User talk:Nat/Archives 3

Smile

Connell66 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. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Kosovo: country status

Hello. There's a discussion going on Talk:List of countries as to whether or not Kosovo should be included in that list. You've contributed to discussions on the page and I thought you might be interested. The articles List of countries and Annex to the list of countries (where the inclusion criteria reside) are both relevant. Cheers. DSuser 13:44, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks... again

For the second time, Thanks for the reminder Nat :) --snowolfD4 ^{( talk / @ )} 06:19, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

WP:ANI/3RR

Nat.tang, no offense intended, but your involvement in 3RR (based only on what I see right now) hasn't been very helpful. In a few cases, it seems that you didn't examine the evidence, but only vetted reports based on perceived technical flaws, which a closer examination reveals aren't present or relevant. I encourage you to stay involved, while also urging you to take the time to look more closely at the reports upon which you're commenting. Additionally, remember that sometimes several violations of policy are present simultaneously, in addition to 3RR: this doesn't mean that the report shouldn't have been reported there or shouldn't be acted upon; it only makes the case for action stronger. Similarly, the nature of the content dispute, though not a formal criterion of 3RR, may be taken into account by responding administrators and other commenters. We don't want long threaded discussions, but that doesn't mean that context is forbidden.Proabivouac 06:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Sorry I am on a vacation so I was kinda inactive when you gave me the message. What did the IP user do? I might not reply until August or Sept so be patient! :)--Jerry 09:54, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi, Nat.tang, and thanks for your participation in my RfA. I've withdrawn it, and will be writing up an "analysis" of it, which will soon be available at User:Giggy/RfA/Giggy when it's done. Please come around when you get the chance, and give me feedback on how I can improve. Thanks again, Giggy _U^CP 04:07, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Beautiful

You create the most beautiful images. They are amazing. Great job, and thank you for your help. :-) If you're feeling up to it, the userboxes for the Green Party of British Columbia, the Green Party of Alberta, and the Green Party of Manitoba need cool images. :-) I have a list of all the user boxes I've ever created here. GreenJoe 02:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

You may want to consider putting the new user boxes that you're creating in your own "user space", although I'd be willing to host them in my space. As we saw a few months ago they like to delete POV-related user boxes that are in the general template space. GreenJoe 03:45, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Adminship

Hey Nat - have you thought about becoming an admin? We could use another one in the east Asia region, and I think you'd be great at it. --Folic Acid 11:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

RFA Report

Hey Nat, thanks for your message. It looks like the report is now fixed. Cheers, Tangotango (talk) 14:00, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Help with template

{{helpme}} I need help with fixing this template/infobox I created. The problem: I can't "activate" the hidden parts when I add info as it can be seen here.

All you need to do is copy/paste the text inside the topmost dotted box here. At the moment it looks like you've copied the source code. I've made a test edit to demonstrate. All you need to do is fill in the values for each parameter. --DeLarge 20:50, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Ooops, I noticed a problem. Image:Trincrest.png, which you're using in the template, is fair use, and you're not allowed FU images in userspace as per Wikipedia:Non-free content#Policy (no.9). Sorry... --DeLarge 21:00, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I've moved the page... Nat Tang ^{ta | co | em} 21:01, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Confused!

Hi, I think I understand why you added {{Rally}} to the vote at Talk:Commonwealth Realm (because it's not really a vote in the Wiki sense and thus may confuse people, correct?), but I'm wondering why you added your vote but then removed it. Can you clue me in? -- Hux 10:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I was a bit tired so I didn't read your proposal clearly/wasn't think clearly...so I removed it...but its back up now :D. Nat Tang ^{ta | co | em} 11:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Why "Commonwealth Realm" [sic] violates Wikipedia policy

Wikipedia article naming conventions (an official Wikipedia policy) state:

Convention: Do not capitalize second and subsequent words unless the title is a proper noun (such as a name) or is otherwise almost always capitalized (for example: John Wayne and Art Nouveau, but not Computer And Video Games).

Commonwealth realm is not always capitalized as clearly demonstrated by the facts that the Queen herself[1] doesn't capitalize it and most academic articles cited on Google Scholar[2] don't capitalize it.

Furthermore, it is not a proper noun designating a specific entity like Canada or Britain. It is a common noun because it designates a class of entities like the Atlantic provinces, ASEAN member states or British cities. A sure sign that something is a common noun is the fact that you can use the indefinite article in front of it: an Atlantic province, an ASEAN member state or a British city. Canada is a Commonwealth realm.

The Queen herself, as Head of the Commonwealth, lowercases "Commonwealth realm," probably to signify that she doesn't consider any member of the Commonwealth to be better than any other. She wants to be the Head of the Commonwealth for everyone, not just those in the Commonwealth realms. My opponents refuse to listen to her.

Jonathan David Makepeace 19:23, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

The New Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th ed., never uses the expression "Commonwealth R/realm(s)" in its articles on dominions (of the Commonwealth), the Commonwealth, Elizabeth II or the United Kingdom. However ...

On p. 454 in vol. 4 of the Micropaedia the article on Elizabeth II states her title as "queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of her other realms and territories, head of the Commonwealth of Nations."

p. 98 in vol. 21 of the Macropaedia in the article on the United Kingdom: "This loosening of the previous connections was taken a stage further in 1949, when India stated its wish to assume the status of a republic but to remain within the Commonwealth. The other members gave approval. The crown thus became an institution applicable to individual Commonwealth countries, which remained realms, but not to the Commonwealth as a whole."

