User talk:Gazimoff/Archives/2008/August

Peer Review Request

Hey Gazimoff, I currently have the article The Great American Bash (2005) up for Peer review, here. I come to you in hopes of you reviewing the article, as I'm aiming to get this article prepared for Featured Article status. I would really appreciate if you would take some time and review this article to the best of your abilities. Cheers, -- iMatthew _T.C. 13:26, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I'll do what I can over the next few days, although I'm not a specialist in this field. It'll probably be more a case of reading through and asking about layout, sourcing etc. I may end up asking a lot of stupid questions, but hopefully it'll be useful. Hope this helps. Gazimoff 13:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm trying to get reviews from those who do not know about professional wrestling, so make the article easily read by all readers, and not just wrestling fans. -- iMatthew _T.C. 13:51, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For re-uploading that image for me when I was unsure how to re-scale it using GIMP, I award you this barnstar for your help! :) Qst (talk) 13:28, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Completely unnecessary, but thanks all the same! Gazimoff 13:30, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Much congrats!

Good job on your RfA! :) Keep up the good work. Malinaccier (talk) 17:16, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks! Phew! Gazimoff 17:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I have to say, that was a rather boring RFA :-) PF evidence of a good candidate. Much deserved. Dont' go breaking anything. Your first paycheck from WMF should arrive shortly, I'd hate to see you hafta return it :-) ....Keeper ǀ 76 17:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Many, many thanks, Keeper. i'll do my best. besides, the first job I have to do is sort out rfa-thanks-spam :) Gazimoff 17:24, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Talk me out of nominating Gameplay of World of Warcraft for deletion

) I am thinking about it, because how is it notable outside of the game itself? Isn't this just overflow of information? Shouldn't it be summarized and covered all in the main article? Best, Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:56, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Essentially, it's because it's a spinoff of the three articles - World of Warcraft, Burning Crusade and Wrath of the Lich King. What we're trying to do is really condense down the main article - as it's very, very long and has a huge amount of detail in it that we want to use per reviews to remove. We also don't want to replicate information between the three articles - it makes much more sense to redirect readers to an article that contains all gameplay information then just focus on the major additions for the two expansions. This of course means that the expansion articles themselves need a rewrite, but one glance at those two articles confirms it anyway. So, in a nutshell, it's an attempt to use summary style to keep the length of the main article down (and reduce it further) and avoid duplication with the expansion pack articles when they're cleaned up. Hope that makes sense, Gazimoff 05:55, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on your successsful RFA!

Gazimoff (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) My admin log

Congratulations!
It is my great pleasure to inform you that your Request for Adminship has closed successfully and you are now an administrator! Useful Links: • Administrators' reading list • Administrators' how-to guide • • Administrator's Noticeboard • Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents • Administrator's Noticeboard for 3RR • Your admin logs: • blocks • deletions • moves • protects • uploads •

If you have questions, feel free to leave a talk page message for me or any other admin. Again, congratulations! — Rlevse • Talk • 17:23, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

CONGRATULATIONS!!!! Have fun with the mop! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 17:22, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

This is not Gazimoff. —Animum (talk) 18:38, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! Now you can do fun things like indef block Jimbo, replace the main page with porn, and then going fishing for fun! Erik the Red 2 (AVE·CAESAR) 17:38, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Just remember that you can't delete the main page. Not that I'm suggesting you try, but check it out. I'm highly sorry you don't have the opportunity to break things really hard. Cheers, and 'grats. lifebaka++ 17:41, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, on your successful RFA... You may now delete the main page, believe me :) -- Tinu Cherian - 17:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks everyone, I really appreciate it. Not just for making it as pleasant an experience as possible, but for keeping it drama free as well. I'm completely dumbstruck by the level of support I got, and I hope to be going round and thanking everyone who took part personally as soon as I can :) Gazimoff 17:49, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! I have every confidence that you will make a superb admin. Please don't block me...! Okiefromokla ^questions? 18:49, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Echoing the above, congrats - May your dhramaz be swiftly archived, and whatnot. Best, UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 19:28, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations - I'll see you back at the mentoring page in the morning! :) Fritzpoll (talk) 21:07, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to adminship. :) Acalamari 21:27, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Why did that sound like "Welcome to hell"? Gazimoff 23:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations...I hadn't been this enthusiastic in supporting a request for adminship in a considerably long time. Best of luck getting used to it all! —Mizu onna sango15^Hello! 21:49, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I think the New Admin School will help me there. Hopefully it should all be OK though! Gazimoff 23:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Great to hear your news! Top show old man! You're sending responses to all 128 participants? Its going to be a while before you get around to actually doing some admining then! -- Sabre (talk) 22:08, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it took a while. Worth it though :) Gazimoff 23:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Congrats mate. Feel free to look over my post-RFA mentoring page, there may be some useful tidbits of info there. You may also find {{admin dashboard}} handy for finding stuff to do with your new buttonz. –xeno (talk) 22:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that! I'll look at wrapping a suitable frame around it, but that's an excellent template. Many thanks! Gazimoff 23:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! Sorry, I couldn't resist adding the annoying blinking text... Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 23:20, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

