A great job deserves praise

Hello! You may recall that I was the silly person who initiated the AfD on the Spy vs Spy article -- I subsequently withdrew the AfD. Today I have a new identity: I am the not-so-silly person who verified your DYK on that very same article -- and I wanted to say that I am very happy that the article has been saved and is on its way to an award. You did a great job, and a great job deserve praise:

		The Original Barnstar
		In appreciation of your wonderful contributions to improving the content and character of Wikipedia. Job well done! Ecoleetage (talk) 04:34, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Spy vs Spy (Australian band)

On 12 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Spy vs Spy (Australian band), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Cirt (talk) 09:28, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a message

Hi! You tagged an article of mine for questioning neutrality and it is not a personal problem as I respect all opinions and admit I am still learning the ropes, so to speak, but may I recommend that it helps those of us new to actually authoring articles (vs. editing them) to have an idea what the problem was. I truly want to become a good and respected Wiki Editor and Author so all advice is welcome. In the case of this article I struggled with neutrality, actually sought out sources on both side of issue. But happy to get your input OneHappyHusky (talk) 08:14, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blethen, Brainerd, and the Rise of the Seattle Times

Apparently Brainerd is not mentioned in the history section of The Seattle Times. I think that althought it needs rewriting, the article could be merged with The Seattle Times. - Mgm|^(talk) 14:31, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And some of it's information could be put into the Erastus Brainerd article, because it

definitely could have more added to it. Hi878 (talk) 17:17, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Episode Summaries & Characters

Hi. I noticed that you deleted all of the NCIS episode summaries. lol I was going to point you to Wikipedia guidelines about tagging the pages first, but fortunately I checked the histories right before posting this message and saw that they were already tagged. Thank goodness I avoided sticking my foot in my mouth. :) But, I digress. If notability issues are addressed in the episode summary pages, do you mind having your edits reverted? A lot of information was removed by your deletions that could be of help to readers, not to mention I hate to see so many people's hard work go for naught.

I also do not feel that a consensus was reached on the characters. The responses look more like voting, and having a 62.5/37.5 percent (5-3) split is hardly a consensus. You probably already know this, but Wikipedia is not a democracy. I call it voting because people voiced their opinions and whether or not they agreed with you, yet no one made any suggestions on how a compromise could be reached or even bothered debating the issue further. However, while I disagree with your deleting the pages, I do admit that some (maybe all, depending on number of sources needed) character pages fail to establish notability.--Flash176 (talk) 08:47, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- So, it's been a couple months. I figured you needed some time off. Where then is the fervor for deleting the episode summaries for CSI now that you've gotten your way with NCIS? Or, is it just something about NCIS itself that requires the rules to be selectively enforced? Mentor397 (talk) 11:07, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DeProds

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Michael Walters (Australian footballer), which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! I've expanded and fully referenced that article, but I have also de-PRODed the other footy players that you PRODed, but labelled them as unreferenced. Remember that WP:ATHLETE is only the additional criteria and the basic criteria of A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject still applies. The-Pope (talk) 13:49, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Hawkins (Jericho character)

I noticed that when you placed the AfD notice on Robert Hawkins (Jericho character), you didn't leave an edit summary. As a result, I almost missed seeing that you nominated that article for deletion. In the future, it would be a good idea to make sure that you have an edit summary when you AfD an article. Thanks. -- Imperator3733 (talk) 20:27, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NCIS characters

I could see why someone would claim these mergers weren't discussed. The list article is not known to everyone and the article talk pages didn't link to it. That said, there doesn't appear to be a wide consensus (just 4 !votes evenly split). Please go to Wikipedia:Requested mergers to get more input. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I restored the original redirect you placed on Leroy Jethro Gibbs after reviewing the comment of the person who undid this move. The redirect should point people to the information we have and encourage the addition of referenced facts until the time it's ready to be broken out again. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:59, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merging histories won't work here. It would cause the histories of the several characters and the list itself to overlap which would make the history for that period useless. Why are you so opposed to having the redirects? It's common practice to retain redirects for words and names that are likely search terms for the article it redirects to. - Mgm|^(talk) 20:35, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NCIS episode summary deletion

Again, I ask. Where is your righteous indignation over the CSI episode summaries? Obviously you have something against NCIS. I would like to know what the difference between the two are. Mentor397 (talk) 11:22, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Hello. Per the checkuser findings at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cosmomancer, I have blocked you for three days for abusing multiple accounts. Please do not repeat this behaviour or you may be blocked for a much longer period. Please see WP:SOCK#LEGIT for legitimate uses of alternate accounts. Thank you. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:50, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry that this had to happen, no one else had to go through this much harassment over their votes. Arma virumque cano (talk) 01:17, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Leroy Jethro Gibbs

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Leroy Jethro Gibbs. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leroy Jethro Gibbs (3rd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:15, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Food for thought

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/3280030/Alex-Salmond-refuses-to-back-down-after-Norway-says-were-not-like-Scotland..html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.173.129.174 (talk) 10:37, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedian in Residence at the National Library of Scotland

I'm just dropping you a quick note about a new Wikipedian in Residence job that's opened up at the National Library of Scotland. There're more details at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scotland#Wikimedian in Residence at the National Library of Scotland. Richard Symonds (WMUK) (talk) 15:24, 22 April 2013 (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) 13:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]