Jonathan David Makepeace 22:50, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Tdot

I am indeed in Toronto; live and work downtown. --G2bambino 20:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Toronto's Bid for WM2008

Hey Zanimum, Since you seem to be the person go to as I only saw your name on the bid page, I like to run this by you before I post either of them up on the bid page:

hope you like them... Nat Tang ^{ta | co | em} 08:42, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Great, please do post them. I don't know, however, how much of a bid we'll have for 2008. The stuff you see is recycled from the previous bid for 2006, and back then we had user:SimonP coordinating everything, but he's too busy with the rest of his life, now. But hey, it's worth a shot, so please do post those images, and take a look through the bid, edit it a bit if you like. I'm totally up for anything you can suggest. (BTW, the red/blue jumpy dude was the Boston event logo, and reused by Taipei. But every bid is free to change it to whatever they think appropriate.) -- Zanimum 22:50, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Trin

Yes, I am a student there - as can be seen by how much I hang out around the Trin article :P --Sycron 05:23, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

About Wiikipedian

Since you seem to have had recent problems with him too, perhaps you would be interested in expressing your opinion at: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Wiikipedian Best, --Kudret abi 10:40, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

"Toxic"

No offense, Nat, but please don't meddle in my user-space. No, the page is not an "attack". It's a way of dealing with nasty posts on my talkpage -- disposing of them in a way that keeps them accessible from the talkpage (but off of it) so that I don't get further nasty posts accusing me of "hiding the awful truth". I could do the same thing by creating a section serving the same purpose on the talk-page itself. In fact, I started out to do that, but then came up with what is, I think, and even better solution along the same lines -- one that keeps nastiness even more remote from my talkpage itself. This technique is not directed against any particular user. The page is presently populated by the output of one user because it has to start somewhere, and where it has started is with the talkpage harassment from that one user -- which is what prompted its making. Alike nastiness from anyone else will be dealt with in the same way, or at least that is the intent. -- Lonewolf BC 05:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

P.S.: Please answer here, for sake of continuity. I am "watching". -- Lonewolf BC 05:41, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

haha...well...I saw a similar page before and an admin asked the user who had it to remove it...anyways I get what you're trying to say...so i'll withdraw the MFD... Nat Tang ^{ta | co | em} 05:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: the Images

Will do. Morgan695 04:19, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

User 75.183.170.77's edits

Hi! Please keep an eye on this user's edits (especially on the China article). I've seen it's contributions to articles such as China and Republic of China; his/her edits are incoherent, grammatically incorrect, and sometimes insulting. I noticed that he/she even deleted all the messages on his/her own talk page; shouldn't he/she be "warned" already for this kind of behavior? I hope you look out for his/her edits on the China article, in case if the user keeps reverting again. I think there should be a semi-protection coming soon. Thanks!--Balthazarduju 05:12, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the welcome. I was unsure what to do with regards to user 203.171.95.131's edits, I'll keep in mind your advice in the future. NossB 11:50, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:NDP Maple Leaf.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:NDP Maple Leaf.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. MC 00:51, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello Nat.tang

I figured I'd ask on your talk page rather than publicly to try to disrupt as little as possible. If you look at the additional comment put by Fourdee into the incident where I reported Phral, you will see that this dispute contains a lot of user denigration, which in and of itself is harmful and disruptive for WP, not to mention very hard to ignore for those being denigrated (I do my best). At this point, it's rather clear that the opposing editors consider they have "consensus" even if several editors in the last few days have pointed out many flaws in their reasoning, so I'm basically sure they will decline mediation, which would be the obvious way to resolve the matter. That being said, can you suggest other avenues to help in this situation and to keep the disruption of WP to a strict minimum? Any and all suggestions are appreciated.--Ramdrake 13:51, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I've answered on your talk page nat^tang 14:00, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

RfC?

I'm not sure what that would really accomplish. I don't think his case is really severe enough that people will comment in an RfC - and even then, I doubt anything enforceable will come out of it. But if somebody else wants to file it, I'll comment. I haven't contacted anybody about it yet. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 14:56, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:UofT Heraldic Arms.gif

Hi there. I've tagged Image:UofT Heraldic Arms.gif as lacking a source - there is a discussion at Talk:University of Toronto#Heraldic Arms about the image, and knowing where it came from would be helpful. Please note also that policy requires a source for the image: unsourced images may be deleted. Thank you. — mholland (talk) 21:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Templates

Aren't there automated bots that deal with that? Perspicacite 08:13, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

They run once or twice a day (to the best of my knowledge) and they're pretty slow nat^tang 08:14, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks I was unaware of the format issue as I copied the base template from another page. UkraineToday 00:33, 26 August 2007 (UTC) Thanks again I was in teh process of cleaning up my data and when I went to save ity I discovered you had also done some house keeping for me. Thanks again. PS I think there is a difference between supporting the Eu and being pro-EU. The main reason is that I feel there needs to be a counter balance to teh common misuse of the words pro-West which is generally meant to hide pro-USA under the umbrella of being pro-West. I strongly detest the use of the stereotype pro-west and stating pro-EU helps to strengthen this without having to say opposed to the USA... Which I am not I am just more pro-EU and less USA... Spasibo... UkraineToday 00:47, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Commonwealth realm

Thanks for restoring the r, Nat. I was worried another 'struggle' was about to erupts (you da man). GoodDay 15:53, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

China

User:Gantuya eng still does not understand that she is inserting a PRC flag into an article that's not about the PRC. I've exhausted 3 reverts already. Please watch the article. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 03:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Crest