At least spell it right. :-P —Animum (talk) 01:30, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Heh, many thanks! Gazimoff 23:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! Ecoleetage (talk) 00:11, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure, and congratulations! Jayjg ^(talk) 02:33, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! Masterpiece2000 (talk) 02:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Congrats from me also! --Stormie (talk) 05:24, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! :D --PeaceNT (talk) 06:22, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to you all! Gazimoff 21:36, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I guess I'm late for the party, and congratulations on your well-deserved, new and shiny mop and bucket! =D - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 11:18, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Mailer, one day I hope to be able to show you just how much I owe you for this. Without yoy, Giggy and others, I would never have the confidence to take this on. Gazimoff 21:36, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm a bit late too... Congrats Gazimoff! I expect that you will be one of the better admins :). Seraphim♥Whipp 11:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Heh, we'll see. I can never promise that, but I can promise to do my best for the community. Gazimoff 21:36, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on your (very) successful RfA! I'm pleased to have been part of it. Cosmic Latte (talk) 15:24, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Ach, it wasn't that good. I was very, very lucky!Gazimoff 21:36, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

\o/ Woooo! Let me know if you need tips on being rogue. ;) ~Jennavecia ^(Talk) 19:56, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I downloaded last.fm yesterday. All day I've had it playing Stone Sour, Tool and the like. Should I be worried this deviates from my normal intake of Rammstein and Foo Fighters? Gazimoff 21:36, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

\o/ Good times. Add me as a buddy, I'm LaraLulz on last.fm. Will be amusing to see how our music tastes compare. I'm like super mega ultra low with everyone except GlassCobra. We're high... not like that. >_> Haha. ~Jennavecia ^(Talk) 13:07, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Done! Gazimoff 13:21, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (August 2008)

• Newsletter delivery by xenobot 22:14, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Post review catchup

That's very thoughtful of you! Perhaps you could look at the latest question I posed to Mal. I'm rather lost as to the deletion area. Thanks so much. Well done on your sucessful rfa by the way! Regards, --Cameron* 10:19, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'll do my best to help out. Basically, per nom statements don't mean much in an AfD, as it's a discussion or debate, not a vote. By saying 'per nom', you don't really add anything to a debate. A better way of handling AfD debates is as follows:

• Examine the debate - if it's clearly going one way and it's very unlikely that you'll be able to offer anything new, don't bother piling on
• Otherwise, read throught he article in question and ask yourself how it matches up with the policies or guidelines we have on inclusion. Are the sources detailed reliable, or primary sources? Is there a case for ignoring these policies?
• Can you find any reliable sources that would help to bolster the article or address notability/verifiability concerns?
• Is there a suitable merge target for the article, where the useful content cound contribute to another?
• Is the topic a likely search term? Could there be a suitable redirect target?

If you've exhausted these avenues, clearly state why you think it should be deleted, such as containing no sources or unreliable ones, being unable to fins any suitable ones, etc. Reference policies or guidelines that have helped you come to this conclusion. add the debate to your watchlist and check back before it closes to make sure your argument is still valid with any new information that has been added. Change your position if you feel it's appropriate. This is pretty much the approach I take. I don't feel it's appropriate for me to comment on an AfD unless I can truly add something, but when I do it's methodical and thought out. You should participate and feel welcome to do so, but being selective and thoughtful gives so much more to the area. Hope this helps wih the deletions going forward. Gazimoff 11:40, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Gazimoff, for that thoughtful advice. I'm going to save that advice somewhere safe! : ) regards, --Cameron* 19:36, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem. If you need anything else, just ask. Gazimoff 19:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: MOTD

