft article has undergone several changes in the last few days, including the addition of several references. I am asking participants to re-examine the article in light of these improvements. Thanks Beeblebrox (talk) 05:12, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tove Jansson

Hi there,

Thanks for your recent contributions to Tove Jansson. I wanted to clarify my revert, just answering to your comment "it wasn't hard to fine". I have more than 900 articles in my watch list, and by experience I have seen IP editors coming, adding anything (most of the time false information), leaving and never coming back. So whenever I see an IP adding content that it is not obvious and has not been sourced, I revert, I ask for sources in the revertion and I put a note in the IP talk page in case they want to come back explaining why I reverted. With more than 900 articles in my watch list, I honestly do not have time to check if every single addition is true or not, and for IP editors I do believe that adding "citation needed" does not help, since they barely come back. You can see me for sure reverting vandalism in this and other pages a lot.

I am simply asking for forgiveness in advance if you ever see me again reverting IP editor's contributions because they are not sourced. I hope you understand and once again, thanks for fixing that section and adding the necessary sources. Best regards, Miguel.mateo (talk) 03:34, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brokencyde

Hi. Thanks for the heads up on the brokencyde article. I'm voting to delete this time, because there has been no new press coverage on the band, and likely wont' be until the Warped tour is underway. The article authors are doing a horrible job of trying to present their case with references, and I'm quite frankly sick of looking in obscure punk magazines for additional material. I like to stick up for Punk Rock bands, because they have a different type of press coverage than mainstream bands, and I think some allowances have to be made for that. If the band gets good press coverage, I'm sure there will be 10 screaming fans ready to put the article up again. In the meantime, they can concentrate on flooding the MTV lines with requests for their now 2 year old "hit" song. Thanks again for the heads up. --OliverTwisted ^(Talk)(Stuff) 05:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why'd You undo my edit?

What was wrong with my edit on Same Sex Marriage? You didn't even explain WHY! You deleted my edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.77.203.166 (talk) 10:55, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Regarding the discussion at Lar's semi-protection page, could you please tone it down a bit? We're all acting in good faith here, and the easiest way to resolve a dispute is to discuss it calmly and rationally with other editors. Regards, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:14, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help with BLPs!

		The BLP Barnstar
		Your hard work on BLPs in general, and at User:Lar/Liberal Semi specifically, is much appreciated. That page has now been sunsetted (and I hope never to need to bring it back) but the work you did there (whether by bringing articles forward, reviewing them, or protecting them... or even by questioning or criticizing the process!) was of great help to the project. See you in the trenches! ++Lar: t/c 01:49, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Show me love (film)

Only just noticed a correction you made to this page already last March (2009). I have no problems with your correction. But you added the comment:

“… the source in question seems dubious at best. Should probably find other sources and remove it completely.”

Actually, it's a brilliant academic article. I was inspired to re-write most of the Show Me Love page based on the source in question: Gareth Griffiths, "An Åmål State of Mind", in City + Cinema: Essays on the specificity of location in film, Datutop 29, 2007.

The essay is excellent in going into depth on various issues, including its production and the story of how the film effected the town of Åmål - and judging by the numerous references to the local Åmål newspaper and other Swedish newspapers, the author [albeit probably British!) clearly speaks Swedish. And there is one more excellent academic article on the film: Tiina Rosenberg, Out of the National Closet. Show me Love. Journal of Theatre and Drama, vol. 7/8, 2/2002. Both highly recommended!--Punavuori (talk) 13:40, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

with love Skashifakram (talk) 11:35, 26 October 2011 (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) 13:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Dendlai. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Dendlai. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]