Hi there. I've replaced you crest with one that's pretty much the same, except in reduced resolution to qualify for fair use and in the PNG format. I don't think that would be a problem. Jphillips23 21:16, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Taiwanese military history

The Taiwanese military history task force has recently been created. Please join the project if you are interested. Thanks!--Jerry 23:58, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

ok

i'd appreciate some note on where to place the helpme request then.^[3] Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 19:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

nevermind, i placed the note on my talk. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 19:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

John Tory

You have a lot of instructions for this page. I hope I can comply as all I want to do is to thank you for getting on top of the vanadalisn on the above-captioned page. While I am not a Tory supporter, in either sense of the word/name, vandalism is vandalism. If you are keeping an eye on it, I can take it off my watch list. Thanks again Bielle 20:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Changes from IP addresses

Man - these ROC-related changes by the various IP addresses sure are getting old. I wonder why this guy insists on replacing everything with "ROC" - it doesn't make any sense. Maybe it's TingMing's little brother or something. Regards, --Folic Acid 12:20, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Taipei 101

Hello Nat. I removed the WPCHINA tag from the talkpage because I believe that Taiwan-related articles that are non-political should not be part of WPCHINA. Many people actually think that Taiwan isn't geographically part of China.--Jerry 00:57, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, there was a hidden comment that says this: Hidden comment: The State, Republic and location of the Taipei 101 and Taiwan has been discussed and confirmed in the past. Please do not attempt to change any part of the text. From what I see on the talkpage, the consensus wasn't putting ROC there. I wonder where the discussion the comment is talking about is and who wrote the comment.--Jerry 01:01, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:UofT logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:UofT logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:25, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:UofT logo.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:UofT logo.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD i5.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. nat^tang 14:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:UofT Heraldic Arms.gif

A tag has been placed on Image:UofT Heraldic Arms.gif, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD i5.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. nat^tang 14:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Canada

I would be prefectly happy to be civil if you did not start with an accusation of an edit war where none had happened, OR EVEN THEN, if you had acknowledged my first comment on your talk page. But all you did was cut and paste further admonitions. YOU did not start with "an assumption of good intentions", you started with an assumption of an edit war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.133.124.194 (talk) 02:45, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

incorrectly identified phot

I don't think your image Hôtel_de_Ville_(City_Hall)_de_Montréal_at_Night.jpg (

in the Gallery section of the Wiki article on Montreal is, in fact, a picture of Montreal's city hall.

Moreover, it is labelled as "Montreal's colonial architecture" which is misleading. Texteditor 17:33, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

UofT URL

The URL [www.toronto.edu] is valid, what did you see wrong with it?

Regards, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.151.180.81 (talk) 22:05, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

UofT

Well, at least the CS department still issues them ;-)

Regards, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.151.180.81 (talk) 01:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Hampton.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Hampton.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Morgan695 19:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Mcguinty.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Mcguinty.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Morgan695 19:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Tory.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Tory.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Morgan695 19:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Mcguinty.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Mcguinty.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 13:57, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Hampton.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Hampton.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:01, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:JohnTory.jpg

Hi, Nat. Thanks for the message, and for tagging the image. A couple of things, though: first, as an ancillary question, if the user is indeed who you say he is, is it appropriate, as regards WP:COI, that he is editing the article?

Regarding the image itself, though, the licensing tag reads:

Please note that our policy usually considers fair use images of living people that merely show what they look like to be replaceable by free-licensed images and unsuitable for the project. If this is not the case for this image, a rationale should be provided proving that the image provides information beyond simple identification or showing that this image is difficult to replace by a free-licensed equivalent.

Image licensing is one of those areas I'm a little sketchy on, but my understanding, which would seem to be confirmed by the licensing tag, is that a fair use image is only to be used when there is no free-licensed alternative. I don't see any explanation on the image page asserting that "this image is difficult to replace by a free-licensed equivalent." Surely there must be free-license images of John Tory available? --Rrburke^(talk) 02:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi again, Nat. I don't wish to sound like a broken record, but I'm still concerned about this:

Please note that our policy usually considers fair use images of living people that merely show what they look like to be replaceable by free-licensed images and unsuitable for the project.

This appears to me to be precisely on-point: the only purpose of the image is to show what John Tory looks like, in which case it needs to be replaced if at all possible by a free-licensed image.

I'm also a little perplexed by this part of your fair-use rationale: "no free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information." It's not my sense that there's been an active search yet that could justify the claim that no alternative is available, and since the purpose of the picture is merely to show what Mr. Tory looks like, the fact that the publicity photo might be more appealing and better-looking than an available free-licensed image that also shows what Mr. Tory looks like is not, as I understand it, a reason to prefer the former to the latter, and can't substaintiate the claim that "no free equivalent... would adequately give the same information." The Howard Hampton photo, for example, is kind of appalling -- he looks like a vampire -- but nobody has attempted to replace it with the publicity image from this page: http://ontariondp.com/multimedia , and the change would certainly be reverted if anyone did.

It was certainly my mistake to revert to an earlier image that was no more free than the one that replaced it. However, it's my feeling that there may be a problem with using either image unless it can genuinely be demonstrated that no free-licensed alternative can be found -- something which would be a little hard to believe, anyway, as Mr. Hampton and Mr. McGuinty both have free images accompanying their articles: surely it's just as likely one could be found for Mr. Tory?