No, your suggestions are fine. Probably some of the better ones are completely original ideas. Quotes get used often just because they're easier to find and people recognize them more; but there's no rule that anything has to be a quote. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:22, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Chat about WP

Hi Gazimoff,

Congratulations on your recent successful RfA! I'm a graduate student at Stanford, working in the Human-Computer Interaction Group on tools for Wikipedia. Would you be available for a chat on IM or e-mail about your work on WP? I'd be especially interested in your experience working up to RfA, and now the transition to admin-ship. I'd really appreciate your time. Thanks! Zeppomedio (talk) 22:28, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I've had a think on this, and while I'm amenable to the idea, I would prefer to conduct it on-wiki. If you want to set up a page with your questions, I'll answer them for you there, as well as handle any follow-ups you may have. Hope this helps, Gazimoff 21:54, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

RE: Welcome back!

Yeah, it was very good! Great weather, had a good time and stuffs, although I'm glad I can get back to Wikibusiness for now!  :) weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 21:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

And, OMG you're an admin now...I completely missed that... I thought you said you'd never run? :P weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 21:53, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I did. But people twisted my arm. Had to wait until you went on holiday though :) Gazimoff 21:56, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Mentoring

per my talk page, not going to be around for a bit. You seem to be doing fine, though. Will return to the page if and when I return Fritzpoll (talk) 12:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

If there's anything I can do in this situation, please feel free to ask. I feel that you've performed admirably in this instance and would be only too happy to pick up the baton or offer you any of the support you need. An olive branch has been extended on multiple occasions, only for it to be knocked back and I can completely understand why you're feeling frustrated. Other than that, rest well and I'll see you again soon. There's only so much you can help people - they have to be willing to help themselves as well. Gazimoff 12:59, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Save some time

Before going through the long process of TfD...

Make a question on the Talk page and I'll withdraw the template if a couple others agree.

If that would work out better/faster. Looking for no stress, no drama.

Vengeance is mine, saith the Prime  ^{20:37, 11 Aug 2008 (UTC)}

As to you comment in the MfD

I wanted to add this to your comments, as I really don't DISagree with them... FYI, and so you know from where I am coming.

I won't disagree.

I believe that it does (can?) make a point (though not a WP:POINT.

I added it to one page with myself; I added it to one page where I was rebuked by the "owner".

Equal Opportunity, KWIM?

I will gladly (re-) userfy it back. I would also like suggestions on changes to make it ... worthwhile.

It's not meant as any sort of personal attack (as I used it on myself) and should help REMIND us that pages are not owned.

(Unless Wikipedia gets hacked, in which case it'd be a different kind of "owned"!)

No offense was intended; some utility was incorporated, and I'll speedily withdraw it if necessary.

No need to prolong the process... Vengeance is mine, saith the Prime  ^{20:39, 11 Aug 2008 (UTC)}

Is it that it's coming up in article TALK space? It shouldn't be on articles, only (a couple) talk pages.

If I can modify it a bit, great!

I don't want to be disruptive, and I have no sense of humour (so I'm told)...!

Anyway, I hope the template's actual purpose is reasonably clear and non-threatening.

Again, if it need be revoked, I shan't contest as such. Vengeance is mine, saith the Prime  ^{20:47, 11 Aug 2008 (UTC)}

Any chance of it "eventually" being back in WPspace?

What would need to be adjusted?

And if not in WPspace, would *that* thus allow it to be used on article talk pages?

I'm a little confused.

Let's go with User:VengeancePrime/Templates/Ownership ... sound good?

Thanks for your patience with me; I am trying to understand and abide!!!

Vengeance is mine, saith the Prime  ^{20:55, 11 Aug 2008 (UTC)}

It is unlikely to be allowed on article talk pages or in the mainspace. You can preserve it for humour value in your own userspace, but if it appears on any article talk pages it is likely to be untranscluded and probably listed at MfD. Hope this helps. Gazimoff 20:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

:-( Well, it was at least a good exercise in coding for multiple values...gotta admit it's a pretty slick template...?

Thanks for your help and guidance. Vengeance is mine, saith the Prime  ^{21:00, 11 Aug 2008 (UTC)}

Happy Birthday!