As I mentioned, this topic is kind of outside my accustomed bailiwick: I know a couple of editors knowledgeable about image-licensing, and will ask them what they think. Sound alright? --Rrburke^(talk) 03:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I was actually going to comment on the images, but I'll just put my concerns in this post. Simply put, unless a person is deceased, you cannot post a fair use image of them. Image:JohnTory.jpg and Image:Tory.jpg are considered to be fair use, and as it is reasonable to expect that a free photo of Tory exists, it should be deleted. The other leader images you posted, Image:Mcguinty.jpg and Image:Hampton.jpg do have free alternatives, so they should deleted no debate. Morgan695 23:03, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Repulic of China

It is pretty obvious Republic of China is commonly known as Taiwan, but not Chinese Taipei. Chinese Taipei is only used in very few occasions where using Taiwan is not allowed due to pressure from PRC. In most cases, Republic of China is known as Taiwan. Jim Liu 03:40, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Editor review/Nat.tang 2

Hello Nat, I reviewed you. Two points:

1. I am willing to write a recommendation for you at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship if you think you are ready for that.
2. I don't know when you last modified your talk page header, but you should rethink it. It's likely to scare away newcomers, and that's a bad idea. In particular, I don't like the idea of threatening to delete any unsigned comment. First of all, you can ask Hagermanbot (or whichever bot it is) to automatically sign such comments. Second, it's easy to forget to sign a comment; in those relatively rare cases, you can just check page history to see who it was. I also think the talk page header is too long. Think of the Internet slang: TL;DR (too long; didn't read). Kind of like the review I wrote for you, I guess.... :) Shalom ^Hello 03:06, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

WP:PPOL.

Thanks for pointing that out mate (I was actually asking Riana about that too). I'll not make that mistake again. ;) · AndonicO ^Talk 21:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

RFA nomination

I'll let you ask User:Folic Acid if you want a second nomination from him. It makes no difference to me. If you need help answering the questions or transcluding the RFA page where it needs to go, please ask. I wish you good luck. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 00:29, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Nat, I've added a second nomination for you. I'm happy to modify it, too, if you think there are other examples of the TingMing saga that you think are better. Best of luck! --Folic Acid 13:12, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Best of luck! I'm hoping you pass, some opposition is just plain silly. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 03:49, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Ottawahetech

Dear Nat,

I am here because you have taken issue with an article I submited to Wikipedia. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ottawahitech

I am a new "editor" and there are now three differnet Wikipedia official editors who have taken issue with my article. I thought I had successfully satisfied the first editor (JodyB) after putting in quite a bit of work, but it seems I was wrong. Another editor is now compaining about my "new and improved" article.

I would greatly appreciate it if you could visit my user page and help us sort out what the issues are, and who has the final say.

TIA

Ottawahitech 16:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Categories

These country articles are in country categories. The country categories are in the continental/region categories. There is no useful purpose served by having both the country articles and the country categories in the continental/region categories. Thanks Hmains 04:13, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Montreal colonial architecture

the buildings on St-Paul are much smaller than the one that is captions as Montreal Colonial Architecture. I strongly suggest you delete this image completely from the Montreal Wikipedia entry. Texteditor 15:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a new administrator!

Thanks, Archives 3! Thank you for voicing your opinion in my RfA, which passed today with a unanimous 79/0/0 tally. It feels great to be appreciated, and I will try my best to meet everyone's expectations. If you have any advice or tips, feel free to pass them along, as I am sure that I will need them! Cheers, hmwith talk 21:43, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Hah - I read the summary and thought "Wow! The support for Nat was so overwhelming that they closed the RfA early!" Oh well - soon enough.  :) And congratulations to you, hmwith. --Folic Acid 12:16, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia has another new administrator

And this time it's you! Congratulations, you are now an administrator! If you haven't already, now is the time to visit the Wikipedia:New admin school and look through the Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide and Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me, or at the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Warofdreams talk 01:41, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey! Congrats! :) SQL^{(Query Me!)} 02:10, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations. Bearian 02:16, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Congrats! In time, you'll rule the world! Bwahahahaha! Oh, did I say that out loud? Oops.  :) --Folic Acid 04:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Excellent! I am sure you will be a great Admin. Make sure to ban some vandals for me :) -Icewedge 04:30, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations! -- Chris B • talk 06:16, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, a couple tips for teh new admin, from a new admin :) Come visit us at Wikipedia:IRC channels/wikipedia-en-admins, and, you might find User:^demon/CSD AutoReason invaluable, for CSD :) I know I have so far... SQL^{(Query Me!)} 09:03, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Congrats from me too. You'll be a great admin! Phgao 11:48, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll pile on.  :) Keep up the good work. Cheers, Into The Fray ^T/C 11:52, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Congrats! Now get to work on your new buttons :P --Hirohisat ^Kiwi 22:52, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Re:Thanks!

You're very welcome, and I'm very glad to see that you passed. Happy editing! :-) Lradrama 08:43, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your note and, Congratulations! I'm glad you made it. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 12:43, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Nat. Thanks for your note. Congratulations on your successful RfA. Even though I was opposed, I hope it was clear that my reasons had to do with timing and didn't represent an opposition in principle to your promotion. At any rate, it's water under the bridge now. Best of luck: I'm sure you'll do just fine. Cheers. --Rrburke^(talk) 00:57, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Tupac Shakur

Hi, we appear to have protected-conflicted. You sprotected for 1 week, but I sprotected indef. I was just giving you the heads up, to make sure you knew, and were ok with it. I set no expiry because of the tides of vandalism. see the history. 5 or 6 revisions of vandalism just today. What do you think? -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:18, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, what you have to remember is that it was only unprotected yesterday, and already it has over 50 new revisions, most of which are vandalism, and the reversion of vandalism. That is an extremely concentrated amount of vandalism, and 1 week isn't an especially long period of protection, anyway. So I think it will be best to leave the indef as it is. Regards, -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:27, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Your RfA

You're welcome! Glad you passed. :) Acalamari 16:31, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Another canuck, eh ? Good Taprobanus 19:33, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I admit I gave you a hard time but I'm glad you passed nonetheless. Good luck. Ronnotel 20:42, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Congrats

Hey Nat, congratulation on becoming an admin! Can you please do a favor for me? Please go through my requested move here. The request had been there forever. Thanks!--Jerry 01:21, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your RfA

Hi, Nat. Good job at getting your adminship. I'm glad I could help you along in that. :) tosh²^(talk) 03:54, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Ran article

I understand you copyprotected the Tsukikage Ran.You have every right to do so of course, but you could have waited until I had undone what was clearly a case of vandalism in my opinion.I apologize if I upset you with this,but I thought I should bring this to your attention.-R.G. 04:22, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Unblocked?

You have unblocked an obviously uncivil IP who has committed to vandalism and edit warring despite your warnings. He's reverted about 5 times in the past 5 hours on this page[4], with the last one immediately after you unblocked him, not to mention it is vandalism and he's randomly removing material per WP:Point and blind reverts.. He insists on reverting his personal attacks on the discussion page, and has just recently abused my page nonstop for over 30 minutes. What gives? The unblock was obviously premature..Taharqa 07:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Please stop your defamation of me and calling me a vandal, which is a personal attack. You are revert warring, which is against wikpedia's rules. You are liable to be blocked too. I have invited you to reach consensus on the talk page before deleting large chunks that you don't like. In the other article, I encouraged you to discuss the split proposal, but you responded with attacks. 203.109.33.35 07:30, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

For the life of me, I do not understand why this user is not blocked? I haven't attacked him/her once, which is easily observed, yet he entered the thread, that already consisted of consensus, pending discussion, calling people names and accusing them of all types of things. Not to mention that he's been blind reverting and not adhering to the consensus reached on the page, therefore, warring and vandalizing the page. The user has deliberately looked for removed material that undermines consensus, it is abusive vandalism that has been reverted by numerous editors. He.she only became vocal and "willing to discuss" after being blocked.. Check my user page and check the discussion page on that article, the editor should not have been unblocked..Taharqa 07:44, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you.. Can you please revert the last vandal/possible meat puppet though who made the exact same edits as the blocked user? Edits that don't even make any sense, inserting random photos and distorting terms?Taharqa 08:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Automated tools

Please don't revert good-faith edits with automated tools. It's too broad a brush, removing more than you thought it did - unless you think the {{copyedit}} tag I added was me vandalising? ➔ REDVEЯS was here 08:17, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Race of Ancient Egyptians

You've protected the wrong version!! Only kiding. I was just reviewing that and about to protect when I noticed you beat me to it. Cheers Nat. Pedro :  Chat  08:19, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Seriously, he protected the version of a blocked vandal and his sock... Just look at the edits, as it even deviates from what "Egyegy" reverted, who omitted a certain section.. The meat/sock, copied and pasted the last revision from the blocked IP.. It is a vandalized version..Taharqa 08:22, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Taharqu - see this info on meta. Nat - I'm looking at th IP and will respond asap. Pedro :  Chat  08:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I know, but I was just hoping, considering that this version is a vandalized one, and the fact that another admin even reverted him,[5] for vandalism/being uncivil, I figured that it would be no big deal for another admin to rv back to the non-vandalized version. I won't push it, but I strongly feel that a revert is necessary, per consensus on the talk page. If not, I can try and form one for an edit change, but I didn't think it was necessary..Taharqa 08:37, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

• Hi Nat. Reviewed. I concur with the block. It is not punitive but preventative. [6] Pedro :  Chat  08:38, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Request

Looks like serial mass tagging without any attempt at discussion in this article, can you kindly take a look at it please. Thanks Taprobanus 01:32, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Dir en grey page protection

Dir en grey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

[Added later: I've struck through my initial comments here, because I saw later that you had already seen the report and had all the information, so those comments are not needed. My additional comments following the response of the disruptive user are needed so I've left those in place, though I've re-edited my comments for clarity. --Parsifal _Hello 08:04, 7 October 2007 (UTC) ]

Hi Nat - I noticed you protected Dir en grey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) due to edit warring. I'm not currently an active editor on that page, though I have edited it in the past, mostly to revert vandalism. So this is not a personal issue to me, but I would like to offer some additional information that may be useful for you. It seems to me the page needs semi-protection rather than full protection, because it's not a regular content-dispute, what's happening is that the edit-warring is all coming from one editor who was previously blocked for edit-warring, and then blocked again for evading his block using IP-editing.

Before you placed the protection, I had noticed the problem and posted this report at RFPP.

Other than that one disruptive user, currently editing as an IP (details are in the report I linked), I don't believe that page is actually undergoing a general content dispute. I could be mistaken, but that's how it seems to me. I thought you'd want to know this info so you could consider whether semi-protection might be better. --Parsifal _Hello 02:39, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Sources have nothing to do with that dispute, and provide no information regarding what is written. The other users "Cyrus XIII" and "Notjake13" don't explain their edits, refuse to answer why that information should be entered, even after being asked. Refusal to use the talk page and are uploading personal fandom. What Parsifal wrote, is also a lie and can be confirmed by other admins who resolved the issue, a admin who could speak Japanese and blocked Cyrus XIII. The three users are friends and edit posts to input fandom. 219.90.164.94 03:09, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Nat, the various IP comments in this section are all from Jun kaneko (talk · contribs) who was previously blocked for edit-warring and block-evasion using IP addresses. He posted something like the above on my page as well, plus many more comments.