Hope you will have fun like the guy in the mascot! File:Birthday party with costume.jpg --ɔɹǝɐɯʎ!^Talk 21:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou

Just a little note to say thankyou for participating in my successful RFA candidacy, which passed with 96 supports, 0 opposes, and 1 neutral. I am pleasantly taken aback by the amount of support for me to contribute in an administrative role and look forward to demonstrating that such faith is well placed. Regards, WilliamH (talk) 09:12, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Bill1fr

Yeah, I noticed that deletion log and considered not blocking them, since I figured you would have if they'd gotten too annoying, but their other contributions nailed the coffin, as it were. Thanks. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 13:39, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

No worries. The more eyes we have on something, the better :) Gazimoff 13:41, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

RFA Review

Hope all's going well with you and your newly-minted adminship. We've completed the statistical analysis, and I'm starting to plug the top 3-5 responses into each of the sections under the Reflect phase. I'll also be working on some graphs this afternoon, I think. How is your analysis proceeding? UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 15:43, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. Things have been going a bit slow for me, partly because of my own RfA and partly because I've recently got a new job. I'm hoping to be able to get some more work done on it over the next few days and bring it all up to date. I love what you've been doing so far though - fantastic work!

We now have some commentary in all of the sections of the Reflect page. In most cases, I just added a discussion of what people said; I haven't done much analysis, as that was the process you were working through. Please have a look, and let me know what I can add to help move things along. Thanks! UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 14:54, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm on it now, filtering through my notes and editing stuff. Hope to get it wrapped up shortly and on to the next bit. Gazimoff 17:48, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: WOW Meeting Stones

I'm not sure why you reverted my change on the Warcraft meeting stones. You state that the article is about gameplay pre-burning crusade; However, this gameplay has changed even for people without the expansion (and in-fact, was added to the game before the expansion was released, if my memory serves correctly). Additionally, the statement in the article implies that this is the current gameplay for WoW, which is not correct. Perhaps you could explain your reasoning behind only referring to how things worked on release in an article on an evolving environment? (To remind, the change to the meeting stones was that they no longer are a looking for group tool, they are now a summoning tool for groups to instances. Looking for members is now handled via /lfm and /lfg.)

Thanks, Arrataz (talk) 05:10, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, first up, you're completely correct on the mechanic changing over time. I'll try to give reasons for the action though.

• We work on verifiability, not truth, and have to go on what the sources say. We have a source describing the original mechanic, but nothing to describe the new one at the moment.
• I think the mechanic was introduced post-Burning Crusade. Even though it is available to players without the expansion, we've deliberately sliced the articles up into manageable chunks. World of Warcraft describes the game before expansion, while World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade covers what happenes afterwards. World of Warcraft: Wrath of the Lich King will cover development leading up to and following that expansion. That way, you can have a stable original article, with later changes captured in subsequent ones. It also means that the reviews, criticisms and so on are relevant to the game described.
• World of Warcraft is meant to summarise pre-TBC gameplay elements, while still discussing pre and post release development of the core game up to TBC's release. Gameplay of World of Warcraft is designed to be a detailed article focusing on the gameplay aspects of all three games and how they work together, coupled with how they have evolved over time.

All these are why we have hatnotes in an article, as well as a lead paragraph linking to others in the series and a table at the end listing all related articles in the topic. MMOs are unlike other games because they continually evolve and it's these changes spanning multiple articles that can cause problems. I hope this all helps though. Gazimoff 08:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I kind of understand what you're going for. However, to anyone reading the article, it will misinform them as to part of the gameplay of the game. The use of the present tense combined with outdated information and no note *anywhere* that this is a preservation of how things were at one point in time feels like a very bad combination to me. Anyone reading the article will get the impression that this is how things work, when they haven't for over 2 years. Arrataz (talk) 06:31, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Request for participation in User:Abd/RfC

Because my participation as a Wikipedia editor has been questioned, and if I continue as I have in the past, I can expect future challenges as well, I have begun a standing RfC in my user space, at User:Abd/RfC. There is also a specific incident RfC at User:Abd/RfC/8.11.08 block. I understand that you may not have time to participate directly; however, if you wish to be notified of any outcome from the general or specific RfC, or if you wish to identify a participant or potential participant as one generally trusted by you, or otherwise to indicate interest in the topic(s), please consider listing yourself at User:Abd/RfC/Proxy Table, and, should you so decide, naming a proxy as indicated there. Your designation of a proxy will not bind you, and your proxy will not comment or vote for you, but only for himself or herself; however, I may consider proxy designations in weighing comment in this RfC, as to how they might represent the general community. You may revoke this designation at any time. This RfC is for my own guidance as to future behavior and actions, it is advisory only, upon me and on participants. This notice is going to all those who commented on my Talk page in the period between my warning for personal attack, assumptions of bad faith, and general disruption, on August 11, 2008, until August 20, 2008. This is not a standard RfC; because it is for my advice, I assert authority over the process. However, initially, all editors are welcome, even if otherwise banned from my Talk space or from the project. Canvassing is permitted, as far as I'm concerned; I will regulate participation if needed, but do not spam. Notice of this RfC may be placed on noticeboards or wikiprojects, should any of you think this appropriate; however, the reason for doing this in my user space is to minimize disruption, and I am not responsible for any disruption arising from discussion of this outside my user space. Thanks for considering this. --Abd (talk) 02:39, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