It appears Jun kaneko is upset about me because in addition to the RFPP report today, I've reverted his vandalism at times. While editing a related article, Visual kei, I tried to help him understand WP policies and procedures regarding references. But then he got into tendentious behavior and I gave up on trying to help him. He made some trouble, was blocked, and left for a while. Now he's back, and we see the results.

There have been some ordinary disagreements between other editors on the various related articles he mentioned, even a bit escalated at times, but in general the issues worked out OK by consensus. One of the users he mentioned, Cyrus XIII (talk · contribs), was blocked for a short time in June for WP:POINT according to his block log, though I did not know of him yet then. Apparently the block was reduced and since then there have not been renewed problems with Cyrus XIII.

Regarding Jun kaneko's comment that "the three users are friends" - my contribs show that to be false. I've had no communication with Notjake13 at all, and with Cyrus XIII, only a few times. --Parsifal _Hello 04:01, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

PS... Jun kaneko has been hassling me since I wrote this note here, so far he's made around 15 posts on my talk page, demanding that I explain why I reported his vandalism. I don't know what he's talking about with his "personal fandom" comments, I don't listen to those bands, I just edit according to WP:NPOV and WP:V.

For context, please take a look at his rather extreme response to the uw-3RR warning a few weeks ago that was part of the process leading to his being blocked.

Sorry to have brought this to your talk page; I want nothing to do with him and his antagonistic aggressive disruptions. He seems very interested in writing things on my talk page, but I have no replies for him and am avoiding further communications with him in general. --Parsifal _Hello 07:19, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I have asked him why he has been trying to get me in trouble by repeatadly reporting me with accusations which have been debunked by admins. He has avoided questions, and stated he has no knowledge on the topic, and can not be of any help. Which is strange considering he reported me with serious accusations over this artilce, for removing irrelevant information, which can be considered as fandom. 122.49.149.115 06:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

You mean the Visual Kei article, which you thanked me for provideding reliable sources, until the information conflicted with your fandom? I direct quote by you "Also, I would like you to know that your suggestions have made the article much better. And the history section added a lot of value. Thank you for your contributions. --Parsifal Hello 07:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

This user has been harassing me, stalking my posts, and trying to get my in trouble. 219.90.248.128 07:43, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I'd like to offer my two cents on this: Given that one of the primary fields of my editorial work happens to be Japanese music, I ran into that Jun kaneko character a little while before Parsifal did and I can confirm, that the former's recent harassment on the latter's talk page, as well as the edit warring on the Dir en grey article that preceded it are not isolated incidents. If requested, I can produce diffs/WP:AN3 reports that link at least seven 3RR violations to the Jun kaneko account or respectively the very narrow IP range, under which the user has been editing "anonymously" (quotes due to the fairly consistent behavior pattern of incivility and all-out edit warring). I'll be frank, the other editors Parsifal previously mentioned, including myself are probably among the more regular contributors to some of the articles that were affected by these events. Yet I do hope, that any potential WP:OWN concerns directed at us will not divert administrative attention from the issue at hand. - Cyrus XIII 02:48, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Um, should I rather have left above message at the WP:AN discussion linked below? - Cyrus XIII 02:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:AN

Please provide input here Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Harassment. Rlevse 14:33, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure?

I think [7] actually is Iain Stables. ➔ REDVEЯS was here 08:11, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Wow thanks!

Thanks for removing those rude comments on my talk page! Haha you even blocked them, awesome. Thanks again! — *Hippi ippi 08:14, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Map

Hey Nat, just noticed this, about time someone changed it. The "big" version of the map is still being used on several other pages, but needs to be replaced for the same reasons. I was wondering if you could give your opinion here so there will at least be some consensus on the discussion page. I think it would make much more sense to change the original map back to the small size and use it (instead of switching to the "small" one). I don't think you will be reverted again, there is clearly no reason or consensus to use the large size. Thanks. shoeofdeath 20:32, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and the map of territorial changes at China is great! Is that Ian Kiu's work? Do you think it would be better placed at the top of the article? (I do feel that the modern PRC and ROC territories should be added as the last stage of the territorial changes map). Bathrobe 01:51, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Requests for adminship

Hey, appreciate the feedback on my nomination for adminship - You made some very good points - things that I plan on changing whether I am promoted or not. I would like to point out that while my participation in such things is limited, my observation of them and how they function is still there. Nevertheless, practicality wins over theory all the time : ) Cheers and thanks again! Wisdom89 17:02, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Editor review

Hi, just a minor note: I noticed that you're listed at Category:Wikipedians on Editor review/Backlog. Now that you've been reviewed, can you please remove the cat from your user page to delist your ER from the backlog? I'd do it myself, but I'm reluctant to edit another editor's userpage. Thanks. --Muchness 03:29, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Allegations of Israeli apartheid

Thanks for applying the protection that I requested to the article. Hope it has a useful effect. Ciao, HG | Talk 23:02, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Tourism in Sri Lanka

Nat, can you please comment on the article on its talk page. I wanted to have the this instead of the current version of the page. My reasons for the addition of extra text is to make the article more of a wikipedia article (encyclopedic with the addition of the paragraph). I added the fact tags because the claims are missing an RS backing them up. Watchdogb 02:37, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

3RR block...

Hello there. You might want to check a 3 revert block of paki.tv. here I don't see a violation of 3rr there. paki.tv added new material, which was reverted back and forth 3 times by him and Prester John. Prester John incorrectly reported paki.tv yesterday on another article but he was not blocked. Today seems to be a re-run of that. Both are sitting on 3 reverts, but from my checking neither has breached.

I'm not commenting on the contents of the edits, merely wanting to ensure that any disciplinary action is not only made fairly but also seen to be done fairly. I thus suggest you can't block for 3RR but if you block either for edit warring, you need to block the other. Please correct me if I am wrong here (apologies in advance), but I don't think I am wrong. kind regards and thanks for your good faith admin work. --Merbabu 07:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for this. —Wknight94 (talk) 04:14, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

St. Mike's

Hi, sorry, I was in a rush when I edited that, I didn't intend to start an edit war. The mottoes are similar, I just meant to say that they do have "disce me bonitatem" etc as a Latin motto too. Adam Bishop 01:01, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Cloak

Would you mind letting me know if the cloak request below ever comes through? I put mine in two weeks ago and never heard anything. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:16, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

IRC cloak request

I am UserNat on freenode and I would like the cloak wikimedia/nat. Thanks. --nat^tang 17:05, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/NicolasLord

You should probably consider whether it is in the interests of the candidate in replacing an RfA which was improperly formatted from a user with only 50 edits. I actually completely removed it and encouraged the user not to run at this point as it is highly likely the user will be hurt by the process. Ryan Postlethwaite 17:28, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

And your oppose gets at exactly what I'm trying to say. Ryan Postlethwaite 17:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alkivar

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alkivar. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alkivar/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alkivar/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (t) 20:58, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Be aware

This user is out there, I don't think it's anything to do with you, but...? regards ^Khukri 11:24, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

New article - can you take a look?

Hey Nat - I've just written the article on Chiou I-jen, and wondered if you might have a look at it to see if there's anything that could be improved. Thanks! --FolicAcid 15:30, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - I appreciate your edits.  :) --FolicAcid 16:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thats very kind of you. Thanks! Pojanji 01:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Commons Username

Hi, I am verifying that I am commons:User:Nat.tang and I am also verifying that I have requested to usurp the username Nat on Wikimedia Commons, nat ^{Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?!} 09:12, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

UTCrest.png

Sorry for the confusion.

After I moved far away from the university, I never realized that this logo was no longer used.

Sorry for the trouble,

ThePurpleMonkey_{(talk•contribs)} 17:07, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

No Scrolling references - 2006 Lebanon War.

Hi, can I ask why scroll boxes are not allowed for references? As you can see, The 2006 Lebanon War has over 250 of them, and even in two columns takes up approximately a quarter of the page length. Putting it in a scroll box significantly cuts this length, while still allowing all the references on the page, and the links to references from the body text still work. Is it just a question of compatibility for hand-held browsers? Or just some rule developed when there weren't any pages with as many references? Cheers Iorek 06:48, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Request for unprotection

According to WP:RFP, I should ask you first before posting it on the board, so anyway, would you consider unprotecting the Dir en grey article? There has not been much activity on the article's talk page after that dispute which caused the protection spread out to your own talk page and the administrators' noticeboard and user Jun kaneko (talk · contribs) appears to remain quite alone with their views on both, the appropriate content of the article and conduct towards fellow editors. Of course, turning full protection into semi-protection for a while might just be just as helpful, in re-opening the article for day-to-day editing and still shielding it from any further hard-to-react-to IP based edit warring and incivility. - Cyrus XIII 14:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikimania 2009

I left a message at Zanimum's talk page and I think I should inform you as well. I am interested in helping out Toronto's bid for Wikimania 2009. Do you guys need help? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 17:48, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure the link you gave me is correct? I clicked and it says the page does not exist. I learned the Toronto's bid info via 2008 Toronto's bid page. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 23:37, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Should we establish a list of helpers who're interested in helping out in the new page? It's in the 2008 bid's page. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 23:43, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Time for you to put down your name here OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 03:11, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

What???!!!

Why would you want to add a direct link so people can block you on your sig? -Goodshop 01:35, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

RE: Userpage

Yes, please. I had several vandals on my page for a few days... Thanks. --Esanchez_{(Talk 2 me or Sign here)} 01:36, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

IP editor and Republic of China

Hey Nat - could you keep an eye on the IP editor that's popped up in Republic of China? It looks like that situation might get out of hand. Thanks! -- _{Folic_Acid | talk}  16:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: I have a question

I am, why do you ask? Morgan695 01:54, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikimania 2009

Toronto Candidate City for Wikimania 2009
Support TORONTO in its bid to become the host city of WIKIMANIA 2009 Visit m:Wikimania 2009/Toronto for TORONTO's MetaWiki page and help build a strong bid.

-- Zanimum 15:58, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Is this how it will look like? I like it! Btw, should we mention same-sex marriage is allowed in Canada in Toront's bid page? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 17:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh yeah, mind if I have this banner on my talk page? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 05:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

BLP violations on Haroon Siddiqui

Hi please see here. I have no problems with negative information but it has to come from WP:RS sources and per WP:REDFLAG it better be more than one agreeing with that point. An anon has been adding this information for the last 10 months again and again on a reputable living Canadian journalist. Thanks Taprobanus 12:58, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

changes on China...

Hello Nat!

Would you be so kind to explain why you reverted all my changes to the China article? I know that my english syntax is not so good, and might be corrected, but I think the information was pertinent.