It is with regret that I must decline this invitation. While I understand your desire to improve your understanding of Wikipedia and how its internal policies and guidelines came into effect in relation to your actions, I feel that the proposed mechanism is unsuitable for attaining this eventual goal. Furthermore, I am of the opinion that this strategy would result in an exceedingly inefficient process that is likely to generate more content than conclusion. As always, I am happy to provide you with support, assistance and guidance as appropriate in order to aid you with either constructive contribution to the project or navigation through the nuances of the numerous processes here. I would also encourage you to consider joining one of many wikiprojects we have on a wide range of topics, or to consider mentoring in order to provide you with structured guidance and tutorship. Other than that, I wish you best of luck in your endeavours. Many thanks, Gazimoff 18:25, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind advice, Gazimoff. You were invited to participate because you had edited my Talk page as stated above. I know that many edited my Talk page in that period who don't really care to investigate what is behind an incident; this is how Wilhelmina Will came to be topic banned by a nearly unanimous !vote at AN/I, then, shortly later, after I was essentially warned for intervening, and was blocked based on that warning, the community finally paid enough attention to real evidence, and it was unanimously reversed. Too many Wikipedians are willing to ABF and support sanctions without assuming any responsibility for a factual determination. The Queen in Alice and Wonderland: Sentence first -- verdict afterwards. Now, go back to your articles. Don't waste time with my RfC. Though you would still be welcome, should you change your mind.--Abd (talk) 23:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

A Greener Festival

Thanks for yoiur comments - I have completely reworked the pag - which is now just 'greener fetsivals' and a nuetral review of this area. I also tried to edit and improve 'green festivals' but with hindsight this seems to be a US organisation who have a single issue page of three or four lines for their own purposes - they are fairly ruthless at taking out everything not to do with them!

Benchallis (talk) 10:35, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Curious

Why the notability tag on Invasion Orion? The second game from Epyx seems pretty notable to me... Maury (talk) 18:07, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Essentially because it's unreferenced. Admittedly I may have overdone the tagging here, but it has absolutely no references from which it asserts notability or verifiability. It might be notable, but unless we have sources to back it up we can't prove it. Hence the tag. Hope this helps, Gazimoff 18:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Sort of. A unrefed tag is more appropriate, non-specific tags tend to simply confuse editors. Maury (talk) 18:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

No worries. I'm happy to cut back on the tagging, as I'd like to see the article improved rather than bewildering some poor soul. Gazimoff 18:26, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 28, August 9, 11 and 18, 2008.

Sorry I haven't been sending this over the past few weeks. Ralbot (talk) 06:05, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 31	28 July 2008	About the Signpost

Wikimania 2008 wrap-up	WikiWorld: "Terry Gross"
News and notes: Unblocked in China	Dispatches: Find reliable sources online
WikiProject Report: Military history	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 32	9 August 2008	About the Signpost

Anthrax suspect reportedly edit-warred on Wikipedia	WikiWorld: "Fall Out Boy"
Dispatches: Style guide and policy changes, July	WikiProject Report: WikiProject New York State routes
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 33	11 August 2008	About the Signpost

Study: Wikipedia's growth may indicate unlimited potential	Board of Trustees fills Nominating Committee for new members
Greenspun illustration project moves to first phase	WikiWorld: "George Stroumboulopoulos"
News and notes: Wikipedian dies	Dispatches: Reviewing free images
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 34	18 August 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: Help wanted
WikiWorld: "Cashew"	Dispatches: Choosing Today's Featured Article
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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) 06:05, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 19:40, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

I just saw the history of my userpage, and thanks for reverting that. I have no idea who that was. Anyway, I guess I have my own stalker. --LAAFan 04:54, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

LAAFan has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.