Hope to hear from you! Be well

Pcontrop 09:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Hello my Canadian friend. You left a message on my page saying that you want to block me if I keep deleting info. First of all, I was editing thereby I removed some content. What is more important is that I gave good reasoning why I did it. Did you read it? If you disagree, we can discuss it on the talk page of the article, but you shouldn't threaten to block me. I believe that is unfair. So if your views differ from mine, no problem, we both speak English, we can discuss it. Thank you for your understanding, (209.7.171.66 22:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC))

Revert

Hi. Why did you revert my edit?: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bloc_Qu%C3%A9b%C3%A9cois&diff=167086154&oldid=167069876 Chump Manbear 00:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Logo

I love your logo for the Wikimania Tornonto bid! :-) Cbrown1023 talk 23:10, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikimeetup and Wikimania 2009

Hello Nat. How is it going?

We have met in the September 2007 meetup at Ferret & Firkin and I was the other guy when you and Abebenjoe talked about local politics. How was the October meetup? With respect to Wikimania 2009, how shall you proceed with the bid? BTW do you know OhanaUnited in person? Since all three guys are affiliated with U of T and live reasonably close to each other (NY and RH in GTA), I believe we can get together sometime to get to know each other more. Thank you.Ktsquare (talk) 02:00, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Removed link in Istanbul page

Hi Nat

Noticed you reverted my changes to the Istanbul page but not sure why - would you mind explaining?

Thanks Dave

Deletion of MartialLaw.jpg

Dear sir.

That's makes no sense. The image in question meets all 10 of the criteria at WP:NFCC#7. And it wasn't "orphaned"! It was originally put in as cover art. Cover art is allowed BY YOUR OWN REGULATIONS provided that it's used for CRITICAL COMMENTARY! You guys keep changing the rules as you go along. Plus Alex Jones has repeatedly given permission on his radio show for his ENTIRE FILMS to be used freely for educational purposes. So clearly cover art is included. This is free content.

Re: User:Onorem

Do you need your user page to be semi-protected as allowed per the protection policy? nat ^{Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?!} 16:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

No thanks. I don't mind my user space being vandalized. It's easy enough to detect and revert, and anything that keeps the vandals away from the real articles is a good thing. --Onorem♠Dil 16:44, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: William Lyon Mackenzie King Article Dispute

Hello Nat, I have been attempting to engage this editor in a discussion regarding our disagreements but he seems unwilling to do so. Could you please take a look at this situation and provide your opinion on the matter?

• (copied from discussion page for William Lyon MacKenzie King article) Once again reverted deletion of an entire referenced section of this article by editor RucasHost, who despite the fact that most of the section is specifically referenced with footnotes leading to reputably published sources:

^ Knowles, Valerie. Strangers at Our Gates: Canadian Immigration and Immigration Policy, 1540-1997, (Toronto: Dundurn, 1997)

^ Ferguson, Will. Bastards and Boneheads: Canada's Glorious Leaders Past and Present, (Vancouver: Douglas and McIntyre, 1999) pg. 168.

^ Sunahara, Ann Gomer. The Politics of Racism: The Uprooting of Japanese Canadians During the Second World War, (Toronto: Lorimer, 1981) pg. 23.

continues to insist that the entire section is "unreferenced" and constitutes, in his words, "slander". This editor appears unwilling to discuss this issue on the talk page for the article itself or proceed in a reasonable manner, such as placing citation requests for the specific material he disputes in the body of the article. I will place a second stage vandalism warning on this editors "user" page and continue to hope that he will proceed in a more reasonable fashion.Deconstructhis 03:24, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

PRC article, Falun Gong organ harvesting stuff

Thanks for your diligence! Please see my comments here Talk:People's_Republic_of_China#organ_harvesting_of_Falun_Gong--Asdfg12345 13:21, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Clean Countryside

It is actually in Chinese defined as "the act of killing enemies in an occupied territory." But it is widely used to mean the act of the KMT killing many Taiwanese people (including people who weren't even aware of the 228 incident and a little bit of mainlanders) during and after the incident.--Jerry 20:00, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your help. I am still new to wikipedia so i do not know how to use its features. Thank you for your guidance.

Regards

James collins123 08:57, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Canada Visa Map

Government just revised the visa policy. Czech Republic and Latvia no longer require visas to enter Canada. I think you need to update that image on meta data to reflect this change. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

My Rfa

Thanks for voting in my Rfa, which I withdrew from yesterday. Though I did not get promoted, I see this Rfa as being a success nonetheless. What I got out of this Rfa will help me to be a better, all around editor. Because of this Rfa I have decided to become better in other areas of editing. I'm not going to just be a vandalfighter. Though vandalfighting is good, being active in all areas of editing is even better. Have a nice day.--SJP 22:26, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Translation

It means: "[I have] many classes/lessons/homework, but what can I do" or "[I have] many classes/lessons, but can't do anything about it" or something like that, depending on context. -- AdrianTM 18:45, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Merci!

Merci beaucoup! Thank you very much for protecting Daniel Brière, i support the habs, but i don't support him... heh --Flaaaaaaaaaaaming! 19:08, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Move

Hi Nat, can you please move Conscription of the Republic of China to Conscription in Taiwan? My reason being: The other conscription articles are all named Conscription in COUNTRY and since the article only talks about events after 1949, I think it would not be POV at all to move it to Taiwan.--Jerry 21:59, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

MFD Questions

Nat, why did you speedily keep Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:68.39.174.238/Newgatery v.s. letting the MFD run it's length? — xaosflux ^Talk 17:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)